Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2014-04-21 City Council Agenda Packet
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Council Chambers April 21, 2014 6:00 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 April 21, 2014 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. PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to agendized items; up to three minutes per speaker, to be determined by the presiding officer. If you wish to address the Council on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council, but it is very helpful. TIME ESTIMATES Time estimates are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item is called. HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW Applications and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken. Call to Order Closed Session 6:00-7:00 PM Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker. 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his designees pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Pamela Antil, Lalo Perez, Melissa Tronquet, Joe Saccio, Molly Stump, Walter Rossman, Nancy Nagel, Dennis Burns, Mark Gregerson, Kathryn Shen, Dania Torres Wong) Employee Organization: Palo Alto Police Officers Association (PAPOA) Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) 2 April 21, 2014 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. 2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his designees pursuant to Merit System Rules and (James Keene, Pamela Antil, Lalo Perez, Joe Saccio, Kathryn Shen, Dania Torres Wong, Eric Nickel, Geo Blackshire, Catherine Capriles, Amber Cameron, Melissa Tronquet, Mark Gregerson, Nancy Nagel, Molly Stump, Walter Rossman) Employee Organization: International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 1319 Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) Study Session 7:00-8:00 PM 3. Update of the Climate Protection Plan Special Orders of the Day 8:00-8:15 PM 4. Resolution of the Council Expressing Appreciation to Eduardo Martinez for His Service as Planning and Transportation Commissioner 5. Selection of Candidates to Interview for Two Unexpired Terms (Martinez- October 31, 2017, and Panelli- October 31, 2016) on the Planning and Transportation Commission 6. Appointment of Candidates to the Human Relations Commission, Library Advisory Commission, and Public Art Commission Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Comments 8:15-8:25 PM Oral Communications 8:25-8:40 PM Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. Minutes Approval 8:40-8:45 PM February 24, 2014 3 April 21, 2014 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Consent Calendar 8:45-8:50 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 7. Policy and Services Committee Recommendation of Approval of the Updated Guidelines, Procedures and Selection Processes for the City of Palo Alto Cubberley Artists Studio Program (CASP, formerly the Cubberley Visual Artists Studio Program) in Preparation for the Spring Release of a new Application and Selection Process 8. Finance Committee Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Establishing a Local Solar Plan to Provide Four Percent of the City's Total Energy Needs by 2023 9. Preliminary Approval of the Report of the Advisory Board for Fiscal Year 2015 in Connection with the Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District and Adoption of Resolution Declaring its Intention to Levy an Assessment Against Businesses within the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District for Fiscal Year 2015 and Setting a Time and Place for a Public Hearing on May 12, at 7:00 PM or Thereafter, in the City Council Chambers 10. Finance Committee Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Refunding Accumulated Net Revenue from the Suspended Full Needs Portion of the PaloAltoGreen Program to Program Participants 11. Finance Committee Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Establishing the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Using Certified Environmental Offsets and Approving Three New Rate Schedules: Residential Green Gas Service (G-1-G), Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service (G-2-G), and Large Commercial Green Gas Service (G-3-G) 12. Approval of Stanford University Medical Center Annual Report and Compliance with the Development Agreement 13. Adoption of a Resolution Summarily Vacating Public Easements Which have been Relocated at 888 Boyce Avenue 4 April 21, 2014 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 8:50-9:50 PM 14. Council Review and Direction on the P&TC Recommended Draft California Avenue Area Concept Plan and Authorization to Submit an Application for the Valley Transportation Agency Priority Development Area Planning Grant Program for the Preparation of a Master Plan for the Fry’s property, as Identified in the Concept Plan 15. Public Hearing - Council Adoption of an Ordinance Modifying: (1) Chapter 18.16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) to: (a) Address Sidewalk Width and Building Setbacks (Setback and “build-to” Line Standards, and Context Based Design Criteria) Along El Camino Real, and (b) Reduce the Allowable Floor Area Ratio on CN Zoned Sites Where Dwelling Units are Permitted at 20 Units Per Acre; and (2) PAMC Chapter 18.04 to Adjust the Definition of Lot Area and Add a Definition for “Effective Sidewalk”. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of CEQA per section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) (STAFF REQUESTS ITEM BE CONTINUED TO APRIL 29, 2014) Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs Discussion and Action 9:50-10:00 PM 16. Adoption of a Resolution in Support of Measure AA (Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Bond) 10:00-10:40 PM 17. Discussion and Approval of Caltrain Draft Environmental Impact Report Comment Letter 10:40-11:00 PM 18. Discussion and Direction to Staff on Additional Action the City Should Take on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Proposed Changes to the Regional Measure 2 Program Specifically Related to Dumbarton Rail Funding Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements 11:00-11:10 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. 5 April 21, 2014 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 Meetings Policy and Services Committee April 22, 2014 Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Informational Report Storm Drain Oversight Committee Review of FY2013 Storm Drainage Fund Expenditures Informational Report on the Status of the 2015-2023 Housing Element Update 2014 Clean Bay Pollution Prevention Plan Public Letters to Council Set 1 Early Release Item - Direct Staff to Pursue the Four-Component Organics Facilities Plan City of Palo Alto (ID # 4584) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Earth Day Staff Report Title: Update of the Climate Protection Plan From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation This is an informational report and requires no Council action. Executive Summary Since adoption of Climate Protection Plan (CPP) by the City Council in December 2007, and the adoption of updated goals in 2010, the City of Palo Alto’s municipal operations (City) and the Palo Alto Community (Community) have made considerable progress in reducing their carbon footprint and adopt sustainable practices. The 2012 and 2013 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from City operations are both estimated to be 53% below 2005 levels, well exceeding the Council’s goal to reduce these emissions by 20% by 2012. The activities that led to these reduced emission levels also resulted in reduction of the cost to the City for electricity and natural gas utility services and for vehicular fuel by approximately $500,000 per year in the past two years. Staff’s preliminary estimate is that the 2012 and 2013 combined greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from City and Community were 20% and 29% below 2005 levels, respectively, well exceeding the Council’s goal to reduce these emissions by 20% by 2012. (This is based on estimated community mobile fuel use and consumption of electricity and natural gas.) If these estimates are confirmed by the next Climate Plan, Palo Alto has made a strong head start towards the state’s goal of reducing 2050 emissions by 80% below 1990 levels–but still has a long way to go. The GHG reductions since 2005 were largely achieved by the greening of electricity supplies, aggressive electricity and natural gas efficiency programs, conservation efforts, and utilization of landfill gas at the water quality control plant. The City’s adoption of carbon neutral electric supply in 2013 was the main driver of emission reduction between 2012 and 2013, accounting City of Palo Alto Page 2 for 75,000 Metric Tons (MT) of GHG emissions reduction. An initial assessment of transportation-related emissions based on regional estimates suggests that GHG emissions from this sector have also declined 10% since 2005 based on regional estimates. In the coming year, with input from Council, staff expects to develop a new CPP and an overall sustainability roadmap, in coordination with the planned update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. If the community chooses to further reduce emissions and allocate commensurate resources towards this effort, Palo Alto could become a model city as California embarks on the journey to meet the state’s aspirational goal of 80% reduction (from 1990 levels) by 2050. Aspects of adaptation to climate change will also be considered in this assessment. Background Climate change has become, in the eyes of many, the most important threat facing the global environment and economy, with large potential impacts from sea level rise and severe storm events; human dislocation; macroeconomic effects; and even US competitiveness, as other countries move more dramatically on these concerns. In California, the effects of climate change are likely to reduce the availability of hydroelectric generation, impact the availability of our water supplies, increase the incidence of forest fires and extreme weather events, and lead to a rise in sea level, which would impact Palo Alto's shoreline and flood prone areas. The City took an early leadership role in 2007 as one of the first U.S. cities to develop a Climate Protection Plan (also referred to as the Climate Action Plan by other cities), which described measures that could be taken to reduce the City's GHG emissions and set GHG reduction goals. The City’s Climate Protection Plan (CPP) and GHG emissions reduction goals are described in detail in Attachment A. The City’s initial GHG emission reduction goals were: By 2012, the City will reduce GHG emissions by 20% below 2005 levels. By 2012, the City and Community will reduce emissions by 5% below 2005 levels. By 2020, the City and Community will reduce emissions by 15% below 2005 levels. (The State considers 15% below 2005 to be equivalent to 1990 emissions, so the City’s initial goal was consistent with AB 32, which required the State to reduce its emissions to 1990 levels by 2020.) In 2010, based on the rapid progress being made, Council increased the City reduction goals to 20% by 2012. The City’s achievements to date have exceeded these targets: City emissions for 2013 were 53% below 2005 levels Combined City and emissions for 2013 were 29% below 2005 levels City of Palo Alto Page 3 These are impressive accomplishments and continuation of current programs will produce additional gains. However, the context for this study session is increasingly different than when Council first set these programs in motion. It includes: The growing seriousness of climate impacts, from sea level rise to the intensity and frequency of storm events; The effect of these trends on hydropower, water supply and food supplies; The increasing concern of capital markets and corporate leadership with climate risk and the “carbon bubble”; The rapidly dropping price of renewable energy (and anticipated drops in the cost of energy storage); The mounting evidence of the economic benefits of low-carbon strategies and the economic costs of delay; The disruptive challenges that Distributed Generation (DG) poses to the traditional utility industry business model; The rising expectation of what constitutes “climate leadership.” The next phase of the City’s climate and sustainability planning will need to take these trends into account, as well as the State’s ongoing planning (through the California Air Resources Board “scoping plan”) for the year 2050. At the end of this document, following a summary of the City’s accomplishments, we will offer some suggestions of possible next steps to focus and address these concerns. Discussion Greenhouse Gas Emission Measurement and Reporting Protocols To quantify and report on GHG emissions related to City operations, the City has followed the Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP), which is widely recognized by the industry and regulators. These reports were voluntarily filed with California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) since 2005 and with The Climate Registry (TCR) since 2010. In the beginning, the reports were verified by independent auditors. In recent years, due to the high cost of the audits, the City has filed the reports but has not commissioned independent verification audits. The City also separately voluntarily reports to the US EPA on the management of SF61, a highly potent GHG used in electrical equipment by the electric utility. City emissions shown in this report were based on these filings. With respect to the electric supplies, beginning in 2014 for calendar year 2013, Utilities will report annually using TCR’s Electric Sector Protocol to ensure that the claim of carbon neutral electric supplies can be substantiated. 1 SF6 is a highly potent greenhouse gas used in electrical switchgear as an insulation medium in the past, but at present being gradually phased out. In addition to voluntary TCR reporting, the City also has a number of mandatory GHG reporting under California Air Resources Board (CARB) regulations to implement state law AB32 for the electric utility, gas utility and WQCP operations. Several of these reports also are subject to mandatory independent verification audits. City of Palo Alto Page 4 With respect to the Regional water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) operated by the City, beginning in 2013 RWQCP submits a separate, abbreviated report, to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for the RWQCP emissions only. In addition to reporting ‘corporate entity’2 level GHG emissions for City operations to TCR, ‘ICLEI protocols’3 provide for total community level measurement and reporting of GHG emissions. The City and Community level emissions provided in this report conform to this protocol. GHG Emissions from City Operations As illustrated in Figure 1 below, emissions from City operations in 2013 have been reduced by 53% since 2005, exceeding the 20% reduction goal in the CPP. The reductions are primarily from improvements at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP), efficiency improvements undertaken at many facilities including the City Hall building, participation in recycling and other waste management programs, greater use of renewable electric supply, and reduced utilization of the back-up electrical generator at the Municipal Service Center, as well as the provision of carbon-neutral electricity starting in 2013. Descriptions of these improvements are provided in Attachment B. The annual operational cost saving from these improvements total approximately $500,000 per year, with $350,000 of savings attributable to improvements at the RWQCP, $50,000 related to lower utility bills for City facilities, and more than $100,000 in reduced fuel consumption by the City fleet. The total emission estimates between 2012 and 2013 has largely remained constant, but individual component variation is explained in detail in Attachment B. (See Figure 1 and Table 1 below.) 2 TCR requires corporate level filing of the GHG emission inventory (in this case the City municipal corporation operations) to report all emissions that are within the control of that legal entity. For Palo Alto this excludes emissions such as those related to community transportation. As an electric and gas utility, the City does have some control over emissions related to these two energy sources, and, therefore, must count them in the inventory. 3 The International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICELI) protocol is a premier GHG reporting standard for local governments and communities. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Figure 1: City Operations GHG Emissions: 2005, 2012, 2013 (Total Emissions Reduced from 42,000 MT to 20,000 MT4, a 53% reduction5) 92 5,024 2,399 0 6,642 29 5,502 64 4,659 2,546 387 4,349 3,008 4,643 74 11,269 2,835 767 6,878 9,308 10,698 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 Water Delivery Facilities Wastewater Facilities Vehicle Fleet Streetlights & Traffic Signals Solid Waste Facilities Power Generation Facilities Buildings & Other Facilities 2005 2012 2013 4 MT refers to metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions. 5 For 2012, the emissions reduction excluding adjustments to account for variations in hydro-electricity production and PaloAltoGreen purchases is 31%. This is primarily because 2012 was a relatively dry year which resulted in hydro electric supply providing 42% of electric needs, instead of the 52% supply Palo Alto would have received in an average hydro year or about 62% of supply in a wet year. In 2013, the carbon emissions related to electric supplies is zero. In 2012, staff has revised its baseline calculations for City operations emissions to be in line with the current calculation methodology known as the Local Government Operations protocol (LGOP). The LGOP was developed by California Air Resources Board (CARB) staff in partnership with the Climate Action Reserve (CAR), The Climate Registry (TCR), and Local Governments for Sustainability. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Table 1: City Operations GHG Emissions: 2005, 2012, 2013 GHG Emissions comparison (Scope 1 & 2)2005 2012 2013 Water Delivery Facilities 74 64 92 Wastewater Facilities 11,269 4,659 5,024 Vehicle Fleet 2,835 2,546 2,399 Streetlights & Traffic Signals 692 387 0 Solid Waste Facilities 6,878 4,349 6,642 Power Generation Facilities 9,308 3,008 29 Buildings & Other Facilities 10,698 4,643 5,502 TOTAL 41,754 19,655 19,689 53%53% City of Palo Alto Page 7 GHG Emissions from Community and City Municipal Operations Figure 2 below summarizes the combined City and Community emissions in three categories6. Figure 2: Community and City Operations GHG Emissions: 2005, 2012, 2013 (Total Emissions7 reduced from 798,000 MT to 636,000 MT, 565,000 MT respectively) The use of natural gas has decreased slightly from 2005, primarily as a result of efficiency improvements and a large commercial natural gas customer leaving town. The annual use of natural gas is highly sensitive to how cold the winters are in town. The electricity related emissions reduction in 2012 was largely due to greater amount of renewable energy supply, and the additional 2013 reduction to zero was a result of the implementation of the Carbon Neutral Plan. Attachment C provides greater detail. 6 Scope 1 is defined to be direct emissions that the City can control and as a natural gas utility it primarily includes natural gas related communitywide GHG emissions. Scope 2 is communitywide emissions related to electricity usage. Scope 3 is emissions not in scope 1 or scope 2; some but not all Scope 3 emissions are included in this report. (World Resources Institute protocol adopted by TCR). 7 The total emissions estimate for 2012 is adjusted for hydroelectric production variations caused by weather and PaloAltoGreen energy purchases. Staff has revised its baseline calculations in line with the LGOP protocols. For 2013, the electric supplies are carbon neutral. City of Palo Alto Page 8 The following chart clearly shows our significant GHG reductions, especially with regard to landfill and renewable portfolio standards. It also highlights our biggest remaining GHG challenges: transportation and natural gas use. City of Palo Alto Page 9 Figure 3: Community and City Operations GHG Emissions: 2005, 2012, and 2013 (Total Emissions8 reduced from 798,000 MT to 636,000 MT and 565,000 MT, respectively) 8 For 2012, the total emissions estimate is adjusted for hydroelectric production variations caused by weather and PaloAltoGreen energy purchases. For 2013, the electric supplies are carbon neutral. In 2012, staff revised its baseline calculations in line with the LGOP protocols. City of Palo Alto Page 10 An assessment of transportation-related emissions was conducted by consultants last year, and preliminary results suggest a 10% reduction in vehicle related emissions despite an increase in the ‘service population’ in Palo Alto. This decrease was driven by a reduction of per capita miles travelled and improved vehicular fuel efficiency. A detailed description of the study results and assumptions is provided in Attachment F. Table 1 below summarizes the results: shows that emissions were reduced by 13.6%, from 371,870 MT in 2005 to 321,200 MT in 2012, but remain our largest contributor—and our biggest challenge, since it is tied to our urban form and patterns or life, as well as technology opportunities. It also shows the corresponding emission estimates for year 1990, the base year utilized by the state for emission reduction goals under state law AB32. Table 2: Estimates of Vehicle Emissions within Palo Alto City Limits Source: Fehr and Peer Report of 03/19/2013 Assessment of GHG Emission Trends Since 1990 California’s Global Warming Solutions Act (AB32) of 2006 calls for statewide GHG emission reduction and establishes a goal of reducing emissions to 1990 emission levels by 2020. Staff’s preliminary estimate is that the Community’s GHG emissions in 2013 are 41% below 1990 emission levels based on estimated mobile fuel use and consumption of electricity and natural gas as outlined in Table 3 below. City of Palo Alto Page 11 Table 3: Community and City Greenhouse Gas Emission Estimates for 1990, 2005, 2012, 2013 1990 2005 2012 2013 1990 2005 Natural Gas 194 166 160 161 -17%-3% Electricity 186 160 75 0 -100%-100% Mobile Combustion*382 372 335 335 -12%-10% Other**100 100 66 69 -- Total 962 798 636 565 -41%-29% Emissions Drivers Greenhouse Gas Emissions (000’s of MT) (City Operations and Community)% Change 2013 * Consultant estimates based on population, employment, vehicle miles travelled and vehicular emission profiles ** Includes landfill, refuse and water WQCP emissions; estimate for 1990 is held at the same level as that of 2005, to be revised at a later time In addition to the emission reduction goals, the City’s CPP also set other goals. These goals and the progress made in achieving them are tabulated below. Table 4: CPP Goals and Progress CPP Goals Update on Progress Incorporate carbon reduction into the City's Comprehensive Plan goals to ensure continuity with other City priorities The new CPP is expected to be developed in the same time frame as an update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan, which will include goals and policies related to GHG emissions. This coordinated development process will allow the plans to inform each other and to be consistent. The schedule adopted for the Comprehensive Plan Update anticipated adoption around the end of 2015. City of Palo Alto Page 12 CPP Goals Update on Progress Explore and evaluate a policy whereby all of the Palo Alto Utilities would become climate neutral and enable customers to choose climate neutrality through various voluntary mechanisms. The City developed PaloAltoGreen program, which became the nation's top-ranked voluntary renewable energy program. In March 2013 Council approved the Carbon Neutral Plan for electricity supply for all customers starting in 2013,9 as a result the PaloAltoGreen program was suspended in 2013. A new voluntary PaloAltoGreen Gas program to allow gas customers to neutralize their natural gas related emissions with certified carbon offsets is expected to be launched in July 2014. With the same participation of the PaloAltoGreen (electric) program, this program has the potential of neutralizing 10% of the GHG emissions associated with natural gas combustion in town within a few years. The merits of residential customers switching from natural gas appliances to electric appliances were analyzed in the past year. While initial results suggest that ‘fuel switching’ may not be cost effective yet for typical retrofits, the analysis found that such options could be cost effective for new construction. The study results are being socialized within the community and other stakeholders, and staff is looking at various programs to facilitate fuel switching by residents in the short- and long-term. Maintain and report GHG inventories on a regular basis Staff has compiled and reported on annual GHG emissions inventory of City operations to national registries (CCAR, TCR) since 2005. Since 2010, Utilities has also been reporting to CARB and starting in 2013, RWQCP also reports to CARB. Promote participation by Palo Alto businesses in GHG inventory efforts A number of large companies in the City quantify their carbon footprint and the City assists them in providing utility related emission coefficients. Participating in the natural gas off-set program will help them neutralize these emissions too. Staff will continue to be active in Sustainable Silicon Valley, Joint Venture Silicon Valley, Santa Clara County Sustainable Office, California Air Resource Board (CARB), Green Cities California, ICLEI/Local Governments for Sustainability, the Urban Sustainability Directors Network (USDN) and other related regional and state forums. A more detailed list of accomplishments by the City is provided in Attachment D. It summarizes many of the City’s sustainability efforts, and includes the following sections. I. Utilities Operations II. Sustainable Purchasing, IT and Administrative Practices III. City Fleet Operations IV. City Facilities Operations and Capital Projects; Public Works Projects 9 Electric supply was carbon neutral with RECs in 2013, and will be carbon neutral with direct supply of approximately 50% renewable and 50% hydro supply by 2017. City of Palo Alto Page 13 V. Green Building VI. Zero Waste and Landfill Operations VII. Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) Operations VIII. Education, Motivation, and Community participation The City’s Sustainability Policy and organizational structure is described in Attachment E. Descriptions of Transportation and Land-use related activities are provided in Attachment F. Cost-Benefit Analysis and Impacts on City Budget The City undertakes cost-benefit analyses to prioritize GHG emission reduction actions for large City projects. For example, when evaluating efficiency and conservation programs Utilities uses a ‘Total Resource Cost10’ approach. The RWQCP’s decision to replace chlorine disinfection with an Ultra-Violet light based disinfection process was based on a life-cycle cost assessment. Replacement of street lights with Light Emitting Diode (LED) based fixtures had an 8-year payback on the investment. Though most of the City Hall building capital projects were justified based on non-energy efficiency related factors (maintaining occupant comfort and extending the life of the building), when selecting energy consuming equipment such as boilers, lighting, and motors for various applications, cost-effective energy efficiency improvement was an integral part of the decision making process. In evaluating alternate fueled vehicles for the City fleet, a similar analysis is undertaken. As a result of these efforts, the City again saved an estimated $500,000 in utilities and vehicle fuel costs in 2013. The City will continue to emphasize cost-effectiveness whenever making purchasing decisions and will continue to include the cost of carbon in such assessments. The waste-to-energy project at the WQCP is also looking at the cost effectiveness of the project, and this will be a key metric as the community decides on the merits of such a project in town versus hauling the waste to another location. How the Climate Protection Plan fits into other Environmental Sustainability Efforts The CPP intersects with and influences many other City programs and initiatives—both that explicitly address environmental sustainability as well as other concerns. For example: The Carbon Neutral electricity plan was also driven by the community’s desire to reduce its carbon footprint. The initiative to replace bio-solids incineration at the RWQCP will eliminate a large component of the emission associated with City operations. Digesting the bio-solids and generating electricity has the potential of overall sustainability of the community by sourcing electricity locally. The City's transportation management initiatives will reduce the impact of the Community’s largest source of emissions, as well as reduce traffic congestion and parking demand. 10 The Total Resource Cost test measures the net costs of efficiency programs based on the total costs of the program, including both the participant and utility costs, and includes cost of carbon. . City of Palo Alto Page 14 The City's Green Building code, currently being modified to reflect the new Title 24 standard, will further reduce energy consumption while improving the economic performance of our building stock. The Zero Waste plan calls for an increase of the diversion rate of several categories of solid waste which will further reduce Community GHG emissions. The Urban Forest Master Plan will expand the carbon sequestration properties of an urban canopy, and could reduce air-conditioning related energy costs by strategically locating trees to shade buildings. The City’s Office of Emergency Services (OES) is working with regional partners to develop plans and mitigation strategies for utility disruption (earthquake, terrorism, accident, etc.). The City is one of the first of our size to have a Local Energy Assurance Plan.11 Attachment D provides an update on all these activities and results to date. Economic Development and City’s GHG Reduction Goals Staff is in the process of creating a methodology to assess the impact of the City’s GHG reduction goals on the community’s economic activities. The data collected as part of the “Downtown CAP” study and the anticipated business registry is expected to be very useful in gathering baseline and trend data over time for this analysis. In the meantime, State and regional data continues to be useful to inform the City of the economic impacts of our GHG reduction goals. The State of California (in its economic analysis of the impact of regulations in implementing GHG emission reductions measures related to state law AB32) concluded that: “ … successful implementation of measures designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by increasing the efficiency with which California uses all forms of energy and by reducing its dependence on the fossil fuels that produce greenhouse gases…will mean that we can achieve the goals of AB 32 without adversely affecting the growth of California’s economy over the next decade, especially as the state recovers from the current economic downturn.12” In addition, the following examples demonstrate that the Community’s forward looking sustainability goals only strengthen community cohesion and contribute to Palo Alto’s economic and social vitality: The community surveys conducted (2012) when developing the electric Carbon Neutral Plan and participation in the PaloAltoGreen program indicate that there is wide support in Palo Alto to pay more for sustainable growth and to reduce the Community’s GHG emissions. 11 www.caleap.org 12 Updated Economic Analysis of California’s Climate Change Scoping Plan. Air Resources Board, March 2010. City of Palo Alto Page 15 Utility bill savings from efficiency and conservation measures undertaken by Palo Alto residents (since 2007) are estimated at approximately $5 million per year—a 9% reduction in customer bills.13 --savings which can spur economic growth. The growth of cleantech companies in Palo Alto and Silicon Valley has clearly added to the economic vitality of the community. In fact, a small but significant percentage of the Stanford Research Park is now occupied by cleantech firms. Adaptation to Climate Change In addition to our GHG emissions reduction efforts, Palo Alto will also play a leadership role in developing regional approaches and state/national level efforts to adapt to the impacts of climate change, and pursue available options to reduce local risk. Low-lying areas of Palo Alto (generally east of Louis Road) are subject to tidal flooding and mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements due to the inadequacy of the network of earthen levees along the San Francisco Bay shoreline. The risk of tidal flooding will rise in the future due to anticipated increases in sea level and severe weather events associated with global climate change. Although Palo Alto has lessened the risk to life, property and infrastructure by preserving large areas east of Highway 101 as dedicated open space, there are still several thousand mostly residential parcels within the tidal floodplain. For detailed information and maps, including critical infrastructure that would be impacted by sea level rise, see the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan.14 The City’s primary local response to sea level rise will be to advocate for raising and strengthening of the system of Bayfront levees. The two agencies with primary responsibility for improving the levees are the US Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (District). The Corps-sponsored South San Francisco Bay Shoreline Study is addressing the need for levee improvements in the South Bay. This study has been progressing very slowly, however, due to a lack of federal funding. The District has taken steps to accelerate the improvements through the use of local funding and State grant monies. The District has received a grant from the State Department of Water Resources to conduct design and environmental assessment of local levee improvements. In addition, the District ballot measure approved in the November 2012 election has $20 million earmarked for the study and design of levee improvements in Santa Clara County. Palo Alto staff continues to stay engaged in ongoing discussions with the District, as well as the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority and the City of Mountain View, on the need for levee improvements to protect the community from the impacts of sea level rise. The Office of Emergency Services (OES) is working in collaboration with these local agencies to improve local mitigation, response, and recovery plans and capabilities. Some of these activities may improve our Community Rating System posture in the National Flood Insurance Program. 13 See Fig D-4 in Attachment D, which shows that per capita electricity, natural gas and water consumption has dropped considerably since 2007. 14 http://quake.abag.ca.gov/wp-content/documents/2010LHMP/PaloAlto-Annex-2011.pdf City of Palo Alto Page 16 Sustainability Governance In the past year, staff has developed new organizational approaches to support the City’s commitments to greater sustainability, through the efforts already underway and with new initiatives now being developed. Attachment E presents the enhanced sustainability governance structure, coordinated by the City’s new Chief Sustainability Officer, which will continue to spur sustainability action within City operations and the Community, and to provide leadership at the regional and national level. Future Vision for Climate Protection and Sustainability In the coming year, in coordination with the development of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, staff will develop a new CPP, and broaden the CCP’s scope into a comprehensive sustainability action roadmap. The new plan will continue Palo Alto’s leadership role by addressing the state’s aspirational GHG reduction goal of 80% reduction (from 1990 levels) by 2050, a stretch goal set by the California Governor’s order S-3-05 of June 200515. While the City has made substantial progress toward that goal—the 41% reduction already achieved—the easy parts have been done; meeting or exceeding the 80% target will require innovation as well as commitment, and it will have costs. CARB has begun regulatory proceedings in 2014 to examine how to reach this goal, though actual recommendations may be years away. In order to meet—or exceed—such an ambitious goal, the City will have to address big challenges with regard to Resource Flows and Efficiency; Structures and Infrastructure (including buildings, transportation and land use); Behavior (including purchasing, transparency, and coordination) including such topics as: Reducing reliance on fossil fuels by switching fuel sources from natural gas and gasoline/diesel to carbon neutral electricity; continued emphasis on EVs and supporting infrastructure; reducing the need for vehicle traffic through smart transportation/land-use development, and a focus on mobility, access and convenience; accelerating the evolution of both the City's new and existing building stock to more energy efficient and more economically viable structures, potentially through enhanced building codes and standards, incentive programs and education of property owners, developers and builders; encouraging the development and deployment of breakthrough greening technologies through collaborative programs with the technology community; applying the City’s “open data” and sustainability commitments to support engagement and innovation from government, business and residents; embedding sustainability commitments into budgeting, procurement, management and performance-tracking systems; 15 Since CARB is also expected to delve into ways of meeting this long term aspirational 80% reduction goal for the state in 2013, the development of the new CPP could also be coordinated with this state effort. City of Palo Alto Page 17 understanding the impact of City and Community economic decisions on Scope 3 GHG emissions (the emissions generated by our purchases of goods and services) and on sustainability for future generations; actively collaborating with neighboring jurisdictions, and the Bay Area region, to effectively address issues that are beyond our ability to influence on our own. NEXT STEPS In addition to these and other specific measures, the City will also need to revisit and examine—in the context of the new Climate Plan—our aspirations, goals and commitments. Will we focus on meeting California’s goal of reducing GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels by 2050? Or by 2030? Will we step from carbon neutral electricity by 2017 to a carbon neutral utility by 2020? A carbon neutral city by 2025? A 100% renewables city by 2030? Will we be content to reduce our water use to meet each year’s drought requirements? Prepare to adapt to a new, drier normal, reducing water use 20% by 2020? Or begin to think about net zero water as well as net zero energy? How will we engage with ecosystems and biodiversity, in our parks, gardens, forests and food systems? And the all-important question that each organization and each person will ask: What would that mean to me? Each of these feeds the three fundamental questions that the City will need to address, both for our own well-being, and for the contribution one small, innovative city can make to the sustainability revolution: How good do we really want it to be? What would it take—in technology, investment, innovation and personal change—to get there? In view of those requirements, are we willing to do it—to make the necessary commitments, and to act to deliver the world we want? These are some of the questions we will need to address in the planning process of the next year. Attachments: Attachment A - Summary of 2007 Climate Protection Plan (PDF) Attachment B - City Municipal Operations Emissions (PDF) Attachment C - Palo Alto Community and City Municipal Operations GHG Emission (PDF) Attachment D - Sustainability Initiatives of the City (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 18 Attachment E - Sustainability Policy and Organizational Structure (PDF) Attachment F - Transportation and Sustainable Landuse (PDF) Attachment G - Contributors to report (PDF) Attachment A: Summary of 2007 Climate Protection Plan & Updates from 2010 Page 1 of 3 Summary Description of the 2007 Climate Protection Plan NOTE: Emissions estimate have been updated since 2007, and is reflected in the body of the report. This summary is for reference purposes only. In December 2007 Council approved a Climate Protection Plan (CPP) that set a short, medium, and long term goals to reduce City operations and community greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These goals were: 1. Short Term Goal: By 2009, the City Operations will reduce emissions by 5% from 2005 emission levels for a total reduction of 3,266 metric tons of CO2. 2. Medium Term Goal: By 2012 the City Operations and Community will reduce emissions by 5% from 2005 emissions level for a total reduction of 29,702 metric tons of CO2. 3. Long Term Goals: By 2020, the City Operations and Community will reduce emissions by 15% of 2005 levels, equal to 119,140 metric tons of CO2, and bring the community in line with State emission reduction goals. Outlined below in Figure 1 and Figure 2 are the City’s and Community’s GHG emissions profiles, as outlined in the 2007 CPP. The City’s emissions of 65,329 Metric Tons of CO2e (MT CO2e) and the community’s emissions of 728,720 MT CO2e combined is equivalent to approximately 14 tons per resident. Electricity and natural gas related emissions account for approximately 40% of the 793,621 MT CO2e total municipal plus community emissions. (Note: the natural gas leakage estimate has since been substantially revised downwards, from 19,358 MT CO2e to 4,717 MTCO2e.) Figure 1: Municipal (City Operations) GHG Emission Sources in 2005 (65,329 MT CO2e) Source: Climate Protection Plan: December 2007 Note: Natural gas leakage numbers were updated with more accurate numbers since 2007 that resulted in considerable reduction in leakage estimates. Attachment A: Summary of 2007 Climate Protection Plan & Updates from 2010 Page 2 of 3 Figure 2: Community GHG Emission Sources in 2005 (726,720 MT CO2e) Source: Climate Protection Plan: December 2007 B. Short Term GHG Reduction Goals The City operations undertook a number of departmental level initiatives to meet the goal to reduce municipal GHG emissions by 5% at the end of 2009. Utilities energy efficiency and conservation programs were integral part of this effort. The initiative was classified under five main categories: employee education, electricity conservation and efficiency upgrades, paper use reduction, commute reduction, and waste reduction. A revised 2005 benchmark of 29,364 MT CO2e was established. This lower benchmark down from 65, 329 MT, figure 1 above) reflects the reduced estimate for natural gas leakage and biogenic emissions from the waste water treatment plant because the facility serves other cities too and Palo Alto has minimal control over those emissions. Attachment A: Summary of 2007 Climate Protection Plan & Updates from 2010 Page 3 of 3 April 2010 Update In April 2010, staff reported to Council that municipal GHG emissions declined by 11% in 2009 relative to the revised baseline year of 2005 (excluding employee commute estimates) (CMR: 194:10). Emissions were down from 29,364 MT CO2e to 25,518 MT CO2e. The principle contributors to this reduction are outlined below: Major upgrades and process improvements at the water quality plant, accounted for 75% of the reduction o Replace natural gas used in the biosolids incinerator emission control equipment with landfill gas that had previously been burned in a flare o Improve aeration system and replace air diffusers o Install more efficient motors and lighting fixtures Upgrade building systems and fixtures o Lighting fixture upgrades at the Elwell Court building o Reduced lighting levels at selected locations o City hall upgrades: motors, boilers, HVAC system Updated 2012 GHG Reduction Goal for the City Based on the progress made since 2007, City Council in 2010 increased the City municipal GHG reduction goal to 20% below 2005 levels by 2012. Attachment B: GHG Emissions of City Municipal Operations Page 1 of 3 Attachment B: GHG Emissions of City Municipal Operations: Year 2005 versus 2013 City municipal operations related emissions drivers and associated emissions are shown below. Table B1: City Operations GHG Emission in 2005, 2012 and 2013 (in MT of CO2 equivalent) – Biogenic and Anthropogenic, no adjustment for hydro conditions of PAG purchases - 2005 2012 2013 Scope 1 Biogenic Scope 2 Scope 1 Biogenic Scope 2 Scope 1 Biogenic Scope 2 Buildings and Other Facilities 8,723 0 1,819 7,016 0 1,155 5,502 0 0 Streetlights and Traffic Signals 689 534 0 Water Delivery Facilities 2 0 67 34 0 42 92 0 0 Wastewater Facilities 8,504 16,689 2,546 6,414 15,602 1,950 5,024 11,183 0 Vehicle Fleet 2,835 1 0 2,546 0 0 2,399 0 0 Power Generation Facilities 0 0 8,570 227 0 3,839 29 0 0 Solid Waste Facilities 6,846 5,853 29 4,336 3,827 19 6,642 5,789 0 Other Processes & Fugitive Emissions 3 9 9 26,912 22,543 13,720 20,582 19,429 7,539 19,697 16,972 0 Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions are non-biogenic emissions and caused by human activity. Biogenic emissions are assumed to be net carbon neutral and not reported under GHG emission reporting protocols. Table B2 below shows the transformation of the Table B1 above by excluding biogenic emissions, and shows an emission reduction, since 2005, of 52%. Table B2: City Operations GHG Emission in 2005, 2012 and 2013 (in MT of CO2 equivalent) – Excludes Biogenic, not normalized for hydro conditions of PAG purchases - GHG Emissions comparison (Scope 1 & 2) 2005 2012 Water Delivery Facilities 69 76 Wastewater Facilities 11,049 8,364 Vehicle Fleet 2,835 2,546 Streetlights & Traffic Signals 689 534 Solid Waste Facilities 6,876 4,354 Power Generation Facilities 8,570 4,067 Buildings & Other Facilities 10,542 8,172 TOTAL 40,629 28,112 30.8% Attachment B: GHG Emissions of City Municipal Operations Page 2 of 3 Table B2 does not include the effects of the purchase of PaloAltoGreen resources and the normalization of the vagaries of hydroelectric supply conditions. The Table B3 below accounts for these two effects and shows a 53% reduction in emissions since 2005. Table B3: City Operations GHG Emission in 2005, 2012 and 2013 (in MT of CO2 equivalent) – Excludes Biogenic, normalized for hydro conditions and PAG purchases – GHG Emissions comparison (Scope 1 & 2) 2005 2012 Water Delivery Facilities 74 64 Wastewater Facilities 11,269 4,659 Vehicle Fleet 2,835 2,546 Streetlights & Traffic Signals 748 387 Solid Waste Facilities 6,878 4,349 Power Generation Facilities 9,308 3,008 Buildings & Other Facilities 10,698 4,643 TOTAL 41,811 19,655 53.0% Note: There is not much of a change in emissions related to electric supply portfolio becoming carbon neutral in 2013 is because, the City electric supplies were largely neutralized with the purchase of PaloAltoGreen REC products in 2012. Figure below graphically illustrates Table B3 and is a reproduction of Figure 1 from the body of the report. Figure 1: City Operations GHG Emissions: 2005, 2012 and 2013 Total Emissions Reduced from 42,000 MT to 19,700 MT, a 53% reduction) The primary drivers for GHG emission reduction since 2005 are: Attachment B: GHG Emissions of City Municipal Operations Page 3 of 3 Building and Other Facilities – Due to reduction in electricity consumption enactment of the Carbon Neutral Plan in March 2013, all electricity consumed by the City in 2013 had zero carbon emissions. With the purchase of RECs through the PaloAltoGreen program, city facilities electricity related carbon footprint was low in previous years too. Power Generation Facilities – This category accounts for transmission and distribution system losses. City divested its ownership of the COTP transmission line in 2009 resulting in lower loss allocation to the City. Distribution loss related emissions also were eliminated in 2013 due to carbon neutral electric supplies. Solid Waste Facilities – Closure and capping of the landfill, resulting in less methane production and leakage in CY 2012. Higher collection in CY 2013 likely to be attributable to additional capping during the year and a regulated fraction of CO2 in collected LFG (33%) remaining constant. Streetlights and Traffic Signals – Conversions to LED streetlight (note, only metered fixtures are shown)and greener electric supply; 2013 no emissions due to carbon neutral supply Vehicle Fleet – A slight reduction in consumption of gasoline and CNG fuels, along with a large reduction in diesel fuel. Wastewater Facilities – Combustion of biogenic methane from landfill in incinerator (replacing natural gas), combined with greater level of renewable energy in regular electricity supply and purchase of PaloAltoGreen RECs. Water Delivery Facilities – fluctuating energy use for water pumping Attachment C: GHG Emissions of Palo Alto Community and City Municipal Operations Palo Alto Community & City Municipal Operations GHG Emission: Reduction of 29% since 2005 City Municipal Operations* & Palo Alto Community GHG Emissions Summary Excludes Biogenic Emissions**, All units in Metric Tons (MT) of CO2 equivalent Consumption Quantity 2005 Emissions in 2005 (MT of CO2e) Consumption Quantity 2012 Emissions in 2012 (MT of CO2e) Consumption Quantity 2013 Emissions in 2013 (MT of CO2e) Notes Scope 1 Emissions Natural Gas Use (in Therms)31,374,970 166,350 30,086,536 159,519 30,336,076 160,842 1 Natural Gas Distribution Leakage 4,718 4,718 4,718 2 Palo Alto Landfill Fugitive Emissions 6,811 4,336 6,640 3 Wastewater Process Emissions 8,504 6,414 5,024 4 Scope 2 Emissions -- Actual Total Electric Load in MWh 996,091 966,839 986,241 Hydro Supply (MWh)548,760 413,584 406,570 Renewables Supply (MWh)49,980 188,566 177,027 Brown Power Supply (MWh)397,352 158,427 364,689 145,404 402,644 0 5a Palo Alto Green Purchases (MWh)30,601 (12,201)75,805 (30,224)N/A 6 Scope 2 Emissions -- Weather Adjusted*** Total Electric Load 996,091 966,839 986,241 Hydro Supply (MWh)514,073 514,073 514,073 Renewables Supply (MWh)49,980 188,566 177,027 Brown Power Supply (MWh)432,038 172,257 264,200 105,339 295,141 117,675 5b Palo Alto Green Purchases (MWh)30,601 (12,201)75,805 (30,224)0 0 6 Scope 3 Emissions Commute into, from, and within City 371,870 335,390 335,390 7 Life Cycle Emissions From Annual Total Waste Placed in Landfills 69,491 24,823 43,947 15,698 45,411 16,221 8 Landfilling Recyclable meterial 54,838 34,680 35,836 8 Total (weather adjust., biogenic excl.)797,970 635,870 564,671 Emission Reduction (since 2005) 20%Emission Reduction (since 2005) 29% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 * ** *** Notes Total Community supply of natural gas use/delivery. Calculated using total captured landfill gas, actual methane percentage; fugitive gas assumed to be 33% of captured. rate. 2005 estimate has been revised to reflect current methodologies. Represents N2O emissions from biological treatment process and release of Nitrogen. a. Represents actual quantity of brown power related emission @879/lbs/MWh in 2005 and 2012; not applicable in 2013. b. Weather normalized (for hydro electric generation) quantity of brown power. No GHG impact in 2013. Emissions saved due to purchase of PaloAltoGreen related RECs. PAG related RECs not included in 2013 due to Carbon Neutral electric supply. Leakage from the natural gas distribution system- modelled result, unchanged over the period. Study results from Fehr and Peer (03/19/2013) using Valley Transportation Authority regional transportation model based Vehicular Miles Travelled (VMT) and vehicular profiles - does not account for Palo Alto specific parameters related to greater penetration of alternate fuel vehicles, bicylce use, etc. Study results under review. 2013 assumed to be same as 2012.Based on characteristics and tons of material landfilled: 2005, 2011 and 2012 figures; Landfilled amount in 2013 up 3% in 2012 compared to 2011. Table excludes biogenic emissions related to: Landfill gas flaring and WQCP sludge incineration. Normalized to account for the vagaries of weather on hydroelectric supplies. No GHG impact in 2013. Municipal emissions related to electricity and natural gas consumption included within utility load numbers; fleet vehicle emissions also assumed to be included in community wide commute related emissions estimates made by consultant. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 1 of 30 Attachment D: Highlights of Sustainability Initiatives by City Municipal Operations This discussion is compiled in the order of the sections in the 2007 Climate Protection Plan (CPP). In each section, staff has evaluated actions taken to reduce City and Community GHG emissions. To the extent possible, staff has reviewed existing programs, described results and the potential actions or programs that will help reach future goals.The topics contained in this attachment are: I.Utilities Operations II.Sustainable Purchasing, IT and Administrative Practices III. City Fleet Operations IV.City Facilities,Operations and Capital Projects V.Green Building VI.Zero Waste and Landfill Operations 95% needs Shiva review VII.Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) Operations 95%, needs Shiva review VIII.Education, Motivation, and Community participation 50% needs Gil review Attachment F discusses the topic of Transportation and Sustainable Land Use, an important area that accounted for more than half of the Community GHG emissions in 2013. I.Utilities Operations Considerable progress has been made through the City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) programs to reduce the carbon emissions associated with Community electricity and natural gas usage since 2005.Electric supply related GHG emissions, which accounted for 160,000 MT in 2005,reduced by 53% to 75,000 MT in 2012, and in 2013 completely eliminated with the implementation of the Carbon Neutral electric supply plan in 2013.Figure D-1 below illustrates the electricity supply sources for the base year (2005) and 2013. Figure D-1: Electricity Supply Sources: 2005 vs. 2013 Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 2 of 30 electric supply in 2013 was either large hydroelectric generation, long-term contracts for renewable energy, or market purchases which were made carbon neutral with the purchase of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs). The lower hydro supply in 2013 is due to drier conditions. Renewable energy supplies are expected to increase from 19% in 2013 to 33% by end of 2015. electric needs are expected to be supplied by carbon-free hydro supplies and long-term renewable resources. Natural gas supply related GHG emissions have remained relatively flat since 2005, with efficiency and conservation programs and reduced customer consumption accounting for a 2.6%reduction in load. Natural gas related emissions in 2013 were estimated at 161,000 MT. CPAU is seeking Council approval of a PaloAltoGreen Gas program whereby customers could negate the GHG impact related to the use of natural gas at their homes and businesses by purchasing high quality environmental offsets. Energy Efficiency and Conservations in the Community Since 2005, onservation programs for the community have contributed to considerable reductions in customer energy usage and bills, along with the associated GHG emissions reduction. Figures D-2 and D-3 illustrate the impact of energy efficiency on the projected electric and gas sales, respectively. Figure D-2: Impact of Energy Efficiency on Electric Sales Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 3 of 30 Figure D-3: Impact of Energy Efficiency on Gas Sales In addition to CPAU efficiency and conservation programs1, state and federal energy and water efficiency appliance and equipment standards help residents reduce energy consumption further as illustrated below. Figure D-4 shows that per capita residential electricity, natural gas, and water consumption have declined by 11%, 15%, and 17%,respectively since 2007. Energy efficiency improvements and more stringent building codes and standards explain much of this trend. Figure D-4: Residential Per Capita Utility Consumption Declining 1 and conservation program related savings are computed based on specific measurement criteria mandated by state law. This tends to undercount actual savings and does not account for improved appliance and equipment efficiency standards. Improved building codes and appliance efficiency standards are included in the sales forecasts. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 4 of 30 On the other hand, absolute resource consumption has not moved as dramatically, as shown in Figures D5, D6 and D7. Staff is in the process of closely examining the reasons behind this trend, in order to be able to more effectively reduce both normalized and absolute resource consumption and impacts in the future. Figure D-5: Natural Gas Use (Therms/year) Figure D-6:Electricity Use (kWh/year) Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 5 of 30 Figure D-7: Water Use (ccf/year) CPAU Energy Efficiency Program Achievements State and Federal agencies continue to tighten appliance efficiency standards and code requirements leading to additional energy savings for the community. These savings contribute to the overall decline in per capita energy and water consumption as shown in Figure D-4, but cannot be counted to meet Council-established gas and electric energy efficiency goals. CPAU continues to aggressively pursue those goals and expects to achieve an additional reduction of 4.8% of electricity usage and 2.8% of natural gas usage by 2023. In FY 2013, customer DSM programs achieved electric, gas and water savings of 0.85%, 1.13% and 0.53%,respectively, of projected annual consumption. Key CPAU program achievements in FY 2013 are highlighted below: The Labs Efficiency program, administered by third-party vendor Willdan Energy Solutions, delivered gas and electric savings from two project sites. Two new programs were added during FY 2013 providing direct installation of energy and water efficient devices to hard-to-reach customers (small businesses and multi- family buildings). In April 2013, -based non-profits to raise awareness about water resources, conservation and drive participation in conservation programs. The second annual Great Race to Save Water is on April 19, 2014. In April 2013, the City Council approved a contract renewal with OPower for the continued delivery of quarterly Home Energy Reports (with online access to monthly Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 6 of 30 data) to approximately 17,700 residential customers for three years beginning July 2013. Additionally, a new Home Water Report produced by WaterSmart will be sent separately to residential customers until the two platforms can be integrated into a single report. In May 2013, the City Council approved a contract with the Center for Sustainable Energy California to administer the state-mandated solar water heating (thermal) program, with the option to extend the program for up to four additional years. As required by state law, in December 2012 the City Council adopted updated ten-year energy efficiency (EE) goals to be achieved between 2014 and 2023. These updated electric and gas efficiency goals were based on an extensive analysis of the potential, achievable, and cost- territory. Water efficiency and conservation programs have achieved more than 5% reduction in water consumption since 2005; these savings have minimal impact on the C since the Hetch Hetchy supplies are largely gravity powered. Specific DSM programs include:direct installation of efficiency measures for low income customers, rebates for installation of efficient appliances and equipment, education programs, residential energy use audits, home energy reports, commercial customer programs (by end use and type of business), a green building construction program, and many others. CPAU continues to review and enhance its programs for all members of the community, whether low income or a major international corporation. The City is in the process of issuing an RFP to retain new contractors to assist with the administration, marketing, and management of DSM programs starting in the fall of 2014. The July 2014 introduction of new, upgraded Title 24 building and appliance energy standards will further enhance energy efficiency baseline standards, but this also will result in reduced potential for CPAU to influence additional and incremental energy efficiency savings over and above the more stringent energy code. CPAU staff is working collaboratively with the optimally use utility energy services. Utility Distribution System Operations CPAU also continues to minimize the impact of the operation of its distribution systems on the environment. Such initiatives include: Replacing Street Lights with LED Fixtures: of the com Over the past 3 years, with the help of Federal grants, the City has invested $1.3 million to replace approximately half of the lights with new LED based street lighting which has a lower energy consumption, reduced maintenance cost, and a higher illumination level. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 7 of 30 This investment is expected to reduce annual maintenance cost by 30% and annual energy consumption by 60%, resulting in a simple payback of 8 years. Another 2,300 streetlights will be replaced by the end of 2014. The remaining 15% of the streetlights,which are mostly decorative or special type lighting,is expected to be replaced at a later time when suitable fixtures become available. Control and Management of Sulfur-hexafluoride Equipment and Replacement: Sulfur- hexafluoride (SF6)is a highly potent GHG.Due to its characteristics as a good electrical insulator, SF6 gas based electrical equipment gained popularity three decades ago. The City purchased several of these devices for substation and distribution system installation. Since the impact of this gas on the climate was identified, CPAU has stopped purchasing them, has maintained strict protocols to ensure the gas does not leak from existing equipment, and has begun replacing them with more benign equipment when equipment end of life approaches. To date a few pieces of equipment have been replaced, but 30 circuit breakers and 35 switches remain. The reminder is expected to be replaced over the next decades as they age. Upgrade of Electric Distribution Voltage: Over the past few decades, CPAU has been converting the voltage of the distribution system from 4 kV to 12 kV to reduce distribution line losses,reduce the type of spare equipment purchased and stored for emergencies,and reduce maintenance cost. Customer Engagement with Advanced Meters:A 300-home pilot program called was launched in December 2013 with advanced electric, gas and water meters that will enable customers to have access to hourly utility consumption data and analytical tools to assist with better utilization of utility services. The objective of the program is to gauge interest and applicability of this technology within Palo Alto and to observe how residents might reduce energy usage through such feedback. An early anecdote illustrating the value of this technology came in January 2014, when a customer discovered a large leak in his irrigation system by viewing the utility portal provided through the program. The early detection of the leak, instead of waiting until the monthly utility bill arrives, saved this customer more than $200. Shown below is the illustration of the customer portal that shows high water use for 8 days at the end of December, before the leak was discovered and fixed. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 8 of 30 For further information, see: www.cityofpaloalto.org/ULTcustomerconnect Purchase of Battery Powered Bucket Truck Lifts: CPAU is exploring the purchase of two bucket trucks that will have battery-powered bucket lifts to eliminate the need for the engine to idle while construction is in progress. This will enhance safety, and reduce noise pollution and GHG emissions. Emerging Technology Demonstration: In 2012, CPAU launched a program to open up the prove their value another way the City is helping to meet the challenge of climate change. Since its launch, 24 applications were received and 6 technologies are in the process of being demonstrated. See: www.cityofpaloalto.org/UTLinnovation. Utilities Plans for the Coming Years (2014 to 2020) CPAU plans to continue its programs to reduce GHG emissions,and has many plans in place including the following: Continue to aggressively pursue energy efficiency and conservation opportunities, as well as support the Planning and Community Development Department in encouraging green buildings and permitting processes. These programs are expected to reduce electricity usage by an additional 4.8% and natural gas usage by an additional 2.8% by 2023. Encourage local solar PV resource investments through rebates and guaranteed energy buy-back program in the Palo Alto CLEAN program.In addition staff plans to implement three new programs under the proposed Local Solar Plan scheduled for Council consideration on 4/21/2014. The three new programs under the plan are: 1) a Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 9 of 30 community solar share program for residents who do not have suitable roofs to obtain the output of a local solar project, 2) a donation program to get solar on the roof of schools and local not-for-profit organizations; and -program whereby residents who are interested to have solar on their roofs could collectively buy and install systems and enjoy the economies of scale associated with bulk-buying, potentially bringing down cost by 10-25%. The overall objective of the Local Solar Plan initiatives is to generate about 4% of the Citywide load through local PV system by 2023, a 5 fold increase from current levels. Under the proposed new PaloAltoGreen Gas program, which Council is scheduled to consider on 4/21/14, customers will have the opportunity to neutralize the GHG emissions related to their natural gas combustion. If 20% of the households participate in the program (as in the PaloAltoGreen (electric) program), the program has the potential to reduce GHG emissions by approximately 16,000 MT, a 10% reduction from the 160,000MT of GHG emission associated with natural gas combustion in Palo Alto. Staff analyzed the opportunities and cost effectiveness of switching from natural gas appliances to electric appliances in single-family homes and provided the results to the Council in February 2014 (Staff Report ID #4422). The results suggest that fuel switching for residential appliances is not cost effective at this time,and that the purchase of environmental off-cost-effective way to neutralize GHG emissions associated with natural gas combustion. However, staff is evaluating whether to encourage all-electric homes, especially for new construction opportunities, when fuel switching opportunities could be more cost effective compared to retrofitting. The Georgetown University Energy Prize is a $5 million prize to be awarded to a small to mid-sized community that demonstrates substantial progress in implementing energy efficiency and conservation programs. Communities will be judged on their ability to save energy (electric and natural gas) from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2016 in residences, public schools and municipal buildings. Communities will also be evaluated on the extent their programs spur innovation, are replicable and scalable, and on their plans to continue to decrease their energy consumption even after the evaluation period. The City is planning to participate in this competition with active community support, but the chances of winning the prize may be low,due to success of already implemented energy efficiency and conservation measures in Palo Alto. Continue to procure renewable resources to meet Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS)of at least 33% of electricity sales coming from renewable energy sources by 2015 and to implement the Carbon Neutral Plan so that renewable energy supplies are close to 50% of supply by 2017. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 10 of 30 After successful implementation of the pilot, make residential Electric Vehicle (EV) Time- Of-Use rates available to all residents in the City because: o Charging EVs during peak use times could impact local distribution transformers and require expensive upgrades. o Charging EVs at night and in the early morning reduces the cost to purchase electricity o Faster adaptation and lower cost of operating EVs will also reduce Community GHG emissions. Based on California Energy Commission (CEC) projections, Palo Alto may have 3,000 to 10,000 residential and commuter EVs charging in the City by 2020, which would reduce Community GHG emissions by 1.5% to 5% by 2020. These EVs are expected to increase Community electrical usage by 1% to 3%in the same timeline an increase that should largely be offset by new local solar generation. Low Carbon Fuel Standards (LCSF) regulation provides a mechanism for electric utilities to claim GHG credits, to the extent EVs charge within the utilit service territory. The LCSF allowance thus allocated to the electric utility must then be monetized and used for EV-related programs. CPAU is in the process of claiming these emission allowances and will bring to the Council a recommendation of how this value could be channeled back to the benefit of EV owners. The allowances are expected to have a value of approximately $60,000 per year in 2014, but would grow with greater EV adoption in town. Evaluate the implementation of advanced metering infrastructure and smart grid systems throughout the city based on the results of the pilot projects underway. Preliminary results suggest a 1-2% energy/water consumption reduction could be achieved by diligently implementing and maintaining smart grid systems, and establishing effective communication channels with customers. Evaluate the use and benefits of Distribution Automation equipment to improve electric system operating efficiency, improve service reliability, and increase energy efficiency. II.Green Purchasing, IT & Administrative Practices Green Purchasing Products and services acquired by the City will have an environmental impact during their manufacture, distribution, use, and disposal. Incorporating environmental performance criteria into procurement decisions can have a significant impact on the as supporting other sustainability policies and programs such as Zero Waste, green building, services, in conjunction with the environmental purchasing efforts of other Bay Area or State Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 11 of 30 Public Agencies, has impacts beyond City of Palo Alto operations, as these purchases contribute to expanded market demand and access to these products and services. Many purchases that are environmentally preferable are also fiscally preferable because of less material use (e.g., paper when copiers and printers are set to duplex), reduced maintenance (e.g., structural pest control which relies on long-lasting structural repairs instead of expensive automatic monthly spraying or other chemical control), and direct costs, (e.g., remanufactured toner cartridges, which when specified correctly cost approximately 30-60% less per copy than new cartridges). Other cost savings can be seen through the use of reduced-risk products which decrease potential harm to users and to the environment and reduced disposal and end-of-life costs. The CPP authorized the implementation of a green purchasing program in 2007, and adopted a Green Purchasing Policy in 2008 which supports existing environmental policies and Council direction to reduce GHG, pesticides, mercury and achieve Zero Waste and pollution prevention goals. The existence of a green purchasing policy allows the City to qualify for certain state wide grants, including a $250,000 grant the City received from CalRecycle for street maintenance. Palo Alto has greened many of its goods and services and received the 2011 Green California Summit and Exposition Award for Leadership in Green Purchasing The following products and services are purchased using green purchasing criteria: Office Supplies:In 2013, The City approved a new office supply contract with Staples. The new contract allows staff to purchase materials over the Staples website. Staples is working with staff to block the purchase of those items that are prohibited by City environmental policies or other established goals a function that was not available in the previous contract. The website also encourages the purchase of greener items by guiding users to a convenient drag-down list of greener selections for an array of products (e.g., pens, paper, folders, binders). Staples has a robust program to right-size boxes and reduce packaging and it can provide a reporting function on environmental impacts of purchasing certain commodities such as recycled-content copy paper and remanufactured toner cartridges. The City is currently transitioning from its use of 30% post-consumer content recycled copy paper to 100%which is less energy-intensive to manufacture. When the transition is complete Staples estimates that the City will reduce approximately 80 metric tons of C02 emissions through its copy paper purchases.The City is offsetting the greater cost of 100% recycled paper by purchasing high-quality remanufactured toner cartridges which by themselves reduce waste and GHG emissions, for projected net savings of $9,400. In 2014, staff will work to further increase the purchase of recycled content office paper and other supplies and revisit the status of priority goods and services to green.It will Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 12 of 30 also be able to provide more detailed metrics about the impacts of this contract after one full year of use. Copiers and printers duplex capability,preset to provide that function before they are deployed for use. Printers with a duplex function are replacing older models as they are phased out. Through these efforts an initial assessment in 2010 (based on 2009 use) indicated a 15% reduction in paper use and annual savings of approximately $7,000 in paper costs. This number has not yet been revised to reflect more recent paper purchases.In 2014, staff will work with IT to update these efforts to ensure that these settings are in check for all new computers that were deployed in 2013. IT also requires that computer and monitor purchases ds. EPEAT criteria incorporate environmental attributes that attempt to address the full lifecycle of electronic products,including the reduction or elimination of environmentally sensitive materials, material selection, design for end of life, energy conservation, corporate performance and packaging. Low-mercury fluorescent lighting Discontinued use of hand soaps containing triclosan anti-bacterial product associated with water quality and potential human health issues Discontinued use of spray insecticides and poison rodenticides. Structural pest control requires the rigorous EcoWise Certification (Palo Alto was the first to require this certification) and additional requirements for local reporting and bee protection. Use of locally-sourced mulches, OMRI certified organic fertilizers and other waste reducing measures mentioned in the Bay-Friendly landscaping standards in landscape maintenance contracts. place an emphasis on reduced-toxicity and higher recycled content (these same standards for City staff use will be explored in the coming months). Out-sourced printing services must use a minimum 30%recycled-content paper when available and utility inserts are printed on 100% post-consumer content paper. These following additional measures seek to avoid the purchase of certain materials which can indirectly reduce GHG emissions: Expanded foam food ware and plastic bags are not distributed at City- sponsored events. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 13 of 30 A portable drinking water station is available for use at some special events to reduce the use of single-use water bottles. (The City adopted a policy of no bottled water at City sponsored events, but this appears to be honored inconsistently.) Boilerplate language in Purchasing contract Terms and Conditions has been revised to require,where feasible, extended producer responsibility, disallow the use of expanded foam plastics as packaging material, and standards for energy and water efficiency and Zero Waste.This revision was part of a larger regional effort led by Palo Alto staff and City of Sunnyvale and City of San Jose partners to encourage other municipalities to follow suit. In addition: In select contracts, additional evaluation points are given to those companies that are Certified as a Bay Area Green Business Multiple life cycle costing workshops have been held by Utilities for key accounts and staff. Staff will explore extension of LCC methods to other spending categories, and will schedule additional workshops as needed. On the other hand, these new purchasing requirements are not yet implemented consistently. While the City has made good strides on its green purchasing program, the very limited staff time available to run this program has not supported regular tracking of implementation and and other environmental goals. In FY 2015, staff will determine priorities and goals for strengthening this initiative, and develop plans for expanding and leveraging green purchasing, and quantifying the impacts of the program. IT & Administrative Service Department Related Initiatives Effort to switch to laptops from desktops could assist with reducing energy consumption by more than 50% Increased the temperature setting in the server room, reducing the air-conditioning loads marginally Established duplex printing capability, to reduce single-sided printing Established Green IT Purchasing guidelines striving for the procurement of EPEAT Gold- rated IT equipment as well as the reduction of expanded plastics in packaging materials Deployed video conferencing capabilities in City facilities to support more virtual meetings allowing for less travel Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 14 of 30 Make the Budget and Audited financial statements available electronically and reduce the amount of printed copies over the past 5 years approximately 40% paper reduction. Planned Activities for any new technology initiatives reducing energy costs for power and cooling in the Data Center. Establishing a Data Center Footprint Reduction initiative performing consolidation via virtualization and Cloud technologies III.City Fleet Operations Fleet Operations has strived to reduce the carbon foot print of the fleet. These efforts and accomplishments include: Reinstated a vehicle replacement program to remove older, more polluting and less-fuel efficient vehicles, and replace them with newer more efficient ones. The city will invest approximately $3.5 Million to purchase new vehicles.Fleet Maintenance has committed to the use of CNG fueled vehicles and initiated the purchase of 17 new Honda CNG Civics. The Honda CNG Civics are on the road and all of the older civics have been sold.Fleet Maintenance also put in service one new CNG pickup truck, one new CNG van, and are looking at adding purchasing one additional CNG pickup truck. Maintaini -up electric generators (COBUG), reducing the required testing run time down from 8 hours per week to 2 hours per month and saving natural gas usage Completed an under-inated vehicles from the fleet thus reducing fuel usage on those older vehicles. Completed retrofit of heavy duty diesel equipment with particulate filters to reduce the harmful diesel particulates generated (PM10 level) by diesel engine. Fleet staff is working with the Utilities Department on the evaluation of two battery powered bucket truck lifts and with Public Works on a battery supported pavement parking truck to eliminate truck idling during maintenance. Following all OEM recommended oil change interval to help reduce used oil and oil filters added to the waste stream. Also use several re-refined oil and antifreeze products in service inventory to further reduce additional waste products from entering the waste stream. Waste oil filters are recycled and waste oil is re-refined and reused thus reducing demand for new oil. Decreasing miles (2005) to 1.50 million in 2012-a 19% drop. The resulting reduction in transportation fuel use is illustrated below. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 15 of 30 Elimination of the city landfill operations allowed for the disposal of several pieces of large construction equipment Figure D5: Illustration of Fuel Use Pattern by Fleet -2005 to 2013 Correspondingly the fuel related emissions have also dropped from 2,833 MT (2005) to 2,399 MT in 2013, a 15% reduction as shown in the table below. It is also estimated that the resulting fuel cost savings is $100,000 to $150,000 per year. Table D1: Fuel Use and Corresponding GHG Emission Trends: 2005 to 2013 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Fuel Use Gasoline gal.149,861 156,142 152,153 146,398 131,096 137,850 146,595 147,849 146,479 Diesel gal.97,676 103,888 131,810 131,423 122,341 126,500 134,262 95,036 83,539 Biodiesel (B20)gal.46,667 27,261 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CNG (City operations)gge.20,217 18,799 28,197 36,387 36,713 49,948 36,554 40,136 37,854 CNG (including PASCO, PAUSD)gge.44,273 60,928 80,491 88,088 86,786 87,635 85,872 91,125 86,570 FleetEmissions Gasoline tons 1,316 1,371 1,336 1,285 1,151 1,210 1,287 1,298 1,286 Diesel tons 997 1,061 1,346 1,342 1,249 1,292 1,371 970 853 Biodiesel (B20)tons 381 223 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CNG (City operations)tons 139 129 193 250 252 343 251 275 260 CNG (including PASCO, PAUSD)tons 304 418 552 604 595 601 589 625 594 Total 2,833 2,783 2,875 2,877 2,652 2,845 2,909 2,544 2,399 Planned Activity in the next 5 years Approximately 200 vehicles are scheduled for replacement over the next five years which will remove older, less fuel-efficient, vehicles (some over 20 years old) with newer cleaner burning vehicles.73 vehicles scheduled for replacement between FY's 13 and 14, 32 vehicles in FY16, 53 vehicles in FY17, 24 vehicles in FY18, and currently have 16 vehicles on the replacement list for FY19.Included in those 200+ vehicles are 38 CNG vehicles that will be replaced "in-kind" with new CNG. Replacement vehicle specifications have focused on fuel efficiency, low emissions, and modern build techniques. Staff is considering Electric Vehicle Zero Emission units for specific uses or as pool use replacement vehicles. Questions to be addressed include increased initial purchase cost plus the cost of needed charging infrastructure. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 16 of 30 IV.City Facilities Operations & Capital Improvements, and Public Works Projects The Public Works department is committed to building, managing and operating City buildings and infrastructure in a sustainable manner. Sustainable practices are incorporated into major building renovations and everyday work practices. Building Retrofits The City Hall building upgrade project over the past 7 years has resulted in noticeable reduction in energy and water consumption. The project included the installation of new boilers, chiller fans, upgrading motors to premium efficiency, converting electric reheat coils to hot water reheat system, replacing the variable air volume (VAV) box and associated controls, installing a modern building management system, lighting sweep control systems, etc. It is estimated these upgrades have reduced City Hall electricity and natural gas bills by about $50,000 per year (a reduction of about 9%) in 20122. Other recent building renovations include LEED certified buildings such as the Art Center, Downtown Library, and the soon to be completed Mitchell Park Library and Community Center. Focused energy efficiency and conservation efforts in all city facilities resulted in close to 9% reduction in electricity consumption and 21% reduction in natural gas consumption between 2005 and 2012, resulting in utility bill savings of more than $50,000 per year> However, utility usage began increasing in 2013 due the new air-conditioning load at the Art Center and the larger footprint of the Mitchell Park library. . Building Management In addition to implementing sustainable practices, the overarching operational objective of Facilities is to maintain the building in good order for the comfort of the occupants and users, reduce the operating cost of maintaining the buildings, and extend the useful life of the buildings. In this regard, reducing the energy and water usage is an important consideration. Facilities recently purchased building energy management software that allows individual building managers to better track, analyze, and report on utility consumption and cost. Improved data reporting creates more accountability of energy usage. Data from the result of a water leak or faulty equipment. It also makes it simpler to track the outcome of conservation efforts. The application can also be utilized to determine which buildings are consistently using more energy than others of a similar size and usage and if needed, be used as a basis to propose a Capital Improvement Project for building system upgrades. Th 2 Most of this equipment was replaced because they were near the end of their useful life. However, computing simple payback in purely financial terms, the estimated payback was approximately 22 years. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 17 of 30 Manager software, with similar buildings in the state and the nation. Building Maintenance Sustainable work practices for cleaning maintenance include cleaning with environmentally friendly chemicals that are Green Seal Certified and using paper towels in restrooms that contain no chlorine and high in post-consumer content. Pest management also focuses on prevention and then using non-toxic pesticides. Sustainable work practices for building system maintenance include improvements in mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems. Mechanical improvements include the use of cool roofing materials to meet Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, replacing air conditioning units with more energy efficient units (when existing units need replacement) and using Building Management Systems (BMS) to control and monitor and mechanical and electrical equipment (including lighting) via computers in some facilities. Electrical improvements include the use of high efficiency T8 lamps, some beginning implementation of LED parking lot lighting, the use of occupancy sensors for office lighting, and bi-level lighting for parking garages. Plumbing improvements include the use of low flow urinals and low flow toilets. Land and Water Public Works staff continues to promote measures that reduce storm water runoff and associated urban pollutants in order to improve the health of local creeks and San Francisco Bay. Using specially-designated revenue from the monthly storm drainage fees charged to developed properties throughout the City, the Storm Water Rebate Program offers financial incentives to residents and businesses for the installation of rain barrels, rainwater cisterns, permeable pavement, and green roofs. deficiencies in the Southgate neighborhood. The project includes the construction of bio- retention planters at selected intersections that will intercept, infiltrate, and filter storm water runoff. The planters will be filled with native plants and permeable soil media that will treat and reduce runoff before it is discharged to the storm drain system. A number of existing concrete/asphalt walkways and crosswalks in the neighborhood will also be replaced with permeable interlocking concrete pavers to further reduce storm runoff. Park renovation projects managed by Public Works incorporate sustainable landscaping and turf elimination to conserve water whenever possible. The Cogswell Plaza project and Eleanor Pardee Park project are projected to save more than 360,000 gallons per year. EV chargers Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 18 of 30 With state grant funds, Facilities installed 5 electric vehicle chargers at 3 downtown garages in 2011 and an additional 5 chargers in 2013. In CY 2013,9,600 charging sessions took place at the 5 smart chargers, up 50% from CY 2012 levels. These chargers using 70,000 kWh of electricity at a cost of $7,500 to the City. The estimated GHG reduction as a result on such charging is estimated at 35 MT of CO2 equivalent. The City just received Notice of Proposed Award of $34,500 funding from CEC (solicited in collaboration with BACC) for 3 additional dual-port charging units. Two units are to be located at the Cowper/Webster Lot J Garage and one unit to be located at High Street Lot R Garage. That totals 6 J1772 ports. The dollar value is approximately $11,500 per unit for a total of $34,500. All costs for the units and installation are covered by the grant. (Matching funds are supplied by equipment discount from ChargePoint). Palo Alto will be responsible for network service charges of $230/port/year over the 2 year term of the grant. Urban Forestry January 2011 a resource analysis which qu street trees found that street trees provided about $6.6 million in annual benefits, at a benefit/cost ratio of $3.22 for every $1 spent.Notable benefits included reducing annual electric energy consumption by 3,729 megawatt hours (MWh) and natural gas consumption by 75,183 therms, sequestration of 2,264 tons of carbon plus an additional 1,567 tons avoided due to decreased energy use, and interception of 42.6 million gallons of stormwater.(This analysis only quantified street tree benefits--accounting for less than 10% of the total tree population.) Some benefits were not included such as consumer preference which has been shown with healthy trees and landscaping to increase willingness to pay for retail goods and services by 11% (correlating to increased sales tax), or longer asphalt duration of 5-10 years due to shading, or reduced gasoline volatilization from parked cars.Many ecosystem services cannot be effectively monetized such as benefits to human health, sense of place, or enhanced learning environment,but are nonetheless essential to the quality of life enjoyed in Palo Alto.Staff plans to repeat this analysis on an annual basis starting in FY 2015, and is exploring research methods to analyze the entire urban forest across ownerships and resource types.. Staff participated in developing the draft Urban Forest Protocol with Climate Action Reserve, posted in March 2014 on the Urban Forest Revision webpage, along with the public workshop notice and online form to submit public comments. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 19 of 30 V.Green Buildings The City of Palo Alto Green Building Program celebrated ten years of operation during the 2013 Fiscal Year. Over the past decade, the City of Palo Alto established itself as a national leader for its progressive, high-level program for a new generation of efficient buildings in Palo Alto, which are environmentally responsible and healthy places in which to live and work. -profit organization. The City has required Green Point Rated recognition, the Build it Green home rating system, on residential projects since 2008. City of Palo Alto Green Building Program: Ten Years in Review checklists at early stages (Architectural Review) of an application to ensure an integrated approach for projects. In 2007, zoning ordinance changes outlined voluntary compliance criteria, followed in 2008 by a Green Building ordinance requiring Green Point Rated (Build It Green) compliance for residential projects and Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Silver level compliance for non-residential projects meeting certain size thresholds. Following the 2008 ordinance, City staff has recommended updates to the ordinance to Council each year, including addition of Home Energy Rating System (HERS) requirements for existing amendments to CalGreen required a higher level (Tier 2) compliance as mandatory (approximately LEED Silver level plus 15% additional energy efficiency for buildings beyond Title Neighborhoods as a voluntary program, intended to measure the success of a project in meeting community goals for walkability, access to transit, provision of mixed uses and services, and open space design, etc. ment expanded to include these project types. The inclusion of Alterations and Additions significantly increased the total amount of projects that required green building mandatory requirements. 2003-2013 Accomplishments: The City uses Green Halo, a cloud-based tracking software, to monitor construction and demolition waste. The software enables customers and Development Services personnel to monitor and manage the Construction & Demolition waste diverted from Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 20 of 30 local landfills. The program has streamlined the process for contractors in the field to track their waste diversion tags in a simple and streamlined manor. The City passed an ordinance to pre-wire new homes to fit electric vehicle (EV) charging stations. The ordinance requires that new residences install a 208/240V, 50 amp grounded AC outlet (Level 2 Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment). The first LEED-ND pilot program (LEED for Neighborhood Development) in the nation for hborhood project, including features that reduce dependence on automobile use, increase walkability, and encourage healthy living. The program lasted one year. The city developed an initiative to disclose energy use for existing buildings undergoing small renovation work. This initiative helped city staff to better understand the performance of these existing buildings to assist in the development of future energy efficiency policy. r new City buildings (e.g., the Downtown Library; Mitchell Park Library and Community Center and the Art Center) and new private buildings over 5,000 square feet; increased energy efficiency 15% beyond the state mandatory level, with rebates available through the Utilities department for even higher levels of savings; Palo Alto was an early adopter of the California Green Building code during the CA voluntary adoption phase. During this period, the city developed a strong knowledge base of how to enforce the Code.In 2011, the code became mandatory for all cities in California. Due to its early adoption of the code,Palo Alto became a leader in green building code enforcement. Palo Alto continues to maintain a reputation for aggressive green building code enforcement. Staff continues to work with Utilities staff on publicizing energy efficiency and solar rebate programs; New single-family residential construction required to have a minimum level of green building compliance (70 GPR points, with increasing points required for larger homes.). California Green Building Code (CalGreen) was adopted by reference in 2010 and 2013, building performance thresholds. In 2011, it was estimated that a little over 2,000 people are either working or living in building projects were on record throughout the City. At the end of FY 2011, over 240 Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 21 of 30 had been completed or were under construction. Projects are using one of the following standards: LEED, Build It Green GreenPoint Rated (GPR), or the California Green Building Code with locally adopted enhanced measures (CALGreen). The City has monitored its progress with annual updates to the codes through 2011. The 2011 report noted a practice of annual tracking of the numbers and square footage of completed green building projects as well as the number of LEED and Green Point Rated certifications and point ratings achieved. In the last half of FY 12 and during FY13, consultants were used to manage the green building program while the sustainability planner vacancy went unfilled. The City Photovoltaic (PV) Partners Program, an innovative solar energy incentive program, enables Development Services to promptly issue permits and perform inspections for residential photovoltaic systems reducing the time to issue permits from 70 days to over the counter. In 2014, the City Partners Program from the Solar Power Generation USA Congress. FY 2013 Statistics Green Building permit applications processed:1037 (up from 887 in 2012) Green Building valuations subject to mandatory regulations:$569 million (up from $543 million in 2012) Green Building square feet subject to mandatory regulations:2.44 million square feet (up from 1.34 million in 2012) Energy savings:2,703 kBtu/yr (up from from 1,701 kBtu/yr in 2012) Waste diversion from landfill: 53,629 tons (down from 69,095 tons in 2012) CO2 emissions reduction:62 tons; less than 10 projects reported CO2 emissions reduction estimates. This is up from 21 tons reduced in 2012. Community Involvement Development Services is approaching green building with strong community involvement. The current working groups are contributing to the next generation of green building efforts in Palo Alto: Green Building Advisory Group The Green Building Advisory Group is an interdisciplinary team of city staff and community members tasked with providing recommendations for the new Green Building Ordinance. The team currently meets bi-monthly to develop suggested framework and revisions. Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment Task Force The Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment Task Force is a group of community experts and city staff. The team meets to define how the City of Palo Alto will meet the Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 22 of 30 install of Electric Vehicle charging stations in new development. VI.Zero Waste and Landfill Operations mid-term target of achieving 77 percent diversion by 2011 and striving to reach Zero Waste (virtual elimination of waste to landfills) by 2021 A total of 69,491 tons of Palo Alto solid waste was sent to landfills in 2005. The most recent landfill tonnage figures from the State of California indicate that the amount of solid waste landfilled in 2012 totaled 45,411tons, up about 3% from 2011 [Note: the 2011 landfilled was 43,947 tons, and not 32,434 tons as reported in the April 2013 report). The 2012 State of California annual report provides a Palo Alto per capita disposal rate, in pounds per person per day, which is equivalent to a diversion percentage of 77 percent, up slightly from 2012 estimates. The Life Cycle Fugitive Emissions listed in Table D2 below were estimated using 2012 numbers. A primary factor responsible overall long term decrease in landfilled waste from Palo Alto is the Zero Waste services that are included in the collection and processing contract with for collecting and composting commercial food waste and compostables, a shift to a single stream recycling program, and the processing of all construction and demolition debris boxes nd Demolition Debris Recycling and Reuse Ordinance, Zero Waste program outreach on recycling and waste prevention, and the economic downturn. greenhouse gas emissions. The Climate Protection Plan considered three types of greenhouse gas emissions related to solid waste: 1.Fugitive emissions of landfill gas from the Palo Alto Landfill that are not captured and flared by the landfill gas control systems, thereby releasing methane into the atmosphere. These emissions are calendar year-based and are calculated using measured volumes of landfill gas flared and assuming a capture rate percentage for the control systems. This is considered Scope 1, anthropogenic emission and tracked in the GHG reporting protocol. 2.Life cycle fugitive emissions are GHG emissions calculated from the amount of solid Protection (CACP) software. Inputs to the software are the total tons of Palo Alto solid Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 23 of 30 waste landfilled and the amounts of paper products, food waste, plant debris, and wood/textiles in the landfilled waste. 3.Emissions from landfilling of recyclable materials, where failure to recycle the materials results in emissions from manufacturing using virgin materials that are greater than the emissions that would have resulted from recycling the materials. These emissions were calculated using the total tonnage of Palo Alto solid waste land-filled, the results of a 2006 Palo Alto Waste Composition Study, and US EPA emissions factors. This was not estimated this year, and needs further review. The table D2 below provides a comparison between the solid waste-related greenhouse gas emissions estimates for 2005 and 2012. Table D2: Solid Waste Related GHG Emissions3 Emissions Source 2005 Emissions (MT) 20114 Emissions (MT) 2012 Emissions (MT) Difference (MT) Difference (percent) Landfill fugitive emissions during the year 6,811 4336 7,2505 171 3% Life cycle fugitive emissions 24,823 15,698 16,2216 8,602 -35% Life cycle, landfilling recyclable materials 54,838 34,680 35,8367 19,002 -35% The Palo Alto landfill fugitive emissions figure for 2010 was calculated using the volume of landfill gas captured by the landfill gas controls system and assuming a 75 percent capture rate. Life cycle fugitive emissions and landfilling of recyclable materials emissions for 2012 have been calculated using the ratio of waste landfilled in 2012 to waste landfilled in 2005. There are several factors that may introduce error into the estimates for life cycle fugitive and landfilling of recyclable materials. The 2005 estimates relied on a 2006 Waste Composition Study, and the method used for the 2012 estimate is based on a 2013 waste characterization study. However, waste tonnage, such as the Construction and Demolition program and the commercial compostables program, also affected the composition of the waste. Another factor to consider is that the 2005 baseline emissions for solid waste did not include calculating emissions from the PASCO collection fleet. The fuel used for GreenWaste collection vehicles includes CNG provided by the City at the MSC and purchased diesel fuel.The CNG fuel use is captured in 3 Waste related life cycle emissions estimates lag by a year, hence 2013 information is still not available. 4 The 2011 life cycle emission estimates were revised from the ones reported in the 2013 Earth-day report.5 These emissions are related to methane generated in the landfill that was not captured and flared. Assumed to be 33% of the collected landfill gas in accordance with LGOP protocol. 6 Is Scope 3 emission, included in Attachment C as community emissions. 7 Is Scope 3 emissions, included in Attachment C as community emissions. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 24 of 30 another section. In 2013, GreenWaste used 175,279 gallons of diesel fuel in the collection vehicles, up 6% from prior year. This report does not estimate greenhouse gas emissions from processing activities such as recycling recovery from garbage at the SMaRT Station in Sunnyvale, single stream recycling sorting at the GreenWaste MRF in San Jose, or the composting of the materials at Z-Best in Gilroy. Emissions from these activities are calculated by the host cities. VII.Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP) Operations Electricity and Natural Gas Use at the Plant The Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (WQCP or plant) is the largest municipal energy consumer, accounting for approximately 80% of the electricity and natural gas used in City operations. Since 2005, the plant has implemented numerous steps to reduce its energy consumption and institutionalize sustainability policies in plant operations and maintenance, and when evaluating capital improvement projects. Figure D# below illustrates the decline in natural gas usage by 50% since 2004, due to: Figure D6: Natural Gas Usage at WQCP Declined more than 40% since 2004 Use of landfill gas from the Palo Alto Landfill as a substitute for natural gas in the incinerator afterburner (2005). Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 25 of 30 Incinerator burner fine tuning (2011 and 2012): In 2011 and 2012, both incinerator 1 and 2 were fine-tuned, resulting in lower natural gas consumption. It was found that the incinerators were operating rich, or burning more natural gas than needed. The air fuel mixture was adjusted and plant personnel were trained on the maintenance of the new set points. year (a reduction of about 43%) compared to 2005. to the natural gas that must augment the landfill gas in the afterburner. The electricity use has remained relatively flat since 2005 as illustrated in Figure D7 below. This is the net effect of reduced load due to various energy efficiency measures which offset the increased load due to the installation of the more sustainable technology of UV based disinfection of treatment plant effluent. In 2013, the City began purchasing all of its power from carbon neutral sources. Figure D7: Electricity Usage at WQCP Relatively Flat, but Greener Supplies stantially in 2009 as energy efficiency improvements were made to the activated sludge aeration basins and the trickling filter lift pumps. Electricity use increased in 2011 and 2012 due to increased recycled water pumping and the startup of the new ultraviolet light disinfection process that replaced chlorine disinfection in August 2010.A new aeration basin process control system was installed in 2012. This system was expected to further reduce energy consumption, but is still being optimized. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 26 of 30 Figure D8: Illustration of Components of Electricity Usage at WQCP in 2009 Detailed description of the electricity consumption related projects are as follows: Aeration Basins Optimization and Dome Replacement: As discussed above, the aeration basin blowers comp began using fine bubble diffusers and high speed single stage centrifugal blowers over ten years ago. This technology is much more efficient than previous equipment. Beginning in late 2008,the RWQCP began tracking blower use more carefully to avoid adding excess air to the aeration basins beyond necessary dissolved oxygen level process set-points. In summer 2009, all of the 19,000 dome diffusers in the aeration basins were replaced with new diffusers. The old diffusers had been in service for over ten years, and laboratory tests showed they had lost much of their efficiency. Typical daily electricity use by the blowers has decreased from nearly 13,000 kWh per day in 2008 to an average of 9,500 kWh per day in late 2010. The RWQCP made further improvements to the blower control equipment and software in early 2012. These improvements were expected to optimize the blower control sequence and further reduce electricity use. Unfortunately, no significant reduction has been seen to date, however we are hopeful that we will see reductions in the future. Trickling Filter Variable Frequency Drives: Trickling filter lift pumps (also called tower lift ity. In December 2009, RWQCP staff completed a new trickling filter lift pump control program. Additionally, two of the six lift pump controls were replaced with variable frequency drives (VFD). Use of the VFD controllers reduces the amount of water that is re-circulated and pumped over the trickling filters a second time. Although the improvements to this system are recent and more data needs to be collected, preliminary data appear to show that electricity use by the pumps has decreased by about 1,000 kWh/day; this equates to approximately 15% of the total Aeration Basin Blow ers,23.4% Tower Lift Pumps, 15.5% RSP from (9/4/08), 10.9%Blend Tank Pumps, 4.3% Old RAS, 4.3% New RAS, 3.7% #4 Water, Injection, 3.4% Other, 7.2% Biofilter Fans, 6.4% DMF Lift Pumps, 6.4% LFG Compressor , 2.1% Incinerator Induction Fans, 6.4% Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 27 of 30 trickling filter lift pump electricity use. The RWQCP is also considering options for making greater use of VFDs in the trickling filter lift pumps. Estimated Incremental Impact of Flow-rate on RWQCP Electricity Demand: The impact of influent flow-rate on RWQCP electricity usage was assessed using daily electricity demand and influent flow data for January 2009 through May 2010. The results suggest that at flows less than 26 million gallons per day (MGD), the flow-rate is not the primary factor impacting electricity usage. A superior correlation between influent flow and electrical demand was found when flows exceeded 27 MGD. It is recommended that 436 kWh/MG be used to estimate the impact on electrical demands due to an incremental increase in flow-rate. For every 1 MGD increase in influent flow, one may expect an increased demand of 436 kWh per day. The RWQCP is to confirm the accuracy of this factor following the installation of automated aeration controllers. Investment in Technology for Sustainable Operations and Cost Effectiveness The plant has made numerous technology upgrades since 2005 which has enabled more sustainable and reliable operations. These upgrades have also resulted in operational cost reduction.A classic example of such a project is the use of landfill gas to supplement natural $1,000,000 project came online in 2005 with a payback period of 5 years. It is estimated that the use of landfill gas continues to save the plant an become more sustainable as the once discarded landfill gas is utilized. In 2008, the plant upgraded office lighting by installing 576 energy efficient lamps, ballasts, and motion sensors. The $36,000 project had a simple payback of 8 years, reduced annual overall energy use by approximately 46,500 kWh, and reduced the annual plant greenhouse gas emissions by 19 metric tons. In 2011 and 2012, the plant fine-tuned the incinerator burners to limit the quantity of natural gas consumed. This $12,400 project had a simple payback of 21 days. It is estimated that this project has decreased the average annual natural gas consumption by approx. $200,000 and has reduced annual greenhouse gas emissions by 1136 MT. GHG Emission of the Plant The plant generates Scope 1, Scope 2, and biogenic GHG emissions. However, the GHG reporting protocols exclude biogenic emissions from being reported to The Climate Registry electricity related emissions were eliminated when City electricity supplies became carbon neutral in 2013. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 28 of 30 Table D3: Plant Emission: 2005, 2012,and 2013 2005 2012 2013 Scope 1 Biogenic8 Scope 2 Scope 1 Biogenic9 Scope 2 Scope 1 Biogenic Scope 2 Wastewater Facilities 8,504 16,689 2,546 6,414 9,493 1,950 5,024 9,274 0 Reduction since 2005 41%n/a 100% Future Actions Palo Alto incinerator retirement is being planned for 2019, when the incinerators will have been in service for 47 years. The incinerators are of an older generation and are not amenable for conversion to a renewable bioenergy facility that would recover energy from the bio-solids. A Biosolids Facility Plan is currently being drafted and will evaluate options for sludge disposal such as anaerobic digestion and gasification options. The current incinerators are the largest source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from City facilities. In contrast to incinerators, which release the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide to atmosphere, gasification or anaerobic digestion convert carbon from bio-solids into renewable fuels. VIII.Education, Motivation, and Community Participation The City plays a pivotal role in facilitating sustainable community practices. Staff collaborates with many organizations and groups throughout the community on many levels and on many projects to promote sustainable behaviors. Much of this has already been discussed. The new governance structure to further enhance sustainability effort will greatly aid future efforts. The Facilitating Community Environmental Action Partnership (CEAP) efforts to work with a variety of different groups within Palo Alto to further sustainable business and living. Encouraging and facilitating staff volunteer action through the Green Team. The City Employee Green Team was founded in 2008 in accordance with recommendations made by a to identify, create and implemen -stakeholder group allows employees to cultivate ideas for resource efficiency, climate protection and other environmental projects that align with personal values and interests, often dovetailing with the -out, 8 The 2005 biogenic emission estimates were based on a different methodology and hence are not comparable.9 2012 biogenic emission estimates were revised from those in the April 2013 Earth day report. The corrections were based on a new higher heating value estimate for municipal sludge made available by USEPA. Additionally, the 2012 sludge amount incinerated was revised from 7,068 short tons up to 7,342 short tons. The 2013 sludge amount incinerated was 7,115 short tons. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 29 of 30 two City demonstration gardens. The Green Team is instituting an on- and effectiveness of these initiatives.The Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) serves as liaison for the Green Team to the City Mana Working with the Palo Alto School District, Acterra, neighborhood associations and a variety of other agencies and groups to encourage innovation and provide education on a variety of sustainability issues at events. Conducting community level classes and workshops on: Building a sustainable home: Leading tours and workshops through the EcoHome demonstration house. Organizing water conservation workshops on such topics as alternatives to lawn, care of trees in a low water use garden, irrigation systems and more during the period around Earth Day in April and Fix a Leak Week in March, as a part of the Summer Workshop Series and in the fall. Leading workshops on solar electric and solar water heating systems at least twice per year. Providing electric efficiency and sustainable home practices throughout the year, but particularly during the Summer Workshop Series. Attending many events at business sites to provide employees with information Providing the quarterly OPower Home Energy Reports that give residents a comparison of with those of 100 homes in the vicinity. These homes are of similar size, use the same type of heating and are occupied to provide a greater ability for residents to see how their energy use compares. The paper and online reports provide a variety of tips and tools for ways to reduce electric and natural gas consumption and Delivering monthly newsletters to residents and businesses with a great variety of information on how to be more efficient and reduce GHG consumption. Working with the school district on a variety of in-class workshops on energy and water saving. Providing the PAUSD with an annual $50,000 grant to enhance curricula on sustainability issues. Also, coordinating with the parent-sponsored group Zilowatt to develop a curriculum, coordinated with science class requirements,to provide hands-on and relevant information on solar electric systems and efficiency. Attachment D: City Departmental Level Initiatives Page 30 of 30 Forum facilitated by Utilities about three times per year; The soon to be established Sustainability Executive Advisory Group to advise the City Manager will provide a another channel to seek input and support local businesses in their own efforts. Working with Clean Cities Challenge to pilot an intensive, block-by-block community engagement to enroll 25% of Palo Alto residents in reducing their energy use 25%. Working with regional networks (including Public Sector Climate Task Force, League of Cities,Local Government Commission, and others), and national networks (including ICLEI, Green Cities California, Urban Sustainability Directors Network, and others) to share best two key questions: o life, prosperity and resilience of this community? o What can one small innovative city continue to advancing the regional and global sustainability revolution? Attachment E: Sustainability Policy and Organizational Structure Page 1 of 3 Attachment E: Sustainability Policy & Organization Structure Shown below is the City’s Sustainability Policy approved by the Council in 2007. POLICY AND PROCEDURES 5-01/MGR First adopted in April, 2000 Revised June 18, 2007 CMR: 260:07 SUPPORT FOR SUSTAINABILITY POLICY STATEMENT It is the intent of the City of Palo Alto to be a sustainable community – one which meets its current needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. In adopting this policy, the City of Palo Alto accepts its responsibility, through its operations, programs and services to: Economy: Maintain a healthy, thriving and well-balanced economy comprising a blend of large and small business, which encourages the development of independent businesses and is resilient to the economic changes common to California’s economy Social Equity: Continuously improve the quality of life for all Palo Alto community members without adversely affecting others Environment: Enhance the quality of the air, water, land and other natural resources by minimizing human impacts on local, regional and global ecosystems through greater conservancy, reduced pollution, increased efficiency, and protection of native vegetation, fish, wildlife habitats and other ecosystems. In working toward these goals, the City will, when appropriate, align and partner with community groups, businesses, non-profits, and neighboring communities. NOTE: Questions and/or clarification of this policy should be directed to the City Manager’s Office. Attachment E: Sustainability Policy and Organizational Structure Page 2 of 3 Organizational Structure to Facilitate Sustainability Actions and to Achieve Goals City Manager determined that the City’s many cross-departmental environmental sustainability activities requires a clear organizational structure to succeed. In preparation for the recruitment of the new position of Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO), roles and responsibilities for each part of the organization was established. Sustainability Board: Comprised of Directors from key departments, will establish the vision and goals for the overall effort, approve the CSO’s work plan, and identify and approve resources to complete the work plan tasks. Sustainability Executive Advisory Group: To solicit input from outside the City, the City Manager will organize and lead such an ad hoc group, whose membership will include key executives from Palo Alto institutions, community leaders, and representatives from Stanford and large companies. The function of the group is to give advice and feedback to the City Manager, get input from the “real world”, forge and leverage international relationships/partnerships, build excitement, and model and motivate behavioral changes. Chief Sustainability Officer: The CSO will report to the City Manager and take direction from the Sustainability Board. A critical task of the CSO is to develop the long-term sustainability work plan and prioritize tasks for each fiscal year. The CSO will work with a larger group of individuals from many City departments to complete the tasks on the work plan. That larger group, the Sustainability Team, will organize itself into committees to implement the work plan as prioritized by the CSO. Participants in the Sustainability Team will be embedded in job descriptions and annual appraisals to ensure that team members understand that the sustainability work plan tasks are key City priorities. The CSO will also be responsible for community outreach on sustainability efforts and will act as the co-chair of community based Community Environmental Action Partnership (CEAP). Green Team: This is a long standing individual employee initiative driven team with voluntary membership. The Green Team includes employees from many work groups and has historically been project-based with the goal to complete projects and a bias towards action. This group of engaged employees will be a valuable asset for the CSO to work with as they act as ambassadors to their own work groups and spread the word on sustainability throughout the City. Many Green Team members will also be on the Sustainability Team. The CSO will act as the liaison to the Green Team co-chairs and will convey information to and from the Sustainability Board. One of the key tasks for the CSO and the Sustainability Board, the Sustainability Team and the Green Team is to update the 2007 Climate Protection Plan. In addition, measuring performance with respect to the goals of the plan must be done on an annual basis. Attached is the line-diagram of the proposed governance structure. Attachment E: Sustainability Policy and Organizational Structure Page 3 of 3 Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 1 Transportation and Sustainable Land Use Transportation and land use continues to represent the largest contributors to GHG emissions, with transportation related emissions accounting for more than 50% of Community emissions according to the most recent survey. In 2013, the City made great strides towards taking a more comprehensive approach to reducing GHG emissions through coordinated Transportation Demand Management (TDM) policies. In addition to recent Council direction on TDM and related parking policies (explained below), the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Capital Improvements Program direct the City to develop projects and programs to facilitate pedestrian and transit-oriented development, safer and more convenient pedestrian and bicycle travel, particularly related to school routes, traffic calming for safety of drivers and other road users, and facilitation of greater use of Caltrain, buses, and shuttles. In general, every single-vehicle auto trip diverted to another mode reduces greenhouse gas emissions. The City has also encouraged and facilitated the use of low emission, including all-electric, vehicles. Staff is working on many programs to enable a reduction of such emissions, as described below. Short and Medium Term Goals from 2008-2013 Develop land use patterns that reduce travel-related emissions by supporting pedestrian, bicycle and transit use Reduce and/or offset community travel-related emissions by 5% Coordinate with Green Building efforts to ensure compatibility between built environment and sustainable land use initiatives. Reduce emissions by an additional 10% by 2015 Increase Caltrain and other transit use by 25% by 2015 Increase Electric Vehicle (EV) infrastructure Begin process to establish citywide and district level coordinated Transportation Demand Management and Parking policies and programs. Coordinate parking policies to work in tandem and support of TDM efforts Expand City-wide shuttle system How did we do on short and medium term actions? 1. Facilitate and enhance potential for mixed-use development. Several mixed use developments were approved through the entitlement process 2011-2013, or approved in previous years through planning entitlement process, but not yet completed the building permit process. Some of the mixed use projects of significance include: Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 2 2180 El Camino Real (College Terrace Center): Planned Community approved by Council with 30,000 square feet of office space, a small grocery store and other retail, and 8 below-market rate rental units. Construction anticipated in 2014. 3445 Alma Street (Alma Plaza): Planned Community including a grocery store and other retail space with 14 below-market rate rental housing units above the grocery store and 37 single-family homes immediately to the rear of the site. Construction completed 2012 for commercial space and BMR housing units above. New grocery store opened in April 2014. 1080 Channing Avenue (Edgewood Plaza): a grocery store, other retail space, and 10 single-family homes. Approved by Council; grocery store construction completed in 2013, housing construction underway. 102 University Circle: two stories of office and retail space, with four residential units on the third and fourth floors. Construction completed and occupied by 2011. A handful of smaller projects on El Camino Real include 2-3 stories of office/commercial space with one or two residential units above (4073 El Camino Real, 1845 El Camino Real) 3159 El Camino Real: In 2013 the City Council approved the planning entitlements for this mixed-use project at the corner of Portage Avenue and El Camino Real. The development of this new four-story, 55 foot tall, mixed use building includes 74,122 square feet of floor area. There are 48 smaller apartments, and 31,262 sq. ft. of commercial square footage for office, retail, restaurant, and commercial recreation uses. It is expected the construction will begin in 2014. 2. Zone for Mixed Use and Higher Density Around Transit Stations The City has adopted Pedestrian-Transit Oriented Development (PTOD) zoning near the California Avenue station. Existing zoning allows for mixed use and higher density around the downtown transit station, though parking remains an obstacle to successful projects. Two mixed use PTOD projects noted above have been approved (and one constructed) in the California Avenue PTOD area. In 2012, the 195 Page Mill Road/2865 Park Boulevard mixed use project was approved by Council. This project is now under construction. The 102 University Circle project provides a mix of uses downtown, and high density housing near the downtown Caltrain station was approved 50 affordable housing units at 801 Alma Street now ocupied. Another high density affordable housing project was approved and constructed at 488 W. Charleston Road, which is proximate to a future Bus Rapid Transit stop on El Camino Real. Finally, the Lytton Gateway project, which contains 50,000 square feet of office and retail space, is finalizing construction directly across the street from the train station and will open shortly, in 2014. 3. Project Level Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Programs Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs have been proposed and approved in recent years for several projects, including 901 San Antonio, 2180 El Camino Real, 1601 California Avenue (Facebook, since departed), 3401 Hillview Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 3 (VMWare) and the pending 355 Alma Street (Lytton Gateway). TDM programs have included such measures as transit passes (such as Caltrain “Go-Pass”) for building occupants, Zip Cars or similar rentals, and/or vanpool or carpool priority, etc. TDM programs are required whenever parking reductions are requested or where required as environmental mitigation. The programs typically specify performance objectives, and monitoring information is provided to the City at 2 years and 5 years after project occupancy. 4. Establishment of a Transportation Management Association. In October 2013, the City Council gave direction to staff to investigate the establishment of a Transportation Management Association in order to coordinate TDM efforts. Since that time, regional experts have presented to the Council regarding best practices. In addition, in February 2014, the Council gave direction to staff to move forward with a Request for Proposal for a consultant to establish a Transportation Management Association (TMA). The City will release the RFP in mid-April. A Transportation Management Association (TMA) could effectively market and manage TDM strategies, and monitor their effectiveness on a district- or city-wide basis. As an independent non-profit organization, a TMA can also build collaboration between businesses and government, working towards a common goal of decreasing trips by single occupancy vehicle 5. Civic Center Caltrain Go-Pass Program: The Council recently authorized staff to move forward with a City Hall TDM program, to reduce the number of employees that are driving to work. This program went into effect in April 2014. This program grants free, Caltrain Go-Passes to any civic center employee in exchange for giving up their parking pass. The overall goal is to “free-up” spaces in the City Hall garage by increasing the number of people who taking transit and frequency in which they take transit. 6. Citywide Transportation Survey In March 2013, the Transportation Division released a first of its kind, city-wide transportation survey. The goal of this survey is to determine the mode share of various forms of transportation. This survey has been sent out to those who live, work or visits the City of Palo Alto. Based on information gained from this survey, the City will be able to better plan for transportation improvements, and create the programs and incentives necessary to support alternative forms of transportation. City staff will also be taking this survey, in order to develop a City Hall TDM program as identified above. The next iteration of this survey will be released in Fall 2014. 7. Downtown Studies: The City has recently embarked on the first phase Downtown Development Cap Study. As part of the first phase, the City has hired a survey firm to conduct two critical surveys. The first will determine travel mode share for downtown workers (how people are getting to and from work). The second survey will determine building intensity/occupancy is for various office uses (how many Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 4 people per square foot). Together these two surveys will provide information that will help guide future decision making related to parking and transportation policy. The study will also help quantify the impact of automobile traffic has on the Downtown area, and will project conditions into the future. One of the primary goals of the second phase of this study, will to be to create policies which help to reduce automobile traffic in the Downtown area by encouraging transit use and other alternative forms of transportation. 8. Implement Plans for Transportation Improvements around California Avenue Caltrain Station. The City has developed a concept for streetscape improvements along California Avenue to provide for a “complete street” approach benefiting all modes of travel, enhancing pedestrian and bicycle safety, and enhancing the aesthetics of the streetscape. Project construction started in March 2014 and is expected to be completed by the end of the year. The City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan designates Park Blvd., serving as a key connector to California Avenue and the train station, as a “bicycle boulevard”. 9. Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan and Infrastructure a) Bicycle Plan and Programs: The City of Palo Alto is currently a Gold Level Bicycle Friendly City, and bicycle use comprises an estimated 7% of commute trips to and from the city (2009-2011 American Community Survey 3-Year Average Estimate, United States Census Bureau). The Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan, adopted in July 2012. The Plan is intended to enhance the use of bicycles for commuter, convenience, and recreational uses, with a goal of becoming a “Platinum” Bicycle Friendly Community. The Plan objectives and other anticipated programs include: Increasing bike boulevard mileage by 18 miles to 22 miles. Increasing bike lane mileage by 3 miles to 44 miles Increasing Class I trails (separated bikeways) from by 7 miles to 20 miles of facilities; and Participation in the Regional Bike Share program. Palo Alto has four current Bike Share Stations in the Downtown and California Avenue Business Districts; and b) Safe Routes to School: On March 1, 2012, the City initiated an expansion of its highly successful Safe Routes to School program, thanks to a two year grant from the Vehicle Emission Reductions Based at Schools (VERBS) program of the Santa Clara County Valley Transportation Authority. This grant provides funding for a broad range of efforts to reduce auto congestion and increase greener school commute choices, including comprehensive Walk and Roll to School maps for every PAUSD school, updated and expanded bicycle safety education for students and parents, Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 5 and school-level promotions of walking, biking, taking the bus/shuttle, and carpooling to/from school. Since 2005, there has been a dramatic growth in cycling at PAUSD secondary schools, a very different picture than in virtually any other city in the state or nation. In Fall 2013, there were 1640 PAUSD high school students biking to school, or 43% of the total number of students. This was a dramatic increase over Fall 2005, when there were 580 student bicyclists or 17% of the student population at the two high school campuses. The middle schools historically have had higher rates of bicycling, as indicated by the 2005 baseline year counts showing 830 bicyclists (34% of all middle school students). In 2013, , the counts increased to 1400 bicyclists (more than 50% of the students). This growth in biking has substantially outpaced the increase in student population at both levels compared to the baseline year for the Climate Protection Plan as shown in the table below: PAUSD High Schools Student population Bikes % Biking Fall 2005 3450 580 16.8% Fall 2013 3900 1640 43.2% Increase 2005-13 +450 +1060 PAUSD Middle Schools Student population Bikes % Biking Fall 2005 2420 830 34.5% Fall 2013 2760 1400 50.6% Increase 2005-13 +340 +570 Between April 2012 and March 2014, VERBS funded initiatives included the developing of Walk and Roll maps at all 17 PAUSD schools. These maps show suggested walking and biking routes to school, based on community input and updating safety signage and striping on these routes. This process also led to the identification of a list of recommended longer term improvements on school commute routes, to be implemented as funding becomes available. All secondary schools are going through a second round of increasing bike parking, and many of the elementary schools identified expanded and secure bike parking as key improvement needed. The Walk & Roll maps are posted online at www.cityofpaloalto.org/saferoutes and include “share the road” safety tips for pedestrians, bicyclists and drivers. They are used in back to school promotions, and in the expanded promotion of green ways to get to school in both fall and spring. Seven schools are also piloting an online “Schoolpool” program to help reduce peak period congestion near schools by encouraging more parents to share the ride to school with another family, or form Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 6 parent-led bikepools or walkpools, thereby reducing the number of solo family vehicle trips to school each day. The program evaluation incorporated into the grant will include GHG reduction calculations for Palo Alto's Safe Routes to School program, based on a regional methodology now being developed by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. 10. Expanded Palo Alto Shuttle System The City sponsors and jointly funds the Crosstown Shuttle and Embarcadero Shuttle, providing transit service to students, seniors and others in areas not served by other public transportation. The following chart provides the ridership numbers of the past four years: Fiscal Year 2009-2010 137,825 Fiscal Year 2010-2011 118,455 Fiscal Year 2011-2012 140,321 Fiscal Year 2012-2013 134,504 The number of riders on the City’s shuttles dipped in the 2010-2011 fiscal year, due to cuts in funding that resulted in the Crosstown shuttle being served on an hourly basis, rather than twice per hour. In March 2011, The City introduced School Service rout which helped to increase ridership again. The City has released a Request for Proposal (RFP for expanded shuttle services, which include one base route (the existing Crosstown shuttle service) and eight suggested optional routes upon which transit providers may choose to bid. The shuttle provider may also propose additional routes and/or alter proposed routes if they feel they would be ineffective. 11. Ride Share (Carpooling) Apps The City entered into an agreement with SAP for a one-year trial of the software company’s TwoGo app, which provides a ride-sharing service for members companies. The tool also provides powerful data analytics for users of the program, including information about where they are coming from going to. The City is exploring incentive structures to help employees consider trying carpool, and is also looking at other apps including Hovee which has offered the City a free one-year trial. 12. Electric Vehicle Infrastructure The City has taken steps to facilitate the implementation of infrastructure, particularly charging stations, for electric vehicles (EVs). In the past year, five charging stations have been installed in City garages. Right charging stations have Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 7 been approved in conjunction with development proposals. This includes 4 charging stations at the Lytton Gateway project and 2 at the Edgewood Plaza project. In addition, the City is planning for 6 additional chargers at City facilities as follows: City Hall Garage (1) Cowper-Webster Garage (1) Bryant St Garage (1) Cal Avenue – West Garage (2) Cal Avenue – East Garage (1) 13. Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan Implementation/Neighborhood Traffic Calming In 2013 there were no new traffic calming projects in the City. The City is planning for an expansion of traffic calming measures as a part of the implementation of the Palo Alto Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan. The City has 20 active bicycle projects, each of which will include focused pedestrian improvements and traffic calming measures, pending community outreach. A list of active projects is provided below: Alma Street Enhanced Bikeway (San Antonio Av to E Charleston Rd) Barron Park Neighborhoods Bicycle Routes Bryant St Bicycle Boulevard Extension (South of E Meadow Dr) Bryant St Bicycle Boulevard Update (North of E Meadow Dr) Charleston Rd-Arastradero Rd Corridor Project (Fabian Wy to Miranda Av) Churchill Av Corridor Improvements (Castilleja Av to El Camino Real) Cubberly Community Center Bicycle Route Fabian Way Enhanced Bikeway (E Meadow Dr to Charleston Rd) Greer Road Bicycle Boulevard (Edgewood Dr to Louis Rd) Homer Av-Channing Av Enhanced Bikeway (Guinda Av to Alma St) Matadero Av-Margarita Av Bicycle Boulevard (Bol Park Path to Park Blvd) Matadero Creek Trail – Phase 1 Midtown Feasibility Study (Hwy 101 to Alma St) Maybell Av Bicycle Boulevard (E Meadow Dr to Arastradero Rd) Moreno Av-Amarillo AV Bicycle Boulevard (Middlefield Rd to W Bayshore Blvd) Park Blvd Bicycle Boulevard (Castilleja Av to W Charleston Rd) Ross Rd Bicycle Boulevard (N California Av to Louis Rd) San Antonio Av Bicycle Route (Byron St to Alma St) San Antonio Rd Bicycle Route (Hwy 101 to W City Limit) Stanford Av Bicycle Boulevard (El Camino Real to Park Blvd) Wilkie Way Bicycle Boulevard (Park Blvd to San Antonio Rd) Long Term Goals (2014-2020) • Reduce emissions by an additional 10% by 2020 • Increase Caltrain and other transit use by an additional 50% by 2020, or as Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 8 otherwise determined through the Comp Plan public outreach process and EIR. What is planned for Long Term Actions? 1. Evaluate Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Development Zoning Intensity, Including Along El Camino Real. As part of the City’s Comprehensive Plan update, an Environmental Impact Report will be completed. This EIR will evaluate various alternative land use patterns that are developed through a public outreach process. Given the requirements to meet regional housing needs, focused TOD will need to be evaluated. This evaluation, along with other alternatives, will assist the City in making land use and transportation decisions. Finally, it will also help us better understand how are land use and transpiration decisions are connected. 2. Develop a Vision for the Intermodal Transit Center & Surrounding Area. As part of the Comprehensive Plan process, the City will also study how the Intermodal Transit Center can best be used to support increased transit use. This includes evaluated the impact of increased Caltrain usage, upcoming VTA Bus Rapid Transit and expanded private and public shuttle networks. Furthermore, land uses surrounding the train station must be studied as part of the Comprehensive to ensure they are developed to take advantage of the proximity of the transit center. 3. Climate Action Plan: [For Gil to fill in] As part of the Climate Action Plan process this year, and in coordination with the Comp Plan, staff will reassess and update our estimates of transportation contribution to the City’s GHG emissions; assess the strategies described here for their GHG reduction potential; and consider other strategies that could contribute to the our goals of improving mobility and access while reducing impacts. 4. Establish a Self-Sufficient Transportation Management Association. In February, Council directed staff to distribute a Request for Proposal to establish a TMA. Staff sees this as the first step in a 3 year process to establish a self-sufficient TMA. The TMA is envisioned as an independent non-profit organization that would work in collaboration with the City and the business community. Establishment of a TMA would require seed funding from the City, but the organization would ultimately seek financial support from large employers and other sources for its ongoing operations. New development projects could be required to participate. The TMA’s primary responsibilities would be to coordinate and market an expanded City shuttle program, to coordinate and market incentive programs aimed at increasing the use of transit, carpooling, and bicycling, and to pursue additional incentives and initiatives consistent with this mission. 5. Expanded Shuttle Network: In February, the Council also gave direction to staff to request proposals from shuttle operators for an expanded Palo Alto shuttle network. Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 9 In the absence of a robust regional transit network, an effective shuttle service is crucial for the success of Transportation Demand Management. It provides an alternative to solo driving for local commuting and errand-running; it requires no additional infrastructure other than potential additional stops, and it can help Caltrain riders get to other parts of the City without the use of a car. Based on this Council recommendation, the City is now in the process of soliciting proposals from shuttle service providers to build an expanded shuttle network, including new routes and more frequent service, with the aim of significantly increasing ridership within three years (concurrent with the development of the TMA). Transportation Related Community Emissions - Methodology & Summary of Findings The City commissioned a short study by consulting firm Fehr and Peer in early 2013 to provide an assessment of transportation related community emissions. This high level assessment used the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) regional Travel Demand Forecasting (TDF) model for developing long-range citywide daily vehicle miles traveled (VMT) estimates for streets and highways in the greater Palo Alto area. The VTA TDF model includes a 2005 base year, and a 2035 future year (with 5 year incremental planning years) that reflects future planned growth in San Francisco Bay Area and nearby counties. The model assigns traffic volumes for a typical weekday during the morning (AM) peak period, midday, evening (PM) peak period, and late night, as well as the morning one-hour peak and evening one-hour peak. The regional transportation network coverage (roadway and transit network) captures regional travel patterns and behavior to be accounted for in the focused study area of Palo Alto, which is more important with the recent legislative requirements associated with GHG quantification and impacts. VTA staff provided daily VMT estimates for the planning years of 2005, 2010, and 2015. A review of the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) for the City of Palo Alto was undertaken to determine which TAZs should be included in the calculation of VMT and CO2 emissions. TAZs within the City’s boundary were included along with some TAZs within the Stanford University Boundary where the City of Palo Alto controls land use decisions (i.e. Stanford Shopping Center and Stanford Medical Center). The Palo Alto specific VMT estimates were primarily a function of service population defined by residents plus employees within City limit. In the absence of reliable employment number, a constant 90,000 was used for the assessment. Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 10 The assessment did not consider Palo Alto specific data related to bicycle use, alternate transportation modes, or vehicles profiles. Based on the above described assumptions and methodology, the study found: VMT per service population decrease from 1990 to 2012 CO2 emissions per service population decrease from 1990 to 2005 and 2012 The combination of reduced VMT per service population, improved vehicle technology, and improved fuel efficiency are all key factors in the decreased CO2 emissions per mile. The Community CO2 emissions reduced by 13.6% from 371,870 MT in 2005 to 321,200 MT in 2012. It also found 2005 emissions were 15.9% below those of 1990 levels. Role of Electric Vehicles in Reducing GHG Emissions With a Carbon Neutral electric supply, Electric Vehicles (EVs) provide an avenue for the Palo Alto Community to reduce its carbon footprint with vehicular fuel switching. The City took a first step in adopting an Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Policy in December 2011. The policy encouraged night time EV charging and passing on the lower cost of electric supply through lower time-of-use electric rates to EV owners who charge at night. The policy also called for the City to facilitate community adoption of this technology. Responding to community interest, City is the process of exploring a pilot program designed to facilitate home owners in residential neighborhoods, with adequate street parking, to install, own, and maintain EV chargers or 240 volt outlet on the publicly owned planting strip across their homes. Building code related efforts to facilitate EVs are discussed in the Green Building section of this report. Working with BACC, the City has received a Notice of Proposed Award (with final approval expected at the CEC business meeting on April 22) for $34,000 to support upgrading of EV charging infrastructure in City facilities. The City has also applied for the California EV Readiness Award, recognizing the cities that have done the most to prepare for this transition. Attachment F: Transportation and Sustainable Land Use 11 Staff is also working with Recargo, a local start-up company, that has the technology to enroll EV owners and provides them helpful information related to their vehicle charging patterns and provide useful information to the electric utility. Palo Alto Utilities plans to use this information to inform participating EV owners when ‘Demand Response’ events occur and to urge them not to charge their cars when the electrical grid is under distress on hot summer days. City is also working with SAP Labs and other industry partners to make useful information available to potential EV owners at EV dealerships via a mobile application to enhance customer experience. With vehicular emissions making up 54% of community emissions in 2013, EVs are likely to play a large role in further reducing community GHG emissions. In addition to EVs, there is nascent effort to introduce hydrogen fuel cell vehicles in California by 2015 to meet the state’s objective of having Zero Emissions Vehicles (ZEVs) make up 15% of all auto sales by 2025. City will be monitoring this development and will be evaluating ways of facilitate this technology in town. City of Palo Alto (ID # 4679) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Special Orders of the Day Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Eduardo Martinez Resolution Title: Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Eduardo Martinez for His Service as Planning and Transportation Commissioner From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Attachments: Eduardo Martinez Resolution (DOC) RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO EXPRESSING APPRECIATION TO EDUARDO MARTINEZ WHEREAS, Eduardo Martinez has served the City of Palo Alto as a member of the Planning and Transportation Commission for over four years from August 2009 to April 2014; whereupon he served as Chair for 2 years from August 2011 through August 2013; and WHEREAS, Eduardo Martinez has actively provided insightful input and thorough analysis for significant land use policy recommendations; leading much of the Planning & Transportation Commissions efforts to update the Comprehensive Plan towards completion; the Maybell Housing project; the Housing Element Update; and WHEREAS, Eduardo Martinez served as the liaison to the Architectural Review Board (ARB) and coordinated various matters of joint or overlapping responsibilities between the Planning and Transportation Commission and ARB; and WHEREAS, Eduardo Martinez was passionate about completing the update of Palo Alto’s Comprehensive Plan, raising awareness and understanding of Public Benefit, social justice in land use policies and supporting principles of good urban design and community planning. He was conscientious, diligent, thoughtful, patient, supportive and light-hearted. Eduardo’s sense of humor lightened up contentious and controversial issues of great potential importance to the City and he welcomed contributions from the public, colleagues on the commission and the staff; and WHEREAS, Eduardo Martinez was a member of the Architectural Review Committee for the San Jose City Planning Department for four years (2005-2009). Eduardo was an architect specializing in public architecture including public housing and community non-profits; and WHEREAS, Eduardo Martinez has a Bachelor of Architecture, Architecture and Urban Design from the University of California, Berkeley; a Master of Architecture, Urban Design from Harvard University Graduate School of Design and was an Assistant Professor of Architecture, University of California, Berkeley, College of Architecture and Environmental Design. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby gratefully records and extends its sincere appreciation and the appreciation of the community to Eduardo Martinez for his faithful and excellent service rendered to the City. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: April 21, 2014 ATTEST: APPROVED: ___________________ ______________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________ ______________________ City Attorney City Manager CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK April 21, 2014 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Selection of Candidates to Interview for Two Unexpired Terms (Martinez- October 31, 2017, and Panelli- October 31, 2016) on the Planning and Transportation Commission Enclosed are seven applications submitted for two unexpired terms on the Planning and Transportation Commission, one ending on October 31, 2016 and the other ending on October 31, 2017. These are due to the resignation of Alex Panelli and Eduardo Martinez. The interview date is set for Wednesday, May 7, 2014 at 6:00 P.M. List of Applicants Przemek Gardias Brian Hamachek Sam Kwok Freda Manuel Sea Reddy Eric Rosenblum Paula Shaviv Copies of all applications are attached. Some applications may be redacted at the request of the applicant. A full set of non-redacted applications will be emailed to Council Members directly. ATTACHMENTS: Gardias, Przemek PTC (PDF) Hamachek, Brian PTC (PDF) Kwok, Sam PTC (PDF) Manuel, Freda PTC (PDF) Reddy, Seelam (Sea) Prabhaka PTC (PDF) Rosenblum, Eric PTC (PDF) Page 2 Shaviv, Paula PTC (PDF) Department Head: Donna Grider, City Clerk Page 3 Name: Przemek Gardias Address: 1252 Cedar Street, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Phone 1: 6503231238 Phone 2: E-mail: przemek@gardias.com Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Daily Post Other: Library flier Practice at Dziekonski & Domaradzki Architects and Urban Planners 1989-1990 State of California Registered Architect C27737 Troop 57 Assistant Scoutmaster (ASM) 2010-2013. Experience: Urban planning 1987 (internship at Espea), Urban planning at Dziekonski & Domaradzki 1989-1990, architectural pract!ce at Dave Terpening Architects 1995-1996. Kornberg Associates 1997-1998. Interest: Personal interest in city planning. 1. Development plan of California Ave in regards to retention of Palo Alto local business. 2. Riconada Park master plan in regards to synergy of 1. Continued urban development with high retention of local business community - zoning fragmentation for higher density; 2. Expansion of biking routes and pedestrian access -influence business to promote and subsidize btke to work commuting; 3. Collaboration of work commuting services within and beyond Palo Alto boundaries Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan LINK Zoning Code LINK Yes. Experienced due to my work as an architect. City Charter LINK California Environmental Quality Act LINK EI Camino Real Design Guidelines and Master Plan. LINK Downtown Urban Design Guide/Plan LINK South of Forest Avenue Plans I and" LINK Baylands Master Plan LINK California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first I obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not I be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. I The full code can be read here: LINK I Read the code; and check only ONE option below: Yes I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code I I Section 6254.21. I may revoke this pennission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following altemate infonnation and request that they use the following contact Information instead. . Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Signature: -----:;o.L--Jc:-:7'-:;....--~-------------Date: March 21, 2014 ---------------------------- Name: Brian Hamachek Address: 1400 Oak Creek Drive #302 Phone 1: 650-556-4141 Phone 2: E-mail: brian@brianhama.com Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3} be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Other: I have heen closely following this commision for some time. Computer Science, University of California at Santa Barhara Present or Last Employer: Occupation: CEO Judge for the Palo Alto App Challenge Volunteer at the Hack Palo Alto event Member of the Palo Alto Tennis Club Founder of the Palo Alto After Work Tennis Meetup Alumni! Advisor for Stanford StarlX I have lived in Palo Alto nearly my entire life, so this commission is of particular interest to me because of the direct role it's members have on protecting and guiding Palo Alto's future. My professional expierence as a technology executive has given me many relevant skills, hut I think it is my extensive personal history and deep affection for our city that makes me such a valuable resource to this commission. I would like to see the commission continue to preserve the unique character of Palo Alto while stm implementing neccessary and desirable changes in thoughtful ways. I think that creative use of technology can help to accomplish this goal in some cases. In other cases, this goal can only be accomplished by taking the time to view all the vantage points and then balancing the various interests and needs involved. Zoning Code LlN~ City Charter L1~JS California Environmental Quality Act 11r:~HS EI Camino Real Design Guidelines and Master Plan LINK Downtown Urban Design Guide/Plan LINK South of Forest Avenue Plans I and II LINK Baylands Master Plan LINK I have reviewed most of these documents at various points in lime in order to understand! . evaluate various city issues. California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will. be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: L I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Signature: B~ P. tt~ Date: 3/7/2014 Name: Sam Kwok Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for?· Yes California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of· their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1} engage in business with the City, 2} provide products or services for City projects, or 3} be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly . Daily Post Other: Website; Current Commissioner Education: -UC Berkeley, BA Economics -University of Southern California, MBA Certifications: -Type 6 License -Corporate Finance -Licensed California Real Estate Broker Experience: (Venture Capital & Management Consulting) -Garage Technology Ventures, Partner -Deloitte, Management Consultant -Ernst & Young, Management Consultant Present or Last Employer: Garage Technology Ventures Occupation: Partner, Venture Capital Investments ·www.garage.com I plan to be a long-term Palo Alto resident, and I have a strong Intent on bel.ng Involved with our community. I have been a Bay Area native resident for 30 years and worked in a metropolitan city for 10 years (Hong Kong). I believe this helps me understand the unique characteristics of Pal9 Alto we want to preserve and also'contribute to a broader base of Input for future planning. As a venture capitalist, I am regularly exposed to issues and ideas affecting community, business, and lifestyle enhancement. Overall, I would like to make a positive difference. I believe the Planning and Transportation Commission role will allow me to do so, and I would welcome the opportunity to!>e effective and Involved. Our Palo Alto Initiative: The successful implementation of this initiative can inspire the community to be more effectively engaged and Involved with civic matters. This initiative can make it more convenient for busy people to participate in city planning. New communication technologies can overcome getting to only . a fraction of the people and help bring the voice of the 'community into Our Palo Alto. 1. A robust feedback loop with the Palo Alto community. Following through on some of the existing plans for Our Palo Alto can greatly improve this process. 2. Improved parking in Downtown Palo Alto. I live in Downtown North, which has some of the worst parking in Palo Alto. I acknowledge that many ideas have already been proposed and debated. I would suggest exploring the following: Street parking permits for residents, underground garages, metered parking that can be paid via mobile app. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan LINK Zoning Code LINK City Charter LINK California Environmental Quality Act LINK EI Camino Real Design Guidelines and Master Plan LINK Downtown Urban Design Guide/Plan LINK South of Forest Avenue Plans I and II LINK Baylands Master Plan LINK California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent fonn will not be fSdacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and· check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Cleric OR X I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: 530 Lytton Avenue, 2nd Floor, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Signature: ___ .,,~_-='--........... ~""',...... ""--=-___________ Oate: 03/24/2014 Name: Freda Manuel Address: 369 Everett Avenue, Palo Alto CA Phone 1: (650)325-2805 Phone 2: (347) 861 8793 E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ¥es California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Daily Post Other: __ ","C-l-lit),lfT-40ol,l,.f+P:<;&.al~o ..... A"",lwtoIJ...4'M¥-ITe~b/.l!ilil",itelP-__________________ _ M.S. Real Estate, New York University MBA, Suffolk University Management of Real Property on behalf of Public and Private Entities Present or Last Employer: County of San Mateo (present) Occupation: Real Estate Management Prior civic and community involvement includes business development within a local Chamber of Commerce, volunteer aid and a high school tutor. ~-----~--------------------~-----~---------~---- Regulation ofland use and development is essential to public accord and environmental preservation. As Palo Alto continues to experience economic and population growth, regulation is paramount to ensure compatibility amongst mixed uses and harmony amongst residents. Having managed real property on behalf of public and private entities for over a decade, I understand the significance of guidelines and their impact on the local economy and neighborhoods. The California A venue Area Concept Plan is of interest to me as it encompasses both economic and urban development. Strengthening business districts while preserving and building residential and mixed uses with public and private transportation accessibility and pedestrian and bicyclist connectivity, is a challenging and intricate process as it pertains to, and possibly amending, current zoning codes and building requirements. Public input is essential to open government. I would like to see the Planning and Transportation Commission continue its work to promote this concept, as it is vital to the success of the governmental process. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan LINK Zoning Code LINK City Charter LINK California Environmental Quality Act LINK EI Camino Real Design Guidelines and Master Plan LINK Downtown Urban Design Guide/Plan LINK South of Forest Avenue Plans I and II LINK Baylands Master Plan LINK My involvement with Zoning Codes, City Charters and the California Environmental Quality Act stems from my experience managing real property on behalf of the County of San Mateo and the New York City Economic Development Corporation. California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not pe redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: x I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and I Commission Application intact. I have read and un~:~sta~_~ my rights under Gove-,,-~~~nt COde_I Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: t=-re..aCf/~ 3/18/14 Signature: ________________________ Date: _____ _ CITY OF PALO ALTO Application to Serve on the Planning and Transportation Commission Palo Alto welcomes volunteers and we appreciate that you are taking the time to apply. Completion of this application provides valuable information to the City Council. Please complete the application to the best of your abilities. If you have any questions or concerns please contact the City Clerk's Office. The Planning and Transportation Commission is responsible for: • Preparing and making recommendations to the City Council on the City's Comprehensive Plan regarding development, public facilities and transportation in Palo Alto, • Considering and making recommendations to the City Council on zoning map and zoning ordinance changes, • Reviewing and making recommendations to the City Council on subdivisions, on appeals on variances and use permits, • Considering other policies and programs affecting development and land use in Palo Alto for final City Council action, • Reviewing and making recommendations on individual projects such as Planned Community Zones, Open Space development, and those other projects as are directed by the zoning code, staff and City Council. Please see Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.16 and 2.20, and 19.04.10 for more detailed information. The Planning and Transportation Commission is composed of seven Members who are not Council Members, officers, or employees of the City, and who are residents of the City of Palo Alto. Terms of Commissioners will be for four years. The Planning and Transportation Commission typically meets on the second and last Wednesdays of each month at 6:00 pm. In addition to regular meetings, Commissioners may be asked to participate on at least one sub-committee which could hold additional meetings. Click here to receive email notifications of vacancies CLICK HERE. You are also welcome to contact the City Clerk's Office at 329-2571 or beth.minor@cityofpaloalto.org. CSe.e .... lo..~ Address: '14, Sk'Y)~ J.\.ve.~ Phone 1: b So -4' S' -'3. s;-'3 ~ Phone 2: q 4 q -CZs s..., -2... C,) 0 0 E-mail: pc:t.loCLltoLi.fR. @ .3 'In ~ • c.cnn Are you a Palo Alto Resident? j.Q...$ Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? N U Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? 'i.t.... S California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto whiCh you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? 'n cl Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Present or Last Employer: \llA. " Occupation: £: ' ')'l~ tv\o.'t'\~ S6~ • p (a'Y\-Y\~j rla.'l--\~ ~ 2D2 ¥ PoJo A,l~ -t; 6 l~kF~ aU p~ h U.)O~ k lhJi-be.s b p la.UL tv It V"t m'\ E a:v'lJ\" cI f \o..Y\~ ~ D-<L'Yl ~ ~ t"J • EAu-~ta~ Zoning Code LINK City Charter LINK California Environmental Quality Act LI NK EI Camino Real Design Guidelines and Master Plan LINK Downtown Urban Design Guide/Plan LINK South of Forest Avenue Plans I and II LINK Baylands Master Plan LINK California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: ..&v-I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application ·intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Signature: ___ -=s.=-~ ____ ~ __ +-----___.l-----Date: '1 4 -, S t-o.~ ~....-J folo A-th, J LA qlts o-' Seelam Reddy (Prabhakar.Sealam) Experience: Ludlum+Aerojet+Boeing+Hughes+Northrop+VMs paloaltolife@gmail.com I 747 Stanford Avenue Palo Alto, Ca 94306, USA Stanford iDEAs Engineering SW-HW solutions Theory of Constrains Optimization; lOX, Lean 650.465.3535 c 949.857.2000 c See lam Reddy (Prabhakar) +Hughes+Northrop+VMw ife@gmail.com 747 Stanford Avenue Palo Alto, Co 94306 Stanford iDEAs Engineer SW+HW 650.465.3535 and 949.857.2000 . Seelam PReddy VMwal'e+ Boeing+ Hughes+ NOl·throp •• I paloaltolife@gmail. com \ 747 Stanfol'd Avenue Palo Alto, Ca 04.306, USA paloalto iDEAS MI5JA Integl'ation Services 630.463.3333 c 040.837.2000 e Name: Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: Eric Rosenblum 154 Bryant Street, Palo Alto, CA 94301 2066040443 E-mail: ericr@alum.mit.edu Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? Community Group I;;"~ Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Daily Post .... ·~~~.~¥:{~~~~~,~~~OI·9.~i~~~!r~6~p~~{ti~ri~~gmmi~~i,o~7 .... No educational or work experience directly related to this role. No I received an AB in East Asian Studies (Magna cum Laude) from Harvard University in 1992, and an MBA from the Massachussetts Institute of Technology in 1997. I have been CEO and COO of successful start-ups, and was Director of Strategy at Google from 2008-2012 Present or Last Employer: Occupation: Very little. Drawbridge, Inc (Venture-backed start-up in San Mateo) Chief Operating Officer After I graduated from college, I moved to China, where I lived for 12 years. After returning to the US with my family, I have been involved in light-weight volunteer activities (volunteer work for my children's judo club, volunteer work for our synagogue (Congregation Beth Am, in Los Altos)--my family and I always staff the Home and Hope program, which provides temporary shelter for homeless families who are on their way back to self-sufficiency. I have recently become interested in spending more time on civic engagement, and have been attending City Council meetings and meeting with small community groups to try to educate myself about urban planning issues that impact our community I have spent my career asa data-driven problem solver and concensus-builder.The problems facing Palo Alto Planning and Transportation are primarily those that will be solved through rigorous data-driven analysis and grass-roots concensus building. I am drawn to the issues considered by the PTC because I strongly believe that the planning and transportation decisions that we make directly inipact the well-being of the community. Well-planned cities are bulwarks of opportunity, safety, diversity, vibrancy, and happiness; I am particularly interested in IDM, and its relationship to the "ComprehensivePlan" and the Downtown Cap Study--I believe that all of these items are closely linked, and need to be considered as a system. My interest stems from the notion that Palo Alto is currently at a cross-roads: it is.a vibrant college town that I would like to see the drafting and implementation of the planning and transportation elements of the Comprehensive Plan. In particular, I would like to see the committee take a leadership position on overseeing the design of the elements of a IDM and downtown RPP, combined with a new downtown c;ap regulation. I believe that this will be accomplished through a combination of rigorous work with the city staff, and coalition-building with local residents. I have already started working with local community activist leaders (eg., Neilson Buchanan, Adina Levin, and Elaine Uang) from a wide range of viewpoints. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan LINK Zoning Code LINK City Charter LINK California Environmental Quality Act LINK EI Camino Real Design Guidelines and Master Plan LINK Downtown Urban DeSign Guide/Plan LINK South of Forest Avenue Plans I and II LINK Baylands Master Plan LINK California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, In part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK ,d the code, and check only ONE option below: . _ I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the.followlng contact information instead. Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Signature: eri~ ~:O~U\~Wm Date: 04/04/2014 Phone E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes IL~ AP!~ 10 Ml 8: 04 Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No Community Group Emaii from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Daily Post Other: colleague EDUCATION: • M.Arch -University of Michigan -1988· suma cum laude. • B.Sc. -University of Michigan -1987 -cum laude LICENSURE, REGISTRATION AND MEMBERSHIPS: • Licensed Architect -California, Michigan, Israel • LEED 2.0 Accredited Professional eAmerican Institute of Architects WORK EXPERIENCE: I) Self Employed (6 years) • Steinberg Architects (11 years); • lIan Eldar Architect, Israel (4 years); I) Lester B. Knight, Chicago (2 years) • American Institute of Architects -current member, registered on the following knowledge communities: Committee for the Environment, Design for the Aging I) AlA -California Council-current member ,-.-.. -~--.-----------.-.. ----.. ----.------.. --.----.-------.-_.------._------_ ..... ------' .. _ .. ---... _._.-.... _---._-... -._--------.-----.---..... -.---. • AlA -Santa Clara Valley Chapter -current member, and served on the programs committee (> Served on the Building Committee of Givat Ella, Israel • Silicon Valley Jewish Film Festival-current volunteer til Gunn High School -Band Boosters .. Member and Secretary As a member of the community for over 12 years and as an architect with over 20 years of experience, my personal and professionalUves are closely intertwined with the development, progress and quality of the built environment in Palo Alto. In the course of my career, I have designed, managed, and collaborated on projects involving a broad range of building types, including civic, educational, residential, commercial, non-profit, and institutional facilities -some of which are local and have gone through PTC review. I have led many projects through all phases of project development -from programming, conceptual design, and construction documents through construction administration -and feel that I can utilize that experience in my duties on the Commission. As a volunteer on the Planning and Transportation CommisSion, I would be personally committed to shepherding the planning process in evaluating future projects for compliance with city plans and guidelines in the best interest of our community. I look forward to working closely with fellow commission volunteers to achieve these goals. Being involved in the proposed new construction at 636 Waverley, I had first-hand dealings with the controversial hot button issues of design compatibility with the Immediate built environment and with parking. Both of these were resolved successfully through the city process. Developing clear guidelines for both of these issues will help to calm the controversy and will also set the direction that our community takes in the future. As an advocate of a successful, progressive and vibrant community, I look forward to being part of the process that evaluates land use development, and to collect and analyze developmental data in order to fine-tune a policy for the future of transportation, density and design that supports a city worthy of Palo Alto's stimulating and dynamic reputation. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan LINK -Minor exposure and knowledge Zoning Code LINK -Knowledge and familiarity in conjunction with planning process for local Palo Alto development (the new Epiphany Hotel, Palo Alto Commons, Campus for Jewish Life) City Charter LINK -No previous experience California Environmental Quality Act LINK -Knowledge and familiarity in conjunction with the planning I process for local Palo Alto development (the Campus for Jewish Life) I EI Camino Real Design Guidelines and Master Plan LINK -Knowledge and familiarity in conjunction with I planning process for local Palo Alto development (Palo Alto Commons) \ I Downtown Urban Design Guide/Plan LINK -Knowledge and familiarity in conjunction with planning I process for local Palo Alto development (the new Epiphany Hotel) : South of Forest Avenue Plans I and II LINK -No previous experience Baylands Master Plan LINK -No previous experience ! I I ----____ J 1 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual. II The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Seption 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR .x I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address . from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: 250 Hamilton, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Signature: ~ .. t..r--Date: 11;1'119, iOt-! CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK April 21, 2014 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Appointment of Candidates to the Human Relations Commission, Library Advisory Commission, and Public Art Commission The City Council is scheduled to interview two candidates for the Human Relations Commission (HRC), four candidates for the Library Advisory Commission (LAC), and four candidates for the Public Art Commission (PAC) on Wednesday, April 16, 2014. On Monday, April 21, 2014 the Council will vote to appoint 2 three-year terms on the Human Relations Commission, 3 three-year terms on the Library Advisory Commission, and 4 three- year terms on the Public Art Commission, all expiring on April 30, 2017. The applicants unable to make the interview schedule, should still be considered for the Board or Commission. The 4 HRC Candidates are as follows: Mehdi Alhassani Matthew Mori Daryl Savage The 5 LAC Candidates are as follows: Alan Jerome Bennett Doug Hagan June Loy Don McDougall Jack Sweeney The 6 PAC Candidates are as follows: Christine Miller Kelly Jim Migdal Jeanine (Savannah) Murphy Amanda Beard Ross Dara Olmstead Silverstein Nia Taylor Voting will be by paper ballot. The first candidate to receive at least five votes (required) will be appointed. ATTACHMENTS: Alhassani, Mehdi HRC (PDF) Page 2 Mori, Matthew HRC (PDF) Savage, Daryl HRC - Redacted (PDF) Bennett, Alan Jerome LAC (PDF) Hagan, Doug LAC (PDF) Loy, June LAC (PDF) McDougall, Don LAC (PDF) Sweeney, Jack LAC (PDF) christine Kelly Email (PDF) Kelly, Christine Miller (PDF) Migdal, Jim PAC (PDF) Murphy, Jeanine PAC - redacted (PDF) Ross, Amanda Beard PAC - redacted (PDF) Silverstein, Dara Olmsted PAC (PDF) Taylor, Nia PAC (PDF) Department Head: Donna Grider, City Clerk Page 3 Address: ,,1. Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? No. Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes. California state law requires appointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission. Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in. or do you serve as an officer or director of. a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? See Attached. Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No. Email from City Clerk : Palo Alto Weekly Education: BA, George Washington Universirty Graduation Year: 2006 Ohama for America, Regional Field Director, 2007-2008 Member of the San Francisco Urban Renewal Association Member of of the Peninsula Democratic Coalition Frequently attend various community leader events hosted by organzations such as Green Planning Action Please see pages below Please see pages below Muni Code 9.72 -Mandatory Response Program LINK Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan LINK Please see pages below California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form wiff not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and . Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254;21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR .lL I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am ( ~. -,-; .. -..,'- providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: 4000 Middlefield Road, T2, Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone 1:6506877544 Phone 2: E~mail: mehdi33@gmail.com Signature: ~~ Date: Califomia state law requires apPointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? I work for Palantir Technologies, a software company based in Palo Alto. While the city is not one of our customers, we do try to partner with the Palo Alto on various projects including donating software to the police department, hosting events in our space, and consulting on water conservation. 1. What is it about the Human Relations Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? I have been to virtually every kind of community event that exists in America: From 4th of July parades in Iowa to Pride parades'in Minneapolis: From Sunday mornings at a Baptist church in North Carolina to community meetings in Palo Alto. I went to these places on a mission to help people, especially new partiCipants, become more civically involved, at the time trying to encourage them to vote in the Presidential elections. I am a big believer that greater community involvement leads to better policy decisions and better outcomes for a city. The Human Relations Commission interests me because in this time of growth and transition for Palo Alto, we are in a unique position to piay a pivotal role in educating Palo Altans on the critical issues our city is tackling. The City Council's approach to updating the Comprehensive Plan through the 'Our Palo Alto' initiative reflects a similar understanding. I believe that the HRC, through broad based outreach, educational initiatives, and mediations will also play an important role in helping us engage citizens and encourage policies that will benefit a/l residents of Palo Alto. I believe my experience of outreach would add value to the HRC by being able to engage historically less active communities, particularly youth. Even at my current company, Palantir Technologies, we have over 240 Palo Alto residents, very few of whom are as civically engaged as they could be. I believe I can expand the committee's outreach ability and enable it to further its mission. 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. One of the issues in which I think the Human Relations Commission has shown exemplary leadership on is conducting a deep and holistic study on the housing issues in Palo Alto through the Housing Learning Series that has occurred over the past several months. The HRC has invited a diverse group of speakers- from non-profit leaders to public officials to regional experts, and this has given citizens a much deeper understanding of some Palo Alto's housing issues. Specifically, the HRC did a tremendous job in inviting speakers that shed light on lesser-understood issues such as the homeless. Hearing Gary Goodman talk about the cases he deals with in the courts and the great work Downtown Streets is doing was incredibly beneficial. Moreover, as the Buena Vista issue, Measure D, and 801 Alma have shown us, people feel strongly about housing policies and it is imperative we get them right. Moreover, given the continued job growth and rising housing demands -the way we address these issues will have implications for years to come. The discussions hosted by the HRC were a very critical piece in solving this problem. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Human Relations Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? 1) I believe the HRC can continue to broaden its engagement to a wider base of citizens. Anecdotally in my conversations with fellow residents, a lot of Palo Altans have strong opinions on issues but don't know that there are avenues like the HRC where they can get involved and engage on those issues. 2) Updating the Housing Element -Although this responsibility also falls on other committees/city government bodies as well, I believe the review of the Housing Element in the Comprehensive plan is one of the most important things the city will work over the next two years and as previously mentioned -will have implications that last well beyond that. I hope to help the HRC continue to be leaders in educating Palo Alto on these issues so we can encourage the city to enact the best policies. 4. Human Relations Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with~ny of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience wlth'these documents is not required for selection. I have familiarized myself with the documents below as I regularly attend city council meetings and heard them discussed at great length. I have also spent time studying them on my own to better grasp and understand the cities approach to policies .. ; i/ E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board Members or Commissioners? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? I will be available until approximately August of 2017 California state law requires apPointed board and commission members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Daily Post Other: City of Palo Alto Website None Occupation: Currently a student ----~".-.---~,----------~--,"--.-------.¥-.--.--~--~--.. -~--.--------,---_ .. _-----,---I volunteered over the summer of 2013 with the Boys and Girls Club of the Peninsula. My work amounted to helping underprivileged East Palo Alto children further their education. I have not had much of a chance to do more in the community due to my young age. I am greatly interested in civic engagement, as I believe that working toward improvement In peoples lives is a most noble of I>rofessions. After attending a HRC meeting, I realized that anyone with enough passion could make a difference at the local level, and so when I saw the opening, I decided to apply. and was very interested by what Goodman had to say regarding the unhoused citizens of Palo Alto. I found his dedication to support those who need help most to be inspiring. I have always felt that we who are more privileged have an obligation to help those who are less so. However I never realized the many problems facing individuals in my city. I want to emulate Goodman to do my best, helping those Palo Alto residents who need It. Muni Code 9.72 -Mandatory Response Program LINK, Community Services Element of the Comprehensive Plan LINK I do not have any experience with these documents. California , Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appOinted official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: _X_ I give permiSSion for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permiSSion at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. '-.... ~-----------.-~--~----.--,-,,"' .. _--_._--._------.. -_ .. _._-_ ... _._------_._ .. -.. ----_._._-, I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Phone 1: E-mail: Signature: Matthew Morl Date: 4/1/2014 nin,i:ltf'l~n oornpl~t,-t.heterm ~ppli~d for? Yr=SI .. 'bottr~ .a'ra'd commission members to file a detailed diselos-ure of .prs,gtio6$ ·O!lil,i'Omlssion,Gotifliot of Intetest; Forn'! 700. D.~: you have . 8&.an offioel' or director of, a qornlilany dolng business 1il Palo Alto ..,nln.·", ..... in:~b"'$I~e~~ wlth.the City, 2) provide products. or services for City broi'tmtlI'J.'j ~r .' '. be.a.rd·or COmmi&8ion:you are apply'i.ng for? E~I~di~g.y~llIr'Principal residerto&,do youQwn real property' in ~alo'AltO? No' . .":. . •. ' muoh, tocontlniJe .as j;1 commissioner,' D ........ "1. __ . .t~41! Palo Alto ·POIIO$, Oep1. Cltit~m!~ Advisory Grou,p .... , 'is . ·.·.oftne BQard, Qf\h'e OtreQt~r's~~ICitizeh'$ A~(t~my.l$an . month as Vioe Preside~t' Qf the ~~atl· Francisco FsrOltizeri's , I "<:;'\: "'--__ ., .. _"~ __ ~ __ .. __ ._.~l~f ... h J I t ( I I , I [ ! i I I i ,. ·1 ! i ~. ...... -.-.. ~ ..... -.. _ ...... _ ......... -.... _ ........... _ ............. _ .... -... --............ --.-... ~ ............ -.......... _----.... _." ._ .. _ .... _ ... _ .. "--' .. _-"j ram Interested In serving my c.ommunity -a~d believe the tlRC'is the petfeot.vehicie forme to 00 that. I bell~ve1 have the patience, the pasSion. and the deslteto help 'those Who come to the H.RC f9r help regarding I$sues of homeleS$.ness,or those Who come whobt.lieVe.they wereunfSltiy treated ~eau .. of theit'race, teiiglon, sexliai pre~terice, gender, ete. I am deepfy coMrnlttoo to helping those who are less fortunate. 'th~ .' of homeles~mes$and low-oost . In Palo Alto Is '~f tremendous Importance tom~< .. ; Tne HRC has,beeil fortunate 'these past feW months . hear from sevel'sl organlzation~ that address thesi;S iSSU8&.(iine of the gro~ps we b~ardfroin. was InnVision, a non..proflt that helps fj'ndshelter for hoMeless famllles, Phliip Dah p'resented an overview of the housing siiuation, Including the Opportunity C.enter. ·We Ie;al'tled'th.t InnVI$lon (along with the. Community WOrking Group, as well as many other dedi~ted orgell'i\2:att~8 in bo*h$an Mateo .ati(j$antaClara Counties ,that address the issue of horneless IndlvIGtJjal~), ,is ·maklng a!~,$.al 'dent Intheproblem of homelessness. There i$ hope. . rewtitill'g thel-iRC b.rOchure and hav~ met Molly stump Te: specifics ! 6hi~hflfJl!tle]illitliitlure· .. will ., am also involved' with promOtionallfU~aSQres on h(;!W tOle! mQrepeople in . iLiiiltwtl·ed()n'Ii!·~1,i!n,n.i Illl.a·r·· With the HRC's actIVities. I have P8.rtlclJlar In.terestlnprooil~'irl,$the HRC th,y tearn about the Work Qf this commission. I also believe the HRC till$-,a great I "WC)l'ldrlQ with the new program. "Our Palo Alto,'" to make minority groups in P'alo Altomore I f' j' t. ! i "'''"''0''.''''1 . $tates, in .iNo state or'ft)cal agenoy :81iall PQ$l the eleele-iii or.:appolnted OffiQlalon the Internel wlthQut first jn~;iiy.idl~al.· Thef~1/ Code is attached, This consent fQan wlll not 8mlch.l9:tjHt)tlil&;AlpPJr/cal~/0I1·8ndpd$ted to the Olty's webBite. . the City of P·alo Alto.:to post to the Cityis website the attaohed Board and . intact. Ihaver.,ad andun~~rstand my rights under Government Code revoke this permisSion at any time by providing written notice to the Palo ., .... "'.~ ..... that the City :Qf-Palo Alto redipt my hame add"ress, phone numbers. and email address Att~,~nj~rI BO'ar,~,aJJdCOmmisslon Applioation prjQf to posting to the City's webs:1te. I am'~" followlng~)t~mate Informatioh and requc;lst t~at they use the following contact instead. . . Of Palo Alto Human SelVloes Division, 4000 Middlefield Rd .• #T-2. Palo Alto, CA Phone 2: E;.mail: hrcbQnnie@hotmail.COm .----.------.-.. ----.---.--... ,.---.---------.-.. --._ ... ---------.. -'-"'--" _ .. --.. ---.. ----.----_ ..... .J :',."'. __ ... ...:,}:it::: i I 1 .; I . j f r "1 , I I I. r j ! J Address: 233 Tennyson Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Phone 1: 650-838-9451 E-mail: alanbennett@sbcglobal.net Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No Courses in Spanish, Linguistics and History at San Jose State University 2004-2008 Postdoctoral (NSF Fellowship), Cambridge University 1966 Ph.D., Solid State Physics (NSF Fellowship), University of Chicago 1965 MS, Physics, University of Chicago 1963 BA, Physics (Phi Beta Kappa), University of Pennsylvania 1962 Various Business Courses; e.g. General Electric Management School 1974 Stanford High Technology Marketing Course 1983 Palo Alto University CommitteelWebsite Support Stanford Hospital/ Volunteer Chaplain Science is ElementarylTutor in Elementary School Classrooms Downtown Streets Team/Mentor Congregation Kol Emeth/at various times:Education Committee, Board Member. Library Committee Catholic Worker House/Elementary School Tutor (past) Osher Lifetime Learning Institute, Santa Clara University/Curriculum Committee I an a lifelong devoted user of library services who reads widely in English and other languages. At Varian Associates, the Corporate Library was my responsibility. I have a long time interest in the application of computer technology to library systems. That interest began with courses I audited at the University of Chicago in the early 1960's when a major effort was underway to apply the new technology to libraries. More recently, I have taken a course in linguistics and the application of computer technology to natural language processing at San Jose State University. I am responsible for acquisition in the library of the local synagogue to which I belong. I have been responsible, during my professional career, for supervising the construction of new facilities and have experience in working with contractors and subcontractors. I have also often been responsible for the acquisition and performance of large government contracts. I believe that careful attention to the initial stages of beginning use of of the new Mitchell Park facility is of prime importance. Its success will be a major element in sustaining and building public confidence in our library system. Similarly, progress in the new "Main" Library project is also extremely important for a similar reason. I would recommend that a fresh look be taken at both the Library Service Model Analysis and the Library Technology Plan. At first reading, they both seem to be robust documents, i.e., have potentially long, useful lives. Yet social and technical changes require their reexamination. For example, the rapid development of electronic reading technology and publishing may well make further emphasis on electronic media necessary. The Library system seems to have made considerable progress in that area, but I think that there is room for considerable additional development. Careful examination of efforts underway in other library systems would be a natural approach to the issue. The growth in number of new residents from overseas may indicate the need for more materials in languages other than English. At the least, the issue should be carefully considered. Library Service Model Analysis and Recommendations LINK Library Technology Plan LINK As part of my preparation for this application, I have carefully read both documents. California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ~ •••••••••••••••••••••• _ •• _ •• ___ .............. __ ••••••• __ • _'" •• _ •• ___ ... _ ••••• _ •••••• __ •• w ••••• _. __ ••••• _._ ••••••••••••••••••••••••• __ ~_ •••••••• ___ ._ ••••• _ •••••••••• _ ••••••••••• _ ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• _ ••• _ ... _ ••• _"_,,",_ .·w···_·_···.·.··········_ obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: Yes I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Signature: -->-rlLwo<::.....::· ~-!.J,,~..-9'-a:....q.41~J...::;...:. '--.:::.1.< _____ Date: .3 h 0 / Itt Application to Serve on the Library Advisory Commission Personal Information Name: Doug Hagan Address: 749 Seneca St Palo Alto CA 94301 Phone 1: 650 326 2367 Phone 2: 415 9942367 E-mail: doughagan@yahoo.com Are you a Palo Alto Resident? YES '-,1 Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? NO Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? YES California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? NO Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? NO How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Library Advisory Commission? Community Group Email from City Clerk X Palo Alto Weekly X Daily Post . Other: ______________________________ _ List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: BA, Honors, Urban Studies, University of Pennsylvania MBA, Entrepreneurial Management, The Wharton School. University of Pennsylvania Member, IEEE, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Employment Present or Last Employer: KRYT AR, Inc. Occupation: As President of KRYTAR, Inc. I lead the management team and direct strategy and operations at this technology company. My previous experience includes 20 years in technology, management consulting, and marketing/business development both domestically and internationally. Describe your Involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: I am Chair of the Board of Directors for ZeroDivide and have served on the Board for 10 years. ZeroDivide is a social enterprise focused on creating social change in underserved communities through the transformative power of technology. I also enjoy the opportunity to serve as a Fellow In the Leadership Palo Alto Class of 2014, which has offered leadership development combined with a deeper understanding of Palo Alto. In addition, I have served as a PTA volunteer at Addison School in the PAUSD. as well as a volunteer Coach for Soccer (AYSO) and Baseball (PALL). Through the Addison PTA I have received an introduction to the Developmental Assets framework for youth. and through coaching I have participated in seminars with the Positive Coaching Alliance for youth. 1. What is it about the library Advisory Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific Interest to you, and why? Since I was young, I have had an interest in and love for libraries. Now as a parent, I love libraries for what they offer my family. and as a citizen of Palo Alto, I see our libraries as places that are essential community institutions and increasingly home for programs and resources for the engagement and betterment of everyone in the community. The Library Advisory Commission has a unique and Important role in serving our local libraries and patrons in the community. I am interested in contributing my experience to the Library Advisory Commission serving our community. Through my leadership role on the Board at ZeroDivide over the last decade, I have had the opportunity to support underserved communities through the transformatlve power of technology. With ZeroDivide, I attended the Public Library Association Annual Conference in a convening for libraries to collaborate to deliver community health outcomes. Through a partnership between OClC, The Institute for Museum and Libraries Services (IMlS). and ZeroDlvlde. the program "Health Happens in libraries" was established to focus on public library eHealth services and staff capacity to respond to patron needs regarding the Affordable Care Act. This collaboration engages public libraries and their facilities to explore programs to meet local health needs. This experience has provided me an important perspective on how libraries meet community needs along with a deeper understanding of the potential for technology. programs and resources to enhance the impact of libraries on the community. Professionally, I have 20 years of experience in the technology industry in marketing and partnership development. I would be interested in contributing to the library Advisory Commission my background in leading marketing/outreach, segmentation. strategic planning. and promotion programs as Palo Alto Libraries looks to communicate about its new and redeveloped branches. In addition, after the openings, as Palo Alto Libraries may look at new and expanded uses. incorporating new technology. and working with the community to find out what they would like to see. I would be interested in contributing to the Library Advisory Commission my leadership experience in strategic planning, partnerships and technology. 2. Please describe an Issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular Interest to you and describe why you are interested in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. An issue that recently came before the Library Advisory Commission that is both important to the community and Interesting to me was Library PubliCity and Marketing Strategies and how that relates to Library Advisory Commission priorities. This is important for the community as the new branch at Mitchell Park is opened and the Main Library completes its redevelopment. These important events mark both a renewed commitment to Libraries in Palo Alto and the opportunity for expanded uses of the new spaces incorporating new programs, partnerships and technology. It is Interesting to me as an area where I would be excited to make an immediate contribUtion to the work of the Library AdviSOry Commission though my professional background in marketing and outreach/promotion to support the priority for promoting openings, and my background in partnerships and technology to support the priority for new and expanded uses. In addition, and focused on the longer term efforts of the Library Advisory Commission, my work with ZeroDivide provides me a unique perspective on how a mission driven organization undertakes strategic planning to meet the ever changing needs of a diverse community. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Library Advisory Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? If appointed, I would be interested in supporting the priorities City Council and the Library Advisory Commission are focused on achieving. A specific goal I would like to see the Library Advisory Commission achieve is the goal of renewing the Palo Alto Libraries strategic plan. With this strategic plan, Palo Alto Libraries would survey and identify the different segments within the community and the services to meet their needs. It would also explore how libraries might expand their impact in the community through programs and resources that address important new literacles, such as digilalliteracy and health literacy. I would be excited to participate with the Library Advisory Commission in this capacity and contribute my experience at ZeroDivide in strategic planning in a mission driven organization. I would also like to see Palo Alto Library Advisory Commission achieve the goal of supporting youth development in Palo Alto by taking full advantage of the opportunity libraries have to support Development Assets for youth. In the birthplace of Silicon Valley and in area surrounded by technology companies, I see the potential to further distinguish our libraries through the expansion of technology programs, partnerships and resources in support of the youth developmental assets. EXisting programs like MakeX provide a solid foundation to build on to offer more opportunities to keep libraries at the center of our communities, whether it is offering more devices, or computer labs that make the most of our new spaces, or a Palo Alto library app the turns the Palo Alto library card into a digital membership. I would be excited to be a part of the Library Advisory Commission and leverage my background in technology and partnerships, as well as build upon my experience with the Development Assets for youth. If apPOinted I would also like to see the Palo Alto Library Advisory Commission achieve the goal of expanding outreach to underserved populations. Libraries are unique public places where everyone has the opportunity to learn and grow, and Palo Alto libraries can be leveraged for its diverse patrons with a variety of needs. Emerging programs that provide new literacies around citizenship, life skills, digital literacy and health literacy are opportunities I believe are worth exploring further as Palo Alto looks to make the most of its new spaces and enhance its uses for everyone in the community. I would be interested in supporting the work of the Palo Alto library commission in all its work. including how to reach the broadest community of patrons, and contribUting my experience exploring both the challenges and opportunities of reaching diverse patrons through literacy programs such as "Health Happens in Libraries." 4. Library Advisory Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents Is not required for selection. Library Service Model Analysis and .Recommendatlons LINK Library Technology Plan LINK My experience with the documents is In reading them and reviewing the recommendations. If appOinted to the Palo Alto Library Commission, I would be excited to support the progress that has been made to achieve the plans and look forward to the opportunity to partiCipate in the development of future plans for the next exciting chapter in Palo Alto Libraries and their important role in the community. Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states. in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that Individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ON E option below: X I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Signature: ~ Date: 3} >-, I It --~i&-~-~------~----I I LAG June Loy Objectivt! A challenging position that exercises my skills in Management, Technical Communications, Training, and Usability. Summary • Over 20 years management experience In Technical Communications for a wide variety of , software, networking, and hardware products. , • Significant experience establishing effective teams and processes In a variety of business environments and locations, from startup to large corporation. • Extensive experience planning, scheduling, and implementing technical documentation suites and training programs. Experience managing usability programs and translation. • Hands-on writing and technical experience, including some programming. • Master's Degree In Library Science and experience In Information Architecture. Projects and deliverables include: user guides, online help, networking and system administration guides, programming guides, programming ianguage manuals, operating system manuals, hardware Installation and technical references, microprocessor documentation, operations guides, marketing technical overviews, 'white papers, speclflcations,'style guides, and internal standards; Technical background includes: Junos, UNIX, Windows, DOS, and eros operating systems; Java, C++ and C; 'hardwarej networking, switching, routing, and distributed processingj database; eCommercej digital rights managementj XML, SGML, and HTMLj J2EEi as well as various office . application and web development tools, including Epic Editor, ·Adobe FrameMaker, Microsoft Word, Adobe Acrobat, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Illustrator, and Macromedia Dreamweaver. My teams have received excellent reviews from customers, field support, and other internal users and have also won awards in the Society for Technical Communications (SfC) annual competitions. Management Experience Juniper Networks, Sunnyvale, CA Juniper Is a leading supplier of networking and security products to service providers, enterprises, and governments. The routers run Junos software based on FreeBSD UNIX. Director, Technical Publications, Infrastnaclur. Products Group: 2008-2012 • Lead a multinational team of up to 65 for the Juniper Infrastructure Products Group. • Expan~ed team capacity to Bangalore: all programs and functions are now represented, '. Improved overall efficiency over 30% through operational and staffing changes. • Introduced solutlo'ns-oriented model for selected IPG programs, including the MX-960 introduction, JCS·1200, and Subscriber Management. • Lead team to adopt XML topics model, new authoring tools and methodologies, and convert IPG Junos and hardware topics to new organization while still meeting all product milestones and reducing incoming PR rate and backlog. . • Worked proactively to support cross-company initiatives Director, JUNOS Internet Operating System Documentation: 2004-2008 • Lead a multinational team of over 20 writers and managers who maintained 20,000 pages of documentation. • Directed establishment and development of documentation for the Juniper Partner Solution Development Platform (PSDP), an SDK product for routers. • Planned and directed development of documentation for several new networking programs. • Established Internal technical training program to Improve staff skills. • Converted documentation from FrameMaker to XML authoring system. June Loy, page 2 of 2 InterTrust Technologies Corporation, Santa Clara, CA InterTrust is a pioneer in Digital Rights Management (DRM) solutions. InterTrust's DRM solutions involve complex technology that use cryptography, tamper-resistance techniques, and distributed networking. SDKs provide Java, C++, C, COM, and XML Interfaces for UNIX and Windows platforms. The company currently focuses on their large patent portfolio. Director, Technical Communications, Training, and Usability: 1998-2003 • Directed and managed the Product Documentation, Training, and Usability departments. • Planned and directed the development of all product documentation, print and online. Our SDK and application documentation was highly rated by InterTrust customers. • Directed development of documents for the MetaTrust Certification Program. • Established a usability program, providing analYSiS, recommendations, testing, and messaging to Product Development and also directed development of an online customer survey. Manager, Technical Communications: 1996-1998 • Established publications team and documentation development processes. • Established corporate style guide, trademark and logo guidelines, and document templates. • Established single source development process for hard copy, HTML, and Help. • Planned and directed development of a 3,SOO-page documentation set for a first-generation DRM solution. The set included user gUides, programming guides, and system administration guides, for both UNIX and Windows, and was very well received by customers. • Wrote PrOduct Technical Overview, Product Description, Security OveiVIew, and Release Notes. Unisys Corporation, San Jose, CA Unlsys Is a leading supplier of computer systems to both government and private sectors. At its San Jose facility, Unisys first produced proprietary desktop hardware and software developed by Convergent Technologies. In 1994, Unlsys began production of Windows PC products. Publications Manager, CTOS and PC DiVisions: 1994-1996 • Managed desktop, server, and networking product documentation for two different divisions and provided direction for a team of twenty writers, editors, and artists. Documentation Included hardware installation guides, networking guides; programming gUides, and operating systeni manuals. Work involved regular coordination with remote sites. • Regularly tested documentation for usability through customer surveys and out-of-box audit. •. Managed translation of manuals into French, Italian, German, Spanish, and Japanese. SectIon Manager, CTOS DiVision: 1989-1994 • Coordinated documentation Integration efforts after Unlsys/Convergent Technologies merger. • Established common standards for information development among four publications groups. • Managed publication by Prentice-Hail of open-standards documentation for eros, the ConvergentjUnlsys operating system, and coauthored a trade publication, Exploring erOs. • Managed conversion of a 3,000 page print documentation set to online HTML-like presentation. • Recruited and retained writers who regularly received awards In STC publications competitions. Convergent Technologies Corporation, San Jose,' CA Convergent Technologies was a leading supplier of networked computer systems to banks and polnt-of-sale retailers. They developed the Intel-based eros operating system and implemented a full suite of programming languages, LAN and WAN networking software, and office applications. Writing Manager, CTOS Division: 1985-1989 • Built and managed a team of more them 10 writers. • Planned and managed development of 3,000 page operating system documentation suite. • Managed programming language, networking, microprocessor, and application documentation. Education M.A., Library Science, Rosary College (now Dominican University), River Forest, IL. B.A., Sociology, B.A., Anthropology (Cum Laude) Knox College, Galesburg, IL (Phi Beta Kappa). • CITY or PALO ALTO Application to Serve on the Library Advisory Commission Palo Alto welcomes volunteers and we appreciate that you are taking the time to apply. Completion of this application provides valuable information to the City Council. Please complete the application to the best of your abilities. If you have any questions or concerns please contact the City Clerk's Office. Authority of LibrarY Advisory Commission: To advise the City Council on matters relating lothe Palo Alto City Library, excluding daily administrative operations. The Library AdviSOry Commission is responsible for: II Advising the city council on planning and policy matters pertaining to: II The goals of and the services provided by the Palo Alto City Library, II The future delivery of services by the Palo Alto City Library, • The City Manager's recommendations pertaining to the disposition of major gifts of money, personal property and real property to the city to be used for library purposes, II The construction and renovation of capital facilities of the Palo Alto City Library, II Joint action projects with other public or private information entities, including libraries. II Reviewing state legislative proposals that may affect the operation of the Palo Alto City Library. II Reviewing the city manager's proposed budget for capital improvements and operations relating to the Palo Alto City Library. and thereafter forward any comments to one or more of the applicable committees of the city council. II Providing advice upon such other matters as the city council may from time to time assign. • Receive community input concerning the Palo Alto City Library. _ • Review and comment on fund-raising efforts on behalf of the Palo Alto City Library. The Library Advisory Commission typically meets on the fourth Thursday of each month at 7:00 pm: In addition to regular meetings, Commissioners may be asked to participate on at least one sub-committee which could hold additional meetings. Click here to receive email notifications of vaca(lcies CLICK HERE. You are also welcome to contact the City Clerk's Office at 329-2571 or beth.minor@cityofpaloatlo.org. Name: June Loy Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Are you Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who afe currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No' Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes. Califomla state law requires apPointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects. or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Through the Weekly Daily Post Other:, _____________________________ _ Director, Technical Communications -Juniper Networks 2004·2012. See resume for similar employment. Experience on the board of a volunteer organization, as well as some experience with the PTA, etc. Worked for 2 yeflrs as the Assistant Head of the Sun-Times Newspaper Library in Chicago. Master's Degree in Library Science Present or Last Employer: Juniper Networks· ended in November 201.1 Occupation: Executive. specializing in Technical Communications and Technical Publications In recent years the demands of my job limited time for volunteer pOSitions. I worked with the foreign language program sponsored by the PTA at Ohlone school in the late 80·s. I spent about 3 years working with the Pittsburgh Organization for Childbirth Education, which also did new parent counseling. I was on the board of the organization as served as the Vice-President it! the last year before my family moved to California. . I have a lifelong love of libraries and hold a Masters in ·Llbrary Science. I am also very experienced with management, the practical application of budgets, and am diplomatic in dealing with others. People who know me find me to.be very articulate and to have good judgement. I also have an interest in the future of media and information. Things are changing. The community library will need to keep pace with change but also provide services and locations where information can. be easily accessed and explored. The implementation of the new Mitchell Park Library is of primary importance to Palo Alto for 2014. I see that the commission has been reviewing plans with the Librarian. Once the building can be occupied the moving effort is huge and will require skilled program management and careful communications management. I find both areas of personal Interest and can bring skills to the effort. In addliton to supporting an effective opening for the Mitchell Park library, i would ilke to see the Library do more community advertising and outreach using Social Media, I think the plan to have a Virtual Library Is especially Important for our community. I think the Advisory Commisssion, however, would be most effective In supporting the Librarian to focus efforts and get community support and help for those initiatives that need more funding and skilled help. Library Service Model Analysis and Recommendations LINK Library Technology Plan LINK I do not have specific experience with these documents. I am sure I can read and assimilate them. California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet with.out first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LIN'S Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application Intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Paio Alto City Clerk. . OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E~mail: Signature:--"--7~e ... ~_ . ..-'E.~~~L.t--..-____ oat.: illa:d./.:2 ~ 2 01,/ Name: PtJ/lJ 41Cl):Jtl64t.. L Address: Z7C C/7r!A//V//v6, A~?L.?*f:r~2Li PH 2: 41 Phone 1: ,6SZ; f?IS-1t./5!;- Phone 2: 6!2 -g2~/S"3'1 . E-mail: 41C'~r2;?r4~¢ ~/~rd/a/-:if1?1/~C?J#l Are you a Palo Alto Resident? 1't::f3 :7 Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? ,AJU Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? ~cS California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board or commission you are applying for? /II £) Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? jl/o , . 65C A?I/1~e/l~ E Xc'CU !'?t..e c: c)uf5f::?5 I Present or Last Employer: Occupation: ;5)'?tc"~ /#~ /ks:.e;a /cA t:47t4/1/ 11.0- ~ ;0.&v/4~ *r5#aff~, C~ 7iWa;7f/ «~K5 ~#~~ e1f0;?)/! mhtJ/Z~ W?f//7;Z;c?/5 Library Service Model Analysis and Recommendations LINK Library Technology Plan LINK 5"litP~ /eJvtduJ:e'c{/ ~4e /c:PCCl~. .-C//U! -5{R7c'fe?~~ ;; #"' £t??4 ~d ~'r t1;?/~~ V.5Pz , 411et'&d'5 k d/d/ ~ Iim?<-,Ad?/ /.L~r:-/ ~ #£J/5 California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK R7he code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: #1 e/lA~Hdjl Signature: ------~--+----:r---------------Date: Name: Jack Sweeney Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes California state law requires appointed Boar.d and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure' of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director ot; a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the bo~rd or commission you are applying for? I own stock in companies in Palo Alto directly as well as in mutual funds. Excluding your principaL residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No How did you Learn about the vacancy on the Library Advisory Commission? Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Dally Post I h'ave been aware of the difficulties filling the various Commission positions, Recently saw an ad in the Daily Post. ' List relevant education, training, experience, certificates of training, licenses, or professional registration: I have lived in Palo Alto for 30 years, I have four children who were raised and educated here. I retired from Hewlett Packard Company in 2009, after 29 years, Employment Present or Last Employer: Hewlett Packard Company Occupation: Sales and Marketing management Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Volunteered as a coach in m¥ children's baseball, soccer, and basketball programs. Volunteered at the Friends of the Palo Alto Library. In 2011 and 2012, I participated in most of the meetings regarding Habitation in Vehicles over the last few years, 1. What is it about the Library Advisory Commission that is compatible with your experience and of specific interest to you, and why? I am very supportive of our city library system. Of the four CommiSSions, the Library is the obvious chQice for me. I have previously supported the Library through volunteering at FOPAL. 2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Commission that is of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested .in it. If you have never been to a Commission meeting you can view an archive here: LINK. The delay in the Mitchell Park construction is the single biggest issue currently. However, I am uncertain how the LAC can impact this issue or how it could have prevented the issue. 3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Library Advisory Commission achieve, and why? How would you suggest accomplishing this? Continue to help the library provide the highest quality programs and materials to all residents. And to make certain the Library adopts current technology without impacting the availability of materials in traditional formats; I have no political or personal agenda regarding the Library. My goal is to support the community and help the libraries continue their very valuable services for the future. 4. Library Advisory Commission Members work with the documents listed below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not required for selection. Library Service Model Analysis and Recommendations LINK Library Technology Plan LINK I reviewed the Library Technology Plan which provides highly detailed plans for implementing tools and technologies, but the plan does not appear to go beyond 2013. Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or apPointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of thatindividual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commi~sion Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR -L I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am . providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: I do not have an alternative address or phone number Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Signature: __________________ ~ ____ Date: ____ _ 1 Minor, Beth From:Christine Kelly <cmillerkelly@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, April 16, 2014 1:32 AM To:Lunt, Kimberly; Council, City Cc:Grider, Donna; Minor, Beth Subject:Re: Public Art Commission Attachments:cmk_resume1_2014.pdf; ATT00001.htm Dear City Council Members, I regret that I'm unable to attend the interview session on Wednesday, April 16. I hope that you will seriously consider me for a a position on the Arts Commission. I'm an artist, designer, and educator with almost 20 years of professional experience who is passionate about public art. I'm involved in critique and discussion about art and design on a regular basis. I'm also a home owner and parent of three young children in Palo Alto and would love to have more opportunity to give back to this incredibly vibrant community. Some of my favorite local pieces are the Andy Goldsworthy on the Stanford Campus as well as the Peter Wegner, Monuments to Change as it Changes, at the GSB. My family has spent hour upon hour watching the Wegner piece transform over time. Another favorite is the Patrick Dougherty at the Art Center. My family loves playing, exploring and enjoying these beautifully interactive nests that live a few blocks from our home. I feel strongly that this international, innovative, resource rich community should enter the international art dialogue and invest in contemporary public art pieces that begin to bridge the worlds of technology and traditional art and the bay area with the international art scence. It would be an exciting time to be a part of the discussion and I thank you for your consideration. Please let me know if you have any follow up questions. I'm happy to answer them. Best, Christine Kelly OTHERFine artist, art director for film and television, art gallery director, photography studio manager. EDUCATION B.F.A. California College of the Arts, San Francisco 2007, with honors: major in Industrial DesignB.F.A. Washington University in Saint Louis, 1992: major in Painting, minor in Psychology. HONORS & AWARDS 2007 Dyson IDSA Eye For Why Student Design Award Winner: Second Place2007 IDSA Student Merit Award Winner 2005 IDEA Award (Industrial Design Excellence Award from IDSA and BusinessWeek): Bronze2005 Dyson IDSA Eye For Why Student Design Award Winner: Third Place2005 Proctor & Gamble/IDSA Collaborative Design Competition Winner2005-2006 IDSA Student Chapter Chair 2005 Student Merit Award, Green Dollhouse Competition SELECT PUBLICATIONSSeptember 2011: dadoo kids featured with interview in Los Angeles Times.January 2011: Style Drain (California Faucets) featured with interview in New York Times Home & Garden Section. MILLER KELLY DESIGN (www.millerkellydesign.com) Product and Web DesignerDesign products including soft goods, identity systems and web sites for a variety of clients in industries including bathroom and kitchen fixtures, biotechnology, finance and education. Clients include California Faucets, Perfect Fitness, KaloBios, Alloy Ventures, and the University of California. San Francisco & Palo Alto, CA. September 2006 - Present IDEO (www.ideo.com) Industrial Design InternContributed to team-based projects for the international design and innovation consulting firm. Responsibilities included research, concept development, sketching, prototyping and CAD drawings. San Francisco, CA. May 2005 – August 2005 Emeryville, CA. December 2001 – October 2003 ASK JEEVES (www.ask.com) Art DirectorLed design group for all print and interactive designs for Ask Jeeves, Inc. Responsible for overall look and feel of site, interaction design, annual reports, and ad products. ETOYS (www.etoys.com) Senior Art Director, Graphic DesignerManaged team of 18 designers & art directors. Developed design direction for award winning eToys and BabyCenter web experiences and marketing materials. Considered gatekeeper for all visual aspects of the brands and co-branded sites such as the GAP, Rosie O’Donnell and PBS Kids. Collaborated with user experience team to create an intuitive user interface for all interactive projects. Under my direction eToys was acknowledged as “Best of the Web 2000” in Fortune Magazine and received a Gomez Award for “Best Toy Site”. The site was also nominated for a Webby Award for best e-commerce site. Santa Monica, CA.October 1998 – March 2001 SELECT WORK EXPERIENCE Christine Miller Kelly DADOO KIDS (www.dadookids.com)Founder & DesignerFounded children’s organic clothing company with a focus on playful, modern, and comfortable clothing for active kids with skin sensitivities. Lead all product development efforts from design and logistics to marketing and sales. Palo Alto, CA.September 2009 - Present San Jose, CA.August 2012 - PresentSAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY / School of Art & Design (www.sjsu.edu/design)LecturerTeach all levels of industrial design students including an upper level Soft Goods Design studio and a Freshman Portfolio course. Responsibilities include redesigning curriculum for both courses and connecting students with guest speakers from industry. Palo Alto, California cmillerkelly@gmail.com 415.706.9789 i>~~~~n~Ph~l~~~ipn •.. ' .. Name: Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: Are you Do you have any relatives 01' members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? NO Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? 'i ~~ California state law requires awolnted .Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700, 00 you have an investment ·In, or do you servees an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which voubelleve is likely to; 1) engage In business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City . "'" .~ ..... " .... ' ...... , ..... ' ..... ,...... .., .......... " I'l0 '._.;-.'.yi.F.~!! !l.! V!.IJ.!! V! H 1'_·!V-:'1.! ! t_-=;:'!I.!l .• ! !f._t:=, i31•1 yi.H.! '.n!¥!! !C_."t.!! tJP.'pr.:! q; !!! r t.Hl.1 !"\ltl.' ~ NO Community Group · Email from city Clerk • 6iO Alto Week~ , Dally Post · Other: V:U, ,. b()\.\L -A 11c,'t.1Nl <M4!I ~t Co~iS"S'I'f?1IleV, . ·~~nt~~~~~'i&#~;~~IS!~~:.~~~~~~~r~~,..t9~~!~~~f~R,~ct~~~~~!Ht~~~~~i:0:~.#~~t~~~!:o.ral:r~~I,~t~c'.. . ~ '8yA ~M W~~-\"II) U.VlA~ i1Y iA S+ LolA"S I ?~+\~~ \~or2- .; ~yf\-iVoM ~~D\ C.DU~ of M if' SA4l\~Cl'SO/V\i\~G'V I~c;~ ~ ~ .. 2a>T .. rw.velO~J ()..s ~ 4.v<h'yt iM,.J. Jt~:~e.r foV'~.Lt-t UJ"trs. (lO£O)t.oyt~~~) II> :c UA.Vv~ ~ tl~ il\ 'Dtt* of w-t··t:ues i~ ~ ~ 'J"ose S'\'dt ~ve..ts'fc:l. . li~l~~!;;~~~,i~~iA~G.\~h~I'~~\:.~~~~f2I~~~.wt' f\-s. Present or Last Employer: csrs (.t Se,koo, If !Jrv+ + 'De S ; ~V\ : Occupation: LevhlY~ -:t. ~~ \1\. -+W ~stv i/U 'Ot~ i &" t>~" \r~~~1~.~~~~i~t.\;.~~.~~~ ... ll le~s, . -r. V~tur fuy II\N1 S-Ol;ltS 'Pdo ~ L..\~ ~ -\u.w1s-'l. ~ itc.cz... ~S,~~ t19o~",,~ ~ (Q~ ~~ . . ;I: cf..M ~ t.o-c..L~~ of ~+s~ l>rAwl-·S'1V\LfS'e·~" :r: ~~ ~ wet:> V1>D~'.~) ~'1-~ltV--1-~~,iF California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first . obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached .. This consent form wIll not . be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am ornvlrlinn thA followinn AltArn~tA informAtion Ann rFlnllFl~t thAt thAV II~A thA followinn 1".1'1l1tl'lnt 11SN~R,{. p~~ CI9 q~3{)3 Address: 13/3 IJ~ YlJ." pu,~ U1 "'(3i3 Phone 1: "t IS', 7bf, .. t;1?f"'I Phone 2: E-mail: Date:dJ~ a{, '-I E·mail: Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who areaurrently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes California state law requires appointed Board' and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial Interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an Investment In, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe Is likely to; 1) engage In business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board you are applying for? No. Excluding your prinCipal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No. : Community Group ~ Email from City Clerk : Palo Alto Weekly article in weekly about 1% \ Dally Post .Other: ______________________________ ...- . Grew up surrounded by art, raised by a sculptor in Chicago, a city with rich tradition of pubJic art. Have built small private collection of sculpture, paintings. drawings and photographs. Enthusiast who regularly attends : museum and gallery exhibits in and outside of the US. Am familiar with the different models for acquisition, : stipends, artists in residence etc. Degrees in History (BA, al1d International Relations, MA). Career : in tech creating'and negotiating partnerships with a wide variety of companies in consumer Imobile internet. ; Present or Last Employer: FacebooJe. Inc. ,Occupation: Director of Business Development. Responsible for negotiating partnerships with Facebook's most strategic relationships. Volunteer coach, For the past 4 years have coached teams for YBall, NJB Basketball. A Y SO youth soccer. ¢lassroom volunteer for 3rd grade math at Addison ,~ctiveparent in fundraising, planning for events at Addison. co-managing the school's fall event -the Hoe-Down and Guns and Whiskey ~ most sought after auction event. Sponsor' a college .student via Meritus a non-profit that provides funding for college .. Also support Bay Area youth educationalopportunities·through·philanthropic-commitments·toSummerSearchan d-KIPP·Bay-Area;-·-----, .. i Public art enriches the community and helps to defirie it. I grew up very familiar with the works of Picasso, ! Chagall,Miro, Noguchi and others in Chicago. Art in public places calls for us to think differently, and calls , for dialogue and discussion. Relocating from SF to Palo Alto in 2007, 1 have become a fan of some pieces \ and have been less enthusiastic about others. but feel we are lucky to have art here as a vibrant part of the city. The : adoption of the 1% for art policy is the beginning of an exciting period here and I would like to be part of the team !I think that the I % for art decision is an interesting issue in that it provides a new funding model (that has iworked well in other places) at a time when municipal funding is tight, and when we're seeing a lively !debate in the city about conversion of properties to higher density/higher $ value per square foot. While the !Cominission and the city wiD attract critics about the use of funds (public funds for art always does), the long ; ! I would like to work toward engag~ng a mix of artists in projects that would increase broad-base of support : and enthusiasm for public art and optimizing the communications to ensure the smoothest landing for, i projects in the community. 'I would see a mix of high school, young and established /highly regarded artists, : and would work to engage business peopJe with means to get involved as advocates. • Municipal Arts Plan LINK : The plan looks exciting ... I have extensive experience in partnerships realm. and contacts in the business ~ community through career working in tech (Facebook, eBay, WebTV). I don' have direct experience : in art realm. but would hope to create value based on experience/network in this context. I like the idea : of working with other cities to create programs. For many artists the idea of placing a piece for a year and then • needing to find a new home for it is, a challenge. ' : California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, In part, "No state or local agency shall post the , home address or telephone number of any elected or appOinted official on the Internet without first : obtaining the written permission of that Individual." The full code Is attached. This consent form will not • be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website, , T.he full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: x I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alt$rnate Information and request that they use the fOllowing contact Information Instead. Address: Phone 1: Phone 2: e-mail: 1 uu.J JD ..Af~ Date: 312412014 Signature:_.L~ ______ --,(I-(J-________ _ Jim Migdal Experience FRcebook. -Inc. Palo Alto. CA. 2007-2011 Director, Business 'Development Worked closely with product and engineering leadership to build successful relationships with Facebook's strategic partners. Selected accomplishments: - • Led music-related initiatives, driving negotiations with the labels, Apple, and ultimately closing platform/monetization deal with Spotify - • Closed advertising-related deal with Nielsen to create a new standard for online ad measurement, leading teams to term~ and a signed deal In 19 days • Closed deals with Hotmall and Yahoo to ensure ongoing access to non-Face book social graphs and email deliverability that were both critical to Facebook's user growth and retention _ • Closed platform related deals with Amazon, HP, Comcast, Microsoft Outlook and Windows Live, Yahoo • Oversaw search and advertising relationship with Microsoft, closing several deals that generated significant portion of Facebook's revenue In '07, 'oa • Led platform-related discussions with Apple around iOS, Mac OS • Managed acquisition of various assets, including technology infrastructure _with HP and Intel, licenses for face recognition technology, copyrights, and FB.com • Supported various product initiatives including Maps, Local Deal~, Beacon, Japan-related growth efforts eBRY. Inc. San Jose. CA. 2004-2006 Director, Toys and Sporting Goods (promoted from senior manager) GM with three reports responSible for accelerating the growth of the US $1.7 -B Toys and Sporting Goods businesses. Oversaw strategy, product, PR, financial planning, marketing and business development. • Doubled bid-through rates and increased natural search traffic by 40% through development and irr:Jplementation of kids' toys strategy fo'cused on the gIft buying experience and the eBay Toy Finder • Generated media coverage in 150+ newspapers and several network TV outlets through holiday marketing • Improved manufacturer relationships (e.g., LEGO, Bratz, Lionel, Mattei, Hasbro) through eBay Exclusives and charity auctions Ingenlo. Inc. (acqyired by AT&T) San Francisc9. CA. 1999-2004 Director, Program Management (2001-2004), Director, Business Development (1999-2000) Managed all elements of voice experience for online advisor platform; drove distribution related deals and built out team as first business development hire for Benchmark-backed start-up eventually acquired by AT&T for $2aOMM. . • Grew aOO-number element of business from 0 to 35% of total revenue • Reduced launch time for new service implementations from 24 hours to 15 minutes through partner platform • Increased revenue per customer by 175% and reduced expenses by 40% by optimizing acquisition flows • _ For Match.com, managed end-to-end implementation of subscription-based voice personals service • Developed requirements for telephony and tracking components of Pay-Per-Call business, implementing low-cost solution for number procurement and assessing opportunities for VOIP; cited on two US patents • Closed deals with MSN,Encarta, Office, CNET, Infospace, Inktomi, AT&T, First Date, Global Crossing WebTV Networks. Inc. (acquired by MicrosoID Mountain View. CA. 1997-1999 Senior Manager, Strategic Partnerships Managed four reports responsible for distribution partnerships on the WebTV platform. • Exceeded revenue targets for distribution deals with eBay, Amazon, CTW, Classifieds 2000, and Infoseek • Managed RFP process and closed multi-million dollar deal with First USA for credit card marketing • Implemented plan to improve customer experience and create new monetization stream fOr email • Managed Interactive TV relationships with USA Networks, WarnerBro~, CTW Arthur D. Little. Inc. San Francisco. CA 1995-1997 Manager, promoted from Consultant Led engagement teams with technology clierts, representing $1.8 million in last 12 months at firm. Developed sales presentations, scoped and budgeted projects and delivered findings to executive management. • For Pacific Bell, developed strategy for ISP business, modeling investment requirements and revenues for different options; sold follow-on strategy for delivery of value-added services • For Hutchison Whampoa, valued market opportunities and ROI for a Canadian wireless license acquisition • For Smart Valley, led engagement to assess performance of one of first Public Access Networks • Wrote and published articles in trade publications to generate marketing San Francisco Consulting Group (acquired by KPMG) San Francisco. CA 1991-1994 Consultant, promoted from Analyst Conducted business strategy and market assessments for network operators and technology companies. • For PacTel Video Services, developed requirements for billing, customer care, and provisioning. • For France Telecom, led business process benchmarking effort, conducting client work in French • For NEC and Pac Bill Information Services, drove efforts to optimize of customer support operations Baln & Company Boston. MA. 1989-1990 Associate Consultant Conducted financial, competitive and operational analysis for Fortune 100 companies, including Anheuser- Busch, Sara Lee and Emerson Electric. Education Yale University, New Haven, CT. 1987-1989 MA, International Relations Teaching Assistant In Comparative Politics. SUmmer Intem in Deutscher Bundestag, conducting research on labor relations policy . Macalester College, Saint Paul. MN 1982-1986 BA, History, magna cum laude Phi Beta, Kappa; awarded Highest Honors for senior thesis, written in French Other Languages: fluent in French, good knowledge of German, conversational Spanish Honors: Fulbright Scholar, Relms, France 1986-87 . Interests: Daughters (8,11) and related volunteering, swimming, tennis, surfing, photography, K-12 education . (investors In KIPP, SummerSearch and Meritus) Do you have any your are are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company dOing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board you are applying for? Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly . :~:;o.tili~ ~ . California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first : obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not i be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. : The full code can be read here: LINK Cf(fP. ead the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and :'" Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code , Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo , Alto City Clerk. , OR ~' , I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address , from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website, I am . providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact , information instead. E-mail: March 10, 2014 Subject: Application to serve on the Public Art Commission To the appointment committee: My Name is Jeanine (Savannah) Murphy and I am writing this to you because of my strong desire to serve on the Public Art Commission. Whilst I might not possess all of the requirements that you would outline as requirements to fulfill the position, let me assure you that I am someone that will work and get the job done. Here are skills and benefits that I can bring to the Committee: a.) A strong desire to participate b.) Tenacity and experience with building rapport and breaking down barriers c.) A winning track record of building powerful and winning relationships d.) A desire to give back to the community I plan to live through retirement e.) A background in Global Sales Management supporting 3 different start up organizations As a founding member of a Children's Foundation, I understand the value of giving back. It is now time for me to give back to my city directly. I strongly encourage your consideration. SinCereIY'~tw~ Jeanine (Savannah) Murphy Please Return to: Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-329~2S71 CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC ART COMMISSION SUPPLEMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE Name: Amanda Beard Ross Date: 17 March 2011 \ i Please print or type your answers to the following questions and submit with your completed application. You may submit additional sheets, if necessary, to complete your answers .. 1. Have you attended the following meeting? Yes No <I) Public Art Commission (Date: _____ --'-) x 2. How did you Leam about the vacancy on the Public Art Commission? Community Group: _x_ Palo Alto Weekly: __ Palo Alto Weekly Online: __ Email from City Clerk: __ Library Bulletin Board: __ Fogster.com: __ Other, Please Specify: ________ ---.,.. _________________ _ 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: Please see attached for all responses. 4. What is it about the Public Art Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Public Art Commission? -1- 17 March 2011 Palo Alto Public Art Commission application continued \ J 3. Describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer and civic organizations: ' I am an active parent of a kindergartener in the Spanish Immersion PrQgram at Escondido School and have a preschooler at Phillips Brooks School in Menlo Park who will begin at Escondido next year .. Additionally, our newest family member and I have begun parenting classes at Pre-School Family School. We are members of St Albert the Great Catholic church and at the Cantor Art Museum at Stanford. 4. What is it about the Public Art Commission that interests you? What qualities, experience and expertise would you bring to the Public Art Commission? Firstly, the arts are a passion of mine and one I want to commit myself more formally to in our community. I believe the commission performs the vital role of making art present, available, and relevant to us in our daily lives. My entire, former professional career has been spent in the creative field (see most recent cv attached). As a former deSigner, I feel I can bririg the perspective of the creative process -from inspiration to execution/completion -to the commission and to the decisions it faces. Likewise, I can offer "design thinking" to confront some of the challenges the organization itself may have. . As a member of the community, I want to see art in all of our public spaces and live in a community that visibly values expression and creativity. I enjoy art -seeing it, experiencing it, "doing" it. In fact, I'd like to be an artist when I grow up. Finally, most importantly, as a parent, I want my children to grow up in an area in which they can see (and touch) someone's work and expression of thought and see that it is valued and important and vital to their lives. 5. How would you see your role as board member when recommending policy and working with the Council? If it were necessary to change current roles, how would you approach making such changes? I would view the first part of the term as being there to listen and learn from the other commission members. If changes were necessary, I would approach them calmly and rationally. -3- 14 t1AR 21 At4 10: 35 E-mail Are you a Palo Alto Resident? yes Do. you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? no Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? yes California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing ~usiness in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) b~ affected by decisions of the board you are applying for? no Exclud-ing your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? no Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Daily Post Other: ___________ ------------------- BA, Harvard University (Social Anthropology) MA, Tufts University (Environmental Policy and Urban Planning) Took multiple art classes at Massachusetts College of Art and the Museum of Fine Arts Owned a craft business, Monkeys & Mittens Have done multiple art installations (including one on California Avenue at the European Cobblery) and painted electrical boxes in Somerville and Medford, Massachusetts Present or Last Employer: Stanford University Occupation: Sustainable Food Program Manager Current: Former: Volunteer editor with Kiva Member of College Terrace Green Team Volunteer with Heart & Home Homeless Shelter Harvard College Class of 2000 Class Secretary & Treasurer Volunteer with Boston Cares (and Team Leader). I Led Tufts freshmen in painting electric boxes that were river themed as project with Mystic River I Watershed Association i Local Food Lab: volunteer mentor City Sprouts: volunteer gardener Harvard College Association of Class Secretaries and Treasurers: board member I I I \ i lam interested in ~he Commission's Public Art for Private Development proposal. that was ~xcitedly, ·1 recently passed: This opens up, I would assume, a huge pool of money and potential new projects with I all the development that is going on around the city. Although I find the idea exciting, public art is a i contentious issue, with residents questioning the types of art pieces chosen and their beauty and questioning the allocation of funds to art versus other needed city issues. I think this debate adds an exciting layer to the questions the Commission has to deal with (and is something I'm used to dealing with in the area of environmental sustainability). . I I'd like to help make sure the Commission is continuing to achieve its goals. With the new funding i apprOved, there will hopefully be many new projects and more work for the commission, and at least in I the beginning of my tenure, my main goal would be to be an active participant that helps the team I prioritize and meet its goals and mission. I also love to do research on best practices and see what other I cities are doing in the public art space (I currently subscribe to some public art email lists, like the New i England Foundation for Arts Public Art bulletin and have read multiple books on the murals philadelphia and the SF Mission.) Municipal Arts Plan LINK I don't have experience with the Palo Alto Municipal Arts Plan, but am familiar with planning in general (having a Masters in Urban Planning and also having worked on· multiple climate action plans for cities I and universities). I've read the MuniCipal Arts Plan and would love to help out with any of the goals or priorities. In particular, I'm interested in the marketing, social media, research of best practices, press, and' partnerships. I'm a writer and have written for the Boston Globe, startups, and magazines and also have extensive experience with social media in my past jobs. I'm also interested in the day-to-day work of the commission, and including identifying sites. California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or apPoil'lted official on the Internet wit.haut first obtaining the written permission of that individuaL" The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR Ix ,-I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, .and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. Address: 1313 Newell Road, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Phone 1: Phone 2: E-mail: L-____ . Signature: _______________________ Date: ____ _ ,. . ) ) -fly' P\ease Inform rn-e. thQt ~D\) hov-€, ttc e\'J~d V'f\'j O-.\>? PAYt(O '\hOf)ls '. N(~A Application to Serve on the Public Art Commission Palo Alto welcomes volunteers and we appreciate that you are taking the time to apply. Completion of this application provides valuable information to the City Council. Please complete the application to the best of your abilities. If you have any questions or concerns please contact the City Clerk's Office. The duties of the Commission are: • To advise the city in matters pertaining to the quality, quantity, scope, and style of art in public places, • To periodically review, at least once a year, the capital improvement program with the staff and such other members of the city staff as may be appropriate for inclusion of works of art in various projects, • To devise methods of selecting and commissioning artists with respect to the design, execution, and placement of art in public places and, pursuant to such methods, to advise staff on the selection and commissioning of artists for such purposes, • To advise the city regarding the amounts to be expended on art in public places, • To advise and assist staff in obtaining financial assistance for art in public places from private, corporate, and governmental sources, • To review plans for the installation of art in public places, • To review the inventory of art in public places and to advise the city in matters pertaining to the maintenance, placement, alteration, sale, transfer, ownership, and acceptance or refusal of donations of, and other mailers pertaining to, art in public places, • To recommend the retention of consultants, consistent with the city's consultant selection procedures, to assist the city in making decisions concerning the art in public places program, • To advise the city on such other matters pertaining to the art in public places program as may be appropriate, • To advise and assist private property owners who desire such advice and assistance regarding the selection and installation of works of art to be located on their property in the public view, ) • To act as a liaison between local artists and private property owners desiring to install works of art on their private property in public view, • To give recognition to, and to maintain, an inventory of meritorious works of art in the public view, and • To endeavor to preserve works of art in the public view deemed to be meritorious by the public art commission through agreements with the property owner and/or the artist. Please see Palo Alto Municipal Code Sections 2.16, 2.18, and 2.26 for more detailed information. The Public Art Commission is composed of seven members who are not Council Members, officers, or employees of the City and shall be members of the architectural review board or shall be professional visual artists, professional visual arts educators, professional visual arts scholars, or visual arts collectors whose authorities and skills are known and respected in the community and, whenever feasible, who have demonstrated an interest in, and have participated in, the arts program of the city. Palo Alto residency is not required. Terms of Commissioners will be for three years. The Public Art Commission typically meets on the third Thursday of each month at 7:00 pm. In addition to regular meetings, Commissioners may be asked to participate on at least one sub-committee which could hold additional meetings. Click here to receive email notifications of vacancies 9~lQlS Hl;BI;:'. You are also welcome to contact the City Clerk's Office at 329-2571 or beth.minor@cityofpaloatlo.org. Name: Nia Taylor Address: 444 San Antonio Road # 1 C, Palo Alto, CA, 94306 Phone 1: (650) 380-5991 Phone 2: (650) 855-9008 E-mail: nia.taYlor@gmail.com Are you a Palo Alto Resident? Yes ) Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the City Council, or who are Board or Commission Members? No Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for? Yes California state law requires appointed Board and Commission Members to file a detailed disclosure of their financial interests, Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form 700. Do you have an investment in, or do you serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is likely to; 1) engage in business with the City, 2) provide products or services for City projects, or 3) be affected by decisions of the board you are applying for? No Excluding your principal residence, do you own real property in Palo Alto? No Community Group Email from City Clerk Palo Alto Weekly Daily Post M.A. in Visual Arts Administration from New York University Education Director at C is for Craft (Art studio in downtown Palo Alto) Former employee of the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation (Program Assistant for Cultural Kaleidoscope) Since moving back to Palo Alto, I have not participated in community activities, volunteer or civic organizations. My decision to apply for the Palo Alto Commission is because I care about my hometown and want to make it a meaningful and unique place to live, work, study and visit. '\ ) ) I love the visual arts and I think that art in public places is very important for community building and dialogue. I also think that it is important for others (i.e. cities. visitors, etc.) to see that Palo Alto is not just a hub for technology but a city that cares about the visual arts and creative expression. While an undergraduate student at UMass Amherst, I had the opportunity to work with a group of high school students as they envisioned and created a public mural for the city. This experience taught me how to engoge with city officials, build partnerships with local business and work with the media. As a former employee of Cultural Kaleidoscope, a Program of the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation, I had the opportunity to develop and execute an exhibition that was displayed in the lobby of City Hall. Because City Hall is the central nervous system of of the City of Palo Alto, I strongly believe that it should be filled with works of art that are meaningful and of relevance to our vibrant city. I would be honored to support the Commission on such endeavors. I would to see more public art projects made by and/or inspired by residents and/or the city of Palo Alto. Over the last couple of years, I have seen several public art pieces that cost the city a fortune and look out of place. As a former PAUSD student. I would also like to see more art work being displayed by local stUdents from the school district and/or colleges in the area. Both of the aforementioned initiatives can be accomplished by encouraging the Public Art Commission to seek out local artists for public art pieces and working/collaborating with Sharon Ferguson, PAUSD Art Coordinator, and perhaps Karen Kienzle and/or Ariel Feinberg Berson at the Palo Alto Art Center. As mentioned in question 1, I worked for an arts organization in Western Massachusetts, Youth Action Coalition, where I supported a group of high school students in the development. marketing, fundraising and publicity of a site specific, public art mural that is now on permanent display in the town of Amherst. Massachusetts. California Government Code Section 6254.21 states, in part, "No state or local agency shall post the home address or telephone number of any elected or appointed official on the Internet without first obtaining the written permission of that individual." The full code is attached. This consent form will not be redacted and will be attached to the Application and posted to the City's website. The full code can be read here: LINK Read the code, and check only ONE option below: x I give permission for the City of Palo Alto to post to the City's website the attached Board and Commission Application intact. I have read and understand my rights under Government Code Section 6254.21. I may revoke this permission at any time by providing written notice to the Palo Alto City Clerk. OR I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers, and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application prior to posting to the City's website. I am providing the following alternate information and request that they use the following contact information instead. , . ) Address: 444 San Antonio Road, Palo Alto, CA, 94306 Phone 1: 650-380-5991 Phone 2: 650-855-9008 E-mail: nia.taylor@gmail.com Signature: 1fAk 7fj.bt Date: 3-10-2014 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4659) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Cubberley Artist Program Title: Policy and Services Committee Recommendation of Approval of the Updated Guidelines, Procedures and Selection Processes for the City of Palo Alto Cubberley Artists Studio Program (CASP, formerly the Cubberley Visual Artists Studio Program) in Preparation for the Spring Release of a new Application and Selection Process From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council approve the updated guidelines, procedures and selection processes for the City of Palo Alto Cubberley Artists Studio Program (CASP, formerly the Cubberley Visual Artists Studio Program) in preparation for the spring release of a new application and selection process. These materials were approved unanimously by Policy and Services at its March 25, 2014 meeting, with one change to a provision for incumbent artists, identified later in this report (Attachment A). These updated guidelines are the result of a larger, 9-month, strategic planning effort that include best practices research on artists’ studio and residence programs, sustained community feedback, and extensive staff discussion. Staff is confident that the re-envisioned Cubberley Artists Studio Program will be instrumental in sustaining and strengthening the arts landscape in Palo Alto and the surrounding community. Background: The Cubberley Artists Studio Program (CASP) supports the vitality of the arts in Palo Alto by providing subsidized studio space for artists, building creative community and fostering public engagement with the arts and artists. The Cubberley Visual Artists Studio Program was initiated in 1989 in response to survey results collected from the then Division Director of Arts and Culture, indicating that a lack of studio space for artists was presenting challenges for local artists and arts organizations. While many cities support artist through a variety of programs, City of Palo Alto Page 2 including grants, CASP is one of the few civically sponsored artist studio programs in the United States. In embarking on this project, staff conducted extensive research and determined a strong need for artist studio spaces in the community. Staff also balanced the significant value of the program for participating artists with community feedback about the perception of the program’s lack of diversity, and inaccessibility for new (non-incumbent) artists. Staff also engaged the community in extensive feedback, through a variety of tools including meetings and surveys as part of this initiative. The initiative has resulted in a new mission, vision, and set of program goals for the CASP program that is response to the needs and interests of both the community and participating artists: Updated Mission: The Cubberley Artists Studio Program (CASP) supports the vitality of the arts in Palo Alto by providing City-sponsored, affordable studio space for artists, building the creative community and fostering public engagement with the arts and artists. Updated Vision and Program Goals: Create a community for artists that fosters diverse and numerous opportunities for growth and collaboration in the creation of new work. Ensure that a wide range of experience is represented in terms of artistic disciplines, artistic development, as well as cultural and aesthetic approaches. Create a dynamic and accessible cultural destination for the community, with economic value for the resident artists. Foster active engagement and visibility with the community. Continue to increase the reputation of the program as prestigious and competitive. Ensure that the program is accessible, open, inclusive and equitable, and responsive to the community need for studio space. As a result of this initiative, key changes to the program include: term limits for artists (artist may serve up to two four-year terms, but must wait two terms before reapplying); volunteer service (artists must serve four hours a month or the equivalent with a primary focus on building a more dynamic and active CASP), diversity (an expansion of interest in new artistic disciplines that include a visual component, openness to artists of all ages and all career stages and cultural approaches), lab studios (using larger studios as shared, collaborative spaces for multiple artists), a Cultural Café (that will offer refreshments, dynamic programming, exhibition and sales opportunity for participating artists, and programming space), and a revised Application and Guideline Process. Elements of the program that have been preserved include City of Palo Alto Page 3 the donation of one work of art per residency for each participating artist, participation in Open Studios, and contract compliance requirements. The new CASP Guidelines and Application were discussed in The Policy and Services Committee in two meetings on February 18, 2014 (Attachment B - Minutes) and March 25, 2014 (Attachment C - CMR and Attachments). At the first meeting, Policy and Services requested clarification on a few points, including the value of the annual subsidy (approximately $10,300 per artist; $235,900 annually for the program), whether artists pay insurance and taxes (yes). In addition, The Policy and Services Committee requested details on the marketing and outreach plan to attract new artists to the program and how the planned Cultural Café will engage the community. Details on the percentage of incumbents rejected and selected from past rounds were also requested, as was expansion on the selection process and the role of the jury. Policy and Services Committee members expressed an interest in maintaining continuity in the phasing out of incumbent artists, as well as the engagement of more emerging artist in the community. Based on feedback from the Committee, the Guidelines and Application were updated. At the March 25, 2014 Policy and Services Committee, staff presented the updated Guidelines and Application for discussion. Committee members engaged with staff in further discussion about the value of the program, the selection and jury process, and the role, operation, and programming of the Cultural Café. During the meeting, one key change was requested to the selection process for incumbent artists. Incumbent artists with ten or more years in residence would be eligible for a two-year term (previously artists with 24-15 years in residency would be eligible for a one-year term, with incumbent artists with 10-15 years in residence eligible for a two-year term). Also at the March 25 meeting, staff provided additional details on the marketing effort to promote the program, an initiative that includes outreach to more than 250 organizations and more than 50,000 individuals. Adjusted Timeline: Staff looks forward to launching the CASP program with the following timeline: Spring—Studio inspections, minor facilities repairs May 1-July 1—Open Application Period July—intake and initial staff review for eligibility August—Selection Panel meets September 5—Notification September 5-October 31—Move out, contract execution, insurance requirements October 1-November 1—Contracts begin City of Palo Alto Page 4 Resource Impact There is no significant resource impact to the changes in the guidelines for the Cubberley Artists Studio Program, as we are looking to reassign responsibilities from within CSD to ensure adequate staff support for CASP. Policy Implications The proposed CASP program furthers policy goal C-23: Explore ways to expand the space available in the community for art exhibits, classes, and other cultural activities. Attachments: Attachment A - Minutes from P&S Committee February 18, 2014 (DOCX) Attachment B - Excerpt from 03-25-14 Policy and Services Minutes (DOC) Attachment C - March 25, 2014 Staff Report and Attachments Policy and Services Committee MINUTES 1 Special Meeting February 18, 2014 Chairperson Price called the meeting to order at 7:24 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: Klein, Price (Chair), Schmid Absent: Scharff ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None AGENDA ITEMS 1. Auditor's Office Quarterly Report as of December 31, 2013. Houman Boussina, Acting City Auditor, indicated the Quarterly Report was a standard report which provided an update regarding Audit Reports, other monitoring and administrative assignments, and Fraud, Waste and Abuse Hotline administration. Council Member Schmid noticed the Report contained only one audit on the schedule; the Solid Waste Program Audit. No other major audit items were identified for the third and fourth quarters. Mr. Boussina reported the information indicated only the audits in process or completed during the period of the Report. The Annual Work Plan contained a more comprehensive list of audits planned for the upcoming year. Council Member Schmid asked if other audits were in process at the current time. Mr. Boussina noted the Audit Office completed the Inventory Management Audit; was scheduled to present the Performance Report on March 10, 2014; and was completing field work and preparing a report for the Solid Waste Program Audit. 2 February 18, 2014 Council Member Schmid inquired whether the City Auditor was working on any Special Advisory Memorandums (SAM). Mr. Boussina stated none were currently in process. Staff was contemplating one SAM, and one was listed in the Work Plan. Council Member Schmid liked SAMs and hoped they could be effective. He noted the Inventory Management Audit and Contract Oversight Audit were filled with impacts and asked if the Audits were reported to the Finance Committee. Mr. Boussina answered yes. Council Member Schmid felt the Auditor should also report out to the Policy and Services Committee. Mr. Boussina understood from the prior City Auditor that audits concerning Utilities would be heard by the Finance Committee and most other audits by the Policy & Services Committee. Council Member Schmid indicated the Solid Waste Program Audit may or may not be a Utility audit. Mr. Boussina explained the Audit concerned the Refuse Fund and Enterprise Fund. Council Member Schmid agreed it was an Enterprise Fund, but not necessarily a Utility Fund. Presenting the Audit to the Policy & Services Committee would be valuable as it concerned zero waste goals of the City. Complaint Number 9 regarding the Hotline was noted as entered and closed during the quarter. Yet, the complaint was referred. He requested clarification. Mr. Boussina felt the complaint was important but not necessarily appropriate for the Hotline Committee to address. People Strategies and Operations was the appropriate department to address the complaint. The Hotline Committee considered the issues and agreed that would be the appropriate course of action. Council Member Schmid requested Staff express the action differently in future reports; perhaps note a complaint was being reviewed by the appropriate department. Chair Price noted the City was impacted by reporting from the State Board of Equalization with respect to Sales and Use Tax allocation reviews. Staff could not provide information to the public or address potential 3 February 18, 2014 misallocations until it received reporting from the State Board of Equalization. Mr. Boussina concurred. Chair Price inquired whether it was an ongoing issue. Mr. Boussina replied yes. MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid to recommend the City Council approve the Auditor’s Office Quarterly Reports as of December 31, 2013. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Scharff absent 2. Approval of Updated Guidelines, Procedures, and Selection Processes for the City of Palo Alto’s Cubberley Artists Studio Program (CASP, Formerly the Cubberley Visual Artists Studio Program), in Preparation for the Spring Release of a New Application and Selection Process. Rhyena Halpern, Assistant Director for Community Services, reported the Cubberley Artists Studio Program (CASP) served artists well and demonstrated the City's commitment to artists. CASP was essential to retaining artists in the community. Policies were last reviewed by the Policy and Services Committee in 1995. CASP began in 1989 in response to a need for affordable space for artists. Approximately 60 artists had participated since 1990. Currently 22 artists were in residence, 11 of whom were Palo Alto residents. The program provided 23 studio spaces. Artists paid approximately one-third of the market rate for studio space. The City received approximately $100,000 in revenue annually for CASP. The City's subsidy was valued at approximately $165,000 annually. Primarily two types of programs were identified nationally. The first type of program was a studio rental program; allowed unlimited lease renewals, sometimes had low income requirements, and often had a low rate of turnover. The second type of program was a residency program; was usually short-term with a range up to three years. CASP was a hybrid program. Many programs provided some type of rental subsidy. Many required an onsite service component of two to eight hours per month. CASP required general service but that service was not quantified in terms of time or location of service. Many programs provided shared workspace and shared tools. CASP did not provide shared space or tools. Most programs provided galleries and program spaces. CASP did provide a dedicated exhibition space or program space. CASP artists had limited opportunities to generate revenue. Many programs had regular open hours for the community. CASP held open studios twice per year and episodic programs. Many residency or juried programs had term limits. CASP had terms but not term limits. Staff 4 February 18, 2014 surveyed 120 local artists. One third of respondents were searching for studio space. Half of respondents were residents of Palo Alto; others were residents of Menlo Park, Mountain View, Los Altos, San Jose, and other cities. Five artists currently in residence at Cubberley had been there for 15- 24 years, six artists for 10-14 years, ten artists for 4-9 years, and one for less than 2 years. Since 2003, nine artists left CASP through attrition. Current artists valued long residences and created a strong community. Currently artists applied every five years and were required to donate a piece of art to the City. CASP could serve more artists through term limits and could better reflect the public sector's values. A wider range of artistic disciplines and shared work space would be beneficial to the community. Updating CASP policies and procedures could improve name recognition, public value, economic impacts for artists, accountability and reporting, and Staff involvement. Staff held five outreach meetings and communicated informally with artists regarding proposed changes to CASP. Staff proposed to institute term limits of two 4-year terms. Artists could apply again after two additional terms. If studio space became available during a term, termed-out artists could reapply and be placed on a waiting list. Staff proposed focusing outreach on increasing the diversity of artistic disciplines, the number of artists at different points in their career, and the number of cultural approaches. Staff oversight of and involvement with CASP artists would increase. Staff proposed implementing the practice of shared studios; quantifying community service to four hours a month; increasing economic activity for artists; and converting one vacant space into a café, gallery, shop, and/or program space. Staff proposed an updated Mission Statement, Values, and goals for CASP. Council Member Schmid asked who performed the survey and how the list of participants was chosen. Ms. Halpern indicated a consultant performed the national research and local survey. Council Member Schmid requested details of the survey. Alissa Erickson, Contractor, reported that SurveyMonkey was utilized for the online survey which was open for three weeks in October 2013. Survey participants were identified through the Art Center's Art Alert system, Art Center teaching faculty, artists, and local galleries. Ms. Halpern wished to perform a larger survey at some time in the future. Council Member Schmid inquired whether respondents had some contact or activity with CASP. 5 February 18, 2014 Ms. Erickson explained that respondents had contact with the City of Palo Alto and the Art Center. The survey asked if respondents were familiar with CASP, to which a significant portion of respondents indicated they were not. Council Member Schmid inquired whether Staff was aware of any information in the National Citizen Survey regarding art and the Art Center. Ms. Halpern was not aware of any art information in the National Citizen Survey. Council Member Klein noted the difference in rates charged to Palo Alto artists and nonresident artists appeared to be 10 percent. He asked how that amount was determined. Karen Kienzle, Senior Program Manager, did not know how the original differential was determined. In the Budget Process two years ago, Staff proposed an increase for rates charged to artists. Artists and City Staff negotiated the current differential in rates. Ms. Halpern reported in 1995 the rate was 41 cents per square foot for Palo Alto residents and 45 cents per square foot for nonresident artists. Council Member Klein calculated the differential for those rates to be 10 percent. Greg Betts, Director of Community Services, explained that Staff proposed an increase in artists' rates during the Fiscal Year 2013 Budget cycle. The Finance Committee lowered the amount, and the differential for artist rates was the same as that used for City camp programs and recreational activities. Council Member Klein understood the subsidy did not include amounts paid by the City for utilities, and inquired about the amount the City paid for utilities per square foot. Ms. Halpern could provide that information at a later time. Council Member Klein noted artists in residence did not pay utilities, taxes, and maintenance for their studio spaces. If those amounts were included, the City's subsidy would be greater. He suggested that information be included in Staff's report to the City Council. Ms. Halpern agreed to do so. Council Member Klein inquired about the process for selecting the piece of art donated by each artist in residence. 6 February 18, 2014 Ms. Kienzle explained that the Public Art Commission (Commission) worked with artists to identify three works and then to select one of the three pieces, considering how the individual piece would mesh with the public art collection and long-term care. Council Member Klein suggested Staff include that information in their report as well. Ms. Halpern stated artists were generous in their donations. Staff was interested in receiving pieces that typified artists' work. Council Member Klein referred to Staff's desire to increase attendance at open studio programs, and asked how Staff proposed to do that. Ms. Halpern reported Staff needed to be involved with artists in order to collect good data to create a marketing plan. Council Member Klein noted that points would be deducted for incumbent artists based upon their number of years in residence. He asked how that would work with proposed term limits. Ms. Halpern reiterated that the existing CASP did not have term limits, and Staff recommended term limits be instituted. For the upcoming selection cycle only, Staff recommended a review process that awarded points to applicants. Reducing the number of points for incumbent artists would provide a better chance for other artists to participate in CASP. Council Member Klein stated term limits would not begin for another eight years. Ms. Halpern agreed. Council Member Klein asked why term limits were delayed for eight years. Ms. Halpern wished to accommodate current artists in residence and their need for studio space while also making CASP more accountable, accessible, and equitable. Council Member Klein expressed concern about the application of points. If a deduction was only a few points, it would be meaningless. If a deduction was 50 points, then Staff should institute term limits in the upcoming selection cycle. There would always be a bias in favor of current artists in residence. Ms. Halpern inquired whether Council Member Klein was concerned about not creating bias. 7 February 18, 2014 Council Member Klein was not sure the deduction of points would be effective. Ms. Halpern explained that the selection process would have two tiers. A maximum of 20 points could be awarded in the first tier, which focused on important criteria. If an applicant scored 15 points in the first tier, then he would proceed to the second tier. A maximum of 30 points could be awarded in the second tier. Points would be awarded for overall strength of the application, the clarity and quality of the application, an artist's commitment to community service, and City residency. A maximum of six points would be deducted for incumbent artists based on the length of their incumbency. Council Member Klein asked if the score for an artist with 24 years as an incumbent artist would be reduced six points. Ms. Halpern responded yes. Depending on the pool of applicants, an applicant receiving a score of 20 to 30 points would be recommended for CASP. She requested Council Member Klein's opinion of the selection process. Council Member Klein was concerned that younger artists would not apply because they did not believe they could be selected. He inquired whether Staff spoke with younger artists not affiliated with CASP regarding the selection process. Ms. Halpern reported Staff learned of approximately six younger artists who were interested in CASP. Ms. Kienzle explained that one of the ongoing challenges was CASP's lack of visibility in the Bay Area. Staff hoped to rectify the situation by partnering with participating artists. Hopefully publicity regarding the new selection process would generate strong interest. Informally Staff had heard from non-participating artists that they were interested in CASP. Ms. Halpern remarked that many artists traveled to San Francisco and San Jose for studio space. Those artists would be interested in CASP. Staff had no way of knowing the number of applications they would receive. Council Member Klein inquired about the meaning of "demonstrated need." Ms. Halpern indicated the artist would define need or identify his reasons for needing studio space. The applicant would articulate his need for space and how it would impact his work. Council Member Klein suggested all artists would have the same reasons for needing studio space. 8 February 18, 2014 Ms. Halpern did not know what the reasons would be. Council Member Klein suggested Staff clarify that applicants did not need to submit financial statements or income tax returns to demonstrate need. Ms. Halpern agreed to do so. Council Member Klein offered a hypothetical scenario of an incumbent artist who was chosen for a second term of four years. The artist would have to apply again in four years. He felt the artist would most likely be chosen again unless the artist stopped working. He asked if it was likely that current incumbent artists would remain in CASP for another eight years. Ms. Halpern had no idea of the number of artists who would apply, and there was no way to know that number. Council Member Klein understood that the number of applicants was unknown. Ms. Halpern hoped some artists would reapply. Chair Price inquired whether Staff deliberately drafted criteria that were comparable to criteria of other programs. Ms. Kienzle reported the proposed selection criteria were parallel with and analogous to criteria of other juried programs. Chair Price asked if Staff identified best practices in other programs that could be utilized to obtain the goals of having a diverse artist population and an intensive marketing campaign. Ms. Halpern spent a great deal of time in the prior 15 years reviewing studios in terms of economic development and growth of the creative sector. In terms of best practices, Palo Alto and CASP was a unique situation. CASP could create an energetic, dynamic space that involved many working artists and maximized opportunities. Studio spaces at Cubberley could become an exciting cultural destination. When that happened, economic impacts happened. Chair Price asked if Staff anticipated positioning CASP for other funding and support. Few artist programs were affiliated with local governments. Staff seemed to be suggesting they could market CASP and intensify the creative community using a revitalized approach. She inquired whether current and interested artists were interested in and expressed a need for shared space. Ms. Halpern indicated all comments she received were positive about more shared space. Many artists in residence were interested as well. 9 February 18, 2014 Ms. Kienzle agreed that generally comments were positive regarding shared space. Chair Price agreed with comments about economic vitality and cultural presence. She inquired about Staff's plan to obtain a mixture of individuals to serve on the panel. Ms. Halpern felt it was important to have high-level jurists, whether artists, arts administrators, or art professors. Staff would identify the highest level of people who did not have conflicts of interest locally. Ulla de Llarios noted the average stay for an artist at Cubberley was eight years. The present system achieved the goals of evaluating Cubberley artists against applicants from the community on an ongoing basis and provided available studios for qualified applicants. The proposed rule change was redundant, because the average rental period was eight years or less. Term limits would not guarantee a stronger program, but would likely dilute it. Linda Gass commended many of the proposed changes, but failed to understand how term limits would support the Mission, Vision, and goals of CASP. The only purpose of term limits was to create turnover. Broad advertising to attract a large pool of applicants and robust selection criteria were the best methods to address turnover and the goals of the program. Marguerite Fletcher stated there was not a gravitational likelihood that current artists would automatically receive an advantage in a juried process. CASP had artists from an astonishing number of cultures and an amazing diversity of stages of career. Margot Knight, Djerassi Resident Artists Program Executive Director, believed CASP was a program where artists were partners with the City to create a more vibrant community. Artists were not the key beneficiaries, but secondary beneficiaries to a larger public policy to support a vibrant community. Proposed changes would quantify community access and raise the public profile. A good program would support a variety of artists, career stages, ethnic groups, and art forms. An eight-year mandate was not unreasonable. Perhaps a solution was a fallow period. She suggested an eight-year limit for artists with a four-year period before artists could reapply. Council Member Klein inquired about Djerassi's process for selection, number of artists in residence, and term of residence. Ms. Knight received 900 applications from around the world for 2014 residencies. Djerassi utilized seven separate juried panels for seven 10 February 18, 2014 separate disciplines. Artists were invited for a period of 30 days. After a residency, artists could not reapply for three years. Alumni artists were invited for short residencies in the winter; however, Djerassi did not provide the same level of service and staffing for winter residencies as for core 30- day residencies. Ms. Halpern indicated Staff wished to be equitable, accessible, and open rather than punitive. If term limits were imposed, the worst case scenario would be insufficient applications such that artists on a wait list would receive studio space. Staff felt strongly that CASP should serve artists in need and spread the wealth of CASP to as many artists as possible. Council Member Schmid noted the City was negotiating with Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) regarding the future of Cubberley, and could need to qualify its commitment to CASP in the future. He inquired whether the proposed public space would be contiguous to studio spaces. Ms. Halpern replied yes. Council Member Schmid believed integrating the artistic community with the broader community was important. Currently artist studios at Cubberley were isolated from the broader community. Opening a gallery, selling art, and increasing community awareness would be critical to CASP moving ahead. Ms. Kienzle provided a map of the artists' studios at Cubberley. Council Member Schmid stated there was strong power in incumbency. An existing artist in residence had an advantage in competition. Perhaps incumbent artists were the best artists. He questioned whether long-term residency was the best use of a resource. He noted students were excluded from participation and asked why one studio was not set aside for young people. That could be a way to create or help create a new generation of artists. The survey had a clear bias toward older age groups. Ms. Halpern explained that students were not included, because they had more access to arts and studio space. The lack of support for studio space was one of the main barriers to artists continuing to work. The Art Center served younger people. The Teen Services Program provided many opportunities in creative fields. Staff felt other programs served the younger population. Council Member Schmid questioned the ability to create an artistic community if young people were excluded. He requested Staff present a table that explained turnover by indicating the number of new artists that 11 February 18, 2014 were admitted to CASP in 2003, 2005, 2007, and 2009. Each year the number of incumbents was a small portion of the total applicants. Ms. Halpern reported data for 1995 through 2003 was almost nonexistent. Staff's best information indicated CASP served 60 artists over the life of the program. Council Member Schmid wanted to know the percentage of incumbents who were selected. Ms. Halpern could provide that information. Council Member Schmid suggested that incumbents could be better artists such that new applicants could not compete with incumbents. He wished to ensure that Staff reached out to the wider community and made room for outsiders. Council Member Klein felt the number of applicants was not overwhelming. Given the number of artists in Palo Alto, CASP should receive many more applications. He questioned the need for CASP if only 20 applications were received every few years. Pamela Antil, Assistant City Manager, clarified that Staff did not think the number of applications would be low. The low turnover rate and lack of a term limit discouraged artists from reapplying. Council Member Klein believed better publicity would result in a greater number of applications. If it did not, then Staff should reexamine the need for CASP. Staff should expand their thinking and propose different concepts for term limits. He wanted to include artists in their 20s and 30s. Some spaces should be reserved for the most promising artists. A system should be more welcoming of artists who were not well established. On the other hand, he did not want a wholesale turnover of artists. MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid to continue the item until Staff returns with an updated staff report and guidelines including an outreach plan ensuring a diverse range of artists will apply and a phase-out process for incumbents. Ms. Halpern indicated Staff discussed reserving one studio for emerging artists, another for creative entrepreneurs, and another for installation and public artists. The problem was Staff did not know the likely composition of the applicant pool. Within the selection criteria, Staff was considering artistic excellence or the potential for artistic excellence. Other criteria were the artist's stated need and the artist's contributions to the program and the 12 February 18, 2014 community. An artist's fit into the overall program provided a variety of diversity and artistic disciplines to assure plurality of representation. Council Member Klein recommended Staff further revise CASP policies and procedures. There was an advantage for incumbency, particularly for present excellence versus a promise of excellence. He inquired about the method for a jury to utilize those two criteria which seemed to compete with one another. Perhaps two juries would be necessary. Ms. Halpern explained that was the purpose of having two tiers in the selection process. Council Member Klein did not support delaying implementation of term limits for eight years. A staggered system of one or three years with incumbents divided into two classes could be more appropriate. He did not favor removing artists over a short period of time. Staff should propose efforts to reach less established artists and to obtain a greater number of applicants. Chair Price was not comfortable with term limits. The jury process and attrition would remove incumbent artists over time. She concurred with a staggered approach. In a well juried system, the quality of the panel would provide valuable creativity for artists and the broader community. Many points in the Staff Report were good. Recreating a partnership between the City and artists could provide a meaningful outcome. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION BY THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to return to the Policy & Services Committee on April 8, 2014. Council Member Schmid did not wish to mandate a certain level of turnover. Staff should include in their report efforts to obtain a more diverse group of artists and a statement regarding the proposed public space. Those points would be important in gaining community support. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 3-0 Scharff absent FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS: Chair Price announced the next meeting was scheduled for March 25, 2014, at 7:00 P.M. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 9:17 P.M. Policy and Services Committee MINUTES 1 Special Meeting March 25, 2014 (Excerpt from the March 25th Meeting on the Cubberley Artists Studio Program) Chairperson Price called the meeting to order at 6:06 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: Klein, Price (Chair), Schmid Absent: Scharff ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None AGENDA ITEMS 3. Recommendation that the Policy & Services Committee Approve the Updated Guidelines, Procedures, and Selection Processes for the City of Palo Alto’s Cubberley Artists Studio Program. Rhyena Halpern, Assistant Director of Community Services, reported Staff compiled a list of 235 contacts for marketing and outreach purposes. The criteria and process for selecting artists in residence were retooled slightly. In phase 2 of the selection process, Staff would utilize artists' scores from phase 1 to make final placements, ensuring that missions, visions, and goals of the Program were met. Specific attention would be given to diversity of art disciplines and to artists' ages, cultural approaches, and points in their career. Staff devised a simple plan to ensure a transition period for incumbent artists. Incumbent artists with up to five years of residence would be eligible for a full four-year term; 5-10 years, a three-year term; 10-15 years, a two-year term; and more than 15 years, a one-year term. Artists could submit applications to the Program between May 1 and July 1, 2014. During July 2014 Staff would review applications for eligibility. In August the art panel would make its decisions. Staff would announce selections by September 5, 2014, such that artists could move-in between October 1 and November 1. 2 March 25, 2014 Council Member Schmid noted the subsidy amount was revised to $10,300 and inquired about the calculations used to reach that amount. Ms. Halpern utilized a $2 factor and calculated the amount by square footage. Council Member Schmid asked if the artists' rents were $5,000 per year. Ms. Halpern indicated the City received approximately $100,000 in rent annually from 23 single artist studios. Council Member Schmid inquired whether artists were paying approximately one-third of the market rate. Ms. Halpern remarked that the rate depended on square footage. Studio square footage ranged from 360 feet to more than 1,000 square feet. Artists paid $500 and higher in rent. Most artist studio programs used a subsidized rate. Council Member Schmid inquired about plans for the Cultural Café. Ms. Halpern reported the concept was to create a dynamic space to exhibit Cubberley artists' work and to engage the community. There would be space to sell artisanal products and to hold poetry readings, workshops, classes, and hands-on activities. The Cultural Café would be open limited hours initially. Council Member Schmid asked about the amount of space for the Café. Ms. Halpern replied 1,000-1,100 square feet. Council Member Schmid inquired about the number of people that would fit comfortably into the space. Ms. Halpern noted the space was originally classrooms which would accommodate 30-35 children. Council Member Schmid was interested in having the Program interconnect with the community. The Café could become a magnet for visitors and residents. He inquired whether Staff had considered a computer app for artists to post pictures of their work. Ms. Halpern agreed an online component was needed. The Cubberley artists created a wonderful website that showcased their work and contained links to individual artist websites. Staff had submitted grant proposals totaling $250,000; the proposals contained funding for the Café and a manager. 3 March 25, 2014 Council Member Schmid asked about hours the Café would be open initially. Ms. Halpern indicated the Cultural Café would be open initially during monthly art calls and then move to once a week and during special events. Council Member Schmid asked if the Café would be a special space. Ms. Halpern stated it would have special hours until it could sustain itself. Council Member Schmid felt the jury panel should be qualified to make judgments on artists who would flourish in the environment. He inquired whether no Staff and no members of the Public Art Commission would be members of the panel. Ms. Halpern reported the panel would include accomplished executive directors of nonprofit arts organizations, professors and arts educators, directors of respected commercial art galleries, and established artists. An Arts Commissioner who fit one of those categories and did not have a conflict of interest would be acceptable. Council Member Schmid felt it was critical for the panel to be credible and independent. He asked about the importance of the selection criteria of residency in Palo Alto. Ms. Halpern indicated it had minor importance. If an artist lived in Palo Alto and applied, he/she should receive some consideration for that. Approximately half of artists were residents of Palo Alto. Council Member Schmid asked if a selection criteria of sales in the community would be appropriate. Ms. Halpern explained the point of the Program was to support artists at different stages in their careers. For some artists, selling their work was not an important part of their artistic life. Economic outcomes were not always good criteria. Council Member Schmid was searching for ways to measure the Program's impact on the community. He noted an artist could apply for an additional term after an initial four-year term and asked if artists were limited to eight years. Ms. Halpern reported artists could be selected for two consecutive four-year terms and then reapply after an eight-year wait. If an incumbent artist was selected for a portion of a term, he/she would have to wait eight years before reapplying. 4 March 25, 2014 Council Member Schmid remarked that an incumbent of five years could reapply for a three-year term, resulting in a maximum of 11 years. Ms. Halpern explained that artists would apply for one four-year term, and then apply again for another four-year term, totaling eight years. Council Member Schmid reiterated that the new cap would be eight years. Ms. Halpern noted that incumbents could apply again and be placed for one to four years. Council Member Schmid inquired whether artists were agreeable to term limits. Ms. Halpern reported artist feedback indicated term limits were not necessary. Council Member Schmid noted at least half the current artists in residence had been there more than eight years. Ms. Halpern clarified most had been there more than 12 years. Council Member Schmid believed they would be affected dramatically. Council Member Klein asked where term limits were stated in the Staff Report. Ms. Halpern was unsure whether term limits were restated in the Staff Report; however, they were contained in the Guidelines. Council Member Klein felt the phase-out of incumbent artists was logical and elegant. Ms. Halpern stated page 7 of the Guidelines outlined term limits. Chair Price added term limits were not stated within the body of the Staff Report. Council Member Klein remarked the phase-out process could result in Staff having to conduct jury panels every year for a few years. Ms. Halpern reported Staff would utilize a list of alternates to fill vacancies that occurred through term limits or attrition. Council Member Klein asked how often Staff would convene a panel of judges. Ms. Halpern answered every four years. 5 March 25, 2014 Council Member Klein was pleased with Staff's efforts and changes. Chair Price inquired about the number of current artists who had been in the Program more than ten years. Ms. Halpern indicated 11 had been in the Program more than ten years; however, in the last month, six artists provided notices that they would vacate their studios by April. Chair Price expressed concern about the phase-out process. Artists with the most experience and wisdom would have a narrow window to leave the Program. She inquired whether the categories of 10-15 years and 15 or more years could be replaced with one category of 10 or more years and a two-year term. Ms. Halpern would accept that change if the Policy and Services Committee (Committee) directed it. Chair Price felt artists in those categories brought a depth and breadth of experience that would be useful during a period of transition. That modification would allow the Program to meet many of its goals. Council Member Klein requested information regarding the six people who tendered resignations. Ms. Halpern reported one decided to move permanently to Vermont, and the remaining five were accepted into a new artist studio in Redwood City. Mary Holzer hoped to apply and be selected as an artist in residence. She felt term limits were good. Lessa Bouchard stated market rate rents were mentioned a great deal; however, the City was restricted to leasing the space to serve the community. She suggested a program whereby incumbent artists would introduce new artists to the Program and help them with applications. Ann McMillen felt emphasis should be placed on artists' professional skills, not their volunteer skills. She felt the program for sharing studio space needed clarification. Artists should be evaluated based on their accomplishments rather than their sales. Marguerite Fletcher believed longevity was a major component of the power and prestige of the Program. She knew of several artists who would not participate in the jurying process, which would leave more than half the studios available. The phase-out process was laborious and unnecessary. 6 March 25, 2014 Sharon Chinen Ingle spent 24 years as an artist in residence. Affordable studio spaces were great programs for artists and the community. Term limits focused on time served rather than on the quality of work. Council Member Schmid posed a hypothetical scenario of incumbents scoring much higher than new artists in the jury process. He inquired whether the Program would still be obligated to select new artists in that scenario. Ms. Halpern suggested those types of questions could be presented to the jury, who was frequently helpful in providing solutions. Council Member Schmid noted the City was negotiating the future of Cubberley and asked if the City had legal obligations to provide space to artists once they were selected for the Program. James Keene, City Manager, believed it was unlikely the situation with Cubberley would change in the next four-year period. The City had an ongoing obligation to ensure everyone was informed of the situation. Council Member Klein remarked the public comment regarding market rates was true; however, the City was not legally required to lease the space for community service. The City could receive higher rents as there was a great demand for space. Ms. Halpern recalled the Program began at Jordan Middle School. At that time, the policy was to charge artists for utilities and maintenance only. In Fiscal Year 2013, the cost for maintenance alone was $1.97 per square foot. Council Member Klein commented that most everyone mentioned the effect of term limits on current artists in residence. Incoming artists would also be subject to term limits. It was important for everyone to understand the process and the terms of the Program. MOTION: Chair Price moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid that the Policy & Services Committee recommend the City Council approve the updated guidelines procedures and selection processes for the City of Palo Alto’s Cubberley Artists Studio Program (formerly the Cubberley Visual Artists Studio Program), offered at the Cubberley Community Center, with one modification: under the incumbent artists with 10 or more years in residence would be eligible for two years of the new four-year term and the category of 15 to 24 years would be deleted. Chair Price indicated the Motion considered the experience and contributions of artists and an approach to involve upcoming artists. The Cubberley Artists Studio Program was vital to the community. 7 March 25, 2014 Council Member Schmid asked if the Committee was approving the Program or recommending it to the Council. Chair Price responded recommending it to the Council. Council Member Schmid supported Staff's proposal. Staff would be sensitive to jury feedback and report to Council any needed modifications. He assumed Staff would remain active in identifying new and different ways to reach out to the community. Council Member Klein asked if the item would be presented to the Council on the Consent Calendar. The vote was unanimous; however, one Committee Member was absent. Mr. Keene interpreted the vote as unanimous, but would confirm the proper process. Council Member Klein asked if Committee Members wanted the item presented to the Council on the Consent Calendar. Chair Price agreed. Council Member Schmid agreed and suggested Chair Price informally confer with Council Member Scharff to obtain his opinion. Chair Price agreed to do so. The item would be presented to the Council on the Consent Calendar as soon as feasible. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Scharff absent City of Palo Alto (ID # 4608) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Council Priority: Environmental Sustainability Summary Title: Local Solar Plan Title: Finance Committee Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Establishing a Local Solar Plan to Provide Four Percent of the City's Total Energy Needs by 2023 From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff, the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC), and the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council approve a resolution (Attachment A) establishing the Local Solar Plan to increase the installation of local solar photovoltaic facilities in order to provide 4 percent of the City’s total energy needs by 2023. The Finance Committee recommends that the Local Solar Plan prioritize development of a community solar share program over the solar donation program. Recommended Motion Motion that the City Council approve a resolution (Attachment A) establishing the Local Solar Plan to increase the installation of local solar photovoltaic facilities in order to provide 4 percent of the City’s total energy needs by 2023, prioritizing the development of a community solar share program over the solar donation program. Summary The City of Palo Alto desires to be a leading city in sustainability efforts and, as such, has set significant goals to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Individual homeowners and businesses desire to do their part to reduce GHG emissions, want to control the cost of meeting their energy needs, and often look to solar energy as a means to achieve those goals. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Besides being carbon-free, local solar systems achieve many benefits for Palo Alto, including: reducing the amount of remote renewable energy the City must buy for the community, which helps keep everyone’s rates down; avoiding the costs and losses from transmitting and distributing electricity from distant power facilities; and reducing the need to build expensive transmission lines throughout the state, thus improving grid reliability. Local solar generating facilities provide other strategic benefits to the participant and community including improving localized distribution system resiliency and, depending on where the systems are installed, providing rain protection and shade, which can reduce air conditioning costs and increase comfort. The City’s PV Partners program, which provides rebates to electric customers who install rooftop photovoltaic (PV) solar systems, has been very successful, but the remaining program funds are expected to be reserved by the end of 2014. State and national efforts to expand the installation of solar energy systems have grown exponentially. The cost of installing solar on rooftops has fallen and many third-party entities offer creative ways for residents and businesses to install systems. However, the benefits to potential solar owners locally are lower due to Palo Alto’s relatively low electric retail rates. Further, with the adoption of the City’s Carbon Neutral Plan for the electric supply portfolio, installing solar in Palo Alto may be less compelling for some customers than it once was. The proposed Local Solar Plan identifies a set of strategies and initiatives to continue promoting solar in a cost-effective and sustainable manner by accelerating and increasing solar penetration in Palo Alto. Implementing the Local Solar Plan allows the City to continue to be a leading solar community and a leader in environmental sustainability. Background The City has been a leader in local solar development starting in 1980 when it launched a solar hot water heating program. In 1999 the City launched its first solar PV system rebate program to encourage residents and businesses to install solar PV systems. A detailed description of the City’s existing solar programs is presented in Attachment D. Discussion The staff report to the Finance Committee (Attachment C) provides a detailed discussion of proposed Local Solar Plan (Attachment B) and how the goal, objectives and strategies for the plan were developed. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Committee Review and Recommendation At its February 12, 2014 meeting, the UAC unanimously recommended Council approve the proposed Local Solar Plan. The minutes of the UAC’s meeting are provided in Attachment D. At its March 18, 2014 meeting, the Finance Committee discussed the Local Solar Plan and staff’s proposed timeline for designing and launching new solar programs. The staff report to the Finance Committee (Attachment C) contains the tentative timeline of the three new solar programs that are part of the Local Solar Plan shown in Table 1. Table 1: Tentative Review and Approval Timeline for Major Programs Program Development UAC Review Finance Comm. Review Council Review Program Launch 1. Community Solar Donation Program Through May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 Aug. 2014 Oct. 2014 2. Community Solar Share Program July-October 2014 Nov. 2014 Dec. 2014 Jan. 2015 July 2015 3. Solar Group-discount Program Jan-April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 Jan. 2016 The Finance Committee expressed concerns over the development of the solar donation program before the community share program, which was considered to have more potential impact. After much discussion, the Finance Committee voted unanimously (4-0) to recommend that Council approve a resolution adopting the Local Solar Plan and prioritizing the development of a community solar share program over a solar donation program. The final minutes of the Finance Committee’s March 18, 2014 meeting are provided as Attachment E. Next Steps Provided Council approves the proposed Local Solar Plan, staff will develop the programs and will return to the UAC, Finance Committee and Council for recommendations and approval of each specific programs. When it seeks Council approval of individual programs, staff will provide a thorough description of the program, potential participation, benefits and costs and identify funding and resource needs for implementation. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Table 2 reflects a new tentative timeline for launching the three solar programs that prioritizes the Community Solar Share Program and speeds up its launch by six months. The timeline is based on staff’s best estimate of the amount of resources needed to design, contract for administrative and marketing services, and gain approval for the individual programs. Staff has determined that it would be advantageous to issue one Request for Proposals (RFP) for marketing and administrative services for both the Community Solar Share Program and the Solar Donation Program. Depending on the results of the RFP and the complexity of each of the programs, staff will work to meet or beat the program launch dates indicated in Table 2. Table 2: Tentative Review and Approval Timeline for Major Programs Program Development UAC Review Finance Comm. Review Council Review Program Launch 1. Community Solar Share Program Through Sept. 2014 Oct. 2014 Nov. 2014 Dec. 2014 Jan. 2015 2. Community Solar Donation Program Through Dec. 2014 Jan. 2015 Feb. 2015 Mar. 2015 July 2015 3. Solar Group-discount Program Jan-April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 Jan. 2016 Resource Impacts Approval of the Local Solar Plan will not impact budget resources for fiscal year 2014. Staff resources will be impacted for the programs contained in the plan and as such staff may seek consulting and program administration services to assist with the implementation of the Local Solar Plan. Staff will identify resource impacts and will seek Council approval for funds to implement specific programs, as needed. Policy Impacts Approval of the Local Solar Plan is consistent with existing solar legislative mandates and is in support of the 1) City’s Climate Protection Plan; 2) CPAU’s Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan; and 3) CPAU’s Strategic Plan. Environmental Impacts Approval of the Local Solar Plan does not meet the California Environmental Quality Act’s (CEQA) definition of “project” under California Public Resources Code Sec. 21065, thus no environmental review is required. Construction and installation of individual solar systems on City of Palo Alto Page 5 buildings in the community may be subject to CEQA review and will be addressed as needed, as each of the Local Solar Plan’s individual sub-programs are brought forward. Attachments: Attachment A: Resolution (PDF) Attachment B: Local Solar Plan (PDF) Attachment C: Finance Committee Staff Report ID 4511 Local Solar Plan (without its attachments) (PDF) Attachment D: Excerpted Final UAC Minutes of February 12, 2014 (PDF) Attachment E: Excerpted Final FC Minutes of 3-18-14 (PDF) Attachment F: Description of Current Solar Programs (PDF) Attachment A * NOT YET APPROVED * 140303 dm 6053026 1 Resolution No. _________ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing a Local Solar Plan to Provide Four Percent of the City’s Total Energy Needs by 2023 R E C I T A L S A. In an effort to combat climate change, in December 2007 the City of Palo Alto (“City”) adopted the Climate Protection Plan, which set aggressive greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction goals to be achieved by the year 2020. B. The City currently offers rebates as required by state law through its “PV Partners” program. The City’s goal under the PV Partners program is to install 6.5 megawatts (“MW”) of solar photovoltaic (“PV”) by 2017 through issuance of $13 million in rebates. As of September 30, 2013, 3.9 MW of solar PV have been installed, representing 0.7% of the City’s annual energy needs. An additional 2.5 MW of new electricity from solar installations funded via PV Partners are pending completion. The funds set aside for PV Partners rebates are expected to be exhausted by the end of 2014. C. The City also offers net energy metering incentives as required by state law, to customers who install solar PV systems on their premises, up to a cap of five percent of the City’s peak annual load. The City expects to meet the cap by 2017. D. The City provides incentives to encourage installation of solar hot water heating systems as required by state law. Adoption of solar hot water heating systems in Palo Alto is low due to high adoption cost. E. Through Palo Alto Clean Local Energy Accessible Now (“Palo Alto CLEAN”) Program, the City offers payment for electricity generated from solar PV systems where the electricity is not used on site but is sold to the City to meet the City’s Renewable Portfolio Standard. To date, Palo Alto CLEAN has had no participation, however 3 MW are expected to be installed by end of 2015. F. Local solar systems achieve many benefits for Palo Alto, including: reducing the amount of renewable energy the City must buy for the community, which helps keep all CPAU customers’ rates down; avoiding the cost of losses from transmitting and distributing electricity from distant power facilities; and reducing the need to build expensive transmission lines throughout the state, thus improving grid reliability. CPAU customers and the community as a whole also realize other strategic benefits when local solar generation facilities are developed, including increased localized distribution system resiliency, and increased rain protection and shade at many solar facility locations. G. The City has been recognized as a leader in promoting solar PV energy in Palo Alto, and desires to continue to promote and facilitate the acceleration of solar in Palo Alto in a Attachment A * NOT YET APPROVED * 140303 dm 6053026 2 cost effective and safe manner in order to capture the financial, environmental and systemic benefits of local solar development. H. Staff presented the Local Solar Plan to the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) on February 12, 2014 and the UAC voted unanimously (five in favor and two absent) to recommend that the City adopt the Local Solar Plan. I. On March 18, the Finance Committee voted unanimously (4-0) to recommend that Council approve a resolution adopting the Local Solar Plan and prioritizing the development of a community solar share program over a solar donation program. The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The Council hereby adopts the resolution establishing the Local Solar Plan as described in Exhibit A, prioritizing the development of a community solar share program over the solar donation program. SECTION 2. The Council finds that adoption of the Local Solar Plan to increase the penetration of local solar installations from about 0.7% of the City’s total energy needs in 2013 to 4% by 2023 will offer the following benefits for the Palo Alto community: 1. Reduction in participating customers’ utilities bills; 2. Reduction in the amount of renewable energy the City must buy for the community, which helps keep all CPAU customers’ rates down; 3. Avoidance of the cost of line losses from transmitting and distributing electricity from distant power facilities; 4. Reduction in the need to build expensive transmission lines throughout the state, thus reducing transmission costs; 5. Increased localized distribution system resiliency; and 6. Increased rain protection and shade at many solar facility locations, which can reduce air conditioning costs and increase community well-being. SECTION 2. The Council finds that adoption of the Local Solar Plan will not impact fiscal year 2014 budget resources. The Council will consider any funding needs and assess ratepayer impacts, if any, for each of the Local Solar Plan’s component programs as those programs are brought forward. // // Attachment A * NOT YET APPROVED * 140303 dm 6053026 3 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. Construction and installation of individual solar systems on buildings in the community may be subject to CEQA review and will be addressed as needed, as each of the Local Solar Plan’s individual sub- programs are brought forward. 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 B‐1 Exhibit A to Resolution No XXXX Adopted by City Council on ________________________________ City of Palo Alto Utilities – Local Solar Plan Goal To increase the installation of local solar photovoltaic facilities to provide 4 percent of the City’s total energy needs by 2023. Objectives 1. Facilitate the development of local, safe and cost‐effective solar in Palo Alto to meet the diverse needs of the community 2. Reduce the cost of installing solar in Palo Alto and become a leader in promoting renewable distributed generation through solar installations 3. Understand the community’s solar potential and diverse needs and develop solar programs accordingly 4. Remove internal obstacles to minimize cost and achieve greater solar potential 5. Promote solar installations in a cost effective and safe manner 6. Leverage industry resources to the extent possible 7. Deploy industry best practices Strategies 1. Remove internal system and institutional barriers which increase “soft” costs and may impede adoption of solar in Palo Alto a. Work with the Development Center, Planning and Utilities to identify further improvements to streamline the solar permitting process. b. Promote advancements in the City’s permitting process to community and solar developers. 2. Develop proper policies, incentives, price signals and rates to encourage solar installation a. Solar Policy and Rate Design – explore rate structures that balance cost of service with the City’s policy to promote the development of new solar systems in Palo Alto. i. When evaluating new solar policies, evaluate the impact, if any, on non‐solar ratepayers. b. City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) Billing System – explore modifications to the billing system and/or evaluate: i. Incorporating net metering information on the monthly bills ii. Virtual net metering to allow the sharing of net metering bill credits across accounts c. CPAU Incentives – assess providing rebates or other incentives after the SB1 mandated expenditures are exhausted, the Federal Investment Tax Credit has been reduced from 30% to 10% and the net‐metering cap has been met, to continue to encourage local solar installations. Attachment B B‐2 d. Leverage available resources for solar policy and program development i. Participate in the Federal Department of Energy’s American Solar Transformation Initiative to receive free services including development of a customized solar road map ii. Request assistance from existing membership in Solar Electric Power Association and ESource iii. Consider partnering with regional cities, counties and the State of California in developing solar programs e. Advocate at a local, regional and state level for effective rules, regulations and legislation to promote cost effective and fair solar development i. Coordinate with other municipal utilities through the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) and the California Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA) on state legislation related to solar 3. Assess technical and market potential of solar in Palo Alto a. Review commercial and residential sites to determine solar technical potential b. Determine cost drivers for installing solar in Palo Alto c. Utilize other industry studies to develop a feasible and marketable potential d. Develop a database of solar potential e. Assess the impacts of PV on CPAU’s distribution system 4. Implement policies and programs to increase solar system installations on CPAU customer sites with good solar access a. Continue to promote the PV Partners program to achieve the 6.5 MW of installation by 2017, per CA SB1 b. Continue to promote the Palo Alto CLEAN (feed‐in‐tariff) program and revamp the marketing of Palo Alto CLEAN to facilitate the coordination of potential sites with developers and property owners/managers to achieve some level of participation i. Annually re‐assess the avoided cost of local renewable energy and recommend adjustments to the CLEAN offer price and contract terms, as appropriate ii. Investigate developers’ concerns with Palo Alto CLEAN program rules iii. Continue to educate commercial property owners about the CLEAN program c. Evaluate solar project financing options i. Coordinate with the California FIRST Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program which allows solar system owners to borrow funds for the PV installation and pay it back on their property tax bills over a term equal to the expected system life (20 years). ii. Partner with local lenders to offer solar financing1 1 See an example of such a program from New Jersey’s Public Service Enterprise Group her: http://www.pseg.com/home/save/solar/index.jsp Attachment B B‐3 5. Facilitate and/or develop new programs to encourage new participants to develop local solar installations. a. Develop a solar donation program for community members to donate to public sector and non‐profit organizations which may benefit from solar, but can’t afford the investment on their own. i. Work with PAUSD and other non‐profits to identify sites. Potential installation sites include public sector and non‐profit locations which are ineligible to receive federal tax subsidies. ii. Evaluate alternative mechanisms to provide donations to sustain the program, including: (1) Reformulating the suspended PaloAltoGreen electric program as a mechanism to provide ongoing donations; (2) Developing a bill donation mechanism to raise funds; or (3) Developing on‐line or crowd‐funded sources to raise ongoing funds. b. Develop a community solar share program for the benefit of community members that do not have good solar access but have the desire to invest in local solar. i. Evaluate program design options that allow CPAU customers to invest in a share of a new larger‐scale solar PV installations located in Palo Alto ii. Evaluate options for providing value back to customer investors, including: (1) Evaluate CPAU’s ability to provide monthly payments (in $) on the customer’s Utilities bill (2) Evaluate CPAU’s ability to offer “virtual net metering” so that energy produced (in kWh) from a solar system could be reflected on customers’ Utilities bills. [Note that the billing system challenges may be substantial for this option.] (3) Evaluate providing payments to customers via a third‐party administrator separate from the Utilities bill. iii. Evaluate outsourcing the administration of the community solar program to provide the following: (1) Develop the community solar program (2) Perform program marketing (3) Identify installation sites (4) Manage the solar installation contract (5) Own, operate and maintain the PV installation (or contract with a third‐ party) c. Investigate group‐discount solar PV program options to allow/facilitate Palo Alto residents to pool their buying power to secure significant discounts, making installing solar on their home simple and more affordable. i. Leverage existing group‐discount programs offered to regional residents and company employees. 6. Maximize solar installations on City‐owned facilities a. Assist Public Works in evaluating leasing City‐owned facilities with low electric consumption (elevated garages and surface parking lots) to a solar developer who Attachment B B‐4 could install solar PV systems and would be compensated under the Palo Alto CLEAN program. b. Assist Public Works in investigating installing net‐metered solar on City‐owned sites to reduce the City’s annual electric costs (and benefit the General fund). 7. Educate the community on the benefits of solar through information and demonstration projects a. Develop solar demonstration projects on City and public facilities b. Promote the benefits of PV systems together with fuel switching (replacing end‐of‐ life gas appliances with electric appliances or replacing a gasoline vehicle with an electric vehicle or a plug‐in hybrid vehicle) strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. c. Investigate developing a “one‐stop‐shop” model (e.g., Wave‐one). d. Develop "how to go solar" promotional materials which allows customers to evaluate several solar options. e. Develop direct marketing for small commercial/business customers. f. Develop a database of solar projects installed throughout the community as “case studies” and promote them through CPAU’s web site. g. Promote new innovative solar technologies using the CPAU Emerging technology Program i. Thermoelectric paint ii. PV & batteries iii. Building‐integrated PV (BIPV) iv. White roofs v. Microgrids vi. Solar shingles vii. Solar thermal City of Palo Alto (ID # 4511) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/18/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Council Priority: Environmental Sustainability Summary Title: Local Solar Plan Title: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Establishing a Local Solar Plan to Provide Four Percent of the City's Total Energy Needs by 2023 From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council approve the attached resolution establishing the Local Solar Plan to increase the installation of local solar photovoltaic facilities in order to provide 4 percent of the City’s total energy needs by 2023. Summary The City of Palo Alto desires to be a leading city in sustainability efforts and, as such, has set significant goals to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Individual homeowners and businesses desire to do their part to reduce GHG emissions, want to control the cost of meeting their energy needs, and often look to solar energy as a means to achieve those goals. Besides being carbon-free, local solar systems achieve many benefits for Palo Alto, including: reducing the amount of renewable energy the City must buy for the community, which helps keep everyone’s rates down; avoiding the cost of losses from transmitting and distributing the electricity from distant power facilities; and reducing the need to build expensive transmission lines throughout the state, thus improving grid reliability. The proposed Local Solar Plan identifies a set of strategies and initiatives to continue promoting solar in a cost-effective and sustainable manner by accelerating and increasing solar City of Palo Alto Page 2 penetration in Palo Alto. The City’s PV Partners program, which provides rebates to City electric customers who install rooftop photovoltaic (PV) solar systems, has been very successful, but is expected to run out of funds by the end of 2014. State and national efforts to expand the installation of solar energy systems have grown exponentially. The cost of installing solar on rooftops has fallen and many third-party entities offer creative ways for residents and businesses to install systems. However, the benefits to potential solar owners locally are lower due to Palo Alto’s relatively low electric retail rates. Further, with the adoption of the City’s Carbon Neutral Plan for the electric supply portfolio, installing solar in Palo Alto may be less compelling for some customers than it once was. The City is able to fill a unique role by eliminating some of the hurdles and barriers which are impeding the cost-effective installation of solar systems in Palo Alto. Implementing the Local Solar Plan allows the City to continue to be a leading solar community and a leader in environmental sustainability. At its February 12, 2014 meeting, the UAC unanimously recommended Council approve the proposed Local Solar Plan. Background The City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) has been a leader in local solar development starting in 1980 when it first launched a solar hot water heating program, which reduced the cost of systems through a bulk buy effort and provided low interest loans to home owners payable through their Utilities bill. In 1999 CPAU launched its first solar PV system rebate program to encourage residents and businesses to install solar PV systems. Since then, CPAU’s menu of solar offerings has expanded and the City has been ranked in the top ten nationally based on the number of local solar installations per utility customer since 2008. A detailed description of the City’s existing solar programs is presented in Attachment C. Table 1 provides a summary of local solar installations through the PV Partners program. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Table 1: Solar PV Installations in Palo Alto through the PV Partners Program Year System Count per Year Capacity (kW-AC) per Year 1999 4 16 2000 6 16 2001 27 100 2002 22 73 2003 16 40 2004 17 45 2005 20 74 2006 54 233 2007 77 213 2008 85 1,347 2009 57 340 2010 48 503 2011 51 444 2012 40 204 2013 * 42 254 Total 566 3,904 Data through September 30, 2013. Discussion California has adopted several key pieces of legislation to promote renewable energy and the installation of rooftop solar. A description of these legislative initiatives is included in Attachment C. The two key initiatives are state laws that require utilities such as CPAU: 1) to provide rebates to encourage solar PV; and 2) to offer net energy metering (NEM)1 up to a cap of 5% of the utility’s peak load. These state mandates have been successful in building the market and lowering the installed cost for solar in California. 1 Net energy metering (NEM) allows a customer generating energy via a rooftop solar facility to receive a financial credit for power generated by their onsite system and fed back to the utility. The credit is used to offset the customer's electricity bill. City of Palo Alto Page 4 CPAU has played an important role in promoting solar within Palo Alto through its offering of financial incentives under the PV Partners program. CPAU’s PV Partners program, along with NEM, provides sufficient incentives to promote solar for businesses and homeowners with good solar access. However, the incentives do not provide sufficient inducement for customers who desire to be part of the solar movement, but do not have good solar access, or the financial means to install solar equipment, and/or the information necessary about available incentives. In addition, by the end of 2014 staff expects that customers will have reserved all funds available under the City’s PV Partners program and that the City will have reached its net energy metering participation limit by 2017. The cost of installing solar on rooftops is at an all-time low nationwide2 prompting many third- party entities to develop and market solar locally. A host of solar marketers have sprung up offering many creative ways in which to finance and/or coordinate the development of solar to either receive solar directly to the premise, receive financial benefits or other non-direct benefits. Many of these programs encourage community development of solar energy through group-discount purchases or leases, crowd funding and virtual net metering. Solar leases and power purchase agreements (PPA) are also rising in popularity. These financial instruments are offered by companies who own, operate, and maintain the PV system and provide generation guarantees over a 20-year term. Customers are not required to pay any money up-front, and monthly payments to the financing companies are often lower than the cost to purchase the electricity from the customer’s electric utility. In addition to solar leases and power purchase agreements, customers may finance their PV system on their property tax bill through California’s Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE)3 program. PACE is currently available to commercial customers, including CPAU’s customers, and is expected to expand to the residential sector in 2014. CPAU’s customers are looking to the City to assist them in making decisions to install and/or invest in solar for their homes or community facilities. As such, the City is in a unique position to facilitate the process of bringing more solar systems to Palo Alto. Local Solar Penetration, Forecast and Potential Staff conducted a technical potential assessment by reviewing the total rooftop square footage in Palo Alto, adjusted for several factors including existing penetration rates, shading, and roof setbacks. A total of 100 megawatts (MW) of solar PV technical potential was identified, representing 170,000 MWh/year of energy. The technical potential was developed by assessing 2 See Lawrence Berkeley National Lab and the Department of Energy SunShot Program’s July 2013 report: Tracking the Sun VI: An Historical Summary of the Installed Price of Photovoltaics in the United States from 1998 to 2012 (http://emp.lbl.gov/sites/all/files/lbnl-6350e.pdf) 3 See California First’s program here: https://californiafirst.org/overview. City of Palo Alto Page 5 total commercial and residential rooftop area in the City and applying factors for coverage, orientation, and shading. Staff does not yet have a good estimate of how much of the technical potential can actually be achieved. As part of the Local Solar Plan, staff will develop a better estimate of the technical potential and assess the achievable potential, given the local costs and benefits and existing penetration levels in Palo Alto. As shown in Table 1 above, local solar installations through the PV Partners Program total about 3.9 MW of capacity. The annual energy generated by these installations is 6,630 megawatt hours MWh) per year, or about 0.7% of the City’s annual energy needs. National forecasts for the annual growth rate of customer-sited PV range between 15% and 25%. Because of Palo Alto’s higher costs for PV systems, lower electric rates, and lower solar availability, CPAU assumes a more modest 10% annual growth rate, after 2016 when all the solar installations through the PV Partners program are expected to be completed. Based on this assumption, over the next ten years an additional 12.7 MW of local net metered solar energy is included in the most current electric load forecast, shown in Figure 1. Solar PV associated with participation in Palo Alto CLEAN4 program is not included in the load forecast since it is not net metered and, therefore, does not reduce the City’s load. The Palo Alto CLEAN program is accounted for in CPAU’s renewable electric supply forecast. Staff anticipates 3 MW of local solar capacity will be installed under the Palo Alto CLEAN program by 2015. 4 The Palo Alto CLEAN (Clean Local Energy Accessible Now) program is a feed-in tariff program offering a standard long-term contract for local solar energy. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Figure 1: Electric Load Forecast and PV Penetration (MWh/year) While the total installed cost of solar PV systems has decreased significantly in the last five years on a national, state and local level, there are still obstacles and/or conditions which keep installation costs in Palo Alto high, thus preventing Palo Alto from reaching its maximum solar installation potential. In the last three years, the average installed cost of residential solar PV (before rebates and tax credits) was 10% higher for CPAU customers compared to PG&E customers ($7.38/watt versus $6.73 respectively). One reason may be the higher rebate available for CPAU customers, which may be a reason that installers charge more in Palo Alto. Soft costs associated with design, permitting and interconnection are higher in Palo Alto, which imposes more requirements than other jurisdictions. However, the City has streamlined its permitting process to help bring the costs down. Finally, Palo Alto is considered an affluent community and therefore developers may be finding that they can charge more because of the socioeconomic conditions. Setting a Goal for the Local Solar Plan As shown in Table 1 above, as of the end of September 2013, the City had a total of 3.9 MW of local PV. The remaining funds for the PV Partners will add an additional 4.1 MW by the end of 2016, for a total of about 8.0 MW. The NEM cap of 9.5 MW is expected to be reached by mid- 2017 and additional PV beyond that limit will potentially be harder to get, since the incentives in the form of rebates and NEM may be concluded. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Table 2 below shows the estimated amount of solar that is expected to be developed and installed if the Local Solar Plan is implemented. The goal selected for the plan is aggressive; it requires an increase in the capacity of solar in the City to grow from the current 3.9 MW—that CPAU has achieved after 15 years of implementing the PV Partners program—to 23 MW in the next 10 years. Table 2: Local Solar Forecast, Goal, and Technical Potential Capacity (MW) Energy (MWh/year) % of City’s Energy Use PV Partners Program: Current Installed Capacity 3.9 6,630 0.7% PV Partners Program: Remaining Capacity 4.1 6,970 0.7% Total PV Partners Program Installations 8.0 13,600 1.4% CLEAN Program Capacity 3.0 5,100 0.5% Additional PV Forecasted Absent New Programs * 8.5 14,450 1.5% Additional PV Needed to meet 4% Plan Goal 3.5 5,950 0.6% Solar Penetration Goal in 2023 23.0 39,100 4.0% Maximum Technical Potential 100.0 170,000 17.4% Assumes a 10% annual growth rate starting after 2016 when all the solar installations through the PV Partners program are expected to be completed (as shown in Figure 1), which could occur with no new CPAU programs. Cost to Achieve the Local Solar Plan A vigorous debate on the advisability of NEM is currently underway statewide. On one hand, NEM has clearly provided an incentive to build the solar market, which has led to falling prices for solar PV systems. Advocates for distributed local renewable generation also tout benefits that are shared by all ratepayers, such as less strain on the grid and reduced need for new power plants and transmission lines. On the other hand, some feel that NEM customers do not pay their fair share of the costs of the electric distribution and transmission systems, yet they rely on them every night and when their usage is greater than the production from their system (unless their system includes sufficient battery storage to let them completely disconnect from the distribution system). Staff will evaluate the costs and benefits of NEM and develop a recommendation on whether to continue NEM after the cap has been reached. This evaluation will be completed as part of the electric cost of service study, which is planned for FY 2015. The cost of remote solar installations was recently quantified when the City executed three 30- year power purchase agreements (PPAs) in June 2013 (Staff Report # 3845) at a price of less than $0.07/kWh for a total of 80 MW. However, this energy requires CPAU to incur costs to City of Palo Alto Page 8 transmit the power from the remote location to the City. These costs add about $0.03/kWh to the cost of the power, so that the remote solar projects cost the City about $0.10/kWh. There are other advantages to local solar installations, including those that the Council recognized when it adopted a price for the Palo Alto CLEAN program of $0.165/kWh (Staff Report #4378). Staff assumes that the Local Solar Plan’s goal of 23 MW can be achieved with no new subsidies or costs paid by non-participating customers. When the current mandated rebates that are provided through the PV Partners program are exhausted, the Local Solar Plan does not include new funding for rebates. The Local Solar Plan’s goal is expected to be achievable with the implementation of new City programs to make solar accessible to more customers, the development of proper policies and price signals to encourage solar, the removal of barriers to lower costs, and the implementation of a comprehensive educational and outreach campaign. Local Solar Plan The proposed Local Solar Plan (Attachment B) is a tailored roadmap to encourage cost-effective adoption of solar technologies in Palo Alto in keeping with the City’s objectives for environmental sustainability. Although Palo Alto’s electric supply is now carbon neutral, it still makes sense for homeowners and businesses to consider a solar system at their sites or as an investment. Local solar systems offer the following benefits for CPAU customers and the Palo Alto community: Reduces participating customers’ utilities bills; Reduces the amount of renewable energy the City must buy for the community, which helps keep everyone’s rates down; Avoids the cost of line losses from transmitting and distributing the electricity from distant power facilities; and Helps reduce the need to build expensive transmission lines throughout the state, thus reducing the cost of transmission. The proposed Local Solar Plan contains the following goal, objectives and supporting strategies: Goal To increase the installation of local solar photovoltaic facilities in order to provide 4 percent of the City’s total energy needs by 2023 Objectives 1. Facilitate the development of local, safe and cost-effective solar in Palo Alto to meet the diverse needs of the community City of Palo Alto Page 9 2. Reduce the cost of installing solar in Palo Alto and become a leader in promoting renewable distributed generation through solar installations 3. Understand the community’s solar potential and diverse needs and develop solar programs accordingly 4. Remove internal obstacles to minimize cost and achieve greater solar potential 5. Promote solar installations in a cost effective and safe manner 6. Leverage industry resources to the extent possible 7. Deploy industry best practices Strategies 1. Remove internal system and institutional barriers which increase “soft” costs and may impede adoption of solar in Palo Alto 2. Develop proper policies, incentives, price signals and rates to encourage solar installation 3. Assess technical and market potential of solar in Palo Alto 4. Implement policies and programs to increase solar system installations on CPAU customer sites with good solar access 5. Facilitate and/or develop new programs to encourage new participants to participate in developing local solar installations 6. Maximize solar installations on City-owned facilities 7. Educate the community on the benefits of solar through information and demonstration projects The proposed Local Solar Plan includes several tasks and initiatives. The intent is to implement the Local Solar Plan over the next two years with a focus on developing several solar programs intended to reflect the different interests in the Palo Alto community. The proposed Local Solar Plan requires staff to further evaluate the merits of community solar programs and/or other initiatives, identify several strategies to reduce hurdles to install PV in Palo Alto, and reduce the cost of installing PV and provide information/demonstrations to help residents and business decide if one of the City’s solar programs makes sense for them. Staff intends to return to the UAC and Council with specific program details, including resource and funding needs for each program developed. Specifically, the proposed Local Solar Plan includes the development of at least two community solar programs to facilitate solar for those customers who either don’t have good solar access, cannot support solar at their own premise due to size or home/business ownership status, or want to contribute towards solar for the benefit of a community-based organization, such as local schools. City of Palo Alto Page 10 The main tasks in the Local Solar Plan are to develop new programs to encourage local PV system installations, and are described below: 1. Develop a community solar donation program to be implemented by Fall 2014 In a community solar donation program, participants contribute funds towards building PV systems on community buildings such as schools or other community and/or nonprofit facilities. The projects could be funded in many ways, including via donations from participants through monthly contributions of (e.g., $5 to $10) through their utility bills. In addition, members of the community or businesses could donate additional funds on a one-time basis for the installation of the systems. Alternately, funds could be gathered for specific projects though a crowd funded, or “kick-starter” type, campaign. When sufficient funds are collected, the City would engage with the building owner, who would contract with a developer to build and operate the PV systems. Participants could vote to select sites from a set of locations identified as good candidates. The City’s role would be to facilitate these installations and it would not own, operate or maintain the systems. This program takes the least amount of staff time to develop, and is, therefore, the first program under the Local Solar Plan that staff is able to implement. Staff expects to return to Council with a community solar donation program proposal by August 2014 that could be implemented by October 2014. 2. Develop a community share program to be implemented by July 2015 In a community solar share program, participants pay for a share of the cost of a larger system that would be installed on a local building. This program would be valuable for customers who may not be good candidates for solar PV on their own homes or businesses (due to shading, or other roof or access issues) and could be cheaper per kilowatt (kW) installed due to economies of scale. For example, 100 participants could each pay 1% of the cost of a system and virtually receive 1% of the energy output from the PV system. The City’s Utility billing system may require modifications to implement “virtual net-metering” to make the participant’s experience similar to customers with PV on their own roof. A community solar investment program is a variation of the solar share program described above. In this program, participants would pay for a share of the cost of a PV system that would be installed on a local building. For example, 100 participants could each pay 1% of the cost of a system and receive 1% of the income derived from the sale of the energy produced City of Palo Alto Page 11 from the system. In this case, CPAU would buy the energy using a long-term power purchase agreement. Staff expects to outsource the administration of a community share program and would need to identify changes that may be required to the City’s Utility billing system. As in the solar donation program above, the City would not own, operate, or maintain the systems, but would facilitate the installations by working with the building owners who would engage developers to build the systems. Staff expects to return to Council with a community solar program proposal by October 2014 that could be implemented by March 2015. 3. Develop a solar group-discount program to be implemented by January 2016 The goal of a group-discount solar PV program is to lower the cost of installing PV systems in Palo Alto. In this program, CPAU would likely engage a third-party administrator to offer a group-discount program for solar PV and solar water heating systems to interested customers at a lower purchase or lease cost. CPAU could participate in existing group-discount programs offered by local governments (through ICLEI USA, for example). The program administrator would provide turnkey services including: offering consumer education, preparing a Request for Proposal for local contractors to provide solar PV and solar water heating systems to the interested CPAU customers, and managing the installation contracts. Contractor selection would be based on experience, installation services, cost, financing, and system quality. The program participants would pay the full cost of administering the program. Staff expects to return to Council with a solar group-discount program proposal by July 2015 that could be implemented by January 2016. This program would be available after staff expects that the rebates from the PV Partners program will run out. 4. Develop a plan to install PV at City-owned facilities CPAU staff has worked with Community Services, Planning, Public Works and Real Estate staff to review City-owned sites for their suitability for solar PV installation based on solar access, property leases, future redevelopment plans and whether the buildings are historical. Staff has concluded that the parking garages have good potential for a first solar project on City-owned facilities. Public Works staff has engaged the non-profit CLEAN Coalition to draft a Request for Proposals to solicit bids for installing PV systems on the City-owned garages using a variety of ownership and leasing options. If the proposals have merit, staff would request Council approval, as appropriate, of any lease agreements. In addition, staff will continue to investigate mechanisms to install PV systems on other City- owned facilities and develop a plan to complete those installations. Staff expects to complete the plan for City-owned facilities by July 2014. City of Palo Alto Page 12 Committee Review and Recommendation The UAC reviewed the proposed Local Solar Plan at its February 12, 2014 meeting. The UAC was generally very supportive of the proposed plan and its programs and strategies. The commissioners asked for more clarity on how the goal was selected asked why, if the City’s electric supplies are carbon neutral, the City should seek more local solar. In response, staff added more explanation to this report in the Discussion section One commissioner stated that net energy metering (NEM) customers are not paying their fair share of the distribution costs and that he expects NEM to be discontinued in the future. Staff replied that NEM is a state mandate and that the NEM cap is expected to be reached at about the same time as the PV Partners rebates funds are exhausted. Commissioners also suggested that when staff returns with the specific programs in the proposed plan, a complete economic analysis should be provided that shows the impact on non-participants. Commissioners also advised that the City’s role in any of the programs needs to be well defined. The UAC voted unanimously (5-0, with Commissioners Chang and Waldfogel absent) to recommend that Council approve the proposed Local Solar Plan. Excerpted draft minutes from the February 12, 2014 UAC meeting are included in Attachment D. Next Steps Depending upon the recommendations from the Finance Committee, staff plans to seek Council approval of the proposed Local Solar Plan in April 2014. Provided Council approves the proposed Local Solar Plan, staff intends to develop the programs and will return to the UAC, Finance Committee and Council for recommendations and specific approval of programs. At that time, staff will include a description of the program and potential participation, benefits and costs and include funding and resource needs. Table 3 is a tentative timeline for seeking Council approval for and launching the three key new programs in the Local Solar Plan. City of Palo Alto Page 13 Table 3: Tentative Review and Approval Timeline for Major Programs Program Development UAC Review Finance Comm. Review Council Review Program Launch 1. Community Solar Donation Program Through May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 Aug. 2014 Oct. 2014 2. Community Solar Share Program July-October 2014 Nov. 2014 Dec. 2014 Jan. 2015 July 2015 3. Solar Group-discount Program Jan-April 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 Jan. 2016 Resource Impacts Approval of the Local Solar Plan will not impact budget resources for fiscal year 2014. Staff resources will be impacted for the programs contained in the plan and as such staff may seek consulting and program administration services to assist with the implementation of the Local Solar Plan. Staff will identify resource impacts and will seek Council approval for funds to implement specific programs as needed. Policy Impacts Approval of the Local Solar Plan is consistent with existing solar legislative mandates and is in support of the 1) City’s Climate Protection Plan; 2) CPAU’s Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan; and 3) CPAU’s Strategic Plan. Environmental Impacts Approval of the Local Solar Plan does not meet the California Environmental Quality Act’s (CEQA) definition of “project” under California Public Resources Code Sec. 21065, thus no environmental review is required. Construction and installation of individual solar systems on buildings in the community may be subject to CEQA review and will be addressed as needed, as each of the Local Solar Plan’s individual sub-programs are brought forward. Attachments: Attachment A: Resolution Approving the Local Solar Plan (PDF) Attachment B: Local Solar Plan (PDF) Attachment C: Current Solar Programs (PDF) Attachment D: Excerpted Draft UAC Minutes of February 12, 2014 meeting (PDF) EXCERPTED FINAL MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 12, 2014 UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING ITEM 1: ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission Recommend that the City Council Approve the City’s Local Solar Plan Senior Resource Planner Monica Padilla summarized the written report. Padilla described the proposed Local Solar Plan as a road map, which includes the development and implementation of three new solar programs: a solar donation program, a community solar program and a bulk discount program. She stated that the needs for the plan include high community interest as well as the expected end of the current program to encourage the installation of solar photovoltaic (PV) systems, the PV Partners program. Padilla noted that even though the City ranks 7th in the nation on the number of solar systems installed per customer, there is still the potential to increase the penetration of solar in Palo Alto. As of September 30, 2013, the City had a total of 3.9 MW of solar installed and the goal of the proposed Local Solar Plan is to have 23 MW installed by 2023. Padilla stated that the proposed Local Solar Plan includes seven strategies including reducing any barriers to installing solar, developing proper incentives, assessment of technical and market potential, the development of the three new solar programs, promotion of solar installations on City facilities, and community education. Public Comment: Bruce Hodge, from Carbon Free Palo Alto, supported the proposed plan, but would like to see more analysis of the big picture and accelerated development of solar program. He stated that the plan should include the impact of changes to the electricity landscape such as additional Electric Vehicles (EVs), fuel switching from gas to electricity as well as replacement of most lighting with LED lights on the electric system. Hodge said that the solar plan should be developed in the larger context of the Climate Protection Plan. He recommended accelerating the timeline for the community solar program. Hodge said that a good model already exists for this program and there is no need to reinvent the wheel. He said that this program should be sped up and would have the largest impact. Bret Anderson, a resident of Midtown, who has installed solar on his roof, said that the best option is the community solar program since it's a breakthrough for those who can't have solar on their own roofs. The other options can be done already with existing rules and systems. A community solar program opens up a whole new market and will allow Palo Alto to take the lead in the solar. Commissioner Eglash stated that he is delighted with the plan and recommendations. He said that this plan is the most exciting thing CPAU is doing and noted that the plan has all the right aspects and components. He asked why, if we are already carbon neutral, should the City seek more solar. He noted that the stated goal in the plan is to increase solar, but there is no explanation of why this is a goal. He advised adding a reason for the goal to the plan, noting that these reasons may include good contributions to the Renewable Portfolio Standard given that some of the renewable Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) will be expiring, and that there may be certain benefits of having local renewable systems. Padilla replied that one of the reasons is that local solar decreases the need to buy renewable energy outside the City and that local generation may have some strategic value to the City. Commissioner Eglash noted that the PV Partners will run out of money at the end of 2014 and asked if the City can add new money to the PV Partners program when the current rebates expire. Assistant Director Jane Ratchye replied that state law requires the City to provide the rebates for the PV Partners program, but that once the rebates are all paid out, the subsidy would no longer be mandated. She added that the proposed Local Solar Plan assumes that no new subsidies would be provided since the goal of the state mandate to build a market for local PV systems has largely worked as evidenced by the declining cost of solar. After the program’s funds expire, the hope is that the economics for solar systems will be attractive without the need for further subsidies. Commissioner Eglash noted that the plan mentions solar water heating, but it is not clear if that will be part of the proposed new programs outlined in the plan. Padilla explained that the state established a target for solar water heating systems, but they are not cost-effective, and that there are better technologies. However, the cost could decrease in a group discount program enough that these systems may become cost-effective. Commissioner Eglash said that net energy metering (NEM) customers are not paying their fair share of the distribution costs and that those costs are borne by non-participating customers. He said that he expects NEM to be discontinued in the future and that customer charges will be designed to recover more of the costs of the distribution system and backup service. Commissioner Eglash asked what staff is thinking about NEM. Ratchye said that the NEM limit by state law is 5% of the City’s peak load. She noted that the table in Attachment B shows that the 5% target is expected to be reached at about the same time as the PV Partners program ends. At that point, a policy decision will need to be made as to whether to continue the NEM subsidy beyond the 5% limit. Ratchye also said that electric rates have not been adjusted since 2009 and currently include no fixed customer charge. She said that staff expects to embark on a new electric cost of service study this year that will look at rate design and that this topic will likely be a key issue in that study. Commissioner Hall said that he is supportive of the plan, but would like to see a long-term trajectory of the impacts of the costs of local distributed generation (DG) versus remote, higher intensity, renewable energy sources. He asked where the bright line of the economics is and when is it better to site PV remotely than locally. Noting that the goal is to achieve 4% of the City’s energy needs from local solar, he asked if that cost-effectiveness line is less, or more, than that number. Commissioner Hall suggested that we need to justify the goal established and to explain to everyone, especially to those not participating in the programs, that this is a sensible plan to implement. Padilla said that the 4% goal was selected as it is expected to be achievable without any additional subsidies. Commissioner Hall asked that staff show if the cost of power can be lowered with this plan and its programs. Commissioner Eglash added that the latest remote solar PV PPAs were executed at a very low cost. He suggested that when the individual programs contemplated in the plan return to the UAC for consideration, staff include a complete economic analysis showing the impact on non- participants. Commissioner Hall said that for the three programs in the plan, the role of the City needs to be clearly identified. For example, if a system installed through a community solar program did not work as expected, what would the City do? He said that citizens will understand and may invest in the programs, but staff needs to identify who owns and maintains the systems as part of the plan. Padilla noted that although staff is still evaluating alternative program designs, she does not feel that an alternative where the City owns and maintains the solar system will be a viable option and therefore would not be proposed. Vice Chair Foster said that he was very supportive of the program. He read a statement the UAC received from Walt Hays, the Chairman of the Community Environmental Action Partnership (CEAP): "I am writing to urge you to approve the proposed plan as presented. Staff has worked long and hard in coming up with this plan, including seeking and receiving feedback from the Community Environmental Action Partnership, which I chair, on two occasions. Increasing evidence of climate change impacts makes setting high goals urgent, and the Plan offers an aggressive program to achieve them, including a variety of approaches that allow different groups to participate. Please recommend that the Finance Committee and Council approve it expeditiously so implementation can begin as soon as possible. Thank you for your consideration - and for your continuing service to the community." Vice Chair Foster said that he agreed with the comments from Bruce Hodge and is most supportive of the community solar program. He asked how a donation program would work. Padilla said that the City won’t own any of the facilities. She said that the City might collect money through the Utility bill that is given to a non-profit entity that would build and own the PV system itself. Ratchye added that another way to raise money is a crowd-funded, or “kick- starter” type, campaign for a particular project or location. Lindsay Joye, Solar Marketing Engineer, added that the non-profits are currently an unserved market since they cannot take advantage of federal tax credits that reduce the cost for others. Vice Chair Foster said that he noted that solar water heating systems are not cost-effective, but that a group buy program could help to improve the cost-effectiveness of those systems. Chair Cook said that heat pump water heaters could be a better alternative than solar water heating systems and we may want to encourage those instead. Ratchye referred to the analysis presented to the UAC in December 2013 on fuel switching. That analysis confirmed that air- source electric heat pumps are much more cost-effective than solar water heating systems. Vice Chair Foster supported an accelerated timeline for implementing the community solar program. ACTION: Vice Chair Foster made a motion to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed Local Solar Plan. Commissioner Eglash seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (5-0) with Commissioners Chang and Waldfogel absent. Finance Committee Final Minutes 1 Special Meeting Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3. Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Establishing a Local Solar Plan to Provide Four Percent of the City's Total Energy Needs by 2023. Monica Padilla, Utilities Senior Resource Planner, reported the Local Solar Plan set a roadmap of Staff's intentions to facilitate the acceleration and implementation of solar power in Palo Alto. The Local Solar Plan built on existing programs and offered new strategies to bring solar power to those who did not have it. The goal of the Local Solar Plan was to increase the installations of photovoltaic (PV) systems within Palo Alto to achieve 4 percent of supply from PV locally by 2023. Key to the Local Solar Plan was identification of three major initiatives or new programs. First, a solar donation program would place solar installations on not-for-profit facilities. Second, a community share program would allow community members without good solar access to invest in solar installations somewhere in Palo Alto. Third, a group discount program would work to decrease the price of solar water heaters and solar PV for Palo Alto residents. The community was interested in and supported solar power. Vice Mayor Kniss noted a number of people were installing solar, and asked if the initiatives would be the City or an outside company generating solar power. Ms. Padilla explained that the City would facilitate more solar generation within Palo Alto. Vice Mayor Kniss inquired whether the City would partner with existing companies doing business in Palo Alto. Ms. Padilla responded yes, and with residents. The cost of solar installations has decreased dramatically; therefore, demand had increased. Funds for the PV partner rebate program would be fully committed by the end of 2014. Net Energy Metering was an attractive incentive for PV participants, and Staff expected to reach the cap of those funds by 2017. Federal tax credits for solar installations were expected to expire. Staff wanted to encourage more solar generation in Palo Alto while remaining cost-effective and safe. Benefits of local solar generation were a reduction in the participating customer's utility bills; a reduction in the amount of renewable energy 2 March 18, 2014 purchased for all of Palo Alto; a reduction in the cost of transmitting and distributing electricity; a reduction in the need to build expensive transmission; and strategic value. Strategic value was the sense that local generation provided reliability. Palo Alto ranked number 7 in the nation and number 2 in California in terms of solar installations as measured in systems per customer. Technically local solar generation could generate about 100 megawatts of solar power, but realistically only 23 megawatts. Staff felt 4 percent local generation was and aggressive and achievable goal. The Local Solar Plan established a series of strategies to reach 4 percent local generation by 2023. Staff would work to reduce internal barriers or soft costs; develop proper policies, incentives, and rates to encourage solar without subsidizing it; develop programs for customers with good solar access; develop programs for customers without good solar access; promote solar installations at City facilities; and educate through innovation and demonstration. Staff's Recommendation to approve the Local Solar Plan did not commit the City to a particular program. It provided direction to Staff on launching programs. Staff proposed beginning with the community donation program, because it provided a good transition from the PaloAltoGreen Program for residential customers. Staff hoped to present the program to the Council for approval by August or September 2014 and launch it in October. Staff hoped to launch the community share program in July 2014 and the group discount program in July 2015. The Local Solar Plan was scheduled for the Council Agenda for April 21, 2014. Bruce Hodge, Carbon Free Palo Alto (CFPA), stated CFPA analyzed the plan in detail and was generally supportive of the high level concepts. The City was missing a huge opportunity by following a slow linear progression of program implementation. The community solar program had the largest potential impact of any of the proposed programs and should be fast tracked. CFPA recommended the City enable the implementation of the community solar program by issuing an initial Request for Proposal (RFP) to third parties within the next three to four months so that programs could begin by January 1, 2015. Bret Andersen believed the largest part of the solar market was people without access to sun. The community solar program was the opening of a new market and enabled a new business model. It needed to happen fast in order to take advantage of existing tax credits. He urged the Council and the Utilities Department to accelerate the community solar option. Council Member Burt inquired whether federal tax credits would be reduced by two-thirds by 2016. Jane Ratchye, Assistant Director for the Utilities Department, nodded affirmatively. 3 March 18, 2014 Council Member Burt asked if accelerated depreciation would be eliminated. Ms. Ratchye was unsure. Council Member Burt encouraged Staff to add resiliency for the individual site or the local grid and shade and rain protection as benefits of solar installations. He suggested Staff consider partnerships with schools and faith institutions. The City had to be proactive in identifying locations. He asked if Staff could release an RFP within three to four months. Ms. Padilla noted Staff had constraints in terms of available resources to develop the three programs. The donation program was a transition from PaloAltoGreen, and that was Staff's first focus. Staff did not necessarily assess the potential for each program. Staff identified the potential for generation of 500 kilowatts of solar power at schools; therefore, Staff prioritized that one first. Staff could issue an RFP for the community share program in two to three months once they determined the scope of work and the design of the program. Council Member Burt indicated many school districts were aggressively installing solar power on their sites. Palo Alto's slightly lower electricity rates reduced the feasibility of solar installations. He inquired whether Staff reviewed the economics of Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) installing solar panels. Lindsey Joye, Utilities Marketing Engineer, worked with PAUSD to recognize opportunities. PAUSD had competing pressures for funds. Eight new PAUSD buildings were structurally sound and ready for solar installations. Council Member Burt asked if solar panels were installed when the new buildings were constructed. Ms. Joye answered no. In 2013, PAUSD finances were favorable enough to allow PAUSD to enter into a Power Purchase Agreement that would result in positive cash flow. Council Member Burt inquired whether the donation program needed to be the first priority as PAUSD no longer needed donations. Ms. Joye reported PAUSD would have a tiny positive revenue stream. Nonprofit organizations could not utilize federal tax credits and accelerated depreciation. The donation program would allow PAUSD to have a much larger solar system and have larger revenue for educational benefit. Council Member Burt inquired whether other districts utilized third-party developers who could take advantage of tax credits. 4 March 18, 2014 Ms. Joye indicated Chevron Energy Systems installed a number of systems. Council Member Burt asked if Chevron could capture the tax credits. Ms. Joye replied yes. Council Member Burt asked if PAUSD was considering use of a third-party developer. Ms. Joye remarked that PAUSD was considering both. Council Member requested feedback regarding the option of prioritizing the community share program over the donation program. Ms. Padilla reported Staff had not assessed individual programs to determine the potential. Staff prioritized the donation program first, because it was an easy program to implement and would require small changes to the billing system. Valerie Fong, Utilities Director, added that Staff did not have the capacity to focus on one program. Council Member Holman believed the community share program offered an opportunity for a broader sector of the community to participate. MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Burt to recommend the Council adopt the a Resolution establishing the Local Solar Plan to increase the installation of local solar photovoltaic facilities in order to provide 4 percent of the City’s total energy needs by 2023 prioritizing the proposed programs in order of the community share program, community solar donation program, and the solar group-discount program. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 Vice Mayor Kniss left the meeting at 9:10 P.M. Attachment F C-1 City of Palo Alto Utilities Current Solar Program Offerings California has adopted several key pieces of legislation to promote renewable energy and the installation of local rooftop solar. The City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) has developed programs to comply with these laws, including the following: 1. PV Partners Rebate Program: This program provides incentives for Palo Alto solar electric photovoltaic (PV) customers who generate electricity that is used on site and lowers the facility’s electric bill. Mandated by California law, the funds are reserved on a first-come, first-served basis and are expected to be depleted by 2015. 2. Net Energy Metering (NEM) and Net Surplus Energy Compensation: This program credits solar PV system owners for the energy they feed back into the grid. For example, a customer’s PV system may generate more electricity than their home uses during daylight hours. Under NEM, the electricity meter will run backwards to provide a credit against electricity consumed in the home at night or other periods when electricity use exceeds the PV system's output. Therefore, customers are only billed for their "net" energy use. “Net surplus energy” is the electricity generated by an eligible customer over a 12-month period that exceeds the amount of electricity consumed by the customer. CPAU compensates customers for net surplus energy at the cost of renewable energy. 3. Solar Water Heating Rebate Program: This program provides incentives for Palo Alto solar water heating systems that generate hot water for domestic water heating uses. The funding for the Solar Water Heating program was mandated by California law and is expected to last for at least five years due to slow customer adoption of solar water heating systems. 4. Palo Alto Clean Local Energy Accessible Now (Palo Alto CLEAN) Program: This program offers payment for the electricity generated from Palo Alto solar electric PV installations where the electricity is not used on site but is sold to CPAU for the renewable electricity portfolio. A Power Purchase Agreement establishes a fixed price per unit of electricity delivered to the Palo Alto electric grid over a twenty-year term. 5. Local Distributed Generation (DG) Programs: While the City does not have a specific DG goal, CPAU offers incentives to promote DG through the Power from Local Ultra-clean Generation Incentive (PLUG-In) program. However, the PLUG-In program is under review for possible elimination as it offers incentives for local fossil-fueled DG projects. More detailed descriptions of these programs are provided below. Attachment F C-2 Current Program Detailed Descriptions 1. PV Partners The PV Partners program started in 1999 with a limited annual budget of $200,000 paid from the funds collected by the electric Public Benefits charge. From 1999 through 2006, 166 PV systems were installed for a total of 598 kilowatts (kW) with an average rebate of $3.22 per Watt1. Adopted in 2007, California’s Million Solar Roofs bill (Senate Bill 1, or SB1) requires that all load serving entities such as CPAU, provide incentives in the form of rebates to encourage the installation of 3,000 megawatts (MW) of solar PV systems in California by 2017. The City’s proportionate share of the statewide goal is 6.5 MW2. To meet the SB1 requirements, CPAU increased the PV Partners Program budget to $13 million over ten years. The total budget is divided into ten steps, each funded at $1.3 million. Each step is allocated across four customer classes: residential, small and medium commercial, large commercial and non-profit/public sector. SB1 also required that solar rebates be reduced by a minimum of 7% per year to encourage lower installation costs. The average PV Partners rebate for the SB1 goal is $2 per Watt ($13 million divided by 6.5 MW). For PV systems with capacities less than 30 kW, the rebate is paid in a single check to the system owner. For systems 30 kW and larger, the rebate is paid monthly for five years based on the metered PV system generation (using a revenue-grade generation meter which is separate from the City’s net energy meter). Customers may reserve a PV Partners rebate after they have a purchase contract and have participated in an energy audit. The reservation period is 12 months for retrofits and 24 months for new construction projects. As of September 30, 2013 $5 million of the SB1 PV Partners funds has been expended, $6 million has been reserved and staff expects the balance ($2 million) to be reserved by end of 2014. Table 1 provides a summary of local solar installations through the PV Partners Program. 1 All power units (Watts, kilowatts (kW), and megawatts (MW)) are rated using the California Energy Commission (CEC) rating standard. The CEC-AC rating standards are based upon 1,000 Watt/m² solar irradiance, 20 degree Celsius ambient temperature, and 1 meter/second wind speed. The CEC-AC Watt rating is lower than the nameplate rating at Standard Test Conditions (STC). 2 While 6.5 MW was the original AB1 goal for CPAU, over time based on changes to how the capacity can be counted, CPAU expects to get more from its expenditure of the $13 million, or a total of about 7.4 MW plus the 0.6 MW installed prior to SB1 for a total of 8 MW for the PV Partners Program. Attachment F C-3 Table 1: Solar PV Installations in Palo Alto through the PV Partners Program* Year System Count per Year Capacity (kW-AC) per Year 1999 4 16 2000 6 16 2001 27 100 2002 22 73 2003 16 40 2004 17 45 2005 20 74 2006 54 233 2007 77 213 2008 85 1,347 2009 57 340 2010 48 503 2011 51 444 2012 40 204 2013 * 42 254 Total 566 3,904 Data through September 30, 2013. 2. Net Energy Metering and Net Surplus Energy Compensation In 1996 California state law required all electric load serving utilities to offer net energy metering to eligible customers with a solar PV system, up to a defined maximum cap based on the load serving entity’s total customer peak demand. Under current law, the net energy metering cap is 5% of the City’s peak electric demand, or 9.5 MW. Net energy metering is a special billing arrangement that provides a bill credit to customers with solar PV systems for the full retail value of the electricity their system generates. Under net energy metering, the solar customer's electric meter keeps track of how much electricity is consumed by the customer and how much excess electricity is generated by the system and sent back into the electric utility grid. If the customer earns a net metering bill credit, it cannot be cashed out and can only be used to offset future electric consumption charges on the same account. Most solar customers are net consumers and do not generate more electricity than they need in a year. Attachment F C-4 As shown in Table 1 above, as of September 30, 2013, the City has 566 customers on net energy metering, for a total of 3.9 MW of PV capacity representing 2.1% of the City’s peak electric demand. Table 2 is a summary of PV installations through September 30, 2013 along with forecasted new PV installations. The table shows that the 5% net metering cap will be reached in mid-2017. Table 2: PV Partners and Net Energy Metering Participation Year Pending PV Partners Reserved Capacity (kW) Unreserved PV Partners Capacity (kW) Estimated Forecasted PV Capacity After SB1 Funds Depleted3 (kW) Cumulative Installed Capacity (kW) Percent of Net Metering 9.5 MW Cap Rebates paid 1999-2013* 3,904 41% $7.7M 2014 1,689 5,593 59% 2015 765 1,000 7,358 77% 2016 691 509 8,558 90% 2017 1,320 9,878 104% 2018 1,452 11,330 119% 2019 1,597 12,927 136% 2020 1,757 14,684 155% 2021 1,933 16,617 175% TOTAL 2,454 1,691 8,568 * Through September 30, 2013 California Assembly Bill 920 (2009) requires electric utilities to offer the option for solar customers with net energy metering to receive compensation for “net surplus electricity”. Net surplus electricity is the electricity generated by an eligible customer measured in kilowatt- hours over a 12-month period that exceeds the amount of electricity consumed by the customer. AB 920 states that the utility can count the purchased net surplus electricity toward its Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS)4 requirements. The net surplus electricity compensation rate is priced based on the cost of renewable electricity (currently at $0.05481/kWh) so that no extra cost is borne by other rate payers (beyond the program administration cost). 3. Solar Water Heating Program In 2007, California State law (Assembly Bill 1470) established a requirement for all natural gas utilities to offer rebates for solar water heating systems. In 2008, CPAU launched the Solar 3 Forecasted new PV capacity is estimated using 10% annual growth in net metered installations. Does not include systems installed under the CLEAN program since CLEAN participants are not eligible to receive net metering. 4 The annual amount of net surplus electricity generated in Palo Alto is minimal and therefore is not currently counted towards the City’s RPS. Attachment F C-5 Water Heating (SWH) Program which provides incentives in the form of rebates to customers who install qualifying solar water heating systems that offset energy used by an existing water heater or boiler for domestic water heating uses. Space heating, pools and spas are not eligible for CPAU SWH program incentives. CPAU currently provides approximately 32 million therms of natural gas per year to its natural gas customers, which represents approximately 0.25% of statewide non-electric-generation natural gas sales. The State’s goal is to install 200,000 solar water heating systems by 2017, and City’s proportionate share is approximately 530 systems. The City’s Climate Protection Plan has a goal of achieving 1,000 systems by 2020. The SHW Program is available to residential, commercial and industrial natural gas and electricity customers within Palo Alto. CPAU offers incentives on a first-come, first-served basis within each incentive category (Single-Family Residential, Multifamily Low-Income, or Multifamily/Commercial). As of September 30, 2013, $86,737 in rebates have been issued under the program. The program is expected to continue through 2017 with incentive levels decreasing over the program lifetime. Table 3 is an accounting of the number of SWH systems installed in Palo Alto since the SWH Program was launched in 2008. Table 3: Palo Alto Solar Water Heating Installation Count Year SWH System Count per Year 2008 9 2009 10 2010 15 2011 7 2012 1 2013 1 Total 43 4. Palo Alto CLEAN In addition to meeting the mandated solar initiatives, in 2012, the City launched the Palo Alto Clean Local Energy Access Now (CLEAN) program. Through the Palo Alto CLEAN program, building owners may lease their roof tops to solar developers, or develop solar themselves, and sell the energy and renewable attributes to the City at a fixed rate over a 20-year term. Through Palo Alto CLEAN, CPAU would purchase electricity generated by solar electric systems located in the City through a standard Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). The power is separately metered and delivered to CPAU’s electric distribution system (as opposed to being used at the facility where the system is located), and is counted towards CPAU’s renewable energy goals. Programs like this are also known as "feed-in tariff" programs in reference to the fact that the power is "fed into" the electric grid. None of the power is used to offset the host Attachment F C-6 customer’s load and therefore participants in the Palo Alto CLEAN program do not qualify for net energy metering. A key feature of a CLEAN program is the standardized PPA so that participants know what the requirements and payments will be without having to negotiate a contract with CPAU. As of November 30, 2013, CPAU had received no applications to the Palo Alto CLEAN program. The program was first adopted in March 2012 at a price of $0.14/kWh fixed for a 20-year PPA with a maximum capacity for the program of 4 MW. Effective January 1, 2013, Council increased the program price to $0.165/kWh for a 20-year PPA and the maximum capacity for the program was reduced to 2 MW. On February 3, 2014, the City Council voted to continue the program price at $0.165/kWh for a 20-year PPA, but increasing the program cap to 3 MW. There have been no applications for the Palo Alto CLEAN program to date, but staff believes that some CLEAN applications will be completed in 2014. 5. Distributed Generation Programs California’s Governor Jerry Brown has established a distributed generation5 (DG) goal of 12,000 MW. Solar is expected to play an important part in meeting the governor’s DG goals and staff expects legislation or incentives will be developed in support of a DG goal. On a national level, solar makes up more than 90% of all DG6. While the City does not have a specific DG goal, CPAU currently offers incentives through the “Power from Local Ultra-clean Generation Incentive” (PLUG-In) program to promote DG, including from fossil-fueled resources. The PLUG-In program is planned to be revamped or terminated as the program no longer meets the City’s carbon neutrality objectives. Local solar is expected to continue to be the City’s primary DG resource in the future. 5 Distributed generation (DG) refers to power produced at the point of consumption which is connected to the host utility’s distribution system. DG is typically a small-scale energy resource ranging in size from 3 KW to 10 MW, but can be larger. DG may be sourced through fossil-fuel energy (e.g. natural gas) or renewable resources including bio-fuel, wind or solar or be in the form of combined-heat-and-power (sometimes called co-generation) or fuel cells. 6 American Public Power Association, Distributed Generation, An Overview of Recent Policy and Market Developments – November 2013. City of Palo Alto (ID # 4555) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: BID Preliminary Re-Authorization Title: Preliminary Approval of the Report of the Advisory Board for Fiscal Year 2015 in Connection with the Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District and Adoption of Resolution Declaring its Intention to Levy an Assessment Against Businesses within the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District for Fiscal Year 2015 and Setting a Time and Place for a Public Hearing on May 12, at 7:00 PM or Thereafter, in the City Council Chambers From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommended Motion Staff recommends the following motion: that City Council: (a) Preliminarily approve the Business Improvement District (BID) Advisory Board’s 2015 Budget Report for the BID (Attachment 1) and; (b) Adopt a Resolution of Intention to Levy Assessments in the Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District for Fiscal Year 2015, setting a date and time for the public hearing on the levy of the proposed assessments for May 12, 2014, at 7:00 PM, or thereafter, in the City Council Chambers (Attachment 3) Executive Summary This Council action includes a preliminary approval of the BID Board’s annual report, and sets a time and place for a public hearing for the staff presentation, and to determine any objections to the assessments. Since the BID inception in 2004, a number of activities consistent with State BID law have been accomplished by the Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association (PADBPA), the entity with which the City contracts to provide services to the 800+ businesses assessed in the Downtown. These include addressing the three main issues facing downtown businesses: cleanliness, safety, and attractiveness, as well as participation in zoning, transportation, and other matters affecting downtown businesses. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Assessments for BID businesses are based on the size, type and location of the business. Assessments range from $50 for individually owned professional businesses to $500 annually for financial institutions. The PADBPA has monthly open meetings governed by the Ralph M. Brown Act which any business or individual can attend. Background The Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District (BID) was established by the City Council in 2004 pursuant to the California Parking and Business Improvement Area Law to promote the economic revitalization and physical maintenance of the Palo Alto Downtown business district. The Council appointed the Board of Directors of the Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association (PADBPA), a non-profit corporation, as the Advisory Board for the BID. The Board’s purpose is to advise the Council on the method and basis for levy of assessments in the BID and the expenditure of revenues derived from the assessments. Pursuant to BID law, the Advisory Board must annually submit to the Council a report that proposes a budget for the upcoming Fiscal Year for the BID. The report must: 1) propose any boundary changes in the BID; 2) list the improvements and activities to be provided in the Fiscal Year; 3) estimate the cost to provide the improvements and activities; 4) set forth the method and basis for levy of assessments; 5) identify surplus or deficit revenues carried over from the prior Fiscal Year; and 6) identify amounts of contributions from sources other than assessments. The Council must then: 1) review the report and preliminarily approve it as proposed or as changed by the Council; 2) adopt a resolution of intention to levy the assessments for the upcoming Fiscal Year; and 3) set a date and time for the public hearing on the levy of assessments in the BID. Absent a majority protest at the public hearing on May 6, 2013, at the conclusion of the public hearing, the Council may adopt a resolution confirming the report for Fiscal Year 2015 as filed or as modified by the Council. The adoption of the resolution constitutes the levying of the BID assessments for Fiscal Year 2015. Discussion The Advisory Board has prepared a report (Attachment 1) for the Council’s consideration which includes the proposed budget for the Palo Alto Downtown BID for Fiscal Year 2015. As required by BID law, the report has been filed with the City Clerk and contains a list of the improvements, activities, and associated costs proposed in the BID for Fiscal Year 2015. The Advisory Board has recommended no change in the BID boundaries or the method and basis for levying assessments. A map of the BID is attached (Attachment 2). The proposed assessments in the BID for Fiscal Year 2015 are the same as the assessments in Fiscal Year 2014. No increases are proposed. The budget report for Fiscal Year 2015 was reviewed and approved by the Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association board on April 9 2014. Resource Impact City of Palo Alto Page 3 Adoption of the proposed BID budget does not directly impact City revenue. BID assessments are restricted for use exclusively by the BID. It is anticipated that a healthy BID will encourage vitality in the retail community and consequently result in additional sales tax revenue for the City. Some staff effort is expended annually to administer the collection of the BID. Staff will continue to monitor staff administrative time devoted to the collection of BID assessments to assure that City costs do not exceed estimates for these services. The cost and collection of BID assessments past 60 days is borne by the BID. The Attorney's Office will continue to provide legal oversight to the BID during the annual reauthorization process. Administrative Services staff provides assistance in the collection of BID assessments. The Economic Development Manager will continue to provide oversight to the BID and will prepare the annual reauthorization. Environmental Review This action by the City Council does not meet the definition of a project under Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act, and therefore no environmental assessment is necessary. Attachments: PAD Annual Report 2014 (PDF) BID Map (PDF) RESO Declaring Intention to Levy BID FY15 (DOC) 0 EATSGREAT THINGSIDEAS! FIND OUT WHAT’S BLOOMIN’ IN DOWNTOWN PALO ALTO THIS SPRING There are dozens of great places to shop and eat and thousands of great ideas being generated every day. Only in downtown Palo Alto. Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District 2014-15 Annual Report Prepared for: Palo Alto City Council Prepared by: Russ Cohen, Executive Director, Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association 1 Introduction This report from the Advisory Board of the Palo Alto Downtown Business & Professional Association (“PAd”) was prepared for City Council to review for the annual reauthorization of the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District (“BID”) pursuant to Section 36533 of the Parking and Business Improvement Law of 1989 (Section 36500 and following of the California Streets and Highways code) (the “Law”). This report is for the proposed fiscal year for the BID commencing July 1, 2014 and ending June 30, 2015. (“Fiscal Year 2014-15”). As required by the Law, this report contains the following information: I. Any proposed changes in BID boundaries and benefit zones within the BID; II. The improvements and activities to be provided for Fiscal Year 2014-15; III. An estimate of the cost of providing the improvements and the activities for Fiscal Year 2014-15; IV. The method and basis of levying the assessment in sufficient detail to allow each business owner to estimate the amount of the assessment to be levied against his or her business for Fiscal Year 2014-15. V. The amount of any surplus or deficit revenues to be carried over from a previous fiscal year. VI. The amount of any contributions to be made from sources other than assessments levied pursuant to the Law. Submitted by Anne E. Senti-Willis, Chair, and Russell S. Cohen, Executive Director on behalf of the Advisory Board (“Advisory Board”) of the Palo Alto Downtown Business & Professional Association (“PAd”). The Advisory Board approved this report on April 9, 2014. Received on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Palo Alto on April __, 2014. 2 Section I: BID boundaries and Benefit Zones There have been no changes in the BID boundaries or benefit zones within the BID and no changes are proposed. The current boundaries are depicted on the map below. The area of the BID is referred to as “Downtown.” 934- 9 4 4 927 932 233 281 933- 9 3 7 943 327 1001 942 469 475 744 459 832 801 A P T 1 - 5 427-453 920912 362 370 900 838 846 471 459 835 - 8 5 5 460 815 840836 834 845 400 803 928930 931933 835 - 8 3 7 831 - 8 3 3 451453 802800 810 - 8 1 6 818 - 8 2 0 828 - 8 3 0 817 - 8 1 9 823 - 8 2 5 567-569 559563 536 526 1001 101 1 - 540 483 904 912 468 918 926 537 965-971505-507 519-521 939-945 931-935 923-925518-520 539541543 515-517 809811 420 1001 1011 1010 376 370 980960 990 34 354 326 426 4 1000 448 944 471 483948952 959947925 915 933 935 425-443 451449 463-465 936-940 458 460 440 428426 527-533 543 551 510520 558-560 903 825 837 581 575940934 813-823 501-509 511-519 521-529 531-539 541-547 556 596 904 926 561-567 569 845 580 574 566 991- 997 136 610 116-122 150 535529525 542516140 102 116124 163 145 566556 167 528 643635 635 645-685 660- 666 620 180 164 158156 624628632636 640644 617621 151-165 171-195 203 642640636 200 151 115 125 135 514 101 440 444 436432 427 425 117119 630616 208 228220 240-248 575 530-534536540 552 177 156 201209 215225 595 229231 611-623 180 508500 625-631 170172-174 542544 538-542 552548546 541-547 230-238 734 723 721 702- 730220-244 744 701 731 755757 771 200 160 728-732 762-776740-746 250 275 270 255741 265 724 730 651 221-225 227 668 707 205 201203451449 209 219 221 233235450460470442444 400 420 430 411 425 429 185 165 181 412 250 420 245 171-169 441- 445 435-439 346344 333335 342 344 431 460 450 235530 220 220 B 222 240 514278 274270 250 545 540 251485255 271 281 300310301 581 259-267 533535537 261267 518-526 532- 536 520-526 530-536 271 281 252 270 240-248 202-216 228226234238 244242 210- 216 228- 234 223-229 209215 247-259 240 232230 311-317 251 344 326 340 337339 323317 400 420 332330 314 353 355 367 305 347 265272-278 418 319 321- 341 328 330 300-310 431401 366 436 426 #1-7 369 335319 390 301 315 375 307- 311 325330 332 1&2330 1-3 324 326316 318 373-377 416-424 361 338 340 560 345 321325 315 529 285 555 650636 628 1-12 628 A-E 385 365 375380 345 664 325650-654 661 635300 690 675 555541-549533 535-539 318-324 326 352 425 439-441 435429 425 415-419 405403453 461 383460 502 510 526 520 540 499 467 459 439 425555 400 436-452 456 379 370-374376380-382 384-396 550-552 364 360 431 440-444 423 499 475 421-423 431-433 432428 460-476 450 635 446 430 400 745 720706 385744734 724-730 720712704 360 351 315737 332 300 653-681 683 685 512 501619 609605 518 482486496 610 630 455 400 651-687 543-545 532534 542544 550 552 554556 558560562564 635-6 643-6 470 313 334 333 325326 342 303301 229 336 308 310 312 316 318 311 331 315 319 317 321 335 228220 356-360 347-367 351357 369-379360 258-296 350 210204 302- 316 379310 320 328 332 340 437 412 311 A-B 404 313 325 327 333 407401385 411 452 378-390 360 - 1A - 1C360 - 2A - 2C360 - 3A - 3C360 - 4A - 4C360 - 5A - 5C360 - 6A 344-348 418420 482 328 456 321 325 330204 218 236 240 250-252 477 475 467 457453249235225221 201 60 275 505-509 239-243 209- 213 210- 214 513-519 460 474472228-230 535 558 201 1612 20 209 215 223 231 521 80 239-245 530-540 544-554 212-216 218-222 333 335- 337 351 457451 465 463 489-499360 530 480 420 430 480 463 451443437411405 419405401 441 480-498 347 351 355 359 525 430 473 332- 342 425415 400 570568 556 550 543 327321315305 343 515 525 551 555 328 309-311 518-528 536-540 552-554 558-562 573 A-E 591-599 557-571 330-332 318-320 406-418 417 542548568 524 550 500-528 578 564 550 546 540 530 531-535 541 505 525 537 555 565 571530 619-6 520 440-446 579 567 523610 600 555 581420-438 437 566 224 228 A-F 244 579 575 565 559 251 355 A-J 335329604 576 566 345-347 243245 25725920921922723502 505 610-616 727 678 676 674672 642 636-638 567 555 711 701705 725 525 759 730 718 734 738-740 760 746-750 701 721-7 600 827 835 899 850 530 609 759 7517537737-62611 601600 1013 10041000 1006 1001 623 137 145 700 780 790 744 111700 753100 825805 33 51 75 63 841 44 675 49 41 711 799 703 100 101 139654 625 160 1001 1005 1009 1010 1004 930 975945929931 948 181 940 960 145900 955 999875 853 925 81 855 901-907 909 87 98 917 921 925 735 849 707 847 842828 820248 230-232 212 825 829833 839 800 812818 882 165831 801 815 809801 841 791153 718 774 761 795745 201 209 834836 845 895 926 190 934 942 948 203 209 219 225 929200 240 904 910 926 270 935 904 909909A 217 222 148 171 421 130 312 318 324 317 301 186 192 323 329 151 325 329 334 131 129 355301 235 258 212 163 115 291247 210 201 207 64 202 235 251249 252 247 244250 177220 261 251-257 205245231225213205 70 2206 234240 183 251 270 241-247 215- 237 210-216 219 235 62 202 245 54 52 50 203 215 221 313-317318 220- 224 238 542-550 531-539 532 759 223-239 905 911-917907 188190 251- 293 202206 208 210 212 216 220 1008 275 539 201 400 27 168 865857 302 324 340 795 848 918 903903A 408412 440 483A - F 435 751 735 745 532 210 727 733 335 328 330 345 214 350 800 806 441 441A 230302306308312316 301 303 305 307 309 325 251 807 821 829 801 818-824 420 424 430 832A 832 842A 842 852A 852 862A 862 872A 872 351A 351 355A 355 359A 359 363A 363 367A 367 425 911 943 951 918 936 940 944 271 253 241 301 319 919A919 935 949 928 936 940-946 353 264 367 361 310 1005 1010 423425413 - 419 457-467 469-471473-481 454 729 A-D 733-743 734-740 724-732 936 824-828 920 949943941 715 95 445 324 328 545 590 425447 827 565585595 904 315 507 561 706 536 200 100 280-290 150 158164 276 516 698 161 159 157777 132 127 180 528 120 247 372 524 548 550 538 152 345 336 515 658 227 27 29 539 115 135 321 558 #200-202 558 #C & D 965 140 350 808 915 461 435433 945 1012 421 727 A-C 218 255 206 739 260 840 650 642 351 451 551 375 530 643415 12 700 802 99 89 87 901 560564568572576580584588592594 906908 910912914 916918920 922924 548 423 668 901 305 -313 423 405 352354 611 320322 346 323 471 484 528 426 264 430 1001 508 756 -760 940 930 544546 515 7 745 7 549 211213 151 160 257 433-457 482 330 349 401 539 440 691 755 67 312 202 651 443445 447 716 218 398 998 262 335 218 640-646506 327 469 303 401 403 254 401 91 40 101 819 301 725 595 705 541 Quarry Road Homer Avenue Lane 8 West Medical Foundation Way Lane 7 West Lane 7 East Encina Avenue El Camino Real Urban Lane Wells Avenue Forest Avenue High Street Emerson Street Ch a n n i n g A v e n u e Alma Street El Camino Real Mitchell Lane Everett Avenue Lytton Avenue Lane 15 E High Street Alma Street Bryant Street Lane 6 E Lane 11 W Lane 21 High Street Gilman Street Hamilton Avenue University Avenue Bryant Court Lane 30 Florence Street Kipling Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Everett Avenue Waverley Street Cowper Street Webster Street Everett Court Lytton Avenue Lane A West L L La Addison Avenue Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue La Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilton Avenue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant Street Ramona Street Addison Avenue Scott Street Webster Street Cowper Street Addison Avenue Channing Avenue Ramona Street Paulsen Ln Lane 15 E Lane 20 W Lane 20 E University Avenue CalTrain ROW Emerson Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant Street Ramona Street Palo Road ay Pear Lane Lane 12 W Lane 5 E Everett Avenue Homer Avenue Emerson Street talm Dr iv e Alma Street Lytton Avenue This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend abc Zone A (Ground Floor) - Zone B (Upper Floors) abc Zone B 0' 500' Downtown Palo AltoBusiness ImprovementDistrictArea Map CITY O F PALO A L TO INC OR P ORATE D C ALIFORN I A P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A PRIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2012 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2012-04-30 16:57:54CPA BID (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) 3 Who and what are downtown Palo Alto? The following charts illustrate the current makeup of Downtown Palo Alto by business category. Methodology: Ratio estimates based on one time data collection through quick probability samplings considered a “windshield survey.” Margin of error is estimated to be 10-15%. Businesses in downtown Palo Alto 2014 Restaurants = 88 Retail = 72 High tech = 109 Real Estate = 30 Finance = 84 Medical = 79 Other= 230 4 Restaurants Independenty owned=75 Chain or franchise=13 Total=88 Retail Independently owned=51 Chain or franchise=21 Total = 72 5 Restaurant vs. Retail Retaurant = 88 Retail = 72 Total independent vs Chain ( both rest. & retail combined ) Independent = 126 Chain = 34 6 Summary of findings based on the above charts: These data illustrate reality rather than perception. Many perceive that there is a preponderance of restaurants vs. retail, but in reality the mix is quite balanced. That is also true for the number of chains vs. the number of independently owned businesses—it’s clear that there is much more in the way of independently owned businesses than chain or franchised businesses—thus breaking the commonly held perception of downtown being dominated by chains and restaurants. New vs Closed New = 58 Closed = 13 167902.001/56 6883v2 Section II: 2013-14 Year in Review and Planned Activites for Fiscal Year 2014-2015 “Keeping Downtown Palo Alto Safe, Spotless and Successful.” PROJECT STATUS EXPECTED COMPLETION Beautification and Safety Cogswell Park wi-fi hot spot Contributed funds to pilot free wi-fi hot spot program at Cogswell Park; assisted TopCorner.org with fundraising. Complete March - 2013 Operation Flagpole: an initiative to decorate University Ave with flags for special occassions Holes being installed as part of the University Ave landscaping improvements. Palo Alto Rotary and the University Rotary Club funded and volunteered to assemble, install and remove flags each national holiday. Complete July – 2013 and ongoing University Avenue landscape and irrigation rehabilitation Working with the city of Palo Alto on outreach to business community to add awareness and address concerns on scheduled improvements. Began the first of 9 phases of 1-2 weeks each on Feb 7. Work completed. Complete Apr-2013 Public Art: Aurora installation at King PAd has worked with the Pal Alto Arts Commission to move this installation to King Plaza. Fundraising, website and print material distribution underway involving, among others, the Black Rock Art Foundation. Complete Nov - 2013 Monthly sidewalk Worked with the City to increase frequency and improve equipment used for sidewalk cleaning. Ongoing Seasonal lamp post banner In development as a pilot program with the expectation of expanding the program to include a greater variety of banners and more frequent replacement. Additional funding will come from private public partnerships. Complete Spring 2013 and Summer 2013, Holiday 2013 Spring 2014 in progress Public Art: Downtown Mural Project Program under development with Palo Alto Public Arts Commission and Downtown property owners to bring murals to Downtown buildings and other locations. RFP’s have been issued. Exec. Dir. Will serve on review committee. Ongoing 8 Lytton Plaza To make Lytton Plaza more welcoming, umbrellas have been proposed to be added to outdoor seating. Downtown Streets Team has agreed to set up and dismantle umbrellas on weekdays. Outreach is beginning for storage. Friends of LP will fund. Adding public art and foliage is also under development Umbrellas and stands installed. Foliage installed. Umbrellas and stands went missing. Umbrellas will be replaced in Spring 2014 Downtown Ambassador PAd continues to explore sponsorship of “ambassadors” with the Downtown Streets Team, with individuals who would be able to provide information regarding Downtown and direction to visitors. Funding being sought. Seeking funding Downtown gateway feature Development of feature to mark entrances to Downtown being considered. Meetings have commenced Security camera installation in garages Working with PA Chamber of Commerce BAPPF to support program to increase safety in parking garages through installation and monitoring of security cameras. Currently involved with sourcing vendors, obtaining prices and suggesting placement locations. Meetings have commenced Sleeping in Vehicles subcommittee Served on the committee to develop a pilot program with the faith community to address this issue. Ordinance now before council Complete and then put on hold pending out of state litigation No smoking ordinance for Lytton Plaza and Cogswell Plaza Suggested new ordinance to City staff as a result of PAd member complaints. PAd has drafted a letter in support of current Policy & Services Committee consideration and have encouraged further business community support. Ordinance approved by city council. In effect as of June 13 Complete June- 2013 Administration Yearly audit Annual required financial statement audit and tax return completed by independent accounting firm. Complete Feb-2013. In progress for 2014 Annual database update Annual census of new and departed businesses within Downtown complete and provided to the City for annual BID assessment invoicing. Complete Feb-2014 Annual invoices Separate communications from PAd added to all City invoices, including separate welcome letter for new businesses. Scheduled for July 1, 2014 Membership Communications and programming Downtown Palo Alto walking maps In discussions with interactive developer to provide interactive and printed maps of downtown. Under development 9 Publication/ Magazine Magazine devoted to Downtown businesses under development. Partial issue was released during the Palo Alto Institute Film Festival in October 2012. When complete, it will be available for free distribution at Downtown businesses. Under development Website redesign Board authorized ED to proceed with development. Complete Dec 2013 Outdoor dining In conjunction with the City, PAd hosted three meetings on March 18 and in April with Downtown restaurant owners to provide information regarding encroachment permit requirements for outdoor dining. Efforts to facilitate compliance with City ordinances will be ongoing.. Complete June- 2013 Enforcement to begin at any time Media Coverage The past fiscal year has seen at least 15 articles, citations, listings or other references in media outlets. Ongoing Facebook presence Photos, posts and calendar items are all included in facebook content. The facebook presence also provides “friends” with updates on new and departing businesses as well as events and activities in downtown Palo Alto Complete and Ongoing Twitter Account launched Jan 2013 Ongoing Events Holiday Tree Lighting/Shop Small Saturday 2012 tree lighting occurred on November 30. The 2013 lighting is currently scheduled for November 30 to coincide with Small Business Day Account launched Jan 2013. Scheduled for Nov 30, 2014 World Music Day PAd is involved with this annual Father’s Day event through assistance with securing insurance for the event and providing outreach to the Downtown business community regarding street closures and ways to participate in the event. Complete June 2013 “The Downtown Crown” At the grand opening of each new downtown business, PAd welcomes the business to the district by presenting a crown. Ongoing Downtown Parking Committee“ Actively involved in ensuring the downtown parking assessment district is running effectively. It engaged in considerable outreach with downtown neighbors regarding impacts including the development of a pilot RPP program. We continue to be involved with ongoing downtown parking studies, working with city staff and working on outreach to downtown business and property owners. Ongoing Summer Concert Series An underwriter has been identified to resume outdoor concerts downtown. Scheduled for Summer 2014 Event outreach PAd provides continuous member outreach regarding street closures, special events, construction impacts, transportation studies, traffic disruptions and more. Ongoing Section II Continued: Year in review and Planned Activites for Fiscal Year 2014-2015 Creating a spotless downtown. The sidewalks downtown are steam cleaned once per month with super powerful equipment that helps remove stubborn stains like chewing gum. (For the record, individual businesses can sweep but are prohibited from using water to “hose down” the sidewalks, as that debris will flow directly to the bay. Steam cleaning is the most effective and the most environmentally responsible method.) These methods are an improvement over years past. These increases in frequency along with better equipment and the help of the Downtown Streets Team, (founded by The Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association in 2004) help to keep downtown Palo Alto “spotless.” Creating a safe downtown. In addition to the association fees, many merchants in the downtown district also contribute fees to the downtown parking district which helped fund the building of the parking garages downtown (an ongoing cost) and fund the ongoing maintenance of the garages at an approximate cost of $1million each year. The garages are patrolled by the Palo Alto Police Department and outreach efforts by the Downtown Streets Team, both are funded by these fees. The return of dedicated patrols downtown with two officers assigned to the beat also ensure a presence downtown that helps deter crime and provides rapid response to downtown incidents. Creating a destination. Keeping downtown a great place to do business, whether you are a retailer, restaurant, start-up or a one- person office is our mission. There was a time before the existence of the business association that downtown was not a thriving, vibrant place to do business. Today, it is abuzz with activity due in large part to the efforts of the Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association. Making certain that downtown is its own unique brand, one that differentiates itself from any other downtown, is an area of focus for The Association. Creating this brand comes from not only ensuring an attractive downtown, but one that doesn’t mind tooting its own horn. Creating an environment that is business friendly. The Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association provides a conduit to leaders and staff at city hall. We don’t work for the city of Palo Alto; we work with it on behalf of all the business located downtown. From helping to develop public policy regarding public parking to smoking in downtown parks to noise ordinances to issues surrounding outdoor dining, we are a stakeholder with a voice that can be heard amongst other stakeholders and Palo Alto’s civic leaders. Section III. Budget for 2014-15 The total funds available for activities for this fiscal year are estimated to be $148,000. The budget for providing the activities is set forth as follows: BID 2013/14 Budget INCOME Total Non-Assessment Sources Assessments $137,000 Allowance for Uncollectible Assessments ($34,000) Other Revenue $25,000 $25,000 12-13 Surplus Carryover $20,000 TOTAL INCOME $148,000 $25,000 EXPENSES Operating Expenses Staff Salaries Executive Director Salary & Benefits $67,980 Payroll taxes and expense $6,798 Office Supplies & Expenses $250 Internet/Website Maintenance $200 Telephone $600 Rent $3,120 Reauthorization Advertising $2,600 Audit-Tax Returns $5,700 Legal $1,000 $1,000 Insurance - Liability $2,100 Workman's Comp $700 Nominating $800 Contingencies $2,000 Subtotal -- Operating Expenses $93,848 $1,000 Programs, Marketing and Events Banners $14,000 $8,000 Events $15,000 $15,000 Outreach & Communication $14,000 $1,000 Downtown Streets Team $5,000 District Improvement $61,052 Subtotal --Programs, Marketing & Events $54,152 $24,000 TOTAL EXPENSES $148,000 $25,000 Section IV: Method and Basis of Levying the Assessment Cost Benefit Analysis / Bid Assessments The method and basis of levying the assessment is provided in sufficient detail to allow each business owner to estimate the amount of the assessment to be levied against his or her business for Fiscal Year 2014-15 and is not changed from the FY 2013-14 assessment. There have been no changes made to the Cost-Benefit Analysis or to the BID Assessments since they were approved by City Council on February 2, 2004. The method of calculation used to determine the cost and benefit to each business located in the BID is described below. The BID assessments are based on three criteria: the type of business, the location of the business and the size of the business. It has been consistently demonstrated that the typical BID program places a higher priority on activities such as commercial marketing. As a result, the retail and restaurant establishments in the BID are assessed more than service and professional businesses in the district. While service-oriented businesses benefit from a BID less than retailers and restaurateurs, they benefit more than professional businesses such as medical, dental, architectural, consultant and legal offices with their minimal advertising and promotion needs. For these reasons, various business types are assessed according to the benefit that they receive from the BID, as follows: Ø Retail and Restaurant 100% of base amount Ø Service 75% of base amount Ø Professional 50% of base amount Exceptions to this rule include financial institutions that are traditionally charged a flat rate regardless of location or size and lodging businesses that are typically charged by total rooms. The location of a business also determines the degree of benefit that accrues to that business. Centrally located businesses tend to benefit more, as do businesses located on the ground floor. For this reason, A and B benefit zones have been identified for the BID. In Palo Alto, Zone A benefit businesses are assessed 100% of the base benefit assessment while Zone B businesses are assessed 75%. A third criterion is used in the BID to determine benefit. This criterion, the size of the business, takes into consideration the number of full time employees employed by the business. Please refer to Attachment 1 for a more complete understanding of the application of these three variables to establish BID benefit. Attachment 2 is the BID assessment for each business located within the BID boundaries. Applying the criteria identified in Attachment 1, a summary of the assessment that applies to each business by size, type and location is outlined. In addition to the Cost-Benefit Analysis, the assessments include the following criteria: Ø An exemption for “single person professional businesses” that have 25% or fewer full time equivalent (“FTE”), including the business owner. This covers employees who work less than 10 hours a week (based on a 40 hour work week; an FTE equals approximately 2000 hours annually) Ø An assessment specifically for “single person businesses” that have 26% FTE to 1 FTE in the professional business category of the BID (An FTE equals approximately 2000 hours annually) Ø The tiering of other professional businesses by size based (according to benefit) on the “single person business” criteria This outline provides information by which a business can determine its annual assessment based on objective criteria. Except where otherwise defined, all terms shall have the meanings identified below: Definitions of Business Types in the Downtown Business Improvement District Retailers and Restaurants: Businesses that buy or resell goods such as clothing stores, shoe stores, office supplies as well as businesses that sell prepared food and drink. Service Businesses: Businesses that sell services such as beauty or barber shops, repair shops, most automotive businesses, dry cleaners, art and dance studios, printing firms, film processing companies, travel agencies, entertainment businesses such as theatres, etc. Hotel and Lodging: These include businesses that have as their main business the lodging of customers. This is restricted to residential businesses that provide lodging services to customers for less than 30 days. Professional Businesses: Businesses that require advanced and/or specialized licenses or academic degrees such as architects, engineers, attorneys, chiropractors, dentists, doctors, accountants, optometrists, realtors, insurance brokers, venture capital firms, consultants, advertising and marketing professionals and mortgage brokers and similar professions. Financial Institutions: Includes banking, savings and loan institutions and credit unions. Additional clarification on business definitions will be defined according to Section 18.04.030 (Definitions) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. The Advisory Board recommends that the following businesses be exempt from the BID assessment: Ø New businesses established in the BID area following the annual assessment for the year in which they locate in the BID area Ø Non-profit organizations Ø Newspapers Ø “Single person professional businesses” that have 25% or less FTE, including the business owner The Assessment calculated shall be paid to the City no later 30 days after receipt of the invoice with the amount of the annual assessment sent by the City. A second notice will be mailed as a reminder to businesses that have not remitted payment by that date. Late payment will be subject to a 10% late fee. Section V: Revenue Surplus or Deficit Based on the revenue balance on 2/28/14 of $58,631.42, the PAd expects a surplus carryover of $20,000. Expected expenses for the remainder of FY 13-14 are as follows: Current Revenue Balance $58,631.42 Expected expenses for remaining FYE6/30/2014 Staff Salaries $20,000 Elections & Annual Report $3,500 Banners $8,000 Reauthorization Advertising $2,500 Downtown Streets Team $2,500 Rent $1,040 Contingency $1,091.42 Total Expected Expense $38,631.42 Expected Carryover $20,000 Section VI: Non-assessment Income It is estimated that $24,000.00 will be raised in fundraising, and sponsor support. Additionally, we anticipate in kind contribution towards expenses for Fiscal Year 2014-15. Projected Income for Fiscal Year 2014-15 Legal (donation) $1,000 Banners $8,000 Events $15,000 Outreach & Communication $1,000 Total $25,000 Section VI: PAd Board of Directors by Business Type Retailers and Restaurants Alice Deuttscher, Shady Lane Gifts Georgie Gleim, Gleim the Jeweler Rita Comes Whitney, C is for Craft Claudia Cornejo, Café Venetia Alex Giovanotto, Joya Service Businesses Robert Peterson, Peterson Architects Hospitality Barbara Gross, Garden Court Hotel Financial Institutions Gayle Almeida Hague, Boston Private Bank & Trust Company Professional Organizations Anne E. Senti-Willis, Thoits, Love, Hershberger & McLean Brad Ehikian, Premier Properties Patty McGuigan, Cornish & Carey Commercial Michael Lee1, Palantir Non Profit Organizations Chris Richardson, Downtown Streets Team Phil Carter, Palo Alto Farmer’s Market LIAISONS Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce David MacKenzie, President & CEO Downtown Streets Team Eileen Richardson, Executive Director City Of Palo Alto Greg Scharff, Palo Alto City Council Thomas Fehrenbach, Manager of Economic Development 1 Attachment 1 ATTACHMENT 1 A General Statement Regarding Cost-Benefit Analysis For BID Businesses Using The Traditional Three Criteria Formula Criteria 1) Type of Business: Statement Concerning Cost-Benefit Formula For BID Businesses Regarding Type Of Business: In a review of 200 California Business Improvement Districts, it is consistently demonstrated that the typical BID Program places a higher priority on Commercial Marketing Programs than on Civic Beautification and Commercial Recruitment Programs. With that trend in mind, retail and restaurant businesses, with their emphasis on, and need for, commercial marketing, are traditionally assessed more than less marketing-sensitive service-oriented or professional-oriented businesses. However, while service-oriented businesses benefit from a BID less than retailers and restaurateurs, they benefit more, (from commercial marketing programs), than professional businesses such as medical, dental and legal offices with their minimal advertising and promotion needs. Therefore, set forth below, is an example of how various business types might be considered regarding the computation of the annual benefit assessment. • Retail and Restaurant: 100% of base amount • Service: 75% of base amount • Professional: 50% of base amount Exceptions to this rule include financial institutions that are traditionally charged a flat rate regardless of location or size and lodging businesses that are typically charged by total rooms. Lodging businesses are assessed based on the total number of rooms because it is a more equitable manner of determining size. Many lodging businesses have many part time employees, but revenues are based on the room occupancies of the hotel, not the goods sold or serviced provided by employees. Criteria 2) Location of Business: Statement Concerning Cost-Benefit Formula For BID Businesses Regarding Location of Business: It has also been consistently demonstrated that the more centrally located businesses tend to benefit from BID activities and services to a greater degree than businesses located toward the periphery of the proposed BID boundaries. Events and activities tend to originate in the central core of the Downtown area and spread benefit to the outer areas with diminishing energy and impact, much like the ripple effect of a stone tossed into a body of calm water. Furthermore, ground floor businesses tend to benefit to a greater degree than businesses located in upper floors. Therefore, in some cases, a new BID's annual benefit assessment formula also takes these street level criteria into account. As mentioned above, special events, fairs, festivals and other activities tend to take place within, or along, the Main Street core rather than in the areas at the periphery of the Downtown core. Additionally, BID-sponsored seasonal decorations, public art projects, street banners and street furniture tend to be located within the immediate core area. Attachment 1 Therefore, businesses located within the most central area of the proposed BID are considered to be within "Zone A" which should be considered the primary benefit zone. There is typically a "secondary zone" or "Zone B" within most proposed BID areas. This area receives less benefit than Zone A and should be assessed accordingly. An example of how different zones might be treated regarding the computation of the annual benefit assessment is as follows. • Zone A: 100% of base benefit assessment • Zone B: 75% of base benefit assessment In the case of Downtown Palo Alto, it is recommended that all Zone A upper floor businesses, as well as any other businesses located at the periphery of the proposed BID, be considered as Zone B businesses. Please refer to the map in Attachment I. Criteria 3) Size of Business: Statement Concerning Cost-Benefit Formula For BID Businesses Regarding Size of Business: In approximately 50% of newly established BIDs, a third assessment criterion is used. This criterion involves the size of each individual business that is based upon the businesses’ total number of full-time employees. Full-time employees are those working a total of 2,000 hours per year. Part-time employees are grouped into full-time job positions, i.e., two half-time employees total one full-time. Fractions are rounded down to the nearest whole number with no less than one person as a minimum for business. An example of how various business sizes might be treated regarding the computation of the annual benefit assessment is as follows: Retail/Restaurants Service Businesses Small 50% of base amount Under 6 FTE* Under 4 FTE Medium 75% of base amount 6 to under 11 FTE 4 to under 7 FTE Large 100% of base amount 11 or more FTE 7 or more FTE * FTE = full time employees Additionally, an exemption was established for “single person professional businesses” that have 25% or less FTE, including the business owner. This covers employees who work less 10 hours a week (based on a 40 hour work week) Since “single person businesses” that have 26% FTE to 1 FTE in the professional business category of the BID benefit the very least from the assessment, their assessments have been tiered by size based (according to benefit) on the new “single person business” criteria. Error! Unknown document property name. ATTACHMENT 2 Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District Annual BID Assessments ZONE A ZONE B (75% of Zone A amount) Restaurants & Retailers Under 6 FTE (50% of base amount) $225 $170 6 to under 11 FTE (75% of base amount) $340 $260 11 or more FTE (100% of base amount) $450 $340 Service Businesses Under 4 FTE (50% of base amount) $170 $130 4 to under 7 FTE (75% of base amount) $260 $200 Over 7 FTE (100% of base amount) $340 $260 Professional Businesses 25% or fewer FTE, including owner (0% of base amount) Exempt Exempt 26% FTE to under 1 FTE (25% of base amount) $60 $50 2 to 4 FTE (50% of base amount) $110 $90 5 to 9 FTE (75% of base amount) $170 $130 10+ FTE (100% of base amount) $225 $170 Lodging Businesses Up to 20 rooms (50% of base amount) $2258 $170 21 to 40 rooms (75% of base amount) $340 $260 41+ rooms (100% of base amount) $450 $340 Financial Institutions $500 $500 Note 1: For retail, restaurant, service, and professional businesses, size will be determined by number of employees either full-time or equivalent (FTE) made up of multiples of part-time employees. A full FTE equals approximately 2000 hours annually. Lodging facilities will be charged by number of rooms available and financial institutions will be charged a flat fee. Note 2: Second floor (and higher) businesses located within Zone A will be assessed the same as similar street-level businesses located within Zone B. Note 3: Assessment amounts are rounded to the nearest ten dollars. The minimum assessment will be $50.00. 934 - 9 4 4 927 932 233 281 933 - 9 3 7 943 327 1001 94 2 469 475 74 4 459 832 801 A P T 1 - 5 427-453 920 912 362 370 900 838 846 471 459 835 - 8 5 5 460 81 5 840 836 834 845 400 803 928930 931 933 835 - 8 3 7 831 - 8 3 3 451453 802800 81 0 - 8 1 6 81 8 - 8 2 0 82 8 - 8 3 0 817 - 8 1 9 82 3 - 8 2 5 567-569 559563 536 526 100 1 101 1 - 540 483 904 912 468 918 926 537 965-971505-507 519-521 939-945 931-935 923-925 518-520 539541543 515-517 809 811 420 1001 1011 1010 376 370 980960 990 34 354 326 426 4 1000 448 944 471 483948952 959947925 915 933 935 425-443 451449 463-465 936-940 458 460 440 428426 527-533 543 551 510520 558-560 903 825 837 581 575 940934 813-823 501-509 511-519 521-529 531-539 541-547 556 596 904 926 561-567 569 845 580 574 566 991- 997 136 610 116-122 150 535529 525 542516140 102 116 124 163 145 566 556 167 528 643635 635 645- 685 660- 666 620 180 164 158156 624628 632 636 640 644 617 621 151-165 171-195 203 642640 636 200 151 115 125 135 514 101 440 444 436432 427 425 117119 630616 208 228220 240-248 575 530- 534 536 540 552 177 156 201 209215 225 595 229231 611-623 180 508500 625-631 170 172-174 542544 538- 542 552 548 546 541- 547 230-238 734 723 721 702- 730220-244 744 701 731 755757 771 200 160 728-732 762- 776740-746 250 275 270 255 741 265 724 730 651 221-225 227 668 707 205 201203 451449 209 219 221 233 235450 460 470 442 444 400 420 430 411 425 429 185 165 181 412 250 420 245 171-169 441- 445 435- 439 346344 333 335 342 344 431 460 450 235530 220 220 B 222 240 514278 274270 250 545 540 251485255 271 281 300 310 301 581 259-267 533535537 261 267 518-526 532- 536 520-526 530-536 271 281 252 270 240-248 202- 216 228226 234238 244 242 210- 216 228- 234 223- 229 209215 247-259 240 232230 311-317 251 344 326 340 337339 323317 400 420 332330 314 353 355 367 305 347 265272-278 418 319 321- 341 328 330 300- 310 431401 366 436 426 #1-7 369 335 319 390 301 315 375 307- 311 325330 332 1&2330 1-3 324 326316 318 373- 377 416- 424 361 338 340 560 345 321325 315 529 285 555 650636 628 1-12 628 A-E 385 365 375380 345 664 325650-654 661635300 690 675 555541-549533 535- 539 318-324 326 352 425 439-441 435429425 415-419 405403453 461 383460 502 510 526 520 540 499 467 459 439 425 555 400 436-452 456 379 370-374 376 380-382 384-396 550-552 364 360 431 440-444 423 499 475 421-423 431-433 432428 460-476 450 635 446 430 400 745 720706 385744 734 724-730 720 712 704 360 351 315737 332 300 653 -681 683 685 512 501619 609605 518 482486 496 610 630 455 400 651-687 543-545 532534 542544 550 552 554556 558560562564 635-6 643-6 470 313 334 333 325326 342 303301 229 336 308 310 312 316 318 311 331 315 319 317 321 335 228220 356-360 347-367 351357 369-379360 258- 296 350 210 204 302- 316 379310 320 328 332 340 437 412 311 A-B 404 313 325 327 333 407 401385 411 452 378-390 360 - 1A - 1C360 - 2A - 2C360 - 3A - 3C360 - 4A - 4C360 - 5A - 5C360 - 6A 344-348 418420 482 328 456 321 325 330204 218 236 240 250- 252 477 475 467 457 453249235225221 201 60 275 505-509 239- 243 209- 213 210- 214 513-519 460 474472228- 230 535 558 201 16 12 20 209 215 223 231 521 80 239-245 530-540 544-554 212- 216 218-222 333 335- 337 351 457451 465463 489-499360 530 480 420 430 480 463 451443437411 405 419405401 441 480-498 347 351 355 359 525 430 473 332- 342 425415 400 570568 556 550 543 327321315305 343 515 525 551 555 328 309-311 518-528 536-540 552-554 558-562 573 A-E 591-599 557-571 330-332 318-320 406-418 417 542 548568 524 550 500-528 578 564 550 546 540 530 531-535 541 505 525 537 555 565 571 530 619-6 520 440-446 579 567 523610 600 555 581 420-438 437 566 224 228 A-F 244 579 575 565 559 251 355 A-J 335329 604 576 566 345-347 243245 25725920921922723502 505 610-616 727 678 676 674672 642 636-638 567 555 711 701705 725 525 759 730 718 734 738-740 760 746-750 701 721-7 600 827 835 899 850 530 609 759 751753 7 737-62611 601 600 1013 10041000 1006 1001 623 137 145 700 780 790 744 111700 753100 825805 33 51 75 63 841 44 675 49 41 711 799 703 100 101 139654 625 160 1001 1005 1009 1010 1004 930 975 945929931 948 181 940 960 145900 955 999875 853 925 81 855 901-907 909 87 98 917 921 925 735 849 707 847 842828 820248 230-232 212 825 829 833 839 800 812 818 882 165831 801 815 809801 841 791153 718 774 761 795745 201 209 834836 845 895 926 190 934 942 948 203 209 219 225 929200 240 904 910 926 270 935 904 909 909A 217 222 148 171 421 130 312 318 324 317 301 186 192 323 329 151 325 329 334 131 129 355301 235 258 212 163 115 291247 210 201 207 64 202 235 251 249 252 247 244250 177220 261 251-257 205245 231225213205 70 2 206 234240 183 251 270 241-247 215- 237 210- 216 219 235 62 202 245 54 52 50 203 215 221 313-317318 220- 224 238 542-550 531-539 532 759 223-239 905 911-917907 188 190 251- 293 202 206 208 210 212 216 220 1008 275 539 201 400 27 168 865857 302 324 340 795 848 918 903 903A 408 412 440 483A - F 435 751 735 745 532 210 727 733 335 328 330 345 214 350 800 806 441 441A 230302 306 308 312 316 301 303 305 307 309 325 251 807 821 829 801 818-824 420 424 430 832A 832 842A 842 852A 852 862A 862 872A 872 351A 351 355A 355 359A 359 363A 363 367A 367 425 911 943 951 918 936 940 944 271 253 241 301 319 919A 919 935 949 928 936 940-946 353 264 367 361 310 1005 1010 423425413 - 419 457-467 469-471473-481 454 729 A-D 733-743 734-740 724-732 936 824-828 920 949 943941 715 95 445 324 328 545 590 425447 827 565 585 595 904 315 507 561 706 536 200 100 280-290 150 158164 276 516 698 161 159 157777 132 127 180 528 120 247 372 524 548550 538 152 345 336 515 658 227 27 29 539 115 135 321 558 #200-202 558 #C & D 965 140 350 808 915 461 435433 945 1012 421 727 A-C 218 255 206 739 260 840 650 642 351 451 551 375 530 643 415 12 700 802 99 89 87 901 560564568572576580584588592594 906 908 910 912 914 916 918920 922 924 548 423 668 901 305 -313 423 405 352354 611 320322 346 323 471 484 528 426 264 430 1001 508 756 - 760 940 930 544546 515 7 745 7 549 211 213 151 160 257 433-457 482 330 349 401 539 440 691 755 67 312 202 651 443 445 447 716 218 398 998 262 335 218 640-646506 327 469 303 401 403 254 401 91 40 101 819 301 725 595 705 541 Quarry Road Homer Avenue Lane 8 West Medical Foundation Way Lane 7 West Lane 7 East Encina Avenue El Camino Real Urban Lane Wells Avenue Forest Avenue High Street Emerson Street Ch a n n i n g A v e n u e Alma Street El Camino Real Mitchell Lane Everett Avenue Lytton Avenue Lane 15 E High Street Alma Street Bryant Street Lane 6 E Lane 11 W Lane 21 High Street Gilman Street Hamilton Avenue University Avenue Bryant Court Lane 30 Florence Street Kipling Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Everett Avenue Waverley Street Cowper Street Webster Street Everett Court Lytton Avenue Lane A West L L La Addison Avenue Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue La Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilton Avenue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant Street Ramona Street Addison Avenue Scott Street Webster Street Cowper Street Addison Avenue Channing Avenue Ramona Street Paulsen Ln Lane 15 E Lane 20 W Lane 20 E University Avenue CalTrain ROW Emerson Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant Street Ramona Street Palo Road ay Pear Lane Lane 12 W Lane 5 E Everett Avenue Homer Avenue Emerson Street tal m D r iv e Alma Street Lytton Avenue This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend abc Zone A (Ground Floor) - Zone B (Upper Floors) abc Zone B 0' 500' Downtown Palo Alto Business ImprovementDistrict Area Map CITY O F PALO A L TO I N C O R P O R ATE D C ALIFOR N IA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A P RIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2012 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2012-04-30 16:57:54CPA BID (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) Not Yet Approved 120327 jb 0130950 1 Resolution No. _____ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Declaring Its Intention to Levy an Assessment Against Businesses Within the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District for Fiscal Year 2015 and Setting a Time and Place for May 12, 2014 at 7:00 PM or Thereafter, in the Council Chambers THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO DOES HEREBY FIND, DECLARE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989 (the "Law"), California Streets and Highways Code Sections 36500 et seq., authorizes the City Council to levy an assessment against businesses within a parking and business improvement area which is in addition to any assessments, fees, charges, or taxes imposed in the City. SECTION 2. Pursuant to the Law, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 4819 establishing the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District (the "District") in the City of Palo Alto. SECTION 3. The City Council, by Resolution No. 8416, appointed the Board of Directors of the Palo Alto Downtown Business & Professional Association, a California nonprofit mutual benefit corporation, to serve as the Advisory Board for the District (the "Advisory Board"). SECTION 4. In accordance with Section 36533 of the law, the Advisory Board prepared and filed with the City Clerk a report entitled "Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District, Annual Report 2014-2015" (the "Report”). The City Council hereby preliminarily approves the report. SECTION 5. The boundaries of the District are within the City limits of the City of Palo Alto (the "City") and encompass the greater downtown area of the City, generally extending from El Camino Real to the East, Webster Street to the West, Lytton Avenue to the North and Addison Avenue to the South (east of Emerson Street, the boundaries extend only to Forest Avenue to the South). Reference is hereby made to the map of the District attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference for a complete description of the boundaries of the District. SECTION 6. The City Council hereby declares its intention, in addition to any assessments, fees, charges or taxes imposed by the City, to levy and collect an assessment against businesses within the District for fiscal year 2015 (July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2015). Such assessment is not proposed to increase from the assessment levied and collected for the prior fiscal year. The method and basis of levying the assessment is set forth in Exhibit "B" attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference. Not Yet Approved 120327 jb 0130950 2 SECTION 7. The types of improvements to be funded by the levy of an assessment against businesses within the District are the acquisition, construction, installation or maintenance of any tangible property with an estimated useful life of five years or more. The types of activities to be funded by the levy of an assessment against businesses within the District are the promotion of public events which benefit businesses in the area and which take place on or in public places within the District; the furnishing of music in any public place in the District; and activities which benefit businesses located and operating in the District. SECTION 8. New businesses established in the District after the beginning of any fiscal year shall be exempt from the levy of the assessment for that fiscal year. In addition, non-profit organizations, newspapers and professional "single-person businesses," defined as those businesses which have 25% or less full time equivalent employees, including the business owner, shall be exempt from the assessment. SECTION 9. The City Council hereby fixes the time and place for a public hearing on the proposed levy of an assessment against businesses within the District for fiscal year 2015 as follows: TIME: 7:00 p.m. or soon thereafter DATE: Monday, May 12, 2014 PLACE: City Council Chambers 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 At the public hearing, the testimony of all interested persons regarding the levy of an assessment against businesses within the District for fiscal year 2015 shall be heard. A protest may be made orally or in writing by any interested person. Any protest pertaining to the regularity or sufficiency of the proceedings must be in writing and shall clearly set forth the irregularity or defect to which the objection is made. Every written protest must be filed with the City Clerk at or before the time fixed for the public hearing. The City Council may waive any irregularity in the form or content of any written protest and at the public hearing may correct minor defects in the proceedings. A written protest may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the conclusion of the public hearing. Each written protest must contain a description of the business in which the person subscribing the protest is interested sufficient to identify the business and, if a person subscribing is not shown on the official records of the City as the owner of the business, the protest shall contain or be accompanied by written evidence that the person subscribing is the owner of the business. A written protest which does not comply with Not Yet Approved 120327 jb 0130950 3 the requirements set forth in this paragraph will not be counted in determining a majority protest (as defined below). If, at the conclusion of the public hearing, written protests are received from the owners of businesses in the District which will pay 50 percent or more of the assessments proposed to be levied and protests are not withdrawn so as to reduce the protests to less than 50 percent (i.e., there is a majority protest), no further proceedings to levy the proposed assessment, as contained in this resolution of intention, shall be taken for a period of one year from the date of the finding of a majority protest by the City Council. If the majority protest is only against the furnishing of a specified type or types of improvement or activity within the District, those types of improvements or activities shall be eliminated. SECTION 10. For a full and detailed description of the improvements and activities to be provided for fiscal year 2015, the boundaries of the District and the proposed assessments to be levied against the businesses within the District for fiscal year 2015, reference is hereby made to the Report of the Advisory Board. The Report is on file with the City Clerk and open to public inspection. SECTION 11. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to provide notice of the public hearing in accordance with law. // // // // // // // // // // // // Not Yet Approved 120327 jb 0130950 4 SECTION 12. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not meet the definition of a project under Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Director of Administrative Services _____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment Not Yet Approved 120327 jb 0130950 5 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4609) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Council Priority: Environmental Sustainability Summary Title: Refunding of PaloAltoGreen Accumulated Revenues Title: Finance Committee Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Refunding Accumulated Net Revenue from the Suspended Full Needs Portion of the PaloAltoGreen Program to Program Participants From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff, the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC), and the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution refunding accumulated net revenues from the suspended Full Needs portion of the City’s PaloAltoGreen program to Full Needs program participants. Executive Summary The PaloAltoGreen (PAG) program was launched on Earth Day in 2003 and has won many awards for having the most participants in a voluntary green program in the country. The program allowed customers to eliminate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with their use of electricity by paying a small per unit “adder” that was used to purchase Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) so that their electric use would be supplied with 100% renewable energy. In 2013, ten years after the program launched, the City’s regular electric supply portfolio became 100% renewable and 100% carbon neutral, so Council suspended the Full Needs portion of the program in September 2013; however, the Commercial Customer Block portion of the program continues. When the program was launched, and until participation increased, the total costs of the program exceeded revenues. Over time, program expenses decreased as the cost for RECs fell, and the program began accumulating revenues in 2011. In 2013, when Council suspended the residential and small commercial (Full Needs) portion of the PAG program, the accumulated net City of Palo Alto Page 2 revenues amounted to $425,000. Staff proposes that these funds be returned to Full Needs program participants in the form of a utility bill credit. At its February 2014 meeting, the UAC voted unanimously to support staff’s proposal to refund the accumulated net revenues to program participants. The Finance Committee also unanimously supported the proposal at its March 18, 2014 meeting. Discussion The Finance Committee staff report (Staff Report ID 4508) contains a detailed discussion of the issue and proposed solution and is provided as Attachment B. Staff’s proposal is to return the accumulated revenue to program participants in the form of a Utilities bill credit according to the following criteria: 1. Return the funds to current and former Full Needs PAG participants who are still City of Palo Alto Utilities’ customers at the time the bill credit is effected; and 2. Return the funds pro rata according to the amount funds paid into the program, to current and former Full Needs PAG participants during the period of January 2011, when the program first had positive accumulated net revenue, to September 2013, when Council suspended the Full Needs portion of the program. Committee Review and Recommendation At its February 12, 2014 meeting, the UAC supported staff’s recommendation unanimously (5-0 with Commissioners Chang and Waldfogel absent). The final notes from the UAC’s February 12, 2014 meeting are provided as Attachment C. On March 18, 2014, the Finance Committee reviewed staff’s proposal and voted unanimously to recommend that Council adopt a resolution to refund the accumulated net revenues from the suspended Full Needs portion of the City’s PaloAltoGreen program to program participants. Resource Impacts The $425,000 that is proposed to be returned to the PAG Full Needs program participants will be funded from the Electric Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve, where the accumulated net revenues for the program reside. Approval of the proposed disposition of the accumulated PAG net revenues will require existing staff time to implement, but will not require new staff resources. The staff time required to implement the bill credits is estimated to be less than 0.1 FTE. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Policy Impacts Approval of the proposed disposition of the accumulated PAG net revenues does not create new City policy and conforms to the obligations and commitments made by the City to participating PAG customers. Environmental Impacts Approval of the proposed disposition of the accumulated PAG net revenues does not meet the California Environmental Quality Act’s (CEQA) definition of “project” under California Public Resources Code Sec. 21065, thus no environmental review is required. Attachments: Attachment A: Resolution Approving Disposition of Accumulated PaloAltoGreen Revenues (PDF) Attachment B: Finance Committee Staff Report ID 4508 Refunding of PaloAltoGreen Accumulated Revenues (Without Attachments) (PDF) Attachment C: Excerpted Final Minutes of February 12, 2014 UAC meeting (PDF) Attachment D: Excerpted Final Minutes of March 18, 2014 Finance Committee meeting (PDF) Attachment A * NOT YET APPROVED * 140331 dm 6053015 1 Resolution No. _________ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Refunding Accumulated Net Revenues from the Suspended Full Needs Portion of the PaloAltoGreen Program to Program Participants R E C I T A L S A. In an effort to provide City of Palo Alto Utilities (“City”) electric customers the option to voluntarily reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with their electricity use, the City launched the PaloAltoGreen Program in 2003. B. City electric customers could choose to participate in the PaloAltoGreen Program in two ways. The “Full Needs” option allowed residential and small commercial customers to receive renewable energy equivalent to 100 percent of their needs in exchange for paying an additional 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour (“kWh”) assessed on their full electric usage. The “Commercial Customer Block” option allowed non-residential customers to receive renewable energy in blocks of 1,000 kWh in exchange for an additional $15 per 1,000 kWh. Staff procured local renewable energy and/or renewable energy certificates (“RECs”) in proportion to the participating customers’ choices. C. In March 2013, the City unanimously approved the Carbon Neutral Plan (Resolution 9322) directing staff to achieve carbon neutrality for the electric portfolio by 2013. As a result of adoption of the Carbon Neutral Plan, PaloAltoGreen participants no longer need to participate in the program to eliminate the greenhouse gas emissions associated with their electric usage. D. For the first eight years of the PaloAltoGreen program, the costs of RECs and PaloAltoGreen program marketing were nearly equal to the revenues received from PaloAltoGreen participants. Due to lower than projected REC costs, cumulative revenues for both the Full Needs and the Commercial Customer Block portions of PaloAltoGreen have exceeded overall program costs through 2013 by about $692,000. Of that, $425,000 is attributed to the Full Needs portion of PaloAltoGreen. These accumulated net revenues reside in the Electric Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve. E. In September 2013, Council, by Resolution No. 9372, suspended the Full Needs portion of the PaloAltoGreen program, reduced the price for the Commercial Customer Block to $2 per 1,000 kWh, and directed staff to return with a recommendation for how to disperse the accumulated net revenues associated with the Full Needs portion of the PaloAltoGreen program. F. On February 12, 2014, the Utilities Advisory Commission unanimously approved (five in favor and two absent) staff’s recommendation to refund the accumulated net revenues associated with the Full Needs portion of the PaloAltoGreen program to program participants via a credit to their utilities bill. Attachment A * NOT YET APPROVED * 140331 dm 6053015 2 G. On March 18, the Finance Committee voted unanimously (three in favor and one absent) to recommend Council approve staff’s and the UAC’s recommendation to refund the accumulated net revenues associated with the Full Needs portion of the PaloAltoGreen program to program participants via a credit to their utilities bill. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The Council adopts the resolution refunding the accumulated net revenues from the suspended Full Needs portion of the PaloAltoGreen program to Full Needs program participants. SECTION 2. The Council finds that the sufficient funds are available in the Electric Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve to fund the refunds, and that after withdrawal of those funds, the Electric Rate Stabilization Reserve balance will be above the minimum guideline level for that reserve. 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 # 4508) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/18/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Council Priority: Environmental Sustainability Summary Title: Refunding of PaloAltoGreen Accumulated Revenues Title: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Refunding the Accumulated Net Revenues from the Suspended Full Needs Portion of the PaloAltoGreen Program to Program Participants From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution refunding accumulated net revenues from the suspended Full Needs portion of the City’s PaloAltoGreen program to Full Needs program participants Executive Summary The PaloAltoGreen (PAG) program was launched on Earth Day in 2003 and has won many awards for having the most participants in a voluntary green program in the country. The program allowed customers to eliminate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with their use of electricity by paying a small per unit “adder” that was used to purchase Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) so that their electric use would be supplied with 100% renewable energy. In 2013, ten years after the program launched, the City’s regular electric supply portfolio became 100% renewable and 100% carbon neutral, so Council suspended the Full Needs portion of the program in September 2013; however, the Commercial Customer Block portion of the program continues. When the program was launched, and until participation increased, the total costs of the program exceeded revenues. Over time, program expenses decreased as the cost for RECs fell, and the program began accumulating revenues in 2011. In 2013, when the residential and City of Palo Alto Page 2 small commercial (Full Needs) portion of the PAG program was suspended, the accumulated net revenues amounted to $425,000. Staff proposes that these funds be returned to Full Needs program participants in the form of a utility bill credit. Background City electric customers could participate in the PaloAltoGreen Program in two ways. The “Full Needs” option allowed residential and small commercial customers to receive renewable energy equivalent to 100 percent of their needs in exchange for paying an additional 1.5 cents per kilowatt hour (“kWh”) assessed on their full electric usage. The “Commercial Customer Block” option allowed commercial customers to receive renewable energy in blocks of 1,000 kWh in exchange for an additional $15 cents per 1,000 kWh. The PaloAltoGreen Program procured local renewable energy and renewable energy certificates (“RECs”) in proportion to the participating customers’ choices In September 2013, Council suspended the Full Needs portion of the voluntary PAG program (Staff Report #4041, Resolution #9372), because the electric supply portfolio became 100% carbon neutral in 2013. At the same time, Council directed staff to develop a PaloAltoGreen Gas (PAG Gas) Program to provide an opportunity for participants to reduce or eliminate GHG emissions related to their natural gas usage. Staff has proposed a PAG Gas program, which was unanimously supported by the Finance Committee at its March 4, 2014 meeting. The proposed PAG Gas program also received unanimous support from the UAC. Whether a new PAG electric program will also be developed is still under consideration. For the first eight years of the PAG program, the costs of RECs and PAG program marketing were nearly equal to the revenues received from PAG participants. Due to lower than projected REC costs, cumulative revenues for both the Full Needs and the Commercial Customer Block portions of PAG have exceeded overall program costs through 2013 by about $692,000. The cumulative net revenue associated with the Full Needs portion of PAG is $425,000. Table 1 below depicts the history of revenues and expenses (including staff costs) for the PAG program. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Table 1: PaloAltoGreen Revenue and Expense History (for Both Full Needs and Commercial Block Portions of the Program) Calendar Year Revenue Collected Total Expenses Net Revenue Cumulative Net Revenue 2003 $61,006 $299,995 -$238,989 -$238,989 2004 $310,959 $489,747 -$178,788 -$417,778 2005 $458,445 $478,776 -$20,331 -$438,108 2006 $567,534 $510,418 $57,116 -$380,993 2007 $679,438 $685,947 -$6,509 -$387,502 2008 $836,263 $709,573 $126,690 -$260,812 2009 $1,003,707 $922,828 $80,879 -$179,933 2010 $1,066,259 $1,036,130 $30,129 -$149,804 2011 $1,132,337 $903,925 $228,412 $78,608 2012 $1,064,595 $513,719 $550,876 $629,484 2013 $697,300 $635,033 $62,267 $691,751 As part of the PAG program redesign effort, Council directed staff to return with a recommendation on what to do with any excess PAG program funds (Staff Report #3333) by March 2014. This report addresses that recommendation. Discussion Staff reviewed several alternatives for the disposition of the $425,000 of accumulated revenue associated with the Full Needs part of the PAG program, including: Return funds to participants via a rebate or bill credit; Return funds to all electric ratepayers (i.e. use the funds to offset electric costs to benefit all ratepayers, not just PAG program participants); Allow funds to be used to offset costs associated with the Commercial Customer Block portion of PAG program; and Use funds as seed money to further local solar and/or other environmental initiatives. In April 2003 when Council first established PAG (CMR: 230:03), the program was described as a program that “will apply to customers who voluntarily choose to participate in buying their electricity with 100% renewable energy content.” This focus on offering a 100% renewable green energy option for participating customers’ own electricity use remained consistent throughout the program’s life, with the renewable energy purchased on behalf of program participants in the form of RECs. In order to honor the terms of the City’s original program offering, the City Attorney’s Office has advised that accumulated program revenues should be refunded to program participants in accordance with the program’s stated purpose and goals. While many participants may vigorously support using the funds for other environmentally City of Palo Alto Page 4 beneficial projects, such as seed money for installing solar systems on schools, that decision is outside the scope of the program’s stated purpose. Staff estimates that the average bill credit for PAG participants will be about $65. Staff has worked out the details of how the funds can be returned to program participants with the least amount of administrative cost possible. Staff recommends returning the funds in the form of a Utilities bill credit to program participants according to the following guidelines: 1. Return the funds to current and former PAG participants who are still City of Palo Alto Utilities’ customers at the time the bill credit is effected; and 2. Return the funds pro rata according to the amount funds paid into the program, to current and former PAG participants during the period of January 2011, when the program first had positive accumulated net revenue, to September 2013, when Council suspended the Full Needs portion of the program. Committee Review and Recommendation The UAC reviewed the staff recommendation at its February 12, 2014 meeting. At the meeting, staff stated that it investigated how it could provide participants the choice of whether they wanted to receive a bill refund, or for they wanted their share to be used for another purpose such as for local solar installations. However, providing that option would require an inordinate amount of staff resources to log in the preference of each of the over 6,000 participants. Two UAC commissioners expressed support for the idea of offering participants the choice, but understood that the cost would be too high. One commissioner argued that he did not want staff time to be used for the purpose of finding individual participant’s preferences. The UAC supported staff’s recommendation unanimously (5-0 with Commissioners Chang and Waldfogel absent). The draft notes from the UAC’s February 12, 2014 meeting are provided as Attachment B. Next Steps If Council approves the recommendation to refund the accumulated PAG net revenues in April, the bill credit will appear on eligible customer bills by July 2014. Resource Impacts The $425,000 that is proposed to be returned to the PAG Full Needs program participants will be funded from the Electric Supply Rate Stabilization Reserve, where the accumulated net City of Palo Alto Page 5 revenues for the program reside. Approval of the proposed disposition of the accumulated PAG net revenues will require existing staff time to implement, but will not require new staff resources. The staff time required to implement the bill credits is estimated to be less than 0.1 FTE. Policy Impacts Approval of the proposed disposition of the accumulated PAG net revenues does not create new City policy and conforms to the obligations and commitments made by the City to participating PAG customers. Environmental Impacts Approval of the proposed disposition of the accumulated PAG net revenues does not meet the California Environmental Quality Act’s (CEQA) definition of “project” under California Public Resources Code Sec. 21065, thus no environmental review is required. Attachments: Attachment A: Resolution Approving Disposition of Accumulated PaloAltoGreen Revenues (PDF) Attachment B: Excerpted Draft Minutes of February 12, 2014 UAC meeting (PDF) ATTACHMENT C EXCERPTED FINAL MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 12, 2014 UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING ITEM 2: ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission Recommend that the City Council Approve Refunding the Accumulated Net Revenues from the Suspended full Needs Portion of the PaloAltoGreen Program to Program Participants Assistant Director Jane Ratchye stated that this is a relatively straight forward item. Upon advice from the City Attorney’s Office, the accumulated net revenues need to be returned to program participants and staff has identified a fair and reasonable way to do that. Ratchye noted that staff looked into the idea of allowing the participants to indicate whether they wanted the funds returned, or if they would like them put towards another purpose. This plan may sound like a good idea and it seems like it should be simple to do. Unfortunately, it is very much more administratively burdensome and would use up some of the accumulated revenues. One idea is to time the refunds with the launch of a new program to encourage participation in the new program. Vice Chair Foster noted that the option to offer a choice for participants as recommended by Walt Hays would be preferred, but that the cost to do that is too high. Chair Cook said that he felt that it is a tantalizing opportunity to use those funds as seed money for a local solar program, but understood that it would be too time consuming and expensive to offer that choice. Commissioner Melton said that he did not want staff to spend any time trying to discern the desires of the PAG participants. Commissioner Eglash noted that the refunds are not a huge amount of money at $65/customer. ACTION: Commissioner Melton made a motion to recommend that the City Council approve refunding the accumulated net revenues associated with the Full Needs portion of the City’s suspended PaloAltoGreen program to program participants. Commissioner Eglash seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously (5-0) with Commissioners Chang and Waldfogel absent. Finance Committee Final Minutes 1 Special Meeting Tuesday, March 18, 2014 4. Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Refunding the Accumulated Net Revenues from the Suspended Full Needs Portion of the PaloAltoGreen Program to Program Participants Jane Ratchye, Assistant Director for Utilities, reported the PaloAltoGreen Program lost money in the early years due to upfront costs; however, over time revenues increased and costs decreased. The Program ended with approximately $700,000 of cumulative net revenues. Approximately $425,000 of that amount was obtained through the Full Needs Program that the Council suspended in September 2013. Staff recommended refunding money to PaloAltoGreen participants. Staff determined a method to identify which customers would receive refunds and a method to pro rate refunds. Council Member Holman requested the amount of customer refunds. Ms. Ratchye indicated refunds would vary, but the average amount was approximately $65. The refund amount would depend on customer contributions between 2011 and suspension of the program. Council Member Holman inquired whether customers could receive their refunds and then donate their refunds. Ms. Ratchye considered that idea. With 5,000-6,000 customers, a donation process would be administratively burdensome and time consuming. Staff hoped to issue refunds by July 2014, at approximately the same time as the launch of the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program. Council Member Holman felt there should be an easier way for customers to donate their refunds. Ms. Fong stated customers could donate their refunds independent of the City. Council Member Holman did not want donations to be part of the billing system. Jessica Mullen, Senior Deputy City Attorney, explained that the administrative difficulties with securing customers' expressed desire to move 2 March 18, 2014 funds to the new program stemmed from the way the program was created. Staff had to obtain specific consent from customers and track consent to move funds from one place to another. Chair Berman agreed with Staff that a process to transfer funds would be burdensome. The plan was to provide credits on bills. Refunding monies was the right thing to do. MOTION: Chair Berman moved, seconded by Council Member Holman to recommend the City Council adopt a Resolution refunding accumulated net revenues from the suspended Full Needs portion of the City’s PaloAltoGreen program to Full Needs program participants. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Kniss absent City of Palo Alto (ID # 4596) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Resolution Establishing PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Title: Finance Committee Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Establishing the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Using Certified Environmental Offsets and Approving Three New Rate Schedules: Residential Green Gas Service (G-1-G), Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service (G-2-G), and Large Commercial Green Gas Service (G-3-G) From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff, the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC), and the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution: 1. Establishing the voluntary PaloAltoGreen (PAG) Gas Program, which will provide the opportunity for residential and commercial customers to reduce or eliminate the impact of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with their gas usage, through the purchase of certified environmental offsets; and 2. Approving three new associated gas rate schedules: Residential Green Gas Service (G-1- G), Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service (G-2-G) and Large Commercial Green Gas Service (G-3-G). Staff notes one change recommended by the UAC to the proposed PAG Gas Program rate schedules: Recent information regarding the cost to market the program resulted in an increase in the proposed PAG Gas rate from 8₵/therm (which staff presented to the UAC in December 2013) to 12₵/therm. Staff presented this updated information and rate schedules to the Finance Committee in March 2014. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Executive Summary The proposed voluntary PAG Gas Program will provide residential and commercial customers with the opportunity to “green up” their use of gas. Under the PAG Gas Program, the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department (CPAU) will purchase high quality environmental offsets on behalf of participants in order to reduce or eliminate the impact of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with each customer’s gas usage. CPAU will limit purchases under the PAG Gas Program to specific categories of offsets from a preferred set of offset providers, and favor, wherever possible and economic, offset projects based in California. The PAG Gas Program is expected to increase costs for the average participating residential customer by about $2.20 per month in the summer and $6.50 per month in the winter. Commercial customers will be able to purchase blocks of offsets to “green up” gas usage to a level and economic impact they deem appropriate. The proposed voluntary PAG Gas Program is modeled after the highly successful, voluntary PAG Program for electric customers, which allowed participants to receive 100% renewable energy and eliminate the GHG emissions associated with their use of electricity. In light of the fact that electric supplies are now carbon neutral for all customers, the City Council suspended the Full Needs portion of the PAG Program and called for staff to develop a new voluntary PAG Gas Program to allow participants to eliminate the GHG emissions associated with their use of natural gas. At its December 2013 meeting, the UAC reviewed the PAG Gas Program and rate schedules and unanimously recommended Council establish the program and approve the proposed new rate schedules. At that time, the cost to participate in the program was estimated to be 8 cents per therm (8₵/therm), which was reflected in the draft rate schedules. Subsequent to the UAC’s meeting, staff received updated information on the marketing costs for the program and increased the program’s participation cost to 12₵/therm. Staff presented the updated PAG Gas Program rates to the Finance Committee on March 4, 2014. The Finance Committee voted unanimously to recommend that Council establish the PAG Gas Program and approve the proposed new gas rate schedules. Background In March 2013, Council adopted the Carbon Neutral Plan for electricity supplies (Staff Report #3550) and customers no longer needed to participate in the PAG Program to eliminate the GHG emissions associated with their electric usage. In September 2013, Council suspended the Full Needs portion of the PAG program and directed staff to develop a new program that would allow participants to eliminate the GHG emissions associated with their natural gas usage (Staff Report #4041). City of Palo Alto Page 3 Discussion The March 4, 2014 staff report to the Finance Committee provides a full discussion of the PAG Gas Program design and impacts on participating customer bills. At the Finance Committee, Council Member Burt asked for information on the GHG emission reductions that would accrue to the community as a result of implementing the program. He also requested that staff provide an analysis of the cost of the carbon reductions from the PAG Program as well as the proposed PAG Gas Program. Environmental Impact Table 1, from the 2013 Earth Day report to Council, shows the estimate for City and community greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in thousands of metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) for 1990, 2005, and 2012. Table 1: Palo Alto Community and City Greenhouse Gas Emission Estimates, by Category Emissions Drivers GHG Emissions (000’s of Metric Tons) 1990 2005 2012 Natural Gas Use 194 166 160 Electricity Use 186 160 75 Mobile Combustion * 382 372 335 Other ** 100 100 49 Total 862 798 619 * Consultant estimates based on population, employment, vehicle miles travelled and vehicular emission profiles ** Includes landfill, refuse and Regional Water Quality Control Plant emissions The GHG emissions for electricity use will be zero for 2013 when the Carbon Neutral Plan was implemented, so the total emissions for 2013 will be about 544,000 metric tons, assuming other emissions stay about the same as in 2012. The natural gas related emissions totaled 160,000 metric tons in 2012 and are expected to be similar in 2013. If the participation rate for the PAG Gas Program is 20% of residential customers and 5% of non-residential customers (as it was for the electric PAG program in 2012), then about 10% of the City’s natural gas usage (about 3 million therms/year) would be covered with environmental offsets. The resulting reduction of GHG emissions under this scenario is 16,000 tons CO2e per year, or about 3% of the City’s total GHG emissions. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Table 2 compares the cost to participating customers of GHG reduction for PAG and PAG Gas. The cost of GHG reduction depends heavily on the assumed carbon content of the avoided electricity. For this analysis the Western Electricity Coordinating Council – California non- baseload value from 2010 was used. Table 2: GHG Reductions and Cost of Reduction GHG Emissions Reduced GHG tons CO2 e/year Reduction Cost $/ton CO2 e PaloAltoGreen 2012 41,061 $35.501 PaloAltoGreen Gas Estimate 16,000 $22.50 1 Based on the Western Electricity Coordinating Council –CA average energy mix in 2010 of 932 lbs CO2 e per MWh Committee Review and Recommendation On December 4, 2013, the UAC considered the proposed PAG Gas Program and voted unanimously (5-0) to recommend that the Council establish the PAG Gas Program and approving the associated gas rate schedules with the then-proposed 8₵/therm PaloAltoGreen Gas charge. Final minutes from the UAC’s December 4, 2013 meeting are provided as Attachment D. On March 4, 2014, the Finance Committee considered and voted unanimously to recommend Council approval of the proposed PAG Gas Program and associated rate schedules with a 12₵/therm PaloAltoGreen Gas charge. Council Member Burt requested information regarding the expected GHG reductions from the PAG Gas program (see Environmental Impact in Discussion Section) compared to the PAG program, and that additional information is included in this report. Final minutes from the Finance Committee’s March 4, 2014 meeting are provided as Attachment E. Resource Impact As the proposed PAG Gas Program is a revenue neutral, voluntary program, there is no net impact on CPAU’s financial resources. Staff anticipates that customers making up 10% of the City’s total gas load will participate in the PAG Gas Program, leading to PAG Gas Program revenues and matching expenditures of about $360,000 annually. Marketing and program administration costs are expected to be covered by existing budgets in the near term, and self- supporting from PAG Gas Program revenues in the longer-term. While the PAG program became revenue neutral within five years, it is expected that this program will become revenue neutral in a much shorter time period because the concept is not new. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Policy Implications This recommendation is consistent with the Council-approved Utilities Strategic Plan, specifically the objective to offer programs to meet the needs of customers and the community. Environmental Review Council’s establishment of a PAG Gas Program does not meet the definition of a project, pursuant to section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, the City will receive environmental offsets from projects that will constitute a project for the purposes of CEQA, or for projects located outside of California, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other applicable state environmental statute. Offset project developers will be responsible for acquiring necessary environmental reviews and permits as offset projects are developed. Council’s establishment of new gas rates in support of the PAG Gas Program is not subject to CEQA, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Sec. 21080(b)(8) and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Sec. 15273(a)(1) and (3), because the rates adopted by this resolution are necessary to recover PAG Gas Program operating expenses. Attachments: Attachment A: Resolution Approving PAG Gas Program and Adopting New Gas Rate Schedules (PDF) Attachment B: Gas Rate Schedules G-1-G, G-2-G, and G-3-G (PDF) Attachment C: Finance Committee Staff Report ID 4343 (Without Attachments) (PDF) Attachment D: Excerpted Final UAC Minutes of December 4, 2013 (PDF) Attachment E: Excerpted Final Finance Committee Minutes of March 4, 2014 (PDF) ATTACHMENT A * NOT YET APPROVED * 140110 dm 6052006 Resolution No. _________ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Using Certified Environmental Offsets and Approving Three New Gas Rate Schedules G-1-G (Residential Green Gas Service), G-2-G (Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service) and G-3-G (Large Commercial Green Gas Service) A. In an effort to provide City of Palo Alto Utilities (“City”) electric customers the option to voluntarily reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with their electricity use, in 2003, the City launched the PaloAltoGreen Program. B. In March 2013, the Council unanimously approved the Carbon Neutral Plan (Resolution 9322) directing staff to achieve carbon neutrality for the electric supply portfolio by 2013 through the use of a combination of hydroelectric resources, long-term renewable resources and short-term renewable energy resources and/or renewable energy certificates (“RECs”). C. On September 9, 2013, this Council approved a resolution modifying and suspending portions of the PaloAltoGreen Program, and directing staff to develop a PaloAltoGreen Gas Program (Staff Report #4041). D. Establishment of a voluntary PaloAltoGreen Gas Program (PAG Gas Program) will provide the opportunity for residential and commercial customers to economically reduce or eliminate the impact of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with their gas usage through the purchase of certified environmental offsets. E. Establishment of a PAG Gas Program also requires Council approval of three new gas rate schedules to implement the PAG Gas Program. The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The PaloAltoGreen Gas Program is hereby established as of July 1, 2014. SECTION 2. The PaloAltoGreen Gas Program shall adhere to the following principles: a. Participation in the PAG Gas Program shall be voluntary for all CPAU gas customers in good standing; b. CPAU gas customers may participate in or opt out of the PAG Gas Program at any time; ATTACHMENT A * NOT YET APPROVED * 140110 dm 6052006 c. The PAG Gas Program will use certified environmental offsets acquired from an established offset registry and offer appropriate offset protocols, as determined by CPAU staff; d. Staff shall monitor and manage PAG Gas Program expenditures such that revenues and costs are properly balanced, and shall return to Council as needed to request any adjustments to PAG Gas Program rates. SECTION 3. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Utility Rate Schedule G-1-G (Residential Green Gas Service) is added as attached and incorporated. Utility Rate Schedule G-1-G shall become effective as of July 1, 2014. SECTION 4. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Utility Rate Schedule G-2-G (Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service) is added as attached and incorporated. Utility Rate Schedule G-2-G shall become effective as of July 1, 2014. SECTION 5. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Utility Rate Schedule G-3-G (Large Commercial Green Gas Service) is added as attached and incorporated. Utility Rate Schedule G-3-G shall become effective as of July 1, 2014. SECTION 6. The Council finds that revenue derived from the authorized adoption enumerated herein shall be used only for the purpose set forth in Article VII, Section 2, of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto. SECTION 7. The Council’s establishment of a PAG Gas Program does not meet the definition of a project, pursuant to section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, the City will receive environmental offsets from projects that will constitute a project for the purposes of CEQA, or for projects located outside of California, NEPA or other applicable state environmental statute. Offset project developers will be responsible for acquiring necessary environmental reviews and permits as offset projects are developed. // // // // // // ATTACHMENT A * NOT YET APPROVED * 140110 dm 6052006 SECTION 8. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution establishing new gas rates in support of the PAG Gas Program is not subject to CEQA, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Sec. 21080(b)(8) and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Sec. 15273(a)(1) and (3), because the rates adopted by this resolution are necessary to recover the PAG Program’s operating expenses. After reviewing the this resolution and associated staff report, the Council finds that sufficient evidence has been presented setting forth with specificity the basis for this claim of CEQA exemption. 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 RESIDENTIAL GREEN GAS SERVICE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-1-G CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES Issued by the City Council Effective 7-1-2014 New Sheet No G-1-G-1 A. APPLICABILITY: This schedule applies to the following Customers receiving Gas Service from the City of Palo Alto Utilities under the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program: 1. Separately-metered single-family residential Customers. 2. Separately-metered multi-family residential Customers in multi-family residential facilities. B. TERRITORY: This schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Gas Service. C. UNBUNDLED RATES: Per Service Monthly Service Charge: ..........................................................................................................$9.88 Tier 1 Rates: Per Therm Supply Charges: 1. Commodity (Monthly Market Based) .......................................... $0.10-$2.00 2. Administrative ................................................................................... $0.0074 3. Transportation ................................................................................... $0.0435 Distribution Charge:............................................................................................. $0.3883 PaloAltoGreen Gas Charge .................................................................................. $0.1200 Tier 2 Rates: (All usage over 100% of Tier 1) Supply Charges: 1. Commodity (Monthly Market Based) .......................................... $0.10-2.00 2. Administrative.................................................................................... $0.0074 3. Transportation .................................................................................... $0.0435 Distribution Charge:............................................................................................. $0.9037 PaloAltoGreen Gas Charge .................................................................................. $0.1200 D. SPECIAL NOTES: RESIDENTIAL GREEN GAS SERVICE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-1-G CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES Issued by the City Council Effective 7-1-2014 New Sheet No G-1-G-2 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. The Commodity charge is based on the monthly natural gas Bidweek Price Index for delivery at PG&E Citygate, accounting for delivery losses to the Customer’s meter. The Commodity charge will fall within the minimum/maximum range set forth in Section C. 2. Seasonal Rate Changes: The Summer period is effective April 1 to October 31 and the Winter period is effective from November 1 to March 31. 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 for each period. For further discussion of bill calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11. 3. Calculation of Usage Tiers Tier 1 natural gas usage shall be calculated and billed based upon a level of 0.667 therms per day during the Summer period and 2.0 therms per day during the Winter period, rounded to the nearest whole therm, based on meter reading days of service. As an example, for a 30 day bill, the Tier 1 level would be 20 therms during the Summer period and 60 therms during the Winter period months. For further discussion of bill calculation and proration, refer to Rule and Regulation 11. 4. PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Description and Participation PaloAltoGreen Gas provides for the reduction of green-house gas (GHG) emissions associated with a Customer’s Gas usage, through the purchase of certified environmental offsets, with a preference to projects located in California. Purchases are made to match 100% of the therm usage at the Customer’s premises every month. Customers choosing to participate shall fill out a PaloAltoGreen Gas Program application provided by the Customer Service Center. {End} RESIDENTIAL MASTER-METERED AND COMMERCIAL GREEN GAS SERVICE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-2-G CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES Issued by the City Council Effective 7-1-2014 New Sheet No G-2-G-1 A. APPLICABILITY: This schedule applies to the following Customers receiving Gas Service from the City of Palo Alto Utilities under the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program: 1. Master-metered residential Customers in multi-family residential facilities. 2. Commercial Customers who use less than 250,000 therms per year at one site. B. TERRITORY: This schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Gas Service. C. UNBUNDLED RATES: 1. 100% Renewable/Full Green option: Per Service Monthly Service Charge: ............................................................................................$74.86 Per Therm Supply Charges: 1. Commodity (Monthly Market Based) .......................................... $0.10-$2.00 2. Administrative ......................................................................................... $0.0074 3. Transportation .......................................................................................... $0.0435 Distribution Charge: ............................................................................................ $0.5638 PaloAltoGreen Gas Charge .................................................................................. $0.1200 2. 100 Therm block option: Per Service Monthly Service Charge: ............................................................................................$74.86 Per Therm Supply Charges: 1. Commodity (Monthly Market Based) .......................................... $0.10-$2.00 2. Administrative ......................................................................................... $0.0074 3. Transportation .......................................................................................... $0.0435 Distribution Charge: ............................................................................................ $0.5638 RESIDENTIAL MASTER-METERED AND COMMERCIAL GREEN GAS SERVICE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-2-G CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES Issued by the City Council Effective 7-1-2014 New Sheet No G-2-G-2 PaloAltoGreen Gas Charge (per 100 therm block) .............................................. $12.00 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. The Commodity charge is based on the monthly natural gas Bidweek Price Index for delivery at PG&E Citygate, accounting for delivery losses to the Customer’s meter. The Commodity charge will fall within the minimum/maximum range set forth in Section C. 2. Request for Service A qualifying Customer may request service under this schedule for more than one account or meter if the accounts are located on one. A site consists of one or more contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of-ways (e.g. streets). 3. PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Description and Participation PaloAltoGreen Gas provides for the reduction of green-house gas (GHG) emissions associated with a Customer’s gas usage, through the purchase of certified environmental offsets, with a preference to projects located in California. Purchases are made to match 100% of the therm usage at the Customer’s facility every month (the 100% Renewable/Full Green option), or in 100 therm blocks. Customers choosing to participate shall fill out a PaloAltoGreen Gas Program application provided by the Customer Service Center. {End} LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN GAS SERVICE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-3-G CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES Issued by the City Council Effective 7-1-2014 New Sheet No G-3-G-1 A. APPLICABILITY: This schedule applies to the following Customers receiving Gas Service from the City of Palo Alto Utilities under the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program: 1. Commercial Customers who use at least 250,000 therms per year at one site. 2. Customers at City-owned generation facilities. B. TERRITORY: This schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Gas Service. C. UNBUNDLED RATES: 1. 100% Renewable/Full Green option: Per Service Monthly Service Charge: $361.18 Per Therm Supply Charges: 1. Commodity (Monthly Market Based) .......................................................... $0.10-$2.00 2. Administrative ...................................................................................................$0.0074 3. Transportation .....................................................................................................$0.0435 Distribution Charge: .................................................................................................$0.5562 PaloAltoGreen Gas Charge: ......................................................................................$0.1200 2. 100 Therm block option: Per Service Monthly Service Charge: $361.18 Per Therm Supply Charges: 1. Commodity (Monthly Market Based) .......................................................... $0.10-$2.00 2. Administrative ...................................................................................................$0.0074 3. Transportation .....................................................................................................$0.0435 Distribution Charge: .................................................................................................$0.5562 PaloAltoGreen Gas Charge (per 100 therm block): ....................................................$12.00 LARGE COMMERCIAL GREEN GAS SERVICE UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-3-G CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES Issued by the City Council Effective 7-1-2014 New Sheet No G-3-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. The Commodity charge is based on the monthly natural gas Bidweek Price Index for delivery at PG&E Citygate, accounting for delivery losses to the Customer’s meter. The Commodity charge will fall within the minimum/maximum range set forth in Section C. 2. Request for Service A qualifying Customer may request service under this schedule for more than one account or meter if the accounts are located on one site. A site consists of one or more contiguous parcels of land with no intervening public right-of-ways (e.g. streets). 3. PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Description and Participation PaloAltoGreen Gas provides for the reduction of green-house gas (GHG) emissions associated with a Customer’s gas usage, through the purchase of certified environmental offsets, with a preference to projects located in California. Purchases are made to match 100% of the therm usage at the Customer’s facility every month, (the 100% Renewable/Full Green option), or in 100 therm blocks. Customers choosing to participate shall fill out a PaloAltoGreen Gas Program application provided by the Customer Service Center. {End} City of Palo Alto (ID # 4343) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/4/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Resolution Establishing PaloAltoGreen Gas Title: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Establishing the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Using Certified Environmental Offsets and Approving Three New Gas Rate Schedules: Residential Green Gas Service (G-1-G), Residential Master- Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service (G-2-G), and Large Commercial Green Gas Service (G-3-G) From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the Finance Committee recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution: 1. Establishing the voluntary PaloAltoGreen (PAG) Gas Program, which will provide the opportunity for residential and commercial customers to reduce or eliminate the impact of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with their gas usage, through the purchase of certified environmental offsets; and 2. Approving three new associated gas rate schedules: Residential Green Gas Service (G-1- G), Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service (G-2-G) and Large Commercial Green Gas Service (G-3-G). Staff notes one change to the UAC recommended Rate Schedules: Recent information regarding the cost to market the program resulted in an increase in the proposed PAG Gas rate from the 8₵/therm that was presented to the UAC in December 2013 to 12₵/therm. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Executive Summary The proposed voluntary PAG Gas Program will provide residential and commercial customers with the opportunity to “green up” their use of gas. Under the PAG Gas Program, the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department (CPAU) will purchase high quality environmental offsets on behalf of participants in order to reduce or eliminate the impact of GHG emissions associated with each customer’s gas usage. CPAU will limit purchases under the PAG Gas Program to specific categories of offsets from a preferred set of offset providers, and favor, wherever possible and economic, offset projects based in California. The PAG Gas Program is expected to increase costs for the average participating residential customer by about $2.20 per month in the summer and $6.50 per month in the winter. Commercial customers will be able to purchase blocks of offsets to “green up” gas usage to a level and economic impact they deem appropriate. The proposed PAG Gas Program is modeled after the highly successful, voluntary PaloAltoGreen Program for electric customers, which allowed participants to receive 100% renewable energy and eliminate the GHG emissions associated with their use of electricity. In light of the fact that electric supplies are now carbon neutral for all customers, the City Council suspended the PAG Program and called for staff to develop a new voluntary PAG Gas Program to allow participants to eliminate the GHG emissions associated with their use of natural gas. Background For 10 years, the voluntary PAG Program satisfied the community’s desire to support the use of renewable electric power and reduce the carbon footprint associated with its energy use. Participation rates in the program were the highest among similar programs throughout the nation and earned CPAU recognition and multiple awards. In 2012, approximately 20% of CPAU’s customers participated in the PAG Program, representing 8% of the City’s total electric usage. The success of the PAG Program was attributed to CPAU’s ability to provide a direct benefit to participants in the form of reduced GHG emissions equivalent to all or a portion of their electricity consumption in a simple and convenient manner. In addition, participating in the PAG Program allowed CPAU’s commercial customers (including City facilities) to achieve environmental recognition and certifications in line with their own corporate sustainability goals, including participation in the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Green Power Partnership Program and the US Green Building Council Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (USGBC LEED) Program. In March 2013, Council adopted the Carbon Neutral Plan for electricity supplies (Staff Report #3550) and customers no longer needed to participate in the PAG Program to eliminate the City of Palo Alto Page 3 GHG emissions associated with their electric usage. In September 2013, Council suspended the PAG program for residential and small commercial customers who purchased renewable energy credits sufficient to cover all of their electricity use (Staff Report #4041). At the same time, Council directed staff to develop a new program that would allow participants to eliminate the GHG emissions associated with their natural gas usage. Discussion Staff evaluated options for structuring the PAG Gas Program to achieve GHG reductions associated with customer gas usage, including: 1. Direct biogas purchase to replace existing gas usage; or 2. Purchase of environmental offsets. The additional cost for 100% direct biogas purchases for an average residential customer is considered to be too high for customers to accept, especially with added costs for program administration. Staff estimates the increased cost of these purchases would increase an average residential gas customer’s bill by nearly $40 per month in the winter if 100% of the customer’s gas usage was supplied using biogas. In addition, the long-term commitment required to procure physical biogas is incompatible with a voluntary program that allows participants to enter and exit the program whenever they wish. By contrast, a PAG Gas Program backed by certified environmental offsets has a drastically lower cost, and such a program can be implemented in a relatively short amount of time. The impact on participants’ bills will depend on the type of environmental offset procured, which can vary widely depending on offset program, certification, protocol and project source. Environmental Offset Options Offset Suppliers and Prices Environmental offsets are certified by a number of offset registries, including the following: 1. Climate Action Reserve (CAR): CAR is the most popular registry for voluntary offset programs. 2. California Air Resources Board (CARB): CARB certification is required for offsets used to meet a compliance obligation under CARB’s cap-and-trade program. CARB offsets can be guaranteed or non-guaranteed. Guaranteed means that the offset supplier accepts the risk of CARB certification. 3. American Carbon Registry (ACR) 4. Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) 5. Gold Standard 6. Clean Development Mechanism City of Palo Alto Page 4 Offset price can vary and will likely change in the future. Current prices are as follows: 1. CARB guaranteed offsets currently cost $10.50-$11 per metric tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e); 2. CARB non-guaranteed offsets currently cost $10 per metric tonne CO2e; 3. CAR livestock and forestry offsets currently cost $8-$9 per metric tonne CO2e ; 4. CAR landfill gas offsets currently cost $1-$5 per metric tonne CO2e; and 5. Voluntary offsets for other registries are in the same price range as CAR offsets. Categories of Environmental Offsets Each registry certifies a number of different offset protocols, which are ways the offsets are generated, including the following: 1. Forestry 2. Livestock 3. Landfill 4. Coal Mine Methane 5. Urban Forestry 6. Ozone Depleting Substances 7. Rice Cultivation The proposed PAG Gas Program would be supplied with environmental offsets certified by CAR because this is the most commonly used registry in the country for voluntary programs. If sufficient CAR offsets are not available, offsets registered though ACR or VCS would be used. Purchasing offsets from the Gold Standard or Clean Development Mechanisms is not recommended at this time because these are lesser known in the industry. Using CARB certified offsets to supply the program is not recommended because they are more expensive, and CARB certification is unnecessary for a voluntary program like the one proposed. Moreover, since CARB has adopted CAR requirements, CAR-certified projects are identical to, and eligible for, CARB certification under the applicable protocols. In order to be certified, specific projects must meet the requirements of the applicable protocol. Offset buyers, like CPAU for the PAG Gas Program, may specify the desired project location in addition to the registry and protocol. Offsets for the proposed PAG Gas Program are limited to protocols that have been approved by CARB. At this time, CARB has only approved protocols for forestry and livestock projects, but CARB may approve additional protocols over time. Since CARB uses the CAR standards for project certification, CAR-certified projects under CARB approved protocols are the same quality and only lack the CARB verification process, and hence are available at a lower cost. Projects located in California are preferred because staff is confident that a program supplied with these offsets will be most attractive to the PAG Gas Program participants. North American City of Palo Alto Page 5 projects outside California will be considered as a second choice. Local urban forestry projects will be considered when available and when that protocol is approved by CARB. Rate and Bill Impacts Direct Offset Costs One therm of natural gas produces 0.0053 metric tonnes of CO2e1. Offsets costing $9 per tonne of CO2e (CAR livestock and forestry offsets currently cost $8-$9 per tonne CO2e) add 4.8 cents per them (₵/therm) to the gas purchased for PAG Gas Program participants. Program Administration Costs Palo Alto plans to engage a third-party contractor to assist staff in administering and marketing the program. In December 2013, the UAC was presented with proposed rates that included an estimate of 3₵/therm for program administration and marketing costs. Subsequently, a Request for Proposals was issued and responses received indicated that marketing costs, at least for the first several years of the program, need to be in the range of 7₵/therm. Like with the PAG program, marketing costs for the PAG Gas Program are expected to decline over the life of the program, at which point the rate, depending on the cost of the offsets, may be reduced. Overall Cost to Participants The proposed initial premium for the PAG Gas Program is 12₵/therm, which is expected to be sufficient to cover the cost of the offsets as well as administrative and marketing costs. Once a program administrator is engaged and the program has been operational for two to three years, staff will have a better idea of actual ongoing costs and revenues. Staff will monitor the costs and revenues of the program and return to Council, if needed, to request an adjustment to the rates so that revenues equal costs. The increased monthly cost for a residential gas customer with the 12₵/therm PAG Gas Program premium is shown in Table 1. 1 1 tonne/2204.16 lbs * 116 lbs CO2 e /1 MMBtu CH4 *1 MMBtu/10 therms = .0053 tonnes/therm City of Palo Alto Page 6 Table 1: Residential Natural Gas Bill Impact with Environmental Offsets Gas Usage (therms/month) Current Monthly bill * Monthly bill with a premium of 12₵/therm Increased monthly bill with a premium of 12₵/therm $/month % 10 $18.27 $19.47 $1.20 6.6% 18 (summer median) $24.99 $27.15 $2.16 8.6% 25 $33.44 $36.44 $3.00 9.0% 30 $35.06 $38.66 $3.60 10.3% 54 (winter median) $55.20 $61.68 $6.48 11.7% 100 $114.42 $126.42 $12.00 10.5% * Assumes gas commodity cost of 40 ₵/therm The increased cost to commercial customers will depend on the number of blocks purchased by the customer. The price will be the same, 12₵/therm. Potential Cost Variables The total program costs and bill impacts calculated above are based on staff’s best estimates. The actual cost of offsets and the administrative costs may vary. In addition, the number of participants is unknown at this time. If the proposed rates result in excess revenue or cause a significant revenue shortfall, staff will return to Council with a recommendation to adjust rates. Proposed PAG Gas Program Design The proposed PAG Gas Program uses certified environmental offsets to meet the community’s desire to support further reductions in GHG emissions associated with gas usage in an economic manner. Because the PAG (electric) Program was so popular, the proposed PAG Gas Program contains many of the same elements, including: 1. Voluntary participation with ability to join or cancel at any time; 2. Simple, convenient program that covers 100% of a customer’s gas usage, thereby eliminating all GHG emissions associated with their gas usage; and 3. “Block” purchase option for commercial customers allowing those customers to designate the green option for a portion of their gas usage. Proposed Program Summary City of Palo Alto Page 7 In addition to the program design described above, the main components of the PAG Gas Program include: 1. Environmental Offsets: a. Offset protocols allowed are restricted to those that have been approved by CARB. Currently, these include forestry and livestock protocols. b. CAR certification required unless sufficient CAR certified offsets are not available. In that case, offsets registered though ACR or VCS would be used. c. Projects located in California are preferred, but North American projects outside California will be considered as a second choice. 2. Price: a. PAG Gas Program premium for “full needs” customers is 12₵/therm levied on the customer’s entire gas usage. b. PAG Gas Program premium for “block purchases” is $12 per 100 therms (12₵/therm) for the portion of the customer’s gas usage designated to participate in the program. This option not available to residential customers. 3. Implementation a. PAG Gas Program to be implemented on July 1, 2014. Other Voluntary Offset Programs There are several voluntary offset programs offered by electric utilities across the country: 1. The Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) supplies a voluntary program with CAR and VCS certified offsets and a variety of protocols; 2. Duke Energy offers CAR certified offsets using a variety of protocols to customers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Indiana, and Kentucky; 3. Entergy offers CAR certified offsets to customers in the Gulf coast states; and 4. JustEnergy administers a voluntary offset program in the Northeastern US and Canada using CAR certified offsets. Other gas offset programs include: 1. Puget Sound Energy in Washington allows customers to offset their natural gas carbon footprint with CAR certified local dairy digester projects; 2. Northwest Natural Gas in Oregon and Washington administers a program using CAR certified offsets with a wide range of protocols; and 3. Washington Gas in the District of Columbia utilizes CAR and ACR certified offsets with train hauling (as opposed to truck hauling) and landfill gas projects. City of Palo Alto Page 8 Environmental Impact If the participation rate for the PAG Gas Program is 20% of residential customers and 5% of non-residential customers (as it was for the electric PAG program in 2012), then about 10% of the City’s natural gas usage (about 3 million therms/year) would be covered with environmental offsets, resulting in a reduction of GHG emissions totaling 16,000 metric tonnes per year. Implementation Plan If the proposed PAG Gas Program design and rates are approved by Council, staff will make the necessary modifications to CPAU’s billing system to allow for the implementation of the PAG Gas Program by July 2014. While the program may take some time to attract new participants and increase its participation rate, staff expects that a large percentage of current PAG Program customers will sign up for the PAG Gas Program. Staff plans to contract with a green power program consultant to launch and manage the PAG Gas Program by providing a turnkey service (providing both program marketing and offset purchasing). Based on the outcome of negotiations, staff will develop a final implementation plan and will return to Council for contract approval, as required. If, at the beginning of the PAG Gas Program or sometime in the future, staff decides it would be beneficial to use a consultant for marketing services only, new master agreements will be established with wholesale offset sellers. Staff will return to Council for approval of master agreements and a marketing consultant contract, as required. Commission Review and Recommendation On December 4, 2013, the UAC considered the proposed PAG Gas Program. All commissioners liked the simplicity of the proposed program design. Vice Chair Foster proposed that all current PAG customers be automatically enrolled in the PAG Gas Program with the option to opt out of the program. Because this is a gas, not an electric program, as well as a new program, that suggestion was not supported by the other commissioners. Commissioner Chang expressed a preference for CARB certified offsets citing that CARB offsets are the only offsets vetted by a state government, and, in her opinion, CARB offsets offer a higher environmental benefit because of their potential use in the AB32 compliance market. City of Palo Alto Page 9 After discussion, the UAC voted unanimously (5-0) to recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution: (1) Establishing the voluntary PaloAltoGreen (PAG) Gas Program, which will provide the opportunity for residential and commercial customers to reduce or eliminate the impact of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with their gas usage, through the purchase of certified environmental offsets; and (2) Approving three new associated gas rate schedules: Residential Green Gas Service (G-1-G), Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service (G-2-G) and Large Commercial Green Gas Service (G-3-G). Chair Cook and Commissioner Waldfogel were absent. Draft minutes from the UAC’s December 4, 2013 meeting are provided as Attachment C. As a result of the UAC discussion, staff modified the proposed program to include CAR-certified offsets but to have them restricted to only the protocols approved by CARB. More detail regarding offsets and updated costs was added to this report relative to the staff report provided to the UAC. Limiting the protocols to those approved by CARB will ensure high quality offset projects and will, in effect, remove offsets that could be used from those projects from the compliance market. Several commissioners expressed an interest in using locally generated urban forestry offsets. If those offsets become available in the future, staff will evaluate their use. As stated above, recent information regarding the cost to market the program resulted in an increase in the proposed PAG Gas rate from the 8₵/therm that was presented to the UAC in December 2013 to 12₵/therm. Resource Impact As the proposed PAG Gas Program is a revenue neutral, voluntary program, there is no net impact on CPAU’s financial resources. Staff anticipates that customers making up 10% of the City’s total gas load will participate in the PAG Gas Program, leading to PAG Gas Program revenues and matching expenditures of about $360,000 annually. Marketing and program administration costs are expected to be covered by existing budgets in the near term, and self- supporting from PAG Gas Program revenues in the longer-term. While the PAG program became revenue neutral within five years, it is expected that this program will become revenue neutral in a much shorter time period because the concept is not new. City of Palo Alto Page 10 Policy Implications This recommendation is consistent with the Council-approved Utilities Strategic Plan, specifically the objective to offer programs to meet the needs of customers and the community. Environmental Review Council’s establishment of a PAG Gas Program does not meet the definition of a project, pursuant to section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, the City will receive environmental offsets from projects that will constitute a project for the purposes of CEQA, or for projects located outside of California, the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other applicable state environmental statute. Offset project developers will be responsible for acquiring necessary environmental reviews and permits as offset projects are developed. Council’s establishment of new gas rates in support of the PAG Gas Program is not subject to CEQA, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Sec. 21080(b)(8) and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Sec. 15273(a)(1) and (3), because the rates adopted by this resolution are necessary to recover PAG Gas Program operating expenses. Attachments: Attachment A: Resolutino Approving Adoption of New Gas Rate Schedules (PDF) Attachment B: Gas Rate Schedules G-1-G, G-2-G, and G-3-G (PDF) Attachment C: Excerpted Final UAC Minutes of December 4, 2013 (PDF) EXCERPTED FINAL MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 4, 2013 UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING ITEM 1: ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission Recommend that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Establishing the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Using Certified Environmental Offsets and Approving Three New Gas Rate Schedules: Residential Green Gas Service (G-1-G), Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service (G- 2-G) and Large Commercial Green Gas Service (G-3-G) Senior Resource Planner Karla Dailey provided a presentation summarizing the written report. She stated that the PaloAltoGreen (PAG) Gas program is a way to allow customers to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with their gas usage since the electric supply portfolio is carbon neutral and the PAG electric program was suspended by Council. Dailey discussed the different attributes of carbon offsets, including the certification protocol, the type of project, and the price. She stated that staff recommended backing the PAG Gas program with carbon offsets certified by the Climate Action Reserve (CAR) for forestry, urban forestry, or livestock protocols with a preference for projects located in California. She said the proposed PAG Gas program would be structured similarly to the successful PAG program with the cost on a per therm basis and an option for commercial customers to participate in the program for less than their full usage. Commissioner Eglash commended the program for its simplicity in design. He asked if staff envisions difficulties in marketing the program as far as communicating how purchasing offsets make a difference. Dailey responded that the protocols chosen were well developed with attributes that are relatively easy to explain. Dailey added that the Communications Manager would help with the messaging about the program. She remarked that offsets are similar to the Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs) used to back the PAG electric program. Commissioner Melton asked how offsets are generated and how offset projects are developed. Dailey replied that the project has to be a real project and that the registry certifies that the project is real and meets its criteria. Commissioner Melton, noting that the draft Urban Forest Management Plan was provided as an information item in the packet, stated that it would be great if an urban forestry project could be done in Palo Alto so people could see the impact locally. Senior Resource Planner Shiva Swaminathan responded that a local project would be possible, but it would be in the longer term as it takes time to define and certify projects. Commissioner Hall asked how stable offset prices are since it would be impractical to change the program rate often. Dailey said that the offsets prices don’t appear to vary wildly and can be purchased in blocks either during or after the program year to ensure that the correct number of offsets was procured. Commissioner Hall asked if the program could start sooner than July 1, 2014. Dailey replied that the changes needed to implement the new rates in the billing system are the reason for establishing the implementation date of July 1, 2014. Marketing and notification to customers will start before that date. Commissioner Hall stated that he likes the idea brought up by Commissioner Melton of using local projects for the offsets and thinks that it would be highly supported by the community. Commissioner Chang commented that the concept of offsets is more difficult to grasp than the concept of RECs was for the PAG program. Commissioner Chang noted that we assume the same participation rate as for the PAG program. She asked if we know the participation rate other utilities have had with their green gas programs. Commissioner Chang noted that staff recommended using CAR-certified offsets but asked about using the CARB offsets since they are in a regulated system and have been vetted by a state agency. She added that CARB offsets would be used as a way to reduce the number of offsets available in the cap-and-trade market. Therefore, since CARB-certified offsets can be used for compliance in the cap-and-trade system, if Palo Alto purchased CARB offsets, it would reduce the number of offsets available to others who have to comply with their obligation under the state-wide GHG emissions cap. Commissioner Change added that using CARB offsets would be more in keeping with being a leader and raising the bar by using the higher standard. Director Fong stated that the CARB market was not as developed as the one for CAR offsets. Vice Chair Foster asked if the program can state that CARB-certified offsets are preferred, but allow CAR certified offsets. Vice Chair Foster asked Commissioner Chang why she preferred CARB offsets to CAR offsets. Commissioner Chang said that CARB offsets were the only ones vetted by a state government. Vice Chair Foster asked if it was possible that the program start with CAR offsets for the first year and possibly move to CARB offsets after a year of experience with the program. Director Fong said that staff intends to return to the UAC and Council after having one year experience and it can review the program and the offset requirements at that time. Vice Chair Foster stated that the incremental cost for the proposed PAG Gas program is less than the cost for the average customer for the PAG electric program. He stated that he would prefer that the program be an opt-out for current PAG electric program participants. Director Fong stated that not all electric customers are also gas customers and vice versa. On the issue of local offsets, Vice Chair Foster is supportive of local programs, but believes that there is more "bang for your buck" for offset projects in certain locations than in others and that restricting to California may not be the best way to go. He also recommended that staff look at projects in Palo Alto's sister cities around the world. Assistant Director Ratchye explained that offsets are traded on a per ton basis. Vice Chair Foster stated that Commissioner Waldfogel has raised the issue of fracking and would want to determine if it was possible to buy non-fracked gas. Dailey says that this is an offset program, not a physical gas program, but, setting that aside, there's no non-fracked gas product available She stated that pretty much every molecule of gas is fracked in some form and that it is not possible to buy a non-fracked product except for biogas. Commissioner Hall said that with respect to having an opt-in or an opt-out program, he'd prefer to make a new decision and opt in to the program. He also commented that the Communications Manager will have her work cut out for her in describing this program. ACTION: Commissioner Melton made a motion to support the staff recommendation. Commissioner Eglash seconded the motion. Vice Chair Foster made a substitute motion to support the staff recommendation, but with an opt-out for current PAG program participants. The motion failed for lack of a second. Commissioner Chang proposed a friendly amendment to request that staff consider CARB- certified offsets in the future. Commissioner Melton did not accept the amendment. He stated that Council can re-consider the registries and protocols in the future when staff returns with a report after the first year of the program after it has a year of experience administering the program. Commissioner Chang stated that staff could use the first year to gain a better understanding of the differences between CAR and CARB certified offsets. Compliance Manager Debbie Lloyd explained that under CARB's cap-and-trade program it is the allowances that are capped, but she is not aware of a cap on the number of offsets that can be made available. Offsets are available (in addition to allowances) to provide flexibility for participants to meet their compliance obligations, and there is a limit on the number of offsets that a participant can use to meet their compliance obligations, but not necessarily a cap on the number of offsets that could be made available. Therefore, it wouldn’t necessarily be true that using CARB offsets would be a way to reduce the number of offsets available in the cap-and- trade market, if supply could just be increased to meet the increased demand. The motion passed unanimously (5-0) with Chair Cook and Commissioner Waldfogel absent. FINANCE COMMITTEE FINAL MINUTES Page 1 of 5 Regular Meeting March 4, 2014 1. Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Establishing the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program Using Certified Environmental Offsets and Approving Three New Gas Rate Schedules: Residential Green Gas Service (G-1-G), Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service (G-2-G), and Large Commercial Green Gas Service (G-3-G). Karla Dailey, Senior Resource Planner reported the previous PaloAltoGreen Program became redundant when the Council approved the Carbon Neutral Plan. The PaloAltoGreen Gas Program was modeled similarly to the previous PaloAltoGreen Program with voluntary participation. For residential customers, 100 percent of greenhouse gas emissions due to use of natural gas was covered. Block purchases were available for commercial customers. Commercial customers were interested in the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program for Environmental Protection Agency Green Leadership and/or Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Certification. Staff concluded that the product that was best suited to the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program contained carbon offsets. The Climate Action Reserve (CAR) was the registry most commonly used for voluntary programs. Staff did not propose California Air Resources Board (CARB) compliance because the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program was voluntary. Carbon offset projects were subject to the many protocols for each registry. Forestry and livestock protocols were approved protocols for CARB-certified offsets. The cost difference between CAR livestock and forestry protocols and CARB-guaranteed compliance was a few dollars. Staff did not believe there was a need to pay the extra cost for the verification process of CARB certification because the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program was a voluntary program. Staff recommended the use of CAR- certified offsets, but only using protocols approved by CARB. Staff modified their recommendation based on discussions at the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC). The UAC expressed concern regarding offsets possibly being removed from the market. Staff proposed not to pay the extra cost for verification, but wanted to buy offsets from projects that could become compliance ready. The cost of offsets totaled approximately 4.8 cents per therm. Staff originally estimated marketing costs to be approximately three FINAL MINUTES Page 2 of 5 Finance Committee Regular Meeting Final Minutes 3/4/2014 cents per therm. After Staff reviewed responses to a Request for Proposal (RFP), they concluded marketing costs were about seven cents. Therefore, the total estimated cost per therm was 12 cents. The cost impact for the average customer was expected to be approximately $2 per month in the summer and $6.50 in the winter. The previous PaloAltoGreen Program premium was approximately $10 per month. Staff recommended the Finance Committee (Committee) recommend to the Council the approval of the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program and associated rate schedules. MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Chair Berman that the Finance Committee recommend to the City Council to adopt a Resolution: 1. Establishing the voluntary PaloAltoGreen Gas Program, which will provide the opportunity for residential and commercial customers to reduce or eliminate the impact of greenhouse gas emissions associated with their gas usage, through the purchase of certified environmental offsets; and 2. Approving three new associated gas rate schedules: Residential Green Gas Service (G-1-G), Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Green Gas Service (G-2-G) and Large Commercial Green Gas Service (G-3-G). Vice Mayor Kniss felt the cost impact was neither dramatic nor burdensome. Council Member Burt inquired about the amount paid per ton of greenhouse gas emissions. Ms. Dailey indicated the amount was approximately $20 per ton. Council Member Burt asked if the cost was approximately the same under the previous PaloAltoGreen Program. Jane Ratchye, Assistant Director of Utilities, explained that the amount paid would have changed as the portfolio changed. At the beginning of the Program, the amount was expected to be higher but Staff did not perform that calculation. Council Member Burt felt that information would be worthwhile to note so that the community knew the benefit they were receiving by participating in the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program. Ms. Dailey said she would include the dollar per ton in the Staff Report. Council Member Burt inquired about the median use amount and noted that it appeared to be approximately 30 therms per month annually. FINAL MINUTES Page 3 of 5 Finance Committee Regular Meeting Final Minutes 3/4/2014 Ms. Dailey noted Staff provided a summer median and a winter median but 30 therms per month was reasonable as a median. Council Member Burt asked if Staff utilized 30 therms per month to determine the cost of approximately $3.60. Ms. Dailey replied yes. Council Member Burt inquired whether Staff calculated the impact of different adoption scenarios on greenhouse gas avoidance. Ms. Dailey understood Council Member Burt was recommending Staff include an overall expected greenhouse gas reduction impact in the Staff Report. Ms. Ratchye reported a large percentage of residents participated in the PaloAltoGreen Electric Program; however, residents were responsible for only a small portion of electric use and a larger percentage of gas use. If the customers who participated in the PaloAltoGreen Electric Program also participated in the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program, then the amount of greenhouse gas reduction was expected to be greater. Staff was willing to include the difference in those terms in the Staff Report. Council Member Burt asked if 30 to 40 percent of the remaining greenhouse gas emissions resulted from natural gas usage after the electric portfolio became carbon neutral. Ms. Dailey wanted clarification on whether Council Member Burt referred to Utilities or the City. Council Member Burt said the City. Ms. Ratchye reported 30 to 40 percent was the approximate amount. Now that the electric portfolio was 100 percent carbon neutral, greenhouse gas emissions resulted primarily from mobile transportation. Council Member Burt inquired whether Gil Friend, Chief Sustainability Officer was involved in developing the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program. Valerie Fong, Utilities Director added that Mr. Friend reviewed the Program. Council Member Burt assumed Mr. Friend would be interested in the impact to the Climate Action Plan and overall greenhouse gas reduction. If the same number of residents participated in the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program, then the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program reduced total greenhouse gas emissions by five percent. FINAL MINUTES Page 4 of 5 Finance Committee Regular Meeting Final Minutes 3/4/2014 Council Member Holman referenced gas offset programs, and inquired about local or regional programs for residents. Ms. Dailey reported Staff included only registries approved by CARB for the initial program because of UAC concerns. Staff did state a preference for California projects, and if approved, the Urban Forestry protocol was able to be implemented locally. Council Member Holman asked if the Urban Forest Master Plan had to be approved first. Ms. Dailey answered no. CARB had to approve Urban Forestry as a protocol. Several UAC Commissioners were interested in the concept of a project close to Palo Alto; however, that was not initially possible. Council Member Holman asked about the number of communities in the bay area that were considering similar programs. She thought communities could influence projects being approved by CARB in order to provide a greater selection of projects. Ms. Dailey was not aware of other communities considering programs because other communities did not have utilities. Pacific Gas and Electric offered a forestry program called Climate Smart, but it was not successful. In that program individuals were able to buy offsets to cover their personal emissions. Council Member Burt requested Staff share information regarding the national prominence of the PaloAltoGreen Program because he did not fully appreciate the level of residential participation in Palo Alto until he heard comments made at a renewable energy conference. Ms. Dailey reported the PaloAltoGreen Program was wildly successful with the highest participation rate in the country for five consecutive years. Council Member Burt suggested Staff emphasize that fact when launching the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program. It was an achievement for the community and it inspired other communities. Ms. Dailey noted Staff retained the established name of PaloAltoGreen in an attempt to leverage the success of the previous program. Council Member Holman believed the success of the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program could have an influence locally and could offset other projects. FINAL MINUTES Page 5 of 5 Finance Committee Regular Meeting Final Minutes 3/4/2014 Chair Berman was optimistic that goodwill from the PaloAltoGreen Program would carry over to the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program. The fairly low cost impact and ease of use encouraged participation Council Member Holman suggested a discussion regarding the possibility of transportation offsets. Council Member Burt stated a resident could virtually achieve carbon neutrality through the use of a hybrid or electric vehicle and the electric and gas Programs. He expected the community to embrace the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program once they understood the Program's role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 Ms. Fong inquired whether the Item would be presented to the Council on the Consent Calendar. Chair Berman responded yes. Council Member Burt suggested Staff discuss with the City Manager whether to place the Item on the Consent Calendar because if the Item was not placed on the Consent Calendar, the community would have an opportunity to learn about and comment on the program. Ms. Fong reported Staff would ensure media communications about the Program were instituted. Vice Mayor Kniss asked if Staff felt previous participants would participate again. Ms. Fong answered yes. Ms. Fong noted Staff would present an Item in a few weeks regarding accumulated revenues from the PaloAltoGreen Electric Program. If Staff was directed to issue refunds, then they would coordinate refunds with the launch of the PaloAltoGreen Gas Program. City of Palo Alto (ID # 4581) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: SUMC Annual Report Title: Approval of Stanford University Medical Center Annual Report and Compliance with the Development Agreement From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Find that the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) Parties (Stanford Hospitals & Clinics, Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital, and Stanford University) has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the Development Agreement for the 2012-2013 reporting period; and 2. Find that the SUMC Parties are not in default with the terms and conditions of the Agreement. Executive Summary The City Council is required to review the Development Agreement between the SUMC Parties and the City of Palo Alto on an annual basis to ascertain compliance with the terms of the agreement. The SUMC Parties have submitted the annual report for the 2012-2013 period that summarizes the current construction activities and the actions taken to fulfill the obligations of the Agreement. Of particular note, the SUMC has achieved a 40.9% alternative transportation mode split. As described in the supplement to the annual report, the SUMC Parties have paid approximately $32.5 million in public benefit fees to the City. The City Council has established a process for the review of projects that would utilize SUMC public benefit funds. Background On June 6, 2011, the City Council approved Comprehensive Plan amendments, zoning changes, a conditional use permit, annexation and design applications for the Stanford University medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project (the “Projects”). The Projects include the construction of a new Stanford Hospital and clinics buildings, an expansion of the City of Palo Alto Page 2 Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital, construction of new School of Medicine buildings, renovation of the existing Hoover Pavilion, construction of a new medical office building and parking garage at Hoover Pavilion, roadway improvements along Welch Road and Durand Way, and SUMC design guidelines. A Development Agreement (the “Agreement”) vesting these approvals was entered into between the SUMC Parties and the City and was effective on June 6, 2011 and continued for thirty (30) years from the effective date. The Agreement requires annual City Council review of the SUMC Parties compliance. This report covers the SUMC Parties activities during 2012-2013, the second year of the Agreement. Discussion As described in Section 12, “Periodic Review of Compliance”, the City Council is to review the Agreement annually to ascertain the SUMC’s Parties compliance with the terms of the Agreement. Section 12 also includes the reporting requirement for the SUMC Parties and the City to demonstrate good faith compliance with the Agreement. The attached 2011-12 Annual Report (Annual Report) dated July 3, 2013 (Attachment A) from SUMC describes the SUMC Parties’ activities related to implementation of the Agreement. Construction Activities Construction activities during this period include: Hoover Pavilion Renovation- Site work and renovation of the exterior and interior features of the building have been completed and in December 2012, Hoover Pavilion re-opened providing modern medical office and clinics to the SUMC community. The renovation project is considered to be complete. Hoover Pavilion Parking Garage- Site work and construction for the new 1,084-stall parking garage was substantially complete as of June 2013. The garage opened for use in late summer 2013. Parking stalls in the garage are intended for use by patients and staff. Hoover Medical Office Building- Construction is underway for the construction of the medical office building, to be located adjacent to Quarry Road and the existing City of Palo Alto electrical sub-station. Welch Road Utilities Project- This project involves the replacement and installation of utilities to support the New Stanford Hospital and the Lucille Packard Children’s Hospital expansion. The project was considered to be complete in 2013. Two-way automobile traffic currently operated on Welch Road. Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital- Site preparation efforts at LPCH have been completed during the reporting period including mass excavation, installation of shoring walls, and utility line relocation. Construction of the hospital expansion is underway. New Stanford Hospital- Site preparation and excavation activities have commenced at the area surrounding the site of the New Stanford Hospital (NSH). Work included protected tree relocation, the completion of the Kaplan lawn driveway, and foundation work for the new City of Palo Alto Page 3 hospital and adjacent parking structure. Significant construction activities are currently underway at the site. No new square footage has been constructed during this reporting period. Approximately 134,000 square feet of floor area has been demolished on the main and children’s hospital sites, as well as the Hoover Pavilion site. Compliance with Development Agreement Obligations In addition to the construction summary and the summary of net new square footage added within the past year, the Annual Report also summarizes the SUMC Parties’ progress in meeting the terms described in Section 5 of the Agreement, “SUMC Parties’ Promises”. This section of the Annual Report describes the SUMC Parties’ obligations with respect to the following items: Health Care Benefits; Fiscal Benefits; Traffic Mitigation and Reduced Vehicle Trips; Pedestrian, Bicycle and Automobile Linkages; Infrastructure, Sustainable Neighborhoods & Communities, Affordable Housing, and Climate Change. The Annual Report summarizes the activities within the reporting year. The obligations are further summarized in Table 1: Development Agreement, Section 5 – SUMC Parties’ Promises (Attachment B). City staff has reviewed the information within the Annual Report and has determined that it is complete and correct. Traffic Mitigation and Reduced Vehicle Trips The SUMC Parties have made substantial progress in meeting the traffic and alternative transportation obligations of the Agreement. Specifically, they have accomplished the following: Purchased annual CalTrain Go Passes for all eligible employees as of January 1, 2012, three years ahead of the September 1, 2015 requirement as stated in the Agreement; Purchased two additional shuttle busses for the Marguerite Shuttle service; City of Palo Alto Page 4 Hired a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) coordinator, three years ahead of the September 1, 2015 requirement as stated in the Agreement, and Achieved a 40.9% alternative transportation mode split during the reporting year for the hospital employees, meaning 40.9% of employees are using alternatives modes to get to work rather than driving alone. The SUMC Parties and City staff will continue to monitor the TDM program throughout the term of the Agreement and will report annually to the Council. Supplement to the Annual Report In addition to the SUMC Parties’ submittal of the Annual Report, City staff is to prepare a supplement to the Annual Report (the “Supplement”), as described in Section 12(d) of the Agreement. The supplement is to include an accounting of the funds received from the SUMC Parties to satisfy the obligation outlined in Section 5 of the Agreement, a description of the account balances, and a summary and description of expenditures from the funds. The Supplement is contained in Attachment C. In summary, the SUMC Parties have contributed $32,533,666 in public benefit funds as of June 30, 2013. Interest income during the reporting period was $634,000. The SUMC Parties will pay an additional $11.7M upon issuance of the first hospital occupancy permit, expected in 2016. During the reporting period, the City has committed funds for the following: A loan of $1,000,000 to Stevenson House for rehabilitation projects (Staff Report #3176, Ord. 5170); Appropriations to the Arts & Innovation District study of $136,000 from the SUMC Intermodal Transit Fund and $150,000 from the SUMC Infrastructure, Sustainable neighborhoods and Communities, and Affordable Housing fund (Staff Report #3064, Ord. 5165). Of the $286,000 total, $280,000 was spent in FY2013 on the contract services for which it was appropriated. The balance remains in the SUMC fund, and $228,000 for Project Safety Net, as included in the FY 2013 Adopted Operating Budget. General Fund sales and use tax revenues in calendar year 2012 resulting from construction- related activities were approximately $57,200. Figures for 2013 will be received in late June 2014. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Future Use of Development Agreement Funds On September 9, 2013, City Council approved a recommendation from the Policy and Services Committee to establish a process for allocating the SUMC funds to future projects. Once the City Council is in receipt of the Infrastructure Committee report, the Council will develop a ranked master list of projects to guide the allocation of the use of the SUMC funds (excluding the Health and Safety Category), and each year thereafter as part of the budget process. The Finance Committee and Council will review the status of SUMC funds and projects on the master list for possible revisions, until such time that the funds are exhausted. In a parallel process, the Policy and Services Committee will review the allocation of restricted funds under the category of Community Health and Safety of the SUMC funds and make recommendations to the Council until such time that the funds are exhausted. The Policy and Services Committee expressed interest in spending the majority of SUMC funds within the next 10 years. This would ensure that the funds would be used in a near-term impactful way rather than reserved for the future. The Committee also considered the relative value of spending money in the near term versus the declining value of money in the future. The Committee agreed that by spending the SUMC funds on projects in the near term the City would get more projects completed. Resource Impact As summarized above, the City has received approximately $33.6M in public benefit payments and interest to the Stanford University Medical Center Fund, and approximately $67,830 in construction sales taxes to the General Fund since the start of the project. Policy Implications This report does not represent any changes to existing City policies. Environmental Review Finding Stanford University’s compliance with the Terms of the Agreement is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act, and no environmental assessment for the annual compliance review is required. An environmental impact report for the entire SUMC project was prepared and certified by the City Council prior to approval of the Development Agreement. Attachments: Attachment A: 2012-2013 SUMC Annual Report (PDF) Attachment B: Table 1- Development Agreement, Section 5 (DOCX) Attachment C: SUMC Annual Report Supplement FY2013 (PDF) PREPARED FOR THE CITY OF PALO ALTO | JULY 3, 2013 2012-13 ANNUAL REPORT ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 1 On June 6, 2011, the Stanford University Medical Center—comprised of Stanford Hospital and Clinics, Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital, and Stanford University—entered into a Development Agreement with the City of Palo Alto, committing to provide a range of community benefits in exchange for vested development rights to develop and use the SUMC Project facilities in accordance with the approvals granted by the City, and a streamlined process for obtaining subsequent project approvals. The SUMC Renewal and Replacement Project (“Renewal Project”)—driven by a growing demand for healthcare services, state-mandated seismic safety requirements, and the need to replace outmoded facilities with modern, technologically advanced spaces—holds the potential to transform the way that healthcare is delivered and research is conducted. Today, two years after the execution of the Development Agreement, SUMC Renewal Project activities are steadily moving forward, and gaining momentum. Several key milestones have been reached in the past year, including the reopening of the restored Hoover Pavilion, and the issuance of foundation permits for both the Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital expansion and the New Stanford Hospital. Meanwhile, the utilities upgrades and surface improvements on Welch and Quarry Roads are nearing completion, and Welch Road is expected to reopen to two-way traffic in Summer 2013. Against this backdrop, SUMC submits its second Annual Report in compliance with Section 12(c) of the Development Agreement, and looks forward to continued collaboration with the City of Palo Alto in advancing the goals of both the Stanford University Medical Center and the broader community. 2 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 The Palo Alto City Council’s unanimous approval of the entitlements for the Stanford University Medical Center Renewal and Replacement Project in July 2011 has paved the way for a historic investment in new and replacement facilities at SUMC. The project approvals—including new zoning for the Project sites, a conditional use permit, architectural review approval, and the execution of a Development Agreement—allows for the construction of approximately 1.3 million net new square feet of hospital facilities, clinics, medical offices, and medical research spaces, and will enable the hospitals to optimize the delivery of healthcare services to patients, and maintain their position as leading providers of world- class healthcare. In order to facilitate this important replacement and expansion work, SUMC entered into a Development Agreement with the City of Palo, which includes a comprehensive package of community benefits and voluntary mitigation measures. In exchange for these benefits, the City has vested for a period of 30 years SUMC’s rights to develop and use the property in accordance with the project approvals, and will streamline the process for obtaining subsequent approvals. The terms of the Development Agreement (Section 12(c)) provide for a periodic review of compliance, and require that SUMC submit an Annual Report to the City of Palo Alto’s Director of Planning and Community Environment each year within 30 days of the anniversary of the agreement effective date (June 6, 2011). The Annual Report is to summarize the progress on the Renewal Project, including a list of net new square footage for which a certificate of occupancy has been received, and a description of the steps that SUMC has taken to comply with the obligations listed in the Development Agreement. With this report, SUMC fulfills these requirements. Within 45 days of receipt of this Annual Report, the City will prepare a Supplement to the Annual Report, to provide an accounting of the City’s expenditures from each of the City Funds and how they were used. ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 3 The Renewal Project continues to steadily progress, with construction activities for both Hospitals now underway. In the section to follow, SUMC provides an overview of central goals for the project elements that presently are under construction or nearing construction, a synopsis of progress to date, as well as a preview of near-term upcoming activities. HOOVER PAVILION SITE One of the first phases of the Renewal Project was the renovation of Hoover Pavilion to accommodate modern medical offices and clinics. Renovation of the 1931 building began in Summer 2011, and included structural improvements, the installation of modern mechanical and plumbing systems, and the restoration of many of the building’s original historic architectural details, including the reconstruction of the decorative finial that sits atop the Pavilion tower. In December 2012, the Hoover Pavilion reopened its doors and now houses community physicians, Stanford Hospital clinics, and the Stanford Health Library. Meanwhile, other construction activities continue apace on the Hoover Pavilion site. Construction of the Hoover Garage has progressed swiftly, with the new structure scheduled for completion in late Summer 2013. The transformation of the Hoover landscape is also well underway; the site will soon include varied landscaped spaces, including a lawn parterre, Redwood grove, and Oak grove. The groves will feature fifteen mature trees which have been transplanted from other locations on the Hoover site, many of which had been boxed and stored offsite during construction. Plans are also under development for the construction of a new medical office and clinic building on the Hoover site, on Quarry Road immediately west of the Hoover Pavilion, and northwest of the parking garage currently under construction. Permit drawings for the new structure are expected to be submitted to the City of Palo Alto in late 2013. 4 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 WELCH ROAD UTILITIES The Welch Road Utilities Project (WRUP) has laid the groundwork for the New Stanford Hospital and the Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital Expansion, and is a vital step in ensuring the underlying functionality of the new medical facilities. Work has involved the replacement of existing underground utility services along Welch and Quarry Roads—including water, gas, electrical, and telecommunications infrastructure— as well as the construction of new utilities to serve the new hospital facilities once they are built. This effort has also included the widening of Welch Road, one of the main arteries into the medical center campus, and the construction of several roadway surface improvements such as sidewalks, crosswalks, planted medians, street lighting, and two new signalized intersections. The WRUP work at Welch and Quarry Roads began in Fall 2011, and is now nearly complete. Underground utilities have been replaced and rerouted, and roadway surface improvements are nearly complete, with fi nal inspections with the City scheduled shortly. New plantings of trees, grasses, and groundcovers in sidewalk planting strips and in medians offer the beginnings of a vibrant corridor that will grow and mature with time. Also included in the WRUP project scope was the re-working of the Blake-Wilbur parking lot—this included construction of a new entrance to the Advanced Medicine Center with utilities below, construction of a new Ambulance Drive at the southern edge of the existing lot, and the installation of new storm and electrical utilities. The parking lot itself was also reconfi gured, and included the planting of eight redwoods and oaks taken from other areas of the SUMC sites, six of which are protected-status trees. This work was completed in Fall 2012, and the parking area reopened to patients and visitors. One of the fi nal elements of the WRUP project is the replacement of the water line beneath Arboretum Road, between Sand Hill and Quarry Roads. This work commenced in Spring 2013, with work proceeding at night so as to minimize disruption to traffi c, and is expected to complete in Summer 2013. To enable completion of WRUP work under existing roadways, signifi cant traffi c changes were implemented. For nearly two years, Welch Road has operated as a one-lane, one-way road going west from Quarry Road to Pasteur Drive. The road will be returned to two-way traffi c in Summer 2013. Meanwhile, North Pasteur Drive remains closed to traffi c, and South Pasteur continues to function as a two-way road to accommodate traffi c in and out of Stanford Hospital. ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 5 LUCILE PACKARD CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL In response to growing community needs for specialized pediatric and obstetric care, Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital is opening an expanded facility. The new hospital, to be located adjacent to the cur- rent Packard Children’s Hospital, will provide patients and doctors with the most modern clinical advance-ments and technology, while also creating a more patient- and family-centered environment of care, with additional single-patient rooms and more spaces for families to be with their child during treatment and recovery. The Packard Children’s expansion will feature a new entrance lobby, public concourse with dining, three floors of nursing units, and new patient rooms. Spaces have been designed with an attention to natural light and views, and the exterior grounds—more than 3.5 acres of outdoor areas and gardens—will pro- vide a park-like setting for patients, families, and visitors. The Packard expansion completed its major site clearing activities in 2011 and 2012, and has continued to reach key milestones in the past year, including the issuance of the foundation permit by the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD) in November 2012. Mass excavation, shoring, and tieback work is currently underway on the expansion site, as well as preparation work for the delivery of a tower crane to the site. 6 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 NEW STANFORD HOSPITAL Stanford Hospital and Clinics is constructing new and replacement hospital facilities that will usher in a new era of advanced patient care. Growth in patient volumes and rapidly changing medical technology have rendered much of the existing midcentury hospital infrastructure inadequate, while new seismic safety requirements have accelerated the need to construct replacement facilities. The New Stanford Hospital will substantially increase capacity, and will also address a rapidly advancing medical landscape. High-tech spaces such as Surgery, Radiology, and Intensive Care will be replaced to accommodate the latest advances in medical technology, while still retaining the flexibility to adapt to future innovations. Facilities will feature new patient rooms, an enlarged Level-1 trauma center and Emergency Department, and new surgical, diagnostic, and treatment rooms. And foremost, the new facility will create a healing environment responsive to the needs of patients, visitors, and staff. Upper-level pavilions will feature light-filled patient rooms, and a mid-level garden floor will offer dining, conference, and educational facilities, as well as social and spiritual support spaces. Preparation work for the New Stanford Hospital has been underway since late 2011, and many significant project-enabling activities are now complete. Site clearing activities began in November 2012 and continued into February 2013, first with the demolition of PS-3, the existing Hospital’s patient and visitor parking structure, followed by the demolition of the medical office buildings at 1101 Welch. Patient and visitor parking has been relocated to the PS-4 underground structure during this time, and a temporary valet parking lot has been constructed near the Hospital entrance. Four protected-status trees have been relocated from the future Hospital site, and are being stored for use in the final Hospital landscape; dozens of additional trees from the project site were boxed and salvaged by Stanford University for future use. And Kaplan Lawn has now been transformed to include a new roadway—this road, framed by the lawn’s existing heritage oaks, will eventually serve as the main entrance to the new hospital. The foundation permit for the New Stanford Hospital was issued by OSHPD in January 2013. For the new Hospital Garage, City of Palo Alto grading and excavation permits were issued in March 2013, followed by building permit issuance in May 2013. Excavation and shoring activities are now underway on both the Hospital and the Garage sites. ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 7 SCHOOL OF MEDICINE The Stanford University School of Medicine will replace its outmoded research buildings with new state-of-the-art facilities designed to support contemporary translational research. The new facilities will accommodate 21st century medical advancements and enable the development of new medical innovations. The new buildings will feature integrated laboratory suites, with easier access between labs and support facilities, enabling transparency, flexibility, and collaboration. The new facilities will be surrounded by landscaped areas and tree-lined walkways. The School of Medicine development is not yet underway. In the interim, part of the site that will ultimately be developed is currently in use as a temporary valet parking area for Hospital patients and visitors. 8 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 NET NEW SQUARE FOOTAGE The following table summarizes the net new square footage for which a certificate of occupancy has been issued. PROJECT COMPONENT GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE NEW STANFORD HOSPITAL 1101 Welch demolished (40,100) Total (40,100) LUCILE PACKARD CHILDREN’S HOSPITAL EXPANSION 701 Welch demolished (56,300) 703 Welch demolished (23,500) Total (79,800) SCHOOL OF MEDICINE None 0 HOOVER PAVILION Misc. shops and storage demolished (13,831) Total (13,831) ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 9 10 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 11 12 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 13 14 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 15 16 ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 Table 1: Development Agreement, Section 5 - SUMC Parties’ Promises 2012-13 ATTACHMENT B 1 SUMC Development Agreement Compliance: 2011-2012 DA Section Description Summary Activity Complies? Health Care Benefits 5(a)(ii) Fund for Healthcare Services Financial assistance for Palo Alto residents Establishment of $3M SUMC fund Yes 5(a)(iii) Fund for Community Health and Safety Programs $4M fund for selected community health programs for Palo Alto residents Payment of $4M on 8/25/11 to establish City fund Yes Fiscal Benefits 5(b)(i), (ii) Payment of Sales and Use Taxes Activities to maximize sales and use taxes paid to the City General Fund sales and use tax revenues in calendar year 2012 resulting from construction- related activities were approximately $57,200. 5(b)(iii) Funding of Operating Deficit $2.4M fund to address long- term deficits Payment of $2.4M on 8/25/11 to establish fund Yes 5(b)(iv) Payment of Utility Users Tax 5% tax on all electricity, gas and water charges on new construction. No new construction completed; tax is not applicable at this time NA 5(b)(v) School Fees Payment of PAUDS fees for net new square footage $342,617 fee paid for LPCH and NSH expansion. Yes Traffic Mitigation and reduced Vehicle Trips 5(c)(ii) Menlo Park Traffic Mitigation $3.7M payment for traffic mitigation, infrastructure, sustainable neighborhoods, affordable housing First of three $1.23M payments made on 8/19/11. Second payment of $1.23M made on 12/5/12. Yes Table 1: Development Agreement, Section 5 - SUMC Parties’ Promises 2012-13 ATTACHMENT B 2 SUMC Development Agreement Compliance: 2011-2012 DA Section Description Summary Activity Complies? 5(c)(iii) East Palo Alto Voluntary Mitigation $200K for Roadway and single improvements on University Ave. $200K payment made on 8/19/12. Yes 5(c)(iv) Contributions to AC Transit U-line capital improvements, low load factor ratios, parking spaces at Ardenwood Park & Ride No activity. Payments due at hospital occupancy NA 5(c)(v) Opticom Payments $11,200 payment for Opticom traffic control system at 7 intersections No activity. Payments due at hospital occupancy NA 5(c)(vi) CalTrain Go Passes SUMC purchase of passes for all hospital employees working >20hrs/week Go Passes have been purchased per DA Yes 5(c)(vii) Marguerite Shuttle Service Purchase of additional shuttles to meet demand Two additional shuttles have been purchased to meet current demand Yes 5(c)(viii) SUMC Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Coordinator SUMC hires coordinator to promote alternative transportation options TDM Coordinator has been hired. Yes 5(c)(ix) Monitoring of TDM Programs Yearly report regarding alternative transit mode use Report submitted. 40.9% of SUMC employees using alt modes. Yes Linkages 5(d)(i) Intermodal Transit Fund $2.25M payment to improve pedestrian linkages to PA Payment of $2.25M on 8/25/11 to establish City fund Yes Table 1: Development Agreement, Section 5 - SUMC Parties’ Promises 2012-13 ATTACHMENT B 3 SUMC Development Agreement Compliance: 2011-2012 DA Section Description Summary Activity Complies? Intermodal Transit Center 5(d)(ii) Quarry Road Fund $400K payment to improve pedestrian linkages along Quarry Road Payment of $400K on 8/25/11 to establish City fund Yes 5(d)(iii) Stanford Barn Connection SUMC budgets up to $700K for pedestrian connections in the vicinity of barn No activity. Improvements must be made prior to first hospital occupancy NA Infrastructure, Sustainable Neighborhoods and Communities, and Affordable Housing 5(e) Infrastructure, Sustainable Neighborhoods and Communities, and Affordable Housing Fund $23.2M payment for these uses First of three $7.3M payments made on 8/19/11. Second payment of $7.3M made on 12/5/12 Yes Climate Change 5(f) Climate Change Fund $12M payment for climate change-related projects and programs First of three $4M payments made on 8/19/11. Second payment of $4M made on 12/5/12 Yes 2012-13 Annual Report Supplement Prepared by the City of Palo Alto April 7, 2014 Background and Purpose On June 6, 2011, the City Council approved Comprehensive Plan amendments, zoning changes, a conditional use permit, annexation and design applications for the Stanford University Medical Center Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project (the “Projects”). The Projects include the construction of a new Stanford Hospital and clinics buildings, an expansion of the Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital, construction of new School of Medicine buildings, renovation of the existing Hoover Pavilion, construction of a new medical office building and parking garage at Hoover Pavilion, roadway improvements along Welch Road and Durand Way, and SUMC design guidelines. A Development Agreement (the “Agreement”) vesting these approvals was entered into between the SUMC Parties and the City and was effective on June 6, 2011 and continues for thirty (30) years from the effective date. The Agreement requires an annual report, prepared by SUMC that outlines the activities of the preceding year and the efforts to fulfill the obligations of the Agreement. Per the requirements of sections 12(a) and 12(c) of the Agreement, The City of Palo Alto is to prepare a supplement to the annual report that contains an accounting of the funds described in the Section 5 of the Agreement (“SUMC Parties’ Promises”) including the fund balances and expenditures and the purposes for which the expenditures were used. This annual report supplement covers the period during the second year of the Agreement: June 6, 2012 through June 6, 2013. Accounting for the funds outlined in the attachment extends through the end of the City’s Fiscal Year 2013, June 30, 2013. Public Benefit Fund Accounting Attachment A to this report contains a spreadsheet of the funds received and the use of those funds pursuant to the Agreement as of June 30, 2013. In summary, SUMC made a payment of $11,733,333 on December 5, 2012, to the following funds: • Fund for Infrastructure, Sustainable Neighborhoods and Communities and Affordable Housing (Section 5(e)), and • Fund for Sustainable Programs Benefit (Section 5(f)(i)) The specific funding amounts as shown on the spreadsheet are consistent with Section 5 of the Agreement. These funds have been assigned a unique cost center number for accounting purposes. The spreadsheet also contains the investment earnings and the earnings allocation to the various cost centers. Public Benefit Fund Expenditures Expenditures during FY 13 through June 30, 2013, as shown on the spreadsheet, were made from the following three funds: Fund for Pedestrian and Bicycle Connections from Intermodal Transit Center to El Camino Real/Quarry Road Intersection: $280,255.19 was utilized from this fund for staff review and analysis the project known as 27 University Avenue. This project, proposed by John Arrillaga on behalf of Stanford University (the property owner), involves the construction of office buildings, a performing arts center, public transportation facilities, underground parking, and construction of various site improvements and amenities. This project is located in the area between the Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center PAITC) and the El Camino Real/Quarry Road intersection, the area identified for improvements to enhance the connections between the PAITC, the Stanford Shopping Center and the SUMC facilities. The 27 University Avenue project would include the enhancement of the connections specific identified as the purpose of this fund. The use of the funds for the review and analysis of the 27 University project is directly related to the intent of the fund. This project has been put on hold so that the City can complete a Downtown Development Cap analysis, which is expected in late 2014. Fund for Community Health and Safety, Project Safety Net: $161,544.67 was utilized for the Project Safety Net program, which is specifically identified in the Agreement as a community health program that would be appropriate program for the use of this fund. Funds spent during the reporting period were allocated to salaries/benefits for Project Safety Net staff and other expenses relating to the operation of the program. Fund for Infrastructure, Sustainable Neighborhoods and Communities, and Affordable Housing: A loan of $1,000,000 to Stevenson House for rehabilitation-related projects. No other expenditures were made during the reporting period from the other funds as part of the Agreement. City of Palo Alto 4/15/2014 Stanford Medical Center Development Agreement (Fund 260) FY 2013 Expansion Cost Intermodal Transit Quarry Road Infrastructure &Climate Change Community Total FY 2013 FY 2013 Mitigation Improvements Afford Housing & Sustainability Health & Safety Actuals Committed cost centers 26000000 60260010 60260020 60260030 60260040 80260010 Beginning Balance 07/01/12 2,574,813.70 2,133,389.54 426,117.29 8,238,267.18 4,261,172.86 4,231,858.37 21,865,618.93 Revenues: Revenues From Stanford (1)- - - 7,733,333.00 4,000,000.00 - 11,733,333.00 Investment Earnings (86,015.81) (86,015.81) - Allocate to categories 86,015.81 86,015.81 Allocated Investment Earnings (7,045.05) (5,480.85) (1,165.92) (38,583.33) (22,603.72) (11,136.94) (86,015.81) - Total Revenues (7,045.05) (5,480.85) (1,165.92) 7,694,749.67 3,977,396.28 (11,136.94) 11,647,317.19 - Expenditures: Temp Salaries/Benefits 94,319.21 94,319.21 118,000.00 Contract Services for 27 University 130,255.19 150,000.00 280,255.19 374,504.30 Contract Services 61,683.57 61,683.57 95,000.00 Other expenses 5,541.89 5,541.89 15,000.00 Transfer to HIL-Residential 1,720,220.00 1,720,220.00 3,600,000.00 Transfer to HIL-Commercial - - 720,220.00 Total Expenditures - 130,255.19 - 1,870,220.00 - 161,544.67 2,162,019.86 4,922,724.30 FY 2013 Revenues less Exp (7,045.05) (135,736.04) (1,165.92) 5,824,529.67 3,977,396.28 (172,681.61) 9,485,297.33 (4,922,724.30) Net total 06/30/13 2,567,768.65 1,997,653.49 424,951.37 14,062,796.84 8,238,569.15 4,059,176.75 31,350,916.26 Less: Unrealized Gain/Loss 13,522.26 11,204.01 2,237.86 43,265.25 22,378.58 22,224.63 114,832.59 Net total available 06/30/13 2,554,246.40 1,986,449.48 422,713.51 14,019,531.59 8,216,190.56 4,036,952.13 31,236,083.67 Future Revenues from Stanford: Estimated January 2018-1st hospital 7,733,333.00 4,000,000.00 occupancy permit (1) A total of $17,127,228 was received on 12/05/12. An additional $5,393,895 in development impact fees is not included here. S:\ASD\ACCT\General Fund Accounting\SUMC Dev Agreement\SUMC Dev Fund (260).xlsx City of Palo Alto (ID # 4658) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Resolution Vacating Public Service Easements at 888 Boyce Avenue Title: Adoption of a Resolution Summarily Vacating Public Easements Which have been Relocated at 888 Boyce Avenue From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve the attached Resolution Summarily Vacating Public Utilities Easements (PUE) at 888 Boyce Avenue, Palo Alto, CA. DISCUSSION The owners of the property at 888 Boyce Avenue have requested that the City vacate PUE which is no longer necessary due to the relocation of utilities. The utilities have been relocated to adjoining properties within active easements. The owners have paid $17,000.00 for the relocation of these utilities to the neighboring property. Therefore, this PUE is no longer necessary for any future public purpose. Staff has notified AT&T (formerly SBC Communications), the City Utilities, Public Works and Planning Departments of the proposal to vacate the PUE and all concur with the vacation. Therefore, the PUE is to be vacated in accordance with Section 8333 of the California Streets and Highways Code. RESOURCE IMPACT The easement vacation processing fee of $1,811.00, as set forth in the Municipal Fee Schedule, has been paid by the owner. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendation does not represent any change to City policies. The Planning Department has determined that the vacation of this easement is in conformity with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. City of Palo Alto Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed summary vacation of the public utilities easements are categorically exempt from the review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15305 as a minor alteration in land use limitations. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Easement Vacation Resolution Attachments: Attachment A - 888 Boyce Ave Summary Vacation Reso (PDF) Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A City of Palo Alto (ID # 4624) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: California Avenue Concept Plan Title: Council Review and Direction on the P&TC Recommended Draft California Avenue Area Concept Plan and Authorization to Submit an Application for the Valley Transportation Agency Priority Development Area Planning Grant Program for the Preparation of a Master Plan for the Fry’s property, as Identified in the Concept Plan. From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council review and comment on the draft California Avenue Concept Plan recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission and authorize staff to submit an application for a Priority Development Area Grant to the Valley Transportation Authority for the preparation of a master plan of the Fry’s property, as identified in the draft Concept Plan. Upon receipt of the Council’s comments, the draft Concept Plan will be subject to further public input and environmental review as part of the Comprehensive Plan update program and schedule adopted by the Council on March 17, 2014. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of the California Avenue Concept Plan (Cal. Ave. Concept Plan) is to identify appropriate development intensities, the potential for additional housing, and plan for retention and enhancement of retail/service opportunities and improved pedestrian and bicycle connections in the California Avenue area. The Cal. Ave. Concept Plan lays out a unifying vision to guide future development and redevelopment, while preserving and enhancing the quality of life. Specific focus was given to the preferred uses of the Fry’s site and the character of the California Avenue Business District. The Cal. Ave. Concept Plan (Attachment A, previously distributed to Council and available online at: http://goo.gl/yM6q4s) is the outcome of a process with significant public outreach that City of Palo Alto Page 2 began in 2008. There were four community workshops, multiple meetings with stakeholder groups, two City Council Study Sessions, and five Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) hearings. The PTC and staff have recommended approval of the Cal. Ave. Concept Plan for inclusion into the overall Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The list of changes recommended by the PTC is summarized in Attachment B. Following this City Council hearing, staff will refine the Concept Plan further based on input received as part of the larger outreach effort on the Comprehensive Plan. Both the Cal Ave. and East Meadow Circle Concept Plans will return to the City Council with the Comprehensive Plan for a final decision by the Council following preparation of a program-level Environmental Impact Report (EIR). BACKGROUND State law requires local jurisdictions to adopt General Plans to guide land use, development, and public investments. General Plans must contain certain required chapters, or “elements,” and often contain optional elements and geographically-specific area plans. Palo Alto’s General Plan is called the 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan (“Comp Plan”), and is in the process of being updated, as discussed at the Council’s meeting of March 17, 2014 [Council Staff Report ID# 4554] The California Avenue Area Concept Plan (Cal. Ave Concept Plan) is one of two studies that were initiated by the City Council in 2006 as part of the overall Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) amendment project. At that time, Council’s direction for the Comp Plan was to study and prepare concept area plans for two specific areas: the East Meadow Circle and the California Avenue/Fry’s areas. Those concept area plans would help determine if those areas needed land use or policy changes. The two areas have experienced some change over the past several years and haven been further studied to determine the appropriate future land uses. The Concept Plans have addressed land use and circulation issues and will provide policy guidance for each area. Both the PTC and City Council have reviewed the East Meadow Circle Concept Plan and in early 2012 the City Council approved its inclusion into the Comp Plan, meaning that it could be evaluated as part of the updated plan moving forward, and included in the related program-level EIR. The Cal. Ave Concept Plan was recommended for incorporation into the Comprehensive Plan by the PTC on February 12, 2014 and staff is now seeking the Council’s comments such that it too can be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan update process and evaluated in the EIR. Neither plan can be formally approved until the necessary environmental review can be completed (now scheduled for the end of 2015). Discretionary development applications City of Palo Alto Page 3 submitted in the interim must be reviewed based on the site’s existing zoning and Comprehensive Plan application, although the pending Concept Plan can inform the City’s deliberations. The 115-acre California Avenue Area includes the California Avenue business district south to the site containing the existing Fry’s Electronics store. This area was identified for a concept plan study primarily because the area is within the Transit-Oriented Residential (TOR) designation in the current Comprehensive Plan and is within the Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Development (PTOD) zoning district. The Transit-Oriented Residential land use designation allows high density residential development in the California Avenue commercial center within 2,000 feet of the City’s California Avenue multi-modal transit station. The goal of that zoning district is to generate residential densities that would support substantial use of public transportation. The PTOD zoning district is intended to allow higher density residential uses on commercial, industrial, and multi-family parcels within a walkable distance of the California Avenue Caltrain station. Although the 15-acre Fry’s site is on the periphery, outside of the boundary of the PTOD district, the site was included within the plan area to address long range future uses on the property. The Draft Cal. Avenue Area Concept Plan specifies land uses and development intensities, including the potential for additional housing, the desire to retain and enhance retail/service opportunities, and the desire for improved pedestrian and bicycle connections. Specific focus was given to preferred uses of the Fry’s site and the character of the California Avenue business district. The Concept Plan identifies a vision for this area and provides a framework to help guide future development over the course of the Comprehensive Plan horizon period. The Draft Concept Plan was created following a significant public outreach process that began in 2009 and included four community workshops and five PTC hearings. Staff also met with various stakeholder groups and property owners. DISCUSSION Selection of Subareas The Concept Plan focuses on three specific sub-areas: 1) California Avenue, 2) Park Boulevard, and 3) Fry’s Site. Those subareas were seen as the areas that needed change or more guidance and were chosen based on community feedback as areas of greatest concern and potential impacts. Each subarea was chosen because of geography, unique characteristics and development potential. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Organization of Concept Plan The draft Concept Plan uses a format consistent with other elements of the Comprehensive Plan and contains four sections, including an introduction, the purpose for the study, the framework, land use designations and the new goals, policies and programs. Each of these sections is described below: 1. Introduction The introduction describes the study area and provides the context. It discusses that this area has been the subject of many significant developments and planning work, including the PTOD zoning designation, the El Camino Real Design Guidelines, designation as a Priority Development Area, and the Grand Boulevard Initiative. With that backdrop, the purpose of the document is identified: The purpose of this Concept plan is to lay out a unifying vision that weaves together the City’s recent planning initiatives in order to guide future development and redevelopment in the Concept Plan Area, while preserving and enhancing the quality of life in residential neighborhoods in and adjacent to the Concept Plan area…It is intended as a tool to help the public and decision makers frame the context for future planning in this sector of the city. 2. Future Planning Framework and 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations These two sections describe the boundaries of the study area and introduce the three sub- areas. The text explains that the subareas have been identified as the areas with opportunities and challenges, while areas outside the boundary are intended to be retained as-is. The document presents an area wide framework as well as subarea specific opportunities and challenges for California Avenue, Park Boulevard and the Fry’s Site. The land use designation section describes the various land use designations that exist in the area. The section also states that the Concept Plan proposes to maintain all of the current Comprehensive Land Use designations, with the exception of one area, the Fry’s site. It also introduces the Technology Corridor Overlay. The purpose of the overlay is to encourage small-scale, technology-related businesses that are compatible with the area. Table CACP-1 shows numerically that the changes are minor. 4. Goal, Policies, and Programs City of Palo Alto Page 5 This section provides the most critical piece of this study. The larger Goals, associated policies and supporting programs have been developed for the concept plan area in general and specifically for each subarea. They have been carefully structured for consistency with concurrent work on the Comp Plan Amendment. The purpose is to identify a clear vision for each subarea, supported by goals, policies and programs. Area-wide themes center on the public’s strong desire for neighborhood preservation and quality of life, especially given the backdrop of the development identified in Table CACP-2. The study acknowledges the importance of considering cumulative impacts, such as parking, traffic, and roadway safety, and appropriate mitigation measures that will be critical to support new development while not negatively impacting the surrounding neighborhoods and decreasing the quality of life. (The City will fully analyze these and other concerns through the CEQA review process for the Comprehensive Plan and for site specific projects and studies.) The Area Plan also discusses the various studies being undertaken to address traffic and parking concerns, such as citywide transportation demand management measures, and proposes one goal for the area wide section: “Provide a framework for managing change in identified subareas while preserving the existing character of surrounding residential neighborhoods and shopping districts.” Nine policies and five supporting programs are proposed. The policies stress the importance of preserving the existing single-family residential character of the Olive/Pepper enclave. An important policy is Policy CACP-1.5, which states “Prioritize roadway safety for all users.” This policy along with the remaining policies that require circulation and safety improvements for all modes of transport highlight an important component that must be addressed as this area is redeveloped, safety. This issue was one that was brought up at multiple community outreach meetings especially as related to Park Boulevard. The study area in general is also recognized as an appropriate location for a public safety building without tying it to a specific property. Subarea I - California Avenue The California Avenue subarea is identified as an important commercial area that caters to both residents and commuters. The California Avenue subarea includes the business district and surrounding streets, extending between Cambridge Avenue and California Avenue and to the west of Park Boulevard. This subarea includes a portion of El Camino Real and the Caltrain station. The vision for this area, as expressed by the public, is that it should be a local and neighborhood-oriented area. There is a strong desire to maintain its current character as a low intensity retail area with locally owned small businesses. It is important to strengthen and enhance its retail role and its economic and social vitality. One of the key themes brought up during the public meeting and hearings was the desire for greater vibrancy. Also important is parking and careful development standards to keep the subarea comfortable for residents and visitors. The study proposes one goal for this subarea: City of Palo Alto Page 6 “Support the California Avenue subarea as an attractive, transit-rich neighborhood shopping district.” Thirteen new policies and seven programs have been developed to support Goal CACP-2. The policies recognize the importance of maintaining the existing neighborhood-oriented commercial character. The policies encourage mixed use development, with ground floor retail to provide active uses and either office or residential above that take advantage of the proximity to transit. The policies also encourage smaller residential units at the higher end of the allowed density range to promote social and economic vitality. A hotel and associated hospitality uses are also encouraged on El Camino Real. The policies recommend working with property owners and businesses to encourage either the use of transit or provision of shuttles to reduce the amount of cars driving to the area. The study recognizes that higher intensity development, including housing, would be appropriate in this area. However, redevelopment must be carefully planned to maintain compatibility with the character of the area and to avoid any negative impacts, such as traffic or parking. Program CACP-2.71 states that the City should meet with merchants and property owners to encourage the implementation of the PTOD zoning designation for the construction of more transit and pedestrian supporting residences. Program CACP-2.2.1 states that a design competition should be held to generate innovative concepts for the use of City-owned parking lots and structures. Ideas for improving parking, while proposing needed development, such as smaller residential units, would be sought. Smaller residential units would provide housing opportunities for seniors and/or employees in the study area or the adjacent Stanford Research Park, which has been identified as needs in this City. Another important policy is to encourage the creation of better connectivity to California Avenue, especially the County Courthouse. Subarea II- Park Boulevard The Park Boulevard subarea includes the properties located south of California Avenue and between Park Boulevard and Alma Street. It also includes the 395 Page Mill Road site, the subject of the withdrawn Planned Community (PC) project request, as well as the 195 Page Mill Road site that is currently under construction for a mixed residential and office building. Park Boulevard is recognized as a highly traveled bicycle and commute corridor. It is designated as a bicycle corridor on the City’s Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. Accordingly, bicycle and pedestrian safety have been raised as critical issues for the public. The area already has a high level of success as the home of many technology firms, both large and small. Its proximity to the California Avenue commercial area enhances its attraction to a young workforce. This subarea has two goals, which clearly identify the two most important issues. Goal CACP-3 promotes Park Boulevard as an important hub of innovation and entrepreneurship for small new companies, and Goal CACP-4 calls for Park Boulevard to provides safe, easy and comfortable access for cyclists and pedestrians. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Four policies are proposed to support this goal. Policy CACP-3.1 and the associated Programs CACP-3.1.1 and 3.1.2 encourage strengthening the Park Boulevard area’s ability to attract rising technology companies with the application of a Technology Corridor overlay. Per Program CACP-3.1.1, the City would work with developers and property owners to develop incentives and shape the City’s zoning code as necessary to attract smaller technology oriented customers. While the policies encourage new development, they still require that maximum development can only occur if adequate parking and the buildings and site plans are well designed. Policy CACP-3.2 also reflects the preference for smaller residential units. Policy CACP-3.4 also acknowledges that the area is impacted by toxic contamination, which will require coordination with local, state and federal agencies for remediation. Goal CACP-4 highlights the importance of safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. The four policies and three supporting programs, prioritizes roadway safety and cooperation with other agencies to create safer and more direct routes for everyone. The policies reinforce Park Boulevard’s importance in the bicycling and pedestrian network and require implementation of measures to improve conditions. Improvements can include wider sidewalks or new more direct routes to destinations, including transit stations. Subarea III - Fry’s Area This subarea includes the commercial uses to the west and south of the Fry’s Electronics Store as well as some of the low density residential properties to the north. This is the only area proposed for a change. The proposal would be to change the land use designation of the Fry’s Electronics property from Multifamily Residential to Mixed Use. The intent is to provide a flexible designation that would accommodate retail use if desired and other compatible uses such as housing or office. Fry’s Electronics currently leases its site, and the City has no clear understanding about how long the company will stay at this location, making It one of the few large properties left in the City that provides an important opportunity for redevelopment. This subarea has one goal: “Over the long-term, foster the transformation of the Fry’s site subarea into a walkable, human-scale mixed use neighborhood that includes ample amenities.” The first policy implementing this goal addresses the most significant tenant in the area, Fry’s Electronics. If Fry’s leaves, the policy encourages redevelopment with mixed uses that are compatible with surrounding properties. Program CACP-5.2.1 recognizes the site’s importance to the City’s housing requirement. The residential component of a mixed use must be a minimum of 20 of the total square footage. The policy also encourages smaller dwelling units in a variety of formats. The area’s relationship with the rest of the City is highlighted in Policy CACP-5.3, which requires a context sensitive approach, especially in regards to adjacent single family residential neighborhoods. The associated programs state that a significant public outreach and a site specific master plan should be implemented to guide a context sensitive City of Palo Alto Page 8 redevelopment and create better connectivity through the site. The remaining policies stress the importance of improving vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian connection. Public Outreach Significant public outreach has occurred during development of the draft California Avenue Area Concept Plan. Beginning in 2008, staff met with area residents, homeowners and business representatives to elicit feedback. Each of these stakeholder groups had a variety of concerns, including the retention of the existing design character of California Avenue, automobile parking, potential impacts on infrastructure, bicycle/pedestrian safety, increasing neighborhood serving retail and maintaining the small town feel of the business district. Four community workshops were held between February 2009 and November 2012. All meetings were well-attended with between 35-50 people participating. The goal of the first workshop (February 2009) was to identify issues and opportunities. The intent of the second workshop (June 2009) was to evaluate whether changes were needed and to develop alternatives accordingly. Based on community feedback, focus was placed on three subareas: California Avenue, Park Boulevard and the Fry’s site. The third workshop (February 2010) was held to request feedback on the proposed alternatives. The fourth workshop was held on November 8, 2012 to provide the public with the changes made to staff’s recommendations based on community input and PTC direction. Staff has also been in regular contact with interested parties, as well as area property owners and tenants throughout the process. The top issues and recommendations raised by the public are identified below, although they are not intended to represent a consensus of those present: Retain the unique neighborhood serving, small town feel of California Avenue; Provide support to retain and enhance retail uses on California Avenue; Allow mixed use on California Avenue; Improve pedestrian/bicycle connectivity and safety, especially on Park Boulevard; Place transit oriented development along Park Boulevard or closer to the transit station; Allow mixed use and residential on Park Blvd; Improve traffic/circulation safety in the Park Boulevard area Request for special consideration to ensure good mix of uses; Support for Tech Corridor, especially for smaller office spaces; Encourage retention of Fry’s Electronics; City of Palo Alto Page 9 Support for Mixed Use designation for greater flexibility on Fry’s site; Address impacts on schools, traffic, parking, and infrastructure; and Identify more areas for open space, but not necessarily new parks. The California Avenue area has also been the subject of various development proposals. Some of the more significant proposals include applications for 395 Page Mill Road/3045 Park Boulevard (later withdrawn), 260 California Avenue and 3159 El Camino Real. The 260 California Avenue was recently approved and construction has begun for a new three story office/retail building. 3159 El Camino Real is also an approved application to construct a four story commercial/residential mixed use project on the same property as the Equinox fitness facility. A more detailed list of recent and pending developments located within the Cal Ave. area is provided in the attached draft policy document. A website has been established to provide information and updates on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, as well as the Concept Plans. The document can be found at the following location: http://www.paloaltocompplan2020.org/content/california-avenue-area-concept- plan. The website includes the Draft Concept Plan, the workbook, presentations and staff reports that have been prepared for this project. City Council Study Sessions The East Meadow Circle/Fabian Way and the California Avenue Area Concept Plans were the subject of a City Council study session initiated on October 4th 2010 and continued to October18th to give the Council sufficient opportunity to provide comments on the various alternatives. The intent of the study session was to provide a status report on completion of the area studies and to receive Council questions from the Council and feedback regarding the two concept plans. Comments from Council included the following: Ensure viability of retail uses. Accommodate mixed use and startups. Prefer dealerships, incubators, etc. along Park Blvd. over residential development. Flexibility is important, especially with retention of Fry’s. Important to take advantage of area’s proximity to transit. Improve pedestrian and bicycle circulation and safety, especially on Park Boulevard and California Avenue. Protect the single family neighborhoods, such as along Pepper and Olive. City of Palo Alto Page 10 Planning and Transportation Commission Hearings Five public hearings were held before the PTC on the Concept Plan. The first two hearings held on October 27, 2010 and May 8, 2013 to provide the PTC an opportunity to provide general feedback on comments received from the public and direction to staff on the development of the plan. The third hearing held on November 20, 2013 gave the PTC the first opportunity to review of the draft California Avenue Concept Plan document. The Planning and Transportation Commissioners generally supported the draft Concept Plan, but also provided detailed feedback to staff and the consultant. The PTC requested that the Concept Plan provide clear direction to make the document a useful tool for the City and provide guidance for decisions on pending applications. The hearing was continued to December 11, 2013 to allow individuals who attended a developer sponsored community meeting on the 395 Page Mill Road/3045 Park Boulevard project held the same time. The 395 Page Mill Road project has subsequently been withdrawn. The December 11th PTC hearing allowed for a second review of the draft Cal. Ave. Concept Plan document as well as an opportunity for additional public feedback. The PTC generally supported the draft Concept Plan and provided specific amendments for the document and its goals, policies and programs. The PTC agreed that the Concept Plan is a critical component of the Comp Plan amendment because of the importance of the area for residents, business and transit. Staff was directed to work with the Comp Plan PTC subcommittee to refine the changes. The PTC identified six amendments. The amendments, as detailed in Attachment B, included requiring that housing comprise a minimum of 20% of the total square footage on the Fry’s site, identify the concept plan area in general as appropriate location for a public safety building, incorporating policy to encourage smaller residential units, and adding language to encourage greater intensity for commercial, retail or multi-family uses. Following a PTC Subcommittee meeting on January 29th, staff returned the draft Cal. Ave. Concept Plan for a final recommendation to the PTC on February 12, 2014. The February PTC staff report and excerpt minutes are provided as Attachment E and F. The PTC concurred that the revised draft addressed all of the changes they requested on December 11. The PTC voted 5-0-1 (Martinez absent) to recommend that the City Council approve the Concept Plan and directed staff to include in the narrative that a proposal to study the appropriate mix of retail on California Avenue is being considered, as reflected in the draft Business Element. A detailed summary of all changes made to the document per PTC direction can be found in Attachment B. PTC Walking Tour Two walking tours of the Concept Plan area were held for the PTC in October 2010 and July 2013. The walking tours, each comprised of staff and two to three PTC members, provided an overall context for better understanding of the issues specific to the area. The tour also allowed additional opportunities for the individual Commissioners to see the changes that have City of Palo Alto Page 11 been occurring, development trends in the area and to see the area from a pedestrian perspective. Fry’s Master Plan and VTA PDA Grant The PTC and City Council have both expressed concern regarding the future of the Fry’s site. This property remains one of the few sizeable pieces of land in the City that could accommodate significant redevelopment. As a long-time business with ties to the technology industry, there has been a great deal of interest expressed in retaining Fry’s Electronics. Staff has reached out to Fry’s throughout the planning process, but they have not communicated their intention regarding this property or lease. In order to address the concern regarding this site’s future, the Concept Plan includes Program CACP-5.2.1, which states: “Require community outreach and preparation of a site-specific master plan for the Fry’s site, in the event the property owner elects to redevelop or add additional development to the site. The site-specific master plan should focus on fostering mixed-use; improving the relationship of the site with adjacent neighborhoods; enhancing connectivity and circulation for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers; and providing context-sensitive, pedestrian-scaled development consistent with its surroundings.” The purpose of a site-specific master plan would be to develop a cohesive program for development that would be more specific than what is typically included in Comprehensive Plan (or General Plan) documents. While a Comprehensive Plan provides a high level set of policies to guide future development, a site-specific master plan would include development regulations and design standards akin to zoning (or a “specific plan”) for the site. Developing such a plan will require additional public input and collaboration with the property owner and tenant(s), as well as significant staff time and consultant support. City of Palo Alto Page 12 The Valley Transportation Agency (VTA) is the Congestion Management Agency for Santa Clara County. VTA offers a Priority Development Area (PDA) Planning Grant program with the goal of enabling transit-oriented housing and employment growth within the county. A summary of the grant program is provided as Attachment C. The source of the funding is the Federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) Planning Funds. The PDA Planning Program is an initiative to support comprehensive planning in PDA for transit-oriented development. The grant is available for (1) preliminary planning, (2) policy planning, and (3) advanced planning for projects located within a PDA, either planned or potential. There is a funding cap of $1,000,000 per project application, with a minimum request of $100,000, and a minimum local match of 11.47%. Staff anticipates that a master plan would cost between $200,000 to $300,000, depending on the length and complexity of the process. If so, the City must provide between $23,000 to $35,000 as matching funds, although the City can request funding from the property owner for this purpose. There are two grant types available. The first category is ≥$500,000 if the project sponsor obtains authorization through Caltrans Local Assistance. The second category is for <$500,000 where the City would execute a project agreement with VTA, which would be applicable to this project. The application due date is April 28, 2014. Because the site is located within Palo Alto’s one PDA (California Avenue), would provide both housing and employment opportunities, and is proximate to transit, staff feels that the grant would be a valuable resource to help achieve the goals of Cal. Ave. Concept Plan. Staff requests that the City Council authorize the submittal of the grant application to help further Program CACP-5.2.1. If the Council authorizes submittal of the grant application and the City is successful in securing funding, the City would need to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding for the project with VTA. VTA would select and pay for a project consultant, who would work at the City’s direction on a scope of work developed by the City. The Master Plan would be required to be completed no later than February 1, 2016, so it would have to be developed in parallel with the City’s Comprehensive Plan update. NEXT STEPS Following Council review and input, the draft Cal. Avenue Area Plan will be included in the overall Comprehensive Plan Amendment outreach process, and will be evaluated in a program- level EIR to assess potential impacts, including cumulative impacts as development in the plan area occurs. City of Palo Alto Page 13 If the Council authorizes submittal of the VTA grant request and staff is successful in obtaining funds, the next steps would be to refine the general schedule and scope of work for the master planning process called for in the grant application, and these would be provided to the Council for review prior to finalization. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The draft California Avenue Area Concept Plan is generally consistent with the existing goals and policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan, but proposes to change the land use map for the technology overlay and the Fry’s site, and to add a suite of new goals and policies aimed at shaping the future of this area of the City. Policy implications that will require careful consideration as the Concept Plan (and the Comp Plan) moves forward include, but are not limited to: (a) the desired mix and intensity of residential and non-residential uses; (b) the tension between policies supporting a vibrant mix of uses including high density residential uses, and those supporting preservation of the low scale character of California Avenue itself; and (c) ways to enhance the pedestrian environment, ensure safety for all modes of travel, and address traffic and parking concerns. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The draft Concept Plan will be analyzed in the program-level Environmental Impact Report that will be prepared for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Attachments: Attachment A: Cal. Ave. Area Draft Concept Plan - March 2014 (PDF) Attachment B: Concept Plan Errata Sheet (PDF) Attachment C: VTA Grant Memo (PDF) Attachment D: Planning & Transportation Commission Report dated February 12, 2014 (PDF) Attachment E: Planning andTransportation Commission Except Minutes of February 12, 2014 (PDF) California Avenue Area Concept Plan Draft | March 2014 Appendix BAppendix B CONTENTS: 1. Introduction 2. Future Planning Framework 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations 4. Goals, Policies, and Programs CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 1 INTRODUCTION The California Avenue Area Concept Plan focuses on an area in central Palo Alto bounded roughly by Cambridge Avenue in the north, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) tracks to the east, Lambert Avenue to the south, and El Camino Real to the west. As shown in Figure CACP-1, the Concept Plan Area is home to a number of important Palo Alto landmarks and destinations, including the California Avenue Caltrain station, Fry's Electronics, the Santa Clara County Superior Courthouse, and a number of popular local institutions in the California Avenue Business District. With excellent access to transit and the availability of larger vacant or underutilized parcels for redevelopment, private developers have increasingly focused their attention on the Concept Plan area in recent years. Significant multi-family residential and mixed-use developments like the Sheridan Plaza development (1995) and the Palo Alto Central condominium complex (1983) set the table for recently approved projects like the mixed-use Park Plaza Development at 195 Page Mill Road. The Concept Plan Area has also been the focus of a number of recent planning initiatives undertaken by the City, including important regional corridor planning efforts in progress along its perimeter. These initiatives include: h Pedestrian Transit-Oriented Development (PTOD) Combining District Regulations. Applicable to an area within walking distance (2,000 feet) of the California Avenue Caltrain station, the PTOD District regulations (Zoning Code Chapter 18.34) were incorporated into the Palo Alto Zoning Code in 2007. The District is intended to encourage a mix of context-sensitive, higher-density residential, commercial, and office development while also protecting surrounding low-density residential neighborhoods and historic resources. PTOD District regulations contain detailed development standards and design guidelines intended to promote a lively street environment, supporting and encouraging both pedestrian and bicycle activity. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN CONCEPT PLAN AREA FIGURE CACP-1 FIGURE 1A El C a m i n o R e a l Alm a S t Page Mill RoadPage Mill Road California Ave College Ave Sherman Ave Grant Ave Oregon Expwy Oxford Ave Cambridge Ave Sheridan Ave Hansen Way Colorado A v e Washington Ave Santa Rita Ave Ya l e S t Lambert Ave Olive Ave Pepper Ave El Dorado Ave Emerson St Ra mona St El Carmelo Ave Portage Ave Wil l i a m s S t Pa r k B l v d Pa r k B l v d . O re g o n E x pw y Bir c h S t Ash St Acacia Ave PAL O A L TO C O MP RE H E NSIVE PL AN PARK B OULE V A RD SUBAR EA ALTERNATIVE 3Source:CityofPaloAlto 0 330 660Feet Sarah Wallis Park Fry’s Electronics 195 Page Mill Road (Park Plaza) 220 Sheridan (Caffe Riace) Santa Clara County Superior Court California Avenue Caltrain Station Concept Plan Area California Avenue Business District PDA Boundary PTOD District Boundary CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 3 h Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP). The BPTP was adopted in 2012 to strategically guide public and private investments in non-motorized transportation facilities and related programs. The Plan contains policy vision, design guidance, and specific recommendations intended to encourage walking and cycling in order to achieve local and regional targets for accommodating new growth, maintaining mobility, and reducing overall environmental impacts. h California Avenue Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape Improvements Project. Currently in progress, this proposed project envisions streetscape improvements along California Avenue to better balance the needs of drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Proposed improvements include a reduction from four lanes to two lanes of travel, together with curb extensions, parking enhancements, traffic calming treatments, landscaping elements, street furniture, and place-making identity markers. h El Camino Real Design Guidelines Update. In August 2013, City Council directed the Architectural Review Board and the Planning and Transportation Commission to recommend zoning changes and revisions to the south El Camino guidelines, adopted in 2002 to promote a more vibrant El Camino Real. Existing guidelines encourage wider sidewalks, outdoor seating, and other pedestrian amenities where appropriate; however, as the guidelines are not codified in law, developers are not required to meet them. The current initiative will re-examine sidewalk widths, setbacks, and building massing and articulation in order to develop updated requirements that will result in buildings designed to address the street and enhance the public right-of-way. h Priority Development Area (PDA) Designation. The City of Palo Alto has designated much of the Concept Plan Area as a Priority Development Area (PDA) as part of the Bay Area's regional development and conservation strategy. PDAs are designated by the City, based on criteria established by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), as areas that are served by transit and can accommodate additional infill development. The PDA designation makes the California Avenue area eligible for funding from regional agencies for technical assistance, planning grants, and capital infrastructure. The boundaries of the California Avenue Area PDA are shown in Figure CACP-1. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 4 h Rail Corridor Study. Prepared under the direction of a 17-member task force and approved by the Palo Alto City Council in January 2013, this report sets out a community vision for land use, transportation, and urban design opportunities along the Caltrain corridor and includes recommendations in response to the California High Speed Rail project and regional improvements to fixed rail services along tracks through Palo Alto. The Study identifies the California Avenue area as an important area with a strong pedestrian and transit-oriented mix of uses. The Study recognizes this as one of the key areas that can accommodate much of the city’s future development, but must be approached carefully. h Grand Boulevard Initiative. This major regional corridor planning initiative is a collaboration of 19 cities, counties, local and regional agencies united to improve the performance, safety, and aesthetics of El Camino Real from Daly City in the north to the Diridon Caltrain Station in central San Jose. The overarching objective is to enhance the corridor, ensuring the corridor achieves its full potential as a place for residents to work, live, shop and play, and creating links between communities that promote walking and transit and an improved and meaningful quality of life. The purpose of this Concept Plan is to lay out a unifying vision that weaves together the City's recent planning initiatives in order to guide future development and redevelopment in the Concept Plan Area, while preserving and enhancing the quality of life in residential neighborhoods in and adjacent to the Concept Plan area. Developed on the basis of public input received during a series of four community meetings between 2010 and 2012, the Concept Plan generally maintains existing Comprehensive Plan land use designations. It is intended as a tool to help the public and decision makers frame the context for future planning in this sector of the city. FUTURE PLANNING FRAMEWORK Based on input from the community at public meetings held early in the Concept Plan process, three distinct subareas were identified, as shown on Figure CACP-2: the California Avenue subarea, the Park Boulevard subarea, and the Fry’s site subarea. These subareas represent sectors of the Concept Plan area that can accommodate change; locations outside of the subareas are not likely to change and the Concept Plan supports the continuation of their current character. Each subarea has its own set of opportunities and challenges, which are described below. Additionally, CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS AND SUBAREA BOUNDARIES FIGURE CACP-2 FIGURE 1A SUBAREA I: CALIFORNIA AVENUE SUBAREA III: FRY’S SITE SUBAREA II: PARK BOULEVARD College Avenue Page Mill Road El C a m i n o R e a l Pepper Ave Olive Ave California Ave Pa r k B l v d Alm a S t r e e t O r e g o n E x p r e ss w a y Sarah Wallis Park Fry’s Electronics 195 Page Mill Road (Park Plaza) 220 Sheridan (Caffe Riace) Santa Clara County Superior Court California Avenue Caltrain Station PTOD District Boundary Future California Avenue BRT Stop Stanford Marguerite Shuttle Service Dumbarton Express Service VTA Routes 22 and 522 VTA Route 89 Existing Class II Bike Route Planned Class II Bike Lane Planned Pedestrian Trail Existing Class III Bike Route Existing Bicycle Boulevard CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 6 community input helped to establish several important area-wide themes. This Concept Plan presents a future planning framework that addresses both the area- wide themes as well as the specific opportunities and challenges in each of the subareas. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS The Concept Plan area contains a mix of residential, commercial, and light industrial/office uses. As shown in Figure CACP-3, commercial land use designations currently apply to nearly half of the Concept Plan area, with Community Commercial concentrated along California Avenue and Cambridge Avenue near the California Avenue Caltrain station, and Service Commercial concentrated around the Fry's site. Residential designations generally apply near the center of the Concept Plan area, with Multi-Family Residential north of the Oregon Expressway and an enclave of Single-Family Residential along Olive and Pepper Avenues. The Major Institution/Special Facility designation applies to the Santa Clara County Superior Courthouse. The Light Industrial and Research/Office Park designations apply along Park Boulevard and Page Mill Road south of the Oregon Expressway. As shown in Figure CACP-3 and on Table CACP-1, the Concept Plan maintains almost all of the current 2010 Comprehensive Plan land use designations, with the exception of the Fry's site, which would change from its current Service Commercial designation to a Mixed-Use designation. Additionally, Figure CACP-3 shows the location of the Technology Corridor Overlay that would be created through the implementation of Programs CACP-3.1.1 and CACP-3.1.2. A draft overlay designation is presented below. This will become a new overlay in the Comprehensive Plan once the California Avenue Area Concept Plan is approved by Palo Alto City Council. TECHNOLOGY CORRIDOR OVERLAY This overlay designation is intended to encourage small-scale, technology-related businesses that are compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhoods. Allowable uses include offices, research and development facilities, ground floor retail and commercial space, and multi-family residences. Maximum allowable floor area ration (FAR) is 1.5. Alma St Olive Ave O reg o n E xpy Portage Ave Yale St Cambridge Ave College Ave High St Oxford Ave el Dorado Ave S California Ave Page Mill Rd Lambert Ave Park Blvd Sheridan Ave Chestnut Ave Sherman Ave Grant Ave Emerson St Ramona St Williams St Pepper Ave Oregon Ave Fernando Ave Colorado Ave Ash St Bir c h S t Leland Ave Stanford Ave El Camino Real Fry'sElectronics Courthouse F I G U R E C A C P -3 C O M P A R I S O N O F E X I S T I N G A N D P R O P O S E D C O M P R E H E N S I V E P L A N L A N D U S E D E S I G N A T I O N S I N T H E C O N C EP T P L A N A R E A Source: City of Palo Alto, 2013; USGS, 2010; NHD 2013; ESRI, 2010; Tiger Lines, 2010; The Planning Center | DC&E, 2013. Residential Existing Proposed Single Family Res Multi-Family Res Mixed Use Commercial Service Commercial Neighborhood Commercial Regional/Community Commercial Business/Industrial Light Industrial Research/Office Park Other Major Institution/Special Facility Public Park Cal Train Stations Concept Plan Area Technology Corridor Overlay 0 500 1,000 Feet C A L I F O R N I A A V E N U E A R E A C O N C E P T P L A N Alma St Olive Ave Bryant St Oreg o n E xpy Portage Ave Yale St Cambridge Ave College Ave High St Oxford Ave el Dorado Ave S California Ave Page Mill Rd Lambert Ave Park Blvd Sheridan Ave Chestnut Ave Sherman Ave Grant Ave Waverley St Emerson St Ramona St Williams St Pepper Ave So u t h C t Oregon Ave Fernando Ave Colorado Ave Ash St Bir c h S t Leland Ave Stanford Ave El Camino Real Fry'sElectronics Courthouse CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS IN THE CONCEPT PLAN AREA FIGURE CACP-3 CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 8 TABLE CACP-1 COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATIONS IN THE CONCEPT PLAN AREA Land Use Designation Existing Proposed Development Standard Acres % Acres % Residential Non- Residential Single-Family Residential 7.1 5.7% 7.1 5.7% 1 to 14 du/acre N/A Multi-Family Residential 25.6 20.3% 25.6 20.3% 8 to 40 du/acre N/A Mixed-Use 0.0 0.0% 15.2 12.0%1.15 FAR up to 3.0 FAR Neighborhood Commercial 2.6 2.0% 2.6 2.0% N/A 0.4 FAR Service Commercial 26.9 21.3% 11.7 9.2% N/A 0.4 FAR Regional/Community Commercial 32.4 25.7% 32.4 25.7% N/A 0.35 to 2 FAR Research/Office Park 9.9 7.8% 9.9 7.8% N/A 0.3 to 0.5 FAR Major Institution/Special Facility 7.3 5.7% 7.3 5.7% N/A N/A Light Industrial 14.2 11.2% 14.2 11.2% N/A up to 0.5 FAR Public Park 0.4 0.3% 0.4 0.3% N/A N/A 126.4 126.4 GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROGRAMS AREA-WIDE THEMES As shown in Figure CACP-2, the Concept Plan area is made up of the three subareas, a single-family residential enclave centered on Olive and Pepper Avenues, and multi- family residential development along Sheridan Avenue and Page Mill Road. There are also established single-family residential neighborhoods surrounding the Concept Plan area to the north, south, east and southwest. Outside of the subareas, the community has expressed a strong desire for neighborhood preservation and enhanced quality of life. The key planning challenge for the Concept Plan area will be fostering an appropriate level of change in the subareas, while preserving and enhancing the quality of life in adjacent residential neighborhoods. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 9 Table CACP-2 describes a range of recently approved projects and pending development proposals. Given the level of interest developers have shown for sites in the Concept Plan area, there are concerns in the community for adverse effects to neighborhood character and quality of life from new development. Chief among these are concerns for roadway safety, traffic and parking issues, and aesthetics and architectural character. There are mechanisms already in place or currently in development that can help manage change in a way that addresses community concerns, including the plans and studies described in the Introduction, above. For example, the City is considering enhancing its existing transportation demand management policy and will continue to work with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) in developing multi-modal level of services standards that establish acceptable travel conditions for a range of roadway users. The City's robust project approval process will also help to ensure that future development proposals are vetted in public forums with ample opportunity for community input. Design review by the City's Architectural Review Board and implementation of the PTOD District regulations will help ensure a cohesive character in line with community standards. New development will require in-depth studies of potential environmental, safety, or aesthetic impacts, and detailed mitigation measures to reduce any identified impacts. It will be important to carefully consider cumulative traffic, noise, and pollution effects in evaluating future development proposals, and the future planning framework should also encourage consideration for the design of open spaces in the public realm. GOAL CACP-1 Provide a framework for managing change in identified subareas while preserving the existing character of surrounding residential neighborhoods and shopping districts. Policy CACP-1.1 Preserve the existing single-family residential character of the Olive/Pepper enclave. Program CACP-1.1.1 Consider cumulative traffic, noise, pollution, aesthetic effects, and parking impacts from new development adjacent to residential neighborhoods when reviewing new development and redevelopment in the Concept Plan area. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 10 TABLE CACP-2 MAJOR RECENT AND PENDING DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CONCEPT PLAN AREA (AS OF NOVEMBER 2013) Approved Projects Date Approved 420 Cambridge Avenue First project in the Pedestrian/Transit-Oriented Development (PTOD) Overlay Area. A 7,700-square-foot development with four residential units and ground floor retail space. March 2010 2640 Birch Street Second project in the PTOD Overlay Area. Under construction as of fall 2013. A 4-story mixed-use development of 25,000 square feet with office on the ground floor and eight townhomes above; all rental. April 2012 195 Page Mill Road Mixed-use residential/research & development project currently under construction. The project features 50,000 square feet of ground floor research and development space, with 84 residential units above. June 2012 260 California Avenue A new 3-story office/retail building with approximately 27,000 square feet of gross floor area on a 13,500-square-foot project site. June 2013 3159 El Camino Real Four-story, 74,000-square-foot mixed-use building with residential and commercial on the Equinox site. Pending Project Applications 2755 El Camino Real A proposed 4-story, 33,500-square-foot mixed-use building with 3 stories of below- grade parking on the site of an existing VTA lot. 3255 El Camino Real A proposed mixed-use project involving two buildings totaling 28,000 square feet. Proposed are a 2-story commercial building and one 4-story, eight-unit mixed-use building with ground floor retail and three floors of residential. The project will also include a below-grade parking garage. 385 Sherman Avenue A proposed 3-story mixed-use building totaling 55,500 square feet of space. 441 Page Mill Road 21,500 square feet of commercial space and eight residential units with one level of below-grade parking. Policy CACP-1.2 Encourage mixed-use and multi-family infill developments, particularly with smaller units, on appropriate underutilized sites throughout the concept plan area in order to capitalize on opportunities to provide a range of neighborhood housing, close gaps in the neighborhood fabric, and foster the development of publicly accessible open spaces and plazas. Policy CACP-1.3 On appropriate sites in the Concept Plan area, encourage development at the higher end of the allowed density range. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 11 Policy CACP-1.4 Balance the needs of neighborhood residents and the daytime population of the Concept Plan area. Program CACP-1.4.1 Conduct an area-wide parking needs assessment to quantify the amount of parking necessary to support additional residential, retail, and office development in the Concept Plan area. Program CACP-1.4.2 Based on the findings of the area-wide parking needs assessment, develop a strategy to manage parking supply and demand that considers options for parking policy, parking restrictions, parking pricing, shared parking, and additional structured parking. Policy CACP-1.5 Prioritize roadway safety for all users. Program CACP-1.5.1 Periodically evaluate the need for additional traffic calming measures on local roadways to maintain safe residential streets. Program CACP-1.5.2 Work with residents and the Palo Alto Police Department to ensure optimum enforcement of traffic controls. Policy CACP-1.6 Improve circulation for active modes of transport, including walking, cycling, and inline skating. Policy CACP-1.7 Coordinate bicycle and pedestrian planning initiatives, with other regional and local initiatives, including Safe Routes to School and Bay Area Bike Share. Policy CACP-1.8 Encourage incorporation of rooftop gardens, green roofs, and public open spaces into building and site design as redevelopment occurs in the Concept Plan area. Policy CACP-1.9 Recognize the California Avenue area, including Park Boulevard, as an appropriate location for a public safety building. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 12 CALIFORNIA AVENUE SUBAREA This subarea extends from El Camino Real to the California Avenue Caltrain Station, with California Avenue at its heart. The subarea encompasses the California Avenue Business District and includes Sheridan and Cambridge Avenues, as shown in Figure CACP-4. California Avenue was originally the main commercial thoroughfare of the Town of Mayfield, and today it still offers small town shopping in the heart of Palo Alto. Locally owned small businesses on California and Cambridge Avenues cater to the daily needs of residents and commuters alike, with a wide variety of retail and personal service businesses, as well as a popular weekend farmers' market. At the eastern edge of the subarea, the California Avenue Caltrain station provides an important gateway to the city for nearly 1,000 weekday commuters travelling to jobs in Palo Alto. Planning throughout the Concept Plan Area should support the existing neighborhood-oriented commercial character of the subarea and enhance its vitality. People are the key to vitality. Strategies that bring local residents, commuters, and workers to the Concept Plan Area will help strengthen its retail role and stimulate its economic and social vitality. Additionally, carefully crafted development standards and design guidelines can help to activate the street and create safer, more comfortable public spaces, attracting more people to the subarea. The diversity of the type of retail uses on California Avenue is also a concern for Palo Alto. As part of the Comprehensive Plan Update of the Business Element, the City is considering a new program to study appropriate commercial diversity in the California Avenue business district to balance a healthy mix of locally owned and chain-type commercial businesses, and to prevent proliferation of specific use types. With the PTOD District Regulations and the California Avenue Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape Improvements project, the City has already taken important steps toward supporting the vitality of the California Avenue subarea. Together, these planning initiatives provide a framework to guide development and redevelopment in the subarea. As development and redevelopment occur, strategies to optimize parking availability will be required. Attention will also be needed to improve connections between the County Courthouse and California Avenue in order to ensure this important destination remains linked to California Avenue and the Caltrain station. Pa r k B l v d Al m a S t Page Mill Rd Page Mill Rd California Ave C o l l e g e A v e Sherman Ave Oregon Expwy Oregon E x p w y O x f o r d A v e Cambridge Ave Sheridan Ave Wa s h i n g t o n A v e Santa Rite Ave Grant Ave El C a m i n o R e a l CALIFORNIA AVENUE SUBAREA FIGURE CACP-4 CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN California Avenue Caltrain Station Santa Clara County Superior Court City of Palo AltoPublic Parking Lots California Avenue Subarea California Avenue Business District PTOD District Boundary Future California Avenue BRT Stop VTA Routes 22 and 522 VTA Route 89 Existing Class II Bike Route Stanford Marguerite Shuttle Service Dumbarton Express Service Planned Class II Bike Lane Existing Class III Bike Route Existing Bicycle Boulevard Future California Ave BRT Stop CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 14 GOAL CACP-2 Support the California Avenue subarea as an attractive, transit-rich neighborhood shopping district. Policy CACP-2.1 Maintain the existing neighborhood-oriented commercial character of California Avenue and Cambridge Avenue. Policy CACP-2.2 Encourage mixed-use residential development, particularly with smaller units, at the higher end of the allowed density range that promotes the social and economic vitality of the California Avenue Business District while maintaining its neighborhood-oriented commercial character. Program CACP-2.2.1 Hold a design competition to generate innovative concepts for the use of City-owned parking lots and structures. Policy CACP-2.3 Encourage a mix of residential, retail, and personal service uses consistent with the PTOD Combining District Regulations. Program CACP-2.3.1 Consider revising the PTOD Combining District Regulations to further incentivize mixed-use development Program CACP-2.3.2 Consider adding minimum on storefront width to the design standards for the California Avenue Pedestrian Transit-Oriented District (TOD) contained in the Zoning Ordinance. Policy CACP-2.4 Maintain existing multi-family residential uses and encourage new multi-family residential development, particularly with smaller units, at the higher end of the allowed density range on appropriate under-utilized sites where adequate parking can also be provided. Policy CACP-2.5 Support development of a hotel and associated hospitality uses on El Camino Real, in proximity to transit. Policy CACP-2.6 Require active uses on the ground floor of buildings fronting California and Cambridge Avenues, including retail uses, personal service uses, and other uses that provide opportunities for people to come and go throughout the day. Policy CACP-2.7 Encourage implementation of the California Avenue Pedestrian Transit-Oriented District (PTOD) design guidelines. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 15 Program CACP-2.7.1 Meet with merchants and property owners to discuss opportunities to streamline and facilitate implementation of the design guidelines, including provisions applicable to the design of buildings, public spaces, and bicycle and pedestrian amenities. Policy CACP-2.8 Capitalize on the proximity of the California Avenue Caltrain station to major employment centers such as the Stanford Research Park in order to bring more weekday commuters to the California Avenue subarea. Policy CACP-2.9 Work with employers to encourage employee transit use through the development of shuttle programs and the provision of transit passes. Policy CACP-2.10 Create a pedestrian gateway for the County Courthouse and foster better connections with California Avenue. Policy CACP-2.11 Work with transit agencies, including Caltrain and VTA, to ensure that the California Avenue subarea continues to be adequately served by transit as development and redevelopment occurs. Policy CACP-2.12 Together with Caltrain and VTA, evaluate opportunities to improve shuttle service connections from the California Avenue Caltrain station to the Stanford Research Park and other employment centers in proximity to the subarea. Policy CACP-2.13 Promote the use of active transportation, including walking and bicycling, to local shops as an alternative to vehicles for residents of the surrounding neighborhoods. Program CACP-2.13.1 Consider creating incentives for local business owners to provide bicycle parking on California and Cambridge Avenues as a way to encourage local residents to bicycle rather than drive to shops. Program CACP-2.13.2 Coordinate implementation of future California Avenue streetscape improvements with implementation of the Bay Area Bike Share program in Palo Alto. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 16 Program CACP-2.13.3 Evaluate the need for improvements to the Caltrain underpass at California Avenue to improve safety and access for cyclists and pedestrians. Consider improvements that would address issues such as connectivity with the Park Boulevard Bicycle Boulevard and for bicycle and pedestrian access to the underpass order to accommodate via Page Mill Road. PARK BOULEVARD SUBAREA The Park Boulevard subarea includes the area east of Park Boulevard to the railway tracks and south from California Avenue almost to Lambert Avenue, as well as the block bounded by Olive, Ash, and Page Mill Road west of Park Boulevard. The precise boundaries of the subarea are shown in Figure-CACP-5. This sector of the city contains large parcels adjacent to the railway tracks and has attracted significant interest from private developers in recent years. State regulations will require remediation of any remnant contamination still present on former industrial sites in the subarea before development can take place. Construction has begun of a three-story building with research and development uses at ground level and 84 residential units above at 195 Page Mill Road. The subarea is also home to many technology firms, including AOL, Groupon, and numerous smaller companies. Palo Alto has a global reputation as an incubator of Silicon Valley talent, and there is an opportunity to build on the nucleus of small- scale technology-related enterprises already located in the subarea to create a technology corridor that attracts and nurtures even more innovators and entrepreneurs. Park Boulevard is a highly travelled bicycle corridor and a popular commute route. Park Blvd. has been designated as a Bicycle Boulevard in the City's Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan, prioritizing it for bicycle traffic. Striped bicycle lanes and distinctive green paint have been added to the roadway surface to demarcate a clear path for cyclists. Although data from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) does not indicate the rate of collisions involving cyclists is higher relative to other parts of the city, pedestrian and bicycle safety is a significant community concerns. Going forward, a key challenge will be to improve roadway safety throughout the subarea as development and redevelopment occur. Application of PTOD District development standards for the pedestrian and bicycle Pa r k B l v d Al m a S t Oregon E x p w y California Ave Sherman Ave Oregon Expwy Sheridan Ave Pepper Ave Olive Ave Hansen Way Grant Ave Page Mill Road El C a m i n o R e a l Wa s h i n g t o n A v e PARK BOULEVARD SUBAREA FIGURE CACP-5 CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN California Avenue Caltrain Station Groupon 195 Page Mill Road AOL Park Boulevard Subarea PTOD District Boundary VTA Routes 22 and 522 VTA Route 89 Existing Class II Bike Route Stanford Marguerite Shuttle Service Dumbarton Express Service Planned Class II Bike Lane Existing Class III Bike Route Existing Bicycle Boulevard Future California Ave BRT Stop CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 18 environment will also bring improvements to the public realm. However, continued focus will be needed to ensure that adequate pedestrian infrastructure is provided as development occurs. GOAL CACP-3 Promote Park Boulevard as an important hub of innovation and entrepreneurship for small new companies. Policy CACP-3.1 Strengthen Park Boulevard's nascent identity as a technology corridor. Program CACP-3.1.1 Work with developers and property owners to determine appropriate incentives for encouraging smaller, technology-related firms to locate on Park Boulevard. Update the zoning code as necessary to incorporate these incentives. Program CACP-3.1.2 Adopt a new Technology Corridor Overlay applicable to parcels east of Park Boulevard between Oregon Expressway and Lambert Avenue. Policy CACP-3.2 Favor mixed-use development proposals that provide research and development or office uses on the ground floor, with smaller residences or live/work spaces on upper floors, as appropriate. Policy CACP-3.3 Encourage development at the higher end of the allowed density range that is consistent with the standards for context-sensitive design and active street frontage contained in the PTOD District regulations. Policy CACP-3.4 Work with property owners to ensure remediation of remnant contamination required for compliance with federal, State, and local regulations. GOAL CACP-4 Ensure Park Boulevard provides safe, easy, and comfortable access for cyclists and pedestrians. Policy CACP-4.1 Prioritize roadway safety for pedestrians and cyclists, while balancing the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers on Park Boulevard. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 19 Program CACP-4.1.1 Monitor the rate of accidents involving cyclists and pedestrians. Program CACP-4.1.2 Study alternate routes to Caltrain stations that could provide safer, more direct access for cyclists and pedestrians. Consider access via Page Mill Road. Policy CACP-4.2 Recognize Park Boulevard as a designated Bicycle Boulevard and continue to implement strategies from the Bicycle Boulevard Design Toolbox that support its role as a key thoroughfare in the City's bicycle network. Policy CACP-4.3 Require new office uses along Park Boulevard to provide ample bicycle parking for employees. Policy CACP-4.4 Enhance the pedestrian environment along Park Boulevard with such improvements as wider sidewalks, restriped crosswalks, or additional pedestrian amenities. Program CACP-4.4.1 Survey the pedestrian environment along Park Boulevard and incorporate additional recommendations for improvements into the BPTP as appropriate. FRY'S SITE SUBAREA The Fry's Site subarea is generally bounded by El Camino Real, Lambert Avenue, Park Boulevard, and Olive Avenue as shown in Figure CACP-6. The subarea is home to the Palo Alto location of consumer electronics retailer Fry's Electronics, a popular regional shopping destination, located in the interior of the subarea. Given the current trend for large format retailers to locate in areas with excellent freeway access, Fry's may opt to relocate when the option on its current lease expires. Fry's is located on a single large parcel, and should the retailer leave the subarea in the future, there is a significant redevelopment opportunity. The Fry's site subarea also contains a varied mixture of commercial, retail, and office uses, including commercial and retail establishments fronting El Camino Real, professional offices near the interior of the subarea, and smaller technology-related firms closer to Park Boulevard. Single-family homes are found along Olive Avenue. A channelized portion of Matadero Creek runs through the southern portion of the subarea. El Dorado Ave Lambert Ave Matade r o C r e e k To Proposed Hanover Street Multi-Use Trail To Proposed Hanover Street Multi-Use Trail To Proposed Hanover Street Multi-Use Trail Alm a S t Sheridan Ave Olive Ave Portage Ave Pepper Ave Matadero Ave Matadero Ave Hansen Way E l C a r m e l o A v e la e R o n i m a C l E Pa r k B l v d Page Mill Rd Oregon E x p w y CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN FRY’S SITE SUBAREA FIGURE CACP-6 Fry’s Electronics Fry’s Site Subarea VTA Routes 22 and 522 Existing Class II Bike Route Planned Class II Bike Route Existing Bicycle Boulevard Planned Matadero Bicycle Boulevard Planned Pedestrian Trail Stanford Marguerite Shuttle Service Dumbarton Express Service PTOD District Boundary CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 21 Access to the interior of the subarea is available either through the Fry’s parking lot from Park Boulevard, or via Portage Avenue from El Camino Real. Options for future redevelopment could include the addition of a new through street to improve connectivity and circulation. A number of existing and planned bicycle facilities nearby also represent an opportunity to expand the bikeways network and improve bicycle circulation. Pictured in Figure CACP-6, existing facilities include the Bicycle Boulevard on Park Boulevard, the Multi-Use Path at Hanover Street, and the Class II bicycle land on Hansen Avenue west of El Camino Real; planned facilities include a Class II bikeway along Portage Avenue and a Bicycle Boulevard along Matadero Avenue. GOAL CACP-5 Over the long-term, foster the transformation of the Fry's site subarea into a walkable, human-scale mixed- use neighborhood that includes ample amenities. Policy CACP-5.1 If Fry’s chooses to relocate, encourage a mixture of uses in the Fry's site subarea compatible with its surroundings, including smaller dwelling units, single- family residences, multi-family housing types, retail and commercial uses, and office space for research and development and technology-related businesses. Encourage appropriate development, such as residential development with smaller units, at the higher end of the allowed density range on the site. Program CACP-5.1.1 Require the residential component of mixed-use development in the subarea to be no less than 20 percent of the total square footage. Policy CACP-5.2 Coordinate site planning to improve the relationship of the Fry's site to its surroundings, including adjacent single-family residential neighborhoods, Park Boulevard, and El Camino Real. Program CACP-5.2.1 Require community outreach and preparation of a site-specific master plan for the Fry's site, in the event the property owner elects to redevelop or add additional development to the site. The site-specific master plan should focus on fostering mixed-use; improving the relationship of the site with adjacent neighborhoods; enhancing connectivity and circulation for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers; and providing context-sensitive, pedestrian-scaled development consistent with its surroundings. CALIFORNIA AVENUE AREA CONCEPT PLAN 22 Program CACP-5.2.2 Study the possibility of creating a linear park along the portion of Matadero Creek that runs through the subarea. Consider restoring the channelized portion of the creek to create a neighborhood amenity that enhances connectivity. Policy CACP-5.3 Ensure that development and redevelopment is context-sensitive and appropriate in proximity to adjacent single-family residential neighborhoods. Policy CACP-5.4 Recognize the relationship of the Fry's site subarea to El Camino Real and encourage reconfiguration to provide a better connection with El Camino Real. Policy CACP-5.5 Improve bicycle and pedestrian connectivity through the site while accommodating vehicles. Summary of Changes Made To California Ave. Concept Plan (Feb. 2014) No. PTC Direction from December 11, 2013 Original December 2013 Language Revised February 2014 Language 1 Change Program 3.4.1 to identify that the California Avenue/Fry’s planning area is an appropriate area for a public safety building, not only Park Boulevard. Program 3.4.1: "Work with developers, property owners, and the community to determine appropriate incentives and financing structures for encouraging design and construction of a public safety building on Park Boulevard. Update the zoning code as necessary to incorporate these incentives." Program 3.4.1 deleted. Policy 1.9 identifies the California Avenue Fry's Area, including Park Boulevard as an appropriate location for a public safety building. See below for language. Policy 1.8: "Recognize the California Avenue area, including Park Boulevard, as an appropriate location for a public safety building." Policy 1.9 (Renumbered from Policy 1.8): "Recognize the California Avenue area, including Park Boulevard, as an appropriate location for a public safety building." 2 Change Program 5.1.1 to require that the residential component of mixed use development in the subarea to be no less than 20% of the total sq. ft. Program 5.1.1: "Require the residential component of mixed-use development in the subarea to be between 20 and 50 percent of the total square footage." Program 5.1.1: "Require that the residential component of mixed-use development in the subarea to be no less than 20 percent of the total square footage." 3 Strike Policy 3.3.Policy 3.3: "Allow the maximum permitted FAR on parcels that can accommodate more intense development while also providing sufficient underground parking and substantial landscaping." Policy 3.3 deleted. Subsequent policies/programs renumbered as appropriate. 4 Extend the boundary of Fry’s subarea to Lambert and El Camino Real. Figures CACP-3 and CACP-6 originally show the Fry's subarea excluding properties south of Portage, along El Camino Real. Figures CACP-3 and CACP-6 updated to show extended Fry's Site subarea boundary from Portage and El Camino Real to north of Lambert and El Camino Real to show area was considered in analysis. 5 Staff to incorporate language to encourage greater intensity in all uses, commercial, retail and housing if multi-family. Staff to study including additional language for greater scale, density and FAR. Need greater language to increase intensity and scale. Encourage density done right. Policy 2.2: "Encourage mixed-use residential development that promotes the social and economic vitality of the California Avenue Business District while maintaining its neighborhood-oriented commercial character." Policy 2.2: "Encourage mixed-use residential development, particularly with smaller units, at the higher end of the allowed density range that promotes the social and economic vitality of the California Avenue Business District while maintaining its neighborhood- oriented commercial character." Policy 2.4: "Maintain existing multi-family residential uses and encourage new multi- family residential development on appropriate under-utilized sites where adequate parking can also be provided." Policy 2.4: "Maintain existing multi-family residential uses and encourage new multi- family residential development, particularly with smaller units, at the higher end of the allowed density range on appropriate under- utilized sites where adequate parking can also be provided." Policy 3.4: "Encourage development consistent with the standards for context- sensitive design and active street frontage contained in the PTOD District regulations." Policy 3.3 (renumbered): "Encourage development at the higher end of the allowed density range that is consistent with the standards for context-senstive design and active street frontage contained in the PTOD District Regulations." 1 Summary of Changes Made To California Ave. Concept Plan (Feb. 2014) No. PTC Direction from December 11, 2013 Original December 2013 Language Revised February 2014 Language Policy 5.1: "If Fry's chooses to relocate, encourage a mixture of uses in the Fry's site subarea compatible with its surroundings, including smaller dwelling units, single-family residences, multiple-family housing types, retail and commercial uses, and office space for research and development and technology-related businesses." Policy 5.1: "If Fry's chooses to relocate, encourage a mixture of uses in the Fry's site subarea compatible with its surroundings, including smaller dwelling units, single family residences, multi-family housing types, retail and commercial uses, and office space for research and development and technology related businesses. Encourage appropriate development, such as residential development with smaller units, at the higher end of the allowed density range on the site." Added new areawide Policy 1.3: "On appropriate sites in the Concept Plan area, encourage development at the higher end of the allowed density range." (Original Policy 1.3-1.8 renumbered as Policy 1.4-1.9.) 6 Add policy encouraging that housing built be smaller unit sizes Policy 1.2: "Encourage mixed-use and multi- family infill developments on appropriate underutilized sites throughout the concept plan area in order to capitalize on opportunities to provide neighborhood housing, close gaps in the neighborhood fabric, and foster the development of publicly accessible open spaces and plazas." Policy 1.2: "Encourage mixed-use and multi- family infill developments, particularly with smaller units, on appropriate underutilized sites throughout the concept plan area in order to capitalize on opportunities to provide a range of neighborhood housing, close gaps in the neighborhood fabric, and foster the development of publicly accessible open spaces and plazas." Policy 2.2: "Encourage mixed-use residential development, particularly with smaller units, at the higher end of the allowed density range that promotes the social and economic vitality of the California Avenue Business District while maintaining its neighborhood- oriented commercial character." Policy 2.4: "Maintain existing multi-family residential uses and encourage new multi- family residential development, particularly with smaller units, at the higher end of the allowed density range on appropriate under- utilized sites where adequate parking can also be provided." Policy 5.1: "If Fry's chooses to relocate, encourage a mixture of uses in the Fry's site subarea compatible with its surroundings, including smaller dwelling units, single family residences, multi-family housing types, retail and commercial uses, and office space for research and development and technology related businesses. Encourage appropriate development, such as residential development with smaller units, at the higher end of the allowed density range on the site." 2 Summary of Changes Made To California Ave. Concept Plan (Feb. 2014) No. PTC Direction from December 11, 2013 Original December 2013 Language Revised February 2014 Language 7 Direction by PTC at the February 12, 2014 hearing to include in the narrative the proposal to study the appropriate mix of retail on California Avenue is being considered. New text addition to narrative on page 12, end of third paragraph: "The diversity of the type of retail uses on California Avenue is also a concern for Palo Alto. As part of the Comprehensive Plan Update of the Business Element, the City is considering a new program to study appropriate commercial diversity in the California Avenue business district to balance a healthy mix of locally owned and chain-type commercial businesses, and to prevent proliferation of specific use types. " 3 MEMORANDUM TO: City Managers Planning Directors Public Works Directors Technical Advisory Committee Members FROM: John Sighamony, Senior Transportation Planner DATE: February 11, 2014 SUBJECT: Priority Development Area (PDA) Planning Grant Program Call-for-Projects This memorandum serves as the first General Call-for-Projects for the 2016 PDA Planning Grant Program. MTC has directed that each CMA should design its' PDA planning program to emphasize and support growth in housing, employment, and transportation within its' PDAs. In accordance with this direction, VTA staff has developed a PDA Planning Grant program proposal in consultation with member agency staff with the goal of enabling transit-oriented housing and employment growth in Santa Clara County’s PDAs. The PDA Planning Program is an initiative to fund comprehensive planning in PDAs that will result in intensified land uses around public transit hubs and bus and rail corridors in Santa Clara County. The purpose of the PDA Planning Grants is to provide local jurisdictions with assistance in planning and creating vibrant places with adequate housing for all income levels, a mix of uses, access to jobs, and multi-modal transportation infrastructure. VTA envisions that these grants will help local jurisdictions enhance their planning activities to enable developments in the planned or potential PDAs. APPLICATIONS DUE: Date: MONDAY, APRIL 28, 2014 - REVISED Time: 4:00 PM To: CELESTE FIORE, PROGRAMMING & GRANTS SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 3331 NORTH FIRST STREET, BLDG B2 SAN JOSE, CA 95134 PROJECT ELIGIBILITY Funds are available for planning projects that are in the following transportation planning categories: (1) preliminary planning, (2) policy planning, and (3) advanced planning. The planning project must be within a PDA, either planned or potential. Proximate access will not be PDA PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM 2 accepted unless it is a policy planning project where the boundaries stretch over the PDA location. The policy planning project must include the entire PDA. FUND SOURCE DISTRIBUTION Approximately $5.1 million in Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds are available for award. These are Federal funds, Federal Authorization to Proceed (E-76 approval from Caltrans Local Assistance) before any reimbursable or matching expenses can be incurred. Based on grant size, there are two options for Applicants to meet this requirement to consider: Grant Requests > $500,000: Project Sponsor obtains authorization through Caltrans Local Assistance. Grant Requests < $500,000: VTA obtains authorization and retains consultant assistance. Project Sponsor executes a project agreement with VTA. AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEFINITION Affordable housing is defined based on the limits set by HUD for Santa Clara County, found at: http://www.hacsc.org/p_rentlimits.php PDA PLANNING GRANT PROGRAMMING POLICIES The following policies apply to all projects, regardless of the transportation improvement category or fund source. Project sponsors are responsible for compliance with the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Project sponsors must meet all requirements of the MTC Regional Project Delivery Policy: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/funding/delivery/ Federally funded projects require sponsors to adhere to Caltrans Local Assistance Project Delivery Policies and Procedures. Local assistance procedures can be found at the Caltrans website http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/index.html. Minimum grant amount requested = $100,000. Minimum local match = 11.47% APPLICATION The Santa Clara County PDA Planning Grant program has one application form for the three different types of planning work a Local Agency may apply. NEW: all PDA Planning Grant information and documents may be accessed and downloaded from: http://www.vta.org/callforprojects/ Applications should include ten bound, whole-punched hard copies and one electronic file. CONTACT INFORMATION Celeste Fiore at 408.321.5693, Celeste.Fiore@VTA.org For Specific questions regarding the Project that an Agency would like to submit John Sighamony at 408.321.5767, John.Sighamony@VTA.org PDA PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM 3 PDA PLANNING GRANT PROGRAM SCHEDULE REVISED Call for Projects Released February 14, 2014 Application Deadline - REVISED April 28, 2014 Land Use Transportation Integration Working Group May 14, 2014 Capital Improvement Program Working Group May 27, 2014 Committee for Transit Accessibility June 11, 2014 Citizen's Advisory Committee June 11, 2014 Technical Advisory Committee June 12, 2014 Policy Advisory Committee June 12, 2014 VTA Board Approval of PDA Planning Grant Program August 7, 2014 Submit project list to MTC August 8, 2014 Project sponsors submit projects through FMS to MTC September 8, 2014 Obligation request submittal to Caltrans February 1, 2016 ATTACHMENTS A – Santa Clara County PDA Planning Grant Program Scoring Criteria B – Project Application C – PDA Maps D – Communities of Concern Maps E – Community Air Risk Evaluation (CARE) Maps City of Palo Alto (ID # 4458) Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report Report Type: Meeting Date: 2/12/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: California Avenue Concept Plan Title: Cal Ave Concept Plan: Review and Recommendation to the City Council for Incorporation of the revised Draft California Avenue/Fry's Area Concept Plan into the Draft Comprehensive Plan. From: Elena Lee, Senior Planner Lead Department: Planning & Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) review and comment on the draft California Avenue Area Concept Plan (Attachment A) and support its inclusion in the Draft Comprehensive Plan Update. Background The California Avenue Area and Fry’s Area Concept Plan (Cal Ave Concept Plan) is one of two area plans that were initiated by the City Council in 2006 as part of the overall Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) amendment project. The purpose of this plan is to help determine if changes are needed within the plan area and if the existing Comprehensive Plan land use policies and designations should be amended. The plan is intended to become an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan and be used to make changes to the policies and designation if warranted. Once the Cal Ave Concept Plan is approved by the City Council, it will be incorporated into the Environmental Impact Report being prepared for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. All required technical environmental analysis, including traffic, will be studied at the time. The Comprehensive Plan sets policy direction and will be used to inform the next steps in future processes. Those future processes will be more specific because they may include zoning code amendments or the adoption of a specific or coordinated area plan. The 115-acre California Avenue/Fry’s area includes the California Avenue business district south to the site containing the existing Fry’s Electronics store. The intent of the California Avenue/Fry’s Area Concept Plan is to evaluate appropriate development intensities, potential for additional housing, retention and enhancement of retail/service opportunities, and City of Palo Alto Page 2 improved pedestrian and bicycle connections. Specific focus was given to preferred uses of the Fry’s site and the character of the California Avenue business district. The Concept Plan identifies a framework to help guide future development over the course of the Comprehensive Plan horizon period. The Cal Ave. Concept Plan has been the subject of various public hearings held during the past three years. Two formal reviews before the PTC were held on November 20 and December 11, 2013. A copy of the staff report prepared for the December 11th PTC hearing and the draft Concept Plan have been provided as Attachment A. The draft Minutes for the hearing have also been provided as Attachment B. The draft Concept Plan is the direct result of community feedback from the past four years and the various hearings held before both the PTC and City Council. The draft Concept Plan recognizes that the area is a mix of residential and non- residential uses. While it would allow for development at the higher density ranges in appropriate locations, such as the Fry’s site, Goal CACP-1 states the importance of “preserving the existing character of the surrounding residential neighborhoods and shopping districts.” December 11 PTC Hearing A PTC hearing was held on December 11 for a second review of the draft California Avenue Concept Plan document. Because the applicant for a pending application at 395 Page Mill Road and 3045 Park Boulevard held a community meeting the same night as the November 20, 2013 PTC hearing on the draft Cal Ave Concept Plan, a second hearing was held to give members of the public another opportunity to provide input. City staff provided a brief overview of the document. Three members of the public spoke on the proposed plan. The first speaker, a resident of a neighborhood within the Cal Ave Concept Plan area, stated his general support of the Cal Ave Concept Plan. However, he was concerned about recent traffic and parking impacts. Although the resident is supportive of the Tech Corridor designation, he was concerned that the Planned Community project proposed for 395 Page Mill Road and 3045 Park Boulevard was not consistent with the designation. Subsequent to the December 11th hearing, the Jay Paul Company withdrew the proposed Planned Community Zoning application for that site. The speaker wanted clarification on the purpose and impact of the proposed Concept Plan. Following the hearing, staff has had further conversations with this speaker and provided the clarification he requested. The second speaker, the president of the California Avenue Business Association, expressed concern about increase of density. He also requested that the City consider impacts on existing neighborhoods, especially traffic and parking concerns. The third and final speaker asked that the City study the cumulative traffic impact for the plan. The speaker also objected to the inclusion of Program 3.4.1 that encouraged the construction of a public safety building. He felt that the program gave too much support for the proposed project at 395 Page Mill Road and 3045 Park Boulevard by the Jay Paul Company. The Planning and Transportation Commissioners generally supported the draft Concept Plan City of Palo Alto Page 3 and provided specific amendments for the document and its goals, policies and programs. The PTC agreed that the Concept Plan is a critical component of the Comp Plan amendment because of the importance of the area for residents, business and transit. Staff was directed to work with the Comp Plan PTC subcommittee to refine the changes. The amendments will be discussed in the following section in detail. Discussion The PTC identified six amendments for the Cal Ave Concept Plan, directed staff to work with the PTC Land Use subcommittee to refine those changes and continued the item to the next hearing. The item was continued from the January 29th PTC hearing to allow a discussion with the subcommittee. Staff met with the subcommittee on January 29th to review and put together the proposed changes for review by the entire PTC. The amendments and associated changes are as follows (Policies 2.2, 2.4 and 5.1 have changes based on two amendments): Amendment 1: Change Program 3.4.1 to investigate the design and construction of a public safety building in the California Avenue/Fry’s planning area. Response/Change: Program 3.4.1 was deleted. Policy 1.8 more generally states “that the California Avenue/Fry’s planning area, including Park Boulevard, is an appropriate location for a public safety building.” Amendment 2: Change Program 5.1.1 to require that the residential component of mixed use development in the subarea to be no less than 20% of the total square feet. Response/Change: Program 5.1.1 has been modified so that the “residential component of mixed use shall be a minimum 20% of the total square footage.” Amendment 3: Strike Policy 3.3 regarding allowing maximum permitted FAR on appropriate parcels that can provide sufficient underground parking and landscaping. Response/Change: Policy 3.3 has been deleted. Amendment 4: Extend the boundary of Fry’s subarea to Lambert and El Camino Real. Subcommittee and staff to study area for consideration in plan City of Palo Alto Page 4 Response/Change: The boundary of the southernmost section of the Concept Plan has been modified to include Lambert to El Camino Real. Figures CACP-2 and CACP-6 have been updated accordingly. Amendment 5: Staff to incorporate language to encourage greater intensity in all uses, commercial, retail and housing if multi-family. Staff should consider additional language for greater scale, density and FAR. Need greater language to increase intensity and scale. Response/Change: Five policies have been modified to encourage the higher density of the allowed density range at the appropriate locations. They are as follows: Policy 1.3 (new) - “encourage development at the higher end of the allowed density. Policy 2.2 – “Encourage mixed-use residential development at the higher end of the allowed density range…” Policy 2.4 – “Maintain existing multi-family residential uses and encourage new multi-family residential development at the higher end of the allowed density range…” Policy 3.3 – “Encourage development at the higher end of the allowed density range…” Policy 5.1 (Fry’s site) – “Encourage appropriate development at the higher end of the allowed density range...” Amendment 6: Add policy encouraging that housing built be smaller unit sizes. Response/Change: Four policies were amended to encourage smaller unit sizes. They are as follows: Policy 1.2 – “Encourage mixed-use and multi-family infill developments, particularly with smaller units, on appropriate underutilized sites…” City of Palo Alto Page 5 Policy 2.2 – “Encourage mixed-use residential development…, particularly with smaller units…” Policy 2.4 – “…encourage new multi-family residential development at the higher end of the allowed density range, particularly smaller units…” Policy 5.1 – “Encourage appropriate development at the higher end of the allowed density range, particularly with smaller units, on the site.” Other minor changes were made to reflect recent development changes. The changes include relabeling 3159 El Camino Real (Equinox site) as an approved project and removal of any mention of the 395 Page Mill Road and 3045 Park Boulevard project in Table CACP-2 (Major Recent and Pending Developments Table). NEXT STEPS Upon PTC recommendation of approval of the draft Concept Plan, the item will be brought to the City Council in early 2014 for their review and decision. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The draft concept plan is generally consistent with the existing policies in the Comprehensive Plan. Comprehensive Plan policies as a whole are being reconsidered concurrent with this area planning effort, which may require some changes to the Comprehensive Plan policies and programs. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Once a preferred alternative is recommended by the City Council, the plan will be analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report that will be prepared for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The EIR and entire Comprehensive Plan Amendment will return to the Commission for review and recommendation. Attachments: Attachment A: Draft California Avenue Concept Plan (PDF) Attachment B: P&TC Staff Report - 12.11.13 (PDF) Attachment C: P&TC Excerpt Minutes of 12.11.13 (PDF) 1 Planning and Transportation Commission 1 Draft Verbatim Minutes 2 February 12, 2014 3 4 EXCERPT 5 6 California Avenue Concept Plan: Review and recommendation to the City Council for incorporation of 7 the revised Draft California Avenue/Fry's Area Concept Plan into the Draft Comprehensive Plan. (Elena 8 Lee – elena.lee@cityofpaloalto.org) 9 (Continued from the meetings of December 11, 2013 and January 29, 2014) 10 11 Chair Michael: So moving to the public hearing our first topic is the California Avenue Concept Plan and 12 we’ll begin with a staff report. 13 14 Elena Lee, Senior Planner: Thank you, good evening Commission. We are returning to you tonight with 15 the request that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of the California 16 Avenue/Fry’s Area Concept Plan. Following the specific direction provided by the Commission at the 17 December 11th hearing in the form of six amendments staff and the consultant have revised the draft 18 plan for review by the Commission’s Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee, which the Committee approved 19 at their January 29th meeting. Staff has received one comment from the public since then, which was e-20 mailed to the Commission and is available at places at the back of the room. This report reflects, the 21 report and the policies and programs reflects public, Commission, and Council feedback over an extensive 22 public review period with multiple hearings at various bodies. The plan acknowledges the diversity of the 23 area and it also acknowledges that it is important to protect the area while enhancing and protecting the 24 neighborhood shopping area along California Avenue, but it acknowledges that it needs to be balanced 25 between protecting, protection of the neighborhood and also allowing this area to be the correct mix of 26 uses and intensity for the Palo Alto area. So this concludes staff’s report. We’re available for any 27 questions. 28 29 Chair Michael: If there are any members of the public here who would like to speak on this topic you can 30 give a speaker card to Secretary Ellner. But in the meantime while we’re waiting for the speaker cards I’ll 31 just open it up for comments or questions from the Commission. Commissioner King. 32 33 Commissioner King: Well if we’ve got, we’re burning time right now the one question or one comment I 34 would have to staff on agendas. So I see we’ve got a new version here, another version. Sometimes it’s 35 hard to tell which is the most current. These appear to be the same. Is it possible that we can do a rev. 36 because I know sometimes we will pull things and the agenda we receive in our packets then changes by 37 the time we get here? Is that possible to have a rev. number on the agenda document? 38 39 Robin Ellner, Administrative Associate III: I’m sorry, what was your question Commissioner? 40 41 Commissioner King: Can we add a revision number onto the agenda because sometimes it changes from 42 the time we get the agenda Friday to the time that the meeting actually happens and I don’t think we 43 include a revision number on the agenda. 44 45 Ms. Ellner: Sure. The only revision was that Elena Lee had caught that I had put the wrong date that it 46 was continued from, but we can do that in the future. 47 48 Commissioner King: Ok, yeah and I’m not speaking this specific because I didn’t even catch that change, 49 but if we, then we would know oh this is the most current we see it again. 50 51 Ms. Ellner: Sure. 52 53 Commissioner King: Thank you. 54 55 2 Chair Michael: So Elena I wonder if it would be possible I know this topic has been on our agenda 1 previously and we’ve had sort of an in depth report at that time and we’re not planning on doing that 2 again this evening, but there were a number of changes that were made as a result of the discussion that 3 we had at the last meeting, some questions or suggestions from the Commission and on your report 4 again Page 3 you talked about three amendments. I wonder if you could just briefly touch on what’s 5 changed from the last version of the plan that we saw? 6 7 Ms. Lee: Absolutely, thank you. So there were, as I mentioned there were six amendments and a lot of 8 the amendments just were minor tweaks and changes and also some changes to the document to reflect 9 recent decisions as well as project changes. So Amendment Number 1, which basically changed Program 10 3.4.1 to state that instead of Park Boulevard being the specific area that should be, that’s appropriate for 11 a Public Safety Building it was amended to say that the area in general including Park Boulevard is an 12 appropriate area for Public Safety Building. 13 14 The second amendment, which is related to the Fry’s Area, basically removed the range of the required 15 housing. So it was changed to say that it was, that minimum amount of housing on the Fry’s Area 16 specifically would be a minimum of 20 percent. The third amendment was basically striking a policy 17 which stated that the maximum permitted Floor Area Ratio (FAR) should be allowed if enough 18 underground parking and landscaping can be provided. So that was deleted. The fourth amendment 19 was basically amending the boundaries of the Cal Ave. Concept Plan Area to extend towards the south to 20 including Lambert up to El Camino Real. Basically the intent of this is to show that we did look at this 21 area even though it wasn’t formally a part of the plan originally we did look at it during the analysis. And 22 so that was reflected in the plan per Commission direction. 23 24 The fifth amendment was to encourage greater intensity in all uses. So in that case we made changes to 25 about five policies basically stating that if appropriate, that development shall be encouraged at the 26 higher end of the allowed density and that was made to five policies. The sixth and final amendment 27 was basically inclusion of a policy to encourage housing be built in smaller sizes to provide a better range 28 of housing for this area and four policies were amended to encourage smaller unit size. So basically 29 encouraging smaller units as part of the mix in mixed-used developments and also to allow more smaller 30 units for developments that are allowed at the higher range of the allowed density. 31 32 Chair Michael: Ok with those six amendments it appears that you’ve responded to all of the discussion 33 that we had at our last meeting. And just checking with the Commissioners was there any further 34 thoughts or ideas or comments people wanted to make? Commissioner Alcheck. 35 36 Commissioner Alcheck: At our last meeting I identified this as feedback for the Business Element, but it 37 was specific to Cal Ave. My suggestion was we explore the idea of treating Cal Ave., the Cal Ave. area as 38 an experiment where we would restrict formula retail; that we would restrict chain, chain retail. I know 39 that I didn’t bring that up last time we talked about the Cal Ave. Plan, but I would be, I’m encouraging 40 that we consider having the Planning Department as they take this to the City Council include some 41 component of that as a discussion point for City Council, this notion that the retail space in the Cal Ave. 42 specific area be limited to local retail or really just not chain retail. I know I’ve sort of gone into detail. 43 You guys know what I’m talking about when I say that and there was some consensus here to consider 44 that as a topic of discussion in the Business Element. And when I brought that up for this Element I was 45 actually specifically saying as an experiment in Cal Ave. not all of Palo Alto. So considering this is the Cal 46 Ave. Concept Plan I wonder if we would consider just having that brought up to City Council as a topic of 47 discussion or to be investigated? 48 49 Chair Michael: Commissioner King. 50 51 Commissioner King: Yeah, quick question for Staff. So and refresh my memory, I may just be missing 52 this, but are we the way, thanks for these updates, but the way I’m reading this here is it’s, we’re not 53 actually seeing the original. For instance, if there was a change to working on an element we’re not 54 actually seeing the original wording of the element on this staff report. Is there are place where we and 55 3 the public can follow what changes have been made through the life of the document or is that too 1 cumbersome? 2 3 Ms. Lee: We do have the original December 11th version of the Comp Plan version available on our 4 website so we have both this revised version and this and then the previous version on the website. We 5 don’t have a redline version, but what the staff report does is it actually identifies the specific changes 6 because changes were only made to those specific policies. So we thought that it would be clear enough 7 that we wouldn’t have to provide a redline version. 8 9 Commissioner King: Ok. And I guess, and I’d be curious to see what the other Commissioners think and 10 you think, but it seems that it would be ideal to either have a redline here’s where we started, here are 11 all the and maybe it’s just too voluminous to do that or in your staff report then you say, “This element 12 this is what it was, this was the proposed amendment, and this is our response.” 13 14 Ms. Lee: We actually do have a table that shows the original language and the proposed language and 15 we can make sure that that’s available to the public. 16 17 Commissioner King: Ok and where is that? Where does that exist? 18 19 Ms. Lee: It’s currently not posted, but following this hearing we’ll post it. 20 21 Commissioner King: Ok. And that would be under when they look up the California Avenue Plan there 22 would be a separate table saying these are the changes? 23 24 Ms. Lee: We’ll make sure that that’s available both on the City’s website as well as the Comp Plan 25 website. 26 27 Commissioner King: Ok. Ok, thank you. 28 29 Chair Michael: So let’s go to members of the public who have given speaker cards. Vice-Chair Keller 30 who’s first? Three minutes. 31 32 Vice-Chair Keller: The first speaker is Michael Eager to be followed by Robert Moss. 33 34 Michael Eager: Hi, I’ve participated in several of the public outreach meetings for this. My idea of the 35 Concept Plan is that it should lay out a unifying vision to guide future development. My problem with the 36 Plan as written is it seems to be documenting the past going up through current projects. It doesn’t lay 37 out a vision for the future, it doesn’t address issues in the area, and if you look at the previous version of 38 this which had 395 Park the big change from the previous version and this is 395 Park is now off the 39 table. I’m skeptical about the area along Park Boulevard as a technology corridor mostly because the 40 existing buildings and existing plans, projects which are planned there don’t fit in with any conceivable 41 concept of a unified technology corridor, at least none that I can see and certainly not one that I found in 42 the Plan here. 43 44 Finally, this has been mentioned several times… the big problem in that area is the access to Page Mill. I 45 spent a few minutes yesterday afternoon in a line of cars going from Park Boulevard to get onto Page 46 Mill. I don’t know how you’re going to do development in this area unless you address that and a 47 Comprehensive Plan would be a place to say what you’re going to do or what you should do in the 48 future. So I think of this as a retrospective plan, not a forward thinking, not a vision of the future, and 49 basically documenting what we’ve got now. 50 51 Vice-Chair Keller: Next speaker is Bob Moss and I don’t think we have any additional speaker cards, so 52 you’re the final speaker. 53 54 Robert Moss: Thank you Chair Michael and Commissioners. One of the things that bothers me about the 55 Plan in general and the oversight is that you’re completely ignoring the fact that a significant portion of 56 4 this area is heavily contaminated by contaminated groundwater coming from the Superfund sites at 1 Hewlett-Packard (HP) and Varian. The area in general is called COE, California-Olive-Emerson (COE). 2 And the area which is most contaminated is basically from Pepper to Sherman in the California Avenue 3 context from El Camino to Alma. The emphasis you have on housing just makes the risk of people who 4 are in that area greater. 5 6 The major contaminant of concern is called trichloroethene (TCE) and the toxicity level of TCE has been 7 let’s say reduced significantly in the last three years. Also in just about a year and a half ago it was 8 found that exposure of a pregnant woman for as little as three weeks to TCE at levels as low as .5 parts 9 per billion (ppb) is highly likely to cause birth defects. And in residential areas exposure to levels 10 between .5 and 1 are highly likely to cause cancer. So when you build residential buildings in this area 11 you have to protect the people who will be living there and nothing in this Plan even recognizes the fact 12 that you have a real problem with contamination and toxics on the site. So I think you should go back 13 and take another look at it and at least address it. 14 15 For example, the classic 2755 El Camino with a proposal was to put in a three level underground garage, 16 which would penetrate three highly contaminated aquifers. In Mountain View in the Middlefield-Ellis-17 Whisman (MEW) site, which is similar to COE not a single project with an underground garage has been 18 built since 1993. The city has discouraged them. Palo Alto doesn’t do that, but I think you ought to take 19 a serious consideration in the COE area in particular for discouraging underground garages. And then 20 when you talk about putting housing in make sure that the people are adequately protected with vapor 21 barriers and with regular indoor air sampling to be sure the vapor barriers haven’t failed because again in 22 Mountain View I’ve seen it where they do fail over time. So you’re not taking into account the health 23 risks when you look at this project and that bothers me. 24 25 Chair Michael: Thank you very much. Actually one thing that I’d like to encourage if possible in the 26 format of our meetings is when we have members of the public come and they make comments on topics 27 which are on the agenda if we can appropriately respond to those comments or answer any questions, I 28 think that would be a positive reinforcement to get people to come and engage with the Planning 29 Commission and our work. I had one thought in relation to the comments from the first speaker 30 regarding the format of the plan and whether or not it expressed a vision for the area and I think that as 31 the City and the City Council engage with the public in this conversation about Our Palo Alto, the issue of 32 what the vision for the future is is an important topic that permeates the entire effort. 33 34 If you look at the 1998 Comprehensive Plan in the first section it very interestingly says that there are a 35 number of competing visions in the City, but not a single vision. And then you go into the different 36 elements that make up the Comprehensive Plan an there’s a vision statement in front of at the beginning 37 of each element, but there isn’t a vision statement overall and I find that interesting. I wasn’t around 38 and participating in this effort when that document was published and I know that it got lots of positive 39 acknowledgement and awards, but I think that the lack of the vision for the future of the City, the future 40 of California Avenue is an interesting challenge to encourage discussion, debate, clearly there were 41 different stakeholders and they have different ideas about what’s best, but I think the lack of putting a 42 stake in the ground is an opportunity to make this document better, to make the Comprehensive Plan 43 better, and it’s part of the discussion that I look forward to hearing over the next year or so or even two 44 years before the Comprehensive Plan is finally updated. 45 46 And with respect to Mr. Moss’ comments regarding the environmental issues I know that the California 47 Avenue Area Concept Plan isn’t a stand-alone document. It’s meant to be an appendix if adopted by the 48 Council and it fits into an overall Comprehensive Plan that has multiple elements. If there are 49 transportation issues that are relevant to California Avenue there’s the Transportation Element in the 50 Comprehensive Plan and perhaps that would be the place for policies and programs and so forth. 51 Likewise the environmental issues might be addressed elsewhere in the Comprehensive Plan and maybe 52 Aaron Aknin you look like you want to educate us on this topic. 53 54 Aaron Aknin, Assistant Director: Thank you. Aaron Aknin, Assistant Planning Director. I think you pretty 55 much covered it. I think the thing we would note is that this Comprehensive Plan will undergo a full 56 5 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) that will look into issues like that and propose mitigation measures as 1 necessary. That might be mitigation measures that are placed on, eventually placed on individual 2 projects. So the individual elements aren’t always where you go into detail of environmental review. 3 That’s usually in the EIR. 4 5 Chair Michael: Perhaps we could get a Motion and then finish our discussion? Commissioner Alcheck? 6 7 MOTION 8 9 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, I move that staff recommend, excuse me, I move that we approve this draft 10 California Avenue Concept Plan and support its inclusion in the draft Comprehensive Plan Update and 11 move it up the chain. 12 13 SECOND 14 15 Chair Michael: Motion by Commissioner Alcheck, second by Vice-Chair Keller. Commissioner Alcheck 16 would you like to speak to your Motion? 17 18 Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah, I want to thank staff. I think the last two meetings we had on this were 19 lengthy and we had a lot of discussion on the specific things we wanted you guys to address and I was 20 really pleased to see you address them linearly and I thought the staff report actually was very articulate 21 about telling us where we could look to see some of the general ideas that we brought up to you 22 addressed. So I think this articulates our group effort and I’m excited to get this to Council. 23 24 Chair Michael: Vice-Chair Keller. 25 26 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT #1 FAILED, UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #1 27 28 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. So I think that this is an important development, at least the Comp Plan is, 29 I’m not sure about all the developments that will happen as a result of it, but I think that there was input 30 from the public and staff did a lot of work and I know that the Commission had lots of meetings in 31 addition to two tours of the affected area and I’m wondering, I’d like to entertain three particular things 32 that we might consider giving directions to staff on. And I’ll make those as amendments that may be 33 friendly or unfriendly as the maker decides. 34 35 The first is a reference to the underground pollution plume of TCE and concern for the impact of, on 36 development of that plume and basically make a reference to that in the narrative so that people, so it’s 37 front and center while people are reading that. So I make that as a friendly amendment. So I guess the 38 maker declines to make it as a friendly amendment and therefore I offer it as an unfriendly amendment. 39 40 Chair Michael: Is there a second? Is there a second? 41 42 SECOND 43 44 Commissioner King: Yes. 45 46 Chair Michael: So Motion by Vice-Chair Keller, seconded by Commissioner King to include in the narrative 47 a reference to the environmental issue of the TCE plume. Commissioner King do you want to speak to 48 your second? 49 50 Commissioner King: I’d actually like to ask staff a question on that. As far as, so currently and I know 51 there is some truth I remember a couple of years ago at least in the paper there was a sort of that there 52 I believe it was some Google related buildings where they had found unsafe levels of TCE in the air that 53 they had not realized was a risk. So how, currently how does the City or Palo Alto protect their citizens 54 from that potential? 55 56 6 Mr. Aknin: Elena could add… so for instance we have a building under construction right now, 195 Page 1 Mill, and you could correct me if I’m wrong but my understanding is that we actually have required that a 2 special inspector be out there during construction to make sure everything is being built per the federal, 3 state, and local regulations. So in that area there are extra steps that someone has to go through when 4 they’re going under construction and extra remediation that they have to do prior to construction. 5 6 Ms. Lee: Staff has been working really carefully with the Regional Water Quality Board. They are actually 7 the agency that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) designated to regulate the cleanup of the 8 area. So that would be the COE Plume. So staff has been working very carefully with all those agencies 9 throughout reviews of individual projects such as 195 Page Mill as well as the mixed-use project at Birch. 10 So we’re very aware of this contamination issue. We work very carefully with the applicant’s consultants. 11 We’ve also hired our own consultants to do peer review at times and to have regular conversations with 12 both the, with the Water Board. We also understand that the Water Board is working very closely with 13 EPA in trying to make sure that adequate protections are put onsite. And so part of that has included 14 additional inspections onsite throughout both not just the construction process, but also a year after the 15 buildings have been occupied. So there have been a lot of measures put in place. 16 17 The other item is in the Concept Plan does acknowledge this issue. So this would be Policy CACP-3.4 and 18 this would be in the Park Boulevard subarea so this would be on Page 18. It does state that we shall 19 work with property owners to ensure remediation of remnant contamination required for compliance with 20 federal, state, and local regulations. 21 22 Vice-Chair Keller: Which one was that? 23 24 Ms. Lee: This is Page 18, Policy CACP-3.4 above Goal CACP-4. 25 26 UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #1 WITHDRAWN, FRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 27 28 Vice-Chair Keller: In that case I withdraw my amendment since it’s covered. Ok. The second thing is to 29 incorporate a reference to the policy that we asked to add to the Business and Economics Element 30 regarding the retail mix study and basically put in the narrative a comment referencing that study as 31 being applicable to the California Avenue Business District and that would be basically in the area of 32 CACP-2 we’re talking about the business district so I’m proposing that as a friendly amendment. 33 34 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 ACCEPTED 35 36 Commissioner Alcheck: I welcome that. 37 38 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT #3 39 40 Vice-Chair Keller: Ok, and the third one is that we put a reference to the need, probably in CACP-1 I 41 would guess need to balance the rate of growth and parking availability and traffic congestion concerns. 42 Yes, I said that there was a need to balance and obviously staff would wordsmith this, but there’s a need 43 to balance the rate of growth and parking availability and traffic congestion concerns. 44 45 Chair Michael: Is that an additional policy? 46 47 Vice-Chair Keller: It would be an additional to be worded by staff policy under CACP-1. 48 49 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT #3 FAILED 50 51 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, I’m going to decline that so that we can have that as a separate piece. 52 53 UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 54 55 Vice-Chair Keller: Great, so I offer that as an unfriendly amendment then. 56 7 1 UNFRIENDLY AMENDMENT #2 FAILED 2 3 Chair Michael: Is there a second? It appears to fail for lack of a second. 4 5 Vice-Chair Keller: Ok. Alright, thank you. In that case I’m finished with my comments and proposed 6 amendments and I look forward to us having this item and I believe it now then goes to more public 7 feedback along with the rest of the Comp Plan. Is that the idea? 8 9 Ms. Lee: Yes, this will go to City Council for their formal decision and then it would be incorporated into 10 the overall Comp Plan process and that does include extensive public outreach. 11 12 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you very much. 13 14 Mr. Aknin: Through the Chair? I’d like to add one thing is that although staff didn’t include it in our initial 15 recommendation we too are supportive of the second amendment that Vice-Chair Keller had about 16 exploring the possibilities of a formula retail ban or regulations on Cal Ave. 17 18 Chair Michael: All in favor of the Motion please say aye (Aye). 19 20 Commissioner King: Question? 21 22 Chair Michael: Yeah? 23 24 Commissioner King: I’m just not sure, so Arthur that his amendment was fairly long and so I just want to 25 make sure what we’re voting on. Could you or staff read what we’re actually voting on? I understand of 26 course the core. My concern is just that we’re not saying we will have restrictions we’re just saying we’re 27 going to investigate restrictions. 28 29 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck. 30 31 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, the Motion is to approve, excuse me, I keep switching to the next… it’s to 32 (interrupted) 33 34 Chair Michael: It’s to support the inclusion of the California Avenue Area Concept Plan in the draft 35 Comprehensive Plan Update including the proposed amendment to make a reference to a policy favoring 36 non-national chain retail. 37 38 Mr. Aknin: Yes, it’s to explore. 39 40 Commissioner Alcheck: It’s to refer to the discussion we had when we talked about the Business Element 41 regarding I think retail and also there was retail/housing mix and then there was a second component 42 about no loss of retail. So that discussion to include something about investigating those topics in the 43 Concept Plan’s continued evolution. 44 45 Chair Michael: I’m going to try something; what does staff understand? 46 47 Mr. Aknin: That’s basically that my understanding is that it would be the same policy that we included in 48 the Business Element, which is basically to explore the possibility of different regulations related to 49 formula retail bands or investigating the right mixture of uses within the Cal Ave. area. 50 51 Chair Michael: Ok. So we’re going to support the Motion to support the inclusion of the California Avenue 52 Area Concept Plan including staff to explore the possibility of incorporating some constraint on formula 53 retail in the Comprehensive Plan in the appropriate location. 54 55 Mr. Aknin: That works. 56 8 1 Chair Michael: All in favor? Alright, Commissioner Tanaka. 2 3 Commissioner Tanaka: Can you allow some discussion on this before we vote or you want to? 4 5 Chair Michael: Certainly. I thought we had the discussion, but if you would like to discuss it please 6 proceed. 7 8 Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. I don’t support that Motion like I didn’t last time mainly because of two 9 reasons. One is because I believe that I think freedom of enterprise I think it’s important that the best 10 business thrives even if it is not, even if it is a chain or if it’s not a chain. I think the example we talked 11 about last time was Apple. Someone said Apple was first in Palo Alto now it’s a chain with 400 stores, 12 will we not want to have Apple now in Palo Alto? It doesn’t make sense. I think the other thing I think it 13 hurts the consumer as well. So I think in the thought of trying to do the greatest good I think it’s 14 important that the best business is allowed to thrive and that consumers are given a choice even if it is a 15 chain. 16 17 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck. 18 19 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, so just to be really clear this isn’t about encouraging restriction in the Cal 20 Ave. Concept Plan. this is about the way I interpreted the friendly amendment was that Commissioner 21 Keller was asking if we could refer to the language that we used in the Business Element, which 22 encouraged staff to explore the idea among others of retail restrictions not to necessarily impose them. 23 And so I just wanted to be really clear I’m not suggesting that my Motion is to put in play any 24 restrictions, it’s to give staff the power to begin a process of evaluating what sort of restrictions could we 25 contemplate, what sort of options do we have in that area of deciding how that retail mix will occur. And 26 then there were other issues that we discussed and the Business Element included loss of retail and 27 housing mixes. We had this really lengthy discussion on the Business Element about the idea of 28 exploring these topics not actually making them a reality and I wanted us to incorporate that in this 29 ongoing Cal Ave. discussion. So I just don’t want you to think that the debate here is about whether or 30 not chains should or should not be there. It’s really can we have a discussion about whether or not 31 chains should be there? Can we have a discussion? Can we have staff look into it? That’s really the 32 goal. 33 34 Mr. Aknin: And I can read you the actual from the Business Element from the minutes here from what 35 Vice-Chair Keller said is that we basically said “Have explore a policy to have a study of promoting retail 36 diversity by considering such things as a mix of retail, of local and chain stores, locally owned or chain 37 stores and a mix of things like restaurants and nail salons.” So basically what is the correct diversity of 38 uses and should we explore the chain, not having chain stores. But it’s not it wasn’t an actual policy to 39 ban chain stores. 40 41 Chair Michael: I’m concerned that Commissioner Tanaka has raised an excellent point and I think that 42 there’s some difficulty in formulating this concern, this idea about the mix of retail as part of the 43 California Avenue Concept Plan and I don’t want to encumber the good work that’s gone into the 44 California Avenue Concept Plan with something which is unnecessarily controversial. Given the fact that 45 the good thinking that we have relative to appropriate mix of retail is going to be part of the draft 46 Business and Economics Element, which would be part of the Comprehensive Plan if adopted I wonder if 47 the, if this amendment could be withdrawn so we could have a clean Motion on the California Avenue 48 Concept Plan as drafted? 49 50 Vice-Chair Keller: Well there are two ways of handling this. Firstly I was talking about putting in a 51 narrative in there, not necessarily a goal. So this way it would make reference to the fact that this thing 52 affects us. The second thing is that I believe under Robert’s Rules of Order the Chair has the ability to 53 bifurcate motions. 54 55 BIFURCATED MOTION, VOTE 56 9 1 Chair Michael: Ok, so I appreciate the coaching on the power wielded by the Chair. I would like to 2 bifurcate the Motion and call for a vote first upon the Motion to include in the narrative the concept 3 regarding the appropriate mix of retail. So with that let’s vote on that. All in favor of including direction 4 to staff to include something in the narrative regarding the appropriate mix of retail? All opposed? That 5 passes three to two. 6 7 MOTION PASSED (3-2-1, Commissioners Tanaka and Michael opposed, Commissioner Martinez absent) 8 9 BIFURCATED MOTION, VOTE 10 11 Now let’s have a vote on the Motion to support the inclusion of the California Avenue Area Concept Plan 12 in the draft Comprehensive Plan Update. All in favor? That’s unanimous with Commissioner… so 13 Commissioner King, Vice-Chair Keller, Chair Michael, Commissioner Alcheck, and Commissioner Tanaka 14 supporting that. Commissioners Tanaka and Michael voted no on the prior Motion. Congratulations. 15 16 MOTION PASSED (5-0-1, Commissioner Martinez absent) 17 18 Commission Action: Motion by Vice-Chair Keller to include in the narrative the appropriate mix of 19 retail, second by Commissioner King, Motion passed (3-2-1, Vice-Chair Keller and Commissioners Alcheck 20 and King for, Chair Michael and Commissioner Tanaka opposed, Commissioner Martinez absent). Motion 21 by Commissioner Alcheck, second by Vice-Chair Keller to support staff recommendation of the inclusion 22 of the California Avenue Area Concept Plan in to the Concept Plan to City Council. Motion passed 23 unanimously (5-1, Commissioner Martinez absent) 24 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4674) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: El Camino Real Sidewalk Ordinance Continuance to April 28, 2014 Title: Public Hearing - Council Adoption of an Ordinance Modifying: (1) Chapter 18.16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) to: (a) Address Sidewalk Width and Building Setbacks (Setback and “build-to” Line Standards, and Context Based Design Criteria) Along El Camino Real, and (b) Reduce the Allowable Floor Area Ratio on CN Zoned Sites Where Dwelling Units are Permitted at 20 Units Per Acre; and (2) PAMC Chapter 18.04 to Adjust the Definition of Lot Area and Add a Definition for “Effective Sidewalk”. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of CEQA per section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations)(STAFF REQUESTS ITEM BE CONTINUED TO APRIL 29, 2014) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council continue this public hearing item one week to April 29, 2014, to allow public notices to accurately reflect the Planning and Transportation Commission’s (PTC) recommendation at their April 9, 2014 public hearing. The additional time will also allow staff to prepare an amended report addressing questions and comments raised during the PTC hearing. Executive Summary In mid-2013 and early 2014, the City Council requested that staff prepare a draft ordinance for their consideration that would increase sidewalk widths along major thoroughfares in the City and reduce the building density (Floor Area Ration or “FAR”) for a limited number of sites that are zoned Commercial Neighborhood (CN) and allow for residential densities of 20 dwelling units per acre. Staff has prepared and refined a draft ordinance focusing on El Camino Real, and modifying development standards in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapters 18.16 and 18.04. Staff City of Palo Alto Page 2 has received input from property owners and others over the last several months. The Architectural Review Board (ARB) and the PTC have also considered the draft ordinance on multiple occasions and provided their recommendations. Staff requires an additional week to prepare a complete staff report regarding the proposed ordinance and to properly notice the public hearing. Revised notices must accurately reflect the PTC’s recommendation in this case that Council not adopt the proposed ordinance, and instead, incorporate the discussion of sidewalk width, with building height and density, and other related development standards, as part of the Our Palo Alto (Comprehensive Plan) discussion, to realize the Grand Boulevard Initiative. City of Palo Alto (ID # 4690) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Resolution of Support for Measure AA (Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Bond) Title: Adoption of a Resolution in Support of Measure AA (Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Bond) From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommended Motion Approve the resolution in support of Measure AA (Regional Open Space Access, Preservation and Restoration Bond) on the June 3, 2014 ballot. Background The City Council will receive a presentation on Measure AA, a general obligation bond measure that the Midpeninsula Open Space Board of Directors voted to place on the June 3, 2014 ballot. Following the presentation, Council may choose to support a resolution of support for the bond measure (Attachment A). If approved by two-thirds of the voters in the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District, which includes portions of Santa Clara County, San Mateo County, and Santa Cruz County, the Open Space District will be authorized to issue up to $300 million in general obligation bonds. Residents in the district would pay a property tax assessment not to exceed $3.18 per $100,000 assessed value per year. The measure will fund the District’s 25 highest priority projects and will result in expanded public access to protected land, protection of redwood forests, land and natural habitat restoration, and preservation of agricultural land along the San Mateo Coast. The Measure AA projects near Palo Alto would help: Build new trails and support wetlands restoration in the Baylands; Develop new trails and improve existing trails at Windy Hill; Open Hawthorns historic area of Windy Hill with the possibility to connect to Palo Alto trails; City of Palo Alto Page 2 Re-open and improve Alpine Road for trail use; and Build a welcome center at Rancho San Antonio and find solutions to improve access. Regionally, Measure AA projects will: Complete Purisima-to-the-Sea Trail; Build biking and hiking trails at El Corte de Madera Creek and complete gaps in the Ridge Trail; Open upper La Honda Creek Preserve for public recreation and re-introduce grazing and restore habitat; Preserve upper San Gregorio Creek watershed; and Open the Miramontes Ridge to the public with new trails and restore Madonna Creek watershed. Measure AA is endorsed by the League of Women Voters Bay Area, Silicon Valley Leadership Group, Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce, and 300 elected officials and community leaders. Without Measure AA, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District would be able to implement fewer of these projects and at a much slower pace. Additional information about Measure AA is available on the Midpeninsula Open Space District website at http://www.openspace.org/news/bond_measure.asp and yesforopenspace.org. An informational brochure on the bond measure is also attached (Attachment B). Attachments: A - Measure AA Support Resolution_4-21-2014 (PDF) B - Measure AA Regional Open Space Brochure (PDF) RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO SUPPORTING MEASURE AA, REGIONAL OPEN SPACE – ACCESS, PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION BOND WHEREAS , the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Board of Directors voted to place a general obligation bond measure on the June 3, 2014 ballot; and WHEREAS, approval of the bond measure by voters in the District, which includes portions of Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Santa Cruz Counties, would allow the District to seek up to $300 million in general obligation bonds; and residents in the district would pay a property tax assessment not to exceed $3.18 per $100,000 assessed value per year; and WHEREAS, the measure would regionally fund expanded public access to protected land, protection of redwood forests, land and natural habitat restoration, and preservation of agricultural land along the San Mateo Coast; and WHEREAS, the measure would improve recreational opportunities for Palo Alto residents by increasing access to hiking and biking trails, as well as restore and protect natural habitats in the District, improve the scenic beauty of the region, and reduce forest fire risk; and WHEREAS, these Measure AA projects include Baylands trails and restoration, re-opening Alpine Road as a biking and hiking trail, improve facilities at Rancho San Antonio, and the District’s other 25 highest priority projects as defined by its Vision Plan; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby declare its enthusiastic support for Measure AA, Regional Open Space – Access, Preservation and Restoration Bond on the June 2, 2014 ballot. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: April 21, 2014 ATTEST: APPROVED: ___________________ ______________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________ ______________________ City Attorney City Manager Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District To Learn More Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 650-691-1200 www.openspace.org info@openspace.org HIGHLIGHTS Based on public input and feedback, future bond money would: • Expand public access to protected land • Save local redwood forests • Provide clean air and water by restoring land that feeds our lakes, streams, ponds and waterways • Preserve agriculture along the San Mateo Coast • Restore native vegetation to create a healthy habitat for wildlife and preserve biodiversity The Midpen Board of Directors voted to place a general obligation bond measure on the June 3, 2014 ballot. The decision came after a long public process to help shape the direction and priorities of the District into the future. The resulting vision plan reflects the public’s priorities to expand, enhance, and connect regional trails and open space areas, to preserve open space, and to complete restoration projects. The measure requires a two-thirds vote in Midpen’s jurisdiction in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties and a portion of unincorporated Santa Cruz County. overSIGHT An independent citizen oversight committee will review that funds are spent as promised. Measure aa regional open Space | access, Preservation and restoration Bond THE 17 CITIES THAT COMPRISE MIDPENINSULA REGIONAL OPEN SPACE DISTRICT Atherton East Palo Alto Half Moon Bay Menlo Park Portola Valley Redwood City San Carlos Woodside Cupertino Los Altos Los Altos Hills Los Gatos Monte Sereno Mountain View Palo Alto Saratoga Sunnyvale aMoUnT & CoST To improve access to hiking and biking opportunities, protect and preserve redwood forests, natural open spaces, the scenic beauty of our region and coastline, critical wildlife habitat, restore creeks to protect water quality, and reduce forest fire risk; shall Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District be authorized to issue up to $300 million in bonds, at a tax rate not to exceed $3.18 per $100,000 of assessed value of property owned, with expenditures verified by an independent citizen oversight committee? aBoUT THe DISTrICT Founded by voters in 1972, the Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District has protected 62,000 acres of open space in 26 preserves offering places for hiking, biking, horseback riding, or simply connecting with nature close to home and free of charge. SAN MATEO COUNTY SANTA CLARA COUNTY Increased access close to home 1 # 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 128 9 1615 14 17 19 20 13 21 22 23 24 25 18 Midpeninsula Regional Open Space Preserves Regional Trail Public Access, Restoration, Land Conservation Projects# Through a public visioning process, Midpen staff and its Community Advisory Committee identified current and future project areas of high priority. These include adding trails and trail connections, opening new preserves, protecting redwood forests, preserving farmland, restoring wetlands and streams, providing habitat connectivity and reducing fire risk. The funding for this bond measure will be used toward the 25 highest priority projects. A complete list with more details can be found at www.openspace.org/MeasureAA. Projects to be Funded by Measure aa Increasedaccess close to home 1 # 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 11 128 9 1615 14 17 19 20 13 21 22 23 24 25 18 Midpeninsula RegionalOpen Space Preserves Regional Trail Public Access, Restoration,Land Conservation Projects# 330 Distel Circle Los Altos, CA 94022 650-691-1200 www.openspace.org Projects to be Funded by Measure aa 7. La Honda Creek: Driscoll Ranch access, endangered wildlife protection and conservation grazing projects 8. La Honda Creek/Russian Ridge: Preservation of Upper San Gregorio Watershed and Ridge Trail completion 9. Russian Ridge: Public recreation, grazing and wildlife protection projects 10. Coal Creek: Reopening Alpine Road for trail use 11. Rancho San Antonio: Interpretive improvements, refurbishing and transit solutions 12. Peninsula/South Bay Cities: Partnering to complete Middle Stevens Creek Trail 13. Cloverdale Coastal Ranch: Wildlife protection, grazing, and trail connections 14. Regional: Trail connections between regional, county and state parks 15. Regional: Redwood protection and salmon fishery conservation 16. Long Ridge: Trail, conservation and habitat restoration projects 17. Regional: Completion of Upper Stevens Creek Trail 18. South Bay Foothills: Saratoga-to-Sea Trail and wildlife corridor 19. El Sereno: Dog trails and connection to Skyline, Sanborn County Park, and Lexington Reservoir 20. South Bay Foothills: Safe wildlife corridors across Hwy. 17; new Bay Area Ridge Trail crossing 21. Bear Creek Redwoods: Public recreation and interpretive projects 22. Sierra Azul: Cathedral Oaks public access and conservation projects 23. Sierra Azul: Mt. Umunhum public access and interpretation projects 24. Sierra Azul: Rancho de Guadalupe family recreation and interpretive projects 25. Sierra Azul: Loma Prieta area public access, regional trails and habitat protection 1. Miramontes Ridge: San Mateo Coast public access, stream restoration and agricultural enhancement projects 2. Regional: Bayfront habitat protection and public access partnerships 3. Purisima Creek Redwoods: Purisima-to-the-Sea Trail completion, watershed protection, and conservation grazing projects 4. El Corte de Madera Creek: Bike trail and water quality project 5. La Honda Creek: Upper area recreation, habitat restoration, and conservation grazing projects 6. Windy Hill: Trail improvements, preservation and partnership of Hawthorn Area historic area www.openspace.org/MeasureAA City of Palo Alto (ID # 4662) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 Summary Title: Caltrain Modernization EIR Comment Letter Title: Discussion and Approval of Caltrain Draft Environmental Impact Report Comment Letter From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve the attached Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) comment letter (Attachment B) following your review and input. Executive Summary Caltrain recently released the Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Draft Environmental Impact (DEIR). This DEIR aims to analyze the potential environmental impacts associated with a project that would electrify the altrain orridor from San Francisco’s 4th and King altrain Station to approximately the Tamien Caltrain Stationin San Jose, convert diesel-hauled trains to Electric Multiple Unit (EMU) trains, and increase service up to six Caltrain trains per peak hour per direction by 2019. Per California Law, Caltrain has released the DEIR for public review and comment. City staff has conducted the review with the assistance of an experienced environmental consultant firm (Dudek), and has drafted the attached DEIR comment letter. Staff’s review found that altrain generally responded well to the ity’s previous concerns and comments; however there are several areas that need additional follow-up in the Final EIR. A copy of the EIR can be viewed here: http://www.caltrain.com/projectsplans/CaltrainModernization/Modernization/PeninsulaCorrid orElectrificationProject.html Background On January 31, 2013, Caltrain released a “Notice of Preparation” of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to evaluate the environmental issues associated with proposed Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project. The Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project would allow for operation of up to six Caltrain trains per peak hour per direction (an increase from five currently) with operating speeds of up to 79 mph (the same as today). City of Palo Alto Page 1 Caltrain previously evaluated corridor electrification in a prior Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in 2009, but decided to prepare this new EIR for the corridor electrification to update existing conditions, the environmental analysis, and the cumulative analysis. The new EIR allows public agencies, stakeholders, the public, and decision-makers the opportunity to review and comment on the project’s environmental effects in light of current information and analyses. On February 28, 2014, Caltrain released their DEIR and will be accepting comments on that DEIR for 60 days until April 29, 2014. Property owners, residents, public agencies, and all interested parties are invited to review and provide comments on the information contained in the DEIR. The ity submitted “scoping” comments in response to the Notice of Preparation released in early 2013. !fter receiving the Draft EIR, ity staff and the ity’s environmental review consultant (Dudek) reviewed the DEIR Caltrain paying particular attention to how Caltrain addressed comments made in the ity’s comment letter and addressed identified impact. The findings of this review are discussed below. Caltrain will address the comments made in all DEIR comment letters in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), which is currently scheduled for publication in Fall 2014. Discussion In 2013, the ity of Palo !lto submitted a “scoping letter” in response to the Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Draft Environmental Impact (DEIR) “Notice of Preparation” letter. Since the release of the DEIR in February 2014, ity staff (in conjunction with the ity’s environmental consultant firm) has conducted a review of the DEIR to ensure the scoping comments were addressed and identified impacts were properly mitigated. Generally, the DEIR did provide adequate analysis and mitigation as requested in the ity’s scoping letter. However, there are several areas where additional analysis and/or mitigation should be incorporated into the Final EIR. The following report details how Caltrain responded to the ity’s requests in the scoping letter and notes where a Final EIR response is necessary. The attached comment letter is more concise than the following section, as it only details areas where additional analysis and/or mitigation are necessary. The original scoping letter is attached to this report for reference. 1. Analysis of Future Improvements The Corridor Electrification Project is designed to accommodate future High Speed Rail (HSR) service on the corridor, rather than separate commuter and HSR facilities – thus it is referred to as the “blended project.” The orridor Electrification Project is analyzed as a distinct project, and the future HSR service is considered within the cumulative impact analysis. The DEIR justifies this on the basis of the project having independent utility (providing Caltrain electrified service) and logical termini (station end points). Another approach would be to treat the Corridor Electrification as phase 1 of a multi-phase project, based on the ultimate joint use of City of Palo Alto Page 2 facilities and the interrelations of funding (the California High Speed Rail Authority is funding part of the electrification project). Each approach has benefits and drawbacks. The “independent project” approach carries with it a risk that the future effects of the blended project may be understated. However, the cumulative analysis in the DEIR, particularly with regards to operational impacts such as noise and air quality, is robust, and the DEIR’s approach to the corridor electrification project and cumulative impacts is reasonable. 2. Impacts on Local Traffic The project would provide a regional benefit, by reducing intercity automobile trips, but would also affect local traffic. Local traffic would increase near Caltrain stations as more riders access the system. The increase in the number of trains would result in longer gate times, further affecting local traffic near the corridor. The DEIR does address both of these issues (in addition to several others, such as impacts to local parking, and impacts to transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities), however additional follow-up is necessary as noted below and in the attached comment letter. According to the Draft EIR, four intersections within the City of Palo Alto would be significantly impacted by the project. Of these, one intersection would operate at an acceptable level with implementation of mitigation, while the remaining three intersections would remain significant and unavoidable (the most intersections in any jurisdiction along the project corridor). Mitigation for Study Intersection 64, Alma Street/Sand Hill Road, would reduce the project impacts to less-than significant (in part) by widening “the west land of Sand Hill Road by adding one lane to allow southbound right turns on red”. !dditional analysis may be necessary to determine whether this is the right improvement for the City. The Final EIR should indicate that Caltrain will work with the City to determine whether an alternative mitigation may be more appropriate. Furthermore, the DEIR does not identify the funding source, or the responsibility for implementing this measure. This information should be included in the FEIR, and its accompanying Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, in order to demonstrate that this mitigation measure would be implemented and the impact effectively mitigated. ased on altrain’s analysis, the remaining three intersections (Study Intersections #63, 66, and 68) are all located on Alma Street, and cannot be mitigated due to geometric constraints. The DEIR should, however, explore improvements that could reduce (though not avoid) transportation impacts. These could include improved bicycle or pedestrian facilities, either at the affected intersections, or at the Caltrain stations which are the destination point of the increased traffic. Also, given the geometric constraints, the DEIR should consider mitigation beyond lane and signalization improvements for the significantly impacted intersections. For example, the City is currently conducting grade separation feasibility study, and Caltrain could establish a mitigation fund to assist with the implementation of future (not yet identified) corridor improvements to reduce the identified impacts. City of Palo Alto Page 3 3. Catenary Wire Installation Installation of the overhead catenary system (OCS) will have a visual impact and will require the removal of vegetation (which will have an additional visual impact and a potential noise impact, discussed separately below). Long-term impacts are found significant and unavoidable due to vegetation removal, after the implementation of mitigation (Measure AES2b, BIO-5, and CUL- 1d). The comment letter includes the following comments on the visual and vegetation impact analysis related to the OCS (impacts related to Paralleling Station PS-5 are discussed in a separate comment below): Visual simulations are a useful part of the analysis. However, it is noted that Figure 3.1- 9, Churchill Avenue, Palo Alto, does not represent how most viewers will experience the visual impact of the OCS, and minimized the degree of visual change. Most viewers will not be looking down the centerline of the corridor, but will be looking at the side of OCS (similar to Figure 3.1-6) alignment as viewers move through the landscape, particularly on Alma Street. The Final EIR should analyze the potential visual impact of the OCS from the centerline of the corridor. The Final EIR should refer to the adopted Rail Corridor Plan that contains programs designed to facilitate electrification while mitigating impacts to the local environment. Particular attention should be paid to Rail Corridor Plan policies that address visual impacts. Measure AES-2b requires “aesthetic treatments” for project features, “aesthetic considerations” when selecting pole design, no unpainted metal surfaces, color matched paint, and paint tones darker than the surrounding visual area. This implies that all of the catenary poles would be painted, which seems to be impractical in terms of maintenance. The comment letter recommends that the JPB consider different metal finishes, in addition to different paint tone and pole sizes. For example, would galvanized steel or weathered steel finish better fade into the background and reduce the visual impact (and reduce maintenance costs)? The letter recognizes the effort to find the most aesthetically pleasing OCS poles, but notes that these measures would not mitigate for the addition of the cantilevers or wires themselves, which would be visible in certain areas either to the height or lack of vegetation (including removal of vegetation). Measure BIO-5, which is proposed to reduce the effects of tree removal, does not include provisions to add vegetation in areas impacted by OCS installation. No other additional visual screening is proposed in areas where sensitive viewers would be affected by the OCS. The DEIR analysis concludes that the visual effect of tree removal is significant and unavoidable. Given issues regarding implementation of mitigation, further described below, and the removal of approximately 177 trees with in the City of City of Palo Alto Page 4 Palo Alto, the City concurs with this finding. Thus, given that Measure BIO-5 does not fully mitigate for the removal of trees, nor provide additional screening of the OCS, and that measure AES-2b would not fully mitigate the effects of the OCS, the DEIR should find the visual impact of the OCS system significant and unavoidable (while the overall impact of Impact AES-2b is significant and unavoidable due to the vegetation removal, the analysis makes findings for each component, and found the OCS impact to be less than significant). Regarding the overbridge protection barriers, the DEIR options include simple fencing mesh or Lexan. While Lexan, or a fine mesh, may be more aesthetically pleasing in theory, in practice such surfaces may be prone to graffiti or other vandalism, thus creating a long-term visual impact and maintenance problem. The comment letter therefore recommends use of larger fencing mesh in areas susceptible to graffiti. Mitigation Measure AES-2b does not address graffiti impacts for solid project structures, such as the building shown in Figure 3.1-17. The comment letter therefore recommends the measure be modified to take this into account. The comments letter provides the following additional comments regarding Mitigation Measure BIO-5: a) The measure states that tree pruning during construction “will be done in accordance with arboricultural industry recommended practices.” This statement should be more specific, and require compliance with CPUC General Order 118. Pruning specifications should follow ANSI A300 standards and ISA Best Management Practices (these standards are discussed in Appendix F, Tree Inventory and Canopy Assessment, but not incorporated into the mitigation measure itself). b) The comment letter notes that the City agrees with the requirement for tree replacement. Measure BIO-5 states if on-site tree replacement “cannot occur on the Caltrain ROW (where trees are removed from the ROW) or on adjacent property (where trees are removed outside of the ROW), then tree replacement may occur on other parts of the affected property (with concurrence of the land owner) or other parts of the local area (with concurrence of the local municipality).” The use of “may” implies such mitigation may not occur. Since the DEIR does not contain any analysis that sufficient area is available for on-site planting, off-site planting may be a significant component of the mitigation measure, however the DEIR also lacks analysis regarding sufficient area or mechanisms for off-site planting. As an alternative to off-site planting, the JPB may pay into a local urban forestry fund to support local tree planting programs, provided JPB and local municipalities can agree on the appropriate fund and amount. The replacement requirements described above will apply in determining the equivalent funding amount. !gain, because the measure is predicated on “may pay” but only City of Palo Alto Page 5 “provided JP and local municipalities can agree” the measure appears too vague to be effective. The comments letters states the measure should be written affirmatively (e.g. “JP will”) and potential implementing local partners (municipal departments) or urban forestry funds should be described. c) The Tree Avoidance, Minimization, and Replacement Plan described in Measure BIO-5 should include performance standards, survival criteria, and monitoring/reporting requirements for replacement trees. 4. Pedestrian Accessibility In its Scoping Comments, the City noted that the removal of vegetation and creation of an additional clear zone in or adjacent to Caltrain right of way could create an opportunity for additional pedestrian access. This was not addressed in the DEIR. While this would not be a mitigation measure for aesthetic and biological impacts, the comment letter notes that it is a potential opportunity that could also serve as non-vehicular mitigation for the impacts noted above in Comment 2. 5. Ridership Estimates and Impacts to Caltrain Service The ridership estimates developed by Caltrain for Caltrain only (not including HSR) are discussed on page 2-12 of the DEIR. The “blended project” ridership is discussed on page 4-20 of the DEIR, as part of the cumulative impacts. The ridership analysis for the “blended system” is included as Appendix I of the DEIR. The need to improve the stations that would serve blended Caltrain/HSR service is briefly discussed in Section 4.1, Cumulative Impacts (see page 4- 17). It is also noted that the stations within the City of Palo Alto would not be HSR stations. However, the DEIR notes that station “design is at a preliminary conceptual level except for the Transbay Transit enter (TT).” The TT and the San Francisco 4th and King Station were addressed in a 2004 FEIR. The Caltrain FEIR should clarify the responsibility for project-level analysis and CEQA compliance for the rest of the HSR stations. Furthermore, as requested in our scoping letter, the FEIR needs to address to what degree High Speed Rail constrains future Caltrain capacity and what the related impacts are (traffic, GHG, etc) because of those constraints. 6. Construction Impacts The DEIR impact analysis generally does a good job of identifying construction and operational impacts for each affected resource. Construction impacts related to dust and criteria air pollutant emissions are required to adhere to BAAQMD standards and are addressed by Mitigation measures AQ-2a, b, and c. The DEIR identified significant short term noise impacts, for which mitigations were identified. While the short-term impact is significant and unavoidable, the mitigation measures will minimize construction noise (Measure NOI-1a). City of Palo Alto Page 6 Construction related impacts concerning noise are addressed in the DEIR and found to be significant and unavoidable. To the extent feasible, construction noise will be mitigated by MM NOI-1a with a Construction Noise Control Plan. Regarding short-term traffic impacts, most construction activity would occur in the Caltrain ROW, but temporary lane closures could significantly affect traffic. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-1a would mitigate impacts to a less than significant level for traffic operations, including emergency vehicle access. Potential construction impacts related to public utilities would be less-than-significant, including impacts on water systems and landfills, and less-than-significant with mitigation for disruption of utility service with implementation of Mitigation Measures PSU-8a, b, and c, and Measure PSU-9.7. 7. Visual Impact of Paralleling Station PS-5 The location of PS-5 Option 1 is adjacent to the Greenmeadow neighborhood, a historical neighborhood. As the historic quality of the neighborhood is related to aesthetic values of its midcentury architecture, the introduction of contrasting visual elements is a great concern. While the DEIR stated that few houses have a direct view of PS-5 Option 1, the letter also notes that the location is directly opposite Greenmeadow Way, a major access point from the neighborhood to Alma Street, an arterial street, and thus would be visible to many, if not most, residents and visitors, at some point during the day. The vegetative screening simulated in Figure 3.1-17 clearly is inadequate. The vegetation would partially obscure the ground mounted transformers, but not the associated building and not the wire support structure. The attached letter indicates that the City understands that the “clearzone” requirements of the paralleling station do not allow for replacement, or addition, of trees that would more effectively reduce the visual impact of the structure. Based on the sensitivity of the viewers, the degree of change, and the ineffectiveness of the proposed mitigation, the DEIR should find the visual impact of PS-5 Option 1 to be significant and unavoidable. The letter therefore recommend the following: Adoption of Option 2. While this location is visible from residential units on the corner of Alma St. and California (a fact noted briefly by the DEIR but largely downplayed), it is on the south side of the rail corridor, unlike Option 1. In addition, the immediate surroundings of Option 2 are largely commercial or industrial in nature. The proposed station would be located adjacent to a structure of similar size and character. While the optimal operational spacing may be realized at Option 1, there is no evidence in the DEIR that Option 2 is not a fully feasible alternative. The draft letter therefore recommends adoption of Option 2. City of Palo Alto Page 7 San Antonio Drive. If a location closer to Option 1 is required, the DEIR should examine a location near the San Antonio Station. The overcrossing at San Antonio would serve to minimize the visual impact of a paralleling station near that location, residential receptors would be less impacted compared to Option 1, and it appears from aerial photographs that there is adequate space to accommodate the facility. If Option 2 is not selected, the Final EIR should consider an alternative location such as San Antonio Drive or explain why an alternative location is not feasible. If it is demonstrated that an alternative location is not feasible, the letter recommends that the Final EIR should identify additional mitigation specific to the Option 1 site. For example, planted vertical structures (“living walls”) are increasingly used in commercial/industrial landscaping to screen sensitive areas. Even a simpler structure, such as an arbor, or high vine-covered fence could provide screening without encroaching on the clearzone. Additional analysis would be required to determine if this mitigation would reduce the visual impacts to less than significant at this location. 8. Noise at Paralleling Station PS-5 The DEIR utilized Federal Transit Administration (FTA) information to quantify expected noise generation from paralleling stations (including PS-5). The FTA studied noise generation from this type of facility, intended specifically for electrified train systems. The FTA information indicates an operating noise level of 70 dBA (LDN) at 50 feet. The identified noise level from continuous operation would be reduced to 64 dBA (LDN) at 100 feet, and 58 dBA (LDN) at 200 feet. These distances do not include intervening structures or topography (including vegetation). The WIA study identified no significant noise impacts from the PS-5 operation upon vicinity residences (at either Option 1 or Option 2). Based on the information presented in the DEIR, the comment letter does not dispute these findings, although it should be noted that the ity’s consultants did not independently verify the noise attenuation for the PS-5 sensitive receptors. 9. Horn Noise vs. Rail Noise The DEIR provided a comprehensive analysis of noise and vibration effects, beginning with compilation of noise measurement data from a 2004 electrification study and completion of long-term noise measurements at 12 locations in the corridor. The measurements were used to describe the existing noise environment, as well as to calibrate the FTA train noise model. The analysis in the DEIR was able to confirm that the FTA assumptions for freight train and diesel locomotive passenger train noise levels were applicable to the train operations within the project corridor. Thus, the FTA train noise model was appropriate for predicting future noise levels for increased rail operations. For the proposed electrified passenger train service, the analysis used noise data for high-speed passenger trains, as directed in the FTA guidelines. City of Palo Alto Page 8 This is considered conservative, because the high-speed rail operating at 110 MPH would have greater noise emissions levels than the proposed track speed of 79 MPH in the project corridor. The DEIR determined that noise reductions would occur under the proposed 75% replacement of diesel passenger trains with electrified trains; within Palo Alto, the noise reductions from electrified trains would be greater than the slight increases associated with horn and crossing signals operations for the added commuter rail service (increasing from 5 trains to 6 trains per hour). Combining the two effects, a less than 0.5 dBA decrease would occur in the average noise level (expressed as LDN). !sd on the analysis done by the ity’s consultant, the comment letter concurs that this would be an imperceptible change to the public. 10. Freight Train Noise The project does not include expansion or modification of existing freight operations. Cumulative noise impacts will result from the future addition of freight trains in the corridor; although this is not a project effect. Freight trains will be increased in the future, with or without the project (see page 4-82 of the DEIR). The project would actually slightly decrease the average noise levels in the corridor, but these decreases will be overwhelmed in the future by freight train noise increases. In this regard, the project itself does not contribute in a substantial manner to the cumulatively significant noise impact. 11. Vibration Vibrations under the proposed project are expected to be marginally reduced. The track will not be replaced, so there will still be steel wheels rolling along the track, and the weight of the replacement trains is assumed to be similar to the existing train equipment. However, vibration patterns associated with the diesel engines for the passenger trains would be eliminated (75% electrified service by 2020, and 100% by 2040). 12. Greenhouse Gas Emissions The DEIR analyzes greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions related to both project construction and operations in Section 3.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change. Emissions were estimated using EMFAC2011 and CalEEMOD. Additional fuel consumption data provided by Caltrain operations and emission factors from the Climate Registry were used to estimate diesel train emissions. The DEIR uses the ay !rea !ir Quality Management District’s GHG thresholds for non-stationary and stationary sources, while acknowledging that this threshold is not ideally suited to a project of this type (regional transportation). Taking into account the electrification of Caltrain operations (decrease in diesel fuel consumption and increase in electricity usage), the decrease in regional vehicle miles travelled, the increase in local trips (to access Caltrain stations), and the loss of carbon sequestration due to tree removal, the DEIR concludes the overall change is a net reduction of GHG emissions. The impact is therefore determined to be less than significant. This conclusion appears reasonable based on the general approach. The City of Palo Alto Page 9 ity’s consultant, however, did not evaluate the modeling methods and emission factors to verify the assumptions and data used to support the analysis. 13. Train Speed The DEIR assumes a top speed of 79 mph, which is the maximum speed achievable under existing conditions. A top speed of 110 mph is considered in the cumulative analysis (as a result of improvements necessary for blended HSR service). However, the electrification does allow for increased acceleration and deceleration of trains, which in turn supports increased peak service levels from the current five trains per peak hour per direction to six with existing trackage. The DEIR takes into account the increase to six trains per hour per direction in the impact analysis, including traffic impact analysis at intersections with grade crossings. The DEIR also assumes the implementation of an advanced signal system known as CBOSS PTC or CBOSS. CBOSS stands for Communications Based Overlay Signal System and PTC stands for Positive Train Control. These improvements, previously analyzed as an independent project, would be operational in 2015, before operation of the corridor electrification project. 14. Utilities The DEIR discusses utility impacts according to the CEQA Appendix G checklist. Impacts to all utilities along the project corridor, including those within the City of Palo Alto, were analyzed. All effects on utilities were considered to have no impact, be less-than-significant, or be less- than-significant with mitigation. The DEIR also specifically calls out policies related to utilities contained in the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, including policies N-23, N-24, N-34, N-35, and N-37. The DEIR recognizes potential conflicts with utilities and proposed Power Traction Facilities. PS5 Option 2 is located within the City of Palo Alto. PS5 Option 1 is within the City of Mountain View, but directly adjacent to the Greenmeadow neighborhood within the City of Palo Alto. In order to fully address any potential impacts to utilities within the City, Mitigation Measure PSU-8a would require Caltrain to coordinate with all utility providers and local jurisdictions during engineering design and construction to ensure that all potential utility location conflicts are identified. 15. Mitigation The DEIR clearly identifies the mitigation measures in each section of the document and mitigation summary table accurately cross-references the mitigations found in their respective chapters. 16. EIR Age Studies, assessments, database searches conducted, and referenced materials for each section of the Caltrain DEIR were performed within the last two years (maximum) using the most recent figures available. City of Palo Alto Page 10 17. Hazardous Waste The DEIR recognizes that there is a higher probability of encountering hazardous materials during construction due to the record search results of proximate sites. Therefore, a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment will be conducted prior to construction at all Traction Power Facilities, as stated in Mitigation Measure HAZ-2a, and engineering controls and best management practices would be implemented during construction per Measure HAZ-2b. 18. Historic Resources The regulatory setting, Section 3.4.1.1, only addresses local policies for the cities of San Francisco and San Jose. It is not clear why the other Peninsula cities were omitted. For the Final EIR, the comment letter recommends inclusion of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan policy L-51: Encourage public and private upkeep and preservation of resources that have historic merit, including residences listed in the Historic Inventory. The DEIR identifies six historical resources within the City that could be affected by the project: San Francisquito Bridge (1902), the El Palo Alto tree, Palo Alto Station (1940), University Avenue Underpass (1941), Embarcadero Underpass (1936), and the Greenmeadow Neighborhood. The letter states that the City concurs that these are historic resources for the purposes of CEQA. However, it also notes several inconsistencies regarding potential impacts to these resources and the necessary mitigation measures. The discussion in the DEIR regarding the Palo Alto Station (page 3.4-22) is contradictory. Requiring, on the one hand, mitigation to reduce a potentially significant impact, but then stating that “only the setting of the tracks would be slightly affected, in that the poles would be installed between the sets of tracks, and would extend over them, at this location. This, however, is a less-than significant impact.” !s Mitigation Measure UL-1d clearly includes the Palo Alto Station, the discussion should reflect a potentially significant impact, reduced to less than significant with the implementation of measure CUL-1d. The discussion of El Palo !lto states that the “tree would not be impacted by the Proposed Project because all power system supports would be attached to the adjacent San Francisquito Bridge. Thus, the impacts on this resource would be less than significant and no mitigation is identified.” However, in the discussion of impact IO-5 it specifically states that minor trimming of the tree would be required. Further, the BIO-5 impact does not elaborate on what would be “minor.” The comment states that the Final EIR should clarify this, especially given the historic nature of the tree. Furthermore, any pruning must be done per the instructions of the City of Palo Alto Urban Forester. In addition, Impact CUL-1 should be corrected to state that El Palo Alto would be impacted by the project, and that mitigation is required (a cross reference to the updated Measure BIO-5). Lastly mitigation must include dust abatement and needle washing to be performed as needed during the construction process. City of Palo Alto Page 11 Similarly, the discussion of the University Avenue Underpass (page 3.4-29) states that the impact is less than significant, yet Measure CUL-1f requires mitigation to avoid impacts to the underpass. The comment letter indicates that the University Avenue Underpass discussion in Impact CUL-1 should be corrected to state the projects impacts are potentially significant prior to the application of mitigation measures. In addition, the letter recommends a clarification to Measure CUL-1f. The measure should specify that modifications to potentially historic structures will be completed in conformance with the SOI’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. While the project would not directly affect the historic Greenmeadow Neighborhood (by eliminating or modifying a contributing resource), the comment letter indicates that there are potentially significant visual impacts related to the siting of PS-5 Option 1 as currently proposed. This could contribute to an indirect impact to this cultural resource. Certainly the finding of “no impact” stated on page 3.4-30 should be revisited, and this section should cross reference the discussion of visual impacts. 19. Biological Resources New database searches were conducted in 2013 with the USFWS, CDFW, and CNPS, with additional information coming from the studies conducted in 2008 by Garcia and Associates. Combining these resources, the DEIR assembles a list of potentially affected special-status species; 10 plants, and 15 animals. Mitigation measures were prepared to address expected affects to these species from the project and in accordance to the CEQA Appendix G checklist. Dudek limited their review of the DEIR’s biological impact analysis to the proposed tree removals, which would have a direct effect on biological and visual resources within the City (see Comment 3, above). Next Step The Draft Environmental Impact Report comment letter must be submitted to Caltrain by April 28, 2014. After the April 21, 2014 Council review of the comment letter, City staff will incorporate the Council comments as directed. City staff will then work with Caltrain staff over the next several months to make certain that the comments noted in the comment letter are properly addressed in the Final EIR. City staff expects to be able to update the Council on the status on the Final EIR later in 2014. Attachments: Attachment A: Caltrain Electrification NOP Letter 3-18-2013 (PDF) Attachment B: Caltrain Electrification DEIR Comment Letter dated April 21, 2014 (DOCX) City of Palo Alto Page 12 Ci~of Palo Alto Office of the Mayor and City Council March 18, 2013 Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board AITN: Stacy Cocke, Senior Planner 1250 San Carlos Avenue P.O. Box 3006 San Carlos, CA 94070-1306 RE: Scoping Comments in Response to Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Caltrain Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Dear Ms. Cocke: Thank you for the opportunity to provide input into the issues to be discussed in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Caltrain Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project. As you know, the City of Palo Alto had previously provided comments on the 2009 Final EIR prepared for the Electrification Project. The City appreciates the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board studying the potential project impacts within a new EIR, rather than simply re circulating the older version. With that in mind, the City of Palo Alto submits the following new set of comments based on the Notice of Preparation, recent meetings with Caltrain staff and general knowledge of the project. At a minimum, the following potential impacts need to be addressed in the Draft EIR: 1. Analysis of Future Improvements: The Notice of Preparation (NOP) states that this blended project will only be assessed under cumulative conditions. However, this obviously will present some practical difficulties, as it appears that this is the first phase of a multi-phase project. Therefore, some degree of analysis, beyond the typical cumulative analysis should be completed, in order to realistically examine the future impacts this project. 2. Impacts on Local Traffic: The City understands that the increase in the number of trains proposed will result in longer gate down times. The longer gates times will obviously impact traffic at the immediate intersections. An examination of these impacts and potential mitigation measures will need to be addressed in the report. Furthermore, a complete analysis of the impacts increased gate times will have on the local street network must also be addressed. This includes potential impacts to nearby residential and commercial neighborhoods. While this may be an extensive task for Caltrain to undertake, it is critically important and should be required within scope of the EIR analysis, given the proximity of these neighborhoods to the grade crossings. This proximity allows there to be true nexus between the proposed project and potential impacts in these neighborhoods. This should be a comprehensive, multi-modal analysis of the impact to automobile, bicycle and pedestrian traffic. 3. Catenary Wire Installation: The installation of catenary wires could have a significant impact of the surrounding environment. Furthermore, installing catenary wires will require the removal of a substantial number of trees and other significant vegetation. P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.2477 650.328.3631 fax Printed with soy.bairo::;I inks on 1003 recycled paper pro~eued without dtloriM. Attachment A City of Palo Alto Page2 of4 Comment on NOP Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project This tree and vegetation removal may result in a variety of impacts such as aesthetics, biology (removal of nesting habitats), increase in noise (trees act as noise barriers), etc. These impacts need to be analyzed with appropriate mitigations considered. However, it will be difficult to measure the exact impact in advance of the tree and vegetation removal, especially as it relates to noise. Therefore, the City requests that the EIR analyze how these impacts can be measured and monitored after removal, and how mitigation measures will be scaled appropriately. Finally, different catenary wire designs should be analyzed for comparison purposes and the least impactful option should be selected and mitigated. 4. Pedestrian Accessibility: The trimming of existing vegetation proposed as a part of the project provides an opportunity to introduce joint-use trail segments through the City of Palo Alto similar to the existing trail that traverses the border between the existing Caltrain tracks and Palo Alto High School. The 2009 Final EIR did not include a discussion of this type of benefit and opportunity. A discussion of potential trail opportunities as mitigation for the loss of trees and vegetation should be included in the Draft EIR. 5. Ridership Estimates and Impacts to Caltrain Service: Caltrain is a critical part of the Peninsula transportation system and provides a valuable service to its residents. The introduction of High Speed Rail (HSR) into the equation as a part of the "Blended System" could constrain caltrain from servicing future demand. For every potential Caltrain rider that ~annot be accommodated, another driver will be on the road, which will lead to additional automobile traffic. Therefore, the EIR should determine if HSR will restrict Caltrain's ability to accommodate demand, and thereby increase automobile local and regional traffic. In addition, the EIR should determine whether current platforms are large enough to accommodate future demand, particularly in the high ridership stations. Finally, the EIR should determine whether platform extensions would have a positive impact of projected increased ridership. 6. Construction Impacts. The Draft EIR should contain a thorough analysis of construction impacts, including any disruptions to traffic and other vital services, as well as an analysis of the noise and dust impacts. This will be a highly visible project that will take a significant amount of time to complete, and a thorough analysis and plan should be included to reduce construction impacts in the project's vicinity, 7, Visual Impact of Paralleling Station PS·S: The potential visual impact of PS-5 on nearby residential neighbors in the Greenmeadow neighborhood is a significant concern. Existing vegetation is to be removed for the installation of the Paralleling Station, and based on the visual simulation provided in the 2009 Final EIR, it appears that there is inadequate vegetation remaining to screen this paralleling station from the neighborhood. Furthermore, the City of Palo Alto believes an alternative location for the station should be proposed just south of the proposed location, as it is more appropriate within a non-residential context 8. Noise at Parallellng Station PS-5: PS-5 is located within 150 feet of the Greenmeadow neighborhood, which would be impacted by noise from this station. Unfortunately, 2009 Final EIR project failed to indicate operational noise levels in the vicinity of each City of Palo Alto Page 3 of 4 Comment on NOP -Peninsula Corridor Eleetrifieation Projeet paralleling station. Although mitigation measures were proposed in the previous EIR, there was no analysis that indicated that the mitigation would adequately reduce the noise levels. This analysis should be included in the Draft EIR to be prepared. 9. Horn Noise vs. Rail Noise: Residents near the Caltrain tracks already experience noise impacts from horns, particularly in the late evening hours. While the previous EIR addressed the impacts of rail noise with electrification, there was no analysis given of the increase in noise that would be experienced from train horns based on the increased number of trains to run each day. The EIR should analyze and discuss this impact and acknowledge that this is a significant impact, and consider alternatives that will reduce this impact. l 0. Freight Train Noise: The EIR needs to provide information regarding any changes in freight train operations that might result from the electrification project, particularly to the hours of operation of the freight trains. Increases in freight trains, or the operation of freight trains in later evening hours, may result in increased noise impacts to residential neighborhoods. Any increase in the number of freight trains or changes in hours of operation should be addressed in the EIR. 11. Vibration: The 2009 Final EIR indicated that electrification of Caltrain service would result in reduced vibration, but no analysis was done explaining how this would be accomplished. This analysis should be included in the Draft EIR. 12. Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The 2009 Final EIR did not include an analysis of the projects impacts related to Greenhouse Gas Emissions. This analysis should be included in the new Draft EIR. 13. Train Speed: It is understood that train speeds will generally increase as a result of the project. An analysis of the impact of these train speed changes beyond the enhanced ability for trains to accelerate and decelerate needs to be discussed in the EIR. This would result in the need for Advanced Detection or some other method to provide for safety due to the increased train speeds. Appropriate mitigation needs to be developed including traffic signal modifications necessary to address these safety concerns. 14. Utilities: The 2009 Final EIR did not include discussion of all of the utilities potentially impacted by the electrification plans. An evaluation of all utilities and improvement plans to ensure that city utilities are not impacted should be included in the Draft EIR. 15. Mitigation: Make sure that all mitigation measures are identified and that there is consistency between the summary of mitigation measures and those listed in each of the sections. Furthermore, a discussion regarding the appropriate type of environmental review for the implementation of mitigation measure should also be included. The mitigation measures in the 2009 Final EIR were not clearly identified, and the summary table provided did not reflect the language which was included in each of the impact sections. City of Palo Alto Page 4 of 4 Comment on NOP -Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project 16. EIR Age: There was a concern that the 2009 EIR relied on data that was not current at the time the Final EIR was published. It is assumed that the Draft EIR being prepared will gather new data; since it has been four years since the previous Final EIR was completed and considerably longer since the original data was compiled. 17. Hazardous Waste: The Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the 2009 Final EIR was considered to be out of date. It is recommended that new Phase I Environmental Site Assessments be performed for all of the traction power facility sites. 18. Historic Resources: The Greenmeadows neighborhood received historic status in 2005. Palo Alto had recommended that the 2009 Final EIR be revised to address any impacts to the historical integrity of the Greenmeadow neighborhood. This analysis should be included in the new Draft EIR. Furthermore, the Draft EIR should study potential impacts to all historic resources within one-third mile of the Caltrain right-of-way, both visual impacts and physical impacts such as from increased vibration. 19. Biological Resources: There were three biological reports prepared in 2008 to update the EIR for the electrification project. At that time, this appeared to be current for CEQA purposes. However, given the time that has passed since their preparation, it is recommended that these reports be updated for the Draft EIR to be prepared. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the scope of the Draft Environmental Impact Report to be prepared for this important project. We look forward to continuing to provide comments and input as the environmental review of the project is completed. If you have any questions regarding the comments, you may direct them to Aaron Aknin, Assistant Director of Planning and Community Environment at (650) 329-2679 or by email at aa ron. a kn i n@cityofpa loa Ito .org. Sincerely, ~~[;:Nancy Shepherd 'Ja.:><...________ Vice Mayor April 28, 2014 Caltrain Attn: Stacy Cocke, Senior Planner 1250 San Carlos Ave. P.O. Box 3006 San Carlos, CA 94070 RE: City of Palo Alto Comments on Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Dear Ms. Cocke: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). The City of Palo Alto conceptually supports the operational improvements to Caltrain service, provided that all impacts can be effectively mitigated. The Draft EIR addresses a majority of the comments made in the City's scoping letter, as well as many of the issues raised in the 2009 EIR. There are several issues, however, that need to be further addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR). The issues are as follows: 1. Impacts on Local Traffic According to the Draft EIR four intersections within the City of Palo Alto would be significantly impacted by the project. Of these, one intersection would operate at an acceptable level w ith implementation of mit igation, while the remaining three intersections would remain significant and unavoidable (the most intersections in any jurisdiction along the project corridor). Mit igation for Study Intersection 64, Alma St./Sand Hill, would reduce the project impacts to less-than significant (in part) by widening "the west land of Sand Hill Road by adding one lane to allow southbound right turns on red". Additional analysis may be necessary to determine whether this is the right improvement for the City. The Final EIR should indicate that Ca ltrain will work with the City to determine whether an alternative mit igation may be more appropriate. Furthermore, the DEIR does not identify the funding source, or the responsibility for implementing this measure. This information should be included in the FEIR, and its accompanying Mit igation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, in order to demonstrate that this mitigation measure would be implemented and the impact effectively mitigated. Based on Caltrain's analysis, the remaining three intersections (Study Intersections #63, 66, and 68) are all located on Alma Street, and cannot be mitigated due to geometric constraints. The DEIR should, however, explore improvements that could reduce (though not avoid) transportation impacts. These could include improved bicycle or pedestrian facilities, either at the affected intersections, or at the Caltrain stations which are the destination point of the increased traffic. Also, given the geometric constraints, the DEIR should consider mitigation beyond lane and signalization improvements for the significantly impacted intersections. For example, the City is currently conducting grade separation feasibility study, and Caltrain could establish a mitigation Attachment B fund to assist with the implementation of future (not yet identified) corridor improvements to reduce the identified impacts. 2. Catenary Wire Installation Installation of the overhead catenary system (OCS) will have a visua l impact and will require the removal of vegetation (which will have an additional visual impact and a potential noise impact, discussed in a separate comment below). Long-term impacts are found significant and unavoidable due to vegetation removal, after the implementation of mitigation (Measure AES2b, BI0-5, and CUL ld). The City has the following comments on the visual and vegetation impact analysis related to the OCS (impacts related to Paralleling Station PS-5 are discussed in Comment 7, below): ~ Visual simulations are a useful part of the analysis. However, it is noted that Figure 3.1-9, Churchill Avenue, Palo Alto, does not represent how most viewers will experience the visual impact of the OCS, and minimized the degree of visual change. Most viewers will not be looking dow n the centerline of the corridor, but w ill be looking at the side of OCS (similar to Figure 3.1-6) alignment as viewers move through the landscape, particularly on Alma Street. The Final EIR should analyze the potential visual impact of the OCS from centerline of the corridor. ~ The Final EIR should refer to the adopted Rail Corridor Plan that contains programs designed to facilitate electrification while mitigating impacts to the local environment. Particular attention should be paid to Rail Corridor Plan policies that address visual impacts. ~ Measure AES-2b requires "aesthetic treatments" for project features, "aesthetic considerations" when selecting pole design, no unpainted metal surfaces, color matched paint, and paint tones darker than the surrounding visual area. This implies that all of the catenary poles would be painted, which seems to be impractical in terms of maintenance. The City recommends that the JPB consider different metal finishes, in addit ion to different paint tone and pole sizes. For example, would galvanized steel or w eathered steel finish better fade into the background and reduce the visual impact (and reduce maintenance costs)? While we recognize the effort to find the most aesthetically pleasing OCS poles, these measures would not mitigate for the addition of the cantilevers or wires themselves, which would be visible in certain areas either to the height or lack of vegetation (incl uding removal of vegetation). ~ Measure BI0-5, which is proposed to reduce the effects of tree removal, does not include provisions to add vegetation in areas impacted by OCS installation. No other addit ional visual screening is proposed in areas where sensitive viewers would be affected by the OCS. The DEIR analysis concludes that the visual effect of tree removal is significant and unavoidable. Given issues regarding implementation of mitigation, further described below, and the removal of approximately 177 trees within the City of Palo Alto, the City concurs with this finding. Thus, given that Measure BI0-5 does not fully mitigate for the removal of trees, nor provide additional screening of the OCS, and that measure AES-2b would not fully mitigate the effects of the OCS, the DEIR should find the visual impact of the OCS system significant and unavoidable (while the overall impact of Impact AES-2b is significant and unavoidable due to the vegetation removal, the analysis makes findings for each component, and found the OCS impact to be less than significant). Regarding the overbridge protection barriers, options include simple fencing mesh or Lexan. While Lexan, or a fine mesh, may be more aesthetically pleasing in theory, in practice such surfaces may be prone to graffiti or other vandalism, thus creating a long-term visual impact and maintenance problem. We therefore recommend use of larger fencing mesh in areas susceptible to graffiti. Mitigation Measure AES-2b does not address graffiti impacts for solid project structures, such as the building shown in Figure 3.1-17, and recommend the measure be modified to take this into account. We have the follow ing additional comments regarding M itigation Measure BI0-5: a) The measure states that tree pruning during construction "will be done in accordance with arboricultural industry recommended practices." This statement should be more specific, and require compliance with CPUC General Order 118. Pruning specifications should follow ANSI A300 standards and ISA Best Management Practices (these standards are discussed in Appendix F, Tree Inventory and Canopy Assessment, but not incorporated into the mitigation measure itself). b) We concur with the requirement for tree replacement. Measure BI0-5 states if on-site tree replacement "cannot occur on the Caltrain ROW (where trees are removed from the ROW) or on adjacent property (where trees are removed outside of the ROW), then tree replacement may occur on other parts of the affected property (with concurrence of the land owner) or other parts of the local area (with concurrence of the local municipality)." The use of the word "may" implies such mitigation may not occur. Since the DEIR does not contain any analysis that sufficient area is available for on-site planting, off-site planting may be a significant component of the mitigation measure, however the DEIR also lacks analysis regarding sufficient area or mechanisms for off-site planting. As an alternative to off-site planting, the JPB may pay into a local urban forestry fund to support local tree planting programs, provided JPB and local municipalities can agree on the appropriate fund and amount. The replacement requirements described above will apply in determining the equivalent funding amount. Again, because the measure is predicated on "may pay" but only "provided JPB and local municipalities can agree" the measure appears too vague to be effective. The measure should be written affirmatively (e.g. "JPB will") and potential implementing local partners (municipal departments) or urban forestry funds should be described. c) The Tree Avoidance, M inimization, and Replacement Plan described in Measure BI0-5 should include performance standards, survival criteria, and monitoring/ reporting requirements for replacement trees. 3. Pedestrian Accessibility In its Scoping Comments, the City noted that the removal of vegetation and creation of an addit ional clear zone in or adjacent to Caltrain right of way could create an opportunity for additional pedestrian access. This was not addressed in the DEIR. While this would not be a mitigation measure for aesthetic and biological impacts, it is a potential opportunity that could also serve as non vehicular mitigation for the impacts noted above in Comment 1. 4. Ridership Estimates and Impacts to Caltrain Service The City recognizes that ridership estimates developed by Caltrain for Caltrain only (not including HSR) are discussed on page 2-12 of the DEIR. The "blended project" ridership is discussed on page 4 20 of the DEIR, as part of the cumulative impacts. The ridership analysis for the "blended system" is included as Appendix I of the DEIR. The need to improve the stations that would serve blended Caltrain/ HSR service is briefly discussed in Section 4.1, Cumulative Impacts (see page 4-17). It is also noted that the stations within the City of Palo Alto would not be HSR stations. However, the DEIR notes that station "design is at a preli minary conceptual level except for the Transbay Transit Center (TIC)." The TIC and the San Francisco 4th and King Station were addressed in a 2004 FEIR. The Caltrain FEIR should clarify the responsibility for project-level analysis and CEQA compliance for the rest of the HSR stations. Furthermore, as requested in our scoping letter, the FEIR needs to address to what degree High Speed Rail constrains future Caltrain capacity and what the related impacts are (traffic, GHG, etc) because of those constraints. 5. Construction Impacts The DEIR impact analysis generally does a good job of identifying construction and operational impacts for each affected resource. Construction impacts related to dust and criteria air poll utant emissions are required to adhere to BAAQMD standards and are addressed by Mit igation measures AQ-2a, b, and c. The DEIR identified significant short term noise impacts, for which mitigations were identified. While the short-term impact is significant and unavoidable, the mit igation measures will minimize construction noise (Measure NOi-la), and we concur that most people will likely find the temporary noise tolerable. Construction related impacts concerning noise are addressed in the DEIR and found to be significant and unavoidable. To the extent feasible, construction noise will be mitigated by MM NOi-la with a Construction Noise Control Plan. Regarding short-term traffic impacts, most construction activity would occur in the Ca ltrain ROW, but temporary lane closures could significantly affect traffic. Implementation of Mitigation Measure TRA-la would mitigate impacts to a less than significant level for traffic operations, including emergency vehicle access. Potential construction impacts related to public utilit ies would be less-than-significant, including impacts on water systems and landfills, and less-than-significant with mitigation for disruption of utility service with implementation of Mitigation Measures PSU-8a, b, and c, and Measure PSU-9. 6. Visual Impact of Paralle ling Station PS-5. The location of PS-5 Option 1 is adjacent to the Greenmeadow neighborhood, a historical neighborhood. As the historic quality of the neighborhood is related to aesthetic values of its midcentury architecture, the introduction of contrasting visual elements is a great concern. While the DEIR stated that few houses have a direct view of PS-5 Option 1, it should have also noted that the location is directly opposite Greenmeadow Way, a major access point from the neighborhood to Alma Street, an arteria l street, and thus would be visible to many, if not most, residents and visitors, at some point during the day. The vegetative screening simulated in Figure 3.1-17 clearly is inadequate. The vegetation would partially obscure the ground mounted transformers, but not the associated building and not the wire support structure. The City understands that the "clearzone" requirements of the paralleling station do not allow for replacement, or addition, of trees that would more effectively reduce the visual impact of the structure. Based on the sensitivity of the viewers, the degree of change, and the ineffectiveness of the proposed mitigation, the DEIR should find the visual impact of PS-5 Option 1 to be significant and unavoidable. We therefore recommend the following: a. Adoption of Option 2. While this location is visible from residential units on the corner of Alma St. and California (a fact noted briefly by the DEIR but largely dow nplayed), it is on the south side of the rail corridor, unlike Option 1. In addition, the immediate surroundings of Option 2 are largely commercial or industrial in nature. The proposed station would be located adjacent to a structure of similar size and character. While we recognize that optimal operational spacing may be realized at Option 1, we find no evidence in the DEIR that Option 2 is not a fully feasible alternative. We therefore recommend adoption of Option 2. b. San Antonio Drive. If a location closer to Option 1 is required, the DEIR should examine a location near the San Antonio Station. The overcrossing at San Antonio would serve to minimize the visual impact of a paralleling station near that location, residential receptors would be less impacted compared to Option 1, and it appears from aerial photographs that there is adequate space to accommodate the facility. If Option 2 is not selected, the Final EIR should consider an alternative location such as San Antonio Drive or explain why an alternative location is not feasible. c. If it is demonstrated that an alternative location is not feasible, the Final EIR should identify addit ional mit igation specific to the Option 1 site. For example, planted vertical structures ("living walls") are increasingly used in commercial/industrial landscaping to screen sensit ive areas. Even a simpler structure, such as an arbor, or high vine-covered fence could provide screening without encroaching on the clearzone. Additional analysis would be required to determine if this mit igation would reduce the visual impacts to less than significant at this location. 7. Historic Resources. The regulatory setting, Section 3.4.1.1, only addresses local policies for the cit ies of San Francisco and San Jose. It is not clear why the other Peninsu la cities were omitted. For the Final EIR, the City recommends inclusion of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan policy L-51: Encourage public and private upkeep and preservation of resources that have historic merit, including residences listed in the Historic Inventory. The DEIR identifies six historical resources w ithin the City that could be affected by the project: San Francisquito Bridge (1902), the El Palo Alto tree, Palo Alto Station (1940), University Avenue Underpass (1941), Embarcadero Underpass (1936), and the Greenmeadow Neighborhood. The City concurs that these are historic resources for the purposes of CEQA. However, we also note several inconsistencies regarding potential impacts to these resources and the necessary mitigation measures. The discussion of the Palo Alto Station (page 3.4-22) is contradictory. Requiring, on the one hand, mitigation to reduce a potentially significant impact, but then stating that "only the setting of the tracks would be slightly affected, in that the poles would be installed between the sets of tracks, and would extend over them, at this location. This, however, is a less-than significant impact." As Mitigation Measure CUL-ld clearly includes the Palo Alto Station, the discussion should reflect a potentially significant impact, reduced to less than significant w ith the implementation of measure CUL-ld. The discussion of El Palo Alto states that the "tree would not be impacted by the Proposed Project because all power system supports would be attached to the adjacent San Francisquito Bridge. Thus, the impacts on this resource would be less than significant and no mitigation is identified." However, in the discussion of impact BI0-5 it specifically states that minor trimming of the tree would be required. Further, the BI0-5 impact does not elaborate on w hat would be "minor." The Final EIR should clarify this, especially given the historic nature of the tree. Furthermore, any pruning must be done per the instructions of the City of Palo Alto Urban Forester. In addition, Impact CUL-1 should be corrected to state that El Palo Alto would be impacted by the project, and that mitigation is required (a cross reference to the updated Measure BI0-5). Lastly mitigation must include dust abatement and needle washing to be performed as needed during the construction process. Similarly, the discussion of the University Avenue Underpass (page 3.4-29) states that the impact is less than significant, yet Measure CUL-lf requires mitigation to avoid impacts to the underpass. The discussion of the University Avenue Underpass in Impact CUL-1 should be corrected to state the projects impacts are potentially significant prior to the application of mitigation measures. In addition, we recommend a clarification to Measure CUL-lf. The measure should specify that modifications to potentially historic structures will be completed in conformance with the SOi's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. While the project would not directly affect the historic Greenmeadow Neighborhood {by eliminating or modifying a contributing resource), our review indicates that there are potentially significant visual impacts related to the siting of PS-5 Option 1 as currently proposed. This could contribute to an indirect impact to this cultural resource. Certainly the finding of "no impact" stated on page 3.4-30 should be revisited, and this section should cross reference the discussion of visual impacts. Thank you once again for the opportunity to comment of the Draft EIR, and we look forward to working with prior to completing the Final EIR. If you have any questions or comments, feel free to contact Richard Hackman at 650-617-3174 or email at Richard.hackman@cityofpaloalto.org. Sincerely, Nancy Shepherd MAYOR City of Palo Alto (ID # 4664) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs Meeting Date: 4/21/2014 Summary Title: Dumbarton Rail Funding Title: Discussion and Direction to Staff on Additional Action the City Should Take on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s Proposed Changes to the Regional Measure 2 Program Specifically Related to Dumbarton Rail Funding From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Receive report regarding Regional Measure 2 Program letter submitted to Metropolitan Transportation Commission and provide direction regarding whether additional comments related to allocation of transportation funding should be submitted. Executive Summary The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) is currently in the process of conducting a public hearing for a proposed amendment to the Regional Measure 2 (RM2) program. In April 2013, the MTC Programming & Allocations Committee (MTC PAC) directed MTC staff to develop a delivery strategy for the approximately $225 million in unallocated RM2 funds. This amendment would reassign $88.2 million of the $225 million in RM2 funds among several projects, modify the scope (without redirection) on one project, and modify prior conditions on two projects including the forgiveness of a $91 million loan made to the BART Warm Springs extension project from funds identified for the Dumbarton Rail project. The Dumbarton Rail project is scheduled to be repaid in Alameda County Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) funds between FY 2019 and FY 2027. The BART Warm Springs Extension will add 5.4 miles of new tracks from the existing Fremont Station south to a new station in the Warm Springs District of the City of Fremont, with an optional station to be located approximately midway, in the Irvington District. The optional Irvington Station is dependent upon future funding through the City of Fremont and may be added at a later date. The total project budget for the Warm Springs Extension is approximately $890 million. Major construction on the Warm Springs Extension began in August of 2009 and is expected to open for revenue service in the fall of 2015. City of Palo Alto Page 1 A public hearing was conducted by the MTC PAC at their April 9, 2014 meeting to take comments on the proposed amendment. At the meeting, City of Palo Alto staff submitted preliminary input in writing on the program (Attachment A) acknowledging that the Palo Alto City Council would have the opportunity to provide additional direction on the program at their April 21, 2014 meeting. Public comment closes April 23, 2014. Background On March 2, 2004, voters passed RM2, raising the toll on the seven state-owned toll bridges in the San Francisco Bay Area by $1.00. This extra dollar is to fund various transportation projects within the region that have been determined to reduce congestion or to make improvements to travel in the toll bridge corridors, as identified in SB 916 (Chapter 715, Statutes of 2004). Specifically, RM2 establishes the Regional Traffic Relief Plan and identifies specific transit operating assistance and capital projects and programs eligible to receive RM2 funding. The RM2 program reached its 10th anniversary in March 2014. Over $1.2 billion in RM2 capital funds of the $1.5 billion available have been allocated. In April 2013, the MTC PAC directed staff to develop a delivery strategy for the approximately $225 million in unallocated RM2 funds. Initial staff recommendations were presented to the MTC PAC in February 2014. At its March 5, 2014 meeting, the MTC PAC approved the release of the public hearing notice and the opening of the comment period to consider amending the RM2 program. Pursuant to California Streets and Highway Code Section 30914(f), the MTC is to hold a public hearing when considering changing the scope or reassigning funding of projects included in RM2. Based on the information submitted by project sponsors, and the draft recommendations presented in February and March 2014, the MTC is seeking public input on proposed changes to 16 RM2 projects and a shift of $88.2 million between RM2 projects. The comment period opened on March 19, 2014 and, as stated above, a public hearing was conducted by the MTC PAC at their April 9, 2014 meeting to take comments on the proposed amendment. At the meeting, City of Palo Alto staff submitted preliminary input on the program acknowledging that the Palo Alto City Council would have the opportunity to provide additional direction on the program at their April 21, 2014 meeting. The public comment period on the program closes on April 23, 2014 at 4:00 PM. MTC staff will then return to the full MTC in May with a summary of comments received and with recommendations for adoption. Caltrain is still in support of the Dumbarton Rail project but does not have a specific project plan in place or a project timeline. To date, Caltrain has not taken a public position against forgiveness of the $91 BART Warm Springs extension loan. The City of Menlo Park is on record opposing forgiveness of the loan. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Discussion The letter from the City Manager submitted to the MTC PAC at their April 9, 2014 meeting covered the four broad points noted below. The exact language can be found in the attached letter: The City supports the improvements to the Dumbarton Express bus service as East-West connections are one of the primary challenges of our region. The City supports the $20 million allocation to Caltrain Electrification. A modernized Caltrain system is critical to the Peninsula’s overall transit strategy. The City Manager expressed an expectation that the Council would want the MTC to reconsider forgiveness of the $91 million BART Warm Springs loan due to the critical importance of the Caltrain system. MTC could also consider partial forgiveness of the Warm Springs loan to allow MTC greater funding flexibility in the future. Staff requests that the Council provide direction on whether the City should submit additional comments on the RM2 program beyond what staff has provided. Those comments would likely be provided to MTC in the form of a letter. For example, additional comments could range from whether the City supports forgiveness of the $91 million loan to specific Dumbarton Express service improvements the City would like to achieve. Attachments: Attachment A: MTC Dumbarton Rail Loan Repayment Letter dated 4-9-2014 (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 3