Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2013-05-20 City Council Agenda Packet
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Council Chambers May 20, 2013 4:00 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 May 20, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. * The agenda now includes time estimates for each section or item. These are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item is called. Call to Order Closed Session 4:00-6:00 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, Joe Saccio, Kathryn Shen, Sandra Blanch, Marcie Scott, Darrell Murray, Val Fong) Employee Organization: Utilities Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA) Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) 2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS, CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.8 Properties: Cubberley Community Center, 4000 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto 94306 (including 8 acres owned by the City of Palo Alto and remaining acres owned by the Palo Alto Unified School District); and Ventura School site, 3990 Ventura Court, Palo Alto 94306 Agency Negotiators: James Keene, Pam Antil, Lalo Perez, Joe Saccio, Hamid Ghaemmaghami, Greg Betts, Rob De Geus, Thomas Fehrenbach, Aaron Aknin, Molly Stump 2 May 20, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Negotiating Parties: City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Unified School District Under Negotiation: Lease and/or Purchase/Sale* Price and Terms of Payment *The Council does not intend to dispose of the City’s 8 acres through sale. Purchase/sale is listed here only to comply with legal requirements in the event that Council wishes to discuss a land transaction not covered by the term “lease,” such as, for example, easements, purchase options, or land exchanges Study Session 6:00-7:00 PM 3. Potential List of Topics for Joint Meeting with the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission 7:00-8:00 PM 4. Presentation of the City of Palo Alto 3-Year IT Strategy Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW: Applications and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and put up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken. OTHER AGENDA ITEMS: Public comments or testimony on agenda items other than Oral Communications shall be limited to a maximum of three minutes per speaker. City Manager Comments 8:00-8:10 PM Oral Communications 8:10-8:25 PM Members of the public may speak to any item not on the agenda; three minutes per speaker. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. Minutes Approval 8:25-8:30 PM April 1, 2013 Consent Calendar 8:30-8:35 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by two Council Members. 5. Approval of Amendment No. 5 to Contract C10131631 with Turner Construction, Inc., to Decrease Compensation by $135,000; Approval of Contract C13149552 with Turner Construction, Inc., for $700,000 for Construction Management Services for the Mitchell Park Library & 3 May 20, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Community Center Project; and Approval of Amendment No. 7 to Contract C09130744 with Group 4 Architecture, Inc., to Add $260,000 for a Total Contract Amount Not to Exceed $8,855,231 6. Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance, Approval of a Construction Contract with S.J. Amoroso In The Amount of $17,707,000, and Approval of a Professional Services Contract for $1,130,969 with Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning Inc. for the Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project PE-11000 7. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to File an Application for 2013/2014 Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA3) in the Amount of $82,712; Charleston Road Corridor Pathway Improvement Project 8. El Camino Park / Mayfield Pump Station - CDM Amendment #2 Approval of Amendment Number 2 to Contract #C10131396 in the Amount of $1,173,000 with CDM Smith Inc. to Provide Additional Services Associated With the Reservoir, Pump Station, and Well at El Camino Park and Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project WS-08002, for a Total Not to Exceed Amount of $6,300,802 (Continued from April 1, 2013, as amended) 9. Parks and Recreation Commission and Staff Recommend That Council Approve an Amendment to the Park and Open Space Rules and Regulations R1-39 (Attachment A) in Order to Help Reduce the Waiting List for Persons Wishing to Obtain a Plot at one of the Three City Gardens 10. Approval of Change to Purchase Order for One Workplace to Add $89,000 of Storage Costs for a Total Amount Not to Exceed $792,794 for Standard Furniture and Associated Storage Costs for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 8:35-9:35 PM 11. Consideration of City of Palo Alto Offer to Purchase U.S. Post Office Building at 380 Hamilton Avenue and Agreement to Assume Enforcement of Historic Covenant (Continued from May 13, 2013) 4 May 20, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. 9:35-10:35 PM 12. Update of and Direction for Downtown Parking Garage and Attendant Parking Study and Implementation of Trial Attendant Parking at Lot R 10:35-11:05 PM 13. Adoption of a Resolution Adopting the 2007-2014 Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan and Approving a Negative Declaration Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements 11:05-11:20 PM Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the Public are entitled to directly address the City Council/Committee concerning any item that is described in the notice of this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the Council/Committee on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council/Committee, but it is very helpful. 5 May 20, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Additional Information Standing Committee Meetings City Council Rail Committee Meeting Finance Committee Meeting Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Informational Report National Public Works Week May 19-25, 2013 Magical Bridge Playground - Council Update of Project Status Public Letters to Council SET 1 SET 2 SET 3 SET 4 City of Palo Alto (ID # 3837) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Joint Study Session Meeting Date 05/20/2013 Title: Potential List of Topics for Joint Meeting with the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Below are topics of discussion for the joint meeting with the Planning and Transportation Commission. I. Comprehensive Plan Status II. Other Planning and Transportation Topics of Interest III. Council Discussion City of Palo Alto (ID # 3671) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Information Technology 3-Year Strategy Study Session Title: Presentation of the City of Palo Alto 3-Year IT Strategy From: City Manager Lead Department: IT Department Recommendation Staff recommends that Council receive the 3-year Information Technology (IT) Strategy presentation and offer comments and questions. Executive Summary The mission of the City’s Information Technology Department is to provide innovative technology solutions that support City departments in delivering quality services to the community. In the long-term, the vision of technology for the City is to build a leading digital city. The following are the strategic goals that align to the vision and mission: 1. Deploy digital city capabilities 2. Implement IT governance 3. Standardize and enhance service delivery 4. Upgrade technology infrastructure and formalize Information Security With this new strategy, IT expects to lower costs, increase quality and efficiency and provide greater service innovation. The strategy will also enable the City of Palo Alto to become the next digital city. Background The following presentation outlines the City’s 3-year IT strategy. The IT strategy City of Palo Alto Page 2 focuses on lowering overall technology costs, higher quality services, greater use of innovative solutions, and improved efficiency. Discussion The IT department will present highlights of the current technology landscape, our new City IT strategy which kicked off on July 1, 2012, what IT has accomplished since the launch of the strategy, and the plan for how the strategy will be further executed in the future. City of Palo Alto (ID # 3737) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Contracts with Turner and Group 4: Mitchell Park Library & Community Center Title: Approval of Amendment No. 5 to Contract C10131631 with Turner Construction, Inc., to Decrease Compensation by $135,000; Approval of Contract C13149552 with Turner Construction, Inc., for $700,000 for Construction Management Services for the Mitchell Park Library & Community Center Project; and Approval of Amendment No. 7 to Contract C09130744 with Group 4 Architecture, Inc., to Add $260,000 for a Total Contract Amount Not to Exceed $8,855,231 From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1)Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. Five to Contract C10131631 with Turner Construction, Inc. (Attachment A), to decrease the compensation by $135,000 and to revise the set-aside provisions; and 2)Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Contract C13149552 with Turner Construction, Inc. (Attachment B), for $700,000 for construction management services for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center (MPLCC)project; and 3) Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. Seven to Contract C09130744 with Group 4 Architecture, Inc. (Attachment C), to add $260,000 for additional construction administration services for the MPLCC City of Palo Alto Page 2 project a total contract amount of $8,855,231. Executive Summary The Mitchell Park Library and Community Center (MPLCC) project has experienced substantial construction delays and an extremely large number of change orders and claims. The current schedule from the construction contractor,Flintco Pacific,Inc.(Flintco),shows the project being completed in late 2013, approximately one and a half years later than the originally scheduled date for project completion. The delay is primarily the result of construction problems, including Flintco’s failure to properly schedule and coordinate work and inspections, Flintco’s failure to properly manage key subcontractors through the course of the project, and the City’s rejection of installed, but defective building components. As a result of the delays , change orders, claims and corrective action work, it is now necessary to further engage the City’s Construction Manager, Turner Construction, Inc. (Turner),and Architect,Group 4 Architecture, Inc.(Group 4),in order to complete the project. The existing Turner contract ends on June 1, 2013, and the Group 4 contract ends on June 30, 2013. A new Contract with Turner in the amount of $700,000 and an amendment to the existing Group 4 contract in the amount of $260,000 are recommended with termination dates of October 31, 2013. While services of both consultants are likely to be needed beyond that date, details are uncertain at this time. Therefore,staff will return to Council at a later time and any remaining needed work will be identified. Background Measure N, which passed on November 4, 2008, allows the City to sell bonds to fund the renovation of the Downtown Library, construction of a new and expanded Mitchell Park Library and Community Center (MPLCC), renovation and expansion of the Main Library and renovation of temporary facilities to accommodate the various library closures. The City entered into an agreement with Group 4 to provide the architectural services for all of the Library Bond projects. Six amendments have been previously approved by Council to add to and revise the scope of work and project schedules and to add compensation. City of Palo Alto Page 3 The City issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the construction management services for all of the Library Bond projects and Turner was selected. On September 14, 2009, the City and Turner entered into Contract C10131631 for Turner to provide preliminary construction management services for the Downtown and MPLCC projects. Four amendments have been previously approved by Council to add construction management services and compensation for all of the Library Bond projects.Amendment No. 4, approved by Council on November 5, 2012, includes a schedule for the completion of Turner’s construction management services on June 1, 2013. However, due to further project delays caused predominantly by Flintco, City staff now anticipates the completion of construction in late 2013. Accordingly, a new Contract is needed to complete the project. Turner’s current contract includes services that are to be performed after construction is complete, specifically, post-construction and electronic documentation services. The current contract includes $135,000 remaining in the budget for these services. Accordingly, Amendment Five proposes to delete $135,000 from the contract in order for that amount to be added to the new contract. Therefore, $135,000 of the $700,000 new contract amount will essentially be carried over from the old contract and $565,000 of new funding will be added. This is reflected in the chart in the Resource Impact section of this report. Also, Amendment Five proposes to amend Turner’s contract to revise the amount of Turner’s compensation that is to be “set-aside”from $997,016.00 to $850,000.00. The set aside amount of $850,000 will continue to be held by the City until the contractual issues between the City and Turner are resolved. It is likely that the Turner contract issues will be resolved after the contractor claims are resolved. The Tolling Agreement entered into between the City and Turner is still in effect. Group 4 is contracted to provide construction administration services for the MPLCC project. Amendment No. 6 to the contract, approved on November 5, 2012, included a schedule for the completion of these services on June 30, 2013. In order to have Group 4 continue to provide these essential services from July 1 to October 31, 2013, staff recommends that the contract be amended to revise City of Palo Alto Page 4 the schedule and to increase the compensation by $260,000.The City has also entered into a Tolling Agreement with Group 4. Discussion The general contractor for the MPLCC project, Flintco is currently one and a half years behind the original project schedule. Additionally, Flintco has produced an unusually large number of project documents, including change orders, claims, substitutions, requests for information, and submittals that require a substantial amount of extra time by Turner and Group 4 to review and process. Flintco’s failure to properly schedule and coordinate their work and inspections has resulted in Turner spending additional time to intercede in these activities. Flintco has failed to install certain building components correctly and Turner and Group 4 have had to expend considerable amounts of time being involved in the corrections. Given the job difficulties, the funding in both contracts will be exhausted before the anticipated project completion. In addition, the Turner contract will expire on June 1, 2013. Council’s approval of a new contract with Turner also constitutes Council’s approval of Public Works’ request for an exemption from the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC)competitive solicitation requirements. The PAMC generally requires an RFP to select a consultant. However, due to the length of time it takes to issue an RFP, review the proposals, select a consultant, and negotiate the terms and compensation of the contract,and because it would then take a significant amount of time and expense for a new consultant to become as familiar with the project as Turner is, Public Works requests the exemption as allowed per the PAMC in order to not delay the project further. Resource Impact Funds for the recommended new contract with Turner and the Group 4 contract amendment are available in CIP PE-09006. The Group 4, Turner and Flintco contracts and contract amendments encumbered to date as well as the proposed contract and amendment are as follows: City of Palo Alto Page 5 Contract Group 4 Architecture Turner Construction Flintco Construction Original contract $3,827,280 $138,198 $24,365,000 Original Contingency -10%$2,436,500 Additional Contingency -10%$2,436,500 Amendment 1 $92,034 $432,000 n/a Amendment 2 $312,396 $3,008,250 n/a Amendment 3 $3,192,000 $205,297 n/a Amendment 4 $258,041 $2,052,016 n/a Amendment 5 $220,670 ($135,000)n/a Amendment 6 $692,810 n/a n/a Amendment 7 $260,000 n/a n/a New contract w/Turner n/a $700,000 n/a Total Contract Value to Date $8,855,231 $6,400,761 $29,238,000 Policy Implications Amending the contracts with Turner and Group 4 does not conflict with any current City policy. Entering into a new contract with Turner does not conflict with City Policy if Council approves Public Works’request for exemption from competitive solicitation. Timeline Construction of the new Mitchell Park Library and Community Center began in September of 2010 and staff anticipates the facility opening to the public in late 2013. Attachments: ·A -Amendment 5 to Contract with Turner Construction Inc.(PDF) ·B -Contract C13149552 with Turner Construction, Inc.(PDF) ·C -Amendment 7 to Contract with Group 4 (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 6 ·D -Doc letters (PDF) CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. CI0131631 AMENDMENT NO.5 TO CONTRACT NO. CI0131631 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY This Amendment No.5 ("Amendment") to Contract No. C1 0 131631 ("Contract") is entered into and made effective on May 20,2013, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California Charter City ("CITY"), and TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a California corporation with offices located at 60 S. Market Street, Ste. 1100, San Jose, California 95113 ("CONSUL TANT") (City and Consultant may be referred to collectively as "parties" or separately as a "party"). RECITALS: WHEREAS, on September 14, 2009, the City and Consultant entered into the Contract concerning, among other libraries in Palo Alto, the Mitchell Park library and community center ("Project"); and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2010, the parties entered into Contract Amendment No.1; and WHEREAS, on August 5, 2010, the parties entered into Contract Amendment No.2; and WHEREAS, on September 12,2011, the parties entered into Contract Amendment No.3; and WHEREAS, on October 31, 2012, the parties entered into Contract Amendment No.4 ("Amendment No.4") (The Contract and Amendments Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 are collectively referred to as the "Contract"); and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to enter into this Amendment to reduce the total compensation by $135,000, delete one task and revise the "set-aside" amounts established in Amendment No.4, on the terms set forth below. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, ternls, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. SECTION 4 of the Contract, "NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION" is hereby amended to reduce the not to exceed amount to Five Million, One Hundred Seventy One Thousand, Three Hundred Fifty-Three Dollars ($5,171,353.00) and the total compensation not to exceed amount to Five Million, Seven Hundred Thousand, Seven Hundred Sixty-One Dollars ($5,700,761.00). SECTION 2. The budgeted amounts in Exhibit "C" are amended as follows: (1) The $135,000 designated for Electronic Documents & Photo Recording (Mitchell Park Phase II- Construction Phase, Item D) is hereby reduced from $135,000 to $45,000 and (2) The $45,000 I IJO:,14 jhlllJI1J75 designated for post-construction services (Mitchell Park Phase III -Post-Construction Phase, Item A3) is deleted in its entirety. SECTION 3. Phase III: Post Construction Services, Item A Turner Staff Services is hereby deleted from Exhibit A of the Contract. SECTION 4. The Set-Aside Amount' items (3) and (4) in EXHIBIT "C" to Amendment No.4 are hereby deleted, decreasing the total for the Set-Aside Amount from $997,016.00 to $850,000.00. Except as modified in this Amendment, the set aside amount shall be retained by the City under the terms set forth in Amendment No.4. SECTION 5. Except as modified in this Amendment, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first written above. CITY OF PALO ALTO: CONSULTANT: By:, ___________ _ TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:I)WlI~ Name: Kevin T Antonelli City Attorney Title: VP & General Manager By: ___________ _ Capitalized tenns have the meaning as specified in the Contract, unless specifically defined in this Amendment. 2 130514 ,b (II J 1 ()75 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C13149552 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 2nd day of June, 2013, ("Agreement") by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("CITY"), and TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a corporation in the State of New York, located at 60 South Market Street, Suite 1100, San Jose, CA 95113 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to complete construction of the new Mitchell Park Library and Community Center ("Project") and desires to engage a consultant to provide construction management services in connection with the Project ("Services"). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses andlor certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit "A", attached to and made a part of this Agreement. D. CITY and CONSULTANT entered into a prior agreement dated September 14,2009 and subsequent amendments dated June 28, 2010, August 5, 2010, September 12,2011, and October 31, 2012 (collectively "Prior Agreement") whereby CONSULTANT agreed to provide pre- construction, construction and post-construction services for the Project. E. The Prior Agreement expires on June 1,2013 and the Project has not yet been completed. To ensure the continued provision of construction management services, the Parties have elected to enter into this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit "A" on a Time and Materials basis in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. 1 S:flCSfTurner Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through October 31, 2014, unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. The term of this Agreement establishes only the window of time that the CONSULTANT may provide the Services without the need for a new contract or extension of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services on a Time and Materials basis using the schedule ("Schedule") set forth in Exhibit "B", attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services not reflected in the Schedule shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. Nothing herein is intended to waive or limit the CITY's right to claim delay damages to the extent delays are due to the fault of CONSULTANT. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit "A", including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Seven Hundred Thousand Dollars ($700,000.00) (the "Cap"). If the CITY wants CONSULTANT to perform the Services so that CONSULTANT's compensation (for both professional services and reimbursable expenses) would exceed the Cap, CONSULTANT will not be required to perform those Services unless and until the City Council approves a written contract amendment to increase the Cap accordingly. In the event Additional Services are authorized, CONSULTANT shall be compensated on a Time and Materials basis. The applicable rates CONSULTANT will charge and the schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit "C-l", entitled "HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE," which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit "C". CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall be defined as set forth in Exhibit "A," and mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described elsewhere in Exhibit "A". SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT's billing rates (set forth in Exhibit "C- 1 "). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT's payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the CITY's project manager at the address specified in Sec~ion 13 below. The CITY will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT's supervision. CONSULTANT 2 S://CSJTumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in CONSULTANT's work product submitted to CITY, provided that CITY gives written notice to CONSULTANT demonstrating the existence of such errors, omissions, or ambiguities. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct any and all errors, omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project. This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. [NOT APPLICABLE TO THIS CONTRACT] SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSUL T ANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT's obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. Notwithstanding Section 11 above, CITY agrees that subconsultants may be used to complete the Services. The sub consultants authorized by CITY to perform work on this Project are: Allana, Buick & Bers Smith Emery Multivista Facility Management Services S:IICS/Tumer Construction 3 Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. Except as may relate to its obligation to pay CONSULTANT as provided in Exhibit "C," CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation for such subconsultants. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Tom Tripp as the project director to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and Karen Hojas as the project coordinator to represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY's project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY's request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. The City'S project manager is Phil Bobel, Public Works Department, Engineering Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone: 650-279-0464. The project manager will be CONSULTANT's point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. The CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. <;:ONSUL T ANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT's records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an "Indemnified Party") from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, 4 S:lICSrrumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements ("Claims") resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT's services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best's Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY's Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days' notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT's receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY's Purchasing Manager during the entire term of this Agreement. 5 S://CS/Tumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (l0) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT's services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4,20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: S:IICS/Tumer Construction Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 6 Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a "Consultant" as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the City's Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at the City's Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of the City's Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or compo sting waste. In particular, Consultant shall comply with the following zero waste requirements: • All printed materials provided by Consultant to City generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by the City's Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post- consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks. 7 s://CS(fumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 • Goods purchased by Consultant on behalf of the City shall be purchased in accordance with the City's Enviromnental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Office. • Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by the Consultant, at no additional cost to the City, for reuse or recycling. Consultant shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION 24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs, expert witness fees, and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value (based upon the typical hourly rates for attorneys providing such services in Santa Clara County at the time of the commencement of such action) of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys' fees paid to third parties for legal services provided to such party in the action. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in 8 S://CSffurner Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, CITY shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident ("Personal Information"), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform CITY immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without CITY's express written consent. 25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. 25.11 This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement. [Signatures on the next page] 9 S://CS/Tumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 [City Of Palo Alto Contract No. C13149552 Between City of Palo Alto and Turner Construction Company -Signatures] IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY By: City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": EXHIBIT "B": EXHIBIT "C": EXHIBIT "C-l ": EXHIBIT "D": S:IICSffumer Construction SCOPE OF WORK SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE COMPENSATION SCHEDULE OF RATES INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS 10 Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 1. INTRODUCTION EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES In November 2008, voters approved Measure N, which provided for the upgrade, replacement and/or expansion of three libraries in Palo Alto: the Downtown Library, the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center and the Main Library. The Downtown Library project has been completed and the Main Library project has been designed and bid. The Mitchell Park Library and Community Center Project (Project) is under construction. The original library and community center buildings located at 3700 & 3800 Middlefield Road were demolished and removed. A combined library and community center building and associated site amenities including parking have been under construction since September 2010. Group 4 Architecture (Architect) is the design consultant, Flintco Pacific, Inc., (Contractor) is the general contractor, and Turner Construction Company (Consultant) is the Construction Manager, each under separate contract to the City. The original contract with Consultant includes a schedule for the completion of construction phase services by June 1,2013. The term of that contract with Consultant expires June 1,2013. However, the Contractor has advised the City that it will not complete construction of the Project by that date and the City therefore requests that Consultant provide its construction management services beyond June 1, 2013. Accordingly, this new Contract continues the type of services Consultant has been providing. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES Consultant's services shall include construction management serVIces to assist staff in the management of the construction of the Project. If at any time, the City is not satisfied with the performance of Consultant's staff, the City reserves the right to request the services of a different individual. If for any reason the Consultant proposes a change of staffing during the course of the project, the City reserves the right to approve any new staff. Computers, cell phones, and other equipment needed for Consultant's staff shall be provided by the Consultant. These costs shall be included in the Consultant's compensation. Phase I -Preconstruction -[Not applicable.] Phase II -Construction Phase Services To Be Provided On A Time And Materials Basis A. Consultant Staff Services General: Consultant shall be the point of contact for Contractor and shall endeavor to enforce compliance with all of Contractor's contractual requirements on a Time and Materials basis, as follows: 11 S://CS/Tumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 Daily Construction Management: Consultant shall oversee the day-to-day construction work performed by the Contractor. Consultant shall track the construction process, logistics, Requests for Information (RFI), Change Orders (CO) and other information or requests. Consultant shall oversee the construction activities and ensure that all aspects of LEED ® construction requirements are followed and documented and shall work closely with the Project's Commissioning Agent and Architect in that regard. Consultant shall work with the Contractor and any involved parties to implement logistical and communications measures to minimize any impacts to the nearby residential neighborhood, park, fire station, and the various pre-school, elementary, middle, special needs, and charter schools on that block. Consultant shall implement expeditious methods for resolving conflicts. Consultant shall handle the coordination between the City staff, Contractor, and Architect. If night time, holiday or weekend work is required periodically to minimize impacts or due to delay in schedule, Consultant services shall still be required in full effect, but will be compensated as Additional Services, for costs incurred. Consultant shall assume that the third Monday in January (Martin Luther King Day), the second Monday in October (Columbus Day) and November 11 (Veteran's Day) of each year shall be a working day for the Contractor and for the Consultant. December 24 (Christmas Eve) and the Friday following Thanksgiving Day (the fourth Thursday in November) shall also be considered to be regular working days. Consultant shall install, advertise, and maintain a hot-line for community updates, questions, and complaints. Advertisement, equipment and other related costs shall be included in the Reimbursables cost section below. Consultant shall be a liaison with City staff and assist Contractor as-needed in the connection and operation of a Contractor-installed video camera(s) that will be connected to a website to monitor site progress. Field Inspection and Supervision: Consultant, whose title shall be CM Field Superintendent (CMFS), shall maintain a field presence whenever work is under way by the Contractor. The role of the CMFS will be to enforce the Contractor's contract daily in the field to ensure that the work is being constructed in compliance with the contract documents, the approved shop drawings, the current RFI answers, etc, and in general, to protect the interest of the City daily in the field. The CMFS will also observe and report daily field problems with respect to quality, cost and schedule. The CMFS will develop and maintain deficiency, incomplete work item, and preliminary punch list reports and will maintain a daily construction report, as the daily history of the Project, to include significant jobsite field events that occur each day. The CMFS will not be responsible for means and methods of the Contractor, nor for safety of any of the Contractor's employees, but will have the authority, but not the responsibility, to observe and report concerns with regard to such issues. Documentation: Consultant shall oversee and manage the Contractor's preparation and/or review of all necessary documentation for the Project including, but not limited to, daily logs and inspection progress reports, photos/videos, RFI, correspondence, shop drawings, and other contractor submittals. Consultant shall maintain all files and documentation related to managing the Project. Consultant shall track all RFI, correspondence, and submittal status. Responses, approvals, and decisions relative to Contractor's documents shall be provided in a timely manner and as required in the construction documents. 12 S://CS/Tumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 Consultant shall review and comment on any project-related correspondence as requested by the City. Routine correspondence that is related to product information or minor design issues may be prepared and answered by Consultant on its letterhead, with a copy of the response directed to the City's Project Manager (PM) and Architect. Correspondence requiring City response, including but not limited to correspondence with residents, cost or contractual issues, may be drafted by Consultant but shall be signed only by City. Submittals: Consultant shall manage, log and track all project submittals (i.e. shop drawings, product information, substitution request, and samples) for approval in timely manner as required by the construction documents and in order to prevent any delays to the Project. Comments from different reviewers of the submittal shall be compiled before being returned to the Contractor for revisions. All submittals shall be sent directly between the Contractor and the Architect, with copies, documentation and management reports submitted to and managed by the Consultant. Construction Schedule: Consultant shall review the Contractor's construction schedule. Consultant shall analyze, monitor, and request updates for the master schedule as the project progresses. Consultant shall analyze the schedule for logical construction, constraints, level of critical activities and to verify progress in conjunction with the analysis of pay applications. Consultant shall review Contractors' individual Critical Path Method (CPM) schedules, monitor the Contractor's progress, notify the City of any slippage, and coordinate Contractor recovery plans. Progress Payments: Consultant shall review progress payment requests submitted by Contractor, within five (5) days of receipt and verify the accuracy and percentage of completion against the schedule, and resolve any discrepancies in the invoices. Consultant shall review the invoices and backup for completeness and compliance with contract documents and make a recommendation to PM for payment of the progress payment requests. Change Order Monitoring and Processing: Consultant shall review and evaluate all Contractor change order requests. Consultant shall review the contract documents to determine entitlement, complete an independent estimate of the cost of the changes, and reconcile with the Contractor's change order request. Consultant shall prepare contract change order authorizations for City approval and track all scope and schedule changes. Consultant shall also implement expeditious methods for resolving conflicts. Claims: Consultant shall analyze any claims from the Contractor (i.e., compensation and delay) for completeness, accuracy and on-time submittal per the Contractor's contract with the City, and as to whether they are excusable, inexcusable, or compensable and prepare an initial written response for City. This service pertains to the original claim and, if necessary, the Meet & Conf(,!r and Direct Negotiation subsequent steps of the claim process as described in the Contractor's contract with the City. Consultant shall prepare written response letters to the Meet & Confer and Direct Negotiations meetings. Meetings: Throughout the construction process, Consultant shall be prepared to address comments and concerns of the Contractor, other construction contractors under contract to the City, Architect, PM, the City Staff, and the general public on an as-needed basis. Consultant shall set up and conduct weekly progress meetings and any other meetings necessary to facilitate the project work. Consultant shall write and distribute the meeting agendas, and meeting 13 S:IICS/Turner Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 minutes, including: City-Consultant meetings, regular site meetings, and meetings with the City staff, Contractor, City contractors, various City departments, and also the public. The meeting minutes will explicitly track who has the responsibility for each action item with expected completion dates. Consultant will attend City Council meetings only when requested in writing by the PM to do so. Consultant shall coordinate the logistics related to a ground-breaking and to a ribbon-cutting ceremony, including working with committees, identifying power sources, etc. Costs for beverages, materials, photographs shall not be the responsibility of the Consultant. Consultant shall, at the direction of the PM, install, advertise, and maintain a hot-line for community updates, questions, and complaints. Printing of flyers, presentation boards, advertisement, equipment and other related outreach material costs shall considered a reimbursable expense, the cost for which shall be approved in writing in advance by the PM. Miscellaneous: Consultant shall monitor Contractor's compliance in general with the construction documents and contract. Consultant shall address comments and concerns of the Contractor, City contractors and the Architect as needed. During construction, the Consultant's office space shall be provided, maintained and removed by the Contractor, including offices, furniture and office equipment. Quality Control and Assurance: Consultant shall monitor and document the Contractors' work for any deviations in scope, schedule, or performance and keep the City informed of and assist in resolving any issues that may arise. Record Drawings: Consultant shall coordinate the preparation of record drawings with the Contractor, City contractors and Architect on a regular basis, both during the construction and post construction phases, and review the "as-built" drawings for accuracy. Training: Consultant shall set up and coordinate contractor-provided training of City staff as required by the contract documents and as necessary to ensure that the appropriate City personnel are adequately trained and familiar with the new equipment and systems. Commissioning: Consultant shall work with the commissioning agent, Architect, Contractor and City contractors to ensure that all new equipment have been installed in accordance with the contract documents, are working properly as stand-alone equipment, and are working properly as part of a complete system. Substantial Completion: As per the construction contract, once the Contractor requests substantial completion and it is determined to be warranted, Consultant shall prepare and compile a project punch list with the assistance from the City and Architect to be forwarded to the Contractor. Consultant shall oversee the completion of the punch list items before the final notice of completion is issued. Close Out: Consultant shall ensure completion and delivery of all required close out documentations including operation and maintenance (O&M) manuals, record drawings, and warranties. Consultant shall review all these materials for compliance with the contract 14 S://CSfTumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 documents and for completeness, and report any deficiencies or discrepancies to Contractor for corrections and re-submittal. Consultant shall work under the direction of the PM to resolve any contract claim issues that may arise (stop work notices, bonding, delays, extra work, etc). As- built drawings shall be scanned by Consultant for archiving by City. Files: Consultant shall consolidate and deliver all project files and documentation maintained to be retained by the City. Additional Services: Include, but are not limited to, additional meetings, change order and claim analysis and processing following both the Meet & Confer and Direct Negotiation steps of the claim process described in the Contractor's contract with the City, and unforeseen testing or inspection needs. Reimbursables: Travel and meal expenses shall not be Reimbursable items but shall be considered as included in the fee for associated work items. Temporary trailers, computers, copiers, printers and office supplies are not considered as a Reimbursable expense, but will be provided to the Consultant under the Contractor's Contract. Printing of plans and specifications shall be paid by City. Printing of flyers, presentation boards, telephone hotlines and other communication materials needed to fulfill outreach as described herein shall be budgeted for and provided as a Reimbursable item by Consultant. Job site safety fencing is a reimbursable expense. B. Testing and Special Inspections Testing and Special Inspections: A testing agency shall be under contract with and paid for by the Consultant. Consultant shall coordinate with the Contractor in scheduling the testing agency services for materials testing and special inspections needed for the life of the project. This testing includes, but is not limited to, collecting and running geotechnical tests, concrete strength and weld inspection. Consultant shall ensure that all required sign-offs are reviewed and distributed and are in compliance with the specifications and the California Building Codes. Geotechnical Inspections are included by the Architect, and are not included by the Consultant. Building Code Inspection Services: Consultant shall coordinate all building code inspection services for construction phases of the Proj ect. C. -Electronic Documentation and Photograph Recording Electronic Documents: Consultant shall provide an electronic, fully addressable and cross referenced document filing system. It will be developed and used as the Project filing system during construction and will be updated with all closeout documentation, and cross referenced for simple search and retrieve functionality for all project documentation for City's use after construction. Consultant will provide labor to input all documentation, and to train City in the use and access to all electronic project files. Any monthly service fees shall be included herein and not in Reimbursables. Project Documentation -Photographic Record: Based upon a build period of thirty eight (38) months, provide a photographic pre-construction site-survey of existing conditions; thirty eight (38) maximum exterior progressions; interior progressions; nine (9) maximum interior 15 S:IICS/Tumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 mechanical, electrical and plumbing; pre-concrete slab pour; exterior elevation, including window-flashing and waterproofing; three (3) maximum roofing exact built showing the roof at various stages of the project; and finished condition prior to occupancy. All documentation shall include consultations with City identifying project-specific needs, appropriate photographic intervals, schedules, determination of optimal locations based on the site plans, a representative number of digital photographs at such intervals and for such durations and at the specified milestones; linking each photo set to the appropriate location on the site plans and floor plans; online web hosting of the documentation on the Multivista website for the construction period covered by the documentation and for a minimum period of I-year thereafter; password protected access to the documentation and two CD or DVD ROM copies of the entire documentation upon completion. D -Extended Construction Duration -section deleted Phase III: Post Construction Services To Be Provided On A Time And Material Basis A -Consultant Staff Services on a Time and Materials basis as follows: Post Construction and Warranty Services: Consultant shall meet with Library, Community Services and Public Works staff (Staff) monthly for three months commencing after the building is open to the public in order to complete any remaining punch-list items and/or to contact the Contractor for any warranty issues that might arise. After the initial three month period, Consultant shall contact the Staff quarterly for a period of nine months to determine whether any new building or systems issues have been identified. Systems deficiencies that cannot be resolved by the Contractor shall be reported to the Commissioning Agent. Commissioning Verification: Consultant shall participate in the post-construction activities of the Commissioning Agent as follows: Participate in an off-season testing (i.e., testing the heating system prior to winter) session and work with the Contractor to correct any deficiencies. Compile the final testing documentation for the Commissioning Record and O&M manuals. 12 Month Warranty Follow Up: Consultant shall return to the site at month 10 of the 12 month warranty period and review operating conditions with City facility staff and the Commissioning Agent in order to identify any outstanding issues related to the original and seasonal commissioning. The Commissioning Agent will interview facility staff and identify problems or concerns that they have with operating the building as originally intended. The Commissioning Agent will make suggestions for improvements and for recording these changes in the O&M manuals. The Commissioning Agent will identify areas that may come under warranty or under the original construction contract. The Consultant shall work with the Contractor to resolve any warranty issues. 16 S:IICSITumer Construction Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 EXHIBIT "B" SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services on a Time and Materials basis with the goal of completing each milestone described below. Milestones 1. Cel1ificate of Occupancy (CO) 2. Post Construction (3 months after CO) 3, Warranty Period Ellds (12 months after CO) 17 :/ICS{['umcr Construction E :timated Date ctober 31 2013 January 31 2014 October 3] 2014 Professional Services Rev. June 1.2013 EXHIBIT "C" COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT on a time and materials basis for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Compensation shall be calculated on a time and material basis for the performance of the services specified in Phase II, Construction Phase Services in Exhibit "A". The hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 will be used to compensate CONSULTANT for personnel assigned to each task set forth below. The budget per task below will be used by the CITY for internal accounting. For Subconsultants, such as Inspections, special inspections, electronic document services, and photographic documentation services, the CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation for the CONSULTANT shall be calculated based upon the actual cost of the subconsultant, plus a fee of five percent (5%), up to the not to exceed budget amount set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for the performance of services described in Exhibit "A" ("Basic Services") and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $700,000 (the "Cap"). If the CITY wants CONSULTANT to perform the Services so that CONSULTANT's compensation (for both professional services and reimbursable expenses) would exceed the Cap, then (a) prior written authorization from the CITY will be required, and (b) CONSULTANT will not be required to perform those Services unless and until the City Council authorizes a written contract amendment increasing the Cap accordingly. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the Cap without prior authorization from the CITY shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSUL T ANT's work shall be performed on a Time and Materials basis and shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined below. In the event Consultant's Task 1 Staff Costs exceed $105,000 in any month, CONSULTANT shall promptly notify the City Manager and Public Works Director in writing once it becomes aware that such Staff Costs have been incurred. CONSUL T ANT shall submit detailed time records and reimbursables backup in a form acceptable to the CITY. The CITY's Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $700,000. BUDGET SCHEDULE Task 1 Staff Costs (Phase II, Section A: Construction Phase) Task 2 (Phase II, Section B: Testing & Inspection) 18 S://CS/Tumer Construction NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT $525,000 $15,000 Professional Services Rev. June 1,2013 Task 3 (Phase II, Section C: Electronic Documents) Task 4 (Phase II, Section C: Photographic) Task 5 (Phase III: Post Construction) Sub-total Basic Services Reimbursable Expenses Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses Additional Services (Not to Exceed) Maximum Total Compensation REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $90,000 $5,000 $45,000 $680,000 $20,000 $700,000 $0 $700,000 The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. Then CITY will reimburse CONSULTANT for approved subcontracted services billed at cost plus 5%. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY's project manager's request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT's proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-l . The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY's Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement TIME AND MATERIALS WORK Notwithstanding any other provision or anything to the contrary herein, it is expressly understood and agreed by both parties that this contract is for Hourly .and Time and Materials work, and that Consultant will provide staff and services up to the total contract authorization of $700,000 only, regardless of the status of construction, the status of the project, the performance or actions of the Contractor, the status of milestone dates, or the 19 S i'( ·S(IUIIlCI COI1SllUcl1t III 1'1 otcssiullal S~I vices R~\ !lI1lC I. 21)1 ~ status of the Construction Schedule. Consultant will keep the City advised at reasonable intervals as to how the Construction Management compensation is approaching the total authorization of $700,000, and will work with the City to manage the level of staff and the services to work towards the $700,000 authorization. EXHffiIT "C-1" HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Rates for Services Performed in 2013 Rates for Services Performed in 2014 (because anticipated warranty period extends into 2014) Project Executive $261 Project Manager $185 Superintendent $119 Project Engineer $118 Administration $71 Scheduling $174 Accounting $113 .. C"S IUll1e'!' llll"II'II~lhlll Project Executive Project Manager Superintendent Project Engineer Administration Scheduling Accounting 20 $270 $191 $184 $122 $ 73 $179 $116 IJI'(llcs~inllal . Cl'I'ICCS f{\;, June I. 20 IJ EXHIBIT "D" INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THE[R SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTA1N AND MA1NTA1N lNSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST'S KEY RATING OF A-:VlI, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD [S CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY'S INSURANCE REQUiREMENTS, AS SPECWIED, BELOW: MINIMUM LIMITS REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT EACH YES YES YES YES YES YES OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE WORKER'S COMPENSA T[ON STATUTORY EMPLOYER'S LlAB[L1TY STATUTORY BODILY INJURY $1,000,000 $1,000,000 GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE $1,000,000 $1,000,000 PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE $1,000,000 $1,000,000 LIABILITY COMBINED. BODILY INJURY $1,000,000 $1,000,000 -EACH PERSON $1,000,000 $1,000,000 -EACH OCCURRENCE $1,000,000 $1,000,000 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED PROPERTY DAMAGE $1,000,000 $1,000,000 BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY $1,000,000 $1,000,000 DAMAGE, COMBINED PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1 000000 THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, W[TH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER'S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY (30) DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR'S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY'S PRIOR APPROV AL. 11. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO "ADDITIONAL INSUREDS" A, PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. 21 S:i'CS Tlllilcr ('OIlSU'LlCIIOIl Prolessiollul Serviccs ReI JLlIlC I. 2fJIJ B. CROS L1ASI ITY TH ' NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE P 'RSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION A INSUREDS UNDER THE POll V SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH A Y RIGHTS OF THE INSUR.ED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT TI-IIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHAL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LlAI3lLlTY Of-THE OMPANY UNDER THI POLl Y. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION I. IF THE POLICY IS ANC ' LED BEPORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY R.EASON OTHER THAN THE NON·PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITIEI NOTf E BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATJON. 2. IF THE POLl Y IS ANCELED BEFORE IT EXPIRATION DAT · FOR THE NON- PAVMENT OF PREMIUM, THE I SUING OMPANY SI-IALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEA l' A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAlLEI) TO: ~ (~l llrn~'1 I 11I1~II IICW)1I PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATJON CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 22 l'roIC$ Illmll Services RI'I .111111; 1 201.1 1 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE, RESEARCH + PLANNING, INC. This Amendment No. 7 (“Amendment”) to Contract No. C09130744 (“Contract”) is entered into and made effective on May ____, 2013, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE, RESEARCH + PLANNING, INC., a California corporation with offices located at 211 Linden Avenue, South San Francisco, California 94080 (“CONSULTANT”). R E C I T A L S: WHEREAS, the Contract was entered into on March 2, 2009, between the parties for a total Contract amount not to exceed $3,827,280 for the provision of professional consulting design services relating to, among other things, the demolition of an existing library and community center at Mitchell Park and the construction of a new joint library and community center (“Mitchell Park Project”), rehabilitation of the Downtown Library, renovation and addition to the Main Library, and to provide temporary facilities during the construction of the other projects (“Project”); and WHEREAS, on September 14, 2009, the parties amended the Contract to add $92,034 of compensation for a total Contract amount not to exceed $3,919,314; (Amendment No. 1) and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2010, the parties amended the Contract to add $312,396 of compensation for a total Contract amount not to exceed $4,231,710; (Amendment No. 2) and WHEREAS, on August 5, 2010, the parties amended the Contract to add $3,192,000 of for a total Contract amount not to exceed $7,423,710; (Amendment No. 3) and WHEREAS, on July 25, 2011, the parties amended the Contract to add $258,041 of compensation for a total Contract amount not to exceed $7,681,751; (Amendment No. 4) and WHEREAS, on January 5, 2012, the parties amended the Contract to add $220,670 of compensation for a total Contract amount not to exceed $7,902,421; (Amendment No. 5) and 2 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts WHEREAS, on November 5, 2012, the parties amended the Contract to add $692,810 of compensation for a total Contract amount not to exceed $8,595,231. In addition, the parties entered into a Tolling Agreement which remains in effect; (Amendment No. 6); and WHEREAS, the contractor, Flintco, Inc. (“Contractor”), hired to build the Mitchell Park Project has failed to complete the Mitchell Park Project within the time specified in the related construction contract and the current schedules indicate the Mitchell Park Project will be delayed beyond the completion date specified in such construction contract and the parties understand that current projections are for opening of the Mitchell Park Project in November 2013 and Contractor’s Substantial Completion of it sometime before that opening; and WHEREAS, Consultant, on the one hand, contends that the Mitchell Park Project will be delayed beyond the completion date of its responsibility to provide Basic Construction Administration Services for the Construction Phase of the Mitchell Park Library Project and, further contends under Article 1.5.1 of Exhibit A of the Contract and its Amendments, any further time and effort spent by Consultant on behalf of the Construction Phase of the Mitchell Park Project shall be provided as an Additional Service; and the City, on the other hand, desires to reserve its rights regarding these contentions and to assert damages incurred for delay and/or extra consultant fees if the delay and/or consultant fees are required due to the negligence of Consultant; and WHEREAS, the parties seek by this Amendment No. 7 to maintain Consultant services and avoid delay to the Mitchell Park Project by extending the completion date of Consultant’s responsibility to provide Basic Construction Administration Services for the Construction Phase of the Mitchell Park Library Project and amending Consultant’s Compensation under the Contract; and to reserve the City’s rights with respect to certain damages relating to this amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. The Recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Amendment and the Contract by this reference. SECTION 2. Section 4 NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION is hereby amended to read: “Subject to the Reservation of Rights provisions set forth in Exhibit “C”, attached and incorporated by this reference, and Section 7 of this Amendment 7, the compensation paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Seven Million Nine Hundred Fifty Eight Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety Nine Dollars ($7,958,999). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Eight Million Eight Hundred Fifty Five Thousand Two Hundred Thirty One Dollars ($8,855,231). The additional compensation amount of $260,000 added by this 3 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts Amendment No. 7 shall be billed on the actual time and materials basis based on the hourly rate schedules attached as Exhibit C and C‐1 up to such not to exceed amount budgeted for Task G1.1. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C” and “C‐1” which are attached to and made part of this Agreement.” Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit "C" and Exhibit "C‐1". CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit "A". SECTION 3. The following exhibits to the contract are hereby amended to read as set forth in the following attachment to this amendment which is incorporated in full by this reference. a. Exhibit “B” entitled “EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE”. b. Exhibit “C” entitled EXHIBIT “C” “COMPENSATION”. SECTION 4. EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF WORK, II. CONSULTANT’S BASIC SERVICES, SECTION 1.5.1, as most recently amended in Amendment No. 5 to the Contract, is hereby amended to read: “CONSULTANT's responsibility to provide Basic Construction Administration Services for the Construction Phase under this Agreement commences with CITY's issuance of a Notice to Proceed with the Contract for Construction and will end on October 31, 2013 or upon commencement by the CONSULTANT of the Substantial Completion Correction ("Punch") list, as mutually agreed upon by CONSULTANT, the CITY's Construction Manager and CITY, whichever comes first. If the punch list does not commence by October 31, 2013, any further time and effort spent on behalf of the project shall be an Additional Service provided on a time and materials basis. Consultant will not be obligated to provide any work beyond October 31, 2013 unless directed by CITY in writing." SECTION 5. To facilitate the resolution of any reasonably possible dispute between the parties, Consultant agrees to separately document any and all work performed by Consultant that can reasonably be interpreted as being affected by, or necessitated because of, a defect, error or omission on the part of Flintco, Inc. in Flintco, Inc.' s work on the Project. SECTION 6. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 7. Should a dispute (“Dispute”) arise between the parties over the interpretation of this Contract, and the benefits and obligations therein, the parties’ agreement to extend the term or the Schedule of Performance and amend Consultant's Compensation shall not preclude City from asserting damages incurred for delay and/or extra consultant fees if the extension and/or consultant fees are required due to the negligence of Consultant and shall not preclude Consultant from asserting damages incurred for delay and/or extra fees and expenses if the extension and/or consultant fees and expenses are required due to the acts or omissions of City and/or any third party, including City's separate consultants and contractors. The parties agree that nothing contained in the Recitals hereto and provisions herein are in any way intended to be an admission or concession regarding liability and shall not be interpreted to impact the parties' respective positions, rights, claims and remedies in any respect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO James Keene City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney s:/ /CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts 4 GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE, RESEARCH + PLANNING, INC. ~ ~ . By: i~~ 5 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT SEVEN EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed. Milestones Completion No. of Weeks From NTP MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY / COMMUNITY CENTER Task D1: Design Development Week 24 Task E1: Construction Documents Week 50 (26 weeks from receipt of authorization to proceed from Design Development Task) Task F1: Bidding & Award Week 63 (13 weeks from receipt of authorization to proceed from Construction Document Task) Task G1: Construction Administration Approx. October 31, 2013 Task H1: Project Closeout & Record Documents 90 days starting from General Contractors receipt of substantial completion. 6 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT SEVEN EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Contract, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be paid to the CONSULTANT on a lump sum basis for Mitchell Park Library Task D1, E1, F1, subject to the Reservation of Rights below. Compensation shall be paid to the CONSULTANT on a lump sum basis for Renovated Downtown Library Task D2, E2, F2, G2, and H2. Compensation for Temporary Library Task D3, E3, F3, and G3 shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedules attached as Exhibit C‐1 up to the Not to Exceed amount set forth below. Compensation for Participation Task D4 shall be on a per meeting basis as identified in attached Exhibit C‐1 up to the Not to Exceed amount set forth below. Subject to the Reservation of Rights below the compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Contract for all services described in Exhibit "A ", ("Basic Services") and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $7,958,999. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $8,855,231. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY's project manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $7,958,999 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $896,232. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS Reservation of Rights: All sums paid to Consultant and received by Consultant under this Amendment are made without prejudice and City and Consultant hereby agree each reserves any and all rights and/or defenses they may have against each other, whether in existence now or hereafter, including, but not limited to, the City's right to claim it incurred extra consultant fees due to construction delays and/or other causes, irrespective of whether the City’s claimed extra consultant fees were paid to Consultant or the City’s separate consultant(s). The parties reserve the rights to make these claims until such time as the City and Consultant resolve all claims and disputes that may arise between them in connection with the Mitchell Park Project. Any payment made by City to Consultant under Contract Amendment No. 7 shall not affect in any way City’s ability to assert that it incurred damages in the form of extra consultant fees and expenses, in connection with the Mitchell Park Project. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the CITY and CONSULTANT have been unable to agree in writing to the entitlement to the funds paid by CITY to CONSULTANT, subject to the Reservation of Rights above within ninety (90) days after the CITY’s final resolution (e.g., the dates of any of the following: settlement agreement; judgment following trial; or judgment following an award in binding arbitration) of any and all claims by or against Contractor, then CITY AND CONSULTANT may submit the dispute surrounding the Reservation of Rights funds to final and 7 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts binding arbitration to be conducted by a single arbitrator from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services (“JAMS”) of San Jose, California, or any successor entity. The arbitrator, if any, shall be jointly selected by the CITY AND CONSULTANT or, if they are unable to agree within fourteen (14) days of the first written proposal of an arbitrator, appointed in accordance with the then‐current JAMS arbitrator appointment process and subject to all JAMS procedural and discovery rules then in effect. This provision shall not be construed as an agreement to submit any other claims or actions either party has or may have against one another to JAMS arbitration and such other claims or actions shall be governed by the terms set forth in the Contract. 8 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT SEVEN BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT BASIS MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY/COMMUNITY CENTER Task D1 $845,456 Lump Sum (Design Development) Task E1 $1,882,656 Lump Sum (Construction Documents) Task F1 $150,437 Lump Sum (Bidding & Award) Task G1 $1,156,517 Lump Sum (Construction Administration, FFE & Signage) Task G1.1 after Jan. 2, 2012 $940,810 Lump Sum (Construction Administration, FFE & Signage) Task H1 $143,339 Lump Sum (Project Closeout & Record Documents) Subtotal $5,119,215 RENOVATED DOWNTOWN LIBRARY Task D2 $88,383 Lump Sum (Design Development) Task E2 $227,882 Lump Sum (Construction Documents) Task F2 $14,941 Lump Sum (Bidding & Award) Task G2 $146,100 Lump Sum (Construction Administration) Task G2.1 $81,796 Lump Sum (LEED Design & Documentation) Task G2.2 $20,000 Lump Sum (Furniture) 9 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT SEVEN BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT BASIS Task H2 $25,500 Lump Sum (Project Closeout and Record Documents) Subtotal $604,602 TEMPORARY MITCHELL PARK LIBRARY Task D3 $12,688 Time & Materials to a (Schematic Design & Design Build Bid maximum Package) Task E3 $95,916 Lump Sum (Construction Documents) Task F3 $9,440 Lump Sum (Bidding & Award) Task G3 $24,415 Lump Sum (Construction Administration) Subtotal $142,459 MAIN LIBRARY PROJECT Task D4 $488,307 Lump Sum (Design Development) Task E4 $892,814 Lump Sum (Construction Documents) Task E4.1 (Library and Art Center Site Integration $41,948 Lump Sum Design and Construction Documents) Task F4 $90,749 Lump Sum (Bidding & Award) Subtotal $1,513,818 TEMPORARY MAIN LIBRARY Task AS &C5 $39,725 Time & Materials to a (Site Analysis & Prelim Design Documents) maximum Task ES $22,410 Lump Sum (Construction Documents, Bidding & Award) Subtotal $62,135 10 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT SEVEN ART CENTER RENOVATION Task E4.2 $41,948 Lump Sum (Library and Art Center Site Integration) Design & Construction Documents Subtotal $41,948 PARTICIPATION Task D6 Mitchell Park Library $75,000 Lump Sum Allowance Main Library 82,000 Art Center 7,000 Subtotal $164,000 Subtotal Basic Services $7,648,177 Reimbursable Expenses Allowance: Mitchell Park Library $160,000 Mitchell Park Library after Sept. 4, 2012 12,000 Downtown Library 56,000 Temporary MP Library 13,500 Main Library 50,000 Temporary Main Library 19,322 Subtotal Reimbursable Expenses $310,822 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable Expenses $7,958,999 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) Mitchell Park Library $654,510 Downtown Library 56,000 Temporary MP Library 15,600 Main Library 157,082 Temporary Main Library 8,145 Art Center 4,895 Subtotal Additional Services $896,232 Maximum Total Compensation $8,855,231 11 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT SEVEN REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in‐house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. cm shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost not to exceed the total amount shown above. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: • Outside service printing/copying of drawings and documents of any size. • In‐house printing of CAD check sets and presentation drawings larger than 11"x17": $2.00 per square foot. • In‐house black & white photocopying for draft and final reports and specifications: $2.00 per page. • In‐house color and grayscale printing and photocopying up to 11"x 17" for in house, consultant or client use: $1.25 per page. • Software purchase and licensure on behalf of the client. • Postage, delivery and messenger service. • Photographic and digital imaging. • Architectural renderings and scale models. • Travel expenses • Subconsultant costs over and above those included in Basic Services. • Presentation boards. • Facilitation tools. • Workshop accessories. • Workshop facilitation materials All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $1,000.00 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY's project manager's request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT's proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C‐I. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s project manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. 12 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C09130744 – AMENDMENT SEVEN Work required because the following conditions are not satisfied or are exceeded shall be considered as additional services. 1. If any of the following circumstances affect the CONSULTANT's services for the Project, the CONSULTANT may be entitled to an appropriate adjustment in the CONSULTANT's schedule and compensation: a. Change in the instructions or approvals given by the CITY that necessitate revisions in design drawings and which are not caused by CONSULTANT's negligence; b. Enactment or revision of codes, laws, or regulations or official interpretations which necessitate significant changes to previously prepared drawings; c. Material delay caused by the CITY beyond CONSULTANT's reasonable control d. Significant change in the Project including, but not limited to, size, complexity, the Owner's schedule or budget, or procurement method; e. Preparation for and attendance at a dispute resolution proceeding or a legal proceeding except where the CONSULTANT is a party thereto; f. Substantial change in the information contained in Exhibit A. Additional services may also include, meetings exceeding those outlined in Exhibit A as Basic Services. 13 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts EXHIBIT C‐1 CONSULTANT Hourly Rates and Meeting Rates for Additional Services CONSULTANT's hourly and meeting rate schedule shall be: Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc. Position Hourly Rate Consulting Principal $250 Principal in Charge $195 Principal $180 Associate $160 Project Manager $150 Professional I $140 Professional II $130 Professional III $120 Technical I $125 Technical II $110 Technical III $ 95 Technical IV $ 85 Project Support $ 80 Subconsultants of the CONSULTANT will be billed hourly in accordance with the subconsultants’ rate table as follows: BKF Engineering (Civil) Position Hourly Rate Engineering: Associate $170 Project Manager $160‐$165 Engineer IV $150 Engineer I, II, III $105‐$125‐$145 Planning: Planner I, II, III $110‐$125‐$140 Surveying: Project Manager $160 Surveyor I, II, III, IV $105‐$125‐$145‐$150 Survey Party Chief $135 Survey Chainman $105 Apprentice I, II, III, IV $55‐$75‐$85‐$95 14 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts Design & Drafting: Technician I, II, III $105‐$110‐$115 Drafter I, II, III, IV $80‐$90‐$95‐$105 Student Engineer/Surveyor $60 Construction Administration: Senior Construction $160 Administration Resident Engineer $115 Field Engineer I, II, III $115‐$124‐$140 Services & Expenses: Project Assistant $70 Clerical/Admin Assistant $60 Rutherford & ChekeDe (Structural) Position Hourly Rate Executive Principal $230 Principals $190‐$200 Senior Engineers $150‐$190 Engineers $110‐$150 Designers $95‐$120 CADD Specialists $90‐$140 Guttmann & Blaevoet (Mechanical) Position Hourly Rate Principal $230 Associate Principal $210 Associate $185 Senior Engineer $170 Engineer $135 CAD Manager $125 Designer $120 Drafter $110 Administrative $70 O'Mahony & Myer Electrical + Lighting) Position Hourly Rate Founding Principal $235 Principals $200 Project Electrical Engineer $130 Project Lighting Designer $130 15 S://CS/Mitchell Park/Group 4 Contracts Electrical/Lighting Designer $115 CAD Supervisor $105 CAD Technician $90 Administrative $70 Davis Langdon (Cost Estimator) Position Hourly Rate Principals $250‐$300 Associate Principals $210 Senior Associates $185 Associates $160 Cost Planners $90‐$155 Clerical $70 Gates + Associates (Landscape) Position Hourly Rate President $175 Principal $120‐$150 Senior Associates $105‐$125 Irrigation Designer $105 Associates $80\5‐$105 Draftspersons/Landscape Designer $70‐$85 Clerical Staff $60‐$70 Smith Fause McDonald (Technology/Acoustic) Position Hourly Rate Principals $175 Associates/Senior Engineers $145 Project Consultants/Engineers $125 Consultants/Engineers $105 Technicians/Drafting $80 Administrative $70 The above listed rates are adjusted annually. The next adjustment will be 30 June 2013. Minor, Beth From: Michael Goldeen <goldeen@goldeen.coM~ y CLE.r{~;'S OFF ICE· Sent: To: Subject: Wednesday, May 08,2013 12:55 PM Council, City Mitchell Park Library Shambles Perhaps it's time to put City management on notice too. Michael Goldeen 2350 Tasso Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 Phone 650-391-7247 E-mail michael@goldeen.com Library contractor on notice Letter tells Flintco Pacific to produce plans for getting project back on track BYJASON GREEN Daily News Staff Writer 13 MAY -9 Mi lO: 47 5 The city of Palo Alto has put the contractor it hired to rebuild the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center on notice: shape up or ship out. The roughly $27.2 million project is now more than a year behind schedule and isn't expected to be completed until Nov. 22. City Manager James Keene attributed the delay to shoddy work and poor management in a four-page letter he sent Monday to Tom Maxwell, president and CEO of Flintco Pacific. 1 City of Palo Alto (ID # 3696) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Main Library Construction Contract Award Title: Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance, Approval of a Construction Contract with S.J. Amoroso In The Amount of $17,707,000, and Approval of a Professional Services Contract for $1,130,969 with Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning Inc for the Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project PE-11000 From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1. Adopt a Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment A)in the total amount of $3,869,063 to transfer $1,000,000 from the Downtown Library Renovation Project (PE-09006),transfer $500,000 from the Art Center Upgrade Project (PF-09007), transfer $1,317,563 from the Mitchell Park Library Project (PE-09006),and transfer $1,051,000 from the Infrastructure Reserve (IR) to the Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project (PE-11000); 2. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a contract (Attachment B)with S.J. Amoroso, in the amount of $17,707,000 for construction of improvements at the Palo Alto Main Library; 3. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract with S.J. Amoroso, for related, additional but unforeseen work which may develop during the project, the total value of which City of Palo Alto Page 2 shall not exceed $1,770,700; and 4. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a contract (Attachment C)with Group 4 Architecture, Planning + Research, Inc. in the amount of $1,130,969 for final signage design, construction administration services, and project closeout services. Background Main Library is the third and final project to be funded by the Measure N bond measure passed by Palo Alto voters in 2008. The Palo Alto Main Library Expansion and Renovation project was designed by Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning, Inc. The project incorporates upgrades to the historic building’s structural, electrical and mechanical systems, a new Teen Room, and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)upgrades while preserving the integrity of the original architect Edward Durrell Stone’s iconic design. A new 4,000-square foot addition includes a program room and additional restrooms to extend the services of this heavily used branch. The project targets Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification. In October 2012, NOVA Partners was hired to assist staff with construction management. They assisted with a final constructability review of the design, contractor prequalification and bidding. During construction they will help manage the contractor, provide testing and special inspections, maintain project documentation, and establish and track deadlines for submittals, schedules, responses to requests for information (RFIs), change order requests, change orders, inspection requests, and claims. Discussion Budget Amendment Ordinance Because bids for the project were higher than expected, staff recommends that Council adopt a Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) to cover the additional project cost. Market conditions are again changing and construction costs are escalating. The Downtown Library project was completed under budget primarily City of Palo Alto Page 3 due to the recession-related construction market conditions at the time, therefore staff recommends transferring the remaining funds from Downtown Library CIP PE-09006 into the Main Library CIP PE-11000. Additionally, as previously reported to Council, the Main Library project scope was expanded to include approximately $1.3 million of deferred maintenance and code compliance items and approximately $1 million for a new connection between the Art Center and Main Library parking lots. The parking lot connection was not part of the original bond proposal. The attached BAO will provide for funding of $1,800,000 from the IR to the project. The BAO will also transfer $1,317,563 from the Mitchell Park Library CIP PE-09006 to provide the remainder of the funding that is needed. Contractor Prequalification and Bidding Given the size, complexity and location of the Main Library project, staff conducted a prequalification process to ensure that any contractor selected would be capable of completing the project at a high level of quality and in a timely fashion. In December 2012, a Request for Prequalification of Bidders was advertised and posted at local Builder’s Exchanges. Any contractor who intended to submit a bid was required to complete a questionnaire that presented the company’s financial status, ability to obtain bonding, experience on similar structures, and references. The application focused on essential requirements for public bids, history and organizational performance, safety, LEED and relevant technical experience, performance on recent projects, historical building experience and customer feedback. Approved companies demonstrated a successful and established organization with a positive track record in similar public projects. Of the nine applicants, five contractors passed the initial review. Project data sheets showing relevant, successful work of significant dollar value were the main differentiators. During the prequalification process, contractors were notified that certain key subcontractor disciplines would be required to meet specified qualifications during the bidding process. Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Geothermal Drilling/System subcontractors were limited to those having direct experience with similar projects in both size and scope. Additionally, these subcontractors and their key personnel were required to have a minimum number of years City of Palo Alto Page 4 experience. Subcontractor prequalification was one of the safeguards and improvements planned when the NOVA contract was awarded. On March 7, 2013, a notice inviting formal bids (IFB) for the Palo Alto Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project was sent to the five pre-qualified contractors. The bidding period was 33 days. Bids were received from four contractors on April 9, 2013, as listed on the attached bid summary (Attachment D).Bids ranged from a low of $14,592,630 to a high of $19,293,000. The low bidder withdrew their bid due to clerical error on April 16, 2013. The one firm that chose not to submit a bid indicated that they did not have the resources necessary to prepare a proposal. Solicitation:IFB 149297 Palo Alto Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project Proposed Length of Project 440 Days Number of Bids Mailed to Contractors 5 Number of Bids Mailed to Builder’s Exchanges N/A (prequalified contractors only) Total Days to Respond to Bid 33 Pre-Bid Meeting March 14, 2013 Number of Company Attendees at Pre-Bid Meeting 10 Number of Bids Received 4 Bid Price Range*low of $14,592,630 to a high of $19,293,000 * The low bid shown in the table above was withdrawn due to a clerical error. Staff has reviewed all bids submitted and recommends that S.J. Amoroso be declared the lowest responsible bidder. Staff recommends that the City award City of Palo Alto Page 5 the Base Bid ($17,727,000) minus Add Alternate 1 ($20,000) for a total contract award of $17,707,000. Add Alternate 1 is a deductive amount and removes the skylights that were not part of the original architectural design of the Main Library building. The Historic Resources Board (HRB) and the Architectural Review Board (ARB) recommended staff consider the removal of these skylights for historic and aesthetic reasons. The savings is minor, but the removal is in the best interest of the project. The skylights were installed during a previous renovation project in the 1980’s. The interior lighting is sufficient so that the skylights are not needed. By removing them, the roofline will be restored to its original condition. New LED lamps will be installed in the fixtures above the area under the skylights. These lamps will use much less energy and provide ample light to the area. The base bid of $17,727,000 by S.J. Amoroso, is approximately 11 percent above the construction cost estimate for the project of $15,900,000. The withdrawn low bid is eight percent below the cost estimate. The high bid is 21 percent above the estimate. The range of bids is indicative of a changing economic climate where many recent project starts locally and regionally are quickly driving up construction prices. The clerical error claimed by the low bidder indicates that their bid would have been much closer to, but still above the project estimate. They claim the error that caused them to withdraw their bid is in excess of $1.5 million. Staff confirmed with the Contractor’s State License Board that S.J. Amoroso has an active license on file. Staff checked references supplied by the contractor for previous work performed and found no major complaints. Staff reviewed the subcontractor information submitted by S.J. Amoroso and determined that the subcontractors meet the qualification requirements established for the project. A standard construction contingency amount of 10 percent is requested for the Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project. Normally,for a project of this size, age and complexity a larger amount would be requested. However, numerous allowances are included in the contract that provide targeted additional funds that may be necessary due to the historic nature of the project; as well as the increased potential for unforeseen building conditions such as termites,dry rot, window repair, irrigation repair, and sewer line replacement. City of Palo Alto Page 6 For comparison, a contingency of 25 percent was included in the construction contract for the renovation of the historic College Terrace Library (although only 16 percent was actually used). Group 4 Contract –Construction Administration The contract with the design architect, Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning, Inc. (Attachment C) will provide for the architect’s general construction administration oversight during the construction phase of the Main Library. As the designer of record, under this contract Group 4 will respond to design questions and issues raised by the contractor, attend meetings at the job site, oversee green building submissions and assist in the preparation of the record documents. The contract also includes the final signage design for the building and the integrated site signage that includes the Art Center and the adjacent community gardens. Group 4 is the lead designer for all of the projects under the Measure N library and community center bond measure. Timeline On April 30, 2013, the Main Library closed and the majority of the contents will be moved into storage during the month of May 2013. A Temporary Main Library has been established in the Art Center Auditorium. The Temporary Main Library is made possible by a generous donation by the Friends of the Palo Alto Library (FOPAL). It opened on May 3, 2013. The Main Library Expansion and Renovation project is expected to be competed by December 2014. By that time it could be officially renamed if a recent recommendation by the Library Advisory Commision is pursued and ultimately approved by Council. The signage design to be completed under the new contract with Group 4 will take this renaming proposal into consideration for any signs that will contain the library building name. Alternate to Staff Recommendation As an alternative to the staff recommendation, Council may choose to reject all bids and and direct staff to rebid the project. Staff believes that a rebid would City of Palo Alto Page 7 most likely result in cost escalation due to the current high demand for contractor services in Silicon Valley. It is also important to note that one of the five pre- qualified bidders is now ineligible to participate in a rebid because they withdrew their bid by claiming a mistake (Public Contract Code Section 5105). Therefore, there may be only 3 interested and available pre-qualified bidders. Council may also choose to direct staff to reduce the project scope prior to rebidding. Staff has considered a number of options for scope reduction, but they would require additional time and design fees. Some of the options to reduce cost may require review by the HRB and the ARB. The project building permit is also ready to be issued, so changes would require additional time and fees for further plan review. Resource Impact On May 6, 2013, Council approved a Resolution authorizing the second issuance and sale of Measure N General Obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $20.6 million. The second issuance represents the remainder of the $76 million in bonds approved by the voters under Measure N. During the design phase of the Main Library project, deferred maintenance and code compliance work with an estimated cost of approximately $1.3 million was added to the scope of the project. The Art Center Connectivity project was also added to the scope, with the estimated cost of approximately $1 million to be shared between the Art Center and the Main Library projects. These additions to the scope of the Main Library project were made following the approval of the construction contract for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, the cost of which was 25 percent lower than the engineer’s estimate. Because of the lower than estimated cost of the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center projected at that time, it was anticipated that the additions to the scope of the Main Library project could be made without exceeding the $76 million total approved under Measure N. There was also a desire to take advantage of a favorable construction bidding environment and the cost efficiencies of completing the additional work as part of a major project. At the time of the additions, Council discussed the possibility that the additions would be funded by the Infrastructure Reserve (IR) if the total cost of the three Measure N library City of Palo Alto Page 8 projects were to exceed $76 million. Given the increased costs and uncertainty surrounding the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center project,and the higher than estimated construction contract bid for the Main Library project, staff recommends funding the deferred maintenance and Art Center connectivity components of the project, totaling $1.8 million, from the IR. The most recent estimate of projected costs for the Main Library project, as provided in the Mitchell Bimonthly report to Council dated April 8, 2013, was $22.7 million. This estimate was based on the final engineer’s estimate for the construction cost of $15.9 million. The updated project budget for the Main Library project, which incorporates the construction contract with S.J. Amoroso, is $24.7 million. The earlier estimate of $22.7 was developed with respect to the Measure N library bonds and included a credit of $500,000 for the Art Center contribution to the connectivity component of the project. The new $24.7 million budget represents the total appropriation needed for the Main Library project, and does not reflect the $500,000 credit for the Art Center contribution as that contribution is proposed as part of the attached BAO. Therefore, the net increase to the project budget for the Main Library project is $1.6 million. The previously approved appropriation to CIP PE-11000 is $20,848,500, and an additional appropriation of $3,869,063 is therefore needed to fund the updated project budget of $24,717,563. The attached BAO provides a transfer for $1,000,000 from the funds remaining in the Downtown Library project, $500,000 from the Art Center project, and $1,051,500 from the IR. The remaining appropriation of $1,317,563 is from the Mitchell Park Library project. The proposed funding of $1,051,500 from the IR is less than $1,800,000 (the sum of deferred maintenance, code compliance and Main Library portion of connectivity project costs) because past appropriations to CIP PE-11000 had exceeded the original Engineer’s Estimate Budget of $20,100,000. These figures are summarized in the table below City of Palo Alto Page 9 Project Budget and Appropriations Budget Description Engineer’s Estimate Budget $20,100,000 Main Library project estimate from Measure N bond budget Project Budget at Bid Time $22,660,000 Project budget based on engineer’s estimate of construction costs from final plans (included $500,000 credit for Art Center contribution) Final Project Budget $24,717,563 Revised project budget including construction contract with S.J. Amoroso Existing Appropriation $20,848,500 Funds previously appropriated to the Main Library project Total New BAO Appropriation Request comprised of the elements below: $3,869,063 New appropriation needed to match Final Project Budget Downtown Library Project (PE-09005) ($1,000,000)Remaining funding in Downtown Library project CIP Art Center Project (PF-09007) ($500,000)Funding for Art Center portion of connectivity project Infrastructure Reserve ($1,051,500)Funding for deferred maintenance, code compliance, and Main Library portion of connectivity project, net of previous appropriations in excess of $20,100,000 Mitchell Park Library Project (PE-09006) ($1,317,563)Balance of funding from uncommitted appropriations to Mitchell Park Library project City of Palo Alto Page 10 Attachment E provides a summary of the status of the Library Bond Funds in the same format used in the Mitchell Bimonthly report. The summary reflects the staff recommendation to fund $1.8 million of the Main Library project costs from the IR. The updated “Current Projection” of total costs to be funded by the Library bonds is $74.3 million. Policy Implications This recommendation does not represent a change in City policy and is consistent with Council’s previous direction on the library projects and Measure N. Environmental Review On July 21, 2008, the Council confirmed the Director of Planning and Community Environment’s approval of a 2007 Addendum to the 2002 final Environmental Impact Report for the Main Library. A total of 26 trees will be removed during the Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project. Additionally, 4 existing trees will be relocated within the site. During the project 31 new trees will be planted along with new landscape and site improvements. Currently, there are approximately 175 trees within the proposed project area around the Main Library. The entire property that includes the Art Center and community garden area has over 400 trees. Some trees on the site are being removed due to poor health or due to conflicts with other neighboring trees that are to remain. Five trees have been recommended for removal ASAP regardless of a project. Other trees are being removed to accommodate the project site improvements. Prior to removal, a notice will be posted on the tree for at least 14 days. Additional information on the tree removals is available at this website: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/topics/projects/facilities/library/main.asp?BlobID=27033#trees The tree removals have been discussed at the following public meetings and hearings: City of Palo Alto Page 11 ·City Council on May 21, 2012 ·Historic Resources Board (HRB) on July 18, 2012 ·Architectural Review Board (ARB) on July 19, 2012 ·Addendum of EIR by City Council on July 21, 2008 ·Initial EIR review by City Council on June 3, 2002 Attachments: ·A -Budget Amendment Ordinance (DOC) ·B -Main Library Construction Contract (PDF) ·C -Group 4 Contract C13149972 (PDF) ·D -Bid Summary (PDF) ·E -Library Bond Fund Status (PDF) Attachment A ORDINANCE NO.xxxx ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2013 TO PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATION OF $3,869,063 TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT NUMBER PE-11000, MAIN LIBRARY NEW CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and determines as follows: A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 18, 2012 did adopt a budget for fiscal year 2013; and B.In fiscal years 2011, 2012, and 2013, the Council appropriated $20,848,500 for CIP Project PE-11000, Main Library New Construction and Improvements, for work as outlined in the Measure N bond passed by voters in November 2008; and C. The existing appropriation of $20,848,500 is not sufficient to cover the revised project costs of $24,717,563. An additional appropriation of $3,869,063 is needed to complete the project;and D. The additional appropriation of $3,869,063 for the project will be funded by a transfer from existing CIP projects and the Capital Fund Infrastructure Reserve. The details of the funding sources are summarized in the following table; and Funding Source Amount Transfer from CIP Project PE-09005 Downtown Library Improvements $1,000,000 Transfer from CIP Project PF-09007 Art Center Electrical & Mechanical Upgrades $500,000 Transfer from CIP Project PE-09006 Mitchell Park Library and Community Center New Construction $1,317,563 Capital Fund Infrastructure $1,051,500 Reserve Total $3,869,063 E. City Council authorization is needed to amend the 2013 budget as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2.The sum of Three Million Eight Hundred Sixty- Nine Thousand Sixty-Three Dollars ($3,869,063) is hereby appropriated to CIP Project PE-11000, Main Library New Construction and Improvements. SECTION 3. The sum of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) is hereby transferred from CIP Project PE-09005,Downtown Library Improvements to CIP Project PE-11000, Main Library New Construction and Improvements. SECTION 4. The sum of Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000) is hereby transferred from CIP Project PF-09007, Art Center Electrical & Mechanical Upgrades to CIP Project PE- 11000, Main Library New Construction and Improvements. SECTION 5. The sum of One Million Three Hundred Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Sixty-Three Dollars ($1,317,563) is hereby transferred from CIP Project PE-09006,Mitchell Park Library and Community Center New Construction to CIP Project PE-11000, Main Library New Construction and Improvements. SECTION 6.One Million Fifty-One Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($1,051,500) is hereby transferred from the Capital Fund Infrastructure Reserve, leaving a balance of $12,952,070. SECTION 7. As specified in Section 2.28.080(a) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, a two-thirds vote of the City Council is required to adopt this ordinance. SECTION 8. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. SECTION 9.On July 21, 2008, the Council confirmed the Director of Planning and Community Environment’s approval of a 2007 Addendum to the 2002 final Environmental Impact Report for the Main Library. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: _________________________ City Clerk __________________________ Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: _________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney __________________________ City Manager __________________________ Director of Public Works __________________________ Director of Administrative Services 1 130425 jb 0131071 Attachment B CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Contract No. C13149297 City of Palo Alto Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project 2 130425 jb 0131071 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS………………………………………………………. 5 1.1 Recitals. .................................................................................................................................. 5 1.2 Definitions. ............................................................................................................................. 5 SECTION 2 THE PROJECT……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5 SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS……………………………………………………………………………………. 6 SECTION 4 THE WORK………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 7 SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 7 SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION .................................................................................................... 7 6.1 Time Is of Essence. ................................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.7 6.2 Commencement of Work. ...................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.7 6.3 Contract Time. ........................................................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.7 6.4 Liquidated Damages. .............................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.7 6.4.1 Entitlement……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 7 6.4.2 Daily Amount…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 8 6.4.4 Other Remedies……………………………………………………………….................................. 8 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. .............................................................................................. 8 SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR……………………………………………................................... 8 7.1 Contract Sum. ......................................................................................................................... 8 7.2 Full Compensation. ................................................................................................................. 8 SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 9 SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION………………………………………………………………………………………………….... 9 9.1 Hold Harmless. ....................................................................................................................... 9 9.2 Survival. .................................................................................................................................. 9 SECTION 10 NONDISCRIMINATION……………………………………………………………………………………………… 9 SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS………………………………………………………………………………………….. 10 SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS………………………………………………………………………….. 10 SECTION 13 NOTICES ......................................................................................................................... 10 13.3 Method of Notice………..………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10 3 130425 jb 0131071 13.2 Notice Recipents……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 10 13.3 Change of Address. ................................................................................................................. 11 SECTION 14 INTENTIONALLY OMITTED. ............................................................................................ 11 SECTION 15 DEFAULT…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Error! Bookmark not defined.11 15.1 Notice of Default. ................................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.11 15.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. ................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.11 SECTION 16 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES…………………………………………………………………………………. Error! Bookmark not defined.12 16.1 Remedies Upon Default. ........................................................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.12 16.1.1 Delete Certain Services………………………………………………………………………………….. 12 16.1.2 Perform and Withhold……………………………………………………………………………………. Er ror! Bookmark not defined.12 16.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract……………………………………………………………….. 12 16.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default…………………………………………… 12 16.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond………………………………………………………………………… 12 16.1.6 Additional Provisions………………………………………………………………………………………. 12 16.2 Delays by Sureties. ................................................................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.13 16.3 Damages to City. ..................................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.13 16.3.1 For Contractor's Default………………………………………………………………………………….. 13 16.3.2 Compensation for Losses………………………………………………………………………………… 13 16.4 Suspension by City for Convenience. ..................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.13 16.5 Termination Without Cause. .................................................................................................. 13 16.5.1 Compensation…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13 16.5.2 Subcontractors………………………………………………………………………………………………… 14 16.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. ................................................................................. 14 SECTION 17 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES………………………………………………………………….. 14 17.1 Contractor’s Remedies. .......................................................................................................... 14 17.1.1 For Work Stoppage…………………………………………………………………………………………. 14 17.1.2 For City's Non-Payment……………………………………………………….............................. 15 17.2 Damages to Contractor. ......................................................................................................... 15 SECTION 18 ACCOUNTING RECORDS…………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 18.1 Financial Management and City Access. ................................................................................ 15 18.2 Compliance with City Requests. ..................................................................................... ……… 15 SECTION 19 INDEPENDENT PARTIES…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 15 4 130425 jb 0131071 SECTION 20 NUISANCE………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 SECTION 21 PERMITS AND LICENSES…………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 SECTION 22 WAIVER……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 16 SECTION 23 GOVERNING LAW…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 16 SECTION 24 COMPLETE AGREEMENT…………………………………………………………………………………………. 16 SECTION 25 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT………………………………………………………………………………………… 16 SECTION 26 PREVAILING WAGES………………………………………………………………………………………………… 16 SECTION 27 NON APPROPRIATION…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 17 SECTION 28 AUTHORITY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 17 SECTION 29 ATTORNEY FEES………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 17 SECTION 30 COUNTERPARTS………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 17 SECTION 31 SEVERABILITY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 17 5 130425 jb 0131071 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and S.J. Amoroso Construction Co., Inc. ("Contractor"), is made with reference to the following: R E C I T A L S: A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City. B. Contractor is a Corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of California , Contractor’s License Number 331024. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Construction Contract. C. On March 07, 2013 , City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the the City of Palo Alto Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project (“Project”). In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a bid. D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other services as identified in the Bid Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS. 1.1 Recitals. All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 Definitions. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the General Conditions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail. SECTION 2 THE PROJECT. The Project is the City of Palo Alto Main Library Expansion and Renovation Project, located at 1213 Newell Road, Palo Alto, CA. 94303 ("Project"). 6 130425 jb 0131071 SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by reference. 1) Change Orders 2) Field Orders 3) Contract 4) Bidding Addenda 5) Special Provisions 6) General Conditions 7) Project Plans and Drawings 8) Technical Specifications 9) Notice Inviting Bids 10) Instructions to Bidders 11) Invitation for Bids 12) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Affidavit 13) Reports listed in the Bidding Documents 14) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications (most current version at time of Bid) 15) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards (most current version at time of Bid) 16) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements 17) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations 18) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre- Qualification Checklist (if applicable) 19) Performance and Payment Bonds 20) Insurance Forms 3.2 Order of Precedence. 7 130425 jb 0131071 For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City. SECTION 4 THE WORK. The Work includes all labor, materials, equipment, services, permits, fees, licenses and taxes, and all other things necessary for Contractor to perform its obligations and complete the Project, including, without limitation, any Changes approved by City, in accordance with the Contract Documents and all Applicable Code Requirements. SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project. The Project requires that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other members of the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the Project. SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION. 6.1 Time Is of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. 6.2 Commencement of Work. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. 6.3 Contract Time. Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City’s Notice to Proceed and shall be completed not later than . within Four Hundred Forty calendar days (440) after the commencement date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. 6.4 Liquidated Damages. 6.4.1 Entitlement. City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that if Contractor fails to fully and satisfactorily complete the Work within the Contract Time, City will suffer, as a result of Contractor’s failure, substantial damages which are both extremely difficult and impracticable to ascertain and quantify. Such damages may include, but are not limited to: (i) Loss of public confidence in City and its contractors and consultants. (ii) Loss of public use of public facilities. (iii) Extended disruption to the public. 8 130425 jb 0131071 6.4.2 Daily Amount. If Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time, including any approved extensions thereto, City may assess liquidated damages on a daily basis for each day of Unexcused Delay in achieving Substantial Completion, based on the amount of two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) per day, or as otherwise specified in the Special Provisions. Liquidated damages may also be separately assessed for failure to meet milestones specified elsewhere in the Contract Documents, regardless of impact on the time for achieving Substantial Completion. The assessment of liquidated damages is not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages City will suffer by delay in completion of the Work. The City is entitled to setoff the amount of liquidated damages assessed against any payments otherwise due to Contractor, including, but not limited to, setoff against release of retention. If the total amount of liquidated damages assessed exceeds the amount of unreleased retention, City is entitled to recover the balance from Contractor or its sureties. Occupancy or use of the Project in whole or in part prior to Substantial Completion, shall not operate as a waiver of City’s right to assess liquidated damages. 6.4.4 Other Remedies. City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and memorialized in a Change Order approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR. 7.1 Contract Sum. Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents the Contract Sum of Seventeen Million Seven Hundred Seven Thousand Dollars Dollars ($17,707,000.00). [This amount includes the Base Bid and Add Alternates Number 1 (Deduct).] 7.2 Full Compensation. The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor and, except as otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover all Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to suspension or discontinuance of the Work. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted for Change Orders approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE. Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised personnel. All services performed in connection with this Construction Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project. 9 130425 jb 0131071 SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION. 9.1 Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and all Losses arising directly or indirectly from, or in any manner relating to any of, the following: (i) Performance or nonperformance of the Work by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub- subcontractors, of any tier; (ii) Performance or nonperformance by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub- subcontractors of any tier, of any of the obligations under the Contract Documents; (iii) The construction activities of Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub-subcontractors, of any tier, either on the Site or on other properties; (iv) The payment or nonpayment by Contractor to any of its employees, Subcontractors or Sub-subcontractors of any tier, for Work performed on or off the Site for the Project; and (v) Any personal injury, property damage or economic loss to third persons associated with the performance or nonperformance by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub- subcontractors of any tier, of the Work. However, nothing herein shall obligate Contractor to indemnify any Indemnitee for Losses resulting from the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs City incurs to enforce this provision. Nothing in the Contract Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of Contractor against City or any other Indemnitee. 9.2 Survival. The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract. SECTION 10 NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS. On or before the Execution Date, Contractor shall provide City with evidence that it has obtained insurance and Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions. Failure to do so shall be deemed a material breach of this Construction Contract. 10 130425 jb 0131071 SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS. City is entering into this Construction Contract based upon the stated experience and qualifications of the Contractor and its subcontractors set forth in Contractor’s Bid. Accordingly, Contractor shall not assign, hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or transfer without said consent shall be null and void, and shall be deemed a substantial breach of contract and grounds for default in addition to any other legal or equitable remedy available to the City. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity. SECTION 13 NOTICES. 13.1 Method of Notice. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following: (i) On the date delivered if delivered personally; (ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as hereinafter provided; (iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission; (iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or (v) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail. 13.2 Notice Recipients. All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Claims) from Contractor to City shall include the Project name and the number of this Construction Contract and shall be addressed to City at: To City: City of Palo Alto City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copy to: City of Palo Alto Public Works Administration 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: Matt Raschke AND City of Palo Alto Utilities Engineering 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: 11 130425 jb 0131071 In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided to the following: Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to: S.J. Amoroso Construction Co., Inc. 390 Bridge Parkway Redwood Shores, Ca 94065 13.3 Change of Address. In the event of any change of address, the moving party shall notify the other party of the change of address in writing. Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any individuals to whom and addresses to which notice shall be provided. SECTION 14 [Intentionally Omitted.] SECTION 15 DEFAULT. 15.1 Notice of Default. In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. 15.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after receipt of such written notice. SECTION 16 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 16.1 Remedies Upon Default. If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth above in Section 15, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: 12 130425 jb 0131071 16.1.1 Delete Certain Services. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 16.1.2 Perform and Withhold. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 16.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work. 16.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default. City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 15. City’s election to terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein. 16.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond. 16.1.6 Additional Provisions. All of City’s rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City’s authority to designate other breaches as material nor limit City’s right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material. City’s determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City. 16.2 Delays by Sureties. Without limiting to any of City’s other rights or remedies, City has the right to suspend the performance of the Work by Contractor’s sureties in the event of any of the following: (i) The sureties’ failure to begin Work within a reasonable time in such manner as to insure full compliance with the Construction Contract within the Contract Time; (ii) The sureties’ abandonment of the Work; (iii) If at any time City is of the opinion the sureties’ Work is unnecessarily or unreasonably delaying the Work; (iv) The sureties’ violation of any terms of the Construction Contract; (v) The sureties’ failure to perform according to the Contract Documents; or 13 130425 jb 0131071 (vi) The sureties’ failure to follow City’s instructions for completion of the Work within the Contract Time. 16.3 Damages to City. 16.3.1 For Contractor's Default. City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents. 16.3.2 Compensation for Losses. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to withhold monies otherwise payable to Contractor until Final Completion of the Project. If City incurs Losses due to Contractor’s default, then the amount of Losses shall be deducted from the amounts withheld. Should the amount withheld exceed the amount deducted, the balance will be paid to Contractor or its designee upon Final Completion of the Project. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount withheld, Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City. 16.4 Suspension by City for Convenience. City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time. The order shall be specifically identified as a Suspension Order by City. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order. During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered by the Suspension Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. A Suspension Order shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work. 16.5 Termination Without Cause. City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or in whole by giving thirty (30) Days written notice to Contractor. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 16.5 shall be the Contractor’s sole and exclusive compensation for such termination and Contractor waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind resulting from termination without cause. Termination pursuant to this provision does not relieve Contractor or its sureties from any of their obligations for Losses arising from or related to the Work performed by Contractor. 16.5.1 Compensation. Following such termination and within forty-five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 16.5, City shall pay the following to Contractor as Contractor’s sole compensation for performance of the Work : .1 For Work Performed. The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor. .2 For Close-out Costs. Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors: (i) Demobilizing and 14 130425 jb 0131071 (ii) Administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (30) Days after receipt of the notice of termination. .3 For Fabricated Items. Previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work. .4 Profit Allowance. An allowance for profit calculated as four percent (4%) of the sum of the above items, provided Contractor can prove a likelihood that it would have made a profit if the Construction Contract had not been terminated. 16.5.2 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor against City under this Section. 16.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not discontinued; (iii) Provide to City a description, in writing no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto. SECTION 17 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 17.1 Contractor’s Remedies. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the following: 15 130425 jb 0131071 17.1.1 For Work Stoppage. The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable. This provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City’s issuance of a suspension notice issued either for cause or for convenience. 17.1.2 For City's Non-Payment. If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a second notice to City of Contractor’s intention to terminate the Construction Contract. 17.2 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Paragraph 16.5.1 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind. SECTION 18 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. 18.1 Financial Management and City Access. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants during normal business hours, may inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project. Contractor shall retain these documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) final payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by law. 18.2 Compliance with City Requests. Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 18 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. City many enforce Contractor’s obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred to in Section 18.1 for inspection or copying by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony. SECTION 19 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint ventures’ of the other party. City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth. 16 130425 jb 0131071 SECTION 20 NUISANCE. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract. SECTION 21 PERMITS AND LICENSES. Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work. Payment of all costs and expenses for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non-City inspectors or conditions set forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies. SECTION 22 WAIVER. A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character. SECTION 23 GOVERNING LAW. This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California. SECTION 24 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. SECTION 25 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment obligations, and City’s right to audit Contractor’s books and records, shall remain in full force and effect after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract. SECTION 26 PREVAILING WAGES. This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. The Contractor is not required to pay prevailing wages in the performance and implementation of the Project, because the City, pursuant to its authority as a chartered city, has adopted Resolution No. 5981 exempting the City from prevailing wages. The City invokes the exemption from the state prevailing wage requirement for this Project and declares that the Project is funded one hundred percent (100%) by the City of Palo Alto. Or 17 130425 jb 0131071 The Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. Copies of these rates may be obtained at cost at the Purchasing office of the City of Palo Alto. Contractor shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or subcontractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1810, and 1813 of the Labor Code. SECTION 27 NON APPROPRIATION. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Construction Contract are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 28 AUTHORITY. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. SECTION 29 ATTORNEY FEES. Each Party shall bear its own costs, including attorney’s fees through the completion of mediation. If the claim or dispute is not resolved through mediation and in any dispute described in Paragraph 14.2, the prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provision of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorney’s fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorney’s’ fees paid to third parties. SECTION 30 COUNTERPARTS This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement. SECTION 31 SEVERABILITY. In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected. [INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] 18 130425 jb 0131071 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed the date and year first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ Purchasing Manager City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: ___________________________ Public Works Director S.J. Amoroso Construction Co By:___________________________ Name:_________________________ Title:________________________ Professional Services C13149972 Rev. June 2, 2010 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C13149972 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE, RESEARCH + PLANNING, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 20th day of May, 2013, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE, RESEARCH + PLANNING, INC., a corporation in the State of California, located at 211 Linden Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 94080 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to renovate and expand the Main Library (“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant to provide final signage design, construction administration services, and project closeout services in connection with the Project (“Services”). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional ability, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit “A”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit “A” in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. Optional On-Call Provision (This provision only applies if checked and only applies to on- call agreements.) Services will be authorized by the City, as needed, with a Task Order assigned and approved by the City’s Project Manager. Each Task Order shall be in substantially the same form as Exhibit A-1. Each Task Order shall designate a City Project Manager and shall contain a specific scope of work, a specific schedule of performance and a specific compensation amount. The total price of all Task Orders issued under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of Compensation set forth in Section 4 of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall only be compensated for work performed under an authorized Task Order and the City may elect, but is not required, to authorize work up to the maximum compensation amount set forth in Section 4. Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 2 C13149972 SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through completion of the services in accordance with the Schedule of Performance attached as Exhibit “B” unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essences in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT shall not be responsible for delays beyond its reasonable control. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed one million twenty-eight thousand one hundred sixty-nine Dollars ($1,028,169). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed one million one hundred thirty thousand nine hundred sixty-nine Dollars ($1,130,969). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit “A”. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges set forth Exhibit C. The invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 3 C13149972 required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. In accordance with the standard of care described in Section 6, CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct any and all errors, omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project. This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement. SECTION 9. NOT USED SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the experience of CONSULTANT is a material consideration for this Agreement. Other than the portions of the project assigned to the CONSULTANT’S subconsultants, CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. Option A: No Subcontractor: CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. ■ Option B: Subcontracts Authorized: Notwithstanding Section 11 above, CITY agrees that subconsultants may be used to complete the Services. The subconsultants authorized by CITY to perform work on this Project are: Page and Moris, BKF, David Gates and Associates, Rutherford and Chekene, Guttman and Blavoet, O'Mahoney & Myer, Smith Fause McDonald, Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 4 C13149972 Studio Wilks, Garavalia Architecture, GRD, Davis Langdon, Kleinfelder, Linda Stansen, Door Hardware Consultants, AME, and D.Babby. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign as the to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and Johnathan Hartman as the project managerto represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY’s project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. The City’s project manager is Matt Raschke, Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, 6th Floor, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone: (650) 496-5937. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. The CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 18 C13149972 SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its subconsultants, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. CONSULTANT shall indemnify, but shall have no obligation to defend CITY, its Council members, officers, employees (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against liability for damages to the extent actually caused by the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all subconsultants of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, insurance coverage naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation, CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Purchasing Manager during the Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 19 C13149972 entire term of this Agreement. 18.4 Contractor Insurance and Indemnity Requirements: The CITY agrees, in any construction contracts in connection with the Project, to require all contractors of any tier to carry statutory Workers Compensation Insurance, Employers Liability Insurance and appropriate limits of Commercial General Liability Insurance (CGL). The CITY further agrees to require all contractors to have their CGL policies endorsed to name the CITY, the CONSULTANT and its subconsultants as Additional Insured, on a primary and noncontributory basis, and to provide Contractual Liability coverage sufficient to insure the hold harmless and indemnity obligations assumed by the contractors. The CITY shall require all contractors to furnish to the CITY and the CONSULTANT certificates of insurance as evidence of the required insurance as evidence of the required insurance prior to commencing work and upon renewal of each policy during the entire period of construction. In addition, the Client shall require that all contractors will, to the fullest extent permitted by laws, indemnify and hold armless the CITY, the CONSULTANT and its subconsultants from and against any damages, liabilities or costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and defense costs, arising out of or in any way connected with the Project, including all claims by employees of the contractors. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT upon delivery of completed or in-progress documents only for the portion of Services completed prior to such termination. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 20 C13149972 SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the City’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at the City’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of the City’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, Consultant shall comply with the following zero waste requirements: Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 21 C13149972 All printed materials provided by Consultant to City generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks. Goods purchased by Consultant on behalf of the City shall be purchased in accordance with the City’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Office. Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by the Consultant, at no additional cost to the City, for reuse or recycling. Consultant shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION 24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. However in an effort to resolve any conflicts that arise during the design and construction of the Project or following the completion of the Project, the CITY and the CONSULTANT agree that all disputes between them arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the Project shall be first submitted to nonbinding mediation. The CONSULTANT further agrees to include a similar mediation provision in all agreements with their subconsultants, thereby for mediation as the primary method for dispute resolution among the parties to all those agreements. 25.3. NOT USED 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 22 C13149972 Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, City shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City’s express written consent. / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / 25 .9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf oftheir respective legal entities. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date fIrst above written CONSULTANT CITY OF PALO ALTO GROUP 4 ARCHITECTURE, RESEARCH + PLANNING, INC. City Manager BY:~ APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney Attachments:EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF WORK EXHIBIT "B": SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE EXHIBIT "C": COMPENSATION EXHIBIT "C-I": SCHEDULE OF RATES EXHIBIT "D": INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS 23 C13149972 Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 24 C13149972 Exhibit A - Scope of Work Main Library Library Expansion and Renovation Construction Administration, Signage and Project Closeout Services I. INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL INFORMATION 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION 1.1 The “Palo Alto Libraries Schematic Design Report” and drawings, dated May 2008, were prepared by Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning Inc. (CONSULTANT) for the City of Palo Alto (CITY). These reports include the schematic design documents for three libraries in Palo Alto: the renovation of the renovation and addition to the Main Library. The building programs for this project is documented in an earlier Conceptual Design Report also prepared by Group 4 and dated October 2007. The scope of work included in this contract is for construction administration, record documents and project closeout for the Main Library and adjacent site work. This work is based on the approved design and Construction Documents for this project. 2.0 THE PROJECT 2.1 The Main Library is located at 1213 Newell Road in Palo Alto. The original building was designed by Edward Durell Stone and constructed in 1956, then in 1982-84 the building was renovated and a 2,200 square foot addition completed. The project includes the renovation of the existing building structure, mechanical, electrical and interior finishes as well as additions to accommodate a new program room, group study rooms and new public restrooms. The new additions will add approximately 4,200 square feet. The existing Main Library is 21,313 square feet on grade with a 5,000 square foot basement. The Main Library Project shall be designed to meet the standards for LEED certification by the US Green Building Council (USGBC). 2.1.1 In addition to the work described above, the following deferred maintenance items shall be included in the Construction Documents phase of the project: 2.1.1.1 Replace the existing wood shake roof 2.1.1.2 Replace or provide new site pedestrian paving and site landscaping 2.1.1.3 Replace the existing fire sprinkler system 2.1.1.4 Replace the existing exterior plywood walls at the staff area 2.1.1.5 Replace basement sump pumps 2.1.1.6 Upgrade stormwater treatment system 2.1.1.7 Upgrade parking lot lighting 2.1.1.8 Provide for separate access to the Teen room conference area 2.1.1.9 Outfit the library to function as a broadcast center for the local television station. 2.1.1.10 Develop concepts to analyze the integration of the Art Center and Main Library sites and prepare design documents and cost estimates for the parking lots, pedestrian plaza and landscaping to the south and south east of the library (between the library, Art Center and Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 25 C13149972 Community Gardens). 3.0 CITY DUTIES 3.1 During the term of CONSULTANT’s professional services under this AGREEMENT the following items will be the responsibilities of the CITY: 3.1.1 The CITY’s Project Manager or authorized designee shall manage the CONSULTANT’s performance under the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall receive final direction only from the Project Manager or his or her authorized designee. The Project Manager shall resolve any conflicting direction from other groups, departments or agencies. 3.1.2 The CITY shall provide evaluation, mitigation design and administration of work for hazardous materials at site and in the existing building. 3.1.3 CITY shall provide record drawings of existing project facilities (when available). 3.1.4 CITY shall provide all applicable building permits. 3.1.5 CITY shall print and provide construction contractors with copies of bid documents (Plans and Specifications). 3.1.6 CITY shall advertise and award construction contracts. 3.1.7 CITY shall manage the construction of the Project and provide building code and quality control inspections. 3.1.8 The CITY shall oversee and manage the artist selection process, CITY and artist agreements, artwork approvals, budgets and schedule, coordination of artwork with the building design, and artwork installation. 3.1.9 The CITY may prequalify general contractors and key subcontractors and limit bidding to only those firms that have been deemed by the CITY to be qualified. CITY shall actively market the project to general contractors and major trades to increase likelihood of receiving competitive bids. 3.1.10 The CITY shall manage all construction and procurement contracts related to the overall project and shall oversee and coordinate each of the budgets. Within the overall project budget the CITY shall determine with input from the CONSULTANT the specific budgets for each of the procurement contracts including, but not limited to: 3.1.11 Furniture procurement, including multiple contracts for custom, general, systems and miscellaneous furniture 3.1.12 Construction management services 3.1.13 Public art 3.1.14 Moving Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 26 C13149972 3.1.15 Publicity 3.1.16 Computer equipment 3.1.17 Telecommunication equipment. 3.1.18 CITY shall identify, select and procure all equipment such as copy machines, vending machines, miscellaneous office equipment, etc. that is not included in the technology package. II. CONSULTANT’S BASIC SERVICES The CONSULTANT’s scope of Basic Services for the Project is divided into three parts: Construction Administration, Project Closeout and Record Documents. 1.1 TASK G1 CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION 1.1.1 CONSULTANT’s responsibility to provide Basic Construction Administration Services for the Construction Phase under this Agreement commences with CITY's issuance of a Notice to Proceed with the Contract for Construction and will end 440 calendar days from that date or upon commencement by the CONSULTANT of the Substantial Completion Correction (“Punch”) list, as mutually agreed upon by CONSULTANT, the CITY’s Construction Manager and CITY, whichever comes first. If the punch list does not commence within 440 calendar days of the Notice to Proceed, any further time and effort spent on behalf of the project shall be an Additional Service provided on a time and materials basis at the CONSULTANT’s standard billing rates in effect at that time. Consultant will not be obligated to provide any work beyond the 440 calendar days unless directed by CITY in writing and compensated accordingly. 1.1.2 CONSULTANT shall be a representative of and shall advise and consult with the CITY during the provision of the Contract Administration Services. The CONSULTANT shall have authority to act on behalf of the CITY only to the extent provided in this Agreement unless otherwise modified by written amendment. 1.1.3 Duties, responsibilities and limitations of authority of the CONSULTANT under this phase shall not be restricted, modified or extended without written agreement of the CITY. 1.1.4 CONSULTANT shall neither have control over or charge of, nor be responsible for, the construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work, since these are solely the Contractor’s rights and responsibilities under the Contract Documents, the CONSULTANT will not be responsible for the Contractor’s schedules or failure to carry out the work in accordance with the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT will not have control over or charge of acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or of any other persons performing portions of the work. CONSULTANT shall not be responsible for acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors, or their agents or employees, or any other Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 27 C13149972 persons or entities performing portions of the Work. 1.1.5 CONSULTANT will have access to the work at all times wherever it is in preparation or progress within 24 hours of notifying the CITY.. 1.1.6 CONSULTANT shall attend the pre-construction conference. 1.1.7 Project Meetings and Site Visits 1.1.7.1 CONSULTANT shall attend up to 70 site construction meetings. The CONSULTANT as a representative of the CITY, shall visit the site at intervals appropriate to the stage of the Contractor’s operations, or as otherwise agreed by the Project Manager or authorized designee and the CONSULTANT, (1) to become generally familiar with the work and to keep the CITY informed about the progress and quality of the portion of the Work completed, (2) to endeavor to guard the CITY against defects and deficiencies in the Work, and (3) to determine in general if the Work is being performed in a manner indicating that the Work, when fully completed, will be in accordance with the Contract Documents. However, the CONSULTANT shall not be required to make exhaustive or continuous on-site inspections to check the quality or quantity of the Work. 1.1.7.2 CONSULTANT shall report to the CITY observable and known deviations from the Contract Documents by the Contractor. 1.1.7.3 CONSULTANT shall at all times have access to the work wherever it is in preparation or progress. 1.1.7.4 CONSULTANT shall have authority to reject Work that does not conform to the Contract Documents. Whenever the CONSULTANT considers it necessary or advisable, the CONSULTANT will have authority to require inspection or testing of the Work in accordance with the provisions of the Contract Documents, whether or not such Work is fabricated, installed or completed. However, neither this authority of the CONSULTANT nor a decision made in good faith either to exercise or not to exercise such authority shall give rise to a duty or responsibility of the CONSULTANT to the Contractor, Subcontractors, material and equipment suppliers, their agents or employees or other persons or entities performing portions of the Work. 1.1.7.5 CONSULTANT shall be responsible for scheduling the Sub CONSULTANTs visits to the site in coordination with and or as directed by CITY. 1.1.8 On the basis of on-site observations as a CONSULTANT, and through information provided to the CONSULTANT by the CITY’s Project Manager, the CONSULTANT shall keep the CITY informed of the quality of the work. 1.1.9 Submittals: Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 28 C13149972 1.1.9.1 CONSULTANT will review Contractor’s submittals, including Shop Drawings, Product Data and Samples, but only for the limited purpose of checking for conformance with information given and the design concept expressed in the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT’s action shall be taken with such reasonable promptness so as to cause no delay in the work, while allowing sufficient time in the CONSULTANT’s judgment to permit adequate review unless otherwise agreed to. Submittals critical to work flow shall be responded to within a timely manner from receipt. Review of such submittals is not conducted for the purpose of determining the accuracy and completeness of other details such as dimensions and quantities or for substantiating instructions for installation or performance equipment or systems designed by the Contractor, all of which remain the responsibility of the Contractor to the extent required by the Contract Documents. The CONSULTANT’s review shall not constitute review of safety precautions or, unless otherwise specifically stated by the CONSULTANT, of construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures. The CONSULTANT’s review of specific items shall not indicate approval of an assembly of which the item is a component. When professional certification of performance characteristics of materials, systems or equipment is required by the Contract Documents, the CONSULTANT shall be entitled to rely upon such certification to establish that the materials, systems or equipment will meet the performance criteria required by the Contract Documents. 1.1.9.2 CONSULTANT shall maintain copies of submittals supplied by the Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. Reviewed submittals shall be stamped with appropriate action to be taken with notes and comments initialed and dated. 1.1.9.3 Action required of the CONSULTANT beyond review of one submittal and one resubmittal shall be subject to Additional Services. 1.1.10 If professional design services or certifications by a design professional related to systems, materials or equipment are specifically required of the Contractor by the Contract Documents, the CONSULTANT shall specify appropriate performance and design criteria that such services must satisfy. Shop Drawings and other submittals related to the Work designed or certified by the design professional retained by the Contractor shall bear such professional’s written approval when submitted to the CONSULTANT. The CONSULTANT shall be entitled to rely upon the adequacy, accuracy and completeness of the services; certifications or approvals performed by such design professionals. 1.1.11 Request for Information (RFI) & Architectural Supplement Information (ASI) Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 29 C13149972 1.1.11.1 CONSULTANT shall review properly prepared, timely requests by the Contractor for Request for Information (RFI) about the Contract Documents. A properly prepared RFI about the Contract Documents shall be in a form prepared or approved by the CONSULTANT and shall include a detailed written statement that indicates the specific Drawings or Specifications in need of clarification and the nature of the clarification requested. 1.1.11.2 If deemed appropriate by the CONSULTANT or if directed by the Project Manager or her authorized designee, the CONSULTANT shall on the CITY’s behalf prepare, reproduce and distribute supplemental Drawings and Specifications (Architectural Supplemental Information (ASI) in response to RFI by the Contractor or because of a need determined by CONSULTANT to achieve the intent of the Contract Documents. 1.1.11.3 Interpretations and decisions of the CONSULTANT shall be consistent with the intent of and reasonably inferable from the Contract Documents and shall be in writing or in the form of drawings. When making such interpretations and initial decisions, the CONSULTANT shall endeavor to secure faithful performance by both CITY and Contractor, shall not show partiality to either, and shall not be liable for the results of interpretations or decisions so rendered in good faith. 1.1.11.4 CONSULTANT’s action shall be taken with such reasonable promptness as to cause no delay in the Work or in the activities of the CITY, Contractor or separate contractors, while allowing sufficient time in the CONSULTANT s professional judgment to permit adequate review. RFI’s critical to workflow shall be responded to within a timely manner from receipt. 1.1.12 CONSULTANT shall review for compliance, any items submitted by the Contractor for consistency with the contract documents, including but not limited to submittals, O&M Manuals, written guarantees, instruction books, diagrams and charts, etc,. 1.1.13 Review and recommend approval or rejection of substitutions for conformance with the project design concept and for compliance with Contract Documents. CONSULTANT shall briefly review each substitution at no additional cost to the CITY and provide the CITY’s Project Manager with a fee and time schedule for detailed review of each substitution. Time and cost for detailed review of substitutions shall be negotiated with Contractor on a case-by-case basis. Detailed review of each substitution cannot begin until authorized by the CITY’s Project Manager. Detailed review of substitutions is subject to the requirements of Additional Services when approved and authorized by the CITY’s Project Manager prior to beginning the detailed review. 1.1.14 Changes in the Work Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 30 C13149972 1.1.14.1 Change Order Review and Negotiation: All changes to the Contract between the CITY and Contractor shall be only by change orders executed by the CITY. 1.1.14.2 CITY and its designee shall review the contents of all Contractor- requested changes to the contract time or price, endeavor to determine the cause of the request, and assemble and evaluate information concerning the request. CITY and its designee shall in its evaluations of the Contractor’s request consider the CONSULTANT’s comments regarding the proposed changes. 1.1.14.3 All proposed CONSULTANT and CITY -initiated changes shall first be described in detail by the CITY and its designee in a request for a proposal issued to the Contractor. The request shall be accompanied by drawings and specifications prepared by the CONSULTANT. In response to the request for a proposal, the Contractor shall submit to the CITY and its designee for evaluation detailed information concerning. The price and time adjustments, if any, as may be necessary to perform the proposed change order work. The CITY and its designee shall review the Contractor’s proposal, shall discuss the proposed change order with the Contractor, and endeavor to determine the Contractor’s basis for the price and time proposed to perform the work. All work by CONSULTANT related to CITY -initiated changes will be performed as Additional Services on a Time and Material Basis or mutually agreed lump sum. 1.1.14.4 The CITY and its designee shall negotiate change requests on behalf of the CITY. CITY and its designee shall prepare and issue to the Contractor appropriate change order documents, reviewed and signed by the CONSULTANT as required by contract. 1.2 SIGNAGE 1.2.1 BUILDING AND CODE-REQUIRED SITE SIGNAGE 1.2.1.1 CONSULTANT shall provide a sign location drawing and sign copy schedule for the interior signage, exterior building signage, and exterior code signage (disabled access parking, electric vehicle parking signage) 1.2.1.2 CONSULTANT shall provide a 60% and 95% Design Intent Signage Documents for the CITY’s review. 1.2.1.3 CONSULTANT shall provide a 100% Bid Design Intent Signage Document. 1.2.1.4 CONSULTANT shall provide updated estimates of probable construction costs to the CITY at the 60% and 95% Design Intent submittals. 1.2.1.5 CONSULTANT shall provide written responses to the CITY’s review comments. 1.2.1.6 CONSULTANT shall conduct up to three signage design review meetings with the CITY. 1.2.1.7 CONSULTANT shall assist the CITY in reviewing bidder Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 31 C13149972 questions and provide written addenda as required. 1.2.1.8 CONSULTANT shall attend a signage pre-installation meeting with the signage contractor. 1.2.1.9 CONSULTANT shall be available for one day for punch list services. 1.2.2 LIBRARY SITE INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE 1.2.2.1 CONSULTANT shall provide a sign location drawing and sign copy schedule for interpretive signage for the Main Library. The iconography for the site interpretive signage will be consistent with what is being installed at the Mitchell Park project. The interpretive signage will include an exterior site map/interpretive sign, and digital graphics (sign) to be displayed on the digital signage system located in the Library interior. 1.2.2.2 CONSULTANT shall provide a 60% and 95% Design Intent Signage Documents for the CITY’s review. 1.2.2.3 CONSULTANT shall provide a 100% Bid Design Intent Signage Document. 1.2.2.4 CONSULTANT shall provide updated estimates of probable construction costs to the CITY at the 60% and 95% Design Intent submittals. 1.2.2.5 CONSULTANT shall provide written responses to the CITY’s review comments. 1.2.2.6 CONSULTANT shall conduct up to three signage design review meetings with the CITY. 1.2.2.7 CONSULTANT shall assist the CITY in reviewing bidder questions and provide written addenda as required. 1.2.2.8 CONSULTANT shall attend a signage pre-installation meeting with the signage contractor. 1.2.2.9 CONSULTANT shall be available for one day for punch list services. 1.2.3 CAMPUS MONUMENT SIGNAGE 1.2.3.1 CONSULTANT shall provide a sign design for the replacement of the monument sign for the Main Library and Art Center that is located at the intersection of Newell and Embarcadero, monument signs at the two driveways at Newell Road, and site wayfinding signage for the Main Library and Art Center Campus, including the entry to the Community Garden. 1.2.3.2 CONSULTANT shall provide a 60% and 95% Design Intent Signage Documents for the CITY’s review. 1.2.3.3 CONSULTANT shall provide a 100% Bid Design Intent Signage Document. 1.2.3.4 CONSULTANT shall provide updated estimates of probable construction costs to the CITY at the 60% and 95% Design Intent submittals. 1.2.3.5 CONSULTANT shall provide written responses to the CITY’s review comments. Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 32 C13149972 1.2.3.6 CONSULTANT shall conduct up to three signage design review meetings with the CITY. 1.2.3.7 CONSULTANT shall assist the CITY in reviewing bidder questions and provide written addenda as required. 1.2.3.8 CONSULTANT shall attend a signage pre-installation meeting with the signage contractor. 1.2.3.9 CONSULTANT shall be available for one half-day for punch list services. 1.3 PROJECT CLOSEOUT 1.3.1 Project Closeout, will begin with the commencement by CONSULTANT of the Punch List as mutually determined by CONSULTANT, CITY and CITY’s Construction Manager, and will end 60 calendar days from that date. CONSULTANT shall complete all items over which the CONSULTANT has control indicated in the scope of Project Closeout within the 60 calendar day period. CONSULTANT Closeout Services after 60 days will be provided as an Additional Service on a Time & Materials basis. 1.3.2 CONSULTANT shall receive from the Contractor and forward to the CITY, for the CITY’s review and records, written warranties and related documents required by the Contract Documents and assembled by the Contractor. 1.3.3 CONSULTANT shall conduct a “Punch List” review to check conformance of the Work with the requirements of the Contract Documents and to verify the accuracy and completeness of the list submitted by the Contractor of Work to be completed or corrected. 1.3.4 CONSULTANT shall complete and distribute the project punch list in a timely manner from the Contractor’s request of the CITY for review by the CONSULTANT in either MSWord or Excel format. 1.3.5 CONSULTANT shall conduct a Final Completion Review with the CITY to determine whether the punch list items have been completed and are in conformance with the Construction Documents 1.4 RECORD DOCUMENTS 1.4.1 CONSULTANT shall incorporate information provided by the Contractor and information gained during site visits throughout the Project construction, and prepare record drawings and specifications based on record field construction documents package. Prior to acceptance of the Project by the CITY. CONSULTANT shall review the contractor’s “as- built” drawings and specifications, and shall return them to contractor for revision if they are not complete, or otherwise known to not represent facts known to the CONSULTANT. Apart from reviewing Contractor’s as-built documents, CONSULTANT shall prepare and sign the CONSULTANT’s Record Drawings submit both a hard copy on Mylar and an electronic copy Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 33 C13149972 on Compact Disc (CD) to the CITY. II. OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL SERVICES The following services are not part of the CONSULTANT’s Basic Services and shall be performed by the CONSULTANT as Additional Services on a Time & Materials Basis only if and when authorized by the CITY in writing: 2.1 Additional meetings or presentations. 2.2 Developing and preparation of information kiosks. 2.3 Developing project flyers and public information posters. 2.4 Other participation services not described in Basic Services above. 2.5 Other services not specifically identified under Basic Services above. 2.6 Making changes in the design or documentation that is contrary to prior direction provided by the CITY. 2.7 Preparing CITY-initiated change orders during construction. 2.8 Providing more than two reviews of each submittal. 2.9 Detailed review of substitution request. 2.10 Work required to correct non-conforming work of contractor. 2.11 Increasing Professional Liability Insurance from the CONSULTANT’s standard two million ($2,000,000 per claim/$2,000,000 in aggregate) coverage. 2.12 Providing multiple City reviews for signage packages 2.13 Application fees and presentation materials required for Architectural Review and Historic Review Board meetings. Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 34 C13149972 Exhibit B - Schedule of Performance Main Library Expansion and Renovation Construction Administration, Signage and Project Closeout Services CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed. Construction Administration: 440 calendar days Signage Concurrent with above Project Closeout 60 calendar days Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 35 C13149972 Exhibit C - Compensation Main Library Expansion and Renovation Construction Administration, Signage, Project Closeout Services and LEED Services The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be a lump sum, based on scope of services attached as Exhibit A-1 the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $1,028,169. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $1,130,969. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s project manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $1,028,169 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $102,800. Task G4.1 - Construction Administration: $867,037. Lump Sum Task G4.2 – Signage: $64,000. Lump Sum Task H4.1 - Project Closeout: $59,632. Lump Sum Task H4.2 – Record Documents, LEED $37,500. Lump Sum ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement Professional Services Rev June 2, 2010 36 C13149972 Exhibit C-1 – Schedule of Rates Renovation and Addition to the Main Library Construction Administration, Signage, Project Closeout Services and LEED Services SCHEDULE OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Effective 1 January 2013 Consulting Principal $250.00 per hour Principal in Charge 195.00 per hour Principal 180.00 per hour Associate 160.00 per hour Project Manager 150.00 per hour Professional I 140.00 per hour Professional II 130.00 per hour Professional III 120.00 per hour Technical I 125.00 per hour Technical II 110.00 per hour Technical III 95.00 per hour Project Support 80.00 per hour Consultants to the Architect will be billed at 1.15 times direct cost. Reimbursable expenses related to the project, whether for in-house, consultant or client use, will be billed at 1.15 times direct cost. Such expenses include, but are not necessarily limited to: CAD plotting of Check Sets and Presentation Drawings. Outside service printing/copying of drawings and documents of any size. Photographic and digital imaging, including color and gray scale copies of any size. In-house black and white photocopying for draft and final reports and specifications. In-house black and white printing/copying of drawings larger than 11"x 17". Outside telephone conferencing services. Postage, delivery and messenger service. Overtime expenses with prior client approval. Architectural renderings, physical and digital scale models and animations. Videos, web services, opinion surveys. Travel expenses, including mileage, tolls, lodging and meals. Sub-consultant costs. Presentation boards. Facilitation tools. Workshop accessories and facilitation materials. Software purchase and licensure on behalf of the client. The above-listed rates are adjusted annually. The next adjustment will be 1 January 2013 C M R C13149972 CONTRACTORS MAINTAIN INSU RATING OF A-:V TO THE CITY O URANCE IN THE VII, OR HIGHE I OF PALO ALTO E AMOUNTS FOR R, LICENSED O EX INSURANC (CITY), AT THE R THE COVERA OR AUTHORIZE 37 XHIBIT “D CE REQUIR IR SOLE EXPEN GE SPECIFIED B ED TO TRANSA D” REMENTS NSE, SHALL FOR BELOW, AFFOR ACT INSURANCE R THE TERM OF RDED BY COMP E BUSINESS IN Professio Rev J F THE CONTRAC PANIES WITH A N THE STATE O onal Services June 2, 2010 CT OBTAIN AND AM BEST’S KEY OF CALIFORNIA D Y A. ACORD. CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE ~ Daaley, R.nton & A550cl.l9& P. O. 60)1.12675 Oakland, CA 946(14·2675 510 46S·3tl90 Group 4 ArdIilacture Research . Plannlna,In<:. 211 Undon Avonuo Fl'3ncisco, CA 94080 ImURERS AFfORDING COVERAGE '1,000,000 $2,000,000 annl aggr. Alto, IU offk;:ers, agents, employees and voluntee,. Ir, additional Insureds 10 ganaT.lliabillly per policy form wording. City of Palo AUo 2 Purchasing & Contract Administration Attn: Johnell. Walker P.O. Box 10250 PalO Alto, CA 94301-0000 ACORD 2W (Tm)1 of 1 #S3362171M335845 THIlSSOlHII tl81.11'O WILL _YI)II 'IO ....... 30...-0AYSWI'!tmIII H(lLDvr_tO TOlHl LU'I. IU"M.UIU!. l(l DO-o",1rU. C13149972 38 Professio Rev J onal Services June 2, 2010 C13149972 39 Professio Rev J onal Services June 2, 2010 IFB 149297 Attachment D Main Library Expansion & Renovation Bid Summary Item #Description Gonsalves & Stronck Construction S.J. Amoroso Co., Inc.Midstate Construction Big D Pacific Builders, LP Company Inc.Corporation 1 Base bid $13,837,630 $16,977,000 $17,096,750 $18,548,000 2 Signage allowance 150,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 3 Allowances 2-15 595,000 595,000 595,000 595,000 4 Art work foundations 10,000 5,000 13,911 0 Total $14,592,630 $17,727,000 $17,855,661 $19,293,000 Add Alternate # 1 Delete skylights -$21,000 -$20,000 -$25,000 -$100,000 Withdrawn Item 3 break down from Technical Specification 01210 2 $125,000.00 for unforeseen site conditions for substrate installations as per the bid documents. 3 $75,000.00 for repair of dry rot and termite damage over and above that shown or required by the contract documents or termite inspection report. 4 $20,000.00 for the repair or replacement of existing window hardware or the repair or replacement of existing window screens over and above that indicated on the contract documents. 5 $35,000.00 for the removal and abatement of the existing boilers located in the Art Center building (located in basement) over and above that required by the drawings located in the appendices. 6 $25,000.00 for the replacement of sanitary sewer lines above and beyond those indicated on the drawings and that are found to be damaged or not in compliance during the Contractor's required. investigation and video camera survey of the existing sanitary lines that are to remain. 7 $10,000.00 for the patching and repair of existing wood ceilings above and beyond that indicated on the drawings. Page 1 of 2 IFB 149297 Attachment D Main Library Expansion & Renovation Bid Summary Item 3 break down from Technical Specification 01210 8 $40,000.00 for the repair and replacement of existing landscape irrigation components or wiring above and beyond that shown on the drawings or indicated in the specifications. 9 $30,000.00 for tree and limb pruning above and beyond that shown on the drawings or required by the specification 02110 or the Arborist Report contained in the Appendices. 10 $75,000.00 for unforeseen mechanical/plumbing items over and above the requirements of the documents and specifications. 11 $35,000.00 for the removal of existing asphalt and re-compaction of road base and subgrade in accordance with the documents for the driveway area at the Art Center. This allowance shall only apply to the section of the driveway from the eastern limit of work for the Art Center parking area to the concrete pan at Newell Road. 12 $10,000.00 for replacement of grass above and beyond what is required by the drawings or specifications. 13 $5,000.00 for temporary way-finding signage during construction for the Art Center and Main Library sites 14 $100,000.00 for replacement of existing sanitary sewer line from the Main Library to the connection point in the street at Newell Road, including tie-in to the sanitary in Newell Road. 15 $10,000.00 for additional electrical and mechanical appurtenances for the Owner-furnished book-handling equipment above and beyond the requirements of the documents and specifications. Page 2 of 2 4.19 (DT) 5.21 (DT) 4 (DT) $46.08 (Mitchell) $49.04 (Mitchell) $50 (Mitchell) $22.42* (Main) $20.1 (Main) $18 (Main) 1.53 (Other) 1.65 (Other) 4 (Other) Cu r r e n t P r o j e c t i o n E n g i n e e r ' s E s t i m a t e Bo n d E l e c t i o n Es t i m a t e Dollars (Millions) Library Bond Fund Utilization Projections (May 2013) Mitchell Park Library Main Library Temporary Libraries & Bond Costs $74.28M $76M *The total project cost for the Main Library project is $24.7 million. $1.8 million for deferred maintenance items, code compliance items, and the Main Library’s share of the connectivity project is proposed to be funded from the Infrastructure Reserve. $0.5 million for the Art Center’s share of the connectivity project is proposed to be funded from the Art Center project. Therefore, the Main Library project cost to be funded by the Measure N bonds is $22.4 million. $76M $29.24 (Flintco)$5.97 (Turner) $6.02 (Group 4) $4.85 (Other) City of Palo Alto (ID # 3774) City Council Informational Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 May 20, 2013 Page 1 of 4 (ID # 3774) Title: TDA Resolution for Charleston Pathway Grant Funds Subject: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to File an Application for 2013/2014 Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA3) in the Amount of $82,712; Charleston Road Corridor Pathway Improvement Project From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment A) authorizing submittal of Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA3) grant application documents for FY 2014 requesting $82,712 for the Charleston Road Corridor Pathway Improvement Project in the City of Palo Alto. Background The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) issued a call for bicycle and pedestrian projects on March 12, 2013 for the FY 2014 TDA3 funding program. The deadline to submit project applications to VTA was on April 12, 2013 (with which staff complied). A Resolution adopted by the City Council supporting the project submittals is due to VTA on May 31, 2013. VTA staff will review the project proposals for eligibility, completeness and compliance. The resulting countywide list of projects will be reviewed by the VTA Advisory Committees before adoption by the Board of Directors in June. The countywide list will be forwarded to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and MTC will issue funding allocations in the fall. There are two components to the TDA Article 3 program in Santa Clara County (Attachment B): May 20, 2013 Page 2 of 4 (ID # 3774) 1. Bicycle Expenditure Program Per VTA Board policy, approximately 25% of Santa Clara County’s TDA fund is dedicated for projects that are on the Valley Transportation Plan 2030 Countywide Bicycle Plan Bicycle Expenditure Program (BEP) list. There is $614,090 available for BEP3 projects this year. Palo Alto is not requesting funds under the Bicycle Expenditure Program for this fiscal year. 2. Guarantee Funds The remaining 75% of this year’s TDA3 funds ($2,576,616) will be assigned to the Guarantee Fund. The monies in the Guarantee Fund are distributed to local jurisdictions on a population-based apportionment formula. These monies are available to local jurisdictions exclusively for eligible projects of their choosing as per TDA guidelines. There is no competition amongst local jurisdiction to acquire these funds for eligible projects. Palo Alto’s total guaranteed amount for this fiscal year is $81,712. Discussion Staff proposes to request an allocation of $81,712 in TDA funds this year from the City’s Guarantee share for the Charleston Road Corridor Pathway Improvement (Corridor) Project. The Corridor starts at the shared driveway and pathway entrance adjacent to Charleston Road and ends in Mitchell Park at the existing Adobe Creek pedestrian/bike bridge. The City has a 10 feet wide access easement with the County of Santa Clara along the segment from Charleston Road to Mitchell Park. This easement provides access to many users and serves as a school commute route for Fairmeadow Elementary School, Hoover Elementary School, and JLS Middle School. This Corridor project provides pathway improvements totaling $133,000 includes paving, base repair, new signage, and a new 15 feet wide realigned asphalt multi- use bicycle/pedestrian pathway. The proposed 10 feet wide path will widen to 15 feet at the bend near the southern entrance into Mitchell Park (Attachment C). The improvements include re-furbishing of the existing 5 feet wide Adobe Creek Pedestrian/Bike Bridge and new accessible ramps with hand railings on each side of the bridge to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements. Project Coordination May 20, 2013 Page 3 of 4 (ID # 3774) The improvements will be coordinated with the Charleston/Arastradero Corridor and the Magical Bridge Playground projects. Staff met with the Friends of the Magical Bridge (Friends) to discuss use of the Magical Bridge project funding and scope of the project. The ADA improvements are located adjacent to the proposed Magical Bridge site, and the Friends expressed their support towards this project. Final design of the project will begin in FY 2014, and construction is anticipated to begin summer 2014 when school is not in session. The Corridor project requires close coordination with the Magical Bridge Project during construction. Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee Review As required by the MTC grant application policies, the project was reviewed by PABAC at the March 2013 meeting and the Committee supports this project and funding for its implementation. TDA Grant Requirements The TDA grant funds are allocated on a three-year term and the funds are received by the City on a reimbursement basis. MTC requires that City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing staff to submit applications requesting TDA funding. Since 2002, the MTC has attached findings to the resolution authorizing submittal of the TDA grant application. Staff has provided sufficient information in this staff report to support the required findings and is not aware of any issues that would preclude the Council from adopting the findings for this grant request. Staff is requesting Council’s approval to apply for the TDA grant for the Charleston Road Corridor Pathway Improvement project. Staff would like to take advantage of the guarantee TDA grant funding for the proposed construction budget. The increased funding would allow for pathway improvements adjacent to the Magical Bridge playground. Resource Impact When the grant is awarded to the City, a Budget Amendment Ordinance would be required to add the grant funds to the project budget. The grant requires the City to expend its own funds prior to seeking reimbursement by the State. Staff will administer the grant and submit for reimbursements during the project as required by the grant conditions May 20, 2013 Page 4 of 4 (ID # 3774) TDA funds are necessary to supplement the project’s construction budget. The total project funding allocation breakdown is as follows: Magical Bridge Project CIP (PE-12013) in the amount of $48,000, $12, 000 from Benches, Signage & Walkway CIP (PG-06003), both of which have been previously approved by Council, and $82,712 from the proposed ADA improvements being requested for the Charleston Road Corridor Pathway Improvement for a total project budget of $142,712. Policy Implications The recommended actions in this report are consistent with Comprehensive Plan transportation policies and Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan 2012. Environmental Review Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this project is Categorically Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15302 (Replacement and Reconstruction). (App #13PLN-00173) Attachments: A - Resolution for 2013-2014 TDA Funds (PDF) B - Memorandum from Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (PDF) C - Charelston Corridor Connection Pathway Plan (PDF) *Not Yet Approved* Resolution No. __ _ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Authorizing the City Manager to File an Application for 2013/2014 Transportation Development Act Funds for Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects RECITALS A. Article 3 of the Transportation Development Act (TDA), Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 99200 et seq., authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists. B. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), as the regional transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region, has adopted MTC Resolution No. 875, Revised, 'entitled "Transportation Development Act, Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects," which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for the allocation of "TDA Article 3" funding. C. MTC Resolution No. 875, Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single, countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco Bay region. D. The City of Palo Alto desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3 funds to support the p'roject described in Attachment B to this resolution, which is for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists. The Council of the City of Palo RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The City of Palo Alto declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code. SECTION 2. There is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project described in "Attachment B" to this resolution, or that might impair the ability of the City of Palo Alto to carry out the project. SECTION 3. The City of Palo Alto attests to the accuracy of and approves the findings set forth in "Attachment A" to this resolution. SECTION 4. A certified copy of this resolution and its attachments, and any accompanying supporting r:naterials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency, countywide transportation planning agency, or county association of governments, as the case may be, of County of Santa Clara for submission to MTC as part of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim. 130429 jb 0131072 *Not Yet Approved* SECTION 5. An exemption for the proposed project was prepared and approved pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and the Council considered it prior to adopting this resolution. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager Director of Public Works Director of Administrative Services 130429 jb 0131072 *Not Yet Approved* Attachment A The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby makes the following findings: 1. That the City of Palo Alto is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is the City of Palo Alto legally impeded from undertaking the project described in "Attachment B" of this resolution. 2. That the City of Palo Alto has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project described in "Attach ment B". 3. A review of the project described in "Attachment B" has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent matters, including those related to environmental and right-of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the successful completion of the project. 4. Issues attendant to securing environmen"tal and right-of-way permits and clearances for the project described in "Attachment B" will be reviewed in a manner and on a schedule that will not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested. 5. That the project described in "Attachment B" complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.); an exemption was approved by the Director of Planning and Community • Environment. 6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description ofthe project in "Attachment B", the sources of funding other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s). No sources of funding other than this grant are required for completion of this project. 7. That the project described in "Attachment B" is for capital construction and/or design engineering; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA Article 3 funding for such a plan has not been received by the City of Palo Alto within the prior five fiscal years. 8. That the project described in "Attachment B" which is a bicycle project has been included in a detail~d bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan, or inCluded in an adopted comprehensive bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code section 2370 et seq.). 130429 jb 0131072 *Not Yet Approved* 9. That any project described in "Attachment B" that is a "Class I Bikeway," meets the mandatory minimum safety design criteria published in Chapter 1000 ofthe California Highway Design Manual. 10. That the project described in "Attachment B" is ready to commence implementation during the fiscal year of the requested allocation. 11. That the City of Palo Alto agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities described in "Attachment B", for the benefit of and use by the public. 130429 jb 0131072 Resolution No. -----Attachment B page 1 of 1 TDA Article 3 Project Application Form Fiscal Year of this Claim: 2013/14 Applicant: City of Palo Alto Contact person: Elizabeth Ames Mailing Address:250 Hamilton Ave., Palo Alto CA 94303 6th floor E-Mail Address:Elizabeth.ames@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone:650-329-2502 Secondary Contact (in event primary not available) Peter Jensen E-Mail Address:peter.jensen@cityofpaloalto.org Telephone:650-617 -3183 Short Title Description of Project: Charleston Connection Corridor Pathway Improvement Project Amount of claim: $82,712 Functional Description of Project: To provide improvements along the Class I bike and pedestrian pathway from Charleston Road to the Adobe Creek Bridge at Mitchell Park. Improvements include new paving & striping, signage, installation of a new decking on the existing bridge as well as American with Disability Act (ADA) improvements. Financial Plan: List the project elements for which TDA funding is being requested (e.g., planning, environmental, engineering, right-of-way, construction, inspection, contingency, audit). Use the table below to show the project budget. Include prior and proposed future funding of the project. If the project is a segment of a larger project, include prior and proposed funding sources for the other segments. Project Elements: Fundin~ Source All Prior FYs Application FY Next FY Followin~ FYs Totals TDA Article 3 $82,712 $82,712 list all other sources: ';,i<', .' .. ,.: ...... < •... ;. 1:.':> >1.· •. < .,·'i'" ......' ~L .·,.·.-'::j~>.k .<: · .• 'i;~.>~:,;.} E:~~::J;i:;;i:·' .• :.·J;;····.··.:,;~ji; ··.·"P,;. 1, Capital Improvement $49,965 $49,965 Funds 2. 3. 4. Totals $132,677 Project Eligibility: YES?/NO? A. Has the project been approved by the claimant's governing body? (If "NO," provide the approximate date approval is No anticipated) , May 13,2013 B. Has this project previously received TDA Article 3 funding? If "YES," provide an explanation on a separate page, No C. For "bikeways," does the project meet Caltrans minimum safety design criteria pursuant to Chapter 1000 of the California Yes Highway Design Manual? (Available on the internet via: http://www,dot.ca,gov), D. Has the project been reviewed by a Bicycle Advisory Committee? (If "NO," provide an explanation), Yes E. Has the public availability of the environmental compliance documentation for the project (pursuant to CEQA) been No evidenced by the dated stamping of the document by the county clerk or county recorder? (required only for projects that May 30,2013 include construction). F. Will the project be completed before the allocation expires? Enter the anticipated completion date of project (month and Yes year) Anticipated Completion Date Summer 2015 G. Have provisions been made by the claimant to maintain the project or facility, or has the claimant arranged for such Yes maintenance by another agency? (If an agency other than the Claimant is to maintain the facility provide its name: } MTC Programming and Allocations Section April 2005 TDA Article 3 Model Resolution Page 1 of 5 MEMORANDUM TO: TDA Article 3 Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Grant Applicants Technical Advisory Committee Members FROM: Bill Hough, Transportation Planner III DATE: February 26, 2013 (revised March 12, 2013) SUBJECT: Call for Projects, Transportation Development Act Article 3 FY 2013/14 Program TDA Article 3 Funds Available This memorandum serves as the General Call-for-Projects for the FY 2013/14 Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Program funding cycle. There are two components to the TDA Article 3 program: 1. Bicycle Expenditure Program The VTA Board of Directors took action on December 9, 2004 to dedicate 25% of Santa Clara County’s TDA Article 3 funds to projects on the countywide Bicycle Expenditure Program (BEP) list through 2030. On November 5, 2009, the Board committed $150,000 of the TDA3 BEP set-aside to County Expressway Pedestrian Projects. There is $614,090 available for BEP projects this year. Projects must be on the current Board-adopted BEP project list and applications should refer to the BEP project number. BEP project sponsors must submit MTC’s TDA Article 3 Project Application Form and must include a transmittal letter that states when they expect the project begin construction. In the event that BEP applications are oversubscribed, preference will be given to projects that are ready for construction and/or have other funding sources that could be jeopardized if the project is not delivered in a timely manner. 2. Guarantee Funds Table 1 below shows each city and the County’s “Guarantee” share of MTC’s TDA Article 3 Fund Estimate. There is $2,576,616 available for “Guarantee” projects this year. The guarantee share is based on 2012 California Department of Finance (DOF) population projections and funds banked or rescinded from previous years, where applicable. An agency’s total applications cannot exceed its guarantee share listed in the following table: Page 2 of 5 Table 1 2013/14 TDA ARTICLE 3 ESTIMATE FOR SANTA CLARA COUNTY Agency Guarantee Amount (Includes banked and rescinded funds from prior years.) Campbell $50,328 Cupertino $113,703 Gilroy $121,166 Los Altos $37,176 Los Altos Hills $23,134 Los Gatos $37,689 Milpitas $84,506 Monte Sereno $6,502 Morgan Hill $49,375 Mountain View $99,477 Palo Alto $82,712 San Jose $1,225,799 Santa Clara $149,933 Saratoga $38,316 Sunnyvale $180,324 Santa Clara County $276,473 Total $2,576,616 Rescind/Reallocation Requests Agencies may only allocate up to their estimate in any given year. Sponsors may rescind prior year projects, but VTA cannot reallocate them until the next TDA funding cycle. Funds rescinded in 2013 will be added to the sponsor’s guarantee in 2014. It is the responsibility of the project sponsor to monitor project expiration deadlines and to apply for rescind/reallocation of funds in a timely manner. Failure to do so will result in the sponsor losing the funds. Agencies must inform VTA of intent to rescind/reallocate, and failure to do so means that the funds revert to the countywide pool in the next cycle. Banking Funds TDA Article 3 funds may be banked for up to two years plus one year to program funds. To bank TDA funds, project sponsors must submit a letter or email stating that funds will be banked. If banked funds are not programmed by the end of the 3rd Year, they will be redistributed to the countywide TDA Article 3 pool for the following fiscal year. If you are planning to bank funds, please send a letter or email to that effect to Bill Hough at the address below. A member agency must inform VTA in writing of its intent to either claim or bank its TDA3 guarantee funds; failure to do so means that the funds revert to the countywide pool in the next cycle. Page 3 of 5 Project Types and Guidelines Your TDA Article 3 project must be ready to implement within ONE year of the application cycle. Eligible Project Types The following project types are eligible for TDA Article 3 Funding: Design & construction of on and off-street bicycle facility projects – including but not limited to bicycle parking. Design & construction of on and off-street pedestrian facility projects Maintenance of Class I bikeways (unlimited) Maintenance of Class II bikeways. Countywide, the total funds allocated to Class II bikeway maintenance cannot exceed 20% of the total countywide TDA estimate. Call Bill Hough at (408) 321-5735 if you plan to exceed 20% of your agency’s guarantee amount. Bicycle Safety Education Programs (not more than 50% of the project’s budget and not more 5% of the countywide TDA Article 3 funds) Comprehensive Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Plans (not more than once per jurisdiction every 5 years) Projects identified in a recent (within 5 years) comprehensive local bicycle or pedestrian plan Annual TDA Article 3 Audits Other Eligibility & Procedural Issues Environmental clearance is required for construction projects only. If you are submitting an application for design, you are not required to submit a County stamped notice. Additional information on the TDA Article 3 procedures and criteria can be found in the MTC TDA Article 3 Rules and Procedures, which is available on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission website at: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/funding/sta-tda/res-0875.doc Bicycle Advisory Committee and Bicycle Plan Requirement Cities and counties may not receive TDA Article 3 funds for bicycle projects unless the jurisdiction has established a Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) and the project is included in an adopted plan as stipulated in the MTC TDA Article 3 Rules and Procedures. This requirement does not apply to pedestrian projects. VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines The VTA Board of Directors adopted the revised VTA Bicycle Technical Guidelines on December 13, 2012. The purpose of the Guidelines is to provide a uniform set of optimum standards for the planning, design, and construction of bicycle facilities that are part of the countywide bicycle system. Bicycle projects funded by TDA Article 3 funds Page 4 of 5 must comply with the Guidelines. For a copy of this document, please contact Michelle DeRobertis at (408) 321-5716 or Michelle.DeRobertis@vta. org. It is also available on the VTA website at: http://www.vta.org/bike_information/bicycle_technical_guidelines.html Application Submittals MTC’s TDA Article 3 Project Application Form and resolution boilerplate is located at: http://www.mtc.ca.gov/funding/STA-TDA/TDA_Article_3_Claim_Forms.doc Project sponsors must use this form to submit applications. Late applications will not be accepted. Complete one application for each project. PLEASE NOTE: VTA should receive 2 copies of each project application. . 2013/14 TDA Article 3 Detailed New Project Submittal Requirements Number of Copies Item 1 per agency Cover letter that indicates whether application is for guarantee and/or BEP funding. The cover letter must include a statement that the project must be ready to implement within ONE year of the application cycle. 2 per agency Governing body resolution wording and Council Resolution supporting the project(s) (due on May 31, 2013). The sample is on the Metropolitan Transportation Commission website at link above. 2 per project MTC’s TDA Article 3 Application (See Application Form at link above.) 2 per project A vicinity map showing the project’s general location in your jurisdiction 2 per project A detail map showing the project and phases where applicable 2 per project Documentation of environmental clearance (for applicable projects). The county clerk must stamp the environmental document. Completed project applications should be submitted to VTA by 4:00 p.m. on Friday, April 12, 2013. Please send applications to: Bill Hough, Transportation Planner III Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Programming & Grants 3331 North 1st St., Bldg. B2 San Jose, CA 95134-1906 Page 5 of 5 Evaluation Process, Programming and Drawing Programmed Funds VTA staff will review project applications. The resulting countywide program will be reviewed by the VTA advisory committees before adoption by the VTA Board of Directors at its June 2013 meeting. The VTA Board-adopted project priorities will be forwarded to MTC for review and adoption. Once MTC has adopted the program, MTC’s Finance Section will issue allocation instructions to your agency. Please read these instructions carefully, they will provide your agency with guidance on invoicing and annual audit and reporting requirements. All project invoicing goes directly to MTC. All work must be completed by June 30, 2016 and MTC needs to receive reimbursement requests by August 1, 2016. TDA Audit Information In accordance with MTC Resolution 875, all claimants that have received an allocation of TDA funds are required to submit an annual fiscal and compliance audit to MTC and to the Secretary of Business and Transportation Agency within 180 days after the close of the fiscal year. Your audits are due to MTC by December 31 of each year. Failure to submit the audit will prohibit MTC from making a new TDA allocation. If no TDA funds were expended during the fiscal year, the applicant should file a statement to that effect with MTC. Please contact MTC’s TDA program manager Cheryl Chi, at 510-817-5939 or cchi@mtc.ca.gov, for additional information on audit requirements. PATH MITGHELIJ. PARK • • • VE ENTPLAN ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~REGRADEDAREA FOR ACCESS RAMP (BOTH SIDES OF BRIDGE) ~~~--~~----~~~~--~~RENOVATEE~SnNG • BRIDGE WI NEW DECK PLANKS ~~----=--------,---------:-----~~~~~---:--NEW ADA A CCE SSI BLE TENNIS COURTS . ABILITIES , .. ~ UNIT~D RAMP TO BRIDGE WI RETAINING CURBS & HANDRAILS (BOTH SIDES OF BRIDGE) ~~~-:,;";,,,~~--':"--.,;....,-..,.~~'-+--NEW RECONFIGURED " - UN IT)£fl1.At5J • CHlIlR(EFi/ J '~ • · ..... ~END CHALLENGER SCHOOL PATHWAY SEGMENT I~,.....--~----+--PATHWAY PORTION TO BE RESUFACED CITY OF CHARELSTON CONNECTION CORRIDOR PALO ALTO SCALE: 1" = 30' City of Palo Alto (ID # 3815) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: El Camino Park\Mayfield Pump Station Project - CDM Amendment #2 Title: El Camino Park / Mayfield Pump Station - CDM Amendment #2 Approval of Amendment Number 2 to Contract #C10131396 in the Amount of $1,173,000 with CDM Smith Inc. to Provide Additional Services Associated With the Reservoir, Pump Station, and Well at El Camino Park and Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project WS-08002, for a Total Not to Exceed Amount of $6,300,802 (Continued from April 1, 2013, as amended) From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve Amendment Number 2 to Contract #C10131396 in the amount of $1,173,000 with CDM Smith Inc. to provide additional services associated with the reservoir, pump station, and well at El Camino Park and Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project WS-08002 (CMR:424:09) for a total revised contract not to exceed amount of $6,300,802. Amendment Number 2 no longer includes the El Camino Park predesign work originally proposed to evaluate the possible relocation of the Julia Morgan building to El Camino Park. Staff may return to Council to separately seek approval of the predesign work for the possible relocation of the Julia Morgan building. Additional detail on the project delay and schedule have been added to this report, updating the report originally submitted to Council for its April 1, 2013 meeting. Background On November 9, 2009, Council awarded a contract to CDM Smith Inc. for the Design and City of Palo Alto Page 2 Construction Management of El Camino Park Reservoir, Pump Station and Well and Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project (CMR 424:09). Council approved a total budget of $3,190,566 and a contingency amount of $638,114 for this project. This design contract supports the ongoing effort to improve the ability of the City’s water system to supply water during emergency periods when the traditional supply is not available. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) recommends that water systems have the ability to supply an 8 hour peak demand during periods of traditional supply curtailment. On September 10, 2012, Council approved Contract Amendment Number 1 (Staff Report #2979) in the amount of $1,299,122 for three major elements, including the incorporation of: 1) additional design features to minimize legacy operations and maintenance impacts in response to recent changes to the California Department of Public Health requirements, 2) a Community Services Department request to include further upgrades to El Camino Park upon completion of the utility work and 3) a study that would consider expanding the use of our emergency water well at El Camino Park. Amendment Number 1 was approved by Council and all work associated with this amendment has begun. Currently, both the El Camino Park Reservoir, Pump Station and Well, and the Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project have experienced delays. Discussion Three large projects comprise the bulk of the Emergency Water Supply projects. The three projects are: El Camino Park Reservoir and associated Lytton Pump Station re-build and new Well Project (all located in El Camino Park), Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation, and The “Wells Project” comprising 2 new wells and the rehabilitation of five existing wells. Construction of the El Camino Park Reservoir, Pump Station and Well at El Camino Park began in October 2011 and, at that time, was estimated to be completed in December 2012. Construction of the Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project began in August 2011 and, at that time, was estimated to be completed in November 2012. Due to unforeseen delays at each site, construction at the El Camino Park site is not expected to be completed until December 2013 and construction at the Mayfield Pump Station site is not expected to be completed until June 2013. City of Palo Alto Page 3 CDM is the construction manager and design engineer for the El Camino Park Project and the Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation. The CDM contract has two parts (1) a design and engineering portion based on a set number and type of tasks; and (2) a construction management portion based on a broad scope defined by project completion. I It is the City’s contention that the construction management portion of the contract requires CDM to perform all construction management services for a maximum “not to exceed” amount. CDM contends that project delays are outside its control and that they are owed additional compensation. This project is a at a critical juncture in the construction of the pump station at El Camino Park and it is imperative that the CDM continue to perform design and construction management services. To avoid additional delays with the project, CDM and the City have negotiated Contract Amendment 2. This amendment and its exhibits establish a framework for resolving the payment dispute at a later date. Amendment Number 2 establishes a “Set-Aside Account” which will be maintained by the City to retain a portion of the disputed payments for billed services. At a future date, the disputed payments may be released following either a written resolution between the parties, or a binding dispute arbitration proceeding. The amount deposited and retained in the set aside account will be 50% of any amount billed by CDM for contruction management services under Subtask 3.2.1 (Exhibit A), Construction Management Services During Extended Construction Periods, of Amendment Number 2, up to 50% of the total amount of $348,000 budgeted for Subtask 3.2.1, and no more than $174,000. The balance of the billed amount will be paid to CDM. Both the amounts paid for construction management and the amounts held in the set-aside account are subject to the dispute resolution procedure. Amendment Number 2 provides Staff with the authority to procure additional services from CDM beyond the services provided for in the existing contract, if such services become necessary. Subtask 5.2, Additonal Services (such as claims-related support, noise testing, and other construction related services to be determined), provides funding up to $200,000 to be paid to CDM for such additional services on an if, and as requested, basis within the limits of the available Subtask 5.2 budget and the task descriptions included under Subtask 5.2. City is not obligated to authorize any of the additional services described under Subtask 5.2. Project Progress and Delays Staff has kept the public apprised about the progress of all Emergency Water System projects via a dedicated web page (www.cityofpaloalto.org/emergencywater ), notices on the Utilities bill and annual update bill inserts. Additionally, information is disseminated through the Palo Alto Neighborhoods groups email lists and at community events and workshops. City of Palo Alto Page 4 El Camino Park Reservoir Construction on this project is currently behind schedule. At this time, the construction of the concrete reservoir is nearly complete and the site has been back-filled. The new well on the site has been drilled and tested. Construction of the pump station has started and is continuing. To date, no major design oversights or un-corrected, major deficiencies in the facilities have been identified. With the goal of completing the project by the new schedule of December 2013, the City, working with CDM, the construction manager, is in dialog with the (third party) construction contractor to identify the reasons for the delays experienced to date. The construction contractor has made a number of assertions as to the reasons for the delay and the City is doing its due diligence in managing to the contract in order to keep the project on track to complete the project in December of 2013. Some of the reasons for delay asserted by the construction contractor include: changes in temporary piping design, delays in shutting off the pre-existing water supply, delays in obtaining approval to perform work adjacent to the Caltrain right of way, and extra time and costs for excavation of the reservoir and underground piping and compaction of the fill during the rainy seasion. As required by the construction contract, the City has been asking the construction contractor for timely submittals of all change orders related to delays experienced. After several requests by the City, the construction contractor has submitted change orders with delay times and they are being evaluated. Mayfield Reservoir The construction on the project is nearly complete with final acceptance expected to occur in June, 2013. The construction manager and the City are evaluating requests from the construction contractor for the extension of the project due to delays. To date, there have not been any major design oversights or construction errors on the project. Related Project (Julia Morgan Building Relocation) Associated work for the possible relocation of the Julia Morgan building, previously included in the contract amendment request submitted to Council on April 1, 2013, has been removed from the current contract Amendment Number 2. Staff may return to Council to separately seek approval of a third amendment to this contract for an amount of $20,000 for this work. If so, we expect the Council will want a separate discussion on this matter. Amendment 2 Exhibit A includes all additional design and construction management efforts that will be needed to see the project through to the revised completion date. The work scope in Exhibit A increases the budget for these services by $1,173,000 and includes increased submittal review City of Palo Alto Page 5 activities, additional site visits and meeting attendance during the extended construction period, increased change order preparation and review, increased on-site construction management services during the extended construction period, development of Operations and Maintenance Manuals for both El Camino Park and the Mayfield Pump Stations. The included items listed in Exhibit A will be paid through Amendment Number 2 and accounts for the additional $1,173,000 that is requested. All work items listed in Exhibit A were originally or previously scoped items and the contract amounts for the listed tasks need to be increased in order to achieve a project completion date of December 2013. The cost associated with Amendment Number 2 (Exhibit A) totals $1,173,000. The total cost of the contract including this Amendment Number 2 is $6,300,802, which is comparable to other local projects of this magnitude (Graham Reservoir in Mountain View). This Amendment Number 2, with its accompanying tolling agreement, is subject to the Reservation of Rights and Set Aside provisions. Under this amendment, any sums in whatever amounts actually paid to Consultant or paid into any set-aside account are specifically made without prejudice to the City’s right to claim that no such sums are payable hereunder by reason of the previously executed Contract, including any amendments thereto. This amendment keeps Consultant on the Project by advancing and compensating the sums to Consultant, which are subject to a future dispute resolution procedure. Resource Impact The attached Amendment Number 2, Exhibit A, requests an additional appropriation of $1,173,000 for the contract titled, “Design and Construction Management of El Camino Park Reservoir, Pump Station and Well and Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project.” There is sufficient budget in the Emergency Water Supply Project (WS-08002) to fund the additional work included under this Amendment Number 2 to the contract. Current staffing levels and the need to maintain continuity with construction prevent City staff from performing this additional work. Amendment Number 2 will allow for additional construction management work needed to finish the project by the expected completion date. The breakdown of the original contract amount and later amendments is summarized in the following table: Exhibit Summary Breakdown Total Cost Exhibit A (Amendment Two Net Total) $1,173,000 Amendment One (Net Total) $1,299,122 Original Contract Total w/ Contingency (CMR:424:09) $3,828,680 City of Palo Alto Page 6 Revised Contract Grand Total $6,300,802 Staff is currently working with the construction contractors and the City’s construction manager to guide the project through to a reasonable completion date based on adjustments made to the schedule due to unforeseen conditions. Staff is also continuing to work with the City Attorney’s Office to monitor the construction contractor’s performance and compliance with the construction contract requirements. Policy Implications Amendment Number 2 does not represent a change to existing policies. This recommendation is consistent with the Council-approved Utilities Strategic Plan (Staff Report 1880), especially Key Strategy No. 1, “Ensure a high level of system reliability in a cost effective and timely manner”. Environmental Review Council certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this project in March 2007. The environmental aspects of the work contemplated by this Amendment Number 2 present no new significant environmental effects nor a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects beyond those discussed in the March 2007 EIR. Attachments: Attachment A: Palo Alto CDM Smith Amend No 2-05152013085722 (PDF) CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. CI0131396 AMENDMENT NO. TWO TO CONTRACT NO. CI0131396 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND CDM SMITH INC. This Amendment No. Two ("Amendment") to Contract No. C10131396 ("Contract") is entered into and made effective on May ,2013, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California Charter City, with offices located at 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California ("City"), and CDM SMITH INC., a Massachusetts corporation with offices located at 100 Pringle Avenue, Suite 300, Walnut Creek, California 94596 ("Consultant") (City and Consultant may be referred to collectively as "parties" or separately as a "party"). RECITALS: WHEREAS, on November 18, 2009, the City and Consultant entered into the Contract (the "Original Agreement") concerning, among other things, the Reservoir Pump Station and Wells at El Camino Park and Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation in Palo Alto, ("Project"); and WHEREAS, on September 10,2012, the parties entered into Contract Amendment No. One; and WHEREAS, Consultant has presented its Supplement Contract Revision No.1 (also referred to as Supplemental Amendment No.1) to the City, which was added to the Contract as Change Order No.1, Consultant has presented its Supplement Contract Revision No.2 (also referred to as Supplemental Amendment No.2) to the City, which was added to the Contract as Change Order No.2, and the Consultant presented its Supplemental Contract Revision No.3, 4 and 5, (also referred to as Supplemental Amendment No.s 3, 4 and 5) which were added to the Contract as Contract Amendment No. One, referred to above, and WHEREAS, the contractor for the Project, Anderson Pacific Engineering Services, Inc., ("Contractor") hired by the City to build the Project, has not completed the Project within the time specified in the related construction contract; and WHEREAS, a dispute (the "Dispute") has arisen between City and Consultant over the interpretation of the Contract, whereby on the one hand City contends the Contract, as relating to Subtask 3.2 therein, is a "not to exceed" contract for the completion of all work on the Project as described under Subtask 3.2 whenever the Project is completed, such that Consultant is not entitled to any additional compensation for certain Construction Phase Services under the existing Contract upon full payment of the compensation identified for that Subtask 3.2- Construction Management Services (and Subtasks contained therein) and Consultant is obligated to continue to perform such services at no cost to the City, and whereby on the other hand Consultant contends that the Agreement is a time-and-materials contract with a "not-to-exceed" upper limit, which "not-to-exceed" amount was based in part on the anticipated construction AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 1 completion date of June 30, 2012; and because the construction is now expected to be complete by December 31, 2013 and Consultant contends that the extended construction schedule resulted from causes that were not the Consultant's fault and the City desires that Consultant continue to provide Construction Management Services beyond June 30, 2012, Consultant is entitled to be paid pursuant to the Agreement's Billing Rate Schedule to continue to provide such Construction Management Services; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to enter into this Amendment on the terms set forth below in order to keep Consultant on the Project by compensating the sums to Consultant on the terms and conditions set forth below and in the attachments and Exhibits hereto; and WHEREAS, in light of the foregoing, the parties wish to amend the Contract as set forth below. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: AGREEMENT: SECTION 1. The Recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Amendment and the Contract by this reference. The parties agree that nothing contained in this Amendment No.2, including all attachments and Exhibits hereto, is intended in any way to be an admission or concession regarding, and in no way will be interpreted to impact their respective positions, rights, claims and remedies associated with the Dispute, and that the description of the Dispute, above, is for general reference and not intended to limit or constrain either party's position with respect to the Dispute. SECTION 2. Exhibit "A" to the Contract entitled "SCOPE OF SERVICES," is hereby amended to add the following: "Consultant shall also perform the Services as described in Exhibit A to Anlendment No. Two." SECTION 3. SECTION 4 of the Contract, "NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION" is hereby amended to read: Subject to the Reservation of Rights and Set-Aside provisions set forth in Exhibit "C", attached and incorporated by this reference, the compensation to be paid to Consultant for performance of the Services described above and in Exhibit "A," including paynlent for both professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Six Million, One Hundred Thousand, Eight Hundred Two Dollars ($6,100,802.00). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall be increased by those properly authorized amounts, but in no event shall the total compensation exceed Six Million, Three Hundred Thousand, Eight Hundred Two Dollars $6,300,802.00. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit "C", entitled "PAYMENT," which is attached to and made part of this Agreement. AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 2 Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit "C." Consultant shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services perfonned without the prior written authorization of City. Additional Services shall mean any work that is detennined by City to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services including that described in Exhibit "A". SECTION 6. The following exhibits to the Contract are hereby amended to read as set forth in the following attachments to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference: a. EXHIBIT "C" entitled "PAYMENT" as attached hereto. b. EXHIBIT "C-1" entitled "Hourly Rate Schedule" as attached hereto. SECTION 7. Tolling Agreement: The parties agree to enter into the Tolling Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit "D", and which is hereby incorporated by this reference, wherein the parties shall agree to toll any and all statutes of limitations and contractual time bars as indicated. The Tolling Agreement shall survive the tennination of the Contract, unless earlier tenninated as provided therein. SECTION 8. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. In particular (and without in any way whatsoever affecting all such other provisions of the Contract referred to herein, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto), the end date of the Tenn of the Contract as previously set forth in Section 2 of the Amendment entered into on September 10,2012, between the parties is revised to April 1,2015. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first written above. CITY OF PALO ALTO: By: ___________ _ City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: ___________ _ City Atton1ey AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 CONSULTANT: CDM SMITH INC. By -r _____ ~~~~~-- -Title: ~I\;\l~ V~ Pr~/,rJ... I Page 3 EXHIBIT A TO AMENDMENT NO. TWO TO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 BETWEEN CITY OF PALO ALTO AND CDM SMITH INC. (CDM SMITH --SUPPLEMENTAL CONTRACT REVISION NO.6) Scope of Services for Additional Professional Services Design and Construction Management Services for the Reservoir, Pump Station, and Well at EI Camino Park and Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation City of Palo Alto BACKGROUND This Exhibit A to Amendment No. Two (referred to internally by CDM SMITH as Supplemental Contract Revision No.6) amends the scope of professional services initiated in the Original Agreement between the City of Palo Alto (City) and CDM Smith Inc. (Consultant), dated November 18,2009, and as amended by Amendment No. One dated September 10,2012. This Amendment No. Two was prepared to provide additional professional engineering and construction management services during construction of the Reservoir, Pump Station, and Well at El Camino Park and Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project. The Agreement was developed prior to commencement of the project design. At that time, it was estimated that the construction of the projects would be completed by June 30, 2012. Final completion of construction of the Mayfield and El Camino Park Phase 1 projects are now estimated to occur in May and December 2013, respectively. This Amendment No. Two will amend and extend the period of professional engineering and construction management services provided under 'Task 3 -Construction' and 'Task 4 Post- Construction Services' of the Agreement as a result of the projected Final Completion dates for both the Mayfield and El Camino Park Phase 1 projects noted in the paragraph above. This Amendment Two will also amend the amounts of certain tasks and modify the scope of services to be provided by the Consultant. The tasks below are numbered to correspond to the tasks identified in the Agreement, as modified by Amendment No. One, ADDITIONAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Subtask 3.1.1.2: Increased Submittal Review Activities The purpose of this subtask is to increase the budget allocation for shop drawings, product data, and samples requiring engineering review for the Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation project and El Camino Park Reservoir, Lytton Pump Station, and Well Project Phase 1 project. AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 4 Approach: Equitably adjust Consultant budget to reflect number of submittals received to date and projected number of total submittals anticipated through project completion. Assumptions: The number of submittals and resubmittals anticipated in total for the Project in Amendment No. One totaled 320. The number of anticipated submittals and resubmittals will be increased to a total anticipated of 750. Deliverables: One copy of review comments for each submittal. Justification: The nature of the Contractors' assembly of submittal information and total number of submittals/resubmittals for both the Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project and EI Camino Park Reservoir, Lytton Pump Station, and Well Project Phase 1 exceeds the previous assumptions for submittal review. Subtask 3.1.2.1: Site Visits and Meeting Attendance During Extended Construction Periods The purpose of this subtask is to extend the scope and period of site visits and meeting attendance to provide services related to Anderson Pacific Engineering Services, Inc.'s performance of City of Palo Alto Contract No. C12141077 identified in Subtask 3.1.2 of the Agreement to cover the period through December 31, 2013. Approach: As per Subtask 3.1.2 of the Agreement. Assumptions: • Consultant's engineering staff will participate in weekly construction meetings for each of the Mayfield and EI Camino Park projects. Engineering staff attendance will generally be via conference call. • Consultant shall send one engineer to attend construction progress meetings, or other project-related meetings, in person as-requested by City. Deliverables: Minutes of weekly construction meetings will be generated by Consultant's Construction Manager per Subtask 3.2 of the Agreement. Minutes of non-construction meetings will be drafted by Consultant for review by City. AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 5 Justification: The duration and associated quantity of work to support the Mayfield and EI Camino Park Phase 1 projects has increased as compared to the level of effort anticipated by City and Consultant at the time the Agreement was developed. Subtask 3.1.4.1 Increased Change Order Preparation and Review The Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project and EI Camino Park Reservoir, Lytton Pump Station, and Well Project Phase 1 have experienced an increased number of change orders as a result of changes either proposed or identified as necessary by Contractor, City, or Consultant during construction. Approach: As per Subtask 3.1.4 of the Agreement. Assumptions: • As per Subtask 3.1.4 of the Agreement. • 'Change orders' includes 'requests for proposals', 'designer clarifications', and claims support. • The number of project change orders will be increased by 24, from 16 to a new total of 40. It is assumed that each change order, on average, shall take no longer than 12 hours of Consultant labor effort. Deliverables: As per Subtask 3.1.4 of the Agreement. Justification: Although the dollar volume of approved change orders for the projects to date has been less than 3 percent of the total contract value, the number of change orders and associated development, review, processing and negotiations have exceeded the level assumed in the Agreement. Subtask 3.2.1 Construction Management Services During Extended Construction Periods The purpose of this subtask is to extend the Construction Management services provided for in Subtask 3.2 of the Agreement, as modified below, to cover the period of Mayfield and EI Camino Park Phase 1 project construction through December 31,2013. Assumptions: The construction phase of the Project being performed by Anderson Pacific Engineering Services under City of Palo Alto Contract No. C12141077 will conclude at such a time that construction management services provided for under Subtask 3.2 (and this Subtask 3.2.1) will not be required after December 31, 2013. AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 6 Justification: The duration of Construction Management work to support the Mayfield and EI Camino Park Phase 1 projects has increased beyond the Term of the Contract and budget provided in the Agreement. A dispute (the "Dispute") has arisen between City and Consultant over the interpretation of the Contract relating to Subtask 3.2 whereby on the one hand City contends the Contract, as relating to this Subtask 3.2 therein is a "not to exceed" contract for the completion of all work on the Project whenever the Project is completed, such that Consultant is not entitled to any additional compensation for certain Construction Phase Services under the existing Contract, and whereby on the other hand Consultant contends that the Agreement is a time-and-materials contract with a "not-to-exceed" upper limit, which "not-to-exceed" amount was based in part on the anticipated construction completion date of June 30, 2012; and because the construction is now expected to be complete by December 31, 2013 and Consultant contends that the extended construction schedule resulted from causes that were not the Consultant's fault and the City desires that Consultant continue to provide Construction Management Services beyond June 30, 2012, Consultant is entitled to be paid pursuant to the Agreement's Billing Rate Schedule to continue to provide such Construction Management Services. Subtask 4.3: Operations and Maintenance Manuals for New Facilities The purpose of this subtask is to develop Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plans for the new facilities constructed by the Mayfield and El Camino Park -Phase 1 projects. Approach: • Consultant will develop two separate O&M Manuals, one document for the Mayfield Reservoir and Pump Station, and one document for the El Camino Park Reservoir and Lytton Pump Station. Each Manual, including all tables and figures, is anticipated to be on the order of 20-30 pages in length. • Each of the manuals will present, in a summarizing fashion, the following information for each facility: ' o List of major components and equipment and intended purpose/function, o Facility layout/orientation drawing (plan view), o Typical equipment settings, o Pump station operations in 'Normal' and 'Emergency' modes, o Proposed reservoir operations, o Control strategy overview, o Pumping characteristics and pump curves, o SCADA monitoring system, o Generator operation, o Well operation (El Camino site only), o Chemical storage and feed (El Camino site only), o Vendor-suggested and City-desired O&M activities and frequency, o Emergency contact information, o Safety, AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 7 o Alarms. • A total of two O&M coordination meetings (one kickoff and one follow-up as needed) will be held with Utility and Operations staff to discuss document outline, 'normal' and 'emergency' operating conditions, and City-desired O&M activities and frequency. The first meeting will be held with City staff approximately 2-3 weeks after Consultant's receipt of Notice to Proceed. • A draft of each manual will be submitted for Utility and Operations staff review prior to finalization. The draft of the Mayfield PS O&M Manual will be submitted for City review approximately 7-8 weeks after the first O&M coordination meeting. • The comments by all City staff will be reviewed by City and integrated into one tabulated set of review comments on each draft Plan. Comments will be provided to Consultant in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and Consultant shall respond to comments by making entries into this spreadsheet. • The final version of each manual will be provided approximately 2 weeks after receiving City comments. Assumptions: • The O&M Manuals will focus on presenting the information needed to operate the new facilities only; the documents will not be a comprehensive evaluation of all possible operating conditions associated with the City's distribution system or discrete pressure zones of the distribution system. • Equipment information, P&IDs, and detailed O&M information already compiled and presented in either the Contractor-generated construction documents, or contained in Conformed Drawings, may be referenced, but will typically not be contained in the O&M Manuals. • Proposed outlines for each of the O&M manuals have been provided to the City. The final outline and information presented in each manual will be similar in nature and content to that proposed. • This task does not include or rely on any additional distribution system modeling. Deliverables: • Three paper copies of each draft document for City review, • Five paper copies of each final document, • One copy of each of the final documents in Word and Adobe "pdf' format on CD-ROM. Justification: This additional task is being added at the City's request. Task 5.1: Additional Services The purpose of this item is delete the text associated with Task 5.1 -Additional Services from Amendment No.1 to the original Agreement, and replace it with the revised paragraphs below: Approach: Consultant shall provide the following additional services: • Identification of possible leaks at Mayfield Reservoir by underwater inspection of the AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 PageS completed new work within the reservoir by Aqua Video, with a not-to-exceed total allowance of $1 0,000. • A portion of the additional engineering and design services during construction and additional Consultant project management during 2013 as a result of the extended periods of construction at the Mayfield and El Camino Park sites. These tasks are authorized under Task 5.1 with the not-to-exceed cost of$35,000, but can be performed in conjunction with, and billed under Consultant's normal billings associated with Tasks 1-4. Subtask 5.2: Additional Services Approach: Consultant shall provide the following additional services on an if-and as-requested basis within the limits of the available Subtask 5.2 Additional Services budget: • Noise testing or acoustic consultation. • Additional on-site inspection and support during construction beyond the estimated meetings to discuss construction progress and technical issues. • Additional engineering and design services during construction, additional Construction Management, and additional Consultant project management should the construction contract extend beyond the assumptions provided in Task 3 per the Agreement, as revised by Amendment No.1 and by this document. • Additional construction testing and ICC inspection beyond the scope of services added by Subtask 3.2.1 of Amendment No.1 to the Agreement. • Additional project management and QAlQC related to any Additional Service assignment. • Additional claims-related support. • Additional construction submittals, resubmittals, and RFIs for the Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation Project and Camino Park Reservoir, Lytton Pump Station, and Well Project -Phase 1. Use of any portion of the Additional Services budget shall require written direction from the City's Project Manager prior to proceeding with any of the services noted above. The City may, at its sole discretion, decline to authorize any or all work described in Task 5.2. SCHEDULE The contract time for all Phase 1 and Phase 2 work to be completed (including an extra allowance for contract closeout activities), is extended to June 30, 2015 pursuant to the following estimates of completion dates: • Task 1 and Task 2 activities were completed by June 1,2011, • Task 3 activities are estimated to be completed by Decerrlber 31,2013, • Task 4 and Task 5 activities are estimated to be completed by April 1, 2014, • Task 6 through Task 10 activities are estimated to be completed by April 1, 2015, • Task 11 through Task 13 activities are estimated to be completed by June 1,2014. AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT I\JO. C10131396 Page 9 COMPENSATION Compensation for the Tasks and Subtasks identified above are increased by the following amounts. Subtasks 4.3 and 5.2 are new Subtasks as of this Amendment No.2, and are the total amount for each of those Subtasks. Progress payments for the services will be processed according to a tin1e and materials basis according to Consultant's Billing Rate Schedule attached to the Agreement. The amount of increased compensation, or for Subtasks 4.3 and 5.2 initial compensation for the services described herein is summarized below. Tasks Additional Engineering--Sum of all additional activities under Subtask 3.1 Additional Construction Management--Sum of all additional activities under Subtask 3.2 Subtask 4.3: Operations and Maintenance Plans for New Facilities Subtask 5.1: Additional Services (No monetary changes to the sub task amount of $35, 000 approved in Amendment No.1 to the Agreement) Subtask 5.2: Additional Services AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 TOTAL Amount $550,000 $348,000 $75,000 $0 $200,000 $1,173,000 Page 10 AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 EXHIBITB [INTENTIONALL Y LEFT BLANK] Page 11 EXHIBIT C TO AMENDMENT NO. TWO PAYMENT The City agrees to compensate the Consultant for progress in the performance of professional services in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement as modified by this Amendment. Such payments shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. For Subconsultants, such as Inspections, special inspections, electronic document services, and photographic docun1entation services, the City agrees to make payn1ent to the Consultant for services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement as modified by this Amendment, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Payment shall be calculated based on the actual cost of the subconsultant, plus a fee of 10%, up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. Subject to the Reservation of Rights and Set Aside provisions below, the amounts to be paid to Consultant under the Contract and all Change Orders and Amendments thereto, including but not limited to this Amendment, for all services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Six Million, One Hundred Thousand, Eight Hundred Two Dollars ($6,100,802.00). Consultant agrees to complete all services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount provided that in the event that testing, inspection, andlor other sub consultant services exceed the amount allotted herein, the parties will negotiate a separate agreement for how such testing, inspection, and other subconsultant services will be provided and paid for and provided further that in the event the construction schedule is further extended, beyond the current anticipated completion date of Decen1ber 31, 2013, through no fault of the Consultant, the parties shall negotiate in good faith any further amendments to the Agreement that may be required. In the event City authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum payment shall be increased by the amounts properly authorized, but in any event shall not exceed Six Million, Three Hundred Thousand, Eight Hundred Two Dollars $6,300,802.00. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS Any sums in whatever amounts actually paid to Consultant or paid to any set-aside account under this Amendment No. Two to the Contract are specifically made without prejudice to the City's right to claim that no such sums are payable hereunder by reason of the previously executed Contract, including any amendments thereto, and without prejudice to Consultant's right to claim that all such sums payable to Consultant under this Amendment are valid, payable obligations by the City and that such additional sums are owed to Consultant. Nothing in this Amendment prevents Consultant from making any claim for compensation for out-of-scope/extra services for which it believes it is entitled. AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT I\JO. C10131396 Page 12 Any payment made by City to Consultant under this Amendment, either directly or to any set- aside account shall not affect in any way City's ability to assert it is not required to make such payment under the Contract or any amendment thereto. SET -ASIDE SUMS Upon the timely, proper and documented invoicing by Consultant, and instead of making full payments on such invoicing directly to Consultant, City will deposit the following amounts into a "set-aside" account with the City (the "Set-Aside Account") as follows: 1) 50% of any amount paid to the Consultant under Subtask 3.2, up to the amount of 50% of the total amount (of $348,000) for Subtask 3.2 provided for in this Amendment, or no more than $174,000; All other amounts properly invoiced shall be promptly paid to Consultant in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. The "Set-Aside Sum" will be held by the City in the Set-Aside Accolmt until such time as the City and Consultant agree to release them or a ruling has been made as to the disposition of the Set-Aside Amount in a binding dispute resolution proceeding between the parties. This Amendment shall be considered joint set-aside account instructions and the signatures of both parties or a ruling in a binding dispute resolution procedure will be required to release the funds from the Set-Aside Account. The City shall, wi~hin three (3) business days of each deposit, provide Consultant with written notice confirming the deposit of any and all funds into the Set- Aside Account described herein. The parties agree to promptly execute and provide all documents reasonably requested and required by the City in order to administer (e.g., open, deposit funds, release funds and close) the Set-Aside Amount described herein. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the City and Consultant have been unable to agree in writing to the release of the Set-Aside Amount and/or entitlement to the funds paid by City to Consultant subject to the Reservation of Rights as noted above, then within ninety (90) days after the City's final resolution (e.g., the dates of any of the following: settlement agreement; judgment following trial; or judgment following an award in binding arbitration) of any and all claims by or against Contractor, the City and Consultant shall submit the dispute surrounding the Set-Aside Amount and/or all Reservation of Rights funds noted above to final and binding arbitration to be conducted by a single arbitrator from Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services ("JAMS") of San Jose, California, or any successor entity. The arbitrator shall be jointly selected by the City and Consultant or, if they are unable to agree within fourteen (14) days of the first written proposal of an arbitrator, appointed in accordance with the then-current JAMS arbitrator appointment process and subject to all JAMS procedural and discovery rules then in effect. AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 13 This provision shall not be construed as an agreement to submit any other claims or actions either party has or may have against one another to JAMS arbitration and such other claims or actions shall be governed by the terms set forth in the Contract. The provisions of this Set-Aside section of this Amendment shall survive the Term of the Contract and continue in effect until final resolution of any and all claims and disputes described above. AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT 1\10. C10131396 Page 14 EXHIBITD TO AMENDMENT NO. TWO TOLLING AGREEMENT This Tolling Agreement (the "Tolling Agreement") is entered into effective May 2013 (the "Effective Date") by and between the City of Palo Alto, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), CDM SMITH INC, a Massachusetts corporation ("CDM SMITH") (hereinafter collectively referred to as "the Parties"). NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the mutual covenants herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. The Parties agree to toll all statutes of limitations and contractual time bars with respect to the Parties' rights, if any, arising out of and/or relating to that certain written Contract No. C10131396 between City and CDM SMITH (together with all amendments and exhibits, the "Contract"), the design and development, bidding and construction of the Reservoir Pump Station and Wells at El Camino Park and Mayfield Pump Station Augmentation (the "Project"), and/or any pre-construction, construction management or closeout/warranty services provided by CDM SMITH to City for the Project, which tolling shall be from the Effective Date of this Tolling Agreement to its expiration or termination. 2. Except as to the effect of the statutes of limitations provisions as stated in Paragraph 1 above, the Parties agree that upon expiration or termination of this Tolling Agreement, each party will have the same procedural rights, duties, positions and defenses as they had before this Tolling Agreement was signed. 3. The Parties agree that this Tolling Agreement shall be in effect until such time as all legal claims by Anderson Pacific Engineering Services, Inc. relating to the construction of the Project are resolved through a finding that the time for presentation of such claims has expired, through settlement, or through trial or binding arbitration, or this Tolling Agreement is terminated under the terms of Paragraph 12 hereof, and shall expire at that time unless renewed or extended by a writing signed by the Parties. 4. The Parties agree that this Tolling Agreement does not apply to claims, if any, which were barred by limitations as of the Effective Date. Further, this agreement shall not operate to waive, limit, modify or otherwise affect any claims or defenses, or any rights and obligations that any of the Parties may possess against any other Party, except for the tolling effect agreed to herein. 5. The Parties agree this Tolling Agreement shall not be offered in evidence as an admission of liability, nor shall it be used in any way, including in discovery, as evidence thereof. 6. The Parties agree that this document constitutes the entire agreement of the parties regarding the subject matter hereof, that there are no unwritten terms and conditions, and that this is an integrated document which can be modified only in writing signed by all the Parties. AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 16 7. The Parties warrant that each of them has been advised by legal counsel of its own choice as to the terms and conditions of this Tolling Agreement and the legal significance thereof. 8. By signing below, the Parties each acknowledge that they have read this Tolling Agreement and are fully aware of its contents. 9. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Tolling Agreement, nothing in this Tolling Agreement shall prevent City from tendering (a "Tender") to CDM SMITH any claims it receives from Anderson Pacific Engineering Services, Inc. under the indemnity provisions of the Contract; however, notwithstanding any other provision herein, the acceptance or rejection by CDM SMITH of such Tender shall constitute and effect a termination of this Tolling Agreement effective upon sixty (60) days after receipt of such acceptance or rejection. 10. This Tolling Agreement shall be binding and enforceable against the Parties hereto and any assigns or successors-in-interest. The Parties declare and represent that no promise, inducement or agreement not herein expressed has been made to any of their representatives, and this Tolling Agreement contains the entire agreement between the Parties. The terms of this Tolling Agreement are contractual in nature and not mere recitals. The signatories below warrant that they have appropriate authority to execute this Tolling Agreement and understand and acknowledge that all adverse parties are relying on this warranty of authority. 11. This Tolling Agreement may be executed in one or more original or facsimile counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but also which together will constitute one and the same instrument. Copies of signatures hereon shall be treated the same as originals. 12. From and after substantial completion of the Project, this Tolling Agreement may be terminated at any time by any Party hereto upon thirty (30) days' written notice to the other Party, which notice shall be effective upon date of receipt after mailing by first-class certified mail or first-class registered nlail, postage pre-paid, by UPS or Federal Express Overnight delivery, at the addresses as listed in Paragraph 13. Any such notices sent via U.S. mail shall be deemed received three (3) days after sending; sent via overnight mail shall be deemed received the day after sending; sent via e-mail or facsimile shall be deemed sent the same day as sending provided that a copy of such notice also is sent via U.S. Mail. 13. Notices under this Tolling Agreement shall be given as follows: To City: Office of the City Attorney Attn: Molly Stump 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 To CDM Smith: CDM SMITH INC. Attn: James S. Lacknlan, General Counsel 50 Hampshire Street Cambridge, MA 02139 AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 17 15. Each person executing this Tolling Agreement represents that he or she is fully authorized to execute and deliver this Tolling Agreement on behalf of such person or entity. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Tolling Agreement effective as of the Effective Date. CITY OF PALO ALTO By: __________________________ __ Name: -------------------------- Title: ---------------------------- Approved as to Form By: _________ __ City Attorney CDM SMITH INC. B y:-+---+--=----=-+-"--~+t_--_I_:/_------- Title: S~~r V.~ erel''iU-r/ AMENDMENT NO. TWO CONTRACT NO. C10131396 Page 18 City of Palo Alto (ID # 3751) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Community Gardens Title: Parks and Recreation Commission and Staff Recommend That Council Approve an Amendment to the Park and Open Space Rules and Regulations R1-39 (Attachment A) in Order to Help Reduce the Waiting List for Persons Wishing to Obtain a Plot at one of the Three City Gardens From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommendation The Parks and Recreation Commission and staff recommend that Council approve an amendment to the Park and Open Space Rules and Regulations R1-39 (Attachment A) in order to help reduce the waiting list for persons wishing to obtain a plot at one of the three City community gardens. Background In August of 1997, the City Manager formed a Building Regulations Committee made up of representatives from the former Parks and Golf Division and the Open Space and Sciences Division of the Community Services Department. This Committee developed regulations for the public’s use of City facilities and parks. Regulations were deemed necessary as facilities were at times being used by some members of the public in ways that interfered with the mission and function of City programs and services. These regulations have helped City staff respond to complaints and work with facility visitors to encourage appropriate conduct at City facilities. The rules and regulations have since been revised on June 28, 2004, January 24, 2005, February 3, 2006 and April 14, 2008, March 14, 2011 and November 19, 2012. On February 22, 2011, the Parks and Recreation Commission approved revisions to a number of sections of the City’s Park Rules and Regulations and recommended to Council their adoption. A Commission-appointed subcommittee (Commissioners City of Palo Alto Page 2 Hetterly, Dykwel and Markevitch) met with staff at three separate meetings between October and January to formulate the revised park and garden rules. As part of their comprehensive review of the Park Rules and Regulations, the sub- committee recognized that there were a number of changes needed in the Community Garden section of the rules (Section R1-39). The sub-committee agreed that before substantive changes could be made to the garden rules there would need to be special outreach to the gardeners, the volunteer garden liaisons, and to people who are on the garden waiting list to seek their input before changes could be developed. At the January 25, 2011, regular Commission meeting, Commissioners Hetterly, Dykwel and Markevitch were appointed by the Commission to serve as a special sub-committee to continue their study of the garden rules and possible corrections. The garden rules sub-committee met on April 7, April 11, and provided the Commission with an update of its activities at the April 26, 2011 regular meeting of the Parks and Recreation Commission. The sub-committee announced that it would facilitate a public meeting on June 7, 2011, at the Lucie Stern Community Center to gather information from the gardeners and waitlist applicants. Twenty-eight gardeners and one person on the waiting list attended and participated. Subsequent to the creation of the proposed garden rules in 2011, staff and garden liaisons has tested and evaluated the concepts of the proposed rules and have found that they are workable and potentially effective in addressing problems of untended gardens so that the gardens can be made available to persons on the garden waiting lists. Discussion Based on the recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission, staff has proposed the following changes to the Park and Open Space Rules and Regulations (R1-39 Community Garden) that would: Better describe the standards for care of garden plots to ensure that plots are properly maintained by gardeners (by pictures and text standards) Provide a structured notice system to persons who are not maintaining their plots Provide for a 30-day period in which any deficiencies in plot maintenance must be remedied Provide more authority to the community garden liaison (volunteer position) to take action to get gardeners to comply with the maintenance standards and garden rules City of Palo Alto Page 3 Provide a systematic approach to managing the waitlist so that an applicant either accepts an available plot when notified by staff or the liaison, or the person goes back to the end of the waitlist if they decide not to take the offered plot Create a new waitlist structure for current gardeners who wish to “upgrade” to a larger, sunnier or different plot. Again, if the applicant opted to reject the plot that was offered when their name came to the head of the waitlist, they would then go to the bottom of the waitlist and the better plot would be offered to the second person on the waitlist Provide for defined period of time in which applicants must accept the offered garden plot and pay all required deposits and fees Stipulate that documented participation in two out of four annual community garden work days (or make-up work days at other gardens) is mandatory for all gardens Stipulate that gardeners cannot pay in-lieu of active physical participation in the 2- hour garden work days Based on the garden rules subcommittee, the Parks and Recreation Commission recommends that these revisions to the garden rules be implemented now and then continue to be monitored by staff and the liaisons to determine how these changes help to improve the maintenance of garden plots and to reduce the amount of time on the two separate waitlists. It is the Commission’s recommendation that if persons are not tending their plots in earnest, they can (through a systematic and fair process of three warning notices) be removed from the program so that other people can enjoy a garden plot. Resource Impact There is no resource impact associated with the adoption of the revised Park and Open Space Rules and Regulations. Policy Implications These revisions to the Park and Open Space Regulations are consistent with City policy, including Policy C-12 of the Community Services element of the Comprehensive Plan: encourage City work groups to examine and improve operating procedures. Attachments: Attachment A - Park and Open Space Regulations-2013 (DOCX) Attachment B - Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes of July 26, 2011 (DOC) Attachment A PARK AND OPEN SPACE REGULATIONS R1-1. DEFINITIONS The following words and phrases, whenever used in these regulations, shall be construed as defined in these regulations. A. "city" means the City of Palo Alto. B. "department" means the Department of Community Services of the City. C. "facility" or "park facility" means any body of water, land, campsite, garden, trail, levee, recreation area, building, structure, system, equipment, machinery or other appurtenance owned, managed, controlled or operated by the Community Services Department. D. “director” means the Director of Community Services of the City. R1-2. APPLICABILITY The provisions of these regulations apply to all facilities under the jurisdiction of the Community Services Department. R1-3. CLOSURE OF FACILITIES-AUTHORITY The director shall have the authority to close any park facility or portion thereof and require the exit of all persons therein when he or she determines that conditions exist in said facility or portion thereof which presents a hazard to the facility or to public safety. No person shall use, enter or remain in any facility, park or open space which has been posted as being closed under this authority. A. The Open Space, Parks and Golf Division Manager shall have the authority to close open space trails which have been designated as “seasonal trails” when weather conditions predispose the trail or surrounding habitat to damage or erosion. Such trail closures will be posted on park bulletin boards and at the affected trail junction. B. The Open Space, Parks and Golf Division Manager shall have the authority to temporarily close open space trails or facilities when the damage of flora or fauna are threatened by humans or their pets. Such facility closures will be posted on park bulletin boards and at affected trail junctions or facilities. R1-4. CONTENTS OF PERMIT APPLICATION; SUBMISSION Whenever a permit is required by provision in this chapter, an application shall be filed with the director stating: A. The name of each applicant, sponsoring organization and the person(s) who is in charge of or responsible for the proposed activity; B. The address and telephone numbers of each person and/or entity named in subsection (A); C. The name of the park, open space land, building, field or tennis courts requested for the activity, specifically identifying the location of the activity within the park or room within the building; D. The date and starting time of the proposed activity, together with the anticipated arrival time of guests; E. The finish time of the proposed activity, including cleanup; F. The number of persons expected to attend the activity; G. Additional City facilities requested, such as personnel, tables, chairs, etc; H. The nature of the proposed activity or activities, including equipment and vehicles to be brought into the park or open space lands; nature and duration of the use of such equipment; nature and duration of the use of any amplified sound; whether fees or donations for service will be solicited or collected; and whether alcohol will be served. I. Proof of Palo Alto residency may be required for the permit application. J. The necessity for street closure in order to hold an event. The permit application shall be filed with the director by no later than seven (7) days prior to the date of the special event. R1-5. ACTION ON PERMIT APPLICATION The director shall issue a permit within five (5) business days after submission of a completed application if: A. The proposed activity or use of the facility will not unreasonably interfere with or detract from the general public enjoyment of the facility; B. A facility with the required occupancy load capacity is available; C. All conditions, including, where applicable, the payment of fees, approval of the Director of Community Services and insurance coverage, security deposits and/or requirements are met; D. The proposed activity or use will not entail unusual, extraordinary or burdensome expense or security operation by the department; E. If the proposed special event will have more than twenty-five (25) individuals in attendance, involve road closures, traffic control, or the need for inter-departmental review (for example, for a “fun run” or a “live music” event), an additional City-wide special event application from the Police Department may be required for the event. City-wide special event permit applications are not generally required for standard picnic reservations. Completed City-wide special event permit applications may be filed as early as one year before the event, but must be received no later than 30 days before the actual event date, and no later than 90 days before the actual date of the event if the event requires a street closure. F. The facilities desired have not been reserved for other use; G. Special conditions requested in applications are reasonable and feasible. H. The proposed activity will not negatively impact habitat, wildlife, or vegetation in the park or open space area. I. Residency requirements, if any, have been satisfied. R1-6. FOOTHILLS PARK RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS Admittance and use of park facilities within Foothills Park have additional residency requirements. Only residents of the city and regular or part-time City employees, members of their households related by blood, marriage, domestic partnership, or adoption, and their accompanied guests are entitled to enter and remain in Foothills Park. An "accompanied guest" is one who enters Foothills Park in the presence of a resident of the city or a regular or part-time City employee or members of their household as described above. A special use permit will not be granted until these special requirements have been satisfied: A. In the case of Foothills Park Wedding Use Permits, one member of fifteen guests of the guest list must be Palo Alto residents. B. In the case of Foothills Park Day Use Reservations for the Oak Grove Group Area or the Interpretive Center, or Foothills Park Towle Camp Reservations, one member of fifteen guests of the guest list must be a Palo Alto resident. A guest list which includes the home address of the guests must be received one week prior to the proposed activity or activities. C. In the case of Foothills Park Special Use/Group Permits or for groups of more than 24 persons, one member of fifteen guests seeking admittance to the park accompanied by the permit applicant must be a Palo Alto resident. (A guest list is not required for this type of permit.) R1-7. PERMIT--EXHIBITION No person shall fail to produce and exhibit a permit he or she claims to have upon request of any department employee, contracted park ranger or any public or peace officer who desires to inspect the permit for the purpose of enforcing compliance with any regulations of this chapter. R1-8. HOURS OF PARK CLOSURE For purposes of enforcement of the park and open space closure restrictions promulgated in Title 22 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the terms “sunset” and “sunrise” are defined with reference to a table of times that is determined annually and posted at open space facilities. Closure times specified in Title 22 as implemented by this regulation shall be posted prominently at each park or open space facility and shall be posted on the City’s web site. R1-9. HAZARDOUS GAMES OR ACTIVITIES The playing of games and/or activities involving propelled or thrown objects which are sharp or heavy (such as stones, shot puts, arrows or javelins) are prohibited except when a permit is issued by the director in areas compatible for such use. Except in designated areas of Mitchell Park where inflatable structures can be used by City staff or designated contractors as part of a City-sponsored program, inflatable structures, miniature trains designed or used for passengers, pony rides, and dunking tank attractions are prohibited in parks or open space areas. (Revised 6/28/04) R1-9A. USE OF METAL DETECTORS IN PARKS Metal detectors for the purpose of scavenging can only be used within park facilities in such a fashion where turf or landscaped areas are not disturbed, cut or dug into. R1-10. PICNIC SITE USAGE Group picnic site reservations at Foothills Park Oak Grove; Mitchell Park Arbor, East Meadow, Pine Grove and Redwood areas; and Rinconada Park Sequoia area are available to Palo Alto residents only. No more than 60 individuals shall occupy a group picnic site at Mitchell Park Arbor, East Meadow and Redwood areas; 100 individuals at the Pine Grove picnic area; 75 individuals at Rinconada Park Sequoia picnic area; or 150 individuals at Foothills Park Oak Grove. No more than 15 individuals shall occupy any table in an individual picnic site at Mitchell Park and Rinconada Park. With the exception of the two table/one barbecue at individual picnic sites of Mitchell Park, each group of participants shall not occupy more than one individual site. (Revised 6/28/04) R1-10A LYTTON, COGSWELL AND KING PLAZA A. Use of tables: For permitted events and activities, no more than four six-foot tables are permitted at one time at Cogswell Plaza; no more than ten six-foot tables are permitted at Lytton Plaza; and no more than twenty six-foot tables are permitted at King Plaza. Tables shall not be arranged in a configuration longer than twelve-foot wide span and there must be a minimum of three-feet between sets. B. The City shall be compensated the full cost of replacement of any chair, tables or other furnishings damaged by the event or special use. C. Special event organizers must cover existing trash receptacles and provide their own waste stations (compost/recycle/trash) that they will then be responsible for removing after the event. D. Damage deposits may be required for any special event or use at the discretion of City staff. E. No tables, tents or other structures shall be set up closer than ten-feet from the nearest structure. F. Shade canopies may be authorized in a permit so long as the shade structure measures ten-foot by ten-foot, or less. G. Stage platforms shall be no higher than twenty-four inches tall and ten-feet by twelve-feet in maximum area. H. As per the Palo Alto Municipal Code, no alcoholic beverages may be served or consumed at these plaza parks. I. No barricades or cordoning off areas of the plaza. J. No jump/bounce houses are permitted on plaza. K. Special event organizers must supply a layout of all items to be placed within plaza and be approved by City staff before the event. L. As per Palo Alto Municipal Code 22.04.160, no commercial solicitation or business transactions other than those associated with and supportive of city programs or city-sponsored activities for which a permit has been issued by the director is permitted in parks or plazas. R1-10B LYTTON PLAZA NOISE REGULATION A. No permit application is required of any person in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code sections 22.04.040 and 22.04.050 in order to engage in the playing of an amplified musical instrument at Lytton Plaza, which meets the requirements of sections 9.10.050 and 22.04.180, subject to the following: (1) the playing of an amplified musical instrument occurs on a first-come, first-served basis during the following days and times of day: (a) Monday through Thursday, 5:00 PM to 10:00 PM; (b) Friday, 5:00 PM to 11:00 PM; (c) Saturday, noon to 11:00 PM; and Sunday, noon to 10:00 PM. The term “first-come, first-served” means the first person or group of persons to commence playing an amplified musical instrument at Lytton Plaza shall be entitled to play to the exclusion of all others for a period not exceeding three (3) consecutive hours. B. A City-wide special event permit application is required of any person seeking to engage in the playing of an amplified musical instrument at Lytton Plaza outside of the days and times of day specified in paragraph A above. No unpermitted amplified musical instrument may be played during the period of time for which a person holds a permit to play an amplified musical instrument. C. Paragraph A notwithstanding, a person may file a City-wide special event permit application to play an amplified musical instrument within the time period specified in R1-4. If a City-wide special event permit is issued, the permit holder’s right to play any musical instrument at Lytton Plaza will take precedence over any person claiming the right to play under the first-come, first- served basis condition set forth in paragraph A of this Rule. D. The director will post or caused to be posted to the department’s web site the days and times of days for which reservations to play musical instruments have been secured. E. The preceding paragraphs notwithstanding, the playing of any acoustic musical instrument at Lytton Plaza is permitted during posted park use hour or, if no hours are posted, during the regular park use hours. F. A City-wide special event permit application shall be filed whenever a group of more than twenty- five (25) persons attends the playing of any musical instrument or musical instruments regardless of whether any instrument is amplified or acoustic. G. The noise ordinances set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code chapters 9.10 and 22.04 shall apply to all persons playing amplified and acoustic musical instruments at Lytton Plaza. R1-11. TENNIS COURT USAGE Any person or group using a City tennis court shall do so according to the following rules: A. No person shall operate, drive or ride a bicycle, unicycle, roller skates, roller blades, skateboard or other coasting device on City owned tennis courts. B. No person shall provide or offer tennis lessons for compensation on City owned tennis courts except as part of a City-sponsored program, class or camps. C. City owned tennis courts may be reserved for City programs and tournament play only. D. All players must use the court control board to determine which court they shall play on and their playing position. E. No individual person can occupy a court by him or herself if other persons are waiting to play. F. Unleashed dogs are not permitted within tennis courts. G. No person shall play a sport other than tennis on City-owned tennis courts unless expressly allowed via permit issued by the City’s Recreation Division. (Revised 6/28/04) R1-12. ATHLETIC FIELD USE Any person or group using a City athletic field shall do so according to the following rules: A. No activity other than softball (or Little League baseball) is permitted at El Camino Park softball field unless expressly allowed by permit. B. No activity other than baseball is permitted at Baylands Athletic Center Baseball Field unless expressly allowed by permit. C. No activity other than softball is permitted at Baylands Athletic Center Softball Field unless expressly allowed by permit. D. No person shall use an athletic field which is posted (on-site, on-line, or by voice message) as being closed, whether the closure is for excess rainfall or for field maintenance or other reason. E. Field markings applied to athletic fields shall be allowed by permit only and must follow City of Palo Alto Open Space, Parks and Golf Division guidelines. F. Soccer goals must be anchored at all times when located on the playing fields. When goals are not being utilized for play, they must be secured off the playing fields in a manner which will not permit tipping or any hazardous condition that might cause injury to any person. When a field is being utilized for multiple purposes, goals that interfere with the intended use of the field shall be provided by the user groups that require the use of a soccer goal. These goals must be assembled and disassembled before and after each event. The storage of these goals can be coordinated with the Recreation Division. Any goal left on site will be removed and stored until a removal/storage fee of $75.00 is paid. R1-13. PEERS PARK AND JOHNSON PARK VOLLEYBALL USE Any person or group playing volleyball or related game at Peers or Johnson Parks shall do so according to the following rules: A. Drop-in volleyball or related game play is permitted only in the posted area at Johnson Park or on the north end of Peers Park. B. The volleyball area may be reserved for volleyball play, by permit, only on the first Saturday and first Thursday of each month. The director may make additional weekend days available for reservation during the months of June, July and August. R1-14. SKATEBOARD FACILITY The Skateboard Facility, located in John Lucas Greer Park, is for skateboard use only. Use of roller blades, scooters, bicycles, or any other equipment, other than skateboards is prohibited. Any person using or playing upon the skateboard facility shall do so according to the following rules: A. Each person skateboarding in the Skateboard Facility must wear a helmet, elbow pads and knee pads. B. Use of roller blades, scooters, bicycles, or any other equipment, other than skateboards is prohibited. C. No more than seven persons shall skate in the bowl at any given time. D. No person shall do a body flip while riding a skateboard. E. No person shall ride a skateboard facing entirely backwards. F. Two or more persons may not ride on the same skateboard. G. No person shall ride a skateboard on their knees. H. No person shall cause a skateboard to shoot out away from their feet or body. I. No persons shall skateboard in tandem within three feet in front or behind another rider. J. No glass containers are allowed in the facility. K. No skateboarding is allowed when the facility is wet or while it is raining. L. Trash receptacles are to be used to dispose of waste or any other unwanted items. No person shall use, remain in or enter the Skateboard Facility outside of regular park hours between 10:30 PM and sunrise (PAMC 22.04.320) No person shall enter or remain in the Skateboard Facility when that facility is posted as being closed, whether such closure is because of excess moisture or hazard or for any other reason. R1-15. GOLF COURSE Any person or group using or playing upon the golf course shall do so according to the following rules: A. No person shall use the golf course, or any portion thereof, without first having obtained a receipt or other written authorization in due form so to do. B. No golf player shall cut in on, or double back over, any portion of the course, or to play upon the course without a receipt duly issued for the round being played. C. No golf player shall refuse to or fail to show such golf receipt or other written authorization to any employee connected with the municipal golf course, when requested to do so. D. No person shall willfully or maliciously injure any turf on the golf course or in any way destroy or injure property thereon, or remove property or equipment from the golf course. E. Privately owned power golf carts are not allowed to be used on the municipal golf course. R1-16. SWIMMING No person shall swim, bathe or wade in any water or waterways within any park facility when such activity is prohibited and so posted by the director. No person shall use, remain in or enter the Rinconada Pool facility between the hours listed as follows: January 1 through June 15 9 p.m – 6 a.m. June 16 through December 31 10 p.m. – 6 a.m. Rules for the safe use of the Rinconada Swimming complex: 1. Children 7 years of age and younger must be directly supervised by a chaperone 16 years of age and older. Chaperones must wear a swimsuit, accompany the child in the water and be within arm’s length at all times. Children may not be left unattended in the facility at any time. 2. All swimmers must wear swimsuits. Clothing including undergarments is not permitted. Clean over shirts are permitted for modesty or sun protection as long as they are worn over swimsuits. Infants and toddlers who are not yet toilet trained must wear swim diapers. 3. Flotation devices including water wings, padded swimsuits and inner-tubes are not permitted except US Coast Guard approved lifejackets. 4. Flippers, snorkel masks, and hard balls are not permitted. 5. All persons entering the facility must pay, including those not intending to swim, except children 2 years of age and younger. 6. Patrons must pay again to reenter the facility after leaving. 7. Walk at all times on the pool deck. 8. Bicycles, rollerblades, scooters, and skateboards are not permitted on the pool deck. 9. Dogs, cats and other animals are not permitted on the pool deck. 10. Fighting, roughhousing, chicken fighting, screaming, profane language, and pretending to drown is not permitted in the facility. 11. Patrons are not permitted to sit on guard chairs, lane lines, starting blocks or railings. 12. Barbecues, alcohol and glass/breakable containers are not permitted in the facility. 13. Food and drinks must be consumed at picnic tables, on grass or farther than 10 feet from poolside. 14. Heed instructions from Lifeguards and overhead announcements at all times. 15. Aquatics staff reserves the right to ask anyone who violates these rules to leave the facility. 16. To maintain a safe environment, pool rules are subject to change at any time. Lap Pool: 17. Swimmers must be able to swim competently for at least one lap to enter the deep end and/or use the diving boards. Lifeguards have sole discretion. Please ask for a swim test. 18. Lap swimmers using lap lanes during recreation swim may use flippers, kickboards and snorkels as needed. Flippers, kickboards and snorkels are not permitted outside of the lap swim lanes. Non-lap swimmers are not permitted to swim across lap lanes. 19. Diving boards: • One person on the board and ladder at a time. • Wait to dive until area is clear. • Walk or perform a proper diving approach. Do not run on the diving board. • Bounce only once and jump/dive off the end of the board facing forward. • Divers may not jump to anyone in the pool and must swim to the wall unassisted. After diving, swim out toward the closest ladder. Do not swim under, between or in front of the diving boards. Wading Pool: 20. Swimmers must be able to reach the foot pedals to use the “Aquaducks.” Pedaling with hands is not permitted. 21. Swimmers may not sit on or otherwise block the water pressure of the fountains. 22. Slide: Swimmers must be no taller than the slide to use it. One person is permitted on the slide and ladder at a time. Form line on the ground. Do not stand, jump or push other swimmers off the top of the slide. Swimmers must go down slide sitting, feet first. R1-17. BOAT USE A. The dock at Foothills Park and the sailing platform at the Baylands Nature Preserve is intended for the hand launching of canoes, kayaks, small inflatable boats and boats less than sixteen feet in length. The launching of any larger vessel is prohibited. While hand carts may be used to carry boats from the parking lot to the dock or sailing platform, hand carts or other personal equipment may not be used on the docks or left unattended in the immediate vicinity of the dock or sailing platform. Items left unattended will be impounded by a park ranger or police officer. B. Sail boards, sail craft and motorized boats are prohibited on Boronda Lake in Foothills Park. R1-18. BICYCLES, SKATEBOARDS AND ROLLER SKATES A. Bicycles are prohibited on unpaved trails of Foothills Park. Skateboards, roller skates or blades, or other coasting devices are prohibited in Foothills Park. B. Bicycles are prohibited on unpaved trails of open space parks and preserves, unless designated for bike access within the Pearson-Arastradero and Baylands Preserves. Skateboards, roller skates or blades, or other coasting devices are prohibited in open space parks and preserves, except on paved, multi-use bike paths. C. Helmets: No person shall operate a bicycle or similar device on parks or open space preserves without wearing an A.N.S.I. or Snell-approved bicycle helmet for head protection. No parent or guardian shall allow any child under the age of 18 to ride a bicycle without a helmet. D. Unsafe operation: No person shall operate a bicycle in a reckless or negligent manner so as to endanger public property, or the life, limb, or property of any person or animal. No person shall ride in or upon a portion of a bicycle not intended for passengers. No person shall operate a bicycle while wearing earphones that interfere with hearing ambient noise. E. No person shall leave a bicycle, scooter or skateboard in any place or position where other persons may trip over or be injured by it. R1-19. HUMAN FLIGHT No person shall hang-glide, parachute, parasail or engage in any human flight on, over, or into park or open space, except by written permit in designated areas. R1-20. TRAIL USE SPEED LIMIT The maximum speed for all trail uses is 15 miles per hour, unless a lesser maximum speed is posted, and no person shall exceed the maximum speed on any trail; however, no person shall operate a bicycle, or ride a horse or other such animal at a speed greater than is reasonable, prudent, or safe. Bicyclists and equestrians are required to slow to 5 miles per hour when passing others or approaching blind turns. R1-20A. USE OF DESIGNATED TRAILS, PATHS AND RECREATIONAL LAWN AREAS IN OPEN SPACE LANDS No person other than authorized City staff or other persons specifically authorized by City staff shall walk, run or tread in any open space lands except on designated trails, paths, recreational lawn areas or roads, unless expressly permitted to do so pursuant to park regulations or a special use permit. “Designated trails” is defined as those trails which appear on current City of Palo Alto park maps, planning documents, trail guides and/or those trails marked with City directional signs. (Adopted 6/28/04) R1-21. COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES AND SOLICITATION Commercial activities, commercial solicitation, and solicitation for donations (including banners and signage), not associated with and supportive of City programs or City-sponsored activities for which a permit has been issued by the director, are prohibited. R1-21A. COMMERCIAL PHOTOGRAPHY AND FILMING No person shall operate a still, motion picture, video, or other camera for commercial purposes on City lands except pursuant to a permit authorizing such activity or except for those activities associated with and supportive of City programs or City- sponsored events. This section shall not apply to the commercial operation of cameras as part of the bona fide reporting of news. (Adopted 6/28/04) A. Applications shall be submitted not less than ten (10) working days before the proposed use. B. No sound amplification equipment, which will disturb the peace, may be used in connection with any photo shoot, except when used by City employees or safety officers for purposes of crowd control. C. No permit shall be granted for any event between the hours of 8:00 pm and 9:00 am without the prior approval of the Director. D. No permit shall be granted when the closure would result in hampering prompt access to an area or location by emergency vehicles. E. Wherever appropriate, the City will require the applicant to provide and erect barricades according to City specifications for public safety. The person or persons making the application shall be responsible for placing and dismantling all barricades. All barricades shall be removed within one-half (1/2) hour of the ending time of the event. Barricades shall also be immediately removed upon request of any authorized officer or employee of the City. In some situations, the Permittee may be required by the City to provide traffic control and a qualified flag person if City streets or parking lots are involved. R1-22. RESTROOMS Male persons shall not enter any restroom or washroom set apart for females, and female persons shall not enter any restroom or washroom set apart for males; except, this shall not apply to persons with special needs or their accompanying attendants or children under the age of six years old who are accompanied by a person who is of the sex designated for that facility and who has reason to be responsible for such person. R1-23. UNAUTHORIZED USE OF KEYS OR LOCKS No person other than one acting under the direction of the director shall duplicate or cause to be duplicated a key used by the department for a padlock or door lock of any type or description, nor shall any person divulge the combination of any lock so equipped to any unauthorized person. No person, other than the one acting under the direction of the director, shall use a key to access any park and/or open space facilities. The director may issue keys to user groups. Said user groups must use the keys for permitted activity only and return issued keys to the City upon completion of the activity. No person shall place a lock upon any gate or fence in any park or open space area without prior permission from the Director. R1-24. WATER POLLUTION While within the boundaries of any park facility, no person shall throw, discharge or otherwise place or cause to be placed in the waters of any fountain, pond, lake, stream, bay or other body of water or in any tributary, stream or drain flowing into such waters any substance, matter or thing, liquid or solid, including but without limitation to, particles or objects made of paper, metal, glass, garbage, rubbish, rubber, fuel, plant material, food matter, fiber and plastics. R1-25. HARMFUL SUBSTANCES No person shall possess, place, or apply any substance harmful to any person, property, wildlife, or vegetation on park or open space lands. R1-26. LITTERING Depositing refuse or other waste on or into fire rings, barbecues or other devices used to contain fires or for cooking is prohibited. R1-27. DISPOSAL OF EFFLUENT No person shall deposit waste water, sewage or effluent from sinks, portable toilets, or other fixtures upon or into the ground or water. R1-28. SMOKING No person shall smoke any substance in any public places or any area that is within twenty feet of bleachers, backstops, or play structures or any area designated as a playground, nature trail or nature area or in or on any park facility where smoking is posted as being prohibited. Pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Ordinance 9.14.010 (i), public places are defined as: "Public places" means enclosed areas within publicly and privately owned buildings, structures, facilities, or complexes that are open to, used by, or accessible to the general public. Public places include, but are not limited to, stores, banks, eating establishments, bars, hotels, motels, depots and transit terminals, theaters and auditoriums, enclosed sports arenas, convention centers, museums, galleries, polling places, hospitals and other health care facilities of any kind (including clinics, dental, chiropractic, or physical therapy facilities), automotive service centers, general business offices, nonprofit entity offices and libraries. Public places further include, but are not limited to, hallways, restrooms, stairways, escalators, elevators, lobbies, reception areas, waiting rooms, indoor service lines, checkout stations, counters and other pay stations, classrooms, meeting or conference rooms, lecture rooms, buses, or other enclosed places that are open to, used by, or accessible to the general public. R1-29. FIREWORKS No person shall possess, give, sell, discharge, set off, or cause to be discharged, on or into any portion of park or open space lands any firecrackers, missiles, rockets, fireworks, or explosives. R1-30. ANIMALS No person other than public or peace officers, rangers, city naturalists, animal control officers in the discharge of their duties shall: A. Hunt, molest, harm, provide a noxious substance to, frighten, kill, trap, chase, tease, shoot or throw missiles at any animal within the boundaries of any park facility, nor remove nor have in his possession the young, eggs or nest of any such creature; B. Abandon any animal, dead or alive, within any park facility; C. Remove any animal not his own from within any park facility; exception is made to the foregoing in that proper season, fish may by fished and removed from areas designated for fishing by licensed persons, in accordance with the California Fish and Game Code and other related laws, and boarded horses may be removed from a park facility, upon proper notification to the department; D. Bring into or maintain in or upon any park facility any dog, cat or other animal unless such animal at all times is kept on a leash and under full control of its owner or custodian; provided, however, the director may designate areas and times within which persons may exercise, show, demonstrate or train unleashed animals under full control or their owners or custodians. No person shall allow a dog, cat, or domesticated animal, even if leashed, to disturb, chase, molest, injure, or take any kind of native wildlife, whether living or dead, or remove, destroy, or in any manner disturb the natural habitat of any animal on parks or open space land. E. Permit cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, or other animals owned by him/her or in his/her possession to graze within the boundaries of any park facility without express approval of the director; F. No person shall keep or raise cattle, horses, sheep, or other livestock on park or open space land, unless pursuant to a lease, license, or other entitlement of use granted by the City of Palo Alto. G. Ride or lead a horse, pony, mule, burro or other animal onto or over any park facility, other than at times and upon roads or trails designated for riding of animals; except with approval of the director. H. No person owning or having custody or control of any dog shall permit such dog to defecate on any public street, sidewalk, park or parkway without immediately removing the resulting excrement at the time of occurrence. The excrement so removed shall not be disposed of on any property listed in this chapter except in public refuse receptacles. Persons using Seeing-Eye dogs are exempt from this section. I. No person owning or harboring any dog or other animal shall allow or permit such dog or animal to swim, bathe or wade in any water or waterways within any park facility when such activity is prohibited and so posted by the director. R1-31. NUISANCE DOGS No person shall allow or have on park or open space land a dog that is threatening or a nuisance to people, other animals, or property. This includes, but is not limited to growling, barking, bearing of teeth, or challenging in any manner, people, animals, or property. R1-32. DOG EXERCISE AREA Dogs may be allowed off leash in the dog exercise areas, designated as such, in Herbert Hoover Park, John Lucas Greer Park and Mitchell Park. No person, with or without a dog, shall be in a dog exercise area before sunrise or after 10:30 PM, consistent with normal park hours. City employees performing their assigned duties are exempt from this restriction. No dog is to be left unattended in any dog exercise area. A muzzle shall be securely attached over the mouth of all aggressive dogs. Any person with a dog in the dog exercise area shall properly dispose of any dog fecal matter by placing it in the provided receptacles. All dogs shall be placed on a leash upon leaving any dog exercise area. Violations of these regulations may result in a citation and /or limiting the use of the dog exercise area. R1-33. UNAUTHORIZED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES No person shall deposit any earth, sand, rock, stone or other substance within any park facility, nor shall he/she dig or remove any such material from within any park facility, nor shall he/she erect or attempt to erect any building, wharf or structure of any kind by driving or setting up posts or piles, nor in any manner appropriate or encumber any portion of the real property owned by, operated, controlled or managed by the department without a permit from the director. R1-34. USE OF UTILITIES A. Electrical, phone, data communication, and cable receptacles in parks and open space spaces may only be used or accessed for private use within the terms of a special use permit granted by the Community Services Department. B. Gas fixtures, water faucet spigots and irrigation water outlets that require a key or opening device in parks and open space spaces may only be used or accessed for private use within the terms of a special use permit granted by the Community Services Department. C. Sanitary sewers or storm drains in parks or open space areas may not be used for the clean- out of personal septic systems under any circumstances. R1-35. GATHERING WOOD IN OPEN SPACE AREAS Gathering wood from or possessing wood that has been gathered from Open Space areas is not permitted. R1-36. PARKING RESTRICTIONS No person shall park a motor vehicle, except an authorized emergency vehicle, or when in compliance with the directions of a peace officer, ranger, or City employee, in any of the following places: A. In areas where prohibited by "NO PARKING" or “FIRE LANE - DO NOT BLOCK” signs. B. On any fire trail. C. On any equestrian or hiking trail. D. In such a place or manner as would block or obstruct any gate, entrance, or exit. E. In such a place or manner as to take up more than one marked parking space in any authorized parking area. F. In such a place or manner as to block or obstruct the free flow of traffic. G. Within 15 feet of a fire hydrant. H. Adjacent to any curb painted red. I. In any park or open space land after sunset except pursuant to a written permit. J. In areas signed for permit parking on park or open space land without a written permit. K. In any other place on park or open space land not designated by the City as an authorized area. L. The gravel parking lot at the Towle Campground at Foothills Park may only be used for parking by persons with camping reservations. There is a limit of 2 vehicles for the eight person campsites and 4 vehicles for sixteen person campsites. The parking area is restricted to passenger vehicles and small trucks. Recreational vehicles, trailers or other self-contained vehicles (regardless of size, weight or number of axles) are not allowed in the Towle Campground parking lot or beyond the gate at the edge of Orchard Glen Picnic Area. Recreation vehicles or other self-contained vehicles may not be parked in Foothills Park over-night. Non-camping guests should park in the available day-use parking lots. R1-37. OPERATION OF MOTOR VEHICLES No person shall operate, propel, or leave standing any motor vehicle on park or open space land, except: A. Emergency vehicles operated within the scope of official use. B. Upon roads, trails, or paths, which may from time to time be set aside and posted by the City for the use of specifically designated vehicles. C. Upon roads and parking areas open to the public during regular open hours. D. Motor vehicle includes, but is not limited to, any vehicle as defined by section 415 and/or 670 of the California Vehicle Code, motorcycles, off-road vehicles, "dirt bikes", and similar vehicles. E. This section shall apply to all motorized bicycles, carts, scooters and electric personal assistive mobility devices (Segway or similar device) except those devices used by handicapped persons. R1-37A. VEHICLE WEIGHT LIMIT ON BAYLANDS ROADS AND PARKING LOTS No person shall operate or park any vehicle in excess of 6,000 pounds weight on Harbor Road or within any parking lot of the City-owned Baylands or John Fletcher Byxbee Recreational Areas. (Adopted 6/28/04) R1-38. VIOLATION - PENALTY A. The director shall have authority to revoke a permit upon a finding of violation by the permittee or persons acting under the permit of any regulation contained in this chapter or upon a finding of violation of other City ordinance or law of this state in the exercise of the permit. B. The director or designee shall have the authority to eject from any park facility any person acting in violation of regulations contained in this chapter. R1–39. COMMUNITY GARDEN The City of Palo Alto provides, subject to a license agreement, space for Palo Alto residents to enjoy organic gardening on a first-come, first serve basis as space allows. The Palo Alto Community Gardens are designated for the use of Palo Alto residents only. Gardeners and prospective gardeners must provide sufficient proof of residency (i.e., utility bill in the name of the gardener, driver’s license, etc.) and sign a license agreement with the City. A post office box will not be accepted as a resident address. A. The Palo Alto Community Garden Program constitutes a completely organic gardening project. OnlyNo non-organic pesticides, herbicides, chemical fertilizers, or chemically treated wood products are to be used in any garden site. Any gardener installing wood borders or planters may be required to show proof that the wood has not been chemically treated. Violation of this rule will be cause for termination of the Community Garden License Agreement and participation in the garden program. B. The City of Palo Alto Open Space, Parks and Golf Division is responsible for all irrigation sytems, weed and/or pest control, and maintenance of the perimeter on all garden sites. Gardeners shall are not allowed to contract for, or perform, any type of electrical or irrigation work without the written permission of the City Community Garden Coordinator. C. The garden plot and its maintenance is the responsibility of the Gardener. Plots and walkways shall be kept free of weeds, debris and trash year-round. Any gardener composting is restricted to the confines of his/hertheir assigned plot. The entire garden plot must be cultivated and contain an average planting density when it is not being mulched. A chair or small bench is acceptable for use as a resting place, but no patio sets, furniture, tables, bar-b-ques, sheds, or other structures or furnishings are allowed. D. Gardeners are to keep one-half of the width of all the walkways around their garden plot free of weeds and vegetation. Plants that overgrow and block the walkway are to be trimmed back. Wood chips are located at each garden site to help maintain the integrity of the walkways. All plot walkways are to be mulched using wood chips, seed hulls, or dried leaves for garden resident safety and to help vegetation growth.. E. Each garden site is maintained by the resident Gardener. All gardeners are expected required to help on at least 2 of the 4 scheduled annual workdays. Each gardener is required to personally contribute a minimum of 2 hours of confirmed communal garden work per work day (i.e fence repair, exterior pathways, etc.) Persons who are not able to participate in work days at their own garden may make arrangements with the City Community Garden Coordinator or Community Garden Volunteer Liaison to participate in work days at other gardens or to perform a minimum of two hours service by special arrangement with the Community Garden Volunteer Liaison. The Community Garden Volunteer Liaison is responsible for scheduling garden workdays. The number of workdays per year will vary according to size of the garden and the amount of maintenance required to keep the garden site well groomed. Gardeners are required to attend at least two workdays per year. Those gardeners who consistently avoid doing their share of community garden work are subject to verbal or written warning, and possible loss of the garden plot. F. The Community Garden Volunteer Liaison is responsible for scheduling garden work days and for confirming gardener participation. If a gardener cannot attend the scheduled workdays, then that gardener must coordinate with the Community Garden Volunteer Liaison to schedule alternate workdays at their community garden or another Palo Alto community garden. G. Gardeners who avoid doing their share of community garden work are subject to a written warning, and possible loss of the garden plot. It is not permissable to pay in-leiu of participation in communal work days. H. Persons on the waitlist will be invited to participate in communal garden work days by the City Community Garden Coodinator for the sake of gaining gardening experience. IF. Garden plots are confined to the assigned locations and a gGardener may occupy only one garden plot per his/her household (verified by Utility bill). No person Gardener may use a vacant plot or other area in the gardens without the prior written approval from the City Community Garden Coordinator. The City Community Garden Coordinator may make exceptions in unusual circumstances (i.e., extremely small plot or sunlight has deteriorated due to shade trees). No garden plot shall be transferred, traded, divided, shared, sub-leased, or otherwise changed from the original plot assigned and licensed to the signatory Ggardener/Licensee. If any change is desired, contact the City Community Garden Coordinator who maintains a waiting list for plot Formatted: Default, Indent: Left: 0", Firstline: 0" Formatted: Default, Indent: Left: 0", Firstline: 0" assignments. All requests will be reviewed and decided on an individual basis. An exchange of plots is an option, but must be approved by the City Community Garden Coordinator before any exchange occurs. JG. Only vegetables, flowers, berries and herbs may be grown in the plots. Produce from the plot shall not be used for commercial profit. Tall plants, such as corn, berries and tall vines should be located so that they do not produce shade on adjacent plots, and do not extend into pathways. Permanent plants (i.e., rose bushes) are not to be over 5’ in height. Berries are to be trimmed and maintained. Fruit trees and bushes are not permitted because of their invasive roots and shading potential. K.H. In the interest of water conservation, Ggardeners are required to remain in the vicinity of their plots while watering and are requested to turn off faucets at unattended plots. IL. Automatic watering systems prevent other gardeners from accessing the community water supply and contribute to low water pressure problems at some sites. Therefore, aAutomatic watering systems are not permitted unlessexcept upon request in unusual circumstances and by specific permission of the City Community Garden Coordinator. each plot in the garden has a designated water faucet. Automatic watering systems (drip systems preferred) will be allowed in some instances upon request and only by the written permission of the Community Garden Coordinator. The approved systems must be checked on a weekly basis. and aAny system found leaking will be removed. Please contact the City Community Garden Coordinator for written approval before installing any type of watering system. MJ. Plot holders are expected to conduct themselves in a safe, respectful and courteous manner toward other garden residents and the public. Any Gardener taking produce from a plot other than his/her own will be terminated from the garden program and their License Agreement revoked immediately. Garden conflicts should be taken to the Community Garden Volunteer Liaison for resolution. In the event that the Garden Volunteer Liaison cannot resolve the issue, the problem is to be taken to the City’s Community Garden Coordinator for resolution. Non- compliance with this rule may can subject the offending gGardener to immediate expulsiondismissal from the garden program and terminationrevocation of the lLicense aAgreement. NK. Due to health and safety concerns, Ddogs are not allowed inside any Community Garden site, either on or off a leash. Dispensation will be granted in special cases (i.e., handicapped, blind, etc.). Please contact the City Community Garden Coordinator forto request dispensation consideration. .L. O. The amount of the fee associated with the right to cultivate any plot will be calculated by quarter on a calendar year basis. If a garden plot is assigned during the year, payment will be made for the remaining quarters and the remaining initial quarter, if the plot is assigned during the first 44 days of the quarter. If the plot is assigned after the first 44 days of the quarter, only the remaining quarters in the calendar year will be charged. A $100 refundable cleaning deposit (based on published municipal fee schedule) is required at the time of the signing of the License Agreement. Upon termination, if the City Community Garden Coordinator determines that the garden plot is in an acceptable condition for a new tenant (refer to pictures of garden standards), the deposit will be returned 4-6 weeks after the termination of the License Agreement. In the event the plot is abandoned or neglected, the deposit fee will be used to cover costs incurred for having the plot cleared, mulched or tarped with black plastic to retard weeds for benefit of the next tenant. M. Any gardener who is 60 years of age or older, is eligible to receive a 25% discount. The gardener is responsible for informing the Community Garden Coordinator that he or she is eligible to receive the discount. The gardener must provide proof of age. N. Invoices for the current year’s fees will be mailed in January. Fees are due within 30 days of receiving the invoice. Bills will be considered past due 60 days after the invoice date and a late fee of $10.00 (ten dollars) will be charged. Gardeners who fail to pay are subject to revocation of their license to garden. O.P The yearly garden fee is based on the published municipal fee schedule at the time of signing. Invoices for the current year's fees will be mailed in January. The amount of the fee associated with the right to cultivate any plot will be calculated by quarter on a calendar year basis. First year fees will be based on when the garden plot was assigned. Annual plot fees are due within 30 days of invoice date, and a late fee of $10.00 (ten dollars) will be charged if payment is not received on due date. Gardeners who fail to pay 60 days after the invoice date are subject to revocation of their License Agreement. Q. Any gardener who is 60 years of age or older is eligible to receive a 25% discount. The gardener is responsible for informing the City Community Garden Coordinator that he or she is eligible to receive the discount and must provide proof of age. R. Low income youth, senior and/or disabled residents may apply for a fee reduction through the City’s Fee Reduction Program. Applications are available at Lucie Stern Community Center or in the Enjoy! catalog S. Invoices may be paid in person at the Lucie Stern Community Center, 1305 Middlefield Road or by mail to: City of Palo Alto, Community Garden Program, Attention City Community Garden Coordinator, 3201 East Bayshore Road Palo Alto, CA 94303. If on a fee reduction plan, payment must be made in person through Lucie Stern Community Center, 1305 Middlefield Road. T. In the event the Licensee decides toof early terminatione of the License Agreement to cultivate a plot, the City Community Garden Coordinator is to be contactednotified in writing (email will be accepted) by the gardenerLicensee and a refund will be issued for the remaining quarter(s) of the calendar year. No refunds will be given for a part of a quarter (3 months) and no refunds of less than $10.00 (ten dollars) will be issued. Upon In the event of early termination of the lLicense aAgreement (even if no refund is made) the garden plot will be available for reassignmentassigned to the next applicant on either the Johnson Garden, or Eleanor/Main waiting list. UP. Pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code 22.04.320, no person shall use, remain in or enter any Community Garden (Main Garden; Eleanor Pardee Garden, Johnson Park Garden or Timothy Hopkins Creekside Garden) between 10:30 p.m. and sunrise. Closure times specified in Title 22 as implemented by this regulation shall be posted prominently at each garden. Violation of any Community Garden Rule may willsubject the gardener to a verbal or written warning If a gardener receives a written notice of non-compliance, he/she will have thirty (30) days to correct the situation. Failure to remedy the situation within thirty (30 days will be cause for cancellation of the License Agreement. If the gardener receives a second written notice of non-compliance within the same calendar year, the gardener will have thirty (30) days to correct the situation. Again, failure to remedy the situation within thirty (30) days will be cause to terminate the License Agreement. If a gardener fails to maintain their garden according to established garden maintenance standards and receives a third notice within the same calendar year, the License Agreement will be revoked and the plot will be assigned to the next applicant on the waiting list. Any items remaining in the plot will be given to the person taking the plot. The good faith judgment of the City Community Garden Coordinator will be sufficient cause for enforcement of the Community Garden Rules, including revocation of the license to garden and/or possible revocation of his/her license to use a garden plot. If sufficient improvement is not demonstrated on an on-going basis, the plot will be posted as abandoned, and the license to garden the plot will be revoked. The plot will be issued to the next person on the waiting list. Any items remaining in the plot will be given to the person taking the plot. The good faith judgment of the Community Garden Coordinator will be sufficient cause for enforcement of the Community Garden Rules, including revocation of the license to garden. Adopted by City Council June 24, 2002; Revised June 28, 2004; Revised January 24, 2005. Revised February 3, 2006. Revised April 14, 2008. Revised March 14, 2011. Revised November 19, 2012. Formatted: Default, Indent: Left: 0", Firstline: 0" Formatted: Font: 12 pt Approved July 26, 2011 Draft Minutes 1 MINUTES PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING July 26, 2011 City Hall 250 Hamilton Ave Commissioners Present: Deidre Crommie, Sunny Dykwel, Jennifer Hetterly, Ed Lauing, Paul Losch, Pat Markevitch, Daria Walsh Commissioners Absent: Others Present: Council Karen Holman Staff Present: Daren Anderson, Catherine Bourquin, Rob de Geus, I. ROLL CALL CONDUCTED BY: Catherine Bourquin II. AGENDA CHANGES, REQUESTS, and DELETIONS: Staff de Geus explained that the nearby Planning and Transportation meeting would end around 8:30 and that moving item 10 to item 5a would allow Planning and Transportation staff to easily attend our discussion on the Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan. The Commission agreed to this agenda change. III. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None IV. BUSINESS: 1. Approval of Draft Minutes from the May 24, 2011 regular meeting - The May 24th, 2011 draft minutes were approved as amended. Approved 5:2 abstention (Losch) (Crommie absent) 2. Approval of Draft Minutes from the June 21, 2011 regular meeting - The June 21st, 2011 draft minutes were approved as amended. Approved 4:3 abstention (Losch, Markevitch) (Crommie absent) 3. Recommendation to update the rules and regulations that govern the Community Garden Program – Chair Walsh introduced the item and staff Bourquin, Community Garden Coordinator, spoke on the item highlighting the changes that were incorporated from the Parks and Recreation Commission’s June meeting. The primary changes Approved July 26, 2011 Draft Minutes 2 that were discussed at length at the June meeting with the public input included the following: Only two waiting lists, one for Johnson Garden and one for Main and Eleanor Gardens. Having a list for those wanting to upgrade to a more desirable plot Adding the allowance of a garden plot to one per household Removing the option to buy-out a workday Compliance notices, after receiving three non-compliance notices within a year licenses will be terminated. Volunteer garden liaisons will have their garden fee waived for their service. Oral Communications Rita Morgin – Spoke as the Volunteer Garden Liaison for the Main Garden, she was concerned that something should be included in the rules and regulations on constructing fences in the individual plots. She felt that they should not be allowed because of safety issues resulting from pathway intrusion. The Commission was given time to comment and ask questions. After a brief discussion, the Commission entertained a motion to approve the garden rules and regulations as revised. Motion: The Parks and Recreation Commission move to have the Community Garden Rules and Regulations approved as revised. Passed 6:1 (Crommie not part of discussion) 4. Study Session of Regional Water Quality Control Plan (RWQCP) Landscaping Project - Staff de Geus introduced the item and Phil Bobel; Interim Assistant Director Public Works spoke on behalf of items 4 and 5 on tonight’s agenda. He provided some pertinent information that he felt that the Commission should know relevant to the two items. He reiterated that there were still some uncertainties that Public Works was working through on these two projects, but welcomed any comments the Commission had on these related items. Council Liaison Holman wanted to ensure that the Parks and Recreation Commission stays included in any discussion on this item. Assistant Director Bobel assured the Commission if that’s what they wanted, then he would make sure they were included. Julie Weiss, Environmental Specialist for Public Works presented the Commission with an overview of the current landscaping conceptual designs for the Regional Water Quality Control Plant. She provided the Commission with her presentation and pointed out that item number 4 on the agenda and item 5 are closely related because they are located right next to each other. Her item related to the landscaping of the Quality Approved July 26, 2011 Draft Minutes 3 Control Plant. The goal is to make the area safe and aesthetically appealing. The target date for construction to begin is fall of 2012 and completion would be in 2013, possibly even 2014. Oral Communications Herb Borack – Mr. Borack spoke on reminding staff and the Commission that they follow the correct process such as going through the environmental review board, and public noticing of projects such as this. Emily Renzel – Ms. Renzel as a member of the Citizen’s Advisory Board voiced her concern over the retention of the vegetation, and wanted to ensure that other options would be considered before removing it and starting over. She also wanted to ensure that the pedestrian access off of Embarcadero would be preserved assuming that the Park stays intact. Discussion Q: What is the cost of the project? A: With everything included, the cost is approximately $900,000 Q: Does the project include Art? A: They have had discussions with the Art Commission on the use of the 1% Art contingency for projects of this size. Q: Is the funding coming from the City? A: Funding sources are approximately 35% City and 65% from partners, excluding the 1% for art. Q: How many personnel are at the plant? A: 70 – the plant operates 24/7 so staffing isn’t at 70 at one time. Q: How many tours? A: Tours are happening every month. Q: Commissioner Walsh commented on the chain link fence seen from the street and how it disrupts the feeling someone gets entering the Park. A: Staff Anderson spoke to this item and made some suggestions such as possibly adding vegetation to camouflage the fence being careful not to plant an evasive vine, or when the eucalyptus trees grow this would hide eventually cover them. Q: Will the plans be specific to habitat in the Bay? A: Staff Anderson replied that the plan being considered would accommodate a wide range of wild habitat. Q: Commissioner Hetterly inquired on the process for the tours at the Water Quality Plant. A. Assistant Director Bobel responded and said they could schedule the Commission to take a tour. Ms. Weiss would work with staff to set one up. Q. Council Holman inquired on the trails that were discussed earlier. Approved July 26, 2011 Draft Minutes 4 A. Senior Engineer Matt Raschke responded and informed the Commission that the trail in reference is a pedestrian/bike path and it is part of the Pedestrian Bike Path Master Plan that will be discussed tonight. Ms. Weiss thanked the Commission and advised them if they had any questions or comments to let her know. 5. Recommendation to consider the Construction of a New Palo Alto Recycling Center and Improvements to the existing Household Hazardous Waste Drop-Off Facility - The item was introduced by Chair Walsh and Assistant Direct Bobel made a few remarks introducing Senior Engineer Matt Raschke who spoke on the item. He went through Phase I and Phase II components of the project, which included the improvements to the New Recycling Center and Improvements to the Existing Household Hazardous Waste Drop-Off Center. He added that the project was being integrated into the Water Quality Control Plant landscaping project. The cost estimate for the project is $525,000 which includes the small recycling center that is still uncertain may be eliminated. He also spoke on the HHW segment of the project saying it was the most expensive part to operate. The next step in this process is to have a study session with City Council on September 19th sharing the conceptual plans to date and all the feedback from the various commissions and boards. Timeline The tentative project timeline, subject to change, is as follows: Activity Estimated Completion Date Arts Commission presentation Thursday, June 23, 2011 Submit Major Review Application to Planning Tuesday, July 19, 2011 CEQA Initial Study – 20 Day Public Review - Begin Tuesday, July 26, 2011 Parks and Recreation Review Tuesday, July 26, 2011 Planning finalizes Major Review Application Sunday, August 07, 2011 CEQA Initial Study – 20 Day Public Review - End Tuesday, August 16, 2011 PTC Site and Design Review Wednesday, September 14, 2011 ARB Site and Design Review Thursday, October 06, 2011 City Council Site and Design Review Monday, November 07, 2011 Go out for Construction IFB Tuesday, November 08, 2011 Begin Construction Monday, February 20, 2012 End Construction Sunday, May 20, 2012 Oral Communications Herb Borock – Mr. Borock spoke on his concern related to the recycling center and that the Finance Committee voted unanimously to eliminate that from the City. The second concern he had was that the timeline provided shows the CEQA initial study starting today without having the environmental review done yet. Discussion Q: What are the reasons for the cost of having the hazard waste collection? Approved July 26, 2011 Draft Minutes 5 A: The cost is for the storage capacity for the hazardous waste and to collect more frequently versus the current process where it is collected every Saturday and shipped off the same day. Q: Why is the city collecting hazardous waste so close to the Bay? Are there other possible sites to do this? A: Other sites have been considered; such as the former Los Altos treatment site however having it at this location ties into the water treatment plant which already stores a significant amount of hazardous waste. Q: What is the size of the area for this project? A: Approximately a quarter acre as presented in the modified version without the recycling center. Without the recycling center there are still items that residents need to dispose of that won’t be picked up through the curbside process, items that are hazardous such as old medicine. These discussions and ideas still need to be thought through in the next couple of months. Q: What is the current program for recycling medicine? A: Medicine is accepted 5 days a week. We don’t want people flushing their medicines down the toilet, so the more convenient we make it, is what we will be striving for. The cost involved for controlling the problem is much more cost affective then what it would cost to clean up after the fact. Council Member Holman suggested having as much visual material as possible when presenting this project to Council. Also to make sure if relevant information comes up to include Parks and Recreation Commission in the dialogue. Commissioner Crommie would like to see some kind of table that lists what we have and what is needed with cost. Director Bobel replied and said they do have it and would provide it to the Commission. The plant list was also requested. No action was required at this time. 5a. Recommendation for priorities for the implementation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan – Chair Walsh provided an introduction to the item and staff de Geus introduced, Chief Transportation officer Jamie Rodriguez who was present to answer any questions that arose on the subject matter. Commissioner Hetterly, member of the Urban and Trails ad hoc committee began the topic by explaining the information that was provided in the Commissioners packet. She explained that the purpose was to take what the Commission felt was of high value and prioritize them to assist the Council when they were reviewing the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Commissioner Crommie added some information she learned from the consultant from Alta and design related to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The consultant said the 2011 version of the plan is to encourage interested but concerned bicyclists to utilize the city’s bicycle resources as well as pedestrians using the city’s trails. The Commission discussed the differences between the tiers as defined in their packets. Oral Communications Approved July 26, 2011 Draft Minutes 6 Kerry Kenny – Ms. Kenny expressed her support for the Ross Road bike boulevard in the prioritization of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. Mike Aberg – Mr. Aberg spoke on being an advent bicyclist and having Ross Road as a priority for a bike boulevard being the safest route for bicycling with his children. Pam Radin – Ms. Radin spoke on encouraging the Commission to support the Ross Road bike boulevard priority. Commented on all the community support that has been following this priority for over 3 years. John Abraham – Mr. Abraham spoke on supporting the Adobe Creek underpass versus the 101 overpass proposal. He felt with some changes the Adobe Creek underpass could be utilized more efficiently and cost effectively. Jeff Saunders – Mr. Saunders spoke in support of the Adobe Creek overpass proposal and would like to see the plan tie into the Sterling Canal which would make a safer route to Matadero Creek taking bicyclists and pedestrians off of West Bayshore and straight down Sterling Canal. Steve Sabbag – Mr. Sabbag spoke in support of the 101 Adobe bike overpass proposal. Discussion The Commission discussed the recommendation proposal from the ad hoc committee, some of the questions and concerns consisted of having a better understanding of the Ross Road bicycle blvd. Chief Officer, Jaime Rodriguez responded to these concerns. He also added that the Commission and public could access the current plan on line at www.cityofpaloalto.org/bike and submit any questions or comments related to the plan. Commissioner Crommie walked through the tiers in the ad hoc committee report and requested from the Commissioners their acceptance of how it was written. The Commission spent some time discussing the Lefkowitz Tunnel. Elizabeth Ames, Senior Engineer of Public Works responded to questions related to the opening and closing of the Lefkowitz Tunnel. The Commission provided some edits that included changing the wording on page 3; section Open Space Preserves under Tier II Priorities: Continue to explore options for safe and direct bicycle and pedestrian travel from Core Palo Alto to the Arastradero Open Space Preserve and Foothill Park, including the Bay to Ridge Trail. Also on page 4; section Creek trails, Tier II the word Charleston Road was removed after a comment from Chief Officer, Jaime Rodriquez said that it was not going to be feasible per the Santa Clara Water District. Motion: The Parks and Recreation Commission move to approve the recommendation made by the Creeks and Urban Trails Subcommittee as edited. Approved 6:1 (Markevitch) 6. Discussion on the need for additional parking for the El Camino Park Project – Staff de Geus introduced staff Anderson, Division Manager for Open Space, Parks and Golf Division. Staff Anderson discussed the options that the consultant Siegfried designed for Approved July 26, 2011 Draft Minutes 7 the El Camino Park fields to add additional parking to the project. He briefly went over the five scenarios that Siegfried designed using the existing 42 spaces: A - This would require a removal of a tree, gain 26 additional spaces, parking could be utilized by commuters, Red Cross users, McArthur park customers B - No loss of trees, difficulty in turning around, parking could be utilized by commuters, Red Cross users, McArthur park customers C – This would require a removal of tree, gain 22 spaces, the turn around is sufficient, parking could be utilized by commuters, Red Cross users, McArthur park customers D - By shifting the field further north, this concept would provide the most parking spaces with an additional 38 spaces; the obstacles would be a 40” diameter tulip popalar tree too close to the field, and the potential loss of two coast live oak trees. Staff Anderson said after reviewing these options with Siegfried, they were able to come up with another option E. E - This option shifts the field a few feet towards El Camino but avoids any potential problems with the trees. Twenty-nine additional parking spaces will be gained with this option. Access to the parking lot is ideal with this option. The cost is also minimal in compared to option D, more parking spaces adds to the cost. Staff feels that option E would be the best choice. Commissioner Walsh wanted it noted that some attention to an area for dropping and picking up should be considered when designing the parking lot, even if additional parking space had to be eliminated. After a brief discussion, the Commission concurred with staff and felt option E would be the most acceptable of the concepts. Commissioner Hetterly added as a back up to an alternate concept using the South side of the field, option C would be acceptable. Commissioner Crommie felt because of the cost involved, she did not agree with any of the options. . 7. Debrief joint study session with the Planning and Transportation Commission – Commissioner Chair recommended, due to the lateness of the meeting that Commissioners review the insert in their packets which references what was discussed in their joint study session with the Planning and Transportation Commission. Commissioner Crommie wanted to add an item related to Byxbee Park. Commissioner Walsh commented that as we move forward we can add to the list. She also added that discussion could continue at the September meeting. 8. Update on Project Safety Net Community Coalition and plans for 2011-12 – Staff de Geus provided a presentation on how Project Safety Net Community Coalition who worked on teen suicide prevention and youth well being has evolved, where they are going Approved July 26, 2011 Draft Minutes 8 from here. In September the Commission will discuss further what the Commissions role can be in supporting the Project Safety Net effort. 9. Update on the Comprehensive Plan – Community Services Element - Chair Walsh commented that the sub committee met a few times and further meetings are scheduled. More on the Comprehensive plan will be forth coming at the Commissions September meeting. V. COMMENTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Commissioner Crommie brought up the scheduling of an additional meeting related to the Bicycle Pedestrian 101 over pass meeting. Staff de Geus added that Public Works offered to have a special stakeholders meeting because of the oversight with the scheduling of the meeting tonight. Staff would arrange this meeting. 2. Staff de Geus commented that the Summer Aquatics program was going very well. VI. TENTATIVE AGENDA FOR SEPTEMBER 27, 2011 MEETING 1. Comprehensive Plan 2. Sub-committee updates 3. Trail development for Byxbee Park VII. ADJOURNMENT Adjourned at 11:10pm City of Palo Alto (ID # 3764) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval to Increase PO with One Workplace Title: Approval of Change to Purchase Order for One Workplace to Add $89,000 of Storage Costs for a Total Amount Not to Exceed $792,794 for Standard Furniture and Associated Storage Costs for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center From: City Manager Lead Department: Library Recommendation Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager or designee to approve an $89,000 increase to Purchase Order 4513000340 to One Workplace for storage of standard furniture for the Mitchell Park Library and Community Center building project for a total not to exceed $792,794. Background The Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, located at 3700 Middlefield Road, is a joint facility funded by the November 2008 voter-approved Measure N. The library will be a two- story 41,000 square foot facility adjacent to the 15,000 square foot single story community center, requiring the provision and installation of over 1,163 pieces of 85 different furniture bid items. A request for quotation for the provision of the selected standard furniture was issued in November 2011. Three proposals were received and evaluated, and in February 2012 staff recommended that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or designee to execute a purchase order with One Workplace (OWP) in the amount of $632,148 for standard furniture for the joint facility. At that time the facility was expected to open to the public in fall 2012. In May 2012, it became clear to City staff the project would be delayed and notified OWP to hold off placing the order for the standard furniture based on the analysis it would be more City of Palo Alto Page 2 cost effective to pay material price increases to purchase the furniture at a later date than to order the furniture and pay storage costs until the building was ready for furniture installation. In October 2012 Council approved a purchase order addition of $38,646 to cover price increases due to the delay and a $33,000 for contingency for a total not to exceed $703,794. At that time, the facility was expected to be completed in spring 2013. Discussion In November 2012, OWP completed ordering of furniture from approximately 25 different vendors, in anticipation of a February 2013 delivery and installation date per the Flintco construction schedule at that time. In December 2012 the construction schedule was extended by six weeks and the City asked OWP to investigate options and costs of both a delay in fabrication of the furniture and furniture storage until the project was ready for delivery and installation. Five of the 25 vendors had already started manufacturing and were directed to finish and ship their product to OWP for storage at OWP’s warehouse. An additional vendor was to complete manufacturing and store the product at its own warehouse. The approximately 19 remaining vendors were able to delay manufacturing dates to mid-February in anticipation of a mid-March delivery without any cost impact. In March 2013, the building construction schedule was again revised. The facility is now expected to open to the public in fall 2013. To respond to changing construction timelines with as much flexibility as possible, the City asked OWP for a price quote on both a monthly and weekly basis for the cost to store the furniture until October 2013. The storage costs are $8,385 per month. Additional costs were incurred in March when OWP moved offices and warehouses from Milpitas to Santa Clara and had to make special arrangements to transfer the finished product from six vendors to trailers outside the new office. Resource Impact Measure N bond funds already budgeted in a Mitchell Park capital project will be used to pay for the storage costs associated with construction. There is no impact on the General Fund. Environmental Review This is not a project requiring environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: Attachment A: One Workplace Quotations April 2013 (PDF) City of Palo Alto (ID # 3639) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: U.S. Post Office Purchase Title: Consideration of City of Palo Alto Offer to Purchase U.S. Post Office Building at 380 Hamilton Avenue and Agreement to Assume Enforcement of Historic Covenant (Continued from May 13, 2013) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends a Council MOTION to: 1. Authorize staff to submit and negotiate an offer to purchase the U.S. Post Office building at 380 Hamilton Avenue, as soon as the Post Office lists the U.S. Post Office Building for sale, and according to the parameters discussed in the concurrent Closed Session; and 2. Direct staff to represent to USPS the City’s willingness to accept the responsibility to hold the historic covenant to assure the historic integrity of the structure is protected. Executive Summary In February 2012, following a presentation to the public at a Council meeting, the United States Postal Service (USPS) announced its intention to sell the historic Palo Alto Post Office property on Hamilton Avenue. Council directed staff to prepare an analysis of the costs and benefits to the City of purchasing the historically significant property designed for the Palo Alto community by renowned architect Birge Clark in 1932. The analysis was to include possible City uses for the building and financial analysis for the purchase. City staff subsequently completed a number of professional studies to evaluate the Post Office structure, its potential to house City services, and to estimate the cost of seismic retrofit and upgrade to modern, conditioned office space. These studies conclude that the Post Office structure could be seismically retrofitted and upgraded to modern office space at a reasonable cost, while preserving the historic-defining characteristics of the structure. An appraisal of the building and site has been conducted but is confidential for negotiation purposes. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Once the potential use and improvement costs were determined, City staff evaluated the financing for a required ‘all cash’ offer. Financial estimates were based on the possible purchase price, plus necessary structural improvements, tenant improvements and rent savings. The tentative conclusion is that the purchase of the Post Office property makes economic sense, with a payback of approximately 10-15 years, whereas the expected life of the building after the proposed improvements is likely to be at least 30 years. Staff requests that Council provide direction to develop a formal offer to the USPS to be in a position to promptly submit the offer as soon as USPS lists the building. The purchase of the U.S. Post Office building would allow the City to protect and enhance an extremely valuable historic community resource, while relocating City office space to save money in the long run. Background The Palo Alto Post Office is both a historical treasure and a focal community resource for the City. In February 2012, the United States Postal Service (USPS) held a public hearing before the Palo Alto City Council to announce its intention to sell the Palo Alto Post Office property at 380 Hamilton Avenue. A fact sheet, including location map and historic background, is provided as Attachment A. The USPS noted that the property would be put on the market as a competitive sale and that only “all cash” offers would be considered, with no contingencies. At the close of the public hearing/meeting the City Council directed staff to undertake a due diligence study to determine the viability of the City purchasing the Post Office property. The minutes of the Council meeting are included as Attachment B. Staff has been in frequent contact with regional representatives of the USPS, who have most recently indicated that opening the bid process is probably at least 60 days away. Staff has also discussed these issues with the USPS Asset Manager in Washington, D.C., who has confirmed this timing. Staff and some Councilmembers have checked in as well with the City’s federal lobbyists, who have reported similar perspectives on the process and timing. Due Diligence Evaluation Planning staff, working with the Administrative Services and Public Works Departments, has conducted a series of professional studies in order to evaluate the viability of purchasing the Post Office property. These studies included: City of Palo Alto Page 3 Preliminary Title Report, June 1, 2012; Appraisal Report by Hulberg and Associates, July 3, 2012 (as this report was prepared for real estate negotiations, it is not public record at this point); Historic Assessment, Palo Alto Main Post Office, Architectural Resources Group, June 11, 2012; Addendum to Historic Assessment, Architectural Resources Group, October 26, 2012; Seismic Structural Engineering Report, Hohbach-Lewin Inc., June 25 2012; Conceptual Reuse and Conceptual Construction Cost Estimate Report, Hohbach-Lewin, Inc., August 30, 2012; and Fiscal Analysis prepared by the Palo Alto Administrative Services Department, January 2013. A summary of the findings of these studies concludes that while preserving its historic characteristics, the Post Office could provide about 20,000 net square feet (SF) of office space which could be made suitable for offices for City services, and/or for the possible lease of 3,200 SF to USPS for a retail postal outlet. The structural study indicates that cost would be prohibitive, however, to use the building for “essential” public safety services, so that potential relocation of City Police facilities to the building would not be feasible. 1. Zoning and Parking Requirements The property is currently zoned Public Facilities (PF). In order to accommodate commercial office use, the site would require a significant upzoning to Downtown Commercial (CD-C). It is not clear whether the City would permit this upzoning. The appraisal indicates that, whether in public or private ownership, the value of the property is affected by the fact that a substantial in-lieu parking fee (about $2.3 million) would need to be paid for the conversion of the basement and mezzanine areas to office use. 2. Historic Preservation The Post Office, designed by Birge Clark, is listed on the National Historic Registry of Historic buildings and is classified as Category 1 on the City of Palo Alto’s Historic Inventory. The historic architect determined that the structure completed in 1932 could be used for office or retail uses so long as the items identified as elements that contributed to the historic character of the structure were preserved. These elements include: The historic first floor lobby with high ceilings, heavy timber beams with wood corbels, and overhead wrought-iron grills located within the walls between the lobby and work area; Marble wainscot, marble floor pattern and tiles, pendant light fixtures, original post office boxes, paneled and glazed wood doors; City of Palo Alto Page 4 The Post Master’s Office and the loggia/porch; and The facades of the building that face the adjacent public streets. The historic architect prepared schematic plans that documented improvements that would be consistent with the historic structure and would enable modernization of the office space in the basement and on the mezzanine. These plans included restoring the skylight to bring natural light back into the first floor work area and expanding the existing mezzanine area by 3,150 SF. Historic preservation is implemented in the USPS sale process through Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. USPS is required to complete a report identifying historic-defining characteristics using the Secretary of Interior’s standards and to implement a covenant on the property that protects these characteristics. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) must approve USPS’s study and covenant before the property may be listed for sale. As of April 1, SHPO had not agreed with a proposed finding of No Adverse Effects caused by the sale of the Palo Alto Post Office, because USPS had not submitted the wording for the covenant and had not found a third party overseer for the covenant on the Palo Alto Post Office property. City staff has discussed with USPS the potential for the City to be designated in that role, and USPS has also had discussions with the Palo Alto-Stanford Heritage Association (PAST). Structural The structural engineer prepared a study to determine what seismic structural improvements consistent with the historic preservation criteria would be required to bring the structure up to a ‘satisfactory’ seismic rating, which is the typical rating for structures with office uses in the downtown area. Using the historic architect’s plans, the consultant also determined if the improvements needed for seismic stability and efficient use could be achieved structurally. Finally, a conceptual reuse and cost estimate was prepared to determine the cost to make the building seismically stable, to expand the mezzanine, and to complete interior shell improvements to support modern office space. Discussion The sale of the U.S. Post Office building provides a singular opportunity for the City to retain and enhance an iconic downtown community resource, while structuring a financing plan that should save the City lease costs adequate to pay for the building. Because of its location within a block of City Hall and its design for public access and service, the Post Office building is a very desirable location for the City’s Development Center. Relocating this City function from leased space to city owned space would establish a stable rent for the Development Center and help to stablilize the cost of this service to the City over time. Because of the size of the building, service to the public could also be made more efficient by consoldating the Planning and Community Development Department (currently on the fifth floor of City Hall) with the Development Center. There are many direct interconnections between the functions of the City of Palo Alto Page 5 Development Center and Planning and Community Environment. With the mezzanine expansion and use of a modernized full basement, there is more than enough space in the Post Office building to house these two functions. Presently the Development Center leases about 9,000 SF and the Planning and Community Environment Department occupies about 6,000 SF. The retail postal outlet, if included, would need about 3, 200 SF. Therefore, the 20,000 net square feet of the Post Office would accommodate all these uses while preserving the 2,400 SF historic lobby. The space opened up on the fifth floor of City Hall by relocation of the Planning and Community Environment could be occupied by some other city functions currently occupying leased space, which would further control off-site leasing costs. Alternatively, a portion of the ground floor of City Hall could be leased out to private or non-profit uses. Those uses have not yet been identified. Other City uses for the Post Office site can also be considered. Financial Feasibility The final step in the due diligence evaluation was to gather financial data to determine if it would be cost effective for the City to purchase the Post Office property. Finding that it was cost effective over a 10-15 year period, financing options were considered. To assess whether it is financially prudent for the City to purchase the Post Office property, the following factors were considered: Estimated acquisition, soft shell preparation, tenant improvement, and parking in-lieu costs; Rent costs to the City that would be eliminated at the current Development Center site and from other City-leased office space; Estimated revenue generated by leasing space back to USPS for a retail postal outlet; Leasing revenue without USPS occupancy; Estimated, potential rental income by relocating staff from one floor of City Hall and renting that space to a private party; Potential Transfer of Development Right (TDR) revenues were excluded from the analysis. The financial analysis shows that purchasing the Post Office property makes economic sense, particularly since the expected life of the improvements is likely to be 30 years instead of the 20 years assumed in the analysis. Using a payback measure based on how long it would take to recoup up-front capital costs from ongoing revenue streams, all scenarios indicated a payback period of about 15 or fewer years, far short of the building’s useful life. Using net present value calculations, positive results were shown over less than a 25-year period. An Internal City of Palo Alto Page 6 Rate of Return (IRR) analysis showed encouraging results with returns ranging from 5.9% to 8.9%. Financing options are discussed in the Resource Impact section below. Purchase Options Although the post office structure will provide about 20,980 net square feet of office space, because of the historic preservation requirement of retaining the existing lobby and post master’s office, the useable space on the most publically accessible first floor is limited to 6,760 SF, which is about the same square footage currently leased on the first floor by the Development Center. The historic architect’s plans indicate that about 30 feet of counter space can be created along the lobby wall, which will provide the Development Center adequate space for public interaction. Should a Retail postal outlet be included on the first floor, there would be about half the useable floor area and less counter space available to the Development Center. However, there would be considerably more square footage to support Development Center activities available on the other floors of the building. For these reasons it is recommended that the City Council consider two options for purchase: 1. Offer the USPS 3,200 SF on the first floor as a lease back based on a rent less than full market as an incentive for the purchase and use the remainder of the building for the Development Center, Planning and Community Environment Department and other City office space; or 2. Pursue a purchase option that does not include leasing space for a retail postal business and use the entire building for City office space. Because USPS has made it clear that they will consider favorably an offer that provides them a retail outlet without relocation, the City could ‘sweeten’ an offer which excludes USPS from the site by offering to assist USPS in finding an appropriate retail space within the downtown area (or perhaps leasing space to them on the ground floor of City Hall). Staff recommends that the City provide both options in its purchase offer to USPS. The price of the offer would be determined in a Council Closed Session. Historic Covenant The USPS is required to identify an organization or agency who would be responsible for enforcing a historic covenant to assure that the structure’s historic character is not diminished and that any alterations of the structure are consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Guidelines for Historic Rehabilitation. The City of Palo Alto currently fulfills this role when a private developer attains historic preservation bonuses or transfers for renovation of historic structures. For City-sponsored projects, the City has generally turned to outside groups, such as PAST, to assure enforcement of the covenant. City of Palo Alto Page 7 USPS has inquired to know if the City is interested in holding the covenant for the Post Office building. Staff recommends that the City acknowledge its willingness to accept the covenant responsibility, but reserve its right to contract with a third party to oversee the covenant or to seek reimbursement from USPS (or the purchaser) for all enforcement costs. Timeline USPS currently anticipates that it will take SHPO 30 days to review and make a finding of No Adverse Effect after USPS submits the covenant and names a covenant overseeer. USPS would expect to list the property 35 days after SHPO’s action. The earliest date for listing currently anticipated by USPS is June, 2013. Resource Impact Several financing options were evaluated, assuming a City purchase offer is accepted, including: 1. Issuance of Certificates of Participation to acquire the Post Office, with redirection of rental expenses that the City is currently paying to third parties to pay off the COPs; 2. Using part of the Stanford University Medical Center Development Agreement (DA) funds, which would reduce principal and interests costs and/or alternately the City could consider the funds drawn from the DA account as a loan to be repaid over time from available resource streams available by occupying the Post Office; or 3. Purchase the Post Office with existing funds from a combination of the Stanford University Medical Center DA, Infrastructure Reserve, and the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve, to later be reimbursed by potential General Obligation Bond proceeds (the use of GO bonds is time sensitive and must occur within 18 months after the expenditure is made). Staff recommends using Stanford University Medical Center Development Agreement funds for the immediate purchase, with replacement of the funding through the issuance of Certificates of Participation within 12 months of purchase. Savings from current leases, together with potential rental income from USPS or other third parties , would allow the City to cover its annual debt service payments and gain a valuable historic community asset. This option is particularly attractive with the low, current interest rates. Using rents also preserves cash in the long term in the City’s Infrastructure Reserve and the Stanford funds for future critical infrastructure needs. Policy Implications Purchase of the Post Office property by the City is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, including historic conservation policies. Use by the City and the USPS would require no City of Palo Alto Page 8 changes to the current zoning or Comprehensive Plan designation. Environmental Review Environmental review for the sale of the Post Office property is the responsibility of USPS. The agency must comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 which imposes the Secretary of Interior’s guidelines and requires review by the California State Historical Preservation Office. The property may not be sold until the California SHPO has made a finding of No Adverse Effect, including approval of the covenant to be placed on the property and the agency to oversee the enforcement of the covenant. Attachments: Attachment A: Post Office 380 Hamilton Fact Sheet (PDF) Attachment B: February 21, 2012 Council Excerpt Minutes (PDF) 02/21/2012 Special Meeting February 21, 2012 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 6:00 P.M. Present: Burt, Espinosa, Klein, Price arrived @ 6:10 P.M., Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh Absent: Holman, Scharff CLOSED SESSION 1. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY—EXISTING LITIGATION Subject: Schmidlin v. City of Palo Alto Sixth District Court of Appeal, Case No. H034169 Authority: Government Code section 54956.9(a) The City Council returned from the Closed Session at 7:00 P.M. and Mayor Yeh advised no reportable action. SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY 2. Adolescent Counseling Services- Community Presentation. Dr. Philippe Rey, Executive Director of Adolescent Counseling Services (ACS) spoke to the Council about the three main programs that his agency provides. These include the On-campus counseling program, which is on all public middle and high schools in Palo Alto, the Substance Abuse Treatment Program and the After-school Counseling Program. He thanked the Council for the ongoing support from the City through the funds received from the Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP.) He also explained the key role that ACS has taken in Project Safety Net, the community collaborative for suicide prevention and youth well-being. Opportunities to get involved at ACS include through monetary donations and serving on the board of directors. Dr. Rey invited the Council to attend their annual fundraiser, Spring Sounds, to be held on March 16, 6:30- 11:30pm at Club Illusions in Palo Alto. 3. Selection of Candidates to be Interviewed for the Public Art Commission for Three Terms Ending on April 30, 2015. 5 02/21/2012 13. Finance Committee Recommendation to Accept MGO’s Financial Statements and Letter. 14. Adoption of a Resolution 9231 Expressing Appreciation to William Berry Upon Completion of His Term as a Utilities Advisory Commissioner. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 Holman, Scharff absent ACTION ITEMS 15. Public Meeting for Presentation from U.S. Postal Service to Discuss Process for Disposition and Relocation of Post Office at 380 Hamilton Avenue. Director of Planning & Community Environment, Curtis Williams indicated the purpose of tonight's meeting was to allow the U.S. Postal Service to present information regarding the potential disposition and relocation of the Downtown Post Office. He stated Postal Service representatives would outline the process and schedule for a potential sale and would accept public comments now and through March 7. Staff expected, unless Council directed otherwise, to commission an appraisal of the site and to return to Council to discuss whether the City was interested in presenting an offer to purchase the site. He reported no Council action was requested at this time, but Staff had listed this as an Action Item in the event Council wished to provide direction. Jim Wigdell, USPS Communications, reported he was present to discuss the possible relocation of the Palo Alto Post Office currently located on Hamilton Avenue, which USPS called the Hamilton Station. He indicated he would discuss why they were here, the decision-making process, cost and community input. He stated there would be a comment period, which was important to him. He indicated he would discuss the financial condition of the Postal Service, and Ms. Alvarado would discuss the cost avoidance by relocating retail operations in Palo Alto. He stressed this was not a closure of the Palo Alto Hamilton Station; it was merely a relocation. He stated the community would still have the same retail services, the same PO boxes and everything available today; it may not be in the Palo Alto Hamilton Station going forward. Lastly he would discuss the next steps. He explained they were present because of 39 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 241.4, which was a federal law dealing with the relocation of Post Offices no matter where they were located in the country. He indicated there was another process they used for discontinuing a Post Office, 39 CFR § 241.3. He didn't want people to be confused by the two processes. 6 02/21/2012 He repeated this was strictly a relocation process. He stated part of the process was to have a public meeting to ensure increased opportunities for members of the community and local officials to convey their views concerning the contemplated project, and to have those views considered prior to any final decision. He explained the financial climate of the Postal Service had led them to doing these types of projects throughout the country. He noted there were several occurring on the Peninsula currently; the Palo Alto Hamilton Station, Sausalito, Half Moon Bay and a few other similar projects where they were considering selling large buildings and moving into a smaller footprint. He said the biggest problem was the decline of first-class mail volume. He reported in 2006 they had their best year ever as far as mail processing and mail volume, 213 billion pieces of mail; whereas, that count was down to about 168 billion pieces in 2011. He reported first-class mail was simply going away, and first-class mail was their biggest contributor to revenue. The Postal Service received no tax dollars; it was funded by the sale of stamps, other products and services. He said they had to cover their expenses, and so far they were having financial difficulties because of the decline of first-class mail. He reported over the last five years, they had had a decline of about 25 percent of first- class mail volume, and the Postal Service ended Fiscal Year September 30, 2011 with a net loss of $5.1 billion. In 2006 the Postal Enhancement and Accountability Act required the Postal Service to pay into the future retiree healthcare benefits approximately $5.5 billion a year. He explained that was why they were looking at not only changing the way they were doing business, but also looking at properties with high value and possibly relocating Postal Services and Operations to return money to the coffers. He noted traditional retail was declining; over the past six years, retail revenue had declined by over $2 billion and customer visits to Post Office lobbies had dropped by more than 200 million. He indicated 35 percent of all revenue was generated outside of postal facilities, such as ATMs and usps.com and contract postal units or village post offices. He stated they were changing the way they do business to embrace the new reality of the Postal Service. Diana Alvarado, USPS Real Estate Manager, explained a customer service facility was categorized by a facility that provided retail window service and P.O. boxes to the public. She stated any time the Postal Service had a plan to either expand, relocate or have new construction, they had to abide by the CFR and they must host a public meeting. She said it was important to note that this was not a closure or a consolidation. They were proposing to take retail services currently at the Palo Alto Hamilton Station and relocate them into the Downtown. One of the core strategies that the Postmaster General had created was for the Postal Service to become leaner, faster and smarter as an organization. They did that by optimizing their network, realigning the workforce, reducing energy and reducing physical footprint. The Hamilton Station building had 20,300 square feet, 7 02/21/2012 and the Postal Service could provide the same retail services in a 3,500 square foot footprint. By relocating into a right-sized facility, she stated they could have an annual savings of over $100,000 a year, mainly in utility and maintenance costs. She explained over a ten year period, they saved over $1 million from just one building in Palo Alto, which was why they were doing this everywhere. She stated Palo Alto currently had six retail sites. She noted they typically considered sites within 2 1/2 miles, but this would push the Hamilton Station into another facility, so they didn't want to do that. She said they had an asset manager assigned to the project, and all dispositions were operated from the facility's headquarters. She reported due diligence meant ordering appraisals, surveys and internal documents, and they were contracting for a historical consultant. She stated the Postal Service understood the importance of keeping the characteristics of the historical building. She indicated that the historical consultant would be working closely with the State Historical Preservation Officer (SHIPO) to define the covenants and restrictions on the historical building, and the covenants and restrictions would be placed on the deed for whoever purchased the facility. She reported the next steps were to obtain a local broker as the Postal Service had a national contract with CB Richard Ellis. She said they would advertise the property for sale, at which point they would determine qualifications and obtain a best and final offer. She stated it was important to know this proposal was contingent upon locating an acceptable buyer and finding an acceptable relocation space. Mr. Wigdell stated considerations in the decision-making process were community input. He reported the community would have an opportunity to comment up to 15 days following the community input meeting, which was the comment period. He said anybody could write a letter, if they wished. He noted this particular Post Office had been located on Hamilton Avenue for a very long time. He assured the public that any Post Office boxes and corresponding numbers would transfer to the new location, so the consumers would not have to change their address. He said mail delivery would not change the results of this possible relocation of the Hamilton Station. He noted mail delivery would not be affected at all as letter carriers were located in a different building. He explained the Postal Service would make a recommendation, which would be forwarded to USPS headquarters in Washington, D.C. along with the cost analysis and any community input. He stated headquarters would either concur with the recommendation or make a recommendation of its own or stop the process. He reported if the recommendation was to go forward with the proposal, the Postal Service would notify the community of its decision and the community would be given an opportunity to appeal to Washington, D.C. He said they would post the instructions for appeal. He stated the community had 15 days following the public input meeting, until March 7, to send letters and comments to Diana Alvarado at the Pacific Facility 8 02/21/2012 Service Office at the address noted. He stated the Postal Service had a representative present to take notes during the comment period, and those comments would become part of the public record while they formulated their decision. Council Member Burt wished them luck in finding reasonably priced commercial property in Downtown Palo Alto. He asked if they would consider simply reducing the size of services at the present location. Ms. Alvarado stated everything was under consideration at this point. Council Member Burt asked specifically if that was something they were presently considering or had already considered. Ms. Alvarado indicated many developers had asked about the property and asked if they would be willing to stay. She stated they would evaluate everything. She repeated the disposition was handled in Washington, D.C. and all decisions would be made there. She said they would put it all into a formalized report and send it back to Washington, D.C. Council Member Burt inquired how far along they were in looking at alternatives, because it seemed that they would have a hard time in their price range in Downtown Palo Alto. He asked why they wouldn’t want to shrink the size and stay in that location. Ms. Alvarado repeated it was not a local decision, but they would move it forward. She thought it would be considered. Council Member Burt asked if they would be making recommendations. Ms. Alvarado replied absolutely. Council Member Burt inquired why that wouldn’t be their first recommendation. Ms. Alvarado indicated it would be a recommendation. Council Member Klein asked how the USPS covered that deficit, where did the $5 billion come from. Mr. Wigdell replied from sale of the Palo Alto Post Office and others like it around the country. He explained the USPS had a $15 billion credit limit with the Federal Government, and had been tapping into that, and were very close to reaching the limit. He reported the Postmaster General had stated, barring any Congressional changes, the USPS would be out of cash by the middle or end of this year 9 02/21/2012 Council Member Klein noted they didn't discuss the use of sales proceeds. Assuming the property sold for $x million, he asked where the $x million went. Ms. Alvarado stated it went into the general fund of the Postal Service. Council Member Klein thought that would be one way to reduce the annual deficit. Ms. Alvarado answered correct. Mr. Wigdell said this program was part of a larger program of the Postal Service to become solvent by the year 2015 or so, and involved other closures and consolidations and reducing deliveries. Council Member Klein inquired if the highest bid always won. Ms. Alvarado responded no. Council Member Klein asked what went into that decision. Ms. Alvarado explained the highest bidder may not always have the cash or have acceptable credit or propose a suitable use for the property. Council Member Klein inquired if there was a discount for local governments. Ms. Alvarado suggested the City put in an offer. Council Member Klein asked if discounts were in a written policy in the Postal Service or if they had been carried out in actual practice. Ms. Alvarado was not aware of any discounts. Council Member Klein proposed the following scenario: three credible buyers, one bid x amount and wanted to develop it into an office building, another bid a little less than x amount and wanted to turn it into a hotel, and the City bid half of x amount to keep the property in public use. He asked how the Postal Service decided who won the property. Ms. Alvarado couldn't answer that question right now. Council Member Klein inquired how the Council could get guidance on that. Ms. Alvarado said she had provided the name of the asset manager and suggested the City submit a letter of intent. 10 02/21/2012 Council Member Klein indicated the property was zoned PSOSNAC, meaning governmental, public utility, educational, community service and recreation. He asked whether a business developer made an offer contingent on rezoning. He also inquired what the Council's rules were with respect to a prospective buyer. City Attorney, Molly Stump explained that kind of thing could be handled through a contingency. She believed the Postal Service in this case had indicated that they were interested in proposals that would be free of contingencies. She stated that meant, for a proposal to be considered, the purchaser would have to assume the risk of a subsequent zone change if that was the buyer's plans for the facility. She said that would potentially come before the Council at a future date for the Council's consideration. Council Member Klein inquired if the Council was under any obligation to change the zoning given the General Plan Designation of Regional Community Commercial area. Ms. Stump thought the Council would have to work with Staff on any proposal, and it would be in the future in terms of the City having to review its potential. She wasn't sure she was in a position to state exactly the limits of the Council's discretion. She indicated they would have to look at that going forward. City Manager, James Keene thought the City would not be under any obligation to rezone the property based upon the Postal Service agreeing to sell the property to a buyer who was assuming risk. He thought the sale itself didn't put the Council in a situation where it was required to make that change. Council Member Klein asked if it was fair to say that a potential buyer would take that into account and be less willing to pay top dollar. Mr. Keene answered unless there was some benefactor who just generously wanted to buy it for the City and build a building for the City on his place, yes. Council Member Klein hypothesized that Mr. Donald Developer bought the property subject to current zoning restrictions, and a year later he wanted it rezoned to the equivalent of all the surrounding property, and asked if the Council could legally say no to that. Ms. Stump stated he was asking a question containing many hypothetical elements, and thought Staff would have to review the situation at that point and what was in the best interest of the City, then make a 11 02/21/2012 recommendation to the Council. She indicated the Council would have some discretion to consider any request for a zone change that came before the Council. Council Member Espinosa was interested in learning more about the decision process as it seemed to rest in D.C. He was trying to understand how the conversation happened between the Council and USPS to make sure they understood the real estate market Downtown. He asked if the USPS representatives had shared that information so the people in Washington, D.C. would understand which options really made sense. He wanted to make sure the folks in the decision-making seat were receiving information about a unique real estate market. Ms. Alvarado explained when the concept first came about and the planners put it together, they considered the local real estate market as well as the capital expenditure it would require to build out that property, and weighed it against what they thought they could get for the Palo Alto Hamilton Station along with the operational savings. She reported it went through three levels of approval, and it passed all three levels of approval. She stated they had local brokers giving them the prices, and they understood prices were high. Council Member Espinosa inquired if teams from D.C. viewed sites physically or through information when considering options. Ms. Alvarado stated the Facilities Vice President had viewed the property and surrounding area two weeks ago. She repeated staying in the location was possible. Council Member Espinosa asked if any of the examples of property sold had been sold to government agencies. Ms. Alvarado did not know, but stated she could follow up. Council Member Espinosa inquired where the Council fit into the timeline and where in the decision-making process would the USPS be returning for feedback or decision from Council Members. Mr. Wigdell explained the USPS was in the very early stages. He agreed this was a relatively complicated process. He stated the initial step was meeting with the City of Palo Alto, and the next step was the public input meeting. He stated they would wait the 15-day period, but the Asset Management Group had to perform due diligence which was the next step. He did not have a firm timeline on that. 12 02/21/2012 Council Member Espinosa asked if that process was taking four months or 1 1/2 years. Ms. Alvarado indicated due diligence typically required 90 days; however, this one could be longer because they had to rely on the SHIPO to be timely. She explained they typically marketed the property for 90 days, and after that it was probably another 30 days to review qualifications, and probably two weeks to 30 days for a best and final offer. She reiterated finding a qualified buyer and an acceptable location were challenges. She indicated they had to satisfy operational folks, which might be even more difficult. Council Member Espinosa inquired where in the sales process did they return to Council or work with Staff to resolve issues. He asked if there were other public meetings. He wanted to understand when the Council would participate in the process. Mr. Wigdell stated as the process unfolded, the asset manager became involved, due diligence occurred, and the property went on the market, and he wouldn't keep the City Council in the dark. He said there wasn't a specific timeframe when they would return to the Council, but if necessary they would. He indicated there was no requirement for an additional public meeting according to the CFR, but they would keep the Council informed as things proceeded. Council Member Espinosa inquired if any of the other sites had plans for change. Ms. Alvarado answered no. She explained delivery from Menlo Park would probably go into the Palo Alto main office. Council Member Schmid was concerned about how much time potential buyers would have to assess the value of the property once it went on the market. Ms. Alvarado stated approximately 90 days. Council Member Schmid asked if they knew what the earthquake rating of the building was and, if someone was interested in remodeling the interior, were there constraints because of earthquake standards. Ms. Alvarado didn't know, but imagined they would have to follow Code. Council Member Schmid confirmed she couldn't say anything about the existing building structure. In terms of the value of the property, he 13 02/21/2012 noticed that around it was a number of other PFs which were parking. He asked if the City owned those parking lots. Mr. Williams replied yes. Council Member Schmid asked if the City had options along with this property or neighboring properties. Mr. Williams answered correct. Council Member Schmid noted that the City was currently paying parking assessments, which were quite substantial. He asked what that amount was. Mr. Williams replied the site was assessed for 28 parking spaces with an assessment of $140,000, and the City of Palo Alto paid that. Council Member Schmid asked if it was paid each year or a one-time payment. Mr. Williams thought it was either paid at one time or paid over a number of years, but the City was not paying it currently. Council Member Schmid inquired if the City would be reimbursed if the property was transferred. He asked if the parking was being sold along with the property. Mr. Williams indicated the parking did go along with the property, to the extent that there were discretionary approvals associated with that. He indicated they could have a discussion about recouping the cost of that assessment or buying into the Parking District. Council Member Schmid thought there were annual assessments for the Parking District. Mr. Williams stated he would have to check. He thought some property owners had paid upfront and in some instances the City had done that. Council Member Schmid stated any private party that bought the property would have to understand the relationship to the parking assessment and whether that continued or not and whether there was an obligation on it. Mr. Williams replied yes. Council Member Shepherd mentioned the Azula property where Sunnyvale obtained access to former military property without cost. She explained 14 02/21/2012 there was no cost because Foothill College and a park would be located there. She asked why this sale was different from that sale, and why couldn't this sale be like that. Mr. Wigdell indicated that was not their area of expertise, but stated the USPS was not subsidized by taxpayer dollars, so the USPS was a quasi- governmental agency. Ms. Alvarado explained the Federal Acquisition Act did not apply to the Postal Service because it was not subsidized by tax dollars. Council Member Shepherd inquired whether the USPS was looking for a statement from the City of Palo Alto regarding zoning Ms. Alvarado answered they were not looking for that at this time. Council Member Shepherd explained the property's zoning affected the price the USPS would get. She would rather see the Postal Service receive their fair share of that if there was going to be any other consideration. She asked if there had been a presentation for the Palo Alto Unified School District. Ms. Alvarado stated this was the public meeting. Council Member Shepherd inquired if the Council could ask to be part of the sale process in order to review proposals that would complement the type of interest the City had of keeping it a public facility site. Ms. Alvarado explained the City was not typically part of the process. She indicated they could include the City on information sent to Washington, D.C. Council Member Shepherd explained the City prepared zones to build what it wanted and to support what it wanted. She knew the Council had been looking at public facility sites. She wanted to understand if there was a way the City could become part of that process. She asked if the building was in good condition or was it being sold as-is. Ms. Alvarado indicated that a building assessment would be disclosed to the buyer. She had checked the response line and there were no roof leaks. She suggested asking the station manager who was present. She explained the appraisal would provide a good idea of the condition of the building. 15 02/21/2012 Council Member Shepherd requested the City become a hard stop in the process at some point in time, so that the City could work in concert with the buyer. Council Member Price inquired if it was possible to contact the Asset Management Group in Washington, D.C. to determine if there were examples of partnership opportunities with local government. She recognized that was not Ms. Alvarado's specialty, and asked if the Council could make those inquiries to determine if there were some successful examples. Ms. Alvarado answered absolutely; that's why they had provided the asset manager's name in the presentation. Council Member Price thought it was better to present an argument in person, and felt the Council should present its case in person. She encouraged Staff to pursue that. She inquired if there was ever Congressional interest in the deliberations around these kinds of sites. Mr. Wigdell said it depended on the situation. He noted there was a lot of Congressional interest when the Hillsborough Post Office burned down and had to be relocated. Council Member Price thought it advisable for the Council to consider contacting their representatives, if needed. She noted the presentation didn't include anticipated costs in terms of rent and overhead for a smaller location. Ms. Alvarado replied that information was considered proprietary and a part of the study. Council Member Price stated a structural engineering assessment would be performed to answer questions. She explained this was an exquisite building built by architect Burge Clark who was a founding member of the American Institute of Architects Santa Clara Valley. Mayor Yeh asked for a walk-through of some of the physical requirements for a building for USPS services. Ms. Alvarado replied they needed a building of approximately 3,500 square feet that would house three retail counters, Post Office boxes, an automated postal unit, a small platform, security, and customer parking, Mayor Yeh noted the current site had a mail island. 16 02/21/2012 Ms. Alvarado said they called that a snorkel lane, which was no longer a part of the design standard. She noted the snorkel lane could be removed to allow more parking. She suggested the Council approach the USPS about that; they'd be willing to work with the Council on that. Mayor Yeh asked Staff if the City usually relied upon an appraisal obtained by the property owner or obtained an independent appraisal or property assessment. Mr. Keene thought the Council had some discretion, but practice was to obtain an independent appraisal for transparency and validation for the Council on any spending decision. Mayor Yeh was curious about the construction options for the actual building. He assumed there were protections for changing the building itself, and inquired if there were options for construction around the building. Mr. Williams thought there were probably some options for building around the building, not in front of the building. He explained any construction would need to be consistent with the Secretary of Interior standards. He indicated it might be possible to have some kind of addition or separate structure behind the building, but Staff did not have a detailed analysis of that. Mr. Keene understood the Postal Service was required to sell the property at the appraised value, with that being based on existing zoning, the historical nature and requirements, building conditions and market factors. He asked if there were any circumstances where the Postal Service would sell the property for less than the appraised value, separate from something related to the relocation piece. Ms. Alvarado stated they would need special approvals to sell below appraised value. Mr. Keene asked if they had done that before. Ms. Alvarado stated her office had not done that, but she was sure it had been done around the country. Priscilla Bates was somewhat reassured by learning that the Postal Service was interested in relocation, which is what she thought they needed. She thought the City needed a Post Office location Downtown. She stated it was easy to go to the Post Office while doing a number of other errands. She hoped Palo Alto could consider buying that building and using it for Post Office space and some of the other space the City needed for its 17 02/21/2012 services. She thought the Postal Service needed an efficient building Downtown, maybe a high-story building, and wasn't concerned if the Post Office was demolished. Muriel Gravina was reassured by the Council's comments, because she was afraid it was a done deal. She noted one reason for the disposal of the Hamilton Post Office was the sluggish economy. She stated the economy goes in cycles and thought Silicon Valley's economy would rise. She thought prices for property and rental space would continue to rise. She asked what percentage of the $5.1 billion deficit was attributable to the Post Office in Palo Alto. She felt Washington, D.C. would ignore local history and needs. She indicated the national retail figures on page 3 were again national and not local figures. Stephanie Munoz stated the most encouraging thing she had heard all evening was the possibility of the Post Office remaining at the current location. She also had the impression that this was a done deal and the Federal Government was going to sell this property. She indicated the Postal Service was planning on selling a building which was built with taxpayer dollars as it was a gift to the City of Palo Alto. She stated the value of the property depended entirely on zoning. She indicated the parking lot could be intensively developed. Jean Bozman stated the building was finished in 1932 and dedicated by Ogden Mills, Secretary of the Treasury. She noted a lot had changed in the intervening years. She indicated there were some benefits to being grandfathered out of whatever happened in 1932. She said it was sad that the building was constructed during the Great Depression and in the current Great Recession it was being sold. She stated there were very real monetary issues. She agreed with Council Member Burt's comments regarding the dynamics of Palo Alto. She stated the building was unique, located in the center of town, and an icon and symbol of Palo Alto's right- sized architecture. She explained the scale, setbacks, landscaping and classic design were emblematic of Palo Alto. She noted there was a lot to recommend preserving it. Robert Moss stated relocating Downtown would not save the Postal Service money. He indicated a 3,500 square foot building located on the fringes of Downtown would cost about $150,000 per year, so the Postal Service would lose $50,000 a year. He explained the selling price would have to be based on existing zoning; the Postal Service couldn't assume it would be zoned anything other than PF. If the Postal Service remained in the building and sold the remaining portions, he thought the City should purchase it. He suggested the City move the Development Center there; move Emergency Services, 911 or Public Safety there; or, utilize the basement for Police Department storage and the upstairs for the 18 02/21/2012 Development Center. He felt the cost of purchasing the space would be significantly less than purchasing new property. Herb Borock believed it was appropriate for the Council and Staff to consider acquiring this property. He noted the adjacent parking lot was the site of the farmer's market, and an alternative location would need to be found for that. He explained that a request for rezoning required action by the Council and was subject to a referendum. He would have liked to see a floor plan of the current site and the amount of square footage currently being used by the Postal Service. Regarding the issue of a study or report not available through the Freedom of Information Act, he suggested it could be available at the request of a member of Congress. Mayor Yeh asked the representatives of the USPS if they wished to respond to comments and questions raised by the public. Mr. Wigdell appreciated the community's input. He understood the Postal Service was near and dear to everybody's heart. He stated Council Member Burt's comments about the specialness of the Downtown area were important. He indicated they were present to hear these comments. He stated they had been taking notes, and would find answers to the questions they couldn't answer specifically. With regard to the comment of the financial information being national numbers, he explained the USPS did not release local financial information. He stated the financial bind was a national problem, and required drastic steps. He indicated it was not a financial problem with the local Palo Alto Post Office; it was a national problem with finances. He stated the retail Post Office with all services would remain in the basic area. He thanked everyone for their comments and feedback. MOTION: Council Member Price moved, seconded by Council Member Schmid that the City Council direct Staff to; 1) conduct an independent property appraisal of the site, and 2) conduct a preliminary examination of various adaptive reuse concepts and other uses of the immediate vicinity for further Council consideration. Council Member Price thought this was an opportunity for the Council to be creative. She stated this was a key facility and location within the City of Palo Alto. She thought an independent assessment of the value of the site was critical information needed to fully engage in a discussion. She believed an independent appraisal was appropriate. She said various concepts, partnerships and financing models should be fully examined for the use of the building, site and immediate vicinity. She suggested Staff contact the Asset Management Group of USPS to clarify questions raised by Council Members regarding the process and to determine examples of various outcomes in other 19 02/21/2012 parts of the country where there had been effective and productive use of a public facility such as a Post Office building. Council Member Schmid added that timing would be important. He indicated there would not be much time to consider options once the clock started running. Council Member Klein suggested adding some of Council Member Price's remarks as a third item. He stated decisions would be made in Washington, D.C.; therefore, it made sense to talk with the actual decision makers. He thought the City's Washington lobbyists could be helpful. He didn't understand the USPS not disclosing information regarding expenses. He stated rents were well known. He thought the only way to save money, as discussed, was to retain space at 380 Hamilton. He believed the USPS would lose money other than the proceeds from the sale. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to direct Staff to establish contact with the USPS Asset Management staff in Washington, D.C. using our Staff, Council Members (if appropriate), and our Washington, D.C. Lobbyists. Council Member Shepherd inquired how complicated would it be if the City were to determine a venue that would allow the USPS to save the 3,500 square foot space, and what kind of considerations could the representatives take back to Washington, D.C. for purchase price. She asked how would that be evaluated and were they looking to remain in the building. Ms. Alvarado stated she was not the decision maker, and asked the Council to submit a proposal. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER that included in Staff’s evaluation consideration of an option in a proposal that the USPS would have a lease tied to the purchase price of the property at 380 Hamilton Avenue. Mr. Keene stated it was clear this was an option, not a requirement, and there could be variations. Council Member Shepherd stated the Council could quantify it based on market rents and market forces in exchange for dedicated space on some City property in Downtown Palo Alto. Council Member Schmid suggested changing lease to partnership, which could be a lease, a partial purchase, or ownership of a part. 20 02/21/2012 Council Member Shepherd was fine with either term; although, she thought the USPS did not want to be the deed holder on the property. Mr. Keene stated discussions of proposals with price and terms could be appropriate for Closed Session with the Council. Staff understood the intent of the Motion was to be directive and illustrative rather than prescriptive of everything to be considered. He thought Staff understood they were to bring back a range of options and possibilities for consideration. He suggested the Council not try to identify every possible scenario, but keep it open-ended. Council Member Shepherd wanted to bookmark the discussion so the USPS would understand the City was interested in keeping the Postal Service Downtown. She thought this would allow the USPS to meet changing needs and keep public facility space at the highest and best use. Council Member Espinosa supported the Motion. He was interested in preserving the building and honoring it and its context within the street and Downtown while thinking creatively about the maximum use of the remainder of the space. He thought there were some unique opportunities given the parking lots and the shape and structure of the building. Mayor Yeh asked Staff when this Item would return to the Agenda so that members of the public would be aware of additional opportunities for comment. Mr. Keene indicated the timeframe was constrained given the schedule the Postal Service had noted. He noted there would be opportunity for Closed Sessions, and anticipated an Open Session between now and the time of submitting a proposal. He stated there would be at least one more public meeting before the May timeframe identified by the Postal Service representatives. Mayor Yeh recalled the USPS was required to have one public meeting, and stated an open meeting under the auspices of the City of Palo Alto would be open to USPS participation. Council Member Price thought it would be useful for the Council to understand the impact of this on Staff's work plan. Mr. Keene stated this was an important step and a wise move by the Council. He argued that the City's interest in being a potential bidder strengthened the City position as it related to maintenance of the existing PF zoning on that location. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-0 Holman, Scharff absent City of Palo Alto (ID # 3817) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Downtown Parking Garage Study Update Title: Update of and Direction for Downtown Parking Garage and Attendant Parking Study and Implementation of Trial Attendant Parking at Lot R From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends a Council MOTION to: 1. Return to Council in June with a review of the proposal for a private-public parking garage on Lot P; and 2. Direct staff to report the Downtown Parking Garage and Attendant Parking Feasibility Study findings to the Planning and Transportation Commission for recommendations for priority next steps in pursuing development of other new downtown parking garage sites: and 3. Authorize staff to implement a trial attendant parking study at Lot R – Alma Street/High Street (South) Parking Garage. Executive Summary A Downtown Parking Garage and Attendant Parking Feasibility Study was commissioned as part of a series of initiatives to evaluate near-term parking strategies. This study analyzes how the City can better utilize Downtown parking assets, in order to protect nearby residential areas from commercial parking intrusion, while continuing to support downtown economic growth. The study evaluates five existing surface Downtown parking lots, including a comparative analysis of constructability factors. Each site is evaluated as a potential parking garage site, and the comparison is intended to determine the best return on investment, if the City opts to pursue construction. The study also includes a feasibility analysis regarding the use of attendant parking to “stack” additional vehicles in the drive aisles of the garages to provide additional parking permit spaces for use by downtown employees. The attendant would be responsible City of Palo Alto Page 2 for guiding motorists to parking spaces with aisles of the garage, taking possession of the vehicles after the owner parks it, and moving the vehicles to regular parking spaces as they become available. Finally, the attendant would return the keys to the owner when the owner returns to the garage. This report provide a status update on the Downtown Parking Garage and Attendant Parking Feasibility Study to-date; when the final report is complete staff present the findings to the Planning & Transportation Commission for additional input and direction. Staff will also return to the Council in June with a more specific review and recommendation related to the public-private parking lot proposal for Lot P. Staff recommends that the Council receive the report and provide input on the study, and then direct the Planning and Transportation Commission to provide further recommendations on next steps for the other potential sites. Staff also recommends that a one-year attendant parking trial be implemented at Lot R (Alma Street/High Street South). Background Downtown Palo Alto is a regional destination that includes numerous successful retail businesses, restaurant space, and office uses, as well as a variety of other land uses. All of these uses generate a high demand for parking, despite high transit ridership in the area. Therefore, while it is critically important that the City continue to encourage Downtown employees to use alternative modes of transportation, the City must also efficiently utilize existing parking assets, as well as plan for increasing supply to meet demand. The existing Downtown parking inventory includes a mix of surface lots, parking structures, public-private parking structures, and on- street supply identified in Table 1 below. Table 1 Number of Parking Spaces in Downtown Palo Alto Off-Street Parking Facilities Garages Surface Lots Letter Name Hourly Permit Total Letter Name Hourly Permit Total Q Alma/High (North) - 134 134 O Emerson/High 78 - 78 R Alma/High (South) 77 134 211 A Emerson/Lytton 68 - 68 S/L Bryant St 381 307 688 C Ramona/Lytton 50 - 50 WC Cowper/Webster 201 388 589 F Florence/Lytton 46 - 46 CC City Hall 187 519 706 H Cowper/Waverly 90 - 90 B Ramona/University 63 - 63 D Hamilton/Waverly 86 - 86 800 800 High Street 10 53 63 EG Gilman St - 87 87 P High/Hamilton 51 - 51 City of Palo Alto Page 3 KT Lytton/Kipling 40 67 107 N Emerson/Ramona 48 - 48 X Sheridan Hotel - 36 36 Total No. Spaces: 932 1522 2454 Total No. Spaces: 557 190 747 In 2011, the City began an extensive parking monitoring program in response to concerns regarding parking intrusion from the Downtown into the adjacent Downtown North and Downtown South residential communities. The program includes semi-annual parking occupancy counts of all residential streets and surfaces lots/parking garages within the Greater Downtown Area bounded by Palo Alto Avenue to the North, Middlefield Road to the East, Embarcadero Road to the South, and Alma Street to the West. In 2013, additional parking occupancy monitoring east of Middlefield Road (north of University Avenue) also began to further evaluate the Downtown parking impact on surrounding residential communities. Additional analysis East of Middlefield Road (south of University Avenue) will be scheduled in the Fall 2013. In November 2012, the City also started a series of near-term parking improvement projects that were authorized by the City Council during their November 13, 2012 meeting. The near- term projects include: Outreach with residential and business Interests to help identify and build consensus around immediate pilot parking projects such as parking considerations for management through signage restrictions and programs such as residential parking permit programs; Planning Studies (Development Cap Study) to evaluate the feasibility of building new parking structures, operations analysis’ to evaluate strategies for help make existing parking structures for efficient, and policy studies to measure the relativeness of existing parking and zoning policies in the Downtown to current and future growth needs; Technology Research to identify technology solutions to help improve the efficiency of the Downtown Parking Program The City contracted with the Sandis Engineering/HNA Pacific Team to evaluate the feasibility of constructing additional parking structures in and around the Downtown as well as to identify the feasibility of using attendant parking to help increase the parking permit capacity of existing parking structures. The remainder of this report focuses on the findings of this study. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Five existing surface parking structures were analyzed as part of the Parking Garage Feasibility portion of the study, including four of the surface parking lots within the Downtown and one surface parking lot located immediately west of Downtown on Urban Lane, a parking lot operated by Caltrain for commuter rail parking. The five surface parking lots, in alphabetical order, include: Lot D Hamilton Avenue/Waverly Street Lot EG Gilman Street Lot O Emerson Street/High Street Lot P High Street/Hamilton Avenue Lot UL Urban Lane Caltrain Commuter Rail Park and Ride Lot The Parking Garage Feasibility study includes analyzing constructability factors to identify sites that yield the best cost-benefit ratio for construction of new parking structures. The Attendant Parking study includes identifying how many additional parking permits can be released if vehicles were “stacked” in drive aisles of the garage with management by a parking attendant. The attendant would collect and redistribute vehicles into parking spaces as motorists exit the parking garage following their visit to Downtown. Discussion Each of the five existing surface parking lots were analyzed against the following constructability factors to help identify which lots would be most appropriate for construction of new parking structures in comparison to one another: Adjacent Property Impacts: The land uses and buildings adjacent to each site were evaluated to assess the benefit or constraints that a parking structure may yield post-construction. Lots adjacent to properties that rely on the lot for loading operations received less points in this category than lots that do not support the operations of adjacent properties. Construction and Staging Impacts: This category assesses construction staging impacts to adjacent business and properties. Lots that would displace existing business operations received less points than lots that do not impact adjacent businesses. Each site, though, would displace existing parking operations through construction. Access Points: The more access points that a site can provide yields a better garage operation and promotes use of the garage by allowing users to more easily identify and access the garage. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Adjacent Land Use: Land use on each street of Downtown varies with some streets supporting strong retail use such as Emerson Street, while others support office uses. Lots that result in parking structures of similar size and mass received more points in this category than lots that yield inconsistent size and mass to adjacent land uses. Utility Impacts: The need to relocate existing utilities from an existing lot that support adjacent land uses or city infrastructure results in higher construction costs for a parking structure. Lots with minimal utility impacts received higher points in this category than lots with utility relocation requirements. Net Stall Gain: The intent of building a parking structure is to provide additional parking spaces. For Downtown Parking Operations, Permit Parking Spaces are the most important to ensure parking space availability. Lots that yield higher parking space counts compared to the current surface parking lot use receive more points in this category. Cost/Stall: The more parking spaces that can be yielded on an existing surface parking lot result in a lower cost per stall ratio. The lower the cost per stall ratio for each site, the more points the lot receives. Site Potential for Development: Using an existing surface parking lot to build a parking structure isn’t necessarily the highest and best use of the land, in an area as valued as Downtown Palo Alto. Therefore, the potential for alternative developments must also be evaluated. Corner sites, for example, yield higher land values or development opportunities than mid-block sites. As part of this study, each site was equally impacted in this category and a consistent value allotted. The evaluation of each surface parking lot includes an existing conditions assessment that documents adjacent land uses, utility use, and land use constraint such as shared access easements with adjacent properties. In addition, for each site a massing perspective was developed to help evaluate and assign values to the constructability factors as were typical parking structure floor plans to help identify parking space yield for each site (see Attachment A – Progress Drawings for Parking Garage Structures). Table 2 summarizes the Parking Space Counts for each of the prospective parking structure sites from Attachment B. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Table 2 Downtown Palo Alto Parking Garage Feasibility Study PRELIMINARY Parking Structure Option Details Lot # Location Ex. # Spaces Parking Structure Base Details Attendant Parking Option # Floors Height # Parking Spaces Parking Space Gain # Stacked Spaces Total Space Capacity D Hamilton/Waverly 86 5 60’-0” 300 +214 85 385 E Gilman St (West) 34 5 63’-2” 75 +41 27 102 G Gilman St (East) 53 5 63’-11” 166 +113 33 199 EG Gilman St (Combined) 87 5 63’-2” 268 +181 88 356 O Emerson/High 78 5 60’-0” 223 +145 52 275 P High/Hamilton 51 5 60’-9” 140 +89 42 182 UL Urban Lane 164 5 60’-0” 478 +3141 N/A2 N/A2 1 – Lot UL also includes 15 New Bus Bays for Transit Stops and Layover 2 – Stack Option not evaluated at Lot UL due proposed joint use with Caltrain/Samtrans Summary of Sites The analysis of the Constructability Factors Comparison is summarized in Attachment B. Staff notes that the constructability factors do not weigh some key factors, such as cost to the City and potential timeframe for implementation. The following summarizes key benefits and constraints for the sites. Lot D: This site would yield a high parking space return but may also provide for a potential mixed-used development opportunity given the key corner site in the downtown at Hamilton Avenue & Waverly Street. Lot EG: As a combined parking structure with an archway over Gilman Street, this site would provide for substantial parking centrally located in downtown. Opportunities for ground floor retail opportunities can be explored as well. The site may also be a good candidate for solicitation of joint private sector development. Lot O: This lot is located in west downtown and provides a high yield of parking supply but has constraints with adjacent development that use the alley for rear-store access for businesses that front University Avenue. The site may also be a good candidate for a mixed-use project with housing in addition to parking. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Lot P: Located in west downtown, this site is relatively small but could work well for a parking garage project located across from the existing Lot R – Alma/High South parking garage. Private sector interest in development at this site should be considered as part of Lot R garage operations to yield a positive permit supply for the downtown. Lot UL: This is the only site analyzed outside of the downtown and could offer the greatest number of new parking spaces of the garages studies, as well as significant permit sale opportunities to businesses in SOFA and other adjacent business interests, such as Palo Alto Medical Foundation or Town & Country Shopping Center. The site is currently managed by Samtrans as part of a long-term lease agreement with Stanford University. If the City pursues this site in partnership with Samtrans, Stanford University will need to participate in the process for lease negotiations. Attendant Parking Analysis The study includes an analysis of attendant parking use at the existing downtown parking structures. The study estimated the following additional parking capacity at each garage within floors allotted for parking permit use as shown in Table 3. Table 3 Downtown Palo Alto Parking Garage Feasibility Study Attendant/“Stacked” Parking Space Estimates Lot # Location Ex. Hourly Spaces Ex. Permit Spaces Total # Spaces Est. Stacked Spaces Est. Total Capacity CC Civic Center 187 519 706 48 754 R Alma/High (South) 77 134 211 42 253 S Bryant Street 381 307 688 52 740 WC Cowper-Webster 201 388 589 48 637 A one-year trial project at Lot R – Alma/High (South) is recommended to help identify community interest and to measure feasibility of a program for long-term use. Timeline This is a progress update report on the Parking Garage and Attendant Parking Feasibility Study City of Palo Alto Page 8 in the Downtown. A one-year pilot project of an attendant parking program at Lot R – Alma/High (South) is recommended and staff will pursue and refine estimates over the Summer. Following Planning and Transportation Commission review and comments, staff will return to Council with a timeline for decisions regarding the potential garage sites. Discussions with the private sector developer regarding construction of public-private partnership on Lot P will be brought to the Council for consideration in June. Resource Impact This feasibility study is funded in part by a Community Benefit contribution in the amount of $60,000 by the Gateway Project Development located at Alma Street & Lytton Avenue. The total cost of the project is $110,000, with the remainder of the funds provided from Capital Improvement Program (CIP) – PL 12000 (Parking & Transportation Improvements project). The cost of an attendant parking study would be covered by an increase in permit fees in the Parking Assessment District; the cost of theone-year trial is estimated at $120,000. The cost of potential parking structures and financing mechanisms will be studied in future phases of the study. Policy Implications The Parking Garage and Attendant Parking Feasibility Study is supported by the following Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: Goal 8 Attractive Convenient Publicv and Private Parking Facilities Policy T-45 Provide sufficient parking in the University Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue business districts to address long-range needs Policy T-47 Protect residential areas from the parking impacts of nearby business districts Program T-52 Evaluate options to ensure maximum use of the City parking structures in the University Avenue/California Avenue Business Districts Environmental Review No environmental review is required as part of the study effort. If any of the projects move forward to design, environmental review will be required. Attachments: Attachment A: Downtown Parking Garage Perspectives (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 9 Attachment B: Downtown Parking Study - Constructability Factors (XLSX) Lot D Hamilton/Waverly Lot E Gilman/Bryant Lot G Gilman/Waverly Lot O Emerson/High Lot P High/Hamilton Lot U Urban Lane Lot EG Gilman A.Type of Construction Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel B.Lot Size 29,200 SF 11,500 SF 16,875 SF 22,500 SF 15,982 SF 63,598 SF 28,375 SF C.Existing Spaces 86 34 53 78 51 164 87 D.Total Proposed Stalls 300 75 166 223 140 478 268 E.Net Stall Gain 214 41 113 145 89 314 181 F.Stall Gain %249%121%213%186%175%191%208% Estimated Const Cost/Stall Constraint Maximum Potential Constraint Value Constraint Importance Factor 1)Adjacent Property Impacts 10 1.3 7 9 9 3 4 10 9 2)Construction and Staging Impacts 10 1.2 5 5 5 3 1 3 7 3)Access Points 10 1.2 10 7 7 10 5 6 7 4)Adjacent Land Use 10 1.3 5 5 10 10 10 10 10 5)Utility Impacts 10 1.2 5 10 10 5 3 1 10 6)Net Stall Gain 10 1.5 10 2 8 4 4 7 10 7)Cost/Stall 10 1.3 8)Site Potential for Development 10 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 7 Maximum Weighted Value Constraint Scoring Methodology 1)High (1) Medium (5) Low (10) 2)High (1) Meduim (5) Low (10) 3)1 (5) 1-2 (7) 2 (10) 4)Single (5) Mixed Use (10) 5)High (1) Medium (5) Low (10) 6)Based on Stall Percent increase DRAFT Preliminary Site Constructability Constraints (Draft) ATTACHMENT B 100 Total Weighted Site Constraint Points Lot Cost Estimates Not Available at this Time - To be Provided with Final Report Cost Estimates Not Available at this Time - To be Provided with Final Report City of Palo Alto (ID # 3798) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 5/20/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Housing Element Update Title: Adoption of a Resolution Adopting the 2007-2014 Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan and Approving a Negative Declaration From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff, the Planning and Transportation Commission, and the Regional Housing Mandate Committee recommend a City Council MOTION to approve a Resolution (Attachment A) adopting the revised Housing Element 2007-14 of the Comprehensive Plan and approving a Negative Declaration. Executive Summary California State Housing Element law requires each city and county to update its housing element every five years to ensure that all localities provide adequate development sites for sufficient new housing to be built to meet their fair share of the regional housing need. Housing element law is the State’s primary strategy to increase housing supply, choice and affordability. The housing element identifies the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community and promotes a variety of housing types. The housing element also defines the policies and programs that the community will implement to achieve its housing goals and objectives developed to address its housing needs. Cities and counties without compliant housing elements may be faced with legal challenges pursuant to housing element law and/or fair housing law. On July 9, 2012, the City Council authorized staff to submit the Draft 2007-2014 Housing Element to HCD for review. On October 18, 2012, HCD issued a letter indicating the items that needed to be addressed in order to comply with State Housing Element law and qualify for certification. City staff has been working with HCD staff to address the issues, and provided HCD with a Response to Comments on January 29, 2013. An iterative process of Housing Element review and revision continued with HCD through March 26, 2013. On March 29, 2013, HCD City of Palo Alto Page 2 issued a letter indicating that HCD finds that the Revised Draft Housing Element will comply with State Housing Element law when it is adopted by the City Council and submitted to HCD for certification (Attachment B). The draft has been reviewed and recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission and the Council’s Regional Housing Mandate Committee. Background The City of Palo Alto is required to update its Housing Element per State Housing Element Law. The State deadline to complete the update process, which concludes with the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) certification, was June 30, 2009, but cities may continue to request review and certification through the end of the planning period. California State Housing Element law requires each city and county to update its housing element every five years to ensure that all localities provide adequate development sites for sufficient new housing to be built to meet their fair share of the regional housing need. As part of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process overseen by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the City of Palo Alto was assigned a quantified goal of 2,860 units, which represents the City’s “fair share” of projected housing need for the 2007-2014 planning period, distributed among the following income groups: very low (690 units), low (543 units), moderate (641 units) and above moderate (986 units) income categories. Housing Element law is the State’s primary strategy to increase housing supply, choice and affordability. The housing element identifies the existing and projected housing needs of all economic segments of the community, including the homeless and persons with disabilities, and promotes a variety of housing types, including multifamily rental units, transitional and other types of supportive housing. The housing element also defines the policies and programs that the community will implement to achieve its housing goals and objectives developed to address its housing needs. It is important to note that Housing Element law only requires the City to provide residential zoning opportunities to accommodate its RHNA allocation. It does not require the City to approve or construct such housing. Cities and counties without compliant housing elements may be faced with legal challenges pursuant to housing element law and/or fair housing law. If the City fails to identify or make available adequate sites to accommodate its RHNA assignment, the City may be required to carry those units over into the next planning cycle, thus increasing the number of sites required to be identified in the upcoming cycle. In addition, many State housing, transportation and infrastructure funding programs available to local governments require a certified housing element as one of the eligibility criteria. The State’s sustainable communities law (known as SB 375) to reduce greenhouse gases contains further incentives for City of Palo Alto Page 3 cities to submit compliant housing elements by conditioning key transportation grants to compliant elements and by extending the housing cycle for cities with certified elements. On July 9, 2012, the City Council authorized staff to submit the Draft 2007-2014 Housing Element to HCD for review, and the document was submitted to HCD on August 21, 2012. Based on Council direction, the Draft Housing Element included the Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) list to identify sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA (identification of 2,860 units on potential housing sites) and policies and programs to encourage developers in the production of housing. The sites selected are concentrated in the Downtown, the California Avenue area, and the El Camino Real corridor. The Housing Element emphasizes providing incentives for housing development using existing zoning rather than up-zoning single family and low density residential parcels or converting commercial or retail uses to residential use. On October 18, 2012, HCD issued a letter indicating the items that needed to be addressed in order to comply with State Housing Element law and qualify for certification. City staff has been working with HCD staff to address the issues, and provided HCD with a Response to Comments on January 29, 2013. An iterative process of Housing Element review and revision continued with HCD through March 26, 2013. On March 29, 2013, HCD issued a letter indicating that HCD finds that the Revised Draft Housing Element will comply with State Housing Element law when it is adopted by the City Council and submitted to HCD for certification. Planning and Transportation Commission Review The Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed and recommended that the City Council approve the revised Housing Element by a vote of 6-0 (Tanaka absent) at their April 10, 2013 meeting. There were questions about the proposed goals, policies and programs, but most of the comments centered on how the 2007-2014 Housing Element would affect the review and approval process for the 2015-2022 Housing Element, which is due to the State by December 2014. There was also discussion about the City’s RHNA number for this cycle and for the next RHNA cycle. The final portion of the hearing was focused on the environmental document. The April 10, 2013 Meeting minutes have been included as Attachment K. Regional Housing Mandate Committee Review and 567 Maybell Avenue On May 9, 2013, the Regional Housing Mandate Committee reviewed the revised Housing Element. A number of residents were in attendance to speak to Program 2.2.8, which addresses the rezoning of 567-595 Maybell Ave. Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) submitted a Planned Community (PC) rezone application for 567 Maybell Ave. to develop 15 single family homes and 60 affordable senior rental units. Staff included the potential affordable housing project in the Housing Element as Program 2.2.8. The RHMC, as part of its motion, strongly emphasized that their recommendation for the City Council to approve the City of Palo Alto Page 4 Housing Element does not indicate support for approval of the Maybell Avenue project and it should not have any bearing on the Planning and Transportation Commission deliberations of the PC rezone request. The P&TC is scheduled to hear the 567 Maybell Planned Community rezone application on May 22, 2013. The RHMC recommended that the City Council approve the revised Housing Element by a vote of 3-0 (Holman absent). The Committee also directed staff to evaluate the potential to identify an additional 30 units (the difference between the proposed project and the existing zoning) in the event that the Maybell project is not approved. Staff noted that, if the project is not approved and the City’s Housing Element has been certified, the City will need to report back to HCD next year and likely provide a modification to account for the incremental units. Public Process Extensive public outreach was conducted in the preparation of the Housing Element. A Technical Advisory Group (TAG) was formed with representatives from the Palo Alto Unified School District, neighborhood groups, both affordable and market rate housing developers, and interested residents serving on the TAG. In addition, multiple meetings were held to educate the public about the Housing Element and the Regional Housing Mandate Committee conducted public hearings. Discussion HCD Review of Draft Housing Element On August 21, 2012, the Draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD for review and determination if it complies with State Housing Element Law. On October 18, 2012, HCD issued a letter indicating the items that needed to be addressed in order to comply with State Housing Element law and qualify for certification (refer to Attachment E from HCD dated October 18, 2012). Over the course of the last six months, staff has been working with HCD staff to address the issues, and provided HCD with a Response to Comments on January 29, 2013. City staff and HCD continued to review and revise the Housing Element through March 26, 2013 (refer to Attachment C, Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element dated March 26, 2013). This response includes the proposed revisions to the Housing Element that address the concerns raised by HCD. The Revised Draft Housing Element is attached (see Attachment D, and available to the public at: <http://www.paloaltocompplan2020.org/> On March 29, 2013, HCD issued a letter indicating that HCD finds that the Revised Draft Housing Element will comply with State Housing Element law when it is adopted by the City Council and submitted to HCD for certification based on the submitted responses from staff. The letter notes that any significant changes to the proposed programs or text may require additional HCD review or may no longer comply with State Housing Element law. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Following is a summary of the issues raised by HCD and changes made to the Housing Element to address the comments, as outlined in more detail in the Response to HCD Comments document. Progress in Meeting RHNA and Affordability of Units: HCD has asked for more information on how the affordability of the units that are approved or under construction was determined. Text was added to page 71 of the Housing Element describing that all of the affordable units will be deed restricted units, either through the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) program or created with financial assistance from the City. Previous Unaccommodated Need: In the last Housing Element cycle, there was one site identified to accommodate housing that was not rezoned prior to the current cycle. Per State law, this unaccommodated need must be addressed in the current cycle, above what is required by the Regional Housing Needs Allocation. On Page 162 of the Draft Housing Element has been amended to indicate that the unaccommodated 15 units from the previous cycle can be accommodated on a site located at 3877 El Camino Real, which with current zoning can provide the required 15 units. Realistic Capacity, Suitability of Non-vacant Sites, and Small Sites (less than one-half acre): HCD had expressed concern that since many of the sites selected for potential residential development on the Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) table are mixed use sites or commercial sites allowing residential uses, the sites may not yield as many residential units as indicated on the table. Page 78 of the Housing Element was revised to include a description of mixed use projects that have occurred in the last few years that achieved the densities shown in the HIS table. A description is also included of the commercially zoned sites on the HIS table as being along our major transit corridors, which are ideally suited for mixed-use development as proposed. It should be noted that on these parcels, the realistic capacity listed in the HIS table is lower than the maximum density allowed (typically realistic capacity is listed at 20 units per acre, where the zoning would allow 30 to 40 units per acre). In addition, a description of the sites has been added to the Housing Element indicating that many of the commercial sites in these corridors are typically low-intensity, one-story and two story buildings, surrounded by surface parking, constructed in the late 1960’s and 1970’s with relatively little development or improvements in the past decade. To address the issue of smaller sites, text was added to Page 84 of the housing element indicating that mixed use and residential projects have occurred on small parcels, and a map was provided that shows areas where there are opportunities for lot consolidation. The following program was added to encourage development of small lots: H2.2.7 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage development on and consolidation of smaller lots, such as development review streamlining, City of Palo Alto Page 6 reduction in required parking for smaller units, setback modifications, or graduated density when consolidated lots are over one-half acre. HCD staff was still concerned that some of the sites might not achieve the densities outlined in the HIS table, or that a commercial site on the list might be developed with a non-residential use. HCD staff has requested that the following program be added to the Housing Element: H2.2.9 PROGRAM To maintain adequate sites are available throughout the planning period to accommodate the City’s RHNA, on a project basis, pursuant to Government Code Section 65863, the City will monitor available residential capacity and evaluate development applications on Housing Inventory Sites in mixed use zoning districts. Should an approval of development result in a reduction of capacity below the residential capacity needed to accommodate the remaining need for lower-income households, the City will identify and zone sufficient sites to accommodate the shortfall. Clarify Affordability of projects proposed by the Mayfield Agreement: A description of the development proposed by the Mayfield Agreement with Stanford University was added to the Housing Element at the end of Page 82 to clarify the number of units proposed and the units that are designated as affordable per the agreement. Hotel Condominiums: HCD has asked for additional analysis to determine that the proposal in the Housing Element for hotel condominiums as a part of a hotel project would meet the census definition of a housing unit. Upon further analysis of the proposal, staff determined that these units would not meet the Census definition of a housing unit, and this proposal was removed from the Housing Element. This program may be revisited in the next (2014-2022) housing element cycle to see if modifications can be made to qualify such units. Emergency Shelters: HCD has indicated that in order to meet the requirements of State law, a zone or zones must be identified where emergency shelters would be permitted without a conditional use permit of other discretionary action. It is required that the element specifically identifies the zone or zones and demonstrates sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelters within the community. The Housing Element has been revised to include the following program which would allow emergency shelters in the ROLM(E) (Research, Office and Limited Manufacturing - Embarcadero) zone district. The zoning code amendment would include performance standards for the emergency shelters to ensure compatibility with the surrounding area. Additional discussion about the ROLM(E) zone district was added to Page 157 of the housing element. It should be noted that this provision does not require that an emergency shelter be built, but only requires that the zoning is in place to accommodate the use. City of Palo Alto Page 7 H3.5.2 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to allow emergency shelters by right with appropriate performance standards to accommodate the City’s unmet need for unhoused residents within an overlay of the ROLM(E) zone district located east of Highway 101. Land Use Controls, Local Processing and Permit Procedures, and Inclusionary Housing: HCD requested more information about the City’s ordinances and procedures related to permits and processing, as well as the Inclusionary Housing program, specifically an analysis of how these procedures might be considered a constraint to housing development. The Housing Element has been revised to include a better description of the development process and the inclusionary housing program. In addition, the following program has been added to evaluate the Below Market Rate (BMR) program: H3.1.14 PROGRAM Evaluate the provisions of the Below Market Rate (BMR) Program to determine if additional incentives are needed to encourage development of housing given current market conditions. Reasonable Accommodation: State law requires that provisions be available accommodate housing to make it suitable for persons with disabilities. Generally, this would allow persons with disabilities to add a ramp, handrail, lift or elevator to a residence. This can be an issue when installation of these improvements on an existing residence would not meet development standards such as setback and lot coverage. The following program has been added to the Housing Element that would establish a process where individuals with disabilities can make requests for reasonable accommodation to allow installation of the necessary improvements. H4.1.6 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to provide individuals with disabilities reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, practices and procedures that may be necessary to ensure reasonable access to housing. The purpose of this program is to provide a process for individuals with disabilities to make requests for reasonable accommodation in regard to relief from the various land use, zoning, or building laws, rules, policies, practices and/or procedures of the City. Developmentally Disabled: State law requires that the Housing Element include an analysis of the special housing needs of persons with developmental disabilities. This analysis has been added to the Revised Housing Element. In addition, the following program was added that requires that the City work with the San Andreas Regional Center on outreach regarding housing resources available to persons with developmental disabilities: City of Palo Alto Page 8 H4.2.2 PROGRAM Work with the San Andreas Regional Center to implement an outreach program that informs families in Palo Alto about housing and services available for persons with developmental disabilities. The program could include the development of an informational brochure, including information on services on the City’s website, and providing housing- related training for individuals/families through workshops. Analysis of Existing Assisted Housing Developments At-risk of Conversion: HCD requested additional analysis regarding the preservation of at-risk affordable housing units to include units that may be at-risk of conversion to market rate units for a period of ten years from the start of the planning cycle (2009-2019). A discussion has been added in Chapter 2, and the only affordable housing development determined to be at-risk of converting to market rate is the Terman Apartments. A description of the City’s efforts to work with the owners of this property is now included in the Housing Element. Programs - Timelines and Implementation: HCD has requested that the programs outlined in the Housing Element be revised to include quantified objectives and timelines indicating when the programs would be implemented. In addition, HCD has asked for amendments to some of these programs to describe specific actions or describe the City’s role in implementation. All of the policies have been revised to include objectives and timelines, and clarification was added where requested (refer to Attachment F, Palo Alto Revised Draft Housing Element, 5.2 Housing Goals Policies and Programs). Identify Adequate Sites, Rezoning Program: HCD has required additional information in order to determine that the City had met its Regional Housing Needs Assessment requirements for all income levels. Revisions have been made to the Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) table (Attachment F) to identify those sites which qualify to meet the lower income housing need. It was determined that a rezoning program is not required to accommodate the City’s lower income housing need, the needs for the low and very low income units can be accommodated on sites that are already zoned to allow densities of 20 units per acre or greater. While reviewing the HIS table as well as the Table 2-58, List of Housing Unit Production by Income Categories, it was determined that the lists needed to be updated both to include new projects which have been submitted and to address changes to projects that have occurred since the Draft Housing Element was published. As a result, a recent project submitted at 567- 597 Maybell Avenue was moved from the HIS table to the List of Housing Unit Production, which includes those units entitled or in process as well as those for which building permits have been issued. In addition, two projects were removed from that list because the revised projects submitted no longer include housing. The two projects removed from the entitled projects list were 355 Alma Avenue (14 units) and 200 San Antonio Road (35 units). City of Palo Alto Page 9 As a result of these changes, Table 2-57 was also revised to reflect the actual number of units either built/permitted or entitled/in process. This left a higher unmet need to be accommodated by the HIS table than was previously anticipated. Since the HIS table was also modified to remove the Maybell site, there was now a shortage of housing sites to accommodate the unmet need. In order to accommodate this shortage, the site at 340 Portage Avenue (Fry’s Site) was added to the HIS table. Although the maximum capacity that could be accommodated on this 12.47 acre site would be 374 units, the realistic capacity listed on the HIS table is only 75 units. While the site is now zoned RM-30, one of the alternatives for the California Avenue Area Concept Plan now under consideration anticipates mixed use development on this site. With this change to the HIS table, the total number of units that can be accommodated by housing inventory sites is 1,680, where the unmet need is for 1,643 units. The following program has been added to provide for the rezoning of the 595 Maybell site: H2.2.8 PROGRAM Rezone property at 595 Maybell Avenue from the RM-15 and R-2 zone districts to the PC zone district to allow for development of 60 units of extremely-low to low income senior affordable rental housing units and 15 market rate units. Two other programs have been added to the Housing Element to provide for the rezoning of the CN and GM zones to increase the allowable density to be consistent with the realistic capacity as outlined in the HIS Table: 2.2.5 PROGRAM Revise the Zoning Ordinance to increase the density of up to 20 units per acre on CN-zoned parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites. 2.2.6 PROGRAM Revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow for residential uses with the density of up to 30 units per acre on GM parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites. Mixed Use Development: Because the City is relying on underutilized sites and the potential for mixed use development to accommodate the housing needs of lower income households, HCD has required that there be programs to promote redevelopment of these sites, such as incentives for lot consolidation, financial assistance, or regulatory concessions. To meet this requirement, the following program has been added to the Housing Element: H2.1.11 PROGRAM Promote redevelopment of underutilized sites and lot consolidation by providing information about potential housing sites on the City’s website, including the Housing Inventory Sites and information about financial resources available through City housing programs. City of Palo Alto Page 10 Programs to Meet the Needs of Extremely Low-, Very-Low- and Moderate-Income Households: HCD has indicated that although the element includes actions to assist in the development of housing for very-low and low-income households, it is required to include programs that specifically assist in the development of a variety of housing types to address the needs of extremely low income (ELI) households, such as prioritizing some funding for this type of development, or providing financial incentives or regulatory concessions to address the needs of this income group. Staff responded that the Housing Element already includes a program to amend the zoning code to allow Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units in commercial and high density residential zoning districts, noting that these units are generally seen to be affordable to ELI household. In addition, the following two programs were added to address this requirement: H3.1.15 PROGRAM When using its Housing Development funds for residential projects, the City shall give a strong preference to those developments which serve extremely low-income (ELI) households. H3.1.16 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to provide additional incentives to developers who provide extremely-low income (ELI) housing units, above and beyond what is required by the Below Market Rate (BMR) program, such as reduced parking requirements for smaller units, reduced landscaping requirements and reduced fees. Housing Units At-Risk of Conversion to Market Rate: HCD has requested that the Program in the Housing Element that addresses affordable housing units at-risk of conversion to market rate housing be revised to include specific actions. Following is the revised Program H3.1.5, and an added program to address the concerns raised by HCD: H3.1.5 PROGRAM Preserve affordable housing stock by monitoring compliance, providing tenant education, seeking other sources of funds for affordable housing developments at risk of market rate conversions. The City will continue to renew existing funding sources supporting rehabilitation and maintenance activities. H3.1.17 PROGRAM Any affordable development deemed a high risk at market rate conversion, within two years of the expiration of the affordability requirements, the City will contact the owner and explore the possibility of extending the affordability of the development. Quantified Objectives: HCD has requested that add a table that outlines the number of housing units by income category that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over a five-year City of Palo Alto Page 11 time period. This table has been added to the Housing Element. Public Comments Submitted During the HCD Review Two letters were submitted via email regarding the Draft 2007-2014 Housing Element. On September 10, 2012, an email from Sam Tepperman-Gelfant, Senior Staff Attorney for Public Advocates, Inc. (Attachment G) was sent to State HCD and referred to City staff for review. On September 24, 2012, staff received a letter from Melissa A. Morris, Senior Attorney for Public Interest Law Firm (Attachment H). Staff also discussed the issues raised in the letters with Sam Tepperman-Gelfant and Melissa Morris via conference call on two occasions. A summary of the issues raised and how they were addressed follows. Lower Income Housing Needs and Previous Unaccommodated Need: Public Advocates has asked for more clarity in determining how the housing needs for the lower income populations were being met as outlined in the HIS table, and expressed concern that it appeared that there was unaccommodated need from the previous housing element cycle because not all sites were rezoned as required. As noted in the response to HCD comments, the HIS table was modified to clearly identify those properties that meet the requirement to qualify to satisfy the RHNA requirements for low and very-low income households. Sites with an allowed density of twenty units per acre or more qualify by default to meet this need. Sites have been identified to accommodate 1,056 low and very-low income units, and the City is required to accommodate 982 low and very low income units. Also noted in the response to HCD comments is an explanation of how the unaccommodated need from the last housing element cycle has been met in this cycle. There was one parcel identified in the last cycle to be rezoned to accommodate 15 units. Staff has identified a site on the HIS table which provides a replacement for these units, over and above what is required by the RHNA for this cycle. Mayfield Agreement: Public Advocates has noted that the inventory includes 250 units which are a part of the Mayfield Agreement with Stanford University, expressed concern that the units would not all be constructed before the end of the planning period (2014), and questioned how many of the units would be market rate versus affordable units. On Page 83, text has been added to the housing element to clarify the terms of the agreement and to indicate that 70 of the units are required to be affordable. The agreement stipulates that an application for the affordable units be submitted by December 2013, and the remaining units be proposed no later than December 2020. However, the sites are now available for development, and nothing precludes an application being submitted prior to the deadline. Therefore, it is appropriate to leave these units on the HIS Table. City of Palo Alto Page 12 Reliance on Small Sites (less than one-half acre) and sites with existing uses: Both Public Advocates and Public Interest Law Firm have expressed concern that many of the sites on the inventory are less than one-half acre in size, and thought these small sites would not be suitable for lower income housing. In addition, concern was expressed that many of these sites are now developed and wanted information to be added to the HIS Table describing the potential for redevelopment on sites with existing uses. The Housing Element has been amended to provide a description of projects that have been built on sites of less than one-half acre, and programs have been added to encourage lot consolidation as well as offer incentives for development on smaller sites. In addition, information has been added to the HIS Table, as well as in the description of the existing commercial areas identified to explain why these sites are suitable. In many cases, the sites identified with existing commercial uses are now developed with older, single story buildings. There have been successful developments built on similar parcels within these areas, and it is expected that this trend will continue. Hotel Condominiums: Public Advocates also has expressed concern with including hotel condominiums as potential housing sites, indicating that developers of hotel projects have not proposed these types of units. As discussed above, it has been determined that hotel condominiums do not meet the Census definition of housing units, and these sites have been removed from the HIS table. Secondary Dwelling Units: Public Advocates has commented on the assumption that 15 second units would be added during the planning period, indicating that second units recently built were affordable to moderate income, and any added units should not be assumed to be affordable to lower income households. Public Interest Law Firm was also concerned with the parking requirement for second units, given that second units were a potential source for affordable units. Upon further study, it was determined that secondary dwelling units in Palo Alto generally fall in the moderate income level, and it is now assumed that any new units would be at this income level, and second units are not being counted towards the lower income RHNA requirement. Programs: Public Interest Law Firm has expressed concern that the Housing Element’s programs did not have enough detail to determine if the programs will be effective, asking that quantified objectives and timeframes be added, as well as an indication of which department is responsible for implementation. The list of programs in the Housing Element has been modified to include timeframes, quantified objectives and responsible agencies (refer to Attachment E). Affordability of Units Permitted, Entitled or Constructed: Public Interest Law Firm asked for more information about the units included on Table 2-57 to clarify the level of affordability of the units being counted toward the low and very-low income RHNA obligation. The Housing City of Palo Alto Page 13 Element has been amended and Tables 2-57 and 2-58 have been revised to show which units are affordable and to indicate that these are deed restricted units either provided through the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) program, or created with financial assistance from the City. Constraints to the Development of Housing for People with Disabilities: Public Advocates asked for a more comprehensive analysis of constraints to development of housing for people with disabilities, and asked that a reasonable accommodation policy be added to facilitate development of housing for people with disabilities. As noted above in the response to HCD comments, a discussion of the needs for disabled persons, as well as a reasonable accommodation policy have been added to the Draft Housing Element. Next Steps Once the 2007-2014 Housing Element is adopted by the City Council, a copy will be forwarded to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for certification. This will bring Palo Alto’s Housing Element into compliance with State Housing Element Law. Environmental Review An initial study and Negative Declaration have been prepared for the Draft 2007-2014 Housing Element. The Negative Declaration is included as Attachment J. Based on the findings of the Initial Study, the Negative Declaration did not identify any potential significant impacts as the bulk of the City’s RHNA can be accommodated without significant zone changes. Most of the sites identified for housing are already zoned for that use and are located in infill areas. The Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed the Negative Declaration and recommended the Council approve it. The review period will end on May 15, 2013, prior to consideration by the City Council. No comments have been received to date. Attachments: Attachment A: Resolution Adopting 2007-2014 Housing Element (PDF) Attachment B: HCD Letter dated March 29, 2013 (PDF) Attachment C - City Response to HCD Comments dated March 26, 2013 (PDF) Attachment D - Revised Draft 2007-2014 Housing Element (PDF) Attachment E - HCD Response Letter dated October 18, 2012 (PDF) Attachment F - Revised Housing Element Goals, Policies and Programs (PDF) Attachment G - Housing Element Sites Inventory (PDF) Attachment H - Email received from Public Advocates dated September 10, 2012 (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 14 Attachment I - Letter received from Public Interest Law dated September 24, 2012 (PDF) Attachment J - Initial Study (PDF) Attachment K: April 10 2013 Planning and Transportation Commission Meeting Minutes (PDF) Not Yet Approved 1 130506 jb S://013/Planning/Reso Housing Element 2007‐14 Resolution No. _____ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting the Revised Draft Housing Element 2007‐2014 of the Comprehensive Plan and Approving a Negative Declaration R E C I T A L S A. The City of Palo Alto is required to update its Housing Element per State Housing Element law every five years to ensure adequate development sites for sufficient new housing be built to meet the fair share of the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). B. Palo Alto was assigned a quantified goal of 2,860 units, which represents the City’s “fair share” of projected housing need for the 2007‐2014 planning period. C. The Housing Element identifies the existing and projected housing needs for all economic segments of the community, including the homeless and persons with disabilities. D. The Housing Element defines the policies and programs that the community will implement to achieve its housing goals and objectives developed to address its housing needs. E. On July 9, 2012, the City Council authorized staff to submit the Draft 2007‐2014 Housing Element to the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) for review. F. The draft Housing Element included the Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) list to identify sites to accommodate the City’s RHNA and policies and programs to encourage developers in the production of housing. G. On October 18, 2012, the HCD indicated the items that needed to be addressed in order to comply with State Housing Element law and quality for certification. H. On March 29, 2013, the HCD issued a finding that the Revised Draft Housing Element 2007‐2014 will comply with State Housing Element Law when adopted by the Council. I. On April 10, 2013, the Planning and Transportation Commission conducted a hearing on the 2007‐2014 Housing Element and recommended that the City Council adopt the Element. Not Yet Approved 2 130506 jb S://013/Planning/Reso Housing Element 2007‐14 J. The Council desires to adopt the Revised Housing Element 2007‐2014 of the Comprehensive Plan to comply with State Housing Element law. The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The City of Palo Alto Housing Element 2007‐2014, revised March 29, 2013, is hereby adopted and incorporated into the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. This Element supersedes the December 2, 2002 Housing Element. SECTION 2. The City Council adopted a Negative Declaration for this project in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ City Manager _________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element ATTACHMENT B March 26, 2013 A. Housing Needs, Resources, and Constraints 1. Inventory of Land Suitable for Residential Development: Palo Alto has a regional housing need allocation (RHNA) of 2,860 housing units, of which 1,233 are for lower-income households. To address this need, the element relies on non-vacant and mixed use sites along transit corridors. To demonstrate the adequacy of these sites and strategies to accommodate the City’s RHNA, the element needs to include complete analyses: Progress in Meeting the RHNA: The element indicates (page 66) that 168 units affordable to very low-income households and 21 units affordable to low-income households have been built or are under construction or approved, but provides no information documenting how affordability of the units was determined. As you know, the City’s RHNA may be reduced by the number of new units built since January 1, 2007; however, the element must describe the City’s methodology for assigning these units to the various income groups based on the actual sales price or rent level of the units and demonstrate their availability in the planning period. Response: The following text has been added to Page 66 of the housing element to describe the affordability of the units built including revised Table 2-57 and Table 2-58: A Planned Community (PC) rezone application was submitted for 595 Maybell Avenue to develop 60 units of extremely low to low income senior affordable rental housing and 15 market rate units by right, for a total of 75 units. Program 2.2.8 has been added to the Housing Element to emphasize the City’s need for affordable senior housing. Table 2-57 and Table 2-58 have been updated to include the Maybell Avenue application since the application review is in process. Conversely, the Maybell site was originally included in the City’s Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) list as a potential development site. However, since the 60 affordable units have been included in Table 2-57 and Table 2-58, it has been removed from the HIS list. The revised Tables 2-57 and 2-58 are included as Exhibit A of this letter. Therefore, the City now has 251 low or very low income units in process, entitled or built. All 251 very-low and low-income units will be/are deed restricted units. Of the 251 affordable units, 34 very low and low income rental units were created through the City’s Below Market Rate program. Those units are restricted to low income households as established by the State for Santa Clara County for a period of 59 years. The remaining 217 affordable units were created with financial assistance from the City and deed restricted to low, very low and extremely low income households. The City has loaned out over $22 million for the creation of these units. Those units carry a minimum 55-year affordability term, consistent with tax credit financing requirements. However, City documents include options to extend the affordability period. If the 251 entitled/ built low and very low income units are subtracted from the City’s need of 1,233 units, the City’s remaining need for very low and low income households is 982 housing units. State law establishes a density of 20 units per acre as the minimum density necessary to make affordable housing economically feasible in Palo Alto. The City must show that it can Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 2 - accommodate the remaining 982 low and very low income units on sites that have a density of 20 units per acre or higher. In the City’s Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) list, all parcels with an existing zoning density of 20 units per acre or higher have been highlighted. The total number of units provided by the highlighted parcels is 1,056. While the City does have proposed programs that will revise the Zoning Ordinance to increase densities to be consistent with Housing Element law, the City can meet its low and very low needs with existing zoning. Previous Unaccommodated Need: While the element now includes an analysis to identify the unaccommodated need based on the total unmet need from the previous planning period, it does not identify the unaccommodated need by income group. Pursuant to Chapter 614, Statutes of 2005 (AB 1233), as the City of Palo Alto failed to implement Program H-14 to rezone sites in the prior planning period, the City must zone or rezone sites to accommodate any unaccommodated need within the first year of the 2009-2014 planning period. The element must include an analysis by income group to determine if there is a remaining unaccommodated need that must be accommodated in the current planning period. Response: The following text has been added to Page 151 of the housing element to describe how the City is fulfilling the AB 1233 requirements: Of the City parcels that were proposed to be rezoned in Program H-14, the City rezoned all but one parcel as specified in the City’s 1999-2006 Housing Element. The total estimated yield of the one unzoned parcel is 15 units. Therefore, the City’s unmet need is 15 units. In the Draft Housing Element in Appendix 5.3, (1999-2006 Accomplishments Matrix), the City originally reported for Program H14, that it had three unzoned parcels, rather than one. The yield of the two additional parcels originally reported to be unzoned for housing was estimated to be 20 units. Based on further research, the City has determined that the two previously reported unzoned parcels were in fact rezoned. The City will update Appendix 5.3 to reflect this. The explanation of the zoning history of the two parcels is set forth below. At the time of Housing Element adoption in 2002, the City was in the process of adopting the South of Forest Avenue Coordinated Area Plan, Phase 2 (SOFA2) in which two of the parcels are located. The parcels were rezoned from Commercial Downtown-C (community) or CD-S (service), which allowed for mixed use development, to the SOFA 2 land use designation of Residential Transition-50 (RT-50) when SOFA 2 was adopted in December 2003. The RT-50 zone also allows for mixed-use residential developments. The difference between CD and RT- 50 zoning is that CD density is measured by units per acre while RT-50 determines residential density by Floor Area Ratio (FAR). In addition, if it is a proposed residential rental development, the RT-50 zone provides a higher FAR to achieve a more dense development. However, because the City did not rezone the one parcel within the planning period, the City must meet the site suitability requirements of Government Code Section 65583.2 [AB2348]. To fulfill the requirements of AB 2348, the City has selected 3877 El Camino Real as the designated site to accommodate the 15 “carry over” units. This .75 acre site is a mix of Service Commercial (CS) and RM-30 zoning. Approximately 30% of the site (.22 acres), the area fronting El Camino Real, is covered by the CS zone district. CS zoning allows for mixed use development with a maximum density of 30 units. Using the City’s realistic capacity of 20 Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 3 - units per acre, the CS portion could have a capacity of 4 units. The remaining .53 acres of the parcel is zoned RM-30, which at 20 units per acre, could provide 11 residential units. The site is adjacent to a .28 acre, vacant RM-30 parcel (405 Curtner Avenue) that is currently being used as a parking lot. 405 Curtner Avenue is also on the City HIS list which could provide for the potential of a lot merger to achieve a greater yield of housing. Below is a table showing the AB 2348 requirements with an explanation of how the site at 3877 El Camino Real meets each requirement: AB 2348 Requirement 3877 El Camino Real 1. Must meet the 100 percent shortfall The City’s shortfall is 15 units. This site accommodates the entire shortfall of 15 units. 2. The zoning allows owner-occupied and rental multifamily residential uses “by right” Both the RM-30 and CS zoning allows for residential uses by right. The codes do not differentiate by tenure. 3. The site provides development that permits at least 16 units per site based on minimum density Based on the realistic capacity estimate of 20 units per acre, the site can accommodate 15 units. However, as described in page 75 of the draft Housing Element, the realistic capacity is much more conservative than the densities achieved in built or approved developments. The average density of those developments is almost 28 units per acre. Therefore, this site could easily accommodate an additional unit to meet the 16 unit per site requirement. 4. Suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions must provide sites that allow at least 20 dwelling units per acre. Both the RM-30 and CS zoning have a maximum zoning density of 30 units per acre. However, a realistic capacity of 20 units per acre is used to estimate the potential yield for this site. 5. At least 50 percent of the low and very low-income need be accommodated on sites designated exclusively residential uses Seventy percent of the site is zoned RM-30 thus providing more than half of the unaccommodated need in exclusive residential zoning with a density of greater than 20 units per acre. Realistic Capacity: For mixed-use or commercial sites allowing residential uses, the residential capacity estimate should account for potential development of non-residential uses and could consider any performance standards mandating a specified portion of a mixed-use site as non- residential (e.g., first floor, front space as commercial). The element could also describe any existing or proposed regulatory incentives and standards to facilitate housing development in the mixed-use or commercial zones and on the identified non-vacant sites. Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 4 - Response: The following paragraph will be added on Page 76 of the Housing Element following the discussion the Housing Inventory Sites – Mixed Use Development in Existing Commercial Zoning Districts: Many of the City’s commercially zoned parcels which allow residential uses have specific requirements, mainly that the project include a ground floor retail component. There have been many successful mixed use projects developed in the City’s commercial areas which have included ground floor retail and residential units. Following is a list of recently completed projects on smaller sites which yielded projects with residential components at densities ranging from 16 to 28 units per acre: ¥ 420 Cambridge Avenue, 4 units on 6,012 square foot parcel (28 units/acre) ¥ 2180 El Camino Real, 4 units on 22,365 square foot parcel (16 units/acre) ¥ 102 University Avenue, 3 units on 7920 square foot parcel (16 units/acre) ¥ 2051 El Camino Real, 2 units on 4800 square foot parcel (18 units/acre) The commercially zoned parcels selected in the City Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) list were based on parcels within the City’s transit corridors of El Camino Real, University Avenue and California Avenue. However, there are number of other mixed use sites throughout the City that would be equally suitable candidates for mixed use redevelopment. There have been numerous mixed use projects on similar sites that have occurred throughout the City. Based on development trends and to account for the potential for some non-residential uses (as a part of a mixed use development), the realistic capacity used in the HIS list is estimated at 66 per cent of the maximum capacity. Many of the identified sites are commercial uses along the El Camino Real and California Avenue corridors are typically low-intensity, one-story and two story buildings, surrounded by surface parking, constructed in the late 1960’s and 1970’s with relatively little development or improvements in the past decade. These corridors have seen less development than other areas of the City, such as the University Avenue corridor. However, since many of the sites have not been improved and with the City real estate market returning to pre-2008 levels, the identified sites seem more appropriate for redevelopment opportunities. In addition, the California Avenue corridor has been designated by the City Council as a Priority Development Area, through ABAG’s FOCUS program, to provide incentives and attract greater investment in the California Avenue corridor. Note also these projects largely occurred in a down market and we can expect this trend to continue with signs of a significant uptick in the local real estate market. In addition, as incentive to facilitate mixed use developments, the City has proposed Program H 2.2.2 which will expedite permit processing if the development meets certain requirements. It is also anticipated that there will be greater use of the density bonus ordinance, which will allow for projects at greater density that take advantage of the incentives which allow for relaxation of parking standards. Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 5 - In addition, the following program is being added to monitor the Housing Inventory Sites. If nonresidential development occurs on a mixed use zoned Housing Inventory Site, the program would require that a replacement site be identified. H2.2.9 PROGRAM To maintain adequate sites are available throughout the planning period to accommodate the City’s RHNA, on a project basis, pursuant to Government Code Section 65863, the City will monitor available residential capacity and evaluate development applications on Housing Inventory Sites in mixed use zoning districts. Should an approval of development result in a reduction of capacity below the residential capacity needed to accommodate the remaining need for lower-income households, the City will identify and zone sufficient sites to accommodate the shortfall. Five-Year Objective: Maintain Residential Capacity of sites suitable for lower income households. Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing Suitability of Non-Vacant Sites: a. While the element describes market trends, and potential for redevelopment for the corridor areas identified in the sites inventory, it provides minimal descriptions of existing uses of identified sites. The element should describe the existing uses of non- vacant sites sufficiently to demonstrate the potential for redevelopment during the planning period and evaluate the extent to which existing uses impede additional residential development. For example, the element lists several indicators used to determine if a site was suitable for residential or mixed-use development including if a property was “underdeveloped” pursuant to a windshield survey (page 74). The element could describe the factors the city used in determining if a property was underutilized. In addition, the inventory could generally describe whether the use is operating, marginal or discontinued, and the condition of the structure or could describe any expressed interest in redevelopment. Response: The City used a number of criteria to evaluate suitability of a non-vacant site. On Page 74 of the draft Housing Element, the evaluating criteria will be revised to include: ¥ Improvement on sites at least 20 years old ¥ Site of 10,000 sq. ft. or more with a yield of 5 units or more ¥ Site with an A/V of less than 1.5, or with A/V ratios of greater than 1.5 that were determined to have an artificially low assessed land value (parcels under the same ownership for more than 10 years), with the assessed land value is far below current market land values. The improvements on these parcels are much older and are candidates for redevelopment. Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 6 - ¥ Windshield survey of underdeveloped residential or commercial sites consisting of 1 or 2 story structures. Underdeveloped commercial sites were defined as Class B office space structures or older buildings with wood construction. The above criteria were chosen based on the types of sites that had been redeveloped with mixed use or residential projects within the past several years. In the Housing Inventory Sites list, greater detail has been added to each of the listed properties including the specific commercial use and owner of the site. All of the commercial sites identified on the inventory are now operating and there are no marginal or discontinued uses. However, due to the vibrancy of the Palo Alto housing and mixed use market, this has not been a disincentive to reuse of sites for residential or mixed use development. As noted in the response to the comment on realistic capacity, there are many examples of mixed use development occurring on smaller sites similar to those listed in the inventory. b. Several sites in the inventory are part of the Mayfield Agreement with the University of Stanford. Part of this agreement is to provide a portion of the sites for housing affordable to lower-income and the remaining to market rate housing over a 20 year period. Pursuant to conversations with staff, proposed development plans have been submitted for these sites including a Bridge Housing proposal for the lower-income portion. The element should include a description these plans including the proposed affordability and timeframes in order to determine the portion of the housing need for lower-income households these sites can accommodate within the planning period. Response: The following text has been added to the Housing Element following the last paragraph on page 81 to describe the details of the Mayfield Agreement: The City’s executed Mayfield Agreement requires the construction of 250 dwelling units on identified housing sites described in the Agreement. Of the 250 units to be developed, 70 units are required to be affordable rental units to very-low and low income households. The Agreement with Stanford University requires that the University submit a building permit application for 185 units by the end of December 2013 with a specific requirement that an application for Architectural Review be submitted by December 2013 for the 70 affordable units. The agreement stipulates that the remaining units be proposed no later than December 2020. However, nothing precludes the University from submitting applications prior to that deadline. The Agreement establishes the absolute deadline, and the sites are now available for development. Therefore, at a minimum, the 70 affordable units will begin the permit approval process by 2014. c. In addition, most of the sites in the inventory are small (less than 0.5 acres). If the small sites are necessary to accommodate the City’s regional housing need for lower-income households, the element must include analyses that demonstrates these sites can realistically accommodate new residential development, particularly new multifamily rental development and housing affordable to lower income households. While it may be possible to build housing on small parcels, the nature and conditions necessary to construct the units often render the provision of affordable housing infeasible. For Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 7 - example, assisted housing developments utilizing State and federal financial resources typically include 50-80 units. The analysis could describe existing and/or proposed policies or incentives the City will offer to facilitate small lot development, including lot consolidation, and include an evaluation of the financial feasibility of development for lower-income households on smaller sites, given necessary economies of scale. Response: The following text will be added to the Housing Element on Page 82, regarding commercially zoned sites that can accommodate mixed use development: Because the City of Palo Alto is primarily built out, the available sites for new development are limited. Over the past five years, there have been three projects on sites less than one acre that accommodated 128 units at densities ranging from 50 to 83 units per acre. These projects included a total of 85 units affordable to low income households. The City has a good history of mixed use residential developments. Of the 49 residential land use approvals since 2006, 19 of the approvals were approved as mixed use projects. Of the 19 mixed use projects, 11 of the projects were done on parcels of less than half an acre. Residential densities on the 11 projects ranged from 2 units per acre up to 28 units per acre. There was some affordable housing created on the smaller sites. One affordable rental unit was approved as part of a three residential unit development on a .18 acre parcel. And while actual affordable units would not be provided on these smaller mixed use lots, with the City proposing to lower its BMR threshold to three residential units, it anticipates capturing additional housing fees from these smaller developments. These fees would be used to finance future affordable housing developments. In order to encourage more dense housing yields, the City is proposing a number of lot consolidation programs. The advantages of lot consolidation include a potential higher yield of units. Typically, based on the City’s density calculations, the maximum density of a smaller lot always contain a “fractional” unit. By encouraging lot consolidation, these smaller lots would be able to add together the fractional units to create a whole unit. Also, with the removal of a setback requirement, it allows for greater site design flexibility, including parking, which would also yield more units. The City chose smaller parcels, generally less than .25 acres, as potential candidates for lot consolidation. As mentioned , the City has had a number of mixed use development on parcels less than .5 acres, however consolidating these smaller parcels provide a greater feasibility of a higher yield mixed use development. Although smaller parcels were chosen for lot consolidation, it does not preclude larger lots from consolidating. As shown in the City’s HIS maps, there are a number of adjacent sites of varying sizes throughout the City. Those sites also present good lot consolidation opportunities. In addition, in order to encourage development at higher densities on the smaller parcels identified in the inventory, the following programs have been revised and/or added to the list of Goals, Policies and Programs beginning on Page 152 of the Housing Element (text in Bold Italics indicates revisions: Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 8 - H2.2.2 PROGRAM Implement an incentive program within a year of Housing Element adoption for small properties identified as a Housing Inventory Site to encourage housing production on those sites. The incentive would eliminate Site and Design Review if the project meets the following criteria: ¥ The project has 9 residential units or fewer ¥ A residential density of 20 units per acre or higher ¥ Maximum unit size of 900 square feet Five year objective: Streamline processing for identified small Housing Inventory Sites. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Adopt program within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.2.7 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage development on and consolidation of smaller lots, such as development review streamlining, reduction in required parking for smaller units, setback modifications, or graduated density when consolidated lots are over one-half acre. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for lot consolidation to increase availability of suitable sites for affordable housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of adoption of Housing Element Second Units: While the element anticipates 15 new second units will be built in the planning period based on development trends, it must also include an analysis of the anticipated affordability of the second units to demonstrate the appropriateness of this strategy to accommodate the housing needs of low- and moderate-income households. The element should also describe whether or not the units are permitted by right, the need for the units in the community, and the resources or incentives available for their development. Response: The following text has been added to Page 98, following the first paragraph describing Second Units/Cottages: In a review of online rental rates for cottages, attached and detached residential second units in Palo Alto, their rental rates are in the range of moderate income rents as determined by the Tax Credit Allocation Commission (TCAC). Therefore, the anticipated 15 second units will be listed as moderate income. The R-1 District regulations include provisions for second dwelling units by right on properties which meet certain lot size criteria and subject to a list of development standards. The requirements include a minimum parcel size, a maximum living area, a requirement for a covered parking space, and a maximum height of one story. As noted above, Planning staff Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 9 - reviews the project through the building permit process, and if the criteria are met, a building permit is issued. The City has a substantial need for rental housing, and these units provide for an additional type of housing which is attractive to seniors and for multi-generational accommodations. They also offer a way to increase housing stock without using additional land or infrastructure. Hotel Condominiums: The element appears to utilize the potential for new hotels to develop 25 percent of their units for condominium us pursuant to the City’s Service Commercial (CS) Ordinance. While the element states 113 residential units could be provided for residential use based on the approval of three hotels, no information is provided on whether these hotels are actually creating the condominium units as part of the hotel development and whether the housing provided by these hotels meet the census definition of a unit. Should the City rely on these units to accommodate a portion of the housing need for lower-income, the element must include analysis to demonstrate affordability. The analysis should account for all applicable costs such as taxes and insurance and any condominium fees. Response: After a review the requirements for Hotel Condominiums to count towards the City’s RHNA requirements, it appears that the City’s Hotel Condominium ordinance does not meet the census definition of a unit. Therefore, the City will revise Table 3-9 (page 101) and remove the 113 Hotel Condominiums units from the RHNA numbers. In addition, the paragraph describing Hotel Condominiums on Page 96 has been removed from the Housing Element document. Sites with Zoning for a Variety of Housing Types: Emergency Shelters: The element proposes to establish year-round shelters in churches to address the housing need for the homeless population (Program H.3.5.1). However, Chapter 633, Statutes of 2007 (SB 2), requires the identification of a zone(s) where emergency shelters are permitted without a conditional use permit or other discretionary action with sufficient capacity to accommodate at least one year-round shelter. The element must specifically identify the zone(s) or potential zones and demonstrate sufficient capacity to accommodate the need for emergency shelters. The element should also describe the characteristics and suitability of the zone(s) for emergency shelters. Response: The Housing Element has been revised to include the following paragraph on Page 146 describing the zone where emergency shelters will be allowed by right, and to include a Program H3.5.2 which would require that the zoning code be amended to allow emergency shelters by right in this zone within one year of Housing Element adoption (see below). The Research, Office and Limited Manufacturing-Embarcadero (ROLM)(E) zone district was selected to accommodate the homeless shelter. The ROLM(E) zone district is the appropriate district for the emergency shelter for the following reasons: 1. Based on the City’s unmet need of 107 beds, staff calculates that approximately a half acre will be necessary for the shelter. The ROLM(E) district has a greater number of parcels of more than .5 acre to be better able to site the shelter on one parcel. It also has larger parcels that would be appropriate for consolidation to create a .5 acre parcel. Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 10 - 2. The per square footage costs of industrial or light manufacturing uses is much less than residentially or commercially zoned parcels making the emergency shelter more cost efficient. In addition, there are existing buildings in this area which are of an appropriate size to be converted to an emergency shelter. 3. Although not in the downtown area, accessibility to the downtown is available through the City’s free Palo Alto Shuttle. This free crosstown shuttle service begins at the Palo Alto CalTrain station, passes through the downtown area with the final destination in the Embarcadero area. The shuttle operates in the morning through the early evening throughout the work week. Added to Page 146, Emergency and Transitional Housing, paragraph two: The City of Palo Alto has identified the portion of the Research, Office and Limited Manufacturing-Embarcadero (ROLM)(E) zone district east of Highway 101 as having potential sites to accommodate emergency shelters. This area is a light industrial zone, which contains such uses as office use, research facilities and light manufacturing. It is also accessible by transit, and there are retail support services located nearby. The identified area can accommodate a shelter large enough to have capacity for the City’s unmet homeless need. The City has an unmet need of 107 beds. This could translate into a shelter of 107 beds, or the need could be accommodated in two or more shelters of smaller size. Depending on the size of the site required, and other amenities provided in a homeless shelter, an adequately sized facility could be accommodated in this zone. Based on the need for 107 beds, it has been determined that a one-half acre site could accommodate the need for a shelter, or two shelters could be accommodated on smaller sites. There are several sites in this area which are one half acre or more. In addition, there are opportunities for site consolidation. The ROLM(E) district is also appropriate because the square footage costs of industrial or light manufacturing property is much less than residentially or commercial zoned parcels, making the emergency shelter use in this area more cost efficient. Also, there are existing buildings in this area which are of an appropriate size to be converted to an emergency shelter. Accessibility to the downtown from this area is available through the City’s free Palo Alto shuttle, which operates in the morning through the early evening throughout the work week. H3.5.2 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to allow emergency shelters by right with appropriate performance standards to accommodate the City’s unmet need for unhoused residents within an overlay of the ROLM(E) zone district located east of Highway 101. Five-Year Objective: Provide appropriately zoned sites for emergency shelters. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption 2. Government Constraints: Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 11 - Land-Use Controls: The element states the City adopted form-based codes in 2006 (page 123). The element should include a description of the requirements of the code including the following: ¥ The relationship between General Plan land-use designations and the code; ¥ Performance and processing standards; and ¥ Development standards regulating housing including a description of how the code controls form, bulk, building types, performance standards (e.g., ground floor commercial, 30 percent commercial, etc.), uses, density, and any related design criteria. Response: The City’s adopted form-based codes requirements are more similar to contextual based than form based. This means that in addition to the typical list of uses found in traditional zoning regulations, context based design criteria are included for multi-family, commercial, mixed use and pedestrian/transit oriented development. The following text has been added to the Housing Element on Page 123 to further explain the context based standards as they apply to residential development. In multi-family and mixed use zones, the development standards are presented in table format to clearly identify the setback, height, and floor area ratio requirements. In addition, the multi-family and mixed use design criteria offer a framework to guide development that is compatible with adjacent development. These guidelines provide clear direction to developers to help streamline the development review process. The guidelines are illustrated to offer examples of how parking can be integrated in to site design, appropriate locations for open space, as well as recommendations for sustainable building design. When these standards were adopted in 2007, the intent was to bring the zoning regulations into compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. Local Processing and Permit Procedures: The element indicates architectural review is required as part of the approval procedure for residential development (page 142). The element should include a description and analysis of the design criteria review guidelines and process, including identifying requirements and approval procedures and analyzing the impact of the guidelines and process on housing costs and approval certainty. Response: In addition to the discussion on Page 142 of the Housing Element, the following discussion has been added to this section: Architectural review is an important and necessary procedure to insure that new development is consistent and compatible with the existing surrounding developments. All new construction projects of 5000 square feet or more, and all multi-family projects with 3 or more units are required to be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board (ARB). A preliminary meeting with Planning staff is recommended to help streamline the process by identifying any potential issues up front. Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 12 - The design criteria found in the updated zoning code also provides clear guidelines for residential and mixed use projects. Generally, standards are related to measurable criteria such as setback, height and floor area. Once an application is submitted, it is routed to other City departments to obtain a comprehensive review of all code requirements. Once an application is deemed complete, it is scheduled for ARB review, and a recommendation is made. The municipal code findings for Architectural Review include that the design should be consistent with applicable elements of the comprehensive plan, consistent with the immediate environment, promote harmonious transitions in scale and character between different land uses, and that the design incorporates energy efficient elements. The final decision is made by the Planning and Community Environment Director, and this decision may be appealed to the City Council. The timeline for this process can range from 3 to 6 months. In order to expedite processing of applications, the Council recently approved a process revision that establishes that the Architectural Review Board has a maximum of three meetings to approve or deny an application. Because guidelines have been established for this process, there is a fair degree of certainty in the review process. In addition, the draft Housing Element proposes Program 2.2.2 (page 157) to provide an incentive to streamline the development review process by avoiding Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council review in the application process if certain requirements are met. Inclusionary Housing: While the Element generally describes the inclusionary housing ordinance framework (Page 111 and 124), it does not include an evaluation of those requirements for their potential impact on the cost and supply of housing. For example, the element should analyze the types of options and incentives the City offers to provide flexibility and facilitate compliance with the inclusionary requirements. Analyzing the inclusionary provisions is particularly important given current market conditions and the cumulative impact of local regulations. The element could include a program to evaluate the inclusionary ordinance within the next year based on current market conditions and engage the development community to facilitate this analysis. Response: The following paragraph was added to Page 24 of the Housing Element, under the discussion of Below Market Rate Housing Program: Given the high land costs and availability of land suitable for residential development within Santa Clara County and adjacent San Mateo County, most communities in the area have adopted inclusionary housing programs in order to provide affordable housing options. Palo Alto has had a Below Market Rate housing program since 1973. Although this could be seen as a constraint to housing development, from 2000 to 2008, Palo Alto produced an average of 100 units per year, and permits were issued for a total of 921 housing units between 2007 and 2011. The fact that most jurisdictions in the area have similar inclusionary housing programs, and that housing, including the required BMR units, continues to be produced, the City’s BMR program does not hinder housing production. Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 13 - In order to evaluate the program’s impact on housing production, Program H3.1.14 has been added to evaluate the provisions of the BMR program to determine if additional incentives are needed to encourage development of housing given current market conditions. H3.1.14 PROGRAM Evaluate the provisions of the Below Market Rate (BMR) Program to determine if additional incentives are needed to encourage development of housing given current market conditions. Five-Year Objective: Engage in discussions with the development community and determine if additional incentives are needed to improve the BMR Program. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Evaluate the Program within one year of Housing Element adoption Constraints on Persons with Disabilities: While the City has adopted a reasonable accommodation ordinance in respect to the Below Market Rate Program, the ordinance does not apply citywide. The element must include a detailed analysis of zoning and development standards including the City’s reasonable accommodation procedure for the development of housing for persons with disabilities to identify any constraints, and if necessary include programs to address this need. To address this requirement, the element could include a program to apply the current reasonable accommodation procedure beyond the BMR program. Response: The following discussion regarding zoning regulations which may be a constraint to persons with disabilities has been added to Page 147, under the discussion of Reasonable Accommodations Requests: Zoning regulations may be a constraint to development or conversion of housing to make it suitable for persons with disabilities. Physical improvements needed to accommodate a person’s disability may consist of ramps, handrails elevators, lifts, or other physical improvements. Particularly when retrofitting existing housing, it may not be possible to build these improvements within the setbacks, lot coverage and other standards required in a specific zoning district. The City is proposing to amend the zoning code to provide a procedure which would allow a request for modification to these rules, standards and practices for siting, development and use of housing-related facilities to eliminate regulatory barriers and provide a person with a disability equal opportunity to housing of their choice. In addition, Program H.4.1.6 has been added to the Goals, Policies and Programs: H4.1.6 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to provide individuals with disabilities reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, practices and procedures that may be necessary to ensure reasonable access to housing. The purpose of this program is to provide a process for individuals with disabilities to make requests for reasonable accommodation in regard to relief from the various land use, zoning, or building laws, rules, policies, practices and/or procedures of the City. Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 14 - Five-Year Objective: Allow for reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities in interpreting land use regulations. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Amend the Zoning Code within one year of Housing Element adoption 3. Special Housing Needs: Developmentally Disabled Population: Chapter 507, Statutes of 2010 (SB 812), amended State housing element law to require an analysis of the special housing needs of persons with developmental disabilities. The term developmental disability refers to a severe and chronic disability attributable to a mental or physical impairment, such as cerebral palsy, epilepsy, or autism, which begins before individuals reach adulthood (Welfare and Institutions Code, Section 4512). The analysis should include the following: ¥ a quantification of the total number of persons with developmental disabilities; ¥ a description of the types of developmental disabilities; ¥ a description of the housing need, including a description of the potential housing problems; and ¥ a discussion of resources, policies and programs including existing housing and services, for persons with developmental disabilities. Response: The Housing Element has been revised to include the following paragraph on Page 31 describing the developmentally disabled population and their housing needs, and to include a Program H4.2.1 which would require that Palo Alto Work with the San Andreas Regional Center to implement an outreach program that informs families in Palo Alto about housing and services available for persons with developmental disabilities (see below). Added to Page 31, following the discussion on persons with disabilities: Developmentally Disabled: The Developmentally Disabled are a separate population identified by the State of California, with differing housing needs from others with disabilities. The Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Act ensures that “patterns and conditions of everyday life which are as close as possible to the norms and patterns of the mainstream of society” are available to these individuals. Furthermore, the Olmstead v. L.C and E.W. United States Supreme Court case required an “Integration Mandate” that “States are required to place persons with mental disabilities in community settings rather than institutions…when determined to be appropriate.” Despites these laws, people with developmental disabilities are finding it increasingly difficult to find affordable, accessible, and appropriate housing that is inclusive in the local community. A developmental disability is defined by the State as “a lifelong disability caused by a mental and/or physical impairment manifested prior to the age of 18 and are expected to be lifelong.” The conditions included under this definition include: ¥ Mental Retardation, ¥ Epilepsy, Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 15 - ¥ Autism, and/or ¥ Cerebral Palsy, and ¥ “Other Conditions needing services similar to a person with mental retardation.” Source: Background Report, 2008, Developmental Disabilities Board Area 5 The State Department of Developmental Services (DDS) currently provides community based services to approximately 243,000 persons with developmental disabilities and their families through a statewide system of 21 regional centers, four developmental centers, and two community-based facilities. The San Andreas Regional Center is one of 21 regional centers in the State of California that provides point of entry to services for people with developmental disabilities and serves the Santa Clara County area. According to the San Andreas Regional Center, there are 219 persons with developmental disabilities living in Palo Alto in 2012. There is some overlap between the developmentally disabled population and the mentally and physically disabled populations (approximately 10 and 15 percent, respectively). Individuals with developmental disabilities are often independent and can live in their own apartments or homes with little support. Others who have more severe disabilities may require 24 hour assistance in homes that can accommodate their needs as individuals. The housing need for the individuals in Palo Alto with developmental disabilities translates to about 70 units. This number is derived based on the age of the population. As the younger individuals approach adulthood, they will need independent or assisted living; and similarly, as the adults age, they too will need assisted living. There are a number of housing types appropriate for people living with a developmental disability: rent subsidized homes, licensed and unlicensed single-family homes, inclusionary housing, Section 8 vouchers, special programs for home purchase, HUD housing and SB 962 homes. The design of housing-accessibility modifications, the proximity to services and transit, and the availability of group living opportunities represent some of the types of considerations that are important in serving this need group. Incorporating barrier-free design in all new multifamily housing (as required by California and Federal Fair Housing laws) is especially important to provide the widest range of choices for disabled residents. Special consideration should also be given to the affordability of housing, as people with disabilities may be living on a fixed income. The most severely disabled persons may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmentally disabilities exist before adulthood, supportive housing for the developmentally disabled should focus on the transition from the person’s living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult. In order to assist in the housing needs for persons with Developmental Disabilities, the City of Palo Alto will implement programs to coordinate housing activities and outreach with the Regional Center and to facilitate additional housing opportunities in Palo Alto for persons with disabilities, especially persons with developmental disabilities. Add Program H4.2.2: Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 16 - H4.2.2 PROGRAM Work with the San Andreas Regional Center to implement an outreach program that informs families in Palo Alto about housing and services available for persons with developmental disabilities. The program could include the development of an informational brochure, including information on services on the City’s website, and providing housing- related training for individuals/families through workshops. Five-year objective: Provide information regarding housing to families of persons with developmental disabilities. Funding Source: General Fund Responsibility: Planning and Community Environment Time frame: Develop outreach program within two years of adoption of the Housing Element. 4. Analyze existing assisted housing developments that are eligible to change to non-low- income housing uses during the next 10 years due to termination of subsidy contracts, mortgage prepayment, or expiration of use restrictions. (Sections 65583(a)(8) through 65583(a)(9)(D)). While the element includes an identification and analysis of units at risk between 2004-2014, the element must identify and analyze units at-risk during ten years following the beginning of the planning period (2009-2019). If units are found to be at-risk, the element must estimate the total cost of replacing and preserving these units and include a list of entities with the capacity to acquire multifamily developments at-risk. For a listing of units at-risk in Palo Alto, contact the California Housing Partnership Corporation http://www.chpc.net/. Response: The Housing Element has been revised as follows to expand on the discussion of the preservation of at-risk housing. The section discussing at-risk housing begins on Page 62 of the Housing Element. Many of the City’s affordable housing agreements are in place through 2019. However, some affordable housing developments are dependent on Section 8 vouchers to assist in the project cash flow. While difficult to predict the direction of federal funding for the Section 8 program and affordable housing funding in general, the City will continue to advocate for maintaining or increasing funding for affordable housing. Of the City’s affordable housing developments, only one development, the Terman Apartments, was found to be a high risk of reverting to market rate housing. The Terman Apartments were financed using the Section 8 221(d)(3) mortgage insurance program. The development has been at risk for some time and the City has approached the owner a number of times about the possibility of purchasing the unit. However, the owner has not been receptive to selling the development. The City will work with the owner and other non-profit affordable housing developers in preserving this project which serves moderate income households. In 2008, the City and Palo Alto Housing Corporation, Inc. (PAHC), a non-profit housing developer, approached the owner of the Terman Apartments about the possibility of selling the units to PAHC but the owner was not willing. In addition to PAHC, the City has worked with a number of affordable housing developers in the City including Eden Housing and Bridge Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 17 - Housing Corporation, both established affordable housing developers in the Bay Area. Based on recent development proformas of affordable housing projects in the City, the total estimated cost of replacing 92 total units, with land acquisition and developments costs, at the Terman Apartments would be approximately $45 million. C: Housing Programs 1. Programs – Timelines and Implementation: To address the program requirements of Government Code Section 65583 (c) (1-6), and to facilitate implementation, all programs should include: (1) a description of the City’s specific role in implementation; (2) definitive implementation timelines; (3) objectives, quantified where appropriate; and (4) identification of responsible agencies and officials. Programs with clear, quantifiable objectives will assist the City in evaluating the effectiveness of program actions and appropriateness of goals, objectives and policies as required in the review and revise section of State housing element law for future updates. Programs to be revised include, but are not limited to, the following: Programs H1.1.2, H1.1.3, H2.1.1, H2.1.9, H3.3.1, H3.4.4, and H4.2.1: Describe the specific actions and timeframes the City will take to implement these programs. Where applicable, estimate the number of units or households that will be assisted within the planning period. Program H2.1.4: Describe the incentives the City will provide to encourage the development of smaller housing units. Programs H3.3.6, H3.3.7, H4.1.1, and H4.1.2: Describe the City’s specific role in implementation of these programs. Response: All of the programs have been revised to include five-year objectives, funding sources, responsible agencies and time frames. Where appropriate, the five-year objective includes quantifiable objectives, including an estimate of the number of units or households to be assisted within the planning period. Attached is a revised list of programs which replace the programs beginning on Page 150 through Page 161 of the Draft Housing Element. It includes the additional programs added as a result of HCD comments above. Revised and new policies are indicated in bold italic type. Comments on Specific Programs: Listed below are clarifications regarding the specific programs mentioned above: Program H1.1.2 (Second Unit Amnesty) – now includes a time frame that creation of the amnesty program would be implemented within one year of adoption of the housing element. Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 18 - Program H1.1.2 (Incentives to retain rental cottages) – Clarifies the types of incentives to be considered and indicates that the program will be implemented within one year of Housing Element adoption. Program H2.1.1 (Amend zoning code to allow high density residential in mixed use projects near rail & limited exceptions to height limit) – includes timeframe that zoning code amendments will be considered within one year of Housing Element adoption. Program H2.1.9 (Transfer of Development Rights program) – establishes time frame that program will be considered within two years of Housing Element adoption. Program H3.3.1 (Expedite processing for affordable housing projects) – indicates program will continue to be implemented upon adoption of the Housing Element and will be ongoing. Program H3.4.4 (Work with affordable housing developers to acquire, rehabilitate and convert existing multi-family development) – added an objective that the City will identify potential sites and provide this information to developers within one year of Housing Element adoption. Program H4.2.1 (Evaluate zoning code to facilitate construction of housing for special needs households) – Added a time frame that the zoning code will be evaluated within one year of Housing Element adoption. Program H2.1.4 (Encourage the development of smaller housing units) – Program has been amended to indicate the types of incentives which would be provided for creating smaller, more affordable housing units. Describe the City’s specific role in the implementation of the following programs: Program H3.3.6 (Participate in the Santa Clara County Homeless Collaborative) – A five-year objective was added that indicates that City staff will continue to participate as members of the Collaborative’s CDBG and HOME Program Coordinators Group. Program H3.3.7 (Participate with support agencies addressing homelessness) – a five-year objective was added which indicates that City staff will continue to participate in the prioritization of funding for County-wide programs. Program H4.1.1 (Work with agencies to ensure fair housing laws are enforced) – a five-year objective was added that indicates that City staff will continue to coordinate with state and federal agencies to support programs to eliminate housing discrimination. Program H4.1.2 (Support groups that provide fair housing services) – a five-year objective was added which clarifies that the city provides financial support through CDBG finding to the Mid- Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing and Project Sentinel. 2. Identify Adequate Sites Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 19 - As noted in Finding A1, the element does not include a complete site analysis and therefore, the adequacy of sites and zoning were not established. Based on the results of a complete sites inventory and analysis, the City may need to add or revise programs to address a shortfall of sites or zoning available to encourage a variety of housing types. In addition, the element should be revised as follows: Rezoning Program: Please be aware should the element rely on sites which are expected to be rezoned in the CN zoning district to accommodate the lower-income housing need (Page 71), it must include a program to rezone sites in accordance with Government Code Sections 65583(a)(3) and 65583.2(h) for 100 percent of the remaining lower-income housing need. The sites must be zoned to permit owner-occupied and rental multifamily uses by-right during the planning period and include minimum density and development standards that permit at least 16 units per site at a density of at least 20 units per acre. Also, at least 50 percent of the remaining need must be planned on sites that exclusively allow residential uses. Response: The City does not require rezoning additional sites to meet its lower income housing need. After subtracting the 251 lower income units approved or built during the 2007-2014 cycle from the City’s low and very low requirement of 1,233 units, the City has an unmet need of 982 low and very low income units. In order to accommodate the very low and low income needs, State law requires the City to identify sites that have a density of 20 units per acre or higher, as per the density assigned to the City per State law. In the City’s Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) list, all parcels with a density of 20 units per acre or more have been highlighted. The total number provided by the highlighted parcels is 1,056 housing units. Therefore the City can accommodate its unmet low and very low income housing need for the 2007-2014 RHNA cycle by right. While the City does have proposed programs that will revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow up to 20 dwelling units per acre for certain zoning districts, the City can meet its low and very low needs with existing zoning. In addition, an application has been submitted to rezone the site to Planned Community (PC) to allow 60 units of extremely low to low income senior affordable rental housing and 15 market rate units by right, for a total of 75 units for 595 Maybell Avenue. There are now four units on the site, so the net yield will be 71 units. This site, with the proposed rezoning will meet the criteria for accommodating the identified unaccommodated need: the zoning will allow multiple family residential uses by right, the site is large enough to accommodate more than 16 units, and the density will be about 30 units per acre. Although the City does not plan to use this property to meet its unaccommodated need requirements, the rezoning will provide additional affordable housing to help the City meet its RHNA numbers. The following Program 2.2.8 has been added to the Housing Element to provide for the rezoning of this site to accommodate this proposal within one year of Housing Element adoption. H2.2.8 PROGRAM Rezone property at 595 Maybell Avenue from the RM-15 and R-2 zone districts to the PC zone district to allow for development of 60 units of extremely low to low income senior affordable rental housing units and Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 20 - 15 market rate units. Five-Year Objective: Provide an opportunity for development of 60 units affordable to extremely low and low income senior residents and 15 market rate units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption Two other programs have been added to the Housing Element to provide for the rezoning of the CN and GM zones to be consistent with the realistic capacity as outlined in the City Housing Inventory Sites list. The rezones will occur within a one year of Housing Element adoption. 2.2.5 PROGRAM Revise the Zoning Ordinance to increase the density of up to 20 units per acre on CN-zoned parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for affordable units on CN zoned Housing Inventory Sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend zoning code within one year of Housing Element adoption. 2.2.6 PROGRAM Revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow for residential uses with the density of up to 30 units per acre on GM parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for affordable units on GM zoned Housing Inventory Sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Small Sites/Lot Consolidation: The element relies on the potential of small sites to be consolidated to accommodate the City’s share of the RHNA, particularly for lower-income households. As a result, the element must include specific programs to facilitate lot consolidation and development of housing on small sites. Response: Program H2.2.7 has been added to amend the zoning code to create zoning incentives to encourage lot consolidation (see above). The program will be implemented within one year of Housing Element adoption. Mixed Use Development: As the City is relying on underutilized sites and the potential for mixed use development to accommodate its RHNA for lower-income households, the element must include specific program actions to promote redevelopment of underutilized sites and lot consolidation including financial assistance, regulatory concessions or incentives to encourage and facilitate additional or more intense residential development on non-vacant and underutilized sites. Examples of incentive include: 1) organizing special marketing events Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 21 - geared toward the development community; 2) posting the sites inventory on the local government’s webpage; 3) identifying and targeting specific financial resources; and reducing appropriate development standards. Response: In addition to Program H2.1.10 noted above, which establishes zoning incentives for lot consolidation on identified Housing Inventory Sites, the following program has been added: H2.1.11 PROGRAM Promote redevelopment of underutilized sites and lot consolidation by providing information about potential housing sites on the City’s website, including the Housing Inventory Sites and information about financial resources available through City housing programs. Five-Year Objective: Provide information to developers about potential housing sites and opportunities for lot consolidation. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Post information on website within one year of Housing Element adoption 3. Programs to Meet the Needs of Extremely Low-, Very Low-, Low- and Moderate- Income Households While the element includes some actions proposed to assist in the development of housing for very-low and low-income households, it must include programs that specifically assist in the development of a variety of housing types to address the needs of extremely low-income (ELI) households. To address this requirement, the element could revise programs to prioritize some funding for the development of housing affordable to ELI households, and/or offer financial incentives or regulatory concessions to encourage the development of housing types, such as multifamily, single-room occupancy units, and supportive housing, which address some of the needs of this income group. Response: Program H3.1.7 (Page 156 of the Housing Element, proposes to amend the Zoning Code to allow Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units in commercial and high density residential zoning districts. These units are generally seen to be affordable to ELI households. In addition, in order to further address the housing needs of ELI households, the following two programs have been added to the Housing Element: H3.1.15 PROGRAM When using its Housing Development funds for residential projects, the City shall give a strong preference to those developments which serve extremely low-income (ELI) households. Five-Year Objective: Provide funding opportunities for development of housing for Extremely Low Income (ELI) households. Funding Source: City Housing funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 22 - H3.1.16 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to provide additional incentives to developers who provide extremely-low income (ELI) housing units, above and beyond what is required by the Below Market Rate (BMR) program, such as reduced parking requirements for smaller units, reduced landscaping requirements and reduced fees. Five-Year Objective: Provide incentives for development of housing for Extremely Low Income (ELI) households. Funding Source: City Housing funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption 4. Removal of Governmental Constraints: As noted in Finding A2, the element requires a complete analysis of potential government constraints. Depending on the results of that analysis, the City may need to revise or add programs and address and remove or mitigate any identified constraints. Response: As noted above in the response to comment A2 above regarding analysis of government constraints, additional analysis has been provided for the following topics: Land Use Controls, Local Processing and Permit Procedures, Inclusionary Housing and Constraints on Persons with disabilities. As a result of this additional analysis for the City’s inclusionary housing program, Program H3.1.14 was added to the Housing Element, which would require an evaluation of the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) Program to determine if additional incentives are needed to encourage development of housing. In addition, as a result of the additional analysis regarding the Developmentally Disabled population, Program H4.2.2 has been added to implement an outreach program, working with the San Andreas Regional Center. 5. Housing Units At-Risk of Conversion to Market-Rate: The element identifies housing units at-risk of converting to market-rate. Therefore, program H3.1.5 should be revised to include specific and proactive actions. For example, the program should ensure compliance with noticing requirements and include a tenant education component and consider pursuing funding on at least an annual basis. The program should also commit the City to contacting non-profits immediately to develop a preservation strategy by a date certain to be ready to act quickly when notice of conversion is received. Response: Program H3.1.5 has been revised to contain pro-active and specific actions preserve affordable housing at-risk of converting to market rate (see below). In addition, please see discussion about Terman Apartments on Page 13 and 14 of this letter. 3.1.5 Preserve affordable housing stock by monitoring compliance, providing tenant education seeking other sources of funds for affording housing developments at risk of market rate conversions. The City will continue to renew existing funding sources supporting rehabilitation and maintenance activities. Response to HCD comments on Palo Alto Draft Housing Element March 26, 2013 - 23 - In addition, the following program has been added as Program 3.1.17 H3.1.17 PROGRAM Any affordable development deemed a high risk at market rate conversion, within two years of the expiration of the affordability requirements, the City will contact the owner and explore the possibility of extending the affordability of the development. Five-Year Objective: To protect those affordable developments deemed a high risk to converting to market rate. Funding Source: City Housing funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption D. Quantified Objectives: Include quantified objectives estimating the number of housing units by income category that can be constructed, rehabilitated, and conserved over a five-year time period. This requirement could be addressed by utilizing a matrix like the one illustrated below: Income New Construction Rehabilitation Conservation/ Preservation Extremely Low- 45 100 Very Low- 65 175 Low- 20 75 Moderate- 10 600 92 Above Moderate- 650 2400 TOTAL 790 3350 92 Response: The City will add a Quantified Objectives table in Chapter 3 following Table 2-57 demonstrating the estimated numbers of housing units that will constructed, rehabilitated and conserved. The following text will accompany the table: As required by Section 65583 of the California Government Code, the goals, policies and actions identified in this document seek to meet quantified housing objectives. Table 2-57 summarizes these findings, which result in a total estimated construction of 790 new housing units. The estimates for Rehabilitation and Conservation were based on City Planning and Building Department permit data. City of Palo Alto Housing Element 2007-2014 Submitted to HCD: August 16, 2012 Revised: March 29, 2013 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS City Council Gregory Scharff, Mayor Nancy Shepherd, Vice Mayor Marc Berman, Councilmember Patrick Burt, Councilmember Karen Holman, Councilmember Larry Klein, Councilmember Liz Kniss, Councilmember Gail A. Price, Councilmember Greg Schmid, Councilmember Planning and Transportation Commission Eduardo Martinez, Chair Mark Michael, Vice Chair Michael Alcheck Arthur Keller Carl King Alex Panelli Greg Tanaka Technical Advisory Group Susan Fineberg Tony Carrasco Melissa Baten Caswell Sherrie Furman Tom Jordan Carol Lamont Doug Moran Adam Montgomery Jean McCown Janet Owens Deborah Pappas Steve Raney Fran Wagstaff City Staff Curtis Williams, Director of Planning and Community Environment Aaron Aknin, Assistant Director of Planning and Community Environment Steven Turner, Advance Planning Manager Roland Rivera, Senior Planner Tim Wong, Senior Planner Chitra Moitra, Planner Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney Maureen Brooks, Consultant I Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Community Context 1 1.2 Purpose and Scope of the Housing Element 2 1.3 Relationship to the General Plan 2 1.4 Data and Information Sources 4 1.5 Community Involvement 4 1.6 Adoption 5 Chapter 2 Housing Needs Assessment 6 2.1 Demographic Profile 6 Population Growth and Trends 6 Age and Gender Characteristics 7 Race and Ethnicity 8 2.2 Employment Characteristics and Trends 9 Employment Trends 9 Local Employment Growth 10 Jobs-Housing Balance 13 2.3 Household Characteristics and Trends 13 Household Type and Size 14 Households by Tenure 16 Household Income 17 Overpaying and Overcrowded Households 19 Overpaying 19 Overcrowding 22 2.4 Special Needs Groups 25 Senior Households 26 Persons with Disabilities 29 Developmentally Disabled 31 Large Households 39 Single Parent and Female Headed Households 34 Farmworkers 35 Homeless Persons 37 i) Prevention Services 39 ii) Emergency Shelters 40 iii) Transitional Affordable Housing 45 Extremely Low Income Households 46 Projected Needs 48 2.5 Housing Characteristics 49 Housing Development 49 Vacancy Rates 51 II Housing Types 52 Housing Age and Conditions 55 Housing Cost 57 Housing Affordability 58 Foreclosures 60 Assisted Housing At-Risk of Conversion 61 Expiration of Section 8 Project Based Subsidies 63 Section 221(d)(4) Projects 63 Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program Projects 63 Cost Analysis 64 2.6 Regional Housing Needs 65 Housing Needs Allocation Process 65 Units Approved and Remaining Need 66 Chapter 3 Housing Resources and Inventory 72 3.1 Land Inventory 72 Zoning Appropriate to Accommodate Housing for Lower-Income Households 72 Vacant and Infill Redevelopment Opportunities to Accommodate Residential Development 73 3.2 Other Sources of Affordable Housing 108 3.3 Available Sites Conclusions 109 3.4 Financial Resources 109 Federal Funds 111 State Funds 111 Local Funds 112 3.5 Opportunities for Energy Conservation 113 Integrated Land Use and Transportation 114 Energy Conservation 116 Building Design and Construction 121 3.6 Other Programs 121 Chapter 4 Housing Constraints 123 4.1 Non-Governmental Constraints 123 Housing Market Conditions 123 Land Costs 124 Hard/Construction Costs 124 Financing/Soft Costs 125 Affordable Housing Development 127 Environmental Constraints 128 Infrastructure Constraints 129 Small Sites 130 Schools 130 4.2 Governmental Constraints 131 Land Use Controls 131 III Context-Based Design Codes 133 Density Bonus Provisions 134 Second Units 134 Below Market Rate Housing Program 134 Growth Control or Similar Ordinances 134 Zoning for a Variety of Housing 135 Height Limits 140 Parking 141 4.3 Development Review Process 142 Fees and Exactions 142 Nexus Requirements 149 Parks, Community Center, and Libraries Development Fee 150 Housing Development Fee 150 Building Codes and Enforcement 150 On/Off-Site Improvement Standards 150 Development Review Process 151 4.4 Constraints to Housing for Persons With Disabilities 155 Special Needs Housing 156 Emergency and Transitional Housing 157 Reasonable Accommodations Requests 158 Building Codes and Development Regulations 158 Chapter 5 Past Accomplishments and New Housing Goals, Policies and Programs 160 5.1 1999-2006 Housing Plan Accomplishments 160 Summary Evaluation of Past Accomplishments 161 Response to AB 1233 162 5.2 Housing Goals, Policies and Programs 163 5.3 1999-2006 Accomplishments Matrix 171 Figures 1-1 Regional Location of Palo Alto (Map) 1 2-1 Senior and Preschool Population Trends in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 8 2-2 Racial Characteristics of Population in Palo Alto and Santa Clara County, 2008 9 2-3 Total Household Growth in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 14 2-4 Housing Stock by Unit Type in Palo Alto, 2008 55 2-5 Housing Tenure by Structure of Year Built 56 2-6 Housing Stock by Tenure and Number of Bedrooms, 2008 57 2-7 Housing Stock of Palo Alto by Year Built, 2008 58 2-8 Comparison of Achievements in Reaching ABAG Goals in the Past and Current Cycle by Income Level 70 IV Tables 2-1 Historical Population Growth in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 7 2-2 Population Trends of Neighboring Jurisdictions, 1990-2008 7 2-3 Population Increase by Age Cohorts in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 7 2-4 Employment Projections by Industry for Palo Alto, 1980-2020 10 2-5 Major Employers in Palo Alto, 2008 11 2-6 Typical Hourly Wage and Mean Wages of the Some Jobs of Palo Alto Residents, 2008 12 2-7 Commute Patterns of Palo Alto Residents, 2008 12 2-8 Type of Household Growth in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 15 2-9 Average Household Size in Palo Alto, 1970-2008 16 2-10 Tenure of Occupied Housing in Palo Alto Residents, 2000-2008 16 2-11 Tenure by Household Size in Palo Alto, 2008 17 2-12 HUD Annual Household Income Limits, 2008 Santa Clara County 18 2-13 Household Income Distribution by Age for Santa Clara County and Palo Alto, 2008 19 2-14 Affordability of Rental Housing Cost by Area Median Income, 2009 20 2-15 Affordability of Ownership Housing Cost by Area Median Income, 2009 20 2-16 Palo Alto Households Paying More than 30 Percent of Household Income for Housing, 2008 21 2-17 Palo Alto Housing Cost as Percentage of Household Income, 2008 21 2-18 Average Household Size of Occupied Units in Palo Alto, 2008 23 2-19 Household Size by Tenure in Palo Alto, 2008 23 2-20 HUD Established Fair Markets Rents, 2008 24 2-21 Overcrowded Households in Palo Alto, 2008 24 2-22 Senior Population Increase in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 25 2-23 Senior Household Income Distribution for Santa Clara County and Palo Alto, 2008 26 2-24 Senior Households by Tenure in Palo Alto, 2008 27 2-25 Independent Living Facilities for Elderly in Palo Alto, 2008 27 2-26 Residential Care Facilities (Assisted Living) for Elderly Population in Palo Alto 28 2-27 Number of Non-institutionalized Disabled Civilian by Age Group 30 2-28 Licensed Community Care Facilities in Santa Clara County Serving Palo Alto 33 2-29 Larger Households by Tenure in Palo Alto, 2008 34 2-30 Occupied Housing Stock by Number of Bedrooms in Palo Alto, 2008 34 2-31 Female-Headed Households in Palo Alto, 2008 35 2-32 Total Number of Sheltered and Unsheltered Homeless Persons, 2009-2011 38 2-33 Lists of Organizations Providing Prevention Services for the Homeless in Palo Alto 39 2-34 List of Emergency Shelters in Santa Clara County Serving Palo Alto Residents 41 2-35 List of Emergency Shelters in Santa Clara County Serving all Residents 43 V 2-36 Transitional Housing Shelters Serving Palo Alto 45 2-37 Supportive Share Housing Facilities in Palo Alto 46 2-38 HUD Annual Income Limit Santa Clara County, 2008 46 2-39 Median Gross Rent in Palo Alto,1990-2008 46 2-40 Affordability of Rental Housing Cost by Income, 2009 47 2-41 Households with Housing Problems Palo Alto by Income, 2000 48 2-42 ABAG’s New Construction Need by Household Income Level in Palo Alto, 2007-2014 49 2-43 Progress in Meeting Palo Alto’s Fair Share of the Regions 2007-2014 Housing Need by Income Level 49 2-44 Total Number of Housing Units in Palo Alto, 1970-2008 49 2-45 Annual Rate of Housing Production Since 1970 50 2-46 Housing Vacancy in Palo Alto, 2000-2008 51 2-47 Housing Vacancy Type in Palo Alto, 2008 52 2-48 Housing Stock by Type by Type of Housing Since 2000 53 2-49 Regional Median Home Values Since 2000 58 2-50 Rental Housing Affordability, 2009 59 2-51 Ownership Housing Affordability, 2009 59 2-52 Median Rent and Home Value of Palo Alto Since 1990 60 2-53 Median Rents by Number of Bedrooms, 2009 60 2-54 Summary of Government Assisted Units “At Risk” for Conversion 62 2-55 Santa Clara County Housing Needs Allocation, 2007-2014 66 2-56 ABAG’s New Construction Need by Household Income Level in Palo Alto, 2007-2014 66 2-57 Progress in meeting Palo Alto’s Fair Share of the Region’s 2007-2014 Cycle Housing 67 2-57a Quantifiable Objectives 67 2-58 List of Projects with Building Permit Issued and Planning Entitlement Issued by Income Categories as of December 2011 69 3-1 Allowed Residential Densities per Zoning District 74 3-2 Residential Densities of Multifamily Residential or Mixed Use Project Built or Approved 76 3-3 “Realistic Capacity” Density Factor Compared to Allowed Residential Densities per Zoning District 77 3-4 Table of Commercially Zoned Housing Inventory Sites 86-97 3-5 Table of SOFA 2 Housing Inventory Sites 100-103 3-6 Table of Existing Residential Zoning with Existing Commercial uses on HIS 105-107 3-7 Summary of Housing Unit Production from January 2007 to December 2011 109 3-8 Summary of RHNA need and Housing Inventory Sites 110 3-9 Total Capacity of Housing Inventory Sites at 20 DU/AC 111 3-10 List of Integrated Land Use and Transportation Programs in Palo Alto 115 3-11 List of Environmental Sustainability Programs in Palo Alto 117-121 4-1 Disposition Table of Applications for Conventional Home Purchase Loans, 2007 126 4-2 Existing Land Use Category Distribution of Palo Alto 131 VI 4-3 Housing Types Permitted by Zoning Districts 136 4-4 Existing Residential Development Standards 137 4-5 R-1 Districts and Minimum Site Areas 138 4-6 Zoning Category Distribution of Palo Alto 140 4-7 Parking Requirements for Residential Zones 142 4-8 Palo Alto Residential Development Impact Fees 143 4-9 Palo Alto Development Impact Fee Exemptions 144 4-10 City of Palo Alto Planning Division Application Fee Schedule Effective August 27, 2010 146-148 4-11 Building Permits and Other Department Fees 149 4-12 Typical Processing Procedures by Project Type 155 4-13 Timelines for Permit Procedures 155 EXHIBITS A. Map of Parcels in the Housing Inventory Sites a. HIS City Wide Map b. Enlarged HIS map of University Ave. c. Enlarged HIS map of California Ave. d. Enlarged HIS map of El Camino Real B. Goals, Policies, and Programs Disposition C. Technical Assistance Group (TAG) Roster Chapter 1 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 COMMUNITY CONTEXT Incorporated in 1894 and located 35 miles south of San Francisco and 14 miles north of San Jose, the City of Palo Alto is a community of approximately 63,000 residents. Part of the San Francisco Metropolitan Bay Area and the Silicon Valley, Palo Alto is located within Santa Clara County and borders San Mateo County. The City‘s boundaries extend from San Francisco Bay on the east to the Skyline Ridge of the coastal mountains on the west, with Menlo Park to the north and Mountain View to the south. The City encompasses an area of approximately 26 square miles, one-third of which is open space. Palo Alto’s main transportation corridors are Interstate 280, Highway 101, Highway 84 - the Dumbarton Bridge and Highway 92 - the Hayward-San Mateo Bridge. Air transportation is provided by San Francisco, San Jose and Oakland international airports. Within the City, commuter rail stations include the Palo Alto University Avenue stop, one of the most used in the CalTrain system and the California Avenue station. Alternative transportation options include bike paths throughout the City, and an internal shuttle service. Figure 1-1 Regional Location of Palo Alto Chapter 1 2 The City of Palo Alto can be described as a suburban residential community with a vibrant economy in the high technology and medical sectors. Its housing stock provides a number of housing types, including single family homes, townhomes, condominiums and one mobile home park. Of the approximate 27,000 housing units in the City, approximately 63% of the housing units are single family residential units. As with many other Silicon Valley jurisdictions, the demand for housing exceeds housing supply, thus escalating housing prices. In 2006, the median sales price for a single family home was $1,365,000. Even with the downturn of the economy and its affects on the real estate market, current housing prices have rebounded to nearly equal the pre-downturn housing prices. Even with the gradual recovery of its housing market, Palo Alto faces important challenges. The City is nearly built out with only .5% of the City’s developable land vacant with no opportunities to annex additional areas to accommodate the City’s future housing needs. The high cost of the land coupled with the smaller lot sizes in the City makes residential development difficult. With the high median sales price, providing housing affordable to all segments of the population is an issue. In addition, while Palo Alto is fortunate to have a surplus of jobs in the City, the City’s circulation infrastructure is taxed by the large amount of daily commuters, impacting its streets and neighborhoods. 1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT The California State Legislature has identified the attainment of a decent home and suitable living environment for every citizen as the State’s major housing goal. Recognizing the important role of local planning programs in the pursuit of this goal, the Legislature has mandated that every city and county prepare a Housing Element as part of its comprehensive General Plan. The State currently requires each city and county to update its Housing Element every five years to ensure that it addresses its changing housing needs and identifies sufficient opportunities to provide housing for all economic segments of the community. The current Housing Element will serve the planning period that began January 1, 2007 to June 30, 2014 and builds on the progress made under previous Palo Alto Housing Elements. This is a seven year period instead of the usual five due to a request by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) to coincide the Regional Needs Housing Allocation (RHNA) process with the 2008 Regional Transportation Plan update. The City has previously adopted four Housing Elements, the most recent being the 1999-2006 City of Palo Alto Housing Element adopted in 2002. This current Housing Element shows how the City proposes to address its fair share of the regional housing need that ABAG approved in May 2008. This document was prepared pursuant to Article 10.6 of the Government Code (State Housing Element Law) and presents a comprehensive set of housing policies and actions for the years 2007–2014. It builds on an assessment of Palo Alto’s housing needs including the regional housing needs allocation and an evaluation of existing housing programs, available land for future housing, and constraints on housing production. 1.3 RELATIONSHIP TO THE GENERAL PLAN Cities and counties in California are required to develop comprehensive General Plans, which are long-range planning documents to guide future growth and development. A community's Chapter 1 3 General Plan typically provides an extensive and long-term strategy for the physical development of the community and any adjoining land. There are seven subject areas that a community’s General Plan must address, although other subjects can be added based on the community’s needs and objectives. This Housing Element is intended to serve as the seventh mandated Element of Palo Alto’s General Plan (known as the Comprehensive Plan.). The other “Elements” that the Plan must contain are Land Use, Circulation, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, and Safety. The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan addresses the requirements of State law through the following elements: Land Use and Design Housing Transportation Natural Environment Community Services and Facilities Business and Economics In addition to revising the Housing Element, the City of Palo Alto is undertaking a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to update the Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1998. The purpose of the Amendment is to extend the horizon year of the existing Comprehensive Plan from 2010 to 2020, revise base conditions and growth projections, modify policies and programs, and update the land use map as well as revise the Housing Element. A focus of the amendments will be to ensure that sufficient public services will be available to serve new housing development and that sufficient land is preserved to provide neighborhood-serving retail uses. State law requires the Housing Element to include the following: Evaluation of existing housing needs; Estimates of projected housing needs; Review of previous Housing Element goals and programs that evaluates how well they achieved the City’s objectives; Inventory of adequate sites with an analysis that assesses the jurisdiction’s ability to accommodate its share of the regional housing need in light of environmental and infrastructure issues and conditions; Identification of governmental and non-governmental constraints to the production and maintenance of housing: Specific proposals to address identified needs, remove or reduce governmental constraints; and conserve and improve existing affordable housing; and Quantifiable objectives that estimate the maximum number of units by income level for construction, rehabilitation and conservation of housing during the planning period. Chapter 1 4 The State law also requires communities to submit their housing elements for review by the State’s Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), to determine if they comply with State Housing Element Law (Article 10.6 of the Government Code). 1.4 DATA AND INFORMATION SOURCES The information for this Housing Element Update came from a variety of sources. The primary sources used were U.S. Census (Census 1990 and 2000), America Community Survey (ACS) Data 2006-2008, California Department of Finance, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Projections (primarily 2007), and Palo Alto Planning Department’s Building Permit data. Other data sources include Claritas Inc., Real Facts, various private real estate rents, marketing data, and the HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data systems. For data analysis of the Housing Needs Assessment the City has used ACS 2006-2008 data. Although more recent ACS data is available, ACS 2006-2008 data has been determined to be more accurate and reliable. 1.5 COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT The 2007-2014 Palo Alto Housing Element is being prepared with the assistance of considerable community participation. Public outreach conducted as part of this Housing Element update included: Technical Advisory Group (TAG) meetings Community Workshops Developer Focus Group Meetings Meeting with Property Owners of Housing Inventory Sites Planning and Transportation Commission Meetings City Council Meetings An ad hoc Technical Advisory Group (TAG) was formed consisting of seventeen members representing a variety of community groups and public entities that had an interest both in the housing problems facing Palo Alto and in finding solutions to those problems. The group included a member of the Planning and Transportation Commission, a representative from Palo Alto Housing Corporation, a member of Palo Alto Unified School District Board, a representative from the Human Relations Commission, a representative from the League of Women Voters, a Mixed Use Developer/ Architect, a Housing & Homelessness Needs Advocate, a Senior Housing developer, a Palo Alto Neighborhood (PAN) representative, and representatives from the business and real estate sectors. The TAG represented the different housing interests of various segments of the community and provided a forum for the representatives of each group on the TAG to share their knowledge and perspectives regarding housing needs and solutions. Although each TAG member represented the views of their respective groups, they also consulted with other individuals in the community. All TAG Chapter 1 5 meetings were open to the public. The City held more than a dozen TAG meetings between November 2008 and December 2010 to get input and advice on future housing needs and policy recommendations. The TAG provided comments and advice on the City’s housing needs and the policies the City proposed to use to address those needs. It also reviewed draft versions of the Housing Elements Goals, policies and programs. The TAG recommendations were forwarded to the Planning Commission and the City Council. In addition to the work of the TAG, the City held two community workshops for the purposes of collecting input from members of the public who were not members of the TAG. These meetings were held on August 31 and September 7, 2010 in community facilities at locations in the northern and southern areas of Palo Alto. Identical agendas were prepared for each meeting. Discussion topics included: An overview of the Housing Element; The housing challenges facing Palo Alto, and The City’s current affordable housing efforts. At the community meetings, participants were organized into small groups to identify the most critical housing needs in Palo Alto and suggest how the City should address these needs. The small groups then provided a summary of the issues and solutions back to the large group. Information received during these two meetings helped to define the work of City staff in the identification of housing opportunity sites and development of revised goals, policies and programs. These meetings also provided opportunities for members of the public to ask questions of staff in a less formal setting. Staff also met with a group of developers to better understand constraints on developing higher density housing in the City. After generating a draft inventory, staff also held two meetings with property owners of proposed sites to explain the inventory process, address concerns of property owners and to understand development constraints of individual sites. Throughout the Housing Element development process, the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council have held formal public meetings to obtain updates and progress reports regarding City staff’s efforts and to provide direction and feedback. The Planning and Transportation Commission met ten times to discuss the Housing Element prior to its review of the complete draft element in April of 2012. These meetings also provided opportunities for members of the public to provide comment to the Planning and Transportation Commission, City Council, and City staff. 1.6 ADOPTION The City Planning and Transportation Commission first reviewed the draft Housing Element on April 11, 2012. After some program revisions, on May 9, 2012, the PTC recommended the City Council forward the draft Housing Element onto HCD for their review. The City Council approved submitting the draft Housing Element for HCD review on July 9, 2012. The draft Housing Element was submitted to HCD review on August 16, 2012 with comments received from HCD on October 18, 2012. City staff has been working with HCD in revising the draft Housing Element to meet State requirements. Chapter 2 6 CHAPTER 2 HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT 2.1 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE Population Growth and Trends Historical review of Palo Alto population data reveals that population growth from 1980-1990 was relatively low, around 1 percent growth rate. During the decade from 1990-2000, Palo Alto's population grew by almost 5 percent from 55,900 to 58,598, compared to a 12 percent increase for Santa Clara County. This was one of the lowest rates of population growth for communities in Santa Clara County for that decade. From 2000 to 2008, however, Palo Alto’s population grew faster than all of the cities in the County except for Gilroy and Cupertino, recording an 8 percent increase in total population to 63,370. The total Santa Clara County population increased by 3 percent during the same period. Table 2-1 Historical Population Growth in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 Palo Alto’s growth was due to both an increase in the number of dwelling units and an increase in household size. Table 2-2 Population Trends of Neighboring Jurisdictions, 1990-2008 Year Population Numerical Change Percent Change 1980 55,225 741 1% 1990 55,900 675 1% 2000 58,598 2,698 5% 2007 63,752 5,154 9% 2008 63,370 -382 -1% Source:US Census 1980, 1990 and 2000, the 2005-2007 ACS and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Jurisdiction 1990 2000 2007 2008 Name Number Percent Gilroy 31,487 41,464 46,956 48,064 6,600 15.92% Cupertino 40,263 50,546 56,592 55,623 5,077 10.04% Los Gatos 27,357 28,592 29,928 30,963 2,371 8.29% Palo Alto 55,225 58,598 63,752 63,370 4,772 8.14% Santa Clara 93,613 102,361 109,363 110,376 8,015 7.83% Los Altos 26,303 27,693 28,727 29,812 2,119 7.65% MountainView 67,460 70,708 71,153 73,847 3,139 4.44% Sunnyvale 117,229 131,760 136,162 136,352 4,592 3.49% San Jose 782,248 894,943 898,901 905,180 10,237 1.14% Total County 1,497,577 1,682,585 1,722,819 1,734,756 52,171 3.10% Source:US Census 1990 and 2000, the 2005-2007 ACS and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Change (2000-2008) Chapter 2 7 Age and Gender Characteristics The median age of Palo Alto's population has increased dramatically over the last three decades. In 1970, the median age was 29.5 years for males and 33.7 years for females. By 1990, the median age of Palo Alto residents had increased by approximately 6.5 years from 1970, climbing to 36.0 years for males and 40.0 years for females. In the year 2000, the median age for the entire population of Palo Alto was 40.4 years, which was considerably higher than the County median age of 34 years. From 2000-2008 the median age of Palo Alto’s population increased from 40.4 to 42.0 whereas the Santa Clara County median age increased from 34 to 36.4 years. The City of Palo Alto is continuing to experience two trends in the population age breakdown since the 1980’s. Between 2000 and 2008, there has been a dramatic increase in the pre-school age (under 5 years) population, with an approximately 29 percent increase, which continues a trend that started in the 1980’s. In addition, there is a continued decrease in the childbearing population age group (18-44 years) from the 1980’s to present. "Aging" of the population is evident in the increase in Palo Alto's senior population. In 1970, the number of persons age 65 and over was 5,789, constituting 10.3 percent of the City's total population. By 2000, the population aged 65 and over had increased by 3,351 to 9,140 persons, constituting 15.6 percent of the City's total population. From 2000-2008 there has been an additional increase of 13 percent in the population of this group, bringing the total up to 10,300, approximately 16 percent of Palo Alto’s total population. Overall, Palo Alto's senior population increased nearly 39 percent over the 1980-2008 period. Given the extensive senior oriented resources in Palo Alto, it is expected that seniors will continue to reside in Palo Alto, but will begin shifting from single family homes to smaller units. This Housing Element begins planning for this demographic shift. The City of Palo Alto has a slightly higher female population 51 percent (approx.) as compared to 49 percent (approx.) male population. This trend is also associated with an aging population. Table 2-3 Population Increase by Age Cohorts in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 Age 1980 1990 2000 2007 2008 Group Number Number Number Number Number Number Percentage Pre-School (Under 5) 2,168 2,764 2,970 3,893 3,828 858 28.89% School Age (5-17) 8,998 6,999 9,436 10,879 11,025 1,589 16.84% Child Bearing (18-44) 24,004 24,863 21,872 21,468 20,307 -1,565 -7.16% Middle Age (45-64) 12,647 12,527 15,180 17,858 17,910 2,730 17.98% Senior (65 and Over) 7,408 8,747 9,140 9,654 10,300 1,160 12.69% Median Age 35.2 38.2 40.4 42.1 42.0 0.01 3.96% TOTAL PERSONS 55,225 55,900 58,598 63,752 63,370 4,772 8.14% Change (2000-2008) Source:US Census 1980, 1990 and 2000, the 2005-2007 ACS and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Chapter 2 8 Figure 2-1 Senior and Pre-School Population Trends in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 Source: US Census 1980, 1990 and 2000, the 2005-2007 ACS and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Race and Ethnicity In evaluating Palo Alto's racial distribution, the 2000 U.S. Census data indicated that a majority of Palo Alto's population was composed of white persons, which continues to hold in 2008. Approximately 73 percent of the population identified themselves as white in 2000. That number fell to 65 percent in 2008. The next largest population group by race in the City is Asian. They comprised 17.3 percent of the City’s population in 2000. In 2008 their proportion increased to 25 percent. The Hispanic population in the City increased in 2008 by 1.3 percent to 5.9 percent. The African-American population fell slightly from 2 percent in 2000 to 1.7 percent in 2008. Although Palo Alto’s population has become somewhat more diverse between 1990 and 2008, its share of minority racial groups is still less than the countywide average in all categories. For example, 26 percent of Santa Clara County's population is Hispanic while only 5.9 percent of the City's population identified themselves as Hispanic in 2008; however, Palo Alto’s Asian population is increasing towards the countywide average of 30 percent for that group. The following figure graphically illustrates the City's ethnic/racial proportions in comparison to Santa Clara County with statistics from the 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Population Trends in Palo Alto7,4088,7479,1409,6541030027642970 3893 38282,168 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,00019801990200020072008Senior (65 and Over)Pre-School (Under 5) Chapter 2 9 Figure 2-2 Racial Characteristics of Population in Palo Alto and Santa Clara County, 2008 Source: ACS 2006-2008 three-year estimates. 2.2 EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS Employment Trends To assess employment trends and analyze recent changes in the jobs and housing market, this document relies on the same employment and job estimates that are being used to update the City of Palo Alto’s Comprehensive Plan. These data are considered to be more current and accurate than Census 2000 data. Applied Development Economics (ADE), the City’s Economic Consultant for the Comprehensive Plan update, estimated the 2008 baseline numbers and the projection values for population and employment growth. Applied Development Economics used Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) 2007 Projections data as a starting point for their analysis but modified the data based on the land use categories used to update the City’s Comprehensive Plan. ADE estimates the current 2008 employment total to be 76,684 jobs, and projected it to reach 76,774 jobs in 2010. Using the same growth assumptions, total employment growth between 2008 and 2020 within the City is estimated to increase by 5,411 jobs. The Stanford University Hospital expansion projects are anticipated to create 3,076 permanent jobs and other known non-residential projects are anticipated to create the remainder of the jobs. Because the 2020 projected total employment of 82,095 is lower than the year 2000 peak of 86,960, it is assumed that much of this additional employment would be absorbed in existing building space. In 2008, about 36 percent of the total jobs were in the Health, Educational and Recreational sector and 27 percent in the Financial and Professional Services sector. The Manufacturing, Wholesale and Transportation sector is estimated to continue to have slightly 65% 2% 6% 25% 3% 38% 2% 26% 30% 3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% City of Palo Alto Santa Clara County White Black Hispanic Asian Others Chapter 2 10 less than 20 percent of the jobs through 2020. The Retail and Other Services sector accounts for 8 percent of the total jobs in 2008 and is expected to increase marginally after the completion of the Stanford projects. Table 2-4 Employment Projections by Industry for Palo Alto, 2008-2020 Local Employment Growth Palo Alto is one of the main economic drivers of Silicon Valley, home to more than 6,000 businesses employing more than 76,600 people. Stanford Research Park on Page Mill Road is a major research and office area while Sand Hill Road is a hub for many venture capitalists. Many renowned companies and research facilities have their headquarters in Palo Alto including: Amazon.com's A9.com, VmWare, Genencor, Hewlett-Packard, SAP, Space Systems/Loral, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati and Tesla Motors. Stanford Hospitals and Clinics and Stanford Shopping Center continue to be the largest employers in the City, employing close to 10,000 people. The three major hospital groups employ most of the employees in the Health, Educational sector: Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Veterans Health Administration Hospital and Stanford Hospitals Group. Chapter 2 11 Table 2-5 Major Employers in Palo Alto, 2008 The most commonly listed occupations of Palo Alto residents are software engineers and developers (mid level to senior level), upper management level jobs of Silicon Valley companies, product managers, attorneys, physicians, registered nurses and physical therapists and educators. Computer and computer support systems related jobs provide an hourly rate of $45-$55 and above. Medical and health technicians, therapist and other health service related professionals earn from $30-$45 per hour. Upper management of various companies, attorneys and physicians are the highest paid section of the population. A typical hourly and mean wage list of different occupations of Palo Alto is shown below. The median household income of the City of Palo Alto is $126,741 based on 2006-2008 ACS Data. Stanford Hospital and Clinics /Lucile Packard Children's Hospital/ Stanford Univ. School of Medicine/ Stanford Shopping Center 9943 Hewlett-Packard Company 7500 Veterans Health Administration 3500 VMware 2500 Palo Alto Medical Foundation 2000 Varian Medical Systems Inc 1710 Space Systems Loral 1700 Communication and Power Industry 1610 Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati 1100 City of Palo Alto 1076 Source: Reference USA Data 2008, Stanford University Expansion EIR and Local newspaper Employers Approximate Number of Employees Chapter 2 12 Table 2-6 Typical Hourly and Mean Wages of Some of the Jobs of Palo Alto Residents, 2008 Table 2-7 Commute Patterns of Palo Alto Residents, 2008 Estimated Travel Time to Work Number of Commuters 2007 Number of Commuters 2008 0-14 Minutes 9,758 9,363 15-29 Minutes 12,566 12,087 30-44 Minutes 3,342 3,710 45+ Minutes 2,425 2,453 Worked at Home 2,439 2,351 Source: 2005-2009 ACS and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Occupational Title Mean Hourly Wage Mean Annual Wage Management Occupations $69.42 $144,407 Business and Financial Operations Occupations $41.48 $86,285 Computer Software Engineers, Hardware Engineers Applications and Mathematical Occupations $51.55-$55.90 $110,110 Architecture and Engineering Occupations $48.17 $100,189 Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations $43.80 $91,099 Community and Social Services Occupations $25.60 $53,251 Legal Occupations $69.89 $145,365 Education, Training, and Library Occupations $28.57 $59,423 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations $32.72 $68,054 Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations $49.01 $101,949 Retail Sales and Related Occupations $10.66 $50,696 Source: California Employment Development, Occupational Employment statistics. 2007 and 2008 first quarter data. Chapter 2 13 The table above shows the commute travel time to work for Palo Alto residents 16 years of age and above, who work away from home. About 40 percent of the total employed residents of Palo Alto (12,087 people) commute between 15-29 minutes to go to work, while only 8 percent commute for more than 45 minutes. About 8 percent of employed residents in the City work from home. Jobs-Housing Balance These employment trends indicate that Palo Alto will continue in the future to maintain a jobs/housing imbalance heavily skewed to the jobs side of the ratio. Palo Alto currently houses only about 4 percent of Santa Clara County’s population but contains approximately 9 percent to 10 percent of all the County’s jobs. Palo Alto is expected to have a job/housing ratio of 2.4 jobs for every employed resident by the year 2020. This means that Palo Alto will continue to import most of its workers to meet the needs of business and industry resulting in a large unmet need for worker housing in the City. Since many of Palo Alto’s workers cannot afford to live in the City, the imbalance creates negative impacts such as long commutes for workers both inside and outside the region, substantially increased traffic congestion during peak commute periods, and increased air pollution and energy consumption. The production of additional affordable housing would help to reduce or even avoiding these impacts. Over the years, the City has attempted to address its jobs/housing imbalance. In 2007, the City updated its Zoning Code, incorporating changes recommended by the 2002 Housing Element to encourage housing production. The updated code encourages mixed-use development which would include retail and service uses with residential developments. This enables a good mix of land uses conducive to improving the jobs and housing imbalance. The changes in the code introduced the concept of Pedestrian Transit Oriented Development zoning (PTOD) that allows higher density residential dwellings on commercial, industrial and multifamily parcels within a walkable distance of transit stations, while protecting low density residential parcels and parcels located in or adjacent to the areas. Housing developments in a PTOD district will encourage the following: Use of public transportation; A variety of housing types, commercial retail and limited office uses; Project design that achieves an overall context-based development for the PTOD overlay area; Streetscape design elements that are attractive to pedestrians and bicyclists; and Connectivity to surrounding existing and planned pedestrian and bicycle facilities. 2.3 HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS AND TRENDS For purposes of evaluating housing supply and demand, it is useful to translate information from population figures to household data. The change in the number of households in a city is one of the prime determinants of the demand for housing. Households can form even in periods of static population growth as adult children leave home, through divorce, and with the aging of the population. According to the 2006-2008 American Community Survey (ACS) three-year estimate there were 63,370 persons living in Palo Alto. Of this total, 410 were living in group quarters and the remaining 62,960 persons were living in households. There were a total of 25,528 households in the City in 2008. Chapter 2 14 Figure 2-3 Total Household Growth in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 Source:US Census 1980, 1990 and 2000, the 2005-2007 ACS and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Household Type and Size Household size and type of household (Family and Non-Family Households) are important considerations when addressing housing issues. A family household is one in which a householder lives with one or more persons related to him or her by birth, marriage or adoption. A non-family household is one in which a householder lives alone or only with non-relatives. In evaluating these data from a historical perspective, the percentage of people living in family households increased by 11 percent from 1980 to 2008 with 15 percent increase in total population, whereas the number of non-family households has declined since 1990. Currently family households account for 61 percent of total households in Palo Alto. Family households are typically larger than non-family households because family households consist of a minimum of two persons while non-family households can be single person households. In Palo Alto there are more persons living in family than non-family households. Of the total 63,752 persons in Palo Alto in 2008, approximately 78.7 percent were living in family households (49,902 persons) and 20.6 percent (13,058 persons) in non-family households. The remaining 0.65 percent of the population (410 persons) was living in-group quarter facilities. Household Growth Since 1980 22,000 22,500 23,000 23,500 24,000 24,500 25,000 25,500 26,000 1980 1990 2000 2007 2008 Year To t a l H o u s e h o l d s Chapter 2 15 Table 2-8 Type of Household Growth in Palo Alto, 1980-2008 Between 1990 and 2000, there was also a reversal in the trend toward fewer households with children under the age of 18 years at home. In 2008, approximately 15,670 children under the age of 18 years lived in married family households, and 2,360 children under the age of 18 lived in other family households. Although the number of children in other family households is less than married family household, their number is increasing gradually. In 1990, 7 percent of the family households were single parent households (primarily female-headed) with children under the age of 18 years at home. By 2000, the percentage increased to 12 percent. In 2008 female-headed households with children under 18 years is 10 percent of family households. This significant change in male or female-headed household numbers will affect the demand for housing based on type and affordability for future housing in Palo Alto. The number of people occupying a housing unit and the type of occupants affects the size and condition of the unit, as well as the demand for additional units in the housing market. For example, a continued decrease in household size with an increase in population would indicate a demand for additional smaller housing units to accommodate the decreased household sizes. On the other hand, dramatic increases in household size could indicate a number of situations such as "unrelated" members of households living together or an increase in the number of households with children, indicating the need for larger housing units. The 2000 household size in Palo Alto was 2.3 persons per household, which was a slight increase from the 1990 household size of 2.2 persons per household. In 2008, the average household size reached 2.47. Year Family Household Percentage of Total Household Non-Family Household Percentage of Total Household 1980 13,594 58.84% 9,508 41.16% 1990 13,835 56.01% 10,865 43.99% 2000 14,593 57.87% 10,623 42.13% 2007 16,006 62.80% 9,480 37.20% 2008 15,673 61.40% 9,855 38.60% Source:US Census 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, the 2005-2007 and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Chapter 2 16 Table 2-9 Average Household Size in Palo Alto, 1970-2008 The increase in persons per household indicates that the population of Palo Alto has increased at a faster pace than the household formation between 1970 and 2008. Increases in the number of children and households with extended families contributed to the increase in average household size in Palo Alto. This also could indicate that extended families are sharing housing due to the high housing costs of the region , which could lead to overcrowding situations in the future. Households by Tenure Tenure and the ratio of homeowner to renter households are typically influenced by many factors, such as: housing cost (interest rates, economics, land supply, and development constraints), housing type, housing availability, and job availability. About 57 percent of the households in Palo Alto owned their homes in 2000 and 43 percent were renters. The number of renters in Palo Alto fell by 4 percent in 2008 and the ownership rate also increased by 4 percent. This reflects the steady demand for housing in Palo Alto with only 8 percent increase in population since 2000. Table 2-10 Tenure of Occupied Housing in Palo Alto Residents, 2000-2008 Year Household Size (Persons per Household) 1970 2.70 1980 2.30 1990 2.20 2000 2.30 2007 2.48 2008 2.47 Source:US Census 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, the 2005- 2007 and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Tenure Type Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Owner 14,420 57% 15,326 60% 15,485 61% Renter 10,796 43% 10,160 40% 10,043 39% TOTAL 25,216 100% 25,486 100% 25,528 100% 2008 Source:US Census 2000, the 2005-2007 ACS and 2006-2008 ACSdata. 2000 2007 Chapter 2 17 Table 2-11 Tenure by Household Size in Palo Alto, 2008 An overwhelming 93.7 percent of owners and renters live in one- to four-person households in Palo Alto. Only 6.3 percent of both renters and owners live in larger households. This reflects the average size of the housing stock of Palo Alto, which is mainly two- to four-bedroom homes. The average household size for owner occupied housing units in Palo Alto according to ACS 2006-2008 data is 2.71 and for renter-occupied housing units is 2.10. An assumption can be made from this data that rental housing units are smaller in size than ownership units. Household Income Palo Alto households have significantly higher incomes than households in the County as a whole. The 1990 Census data indicated that the median family household income in Palo Alto was $68,737 or 28 percent higher than the median family household income of $53,670 for the County of Santa Clara for the same period. The 2000 Census data showed a slight reduction in the difference to a little over 21 percent between the median family household income for Santa Clara County of $74,335, and the City of Palo Alto’s median family household income of $90,377. However, income estimates from the 2006-2008 ACS Survey data indicate that difference between households in Palo Alto and the County has increased significantly to about 45 percent with the median household income (inflation adjusted dollar amount) for Palo Alto growing to $126,741 compared with $87,287 for Santa Clara County. According to the 2000 Census, while there were many high-income households in Palo Alto, there were also households on more limited incomes. An interesting statistic from the 2000 Census data revealed that 14 percent of all Palo Alto households reported that their annual household income was less than $25,000. This percentage was similar to the countywide average of 13 percent of all Santa Clara County households reporting incomes of $25,000 or less. According to 2006-2008 ACS data, the number of households earning less than $25,000 decreased to 11 percent in Palo Alto while the share of the County remained the same. In other words, Palo Alto has reduced its proportion of households with limited incomes compared to the County through 2008. However, Palo Alto also has more than twice as many households whose incomes are over $200,000 in 2008 than the rest of the County. It should be noted, however, that a $25,000 annual income is not an accurate reflection of the number of lower or “limited” income households in Palo Alto. The federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) considers a family of four earning $53,050 or less and a single person earning $31,850 or less to be very low-income households. The definition of income level varies depending on the government entity or the program. For housing purposes, the jurisdictions in Santa Clara County, including Palo Alto, use HUD’s Total Number Percent Number Percent Number Owner 14,358 60.01% 1,127 70.39%15,485 Renter 9,569 39.99% 474 29.61%10,043 TOTAL 25,528 23,927 93.73% 1,601 6.27%25,528 5+ PersonsHousehold Tenure 1-4 persons Source:The 2006-2008 ACS. Chapter 2 18 determination of County median income ($105,500 for a family of four in 2008) and its definition of household income levels described below: Extremely Low Income: Households with incomes between 0-30 percent of County median family income: 2008 limit for a family of 4: $31,850 Very Low-income: Households with incomes between 31-50 percent of County median family income: 2008 limit for a family of 4: $53,050 Low-income: Households with incomes between 51-80 percent of County median family income: 2008 limit for a family of 4: $84,900 Table 2-12 HUD Annual Household Income Limits, 2008 Santa Clara County Using 2008 ACS Survey data with 2008 inflation rates adjusted, there were 5,289 households earning less than $50,000 (approximately 21 percent of Palo Alto households) with an additional 21 percent of households earning between $50,000-$100,000. The following table shows the median household income by age of householders. Persons in Household Extremely Low (30% of Median Income) Very Low- income Maximum (50% of Median Income) Low-income Maximum (80% of Median Income) 1 $22,330 $37,150 $59,400 2 $25,500 $42,450 $67,900 3 $28,650 $47,750 $76,400 4 $31,850 $53,050 $84,900 5 $34,400 $57,300 $91,650 6 $36,950 $61,550 $98,450 Source:HUD published Area Median Income (AMI). Note: 2008 Santa Clara County area median income for a family of four is $105,500 Chapter 2 19 Table 2-13 Household Income Distribution by Age for Santa Clara County and Palo Alto, 2008 Overpaying and Overcrowded Households Overpaying Housing is generally the greatest single expense item for California families. Current standards measure housing cost in relation to gross household income: households spending more than 30 percent of their income, including utilities, are generally considered to be overpaying or cost burdened. Severe overpaying occurs when households pay 50 percent or more of their gross income for housing. . In a 2006 study done by the National Low Income Housing Coalition, low-income households in California can only afford monthly rents of up to $827, while the fair market rent for a two bedroom unit was $1,189. Low-income households who are overpaying for housing frequently have insufficient resources for other critical essentials including food and medicine. This is a significant hardship for too many workers, families and seniors, but it also impacts local economies as money that might otherwise be spent in local stores generating sales tax revenues are being spent on housing. The impact of high housing costs falls disproportionately on extremely low, very low-income and low-income households, especially renters. While some higher-income households may choose to spend greater portions of their income for housing, the cost burden for lower-income households reflect choices limited by a lack of a sufficient supply of housing affordable to these households. Though Palo Alto had a median household income of $126,741 (in 2008 inflation- adjusted dollars), for owner-occupied households, the median income was $157,421. For renter-occupied households, the median income was substantially lower, about $80,708. During the same time, for owner-occupied households the median income for Santa Clara County was $111,040, and for renter-occupied households, median income was $58,472. The following tables show affordability of rental and ownership housing costs by income. The affordability calculations were based on the 2009 HUD Area Median Income for a family of four. The amount indicates the maximum families could afford to pay for housing to have sufficient resources for other critical essentials. Age Distribution Santa Clara County Palo Alto Total Median Household Income 87,287 126,741 Householder under 25 years: 37,889 37,798 Householder 25 to 44 years: 98,119 156,736 Householder 45 to 64 years: 100,010 152,664 Householder 65 years and over:48,867 67,455 Source:The 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Chapter 2 20 Table 2-14 Affordability of Rental Housing Cost by Area Median Income, 2009 Table 2-15 Affordability of Ownership Housing Cost by Area Median Income, 2009 ACS 2006-2008 data indicates that over 35 percent of all renter households in Palo Alto were “cost burdened” or overpaid for housing in 2008 (i.e., paid more than 30 percent of household income for rent). This figure has increased from 2000 Census data where about 30 percent renters paid more than 30 percent of their income for housing. As shown on the chart below, renters were more likely to overpay for housing than homeowners. Income Group Median Income Maximum Housing Cost (30% of Income) Extremely Low (30% of Median Income) $31,850 $620 Very Low-income Maximum (31%- 50% of Median Income) $53,050 $1,150 Low-income Maximum (51%- 80% of Median $84,900 $1,947 Source: City of Palo Alto Consolidated Plan 2010. Affordablity calculations based on 2009 HUD Area Median Income for family of four. Income Group Median Income Maximum Affordable Home Price Percent of Single Family Homes in North Santa Clara County within the Price Range Extremely Low (0- 30% MFI)$31,850 $132,600 1.4 Very Low (31-50% MFI)$53,050 $220,900 1.8 Low (51-80% MFI) $84,900 $353,500 5.0 Source: City of Palo Alto Consolidated Plan 2010. Affordablity calculations based on 2009 HUD Area Median Income for family of four. Chapter 2 21 Table 2-16 Palo Alto Households Paying More Than 30 percent of Household Income for Housing, 2008 Historically a large proportion of the City’s low and moderate-income households of all types overpaid for housing, particularly very-low and low-income renter households. In 2008, the Median Family Income was $105,50, but still 30 percent of all households severely overpaid for their housing (more than 30 percent of their income). The following ACS 2006-2008 data reveals 27 percent of the owners and 35 percent of the renters paid more than 30 percent of their income for housing. This group of households is least able to devote 30 percent or more of their income to housing without significantly affecting other aspects of family health and quality of life. Further, since lower income rental households are more likely to pay much higher rents proportionally than other households, the City has focused most of its affordable housing efforts towards increasing the supply of affordable rental housing. Table 2-17 Palo Alto Housing Cost as Percentage of Household Income, 2008 Renters Owners All Households Number Overpaying % of Renter Households Number Overpaying % of Owner Households Number Overpaying % of All Households 3,532 35.17% 4,211 27.19% 7,743 30.33% Source:The 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Income Range Total Households % of Total Households 0-20% of HH Income 20-29% of HH Income 30+% of HH Income 0840.33%--0 $1-19,999 707 2.77%65 117 525 $20,000-34,999 868 3.40%355 119 394 $35,000-49,999 507 1.99%190 104 213 $50,000 +13,319 52.17%7,093 3,147 3,079 Subtotal 15,485 60.66%7,703 3,487 4,211 Income Range Total Households % of Total Households 0-20% of HH Income 20-29% of HH Income 30+% of HH Income 0320.13% $1-19,999 1,334 5.23%85 241 1,008 $20,000-34,999 733 2.87%71 0 662 $35,000-49,999 853 3.34%42 157 654 $50,000 +6,877 26.94%3,324 2,345 1,208 No Cash/No Rent 214 0.84% Subtotal 10043 39%3,522 2,743 3,532 TOTAL 25,528 100%11,225 6,230 7,743 Source:The 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Note: Some households are not accounted for; therefore, figures may slightly differ for other U.S. Census estimates for Total Households. OWNER-OCCUPIED UNITS: RENTER-OCCUPIED UNITS: Chapter 2 22 Overcrowding The Census defines an overcrowded unit as one occupied by 1.01 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens). Units with more than 1.5 persons per room are considered severely overcrowded. On a statewide basis, in 1989 an estimated 7 percent of all California households lived in overcrowded housing. (Source: California Statewide Housing Plan Update, 1990, State of California Dept. of Housing and Community Development). The Census 2000 Data indicated that approximately 15 percent of all California households lived in overcrowded housing. Overcrowding increases health and safety concerns and stresses the condition of the housing stock and infrastructure. Overcrowding is strongly related to household size, particularly for large households and especially very large households and the availability of suitably sized housing. Overcrowding impacts both owners and renters; however, renters are generally more significantly impacted. In 2000, renter households were three times more likely to be overcrowded than owner households, regardless of household size. Overcrowding levels generally declined as renter incomes rose, particularly among family renters. According to the 2000 Census, the rate of overcrowding for very-low-income households (50 percent of median income) was nearly three times greater than for households with incomes over 95 percent of median for the state of California. High overcrowding levels were geographically dispersed, including both metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas. More than four-fifths of extremely low- income residents of 17 counties lived in overcrowded conditions in 1990, including such wealthy counties as Santa Clara, San Mateo, and Orange. Overcrowding is particularly exacerbated where there is a mismatch between the number of large family households, defined as households of five or more persons, and the number of available family-sized housing units. According to the 1990 U.S. Census, approximately 655 units or 2.7 percent of Palo Alto’s total occupied housing units were overcrowded with more than one person per room. The 2000 U.S. Census indicates that approximately 4 percent or 1,057 of the City's total occupied housing units were overcrowded with more than one person per room. Of these 1,057 units, 516 were "severely overcrowded" with more than 1.51 persons per room. The majority (425 units) of these severely overcrowded units were occupied by renters. In fact, renter households are more likely to have a higher incidence of overcrowding than owner households. Approximately 76 percent of the total 1,057 overcrowded units are occupied by renter households. As related to the age of the residential structure, overcrowded households are found in both older as well as newer housing units in the City. While 89 percent of the overcrowded households live in units that were built since 1940, this proportion reflects the fact that 84 percent of the units in the City were built since 1940. Therefore, the age of the housing units is not statistically significant in regard to overcrowded households in Palo Alto. Overcrowding is not as serious a housing problem in Palo Alto as it is in Santa Clara County as a whole or as it is in nearby cities such as Mountain View and San Jose. For comparison, approximately 23 percent of all rental units in Santa Clara County (52,993 overcrowded rental units out of 227,227 rental units), 17 percent of all rental units in Mountain View (3,039 overcrowded rental units out of 18,250 rental units), and 29 percent (30,939 overcrowded rental units out of 105,592 rental units) of all rental units in San Jose are considered overcrowded by 2000 Census. Chapter 2 23 Table 2-18 Average Household Size of Occupied Units in Palo Alto, 2008 Households do not typically choose to be overcrowded but end up in that situation because they cannot afford a housing unit that is of size appropriate to their needs. Traditionally, large households have difficulty securing and/or affording housing units of three or more bedrooms partially because of an insufficient supply of these larger units. Large renter families, in particular, have difficulty in finding rental housing stock that is appropriate for their household size and also affordable. The 2000 Census data indicated that there were 1,576 households in Palo Alto that had 5 or more persons. That number went up to 1,601 in 2008 by the estimates of ACS Data. Approximately 4 percent of the owner-occupied units housed more than 5 person households (1,127 households) and another 2 percent of renter-occupied households housed more than 5 person households. Moreover, even small households in Palo Alto have difficulty in finding appropriate size rental housing due to the high cost of housing. Census data confirms that a combination of factors including increase in household size, increase in the number of households with children, and substantial increase in housing costs in the 1990s and 2000’s may have led to increased overcrowding. Table 2-19 Household Size by Tenure in Palo Alto, 2008 The 2006-2008 ACS data indicate that there were 431 occupied rental units that had 3+ or more bedrooms in the City of Palo Alto. These 431 units represent 4 percent of all rental units in the City. The number of 3+ bedroom rental units decreased from 7 percent to 4 percent from 2000 to 2008. Although the percentage of Palo Alto households living in overcrowded conditions is relatively small, this indicates that there is still a need for larger rental units. The same data source reported that there were 1,601 large households (households of five or more persons) and that 474 of these households were renter households. Therefore, the raw statistics would indicate that there appear to be sufficient existing units that are appropriate in size for large households. However the cost to rent these units may be prohibitive for some households. In 1990, 78 percent of these 3+ bedroom rental units had monthly gross rents in excess of $1,800 per month. In March 2001, the average rent for a three-bedroom apartment increased to $2,992 per month (Source: REAL FACTS). By 2008, the median rental price for a Average Household Size California Santa Clara County Palo Alto Total: 2.92 2.91 2.47 Owner occupied 3.01 3.01 2.71 Renter occupied 2.8 2.74 2.1 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2008 American Community Survey Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Owner 14,358 56% 1,127 4%15,485 61% Renter 9,569 37% 474 2%10,043 39% TOTAL 23,927 94% 1,601 6% 25,528 100% 1-4 persons 5+ Persons Total TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS 25,486 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2008 American Community Survey Chapter 2 24 Efficiency 1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 4 BR Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Mobile Home Space Rents $928 $1,076 $1,293 $1,859 $2,047 $696 $575 Fair Market Rents, 2008 Fair Market Rents (FMR) are established by HUD and are used by Housing Agencies to establish the Voucher Payment Standards used in the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. The Fair Market Rents are also used as the maximum allowable gross rents, including utility allowances, for certain special programs, like the Project-Based Voucher Program. Unit condition and location are a consideration in determining rent reasonableness. These FMRs apply to the following cities: Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Jose, San Martin, Santa Clara, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale. http://www.huduser.org/portal/datasets/fmr/fmrs/2008summary.odn 3 bedroom residence was approximately $3,500. In contrast, the 2008 Fair Market Rent (FMR) for a three-bedroom house, as determined by HUD is $1,859. This is significant considering FMR’s are established by HUD to determine the payment standards for its Section 8 Payment Voucher program. The program will not pay more than the established FMR. This situation makes it extremely difficult for lower income families to find adequate housing. Table 2-20 HUD Established Fair Market Rents, 2008 The most obvious need for over crowded households in Palo Alto is large housing units that are adequately sized for large families. Typically there is a need for three, four and five-bedroom housing units for households that are overcrowded due to family size. Developers in the City of Palo Alto, in the past decade, have typically built three and four bedroom units, though these units are usually expensive to rent or buy. Small households in Palo Alto are sometimes also overcrowded because of the high cost of housing. Affordable housing, primarily affordable rental housing, can help further reduce overcrowded households. The City of Palo Alto, however, experiences a relatively small percent of overcrowding compared to the County, Statewide and in nearby cities. There are units in some of the assisted housing developments in the City that are both larger size and affordable. As an example, the Arastradero Park development includes fourteen three-bedroom units and four four-bedroom units. However, given the rapid rise in the rents of large apartments, more family sized apartments are needed to help keep rental costs down as well as reduce overcrowding. Additionally, affordable housing developers Eden Housing and Community Working Group are constructing a 50 unit affordable family housing development at 801 Alma Street. Table 2-21 Overcrowded Households in Palo Alto, 2008 Persons per Room Households Percent Households Percent Households Percent 1.00 or less 15,369 99.25% 9,539 94.98% 1.01 to 1.50 116 0.75% 379 3.77% 495 1.94% 1.51 or more 0 0.00% 125 1.24% 125 0.49% TOTAL 25,528 15,485 100.00% 10,043 100.00% 620 2.43% Source:The 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Owner Renter Total Overcrowded Chapter 2 25 2.4 SPECIAL NEEDS GROUPS There are certain specific demographic or occupational groups that have special needs which require specific program responses. They include Disabled Households, Senior Households, Female Headed Households, Single Parent Households, Large Family Households, Overcrowded Households, Farm Worker households and Homeless Households. State law identifies these groups as Special Needs households. Thorough analyses of these special needs helps a locality identify groups with the most serious housing needs in order to develop and prioritize responsive programs. In Palo Alto, all of the above mentioned special needs households groups exist, except for farm worker households. Information about each of these households is described in more detail in the paragraphs that follow. A general description of each of these household types is provided as well as a summary of the current resources available and a summary of their more significant housing needs. Senior Households Seniors are defined as persons age 65 and over. Seniors are considered a special needs group, as they tend to have more health problems than the population at large. These health problems may make it more difficult for seniors to live in typical housing and to live independently. Seniors with serious health problems may need to live in licensed community care facilities or similar facilities. Also, low and moderate-income senior households are potentially in particular need for housing assistance. Many seniors live on fixed incomes such as Social Security and pensions. Increases in living expenses would make it more difficult for seniors to afford needed housing. Financially strained senior homeowners may have to defer their home maintenance needs. The number of elderly persons in the City of Palo Alto has increased over the last three decades. In 1970, elderly (persons age 65 years and older) comprised 10 percent of the population but, by 2000, that percentage had increased to 15.6 percent of the total population. The total number of elderly persons residing in Palo Alto in 2008 was 10,300, approximately 16 percent of the total population. Between 1980 through 2008, Palo Alto's senior population increased nearly 39 percent. With longer life spans and age expectancies, it is anticipated that the proportion of elderly in Palo Alto's population will continue to increase in future years, particularly given the substantial increase in the City’s middle age population over the last decade. Table 2-22 Senior Population Increase in Palo Alto, 1980- 2008 In 2000, approximately 96 percent of the people 65 years or older in Palo Alto lived in household situations and the remaining 4 percent were living in group quarters or were institutionalized. There were 6,349 households in Palo Alto that contained individuals 65 years or older. These households represented 25.5 percent of all Palo Alto households in 2000. Approximately 36 Age Group 1980 Senior Population 1990 Senior Population 2000 Senior Population 2007 Senior Population 2008 Senior Population Total Population 55,225 55,900 58,598 63,752 63,370 4,772 8.14% Senior (65 and Over) 7,408 8,747 9,140 9,654 10,300 1,160 12.69% Source:US Census 1980, 1990 and 2000, the 2005-2007 ACS and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Percentage Change (2000-2008) Chapter 2 26 percent of persons 65 years old or older were in non-family households, and 64 percent were in family households. In 2000, approximately 65 percent of all elderly non-family households were single females living alone representing approximately 22 percent of all elderly Palo Alto residents. There were 2,591 65-year old householders living alone in 1990. This number increased to 2,736 in 2000, an increase of 5.6 percent. Approximately 5 percent of all elderly (450 persons total) had incomes below the poverty level in 1999. The majority of those persons (254) were over the age of 75 years old. While the percentage of elderly persons living below the poverty level is low, the fact that many elderly households in Palo Alto live on limited incomes is of concern. The 2000 Census data indicate that approximately 54 percent of all elderly households had incomes that were at the low- or very low-income level according to HUD’s income standards. There were approximately 2,382 elderly households with incomes that could be classified as very low-income and another 841 households that were classified as low-income. In 2008, approximately 38 percent of senior households had incomes lower than $50,000 per year while 26 percent had annual incomes between $50,000 and $100,000. The median household income for seniors living in Palo Alto is, however, substantially higher than the median for seniors in Santa Clara County as a whole. Table 2-23 Senior Household Income Distribution for Santa Clara County and Palo Alto, 2008 The majority of Palo Alto elderly households are homeowners. In 2000, approximately 70 percent of all elderly households lived in owner-occupied housing units. 16 percent of elderly households living in owner occupied housing units were paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing. The remaining 30 percent of all elderly households were renters and approximately 65 percent of these renters were paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing in 2000. In 2008, the majority of the elderly (about 4,770) were homeowners and 18 percent of Palo Alto’s senior populations were renters. Housing problems are more prevalent among elderly renter households than owner households. Approximately 60 percent of elderly renter households experienced housing problems, compared to 31 percent of owner households in the county. The 2000 Census confirmed that the number of elderly renter households overpaying for housing has increased given the increase in both the number of elderly households and the increase in housing costs since 1990. With the continued increase in the number and proportion of senior households in Palo Alto, the need for providing affordable housing for the elderly will gain importance. As reported in the City’s current Consolidated Plan 2010-2015, the need for more affordable senior housing facilities is also illustrated by the long waiting lists at existing subsidized developments. Age Distribution Santa Clara County Palo Alto Householder 65 years and over:$48,867 $67,455 Source:The 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Chapter 2 27 Table 2-24 Senior Households by Tenure in Palo Alto, 2008 There are nine housing projects in Palo Alto that include 681 units that are specifically designed for elderly households. Table 2-25 Independent Living Facilities for Elderly in Palo Alto, 2008 The supportive living facilities for Palo Alto’s elderly include nursing care facilities as well as non-profit and for-profit residential care facilities. Lytton III provides skilled nursing care for approximately 145 elderly persons. Lytton III is part of the Lytton Gardens complex (Lytton I, II, III and IV [Lytton Courtyard]), which is the only development in Palo Alto that provides a full range of living options for lower income elderly ranging from independent living to assisted living to skilled nursing care. The Fabian Way Senior Housing project at 901 San Antonio Road has 56 subsidized units for seniors. Additionally, Taube-Koret Campus for Jewish Life at 899 Charleston Road has 24 Below Market Rate Units currently under construction. Table 2-26 lists the existing residential Development Total Units Senior Units Income Level Served Independent Living (No Meals or Other Services) Palo Alto Gardens 156 units 128 units Very Low-Income only Sheridan Apartments 57 units 57 units Low-Income Terman Apartments 92 units 24 units Very Low-Income only Webster Wood 68 units 4 units Low-Income Arastradero Park 66 units 13 units Low-Income Colorado Park 60 units 8 units Low-Income Independent Living (Some Meals Provided) Stevenson House 128 units 128 units Low-Income Only Lytton I and 11 268 units 268 units Low-Income Only Lytton Courtyard 51 units 51 units Low-Income Only TOTAL 946 units 681 units Source: City of Palo Alto, Consolidated Plan Householder Age Owners Renters Total 65-74 years 2,563 724 3,287 75 plus years 2,207 1,121 3,328 TOTAL SENIOR HOUSEHOLDS 4,770 1,845 6,615 Source: 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Chapter 2 28 care facilities available currently for seniors. Although the City has been active in the creation of additional senior housing facilities, there still is a great need for senior housing. As the senior population continues to increase, coupled with the fact that 38% of Palo Alto seniors earn less than $50,000 annually, the demand will continue to increase. Many of the Housing Element’s programs are focused on this escalating need. Table 2-26 Residential Care Facilities (Assisted Living) for Elderly Population in Palo Alto Name of Facility Persons Served Type of Facility Casa Olga 103 Intermediate Nursing Care Channing House 21 Nursing Facility Channing House 285 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) Lytton Gardens Community Care 55 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) Lytton Gardens 145 Nursing Facility Webster House 74 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) Palo Alto Nursing Center 66 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) Palo Alto Commons 150 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) Pleasant Manor 6 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) Sandy Oak Place 6 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) The Birches Residential Care 6 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) May Care 6 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) Sevely Manor Guest Home 6 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) Sweet Little Home 6 Residential Care Facility (Asst. Living) Source: City of Palo Alto, Consolidated Plan Chapter 2 29 Persons with Disabilities Disabled households include households with family members who have physical disabilities, or mental illness or disability. Some individuals have both a physical and mental disability but Census data does not provide that level of specificity. According to the 2006-2008 ACS data, approximately 92.3% and 93% of the household population of Santa Clara County and Palo Alto respectively, do not have disabilities. The City of Palo Alto has 4,400 non-institutionalized disabled civilians. The percentages of disabled population in all age groups in the City and County are comparable, only differing in the 75+ age cohort where City of Palo Alto has more disabled seniors in this age range than the County. Chapter 2 30 Table 2-27 Number of Non-institutionalized Disabled Civilian by Age Group Percentage of Santa Clara County Residents Disabled Palo Alto Percentage of Palo Alto Residents Disabled 100.00%63,349 100% 7.12% 3,834 6.05% 0.03% 0 0.00% 0.01% 0 0.00% 7.08% 3,834 6.05% 17.17% 11,671 18.42% 0.32% 295 0.47% 0.14% 0 0.00% 16.70% 11,376 17.96% 24.17% 11,154 17.61% 0.44% 150 0.24% 0.28% 92 0.15% 23.44% 10,912 17.23% 40.84% 26,340 41.58% 1.66% 661 1.04% 1.16% 426 0.67% 38.02% 25,253 39.86% 5.85% 5,263 8.31% 0.64% 220 0.35% 0.56% 294 0.46% 4.65% 4,749 7.50% 4.85% 5,087 8.03% 0.88% 886 1.40% 1.60% 1,401 2.21% 2.37% 2,800 4.42% Source: 2008-2010 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates No disability 41,520 With one type of disability 15,466 With two or more types of disability 27,979 No disability 81,589 75 years and over:84,965 With one type of disability 11,158 With two or more types of disability 9,841 No disability 666,571 65 to 74 years:102,588 With one type of disability 29,116 With two or more types of disability 20,266 No disability 411,006 35 to 64 years:715,953 With one type of disability 7,755 With two or more types of disability 4,973 No disability 292,837 18 to 34 years:423,734 With one type of disability 5,687 With two or more types of disability 2,539 No disability 124,147 5 to 17 years:301,063 With either a vision or hearing difficulty but not both 456 With both hearing and vision difficulty 194 Total Household Population 1,753,100 Under 5 years:124,797 Santa Clara County Chapter 2 31 Individuals with physical disabilities are in need of housing units that have been modified to improve accessibility. Examples of modifications that are helpful include widened doorways and hallways, bathroom and kitchen modifications (lowered counter heights, accessible tubs/ showers and toilets, etc.) entry and exit ramps, modified smoke detectors and alarm systems for individuals with visual or hearing impairments, and other improvements. A priority need for households with disabilities is housing near transit and jobs. Persons with physical disabilities may need housing that is connected to the provision of individualized services including training, counseling, information and referral services, and rent subsidy services that allow the physically disabled to live in the community. For individuals with a disability that affects their ability to work or who live on a fixed income, affordable housing is a high priority. Agencies that provide supportive services to the disabled population have been discouraged by the high cost of rental housing in Palo Alto. In fact, the City has continued to provide funding to several agencies to help acquire housing units for the disabled in nearby communities because of the lack of affordable housing units in Palo Alto. Palo Alto has a few subsidized housing units specifically designed for persons with physical disabilities. Implementation of Title 24 of the California Building Code relating to disabled accessibility and the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) have resulted in an increase in these opportunities. Subsidized projects that have units specifically designed and adapted for persons with physical disabilities include California Park Apartments (1 unit), the Barker Hotel (5 units), and 330 Emerson Street (1 unit). Other projects, such as Lytton Courtyard, include units that can readily be adapted for persons with physical disabilities. The Alma Place Single Room Occupancy facility has 101 units adaptable for the disabled and 6 fully accessible units. Page Mill Court housing for the developmentally disabled has 16 of 24 units fully accessible and the remaining 8 units adaptable. A few older projects have had units adapted within the limitations of their existing construction including Webster Woods, Terman Park and Sheridan Apartments. The first floor of the Oak Courts Apartments is also fully accessible. Units available at the Opportunity Center are also fully ADA accessible. Table 2-28 lists the number of beds in licensed community care facilities in Santa Clara County that are available to serve Palo Alto residents. Developmentally Disabled The Developmentally Disabled are a separate population identified by the State of California, with differing housing needs from others with disabilities. The Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Act ensures that “patterns and conditions of everyday life which are as close as possible to the norms and patterns of the mainstream of society” are available to these individuals. Furthermore, the Olmstead v. L.C and E.W. United States Supreme Court case required an “Integration Mandate” that “States are required to place persons with mental disabilities in community settings rather than institutions…when determined to be appropriate.” Despites these laws, people with developmental disabilities are finding it increasingly difficult to find affordable, accessible, and appropriate housing that is inclusive in the local community. A developmental disability is defined by the State as “a lifelong disability caused by a mental and/or physical impairment manifested prior to the age of 18 and are expected to be lifelong.” The conditions included under this definition include: Mental Retardation, Epilepsy, Autism, and/or Chapter 2 32 Cerebral Palsy, and “Other Conditions needing services similar to a person with mental retardation.” Source: Background Report, 2008, Developmental Disabilities Board Area 5 The State Department of Developmental Services (DDS) currently provides community based services to approximately 243,000 persons with developmental disabilities and their families through a statewide system of 21 regional centers, four developmental centers, and two community-based facilities. The San Andreas Regional Center is one of 21 regional centers in the State of California that provides point of entry to services for people with developmental disabilities and serves the Santa Clara County area. According to the San Andreas Regional Center, there are 219 persons with developmental disabilities living in Palo Alto in 2012. There is some overlap between the developmentally disabled population and the mentally and physically disabled populations (approximately 10 and 15 percent, respectively). Individuals with developmental disabilities are often independent and can live in their own apartments or homes with little support. Others who have more severe disabilities may require 24 hour assistance in homes that can accommodate their needs as individuals. The housing need for the individuals in Palo Alto with developmental disabilities translates to about 70 units. This number is derived based on the age of the population. As the younger individuals approach adulthood, they will need independent or assisted living; and similarly, as the adults age, they too will need assisted living. There are a number of housing types appropriate for people living with a developmental disability: rent subsidized homes, licensed and unlicensed single-family homes, inclusionary housing, Section 8 vouchers, special programs for home purchase, HUD housing and SB 962 homes. The design of housing-accessibility modifications, the proximity to services and transit, and the availability of group living opportunities represent some of the types of considerations that are important in serving this need group. Incorporating barrier-free design in all new multifamily housing (as required by California and Federal Fair Housing laws) is especially important to provide the widest range of choices for disabled residents. Special consideration should also be given to the affordability of housing, as people with disabilities may be living on a fixed income. The most severely disabled persons may require an institutional environment where medical attention and physical therapy are provided. Because developmentally disabilities exist before adulthood, supportive housing for the developmentally disabled should focus on the transition from the person’s living situation as a child to an appropriate level of independence as an adult. In order to assist in the housing needs for persons with Developmental Disabilities, the City of Palo Alto will implement programs to coordinate housing activities and outreach with the Regional Center and to facilitate additional housing opportunities in Palo Alto for persons with disabilities, especially persons with developmental disabilities. Chapter 2 33 Table 2-28 Licensed Community Care Facilities in Santa Clara County Serving Palo Alto Facilities Beds Facilities Beds Facilities Beds Facilities Beds Facilities Beds Cupertino 10 985 2 12 6 961 2 12 - - Gilroy 29 419 19 127 6 244 4 48 - - Mountain View 20 184 2 18 16 152 2 14 - - Palo Alto 10 1,785 - - 10 1,785 - - - - San Jose 490 4,572 220 1,677 234 2,553 35 336 1 6 Santa Clara 29 285 12 72 15 187 2 26 - - Sunnyvale 50 852 6 60 42 782 1 6 1 4 Urban County - - - Campbell 17 309 2 16 14 284 1 9 - - Los Altos Hills - - - - - - - - - - Los Altos 5 295 - - 5 295 - - - - Los Gatos 10 792 1 6 8 756 1 30 - - Morgan Hill 14 236 5 109 5 103 2 12 2 12 Monte Sereno - - - - - - - - - - Saratoga 5 509 - - 5 509 - - - - Unincorporated County 8 86 4 24 3 56 1 6 - - Urban County Total 59 2,227 12 155 40 2,003 5 57 2 12 Entitlement Jurisdiction 697 11,309 273 2,121 369 8,667 51 499 4 22 Santa Clara County Total 715 11,412 283 2,178 371 8,677 57 535 4 22 Notes: (d) Small Family Homes provide twenty-four hour care in the licensee's family residence for six or fewer children who require special care and supervision due to mental or developmental disabilities or physical handicap Sources California Community Care Licensing Division, 2009, BAE, 2009 Cities (a) Adult Residential Facilities provide 24-hour non-medical care or adults who are unable to provide for their own daily needs (b) Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly provide care, supervision, and assistance with dialy living activities (c ) Group homes provide non-medical care and supervision to children Group Homes (c ) Small Family Home (d)TOTAL Adult Residential (a) Residential Care for the Elderly (b) Chapter 2 34 Large Households Large households are defined as households with five or more members. By this definition, Palo Alto has about 1,601 households with more than five members, approximately 6 percent of total households in 2008. These households are considered to have special needs, due to limited availability of large size affordable units. In Palo Alto, large size units are often very expensive thereby forcing large families to rent small, less expensive units. This often leads to overcrowding to avoid higher housing expenses. In Palo Alto, 70 percent of the large households live in owner occupied units and 30 percent live in rental units. Table 2-29 Larger Households by Tenure in Palo Alto, 2008 Table 2-30 Occupied Housing Stock by Number of Bedrooms in Palo Alto, 2008 Forty-three percent of Palo Alto’s owner-occupied housing stock contain three-bedrooms and approximately 38 percent contain four or more bedrooms. Most of the rental housing, however, contains one or two bedrooms (71 percent) and 11 percent are studio units. Only 18 percent of the rental housing contains three or more bedrooms. Because Palo Alto has a limited supply of larger rental units to accommodate large family households, most large families face an above- average level of difficulty in locating adequately sized, affordable housing. Single Parent and Female Headed Households Over the years, the number of women rearing children alone in America has increased steadily. There were 12 million single mothers in this country in 1993, 86 percent of whom maintained homes for their families. About 8 percent of American households were categorized as female- headed households with children in 2003. In 2006, about 1.5 million single mothers in California Total Number Percent Number Percent Number Owner 14,358 60.01%1,127 70.39%15,485 Renter 9,569 39.99%474 29.61%10,043 TOTAL 25,528 23,927 93.73%1,601 6.27%25,528 5+ PersonsHousehold Tenure 1-4 persons Source:The 2006-2008 ACS. Owner Households Renter Households All Households Number Number Number 0 BR 63 0%1,091 11% 1,154 5% 1 BR 399 3%3,478 35% 3,877 15% 2 BR 2,538 16%3,596 36% 6,134 24% 3 BR 6,585 43%1,447 14% 8,032 31% 4 BR 4,295 28%312 3% 4,607 18% 5+ BR 1,605 10%119 1% 1,724 7% TOTAL 15,485 100% 10,043 100% 25,528 100% Source:The 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. Percent Percent PercentBedroom Type Chapter 2 35 were rearing their children by themselves. Single parent households, particularly female-headed households, generally have lower-incomes and higher living expenses. Providing decent, safe and affordable housing is more difficult oftentimes for single mothers because of low incomes and high expenditures. These households also typically have additional special needs relating to access to day care/childcare, health care and other supportive services. Almost 40 percent of female-headed households in the U.S. have incomes below the poverty rate. In the U.S., about one-half of never-married mothers are unemployed. Fifty-five percent of families headed by never-married females receive public assistance as well as 20 percent of families headed by divorced/separated mothers. The 2000 Census reported that there were 1,220 female-headed households in Palo Alto. These households represented 6.7 percent of all households in the City. Lower household income is one of the more significant factors affecting single parent households. For example, married couple families in Palo Alto reported a median family income of $101,537 annually for 1990 census purposes. However, for female-headed households, the annual median household income was $58,625, or 57.7 percent of the median income of a married couple family. Limited household income levels affect the ability of single parent households to locate affordable housing. 2006-2008 ACS data reveal that of the 5 percent of total households living under the poverty level close to 48 percent of them are female-headed households. Table 2-31 Female -Headed Households in Palo Alto, 2008 Single parent household as used in this document is defined as a family household with one or more children under the age of 18 years and headed by either a female or a male head of household with no spouse present. In 2000, single parent households in Palo Alto represented 8.2 percent of all family households, an increase over the 7 percent from 1990. There were 1,201 single parent households in 2000. A male parent headed 293 single parent households and 908 had a female-head of household. In 2007, there were 2,359 single parent families (826 male headed families and 1533 female headed families) residing in Palo Alto, 15 percent of the total family households. Single-family households typically have a higher than average need for day care and affordable housing. Male single parent households have higher annual incomes than female single parent Householder Type Number Percent Total Households 25,528 100% Total Female Headed Householders 6,978 27% Total Households Under Poverty Level 1293 5% Total Female Headed Households Under the Poverty Level 619 2% Total Households Above Poverty Level 24,235 95% Female Headed Households Above the Poverty Level 6,359 25% Source:The 2006-2008 ACS. Chapter 2 36 households in Palo Alto. In 1990, the annual mean household income for female single parents in Palo Alto was $36,651 or slightly over one-third that of a married couple family.; the same trend continued through 2008. Limited household income levels affect the ability of these households to locate affordable housing and, consequently, this is one of the more significant housing problems of this household category. Single mothers have a greater risk of falling into poverty than single fathers due to factors such as the wage gap between men and women, insufficient training and education for higher-wage jobs, and inadequate child support. Households with single mothers also typically have special needs related to access to day care/childcare, health care, and other supportive services. Limited household incomes constrain the ability of single parent households to "afford" housing units. Consequently, these households may have to pay more than they can afford for housing for themselves and their children; or, they may have to rent a housing unit that is too small for their needs because it is the only type of housing they can afford. Other housing related needs that affect single parent households include assistance with security deposits, locating housing that is close to jobs, availability of child care services and proximity to transit services. Clearly the need for more affordable housing for single parent households has grown since the number of these households increased by about 49 percent over the last decade. Without affordable housing and supportive services, many single parent households are at a higher risk of becoming homeless. Single parent families are the fastest growing segment of the homeless population. The City of Palo Alto supports resources that are available to female head-of-households and single parent households. The City’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program has regularly provided funds to InnVision for the operation of the Opportunity Center (located in Palo Alto), including programs for at-risk families. The Opportunity Center serves singles and families with small children by providing a broad range of services, including family housing in the Bredt Family Center. Services include adult education classes and workshops, child development activities, computer/Internet access, health care, case management, and information and referral. Farmworkers State law requires every jurisdiction in California to assess the need for farmworker housing. In Palo Alto’s case, there is no significant need for farmworker housing since there is no significant farmworker or mining population in the City. The 2000 Census data indicate that there are no farmworker households or mining operations in Palo Alto. There are no large agricultural areas in Palo Alto that are devoted to field crops, orchards or other agricultural uses that would require farmworker labor nor are there any active mining uses that would typically require mining labor; however, there may be Agriculture and Mining sector jobs in Palo Alto related to aspects of this sector not associated with field crops or orchard work or extractive mining work. Large open space areas that could accommodate farming or mining are located within the baylands or hillsides of Palo Alto and its Sphere of Influence and are set aside for park use, conservation purposes, or open space preserves. Finally, no housing advocate or low-income housing provider in Palo Alto has indicated there is an unmet need in the City for farmworker or mineworker housing. Since there does not appear to be a significant number of farmworkers in Palo Alto, the City has not identified or set aside any special housing resources for farmworkers. Housing for farmworkers, to the extent that there are any, would be provided through the City’s policies and programs that address the needs of lower income households in general. Chapter 2 37 Homeless Persons Homelessness in California is a continuing crisis that demands the effective involvement of both the public and private sectors. California has the highest population of homeless, 12 percent of the nation’s population. Throughout California, each county is making an effort through various programs to address this issue. Despite major efforts on the part of many agencies and non-profit organizations, homelessness remains a significant problem in Santa Clara County. Thousands of people experience an episode of homelessness here each year, including families with children; adults employed at lower wage jobs; people with disabilities such as severe mental illness, addiction disorders, HIV/AIDS, and/or developmental disabilities; runaway or "throwaway" children; victims of domestic violence; and veterans. Homelessness currently exists in all parts of the County, whether urban, suburban, or rural, but may be especially prevalent where there are pockets of persistent poverty. It is very difficult to develop a precise and realistic description of homeless households in a community. This is primarily due is the lack of good data on the number and type of homeless households. Because many of the communities in Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties share boundaries, the best approach to address the issue of homelessness is on a regional basis, with coordination of efforts between the two counties, the individual communities and the non-profit agencies which serve these communities. There are two data points available for estimating homeless count: yearly estimates based on a HUD-recommended formula that considers population estimates from State of California Department of Finance data, previous years’ Santa Clara County Homeless Census and survey data. The other source is point-in-time or daily counts performed by Santa Clara County Homeless Census and Survey. The 2007, Annual Estimated Homeless count in Santa Clara County indicated that there were 14,921 homeless individuals in the County and by 2009, their number increased to 18,549 individuals. The 2011 Annual Estimated Homeless count for Santa Clara County recorded 18,272 homeless individuals. The decrease in the annual estimate for 2011 was due to a lower percentage of homeless individuals who had become homeless within the 7 days prior to the survey. The point-in-time daily count of January 2009 by Santa Clara County Homeless Census and Survey estimated 7,086 self-declared homeless as per the HUD definition. These people were found either sleeping in a place not fit for human habitation or in emergency or transitional housing for homeless people. The survey found the greatest number of homeless in San José, with approximately 4,300 homeless people counted, or 60 percent of the County’s total homeless population. Gilroy had the second largest count of homeless people among the jurisdictions, with nearly 660 people living without permanent shelter. Palo Alto had 178 homeless individuals. The 2011 Santa Clara County Homeless Census and Survey showed the total number of sheltered and unsheltered homeless count decreased by 15 percent (178 to 151) for the City of Palo Alto compared with a decline of less than 1 percent (7086 to 7045) for the County. Although the total number of unsheltered homeless individuals rose from 2009 to 2011, the number of individuals living in shelters fell by 10 percent for the City. In 2011, none of the homeless individuals counted in Palo Alto lived in families compared with 23 homeless persons living in families in 2009. Chapter 2 38 Table 2-32 Total Number of Sheltered and Unsheltered Homeless Persons, 2009-2011 Santa Clara County Homeless Census and Survey 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 Santa Clara County 6,078 6,171 1,008 874 2067 0 7,086 7,045 Palo Alto 129 151 23 0 26 0 178 151 Santa Clara County Homeless Census and Survey 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 Santa Clara County 4,917 5,113 66 56 2067 0 4,983 5,169 Palo Alto 79 106 0 0 26 0 105 106 Santa Clara County Homeless Census and Survey 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 2009 2011 Santa Clara County 1,161 1,058 942 818 0 0 2,103 1,876 Palo Alto 50 45 23 0 0 0 73 45 * It should be noted that some changes in the shelter count do not represent a loss of inventory in the County or City capacity, but rather a re-classification of the bed “type” that reflects a programming or funding change for the shelter organization. This report does not attempt to analyze all longitudinal changes in homeless bed and family unit inventory nor their potential changing funding sources. All shelter reporting is the result of agency self-reporting, HMIS comparison and follow-up by ASR staff and the Census project committee’s County and jurisdictional representatives. This includes a thorough comparison of the current inventory to previous reports including the annual HUD eSNAPS Housing Inventory Chart required of all Continuums. Unsheltered Homeless Census Population by Jurisdiction and Family Status* Sheltered Homeless Census Population by Jurisdiction and Family Status* Person In Families Total Persons Individuals in Vehicles,Encampment s, Abandoned Buildings, or Parks Individuals in Vehicles,Encampment s, Abandoned Buildings, or ParksIndividuals Person In Families Total Persons Total Unsheltered and Sheltered Homeless Census Population by Jurisdiction and Family Status Individuals Person In Families Total Persons Individuals in Vehicles,Encampment s, Abandoned Buildings, or Parks Source: Applied Survey Research. (2009). 2007, 2009 and 2011 Santa Clara County Homeless Census. Individuals Chapter 2 39 Despite the fact that the number of homeless individuals in Palo Alto has decreased, the very small decline countywide indicates that the demand for services and shelters in Silicon Valley will likely continue. Moreover, for the current Housing Element cycle, the continued high cost of housing in the City, coupled with the current economic downturn and closure of nearby shelters have created unmet need, which the City needs to address. In an effort to meet the City of Palo Alto’s homeless needs, the 2007-2014 Housing Element through policy implementation is proposing to establish permanent emergency shelter space within one year of adoption of the Housing Element (H.3.5.1). The local homeless services providers throughout the County, reporting an increase in clients seeking assistance, have felt the demands from the increased number of unsheltered homeless individuals. The City of Palo Alto participates in the Santa Clara County Collaborative on Housing and Homeless Issues, which represents homeless shelters, service providers, advocates, non-profit housing developers and local jurisdictions. The City and the Collaborative follow a "Continuum of Care" approach in addressing the needs of homeless persons. The continuum consists of the following steps in providing homeless resources: Prevention Services Emergency Shelter Transitional and Permanent Affordable Housing. Listed below is a description of the resources available to Palo Alto households through the City’s association with the County Collaborative on Housing and Homeless Issues. i) Prevention Services: The goal of this first level of resources is to prevent households from becoming homeless. Households who are "at risk" for becoming homeless are those who are lower income and who have a difficult time paying for their existing housing. Traditionally, these include households who "overpay" for housing (paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing) as well as households who experience job termination, salary reduction or marital separations. The prevention resources include the provision of emergency food and clothing funds as well as emergency rent funds and rental move-in assistance. In Palo Alto, the Opportunity Service Center (OSC), operated by InnVision, is the primary provider of services to homeless persons. The OSC coordinates the provision of supportive services, counseling, job labor referral, transportation vouchers, shower passes, mental health services and maintains a message and mails system. From 100 to 120 persons visit the drop-in center on a daily basis. The OSC drop-in center is located near a major inter-County transit terminal; therefore it is reasonable to assume that some of their clients have connections to other communities and do not solely represent Palo Alto households. The OSC also coordinates the provision of groceries for needy individuals through the Food Closet located at All Saints Episcopal Church in downtown Palo Alto. The Food Closet serves an average of 79 persons daily. Inn Vision’s “Breaking Bread” program also coordinates a daily hot meal program at various church locations. The American Red Cross distributes emergency assistance funds to families and individuals who are threatened with homelessness. The Red Cross is the local distributor of County Emergency Assistance Network Funds. Chapter 2 40 Table 2-33 Lists of Organizations Providing Prevention Services for the Homeless in Palo Alto ii) Emergency Shelters: An emergency shelter as defined by HUD is any facility the primary purpose of which is to provide temporary or transitional shelter for the homeless in general or for specific populations of the homeless. One of the major causes of homelessness is the lack of affordable housing. Most homeless households are on limited or fixed incomes and cannot afford a housing unit in the City’s housing market. Emergency homeless shelters in Palo Alto address the immediate shelter needs of homeless persons who reside, or who once resided, in Palo Alto, but the current economic downturn and the historic high cost of real estate in Palo Alto has prevented construction of any new emergency shelter in Palo Alto by any non-profits even with considerable City contribution. As a result, many of Palo Alto’s homeless, families and individuals, have to receive emergency shelter outside of the City limits, in either Santa Clara County or San Mateo County, a factor that most likely contributes to the relatively lower number of homeless counted in Palo Alto compared with surrounding communities. Currently the Opportunity Service Center (OSC), through InnVision, operates the "Hotel de Zink" emergency shelter out of twelve churches, using a different church each month of the year. A maximum of 15 adults each night can be provided with emergency shelter under this program. Meals are also provided as part of their service. Inn Vision Hotel de Zink is Palo Alto's only emergency shelter for homeless individuals and they are planning to open another 15-bed shelter exclusively for women. The nonprofit organization has modeled the new shelter to follow the original 15-bed Hotel de Zink plan, which rotates among Palo Alto faith communities and is open to all genders. Hotel de Zink Women's Shelter will be open between mid-January and mid-April 2012 and will be a pilot program for 2012 with evaluation by Inn Vision staff. To address the need of the homeless in the City, the City of Palo Alto, in conjunction with other CDBG entitlement jurisdictions throughout the Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties has Service Provider Target Population Services Provided Number of Palo Alto Residents Served Opportunity Service Center (OSC)Individuals and Families Supportive services, counseling, job labor referral, transportation vouchers, shower passes, mental health services, maintains a message, and mails system. 100-120 The Food Closet Individuals and Families Food provision 79 Inn Vision’s “Breaking Bread” program Individuals and Families Hot Meals All The American Red Cross Individuals and Families Emergency assistance All Source: City of Palo Alto Prevention Services Chapter 2 41 Service Provider Target Population Services Provided Capacity/Housing Type Number of Palo Alto Residents Served "Hotel de Zink" Individuals Emergency Shelter 15 adults per night 15 individuals "Hotel de Zink" ( New Proposed Women's Shelter opening in 2012) Individuals (Women Only)Emergency Shelter 15 adults per night 15 individuals Emergency Housing Consortium’s Homeless Reception Center (San Jose) Individuals and Families Provides intake and assessment services 185 year round beds Data not recorded Santa Clara County Children’s Shelter (San Jose)Youth Emergency Shelter 90 beds Data not recorded New County Children’s Shelter (San Jose)Youth Emergency Shelter 130 beds Data not recorded Emergency Housing Consortium’s Sobrato Youth Center Youth Emergency Shelter 10 year round beds Data not recorded Bill Wilson Center in Santa Clara. Youth Emergency Shelter 20 year round beds Data not recorded YWCA Silicon Valley Domestic Violence and Support Network at San Jose Individuals and Families Emergency Shelter, legal assistance and counseling services 16-20 year round beds 27 individuals Source: City of Palo Alto Emergency Shelter Services financed the development of different homeless facilities that serve the Palo Alto homeless population. However, individual emergency shelter service providers do not keep track of the origin of the residents so it is difficult to quantify the actual number of Palo Alto homeless residents receiving these services. Thus, the City cannot take credit for these funded services and apply towards its unmet need of 94 beds. The following is a list of past and present City funded emergency shelters benefitting Palo Alto residents. Table 2-34 List of Emergency Shelters in Santa Clara County Serving Palo Alto Residents Within the County of Santa Clara, there are approximately 791 emergency year round shelter beds and 346 seasonal (winter months) beds. None of these facilities are located in the City of Palo Alto. The City of Palo Alto, through its CDBG entitlements, has helped finance the development of the Emergency Housing Consortium’s Homeless Reception Center in San Jose. The Reception Center operates 185 year-round beds (250 beds during the winter months) and provides intake and assessment services to its clients to ensure that they receive the appropriate level of care. The largest shelter for youth in San Jose is the Santa Clara County Children’s Shelter, providing emergency shelter for wards of the court (usually victims of abuse or neglect) from newborn to 18 years of age. The facility has a 90-bed capacity, which serves Palo Alto’s youth homeless population. The New County Children’s Shelter with a capacity of 130 beds and located in San Jose also serves Palo Alto’s youth. Other shelters for youth including the Bill Wilson Center in Santa Clara serves Palo Alto’s homeless youths. Chapter 2 42 The primary provider for shelter for victims of domestic violence for Palo Alto citizens is the YWCA Silicon Valley, Domestic Violence Department located in San Jose. Statistics from the agency indicate that within FY 09-10 five clients and their accompanying children from Palo Alto were provided emergency shelter and transitional housing for a total of 106 bed-nights and counseling services and legal assistance were provided to 47 residents. In FY 10-11, the number dropped down to 1 Palo Alto individual for shelter and transitional housing, and 36 residents received crisis counseling and legal assistance. The following is a comprehensive list of all Emergency Shelters in Santa Clara County serving all residents. Chapter 2 43 Table 2-35 List of Emergency Shelters in Santa Clara County Serving All Residents Total Family Family Individual Total Year Seasonal Beds Units Beds Round Beds Beds Current Inventory West Valley Community Services Rotating Shelter Cupertino SM 0 0 15 15 Community Solution La Isla Pacifica Gilroy HC DV 14 3 0 14 0 EHC Lifebuilders Armory - Gilroy Gilroy SMF 0 0 0 0 48 Support Network for Battered Emergency Shelter Mountain View HC DV 16 0 6 16 InnVision Hotel de Zinc Palo Alto SMF 0 0 15 15 0 Asian Americans for Community Asian Women's Place San Jose HC DV 12 4 0 0 12 Involvement City Team Ministries City Team Rescue Mission San Jose SM 0 0 50 50 125 Community Homeless Alliance First Christian Church San Jose SMF+HC 19 1 2 21 0 Ministry EHC Lifebuilders Boccardo Regional Receiption Center San Jose SMF 0 0 185 185 0 EHC Lifebuilders Boccardo Regional Receiption Center San Jose SMF 0 0 17 17 0 Medical Respite Center Family Supporting House San Jose Shelter Center San Jose HC 143 35 0 143 0 InnVision Commercial Street Inn San Jose SFHC 40 12 15 55 0 InnVision Montgomery Street Inn Community Inns San Jose SM 0 0 46 0 0 InnVision Julian Street San Jose SMF 0 0 60 0 0 Next Door Solutions to Domestic Next Door Solutions San Jose HC DV 19 7 0 19 48 Violence/Salvation Army Hospitality House (Overnighter) San Jose SM 0 22 22 0 0 Bill Wilson Center Runaway and Homeless Youth Shelter Santa Clara YMF 0 0 20 20 125 EHC Housing Consortium dba EHC Armory - Sunnyvale Sunnyvale SMF 0 0 0 0 0 Lifebuilders EHC Lifebuilders Boccardo Family Living Center in Santa Clara County HC 0 0 0 0 0 San Martin Provider Facility Name City A Target Population (a) All Year-Round Beds/Units B Chapter 2 44 Table 2-35 List of Emergency Shelters in Santa Clara County Serving Palo Alto, Continued Total Family Family Individual Total Year Seasonal Beds Units Beds Round Beds Beds InnVision Clara Mateo Shelter Santa Clara County SMF+HC 18 6 40 58 0 EHC Lifebuilders Boccardo Family Living Center Santa Clara County HC 0 0 0 0 0 Migrant Worker Program (7 Month: March to November) EHC Lifebuilders Sobrato House Youth Center San Jose YMF 0 0 10 10 0 EHC Lifebuilders Veterans Dorm at the Boccardo San Jose YMF VET 0 0 10 10 0 Receiption Center Subtotal 281 74 507 788 346 Under Development Next Door Solutions to Domestic Volie ND Solutions San Jose HC DV 3 1 0 3 0 Total 284 76 507 791 346 Notes: (a) Target Population Key HC:Household with Children SM: Single Males YM:Youth Males SF: Single Females YF:Youth Females SFM: Single Males and Females YMF: Youth Males and Females CO:Couples Only no Children SMF+HC:Single Males and Females Plus Household with Children SMHC:Single Males and Households with Children DV:Domestic Violence Victims only SFHC:Single Female and Households with Children VET:Veterans only HIV:HIV/AIDS Population only Source: Santa Clara County, Continuum of Care Application, 2009, BAE, 2009 All Year-Round Beds/Units Provider Facility Name City Target Population (a) AB Chapter 2 45 iii) Transitional Affordable Housing: Transitional housing facilitates movement of homeless individuals and families to permanent housing within a reasonable amount of time, usually 24 months. Palo Alto has several transitional housing facilities to meet the demand of the homeless population. These facilities are either administered by different Countywide agencies or the Palo Alto Housing Corporation. The Shelter Plus Care Program, administered by the County Office of Homelessness, provides Section 8 rental subsidies to eligible, case-managed homeless persons with a disability. The program has been successfully implemented in both the Barker Hotel (a rehabilitated 26-unit single room occupancy hotel) and Alma Place (a 107-unit single room occupancy residency hotel). In addition to the case-management provided under the Shelter Plus Care Program, the Palo Alto Housing Corporation provides additional, extensive counseling and supportive services to its residents at the Barker Hotel, the majority of whom were previously homeless, or at-risk of becoming homeless. The program, funded with Palo Alto CDBG funds, has significantly reduced the turnover rate at the Barker Hotel, keeping at-risk persons in their homes. The Opportunity Service Center (OSC), provides 88 SRO permanent and transitional units for individuals and families to serve Palo Alto residents. In addition, the Opportunity Center operates a day use and service center for homeless adults and families. Table 2-36 Transitional Housing Shelters serving Palo Alto Source: City of Palo Alto Service Provider Target Population Capacity/Housing Type Number of Palo Alto Residents Served Shelter Plus Care Program at Barker Hotel Homeless with disability 26 SRO units 26 Alma Place Homeless with disability 107 SRO units 107 Opportunity Service Center (OSC) Individuals and Families 88 SRO units 88 Haven Family House (Menlo Park)Families 23 beds As needed Redwood Family House (Redwood City)Families 40 beds As needed Illinois St. House (East Palo Alto)Individuals 8 beds As needed Transitional Supportive Housing Services Chapter 2 46 Table 2-37 Supportive Share Housing Facilities in Palo Alto Extremely Low Income Households Extremely low-income households are those households with income less than 30 percent of area median income. HUD published area median income for Santa Clara County for a family of four is $105,500. This results in an income of $31,850 or less for a four-person household or $22,330 or less for a one-person household as extremely low income. Table 2-38 HUD Annual Household Income Limit Santa Clara County, 2008 Most families and individuals receiving public assistance, such as social security insurance (SSI) or disability insurance (SSDI) are considered extremely low-income households. At the same time, a minimum wage worker could be considered an extremely low-income household with an annual income of approximately $24,000 or less. Following are examples of occupations with wages that could qualify as extremely low-income households. Employment Development Department data shows in the San Jose-Santa Clara-Sunnyvale MSA, occupations like childcare workers and housekeepers earn around $12.00 per hour; manicurists, pedicurists, and hair stylists earn from $10 to $14 per hour; waiters and servers $10-$12 per hour; and food preparation and serving related workers earn $10 per hour. The area median rent for housing has increased considerably over the last two decades making it practically impossible to survive on the above-mentioned wages in Palo Alto. Table 2-39 Median Gross Rent in Palo Alto, 1990-2008 Name Operator Capacity Clientele Pine St. House Palo Alto Housing Corporation 3 Households Small families or individuals Source: City of Palo Alto, Consolidated Plan Rent 1990 2000 2007 2008 1990-2008 Percent Change Median Gross Rent 825 1,349 1,579 1625 97% Sources: Census 1990, 2000, 2005-2007 and 2006-2008 American Community Survey Persons in Household Extremely Low (30% of Median Income) Very Low- income Maximum (50% of Median Income) Low-income Maximum (80% of Median Income) 1 $22,330 $37,150 $59,400 2 $25,500 $42,450 $67,900 3 $28,650 $47,750 $76,400 4 $31,850 $53,050 $84,900 5 $34,400 $57,300 $91,650 6 $36,950 $61,550 $98,450 Source:HUD published Area Median Income (AMI). Note: 2008 Santa Clara County area median income for a family of four is $105,500 Chapter 2 47 The following table shows the affordability of rental housing cost by income level, based on the calculations of 2009 HUD area median income. Table 2-40 Affordability of Rental Housing Cost by Income 2009 About 11 percent of Palo Alto’s households, a total of 2,784, earned less than $25,000 in 2008. These extremely low-income households represented 7 percent of all home owners and 17 percent of the City’s renter households. Both renters and owners in the extremely low income category experienced a high incidence of housing problems. 2000 CHAS data shows 69 percent of the extremely low-income renter households faced housing problems (defined as cost burden greater than 30 percent of income and/or overcrowding and/or without complete kitchen or plumbing facilities) and 40 percent were in overpayment situations. Moreover, 53 percent of extremely low-income households paid more than 50 percent of their income toward housing costs, compared to 17 percent for all households. Income Group Median Income Maximum Housing Cost (30% of Income) Extremely Low (30% of Median Income) $31,850 $620 Very Low-income Maximum (31%-50% of Median Income) $53,050 $1,150 Low-income Maximum (51%-80% of Median Income) $84,900 $1,947 Source: City of Palo Alto Consolidated Plan 2010. Affordablity calculations based on 2009 HUD Area Median Income for family of four. Chapter 2 48 Table 2-41 Households with Housing Problems Palo Alto by Income, 2000 Projected Needs To calculate the projected need for housing to accommodate extremely low-income households the City assumed 50 percent of its very low-income regional housing need is from extremely low-income households. Based on the need for 690 very low-income units, the City has a projected need for 345 units to serve extremely low-income households. Many extremely low-income households will be seeking rental housing and most likely facing an overpayment, overcrowding or substandard housing condition. Some extremely low-income households could have mental or other disabilities and special needs. To address the range of needs, the City employs as part of this Housing Element a detailed housing strategy including promoting a Household by Type, Income, & Housing Problem Total Renters Total Owners Total Household Household Income <=30% MFI 1,975 814 2,789 Household Income <= 50% MFI 2,950 1,483 4,433 % with any housing problems 72.7 67.1 71 % Cost Burden >30% 69.4 64 67.8 % Cost Burden >50% 53.3 52.1 52.9 Household Income >30 to <=50% MFI 975 669 1,644 with any housing problems 86.2 45.6 69.6 % Cost Burden >30%79.2 41.3 63.7 % Cost Burden >50% 47.6 27.2 39.3 Household Income >50 to <=80% MFI 1,065 674 1,739 % with any housing problems 71.5 33.2 56.6 % Cost Burden >30%63.9 33.2 52 % Cost Burden >50% 23.3 25.2 24 Household Income >80% MFI 6,877 12,222 19,099 % with any housing problems 23.8 18.5 20.4 % Cost Burden >30%17.6 17.2 17.3 % Cost Burden >50%1.2 4.2 3.1 Total Households 10,892 14,379 25,271 % with any housing problems 42.9 23.2 31.7 % Cost Burden >30 37 21.7 28.3 % Cost Burden >50 17 9 12.4 Source: CHAS Data 2000 Chapter 2 49 variety of housing types, such as single-room occupancy (SRO) units, senior housing and small sized units. Table 2-42 ABAG’s New Construction Need by Household Income Level in Palo Alto, 2007-2014 Table 2-43 Progress in Meeting Palo Alto’s Fair Share of the Region’s 2007-2014 Housing Need by Income Level HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS Housing Development In the year 2000, there were 26,155 residential units in Palo Alto, an increase of 967 (3.8 percent) from 1990. By 2008, there were a total of 26,960 residential units, an increase of 805 units with a slightly slower growth rate than the previous decade. Table 2-44 Total Number of Housing Units in Palo Alto, 1970-2008 Year Total Number of Units 1970 21,338 1980 23,747 1990 25,188 2000 26,155 2007 26,735 2008 26,960 Source:US Census 1970, 1980 & 2000, the 2005-2007 ACS and 2006-2008 ACS Income Level 2007-2014 New Construction Need Building Permits Issued Units Unmet Need Very Low (0-50% of AMI)690 92 598 Low (51-80% of AMI)543 2 541 Moderate (81-120% of AMI)641 104 537 Above Moderate (over 120% of AMI)986 653 333 TOTAL 2,860 851 2009 * Building Permits Issued through June 2011 Source:City of Palo Alto Income Level Number of Units % of Total Need Extremely Low Income 345 12% Very Low-income Households 345 12% Low-Income Households 543 19% Moderate-Income Households 641 22% Above Moderate-Income Households 986 34% TOTAL 2,860 100% Source:City of Palo Alto, RHNA Chapter 2 50 Table 2-43 shows that there has been a significant decrease in the rate of housing produced in the City of Palo Alto over the last three decades. During the decade from 1970-80, the City's housing stock increased by 2,409 units or approximately 240 units per year. Between 1980 and 1990, production dropped to an average of 144 new units per year and during the following decade (1990-2000), the rate slowed even more to an average of 96 units per year. Despite a slight increase in the rate of production to 101 units per year from 2000 to 2008, the downward trend can be expected to continue because of the small amount of vacant land and limited opportunities for redevelopment. Table 2-45 Annual Rate of Housing Production Since 1970 The developable area within the City of Palo Alto, which is located between Junipero Serra Boulevard and the Bayshore Freeway (US 101) is essentially "built out". Less than 0.5 percent of the developable land area is vacant. The opportunity to annex additional land to the City is limited because the City is bordered to the east and west by the cities of Mountain View, East Palo Alto, Menlo Park and Los Altos with San Francisco Bay and Stanford University to the northeast and southwest. Besides the dearth of available land, another reason for the decrease in housing production has been the two recessions, the first in the early 1990s and most recently in 2008-2010, which affected the value of real estate and made it less attractive to build housing. During the mid- and late-1990s the Silicon Valley economy boomed with the expansion of the Internet and the significant growth in high technology businesses. As the number of workers and their incomes rose, housing demand increased and so did housing production. However, production could not keep pace with demand thus driving up the cost of housing even more rapidly than the growth of the economy. Land costs increased very rapidly particularly in Palo Alto given the limited supply of available residential land which increased financing costs. These factors combined with increased materials and construction costs made it much more difficult to produce housing, especially affordable housing. After slowing down in early 2000, the local economy picked up in 2002-2003, however this had little or no effect on the already overpriced land value and construction cost in the region. Affordability remained an issue during the housing bust period of 2008-2010 because the regional decline in property values, foreclosures, and reduction of interest rates had very little effect on the Palo Alto housing market. The availability of land and stricter financing regulations will continue to be important variables in determining the amount and the rate of new housing produced in the City. Year Rate of Production*Rate of Change 1970-1980 240 units/ year NA 1980-1990 144 units/ year -40% 1990-2000 96 units/year -33% 2000-2008 101 units/ year 5% Source:US Census1970- 2000, the 2005-2007 and 2006-2008 ACS three-year estimates. * Housing units numbers were not available before 1990:Rate of production was calculated assuming a vacancy rate of 3.5% from the Household number Chapter 2 51 Vacancy Rates Vacancy rates have traditionally been used as a gauge to measure the health of a community's housing market. Vacancy trends in housing are analyzed using a “vacancy rate” which establishes the relationship between housing supply and demand. For example, if the demand for housing is greater than the available supply, then the vacancy rate is low, and the price of housing will most likely increase. Additionally, the vacancy rate indicates whether or not the City has an adequate housing supply to provide choice and mobility. HUD standards indicate that a vacancy rate of five percent is sufficient to provide choice and mobility. Low vacancy rates (typically defined as anything less than 3 percent for homeowner units and 5 percent or less for renter units) indicate a tight housing market with few vacant units and increasing demand for those vacant units which then drive up rental costs. Data from the 2000 Census indicated that 828 units were vacant in Palo Alto out of a total housing stock of 26,155 units. That reflected an overall vacancy rate of 3.17 percent. However, in looking at this data more closely only 323 of the 828 units were available for sale or rent. The remaining 505 units were vacant but were being used for seasonal, recreational, or other uses. Therefore, the real vacancy rate when evaluating units available for rent or sale was actually 1.2 percent in year 2000. Table 2-46 Housing Vacancy in Palo Alto, 2000-2008 In 2008, the vacancy rate increased to 5.31 percent. Of the 1432 vacant units, 19 percent were either for rent or for sale. Another 145 of the vacant units are used for seasonal, recreational or occasional use and 266 units were either sold or rented but unoccupied. This reduced the effective vacancy rate to 2.8 percent compared with 1.51 percent for the County as a whole. Housing Units 2008 2000 Total Dwelling Units 26,960 26,155 Total Occupied Dwelling Units 25,528 25,327 Total Vacant Dwelling Units 1,432 828 Vacancy Rate 5.31%3.17% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2008 American Community Survey Chapter 2 52 Table 2-47 Housing Vacancy Type in Palo Alto, 2008 REAL FACTS estimated that occupancy rates for large apartment complexes (50 units or more; 1,943 units total) varied from a low of 98.3 percent (1.7 percent vacancy rate) in the middle quarter of 2000 to a high of 99.3 percent (0.7 percent vacancy rate) during the fourth quarter. However, during the first quarter of 2001, average occupancy rates decreased to 95.9 percent (4.1 percent vacancy rate) reflecting the slowdown in the economy. The rental vacancy review of March 2009, by the Planning and Community Environment Department (required by the provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Chapter 21.40), determined 1.87 percent vacancy rate for multifamily units. The vacancy rate is calculated for regulating the conversion of housing developments containing a minimum of three dwelling units from rental-type tenancy to condominium uses. The data reviewed is obtained from multiple sources like the City’s Building Division records, the City’s Utilities Department records and the Bureau of the Census data. This shows that currently Palo Alto has a total number of 7,622 multifamily rental units of which approximately 143 units are assumed to be vacant resulting in a rental vacancy rate of 1.87 percent. Housing Types The majority of housing units in Palo Alto (64 percent of the housing stock in 2008) are single-family units. Of these, 94 percent are single family detached units and the remainder single family attached units (e.g. condominium and townhouse units). Multifamily units in structures of 2-4 units represented 6 percent of the housing stock in 2008, and approximately 29 percent of the housing stock consisted of multifamily units in structures of 5 and more units. Mobile homes represented less than 0.2 percent of the total housing stock. The illustration below shows the 2008 mix of housing types in the City. 2008 Total Housing Units:26,960 Occupied 25,528 Vacant 1,432 Vacant: For rent 118 Vacant: Rented, not occupied 153 Vacant: For sale only 151 Vacant: Sold, not occupied 113 Vacant: For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 145 For migrant workers 0 Other vacant 752 Source: 2005-2007, 2006-2008 and 2007-2009 American Community Survey Data Chapter 2 53 Figure 2-4 Housing Stock by Unit Type in Palo Alto, 2008 Source: ACS 2006-2008 Data The character of Palo Alto’s housing stock has changed little since 1990 when single-family homes constituted more than 60 percent of housing stock. Increased construction of multiple family housing in Palo Alto rose in the late 1990s. Between 1996 and 2000 the City built about 335 dwelling units of which 212 units were multiple family units. The proportion of structures with 5 or more units has remained constant since 2000. Table 2-48 Housing Stock by Type of Housing Since 2000 In 2008, approximately 61 percent of the 25,528 occupied units in the City were owner-occupied. Homeowners live in 15,485 of the City's occupied units and renter households occupy the remaining 10,043 units. From 1970 to 2000, the home ownership rate slowly increased from 54 percent to 56 percent and by 2008 the ownership rate reached 61 percent. It is interesting to note that the percentage of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units in the City's housing stock is similar to the proportion of owner and renter units in Santa Clara County 2008 Housing Stock by Unit Type Single Family 2-4 Units Other (includes mobile homes, boats, vans & RV) 5+ Units Housing Unit Type 2000 2007 2008 Change 2000 to 2008 Single Family 16,365 17,810 17,332 6% 2-4 Units 1,728 1,579 1,671 -3% 5+ Units 7,897 7,218 7,897 0% Other (includes mobile homes, boats, vans & RV) 165 128 60 -64% TOTAL 26,155 26,735 26,960 3% Source: 2000 U.S. Census, 2005-2007 and 2006-2008 American Community Survey Chapter 2 54 as a whole. The County's housing stock consisted of 40 percent renter-occupied and 60 percent owner-occupied units in 2008. The median year of construction of the renter occupied units in Palo Alto is 1965; while for the County of Santa Clara, it is 1973. This reflects that Palo Alto has older rental unit stock than the County. The owner occupied housing stock of Palo Alto is also older than the County’s, the median year of construction being 1954. Figure 2-5 Housing Tenure by Structure of Year Built Source: U.S. Census Bureau and ACS 2006-2008 Data In 2000, approximately 78.6 percent of all owner-occupied units in Palo Alto were three bedrooms or larger. In 2008, 81 percent of owner-occupied units contained three or more bedrooms. Only 18 percent of the renter occupied units have three or more bedrooms. Eleven percent are studio units, with the majority of the rental units containing 1-2 bedrooms (71%). Year 2000 Census data indicates that the average number of bedrooms in an owner-occupied unit was 3.16 while the average number of bedrooms in a renter occupied unit was 1.52. It was assumed that owner-occupied units have more bedrooms in 2008 given the increasing size of single-family detached dwellings over the last decade, while renter-occupied units in 2008 show a slight decrease in the average number of bedrooms from 1990. 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 Built 2005 or later Built 2000 to 2004 Built 1990 to 1999 Built 1980 to 1989 Built 1970 to 1979 Built 1960 to 1969 Built 1950 to 1959 Built 1940 to 1949 Built 1939 or earlier Owner occupied:Renter occupied: Chapter 2 55 Figure 2-6 Housing Stock by Tenure and Number of Bedrooms, 2008 Source: U.S. Census Bureau and ACS 2006-2008 Data Housing Age and Conditions Like many other California communities, Palo Alto experienced a huge spurt of growth in the decade after World War II. Approximately 29 percent the City's current housing stock was built in the decade between 1950-60. The 2000 Census data indicated that the median year in which a typical Palo Alto owner-occupied housing unit was constructed was 1954. The City's housing stock appears to be divided into three periods of construction or age. Roughly 56 percent of the units were constructed prior to 1959, approximately 12 percent were constructed between 1960-69 and approximately 24 percent were built between 1970-1999. Only 8 percent of the construction took place between 2000 to 2008. By looking at Census data indicators only, Palo Alto's housing stock is not substantially at risk for having severely deteriorated units. Although the majority of the City's units were built after World War II, there are limited numbers of very old housing units (50+ years) in the City without any home improvements or upgrades. Further, the 2000 Census data indicates that only 84 of the City's 26,155 total units lacked complete plumbing facilities. 0 BR 1 BR 2 BR 3 BR 4 BR 5+ BR 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Owner Households Renter Households Chapter 2 56 Figure 2-7 Housing Stock of Palo Alto by Year Built, 2008 Source: U.S. Census Bureau and ACS 2006-2008 Data While a formal "windshield" survey has not been conducted in Palo Alto in recent years, there have been periodic and extensive drive-through observations of the neighborhoods in Palo Alto by both staff and consultants. Because of the high market value and income levels in many Palo Alto neighborhoods, the units generally appear to be in good condition and there appear to be very few, if any, pockets of deteriorating units. The City's 1988-91 "Housing Assistance Plan" estimated that only 3 percent of the City's owner occupied housing stock is substandard. The 3 percent figure was based on information from the City's Housing Improvement Program, which has now been discontinued, and was the most accurate information available on substandard housing. City staff observations indicate minimal change in the amount of substandard housing since 1991. City staff has also observed that in Palo Alto there does not appear to be a correlation between the age of a structure and deterioration. Further, the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) reports that Santa Clara County’s housing stock is in significantly better condition than other areas of the State. Assuming that the proportion (3 percent) of owner-occupied units estimated to be substandard remains the same, only about 465 of the 15,485 owner-occupied units in Palo Alto could be considered substandard. The actual number of substandard homes is probably less, however, given the high real estate values of the City and the high level of investment property owners are likely to spend to maintain these values. The median year of construction of the renter occupied units in Palo Alto is 1965, while for the County of Santa Clara it is 1973. This reflects Palo Alto’s older rental unit stock. The owner occupied housing stock of Palo Alto is also older than the County, the median year of construction being 1954. The City's rental housing stock is "younger" than its total housing stock. 75 percent of the renter-occupied units built on or after 1990 were in structures of 5 or more units. Assuming that very-low and low-income renters might be more likely to live in substandard units because of their limited income for housing costs, a review of income status and age of housing was 8% 24% 12% 56% Built 2000 to current Built 1970 to 1999 Built 1960 to 1969 Pre 1959 Chapter 2 57 conducted using the 1990 Census data. This review indicates that the majority (60 percent) of very low- and low-income tenants in Palo Alto occupied units built after 1960. Another 28 percent (987 households total) of very low- and low-income tenants were living in units built between 1940-59 while the remaining 13 percent (462 households total) of very low- and low-income renters lived in units built prior to 1940. Therefore, the Census data indicates that most very low- and low-income tenants in Palo Alto live in "newer" units (units built after 1960) and these units are typically assumed to be in no serious threat of being substandard. There were 462 very low- and low-income tenants living in units over 50 years of age, and these units are the most likely to be substandard and in need of rehabilitation. There was also 987 very low- and low-income tenants living in units built between 1940-59 and some of these units could also be in need of repair or rehabilitation. The 1,449 total units (462+987=1,449 units) represent 5.8 percent of all housing units in the City in 1990. Assuming the same proportion (5.8 percent) of rental units that are possibly substandard for the year 2000, approximately 1,463 housing units may have needed some rehabilitation in 2000. While it does not appear that there is a serious problem with the condition of rental units, it should be noted that the City has been active in trying to maintain the condition of its existing affordable rental housing stock. Using federal funds and bond authority, several rental housing developments in Palo Alto have been rehabilitated in recent years. In 1998-99, the City assisted the Palo Alto Housing Corporation in preserving and rehabilitating the 57 unit Sheridan Apartments and, in 1999-2000, assisted the Mid-Peninsula Housing Coalition in preserving and rehabilitating the 156 unit Palo Alto Gardens. The City assisted with the acquisition and rehabilitation of the 66 unit Arastradero Park Apartments in 1995. With City assistance, the Palo Alto Housing Corporation rehabilitated the 10 unit Plum Tree Apartments in 1991 and the 26 unit Barker Hotel project in 1994. The City continues to monitor the maintenance and repair needs of this affordable rental housing stock. Housing Cost Housing costs continue to be a concern for California communities, especially in the San Francisco Bay Area. Palo Alto is a very desirable community and, consequently, the cost of housing is especially high and was rising rapidly until 2007. Census 2000 data indicated that the median value for specified owner-occupied housing for Santa Clara County was $446,400 and $811,800 for Palo Alto. The Silicon Valley Board of Realtors indicated that the price of both single-family detached dwellings and condominiums/townhouses in Palo Alto more than doubled between 1996 and 2000. Single-family detached home prices increased 105 percent from $490,000 to $1,006,600. Condominium and townhouse prices increased 107 percent from $264,000 to $546,600 (Source: Silicon Valley Board of Realtors) during this period. ACS 2006-2008 data shows median home values of Palo Alto stands above $1 million, an increase of 23 percent from year 2000. Chapter 2 58 Table 2-49 Regional Median Home Values Since 2000 As of June 2006, the median price home price in Palo Alto was $1,395,000. A condominium or townhouse had a median price of $655,000. Assuming a 20% downpayment, 6.5% interest rate and 30 year term, the monthly mortgage payment would be approximately $8500 per month. If the household would pay no more than 30 percent of their income for housing costs (principal, interest, taxes and insurance), it would mean a household would need to have an annual income of approximately $340,000 to afford the median sales price of $1,395,000 for a single family detached home. As reference, the 2006 household median income, as determined by HUD, was $103,600 for a family of four. Therefore a household would have to earn over three times the County median to purchase the median priced single-family home in Palo Alto. Using the same assumptions, the household income required to purchase the median price condominium or townhome in Palo Alto would be approximately $160,000 per year. Housing Affordability The information in the above paragraph indicates that households in Palo Alto either need a very high household income to afford median priced housing or else would need to have a substantial amount of funds for a large down payment so that the monthly mortgage costs would be reduced. Low- and moderate-income households do not have the household incomes needed to afford these units and, typically, do not have access to large amounts of funds to use for down payments. Therefore, it is very difficult for low- and moderate-income households to afford home ownership in Palo Alto. In fact, unless publicly subsidized in some manner, home ownership in Palo Alto is available only to households with above moderate incomes. The following two tables show rental and ownership affordability for Extremely Low, Very Low and Low income groups restricting spending to 30 percent of their income for housing. 2000 2007 2008 San Jose $394,000 $665,200 $678,100 72% Cupertino $649,000 $948,200 $994,100 53% Sunnyvale $495,200 $705,200 $724,900 46% MountainView $546,900 $727,600 $764,600 40% Palo Alto $811,800 $1,000,000 $1,000,000+ 23% Los Altos Hills $983,000 $1,000,000 1000000+2% City Percent Change From 2000-2008 Median Value Sources: Census 2000, 2005-2007 and 2006-2008 American Community Survey Data. Chapter 2 59 Table 2-50 Rental Housing Affordability, 2009 Table 2-51 Ownership Housing Affordability, 2009 Although there has been limited local decline in home values, it is important to note, that credit markets have also tightened in tandem with the decline in home values. Therefore, although homes have become slightly more affordable, lender requirements for a minimum down payment or credit score present a greater obstacle for buyers today. More accessible home loan products, including Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans have traditionally allowed lower-income households to purchase a home that they could not otherwise afford. However, interviews with lenders suggest that many households are not aware of these programs. Moreover, many loan officers prefer to focus on conventional mortgages because of the added time and effort associated with processing and securing approval on a FHA loan. Income Group Median Income Maximum Housing Cost (30% of Income) Extremely Low (30% of Median Income) $31,850 $620 Very Low-income Maximum (31%-50% of Median Income) $53,050 $1,150 Low-income Maximum (51%-80% of Median Income) $84,900 $1,947 Source: City of Palo Alto Consolidated Plan 2010. Affordablity calculations based on 2009 HUD Area Median Income for family of four. Income Group Median Income Maximum Affordable Home Price Percent of Single Family Homes in North Santa Clara County within the Price Range Extremely Low (0-30% MFI)$31,850 $132,600 1.40% Very Low (31- 50% MFI)$53,050 $220,900 1.80% Low (51-80% MFI)$84,900 $353,500 5% Source: City of Palo Alto Consolidated Plan 2010. Affordablity calculations based on 2009 HUD Area Median Income for family of four. Chapter 2 60 According to the 2000 Census data, the median gross rent in Palo Alto was $1,349 while the median gross rent for Santa Clara County was $1,185. In 2008 the median gross rent for Palo Alto was $1625, a 97 percent rise in rents from 1990. Table 2-52 Median Rent and Home Value of Palo Alto Since 1990 The table below shows the current median rents by bedroom along with the Fair Market Rents established by the Santa Clara Housing Authority. Table 2-53 Median Rents by Number of Bedrooms, 2009 Source: 2009 data from local Real Estate Companies in Palo Alto, Online newspaper advertisements, Craigslist, and Housing Authority Santa Clara County In summary, home ownership in Palo Alto is expensive and available principally to households near the upper end of above moderate incomes. Without a public subsidy in some manner, the median priced home ownership units in the City require minimum household incomes of $163,000-$275,000 depending on unit type. The upper end of the households in the above moderate-income range can "afford" typical rental unit housing costs, but low- and very low-income households have much more difficulty in finding rental properties. Very low-income households, in particular, are much more challenged in finding a rental unit that is affordable and appropriately sized for their household. The recent slowing of the economy and increased vacancy rates may bring about a modest decline in rents and home prices, but not to the extent of substantially improving the affordability of housing in Palo Alto. Foreclosures As a result of the downfall in the housing market from early 2008, millions of Americans have received foreclosure notices and tens of billions in real-estate assets have been written off as losses by banks. By December 2008, the foreclosure rate in California was 3.97 percent (Source: http://www.realtytrac.com/content/press-releases/foreclosure-activity-increases-81-percent-in- 2008-4551). Compared to the rest of Santa Clara County, the rate of foreclosure in Palo Alto was far less. Because of Palo Alto’s premium real estate market, the volume of foreclosure properties Bedroom Type Median Market Rents Fair Market Rents June, 2010 Studio $1,200 $1,032 One-Bedroom $1,800 $1,196 Two-Bedroom $2,700 $1,438 Three-Bedroom $3,500 $2,068 Four-Bedroom $4,150 $2,276 Rent 1990 2000 2007 2008 1990-2008 Percent Change Median Home Value 457,800 811,800 1000000+ 1000000+118% Median Gross Rent 825 1,349 1,579 1625 97% Sources: Census 1990, 2000, 2005-2007 and 2006-2008 American Community Survey Chapter 2 61 was significantly lower than cities like San Jose and Santa Clara. Based on October 2011 Reality Trac data approximately 31 foreclosures were reported in Palo Alto in 2011 (http://www.realtytrac.com/trendcenter/ca/palo+alto-trend.html) which is about .11 percent of the total housing units in Palo Alto. Assisted Housing At-Risk of Conversion Many publicly assisted housing units throughout the state are eligible to change from low-income to market-rate housing. Termination of various government subsidy programs and/or restrictions on rental rates will expedite the conversions. These units, known as at-risk units, are a valuable source of affordable housing for families. State Housing Element law and the City’s HUD Consolidated Plan regulation require cities to prepare an inventory including all assisted multifamily rental units which are eligible to convert to non low- income housing uses due to termination of subsidy contract, mortgage prepayment, or expiring use restrictions. State Housing Element law requires this inventory cover a ten-year evaluation period following the statutory due date of the Housing Element (July 1, 2004); whereas the HUD regulation requires the inventory to cover only the five-year planning period of the Consolidated Plan. To satisfy both state and federal requirements, this at-risk housing analysis period covers from July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2014. Below is a list of Assisted Housing units that are at risk of conversion to market-rate housing from July 2004 to June 2014, based on information from the California Housing Partnership Corporation (CHPC). Palo Alto has 400 units in seven developments of very low- and low-income housing that are subject to increases in rent or conversion to market rate housing to varying degrees. Of these units, 72 are considered at severe risk of conversion, while the remainder is at low risk of conversion. These projects are assisted in part by HUD with Section 8 project-based rental assistance in which a direct subsidy is provided to the owner. Many subsidized affordable housing developments receive government funding that requires units are made affordable for a specified amount of time. Affordable developments owned by for-profit entities are more at-risk of converting to market rate in the next five years, whereas commitment and mission to preserve affordability of the nonprofits’ development significantly lowers the risk of conversion of those units. Many of the City’s affordable housing agreements are in place through 2019. However, some affordable housing developments are dependent on Section 8 vouchers to assist in the project cash flow. While difficult to predict the direction of federal funding for the Section 8 program and affordable housing funding in general, the City will continue to advocate for maintaining or increasing funding for affordable housing. Of the City’s affordable housing developments, only one development, the Terman Apartments, was found to be a high risk of reverting to market rate housing. The Terman Apartments were financed using the Section 8 221(d)(3) mortgage insurance program. The development has been at risk for some time and the City has approached the owner a number of times about the possibility of purchasing the unit. However, the owner has not been receptive to selling the development. The City will work with the owner and other non-profit affordable housing developers in preserving this project which serves moderate income households. In 2008, the City and Palo Alto Housing Corporation, Inc. (PAHC), a non-profit housing developer, approached the owner of the Terman Apartments about the possibility of selling the units to PAHC but the owner was not willing. In addition to PAHC, the City has worked with a Chapter 2 62 number of affordable housing developers in the City including Eden Housing and Bridge Housing Corporation, both established affordable housing developers in the Bay Area. Based on recent development proformas of affordable housing projects in the City, the total estimated cost of replacing 92 total units, with land acquisition and developments costs, at the Terman Apartments would be approximately $45 million. Table 2-54 Summary of Government Assisted Units “At Risk” for Conversion One of the goals of the City’s Consolidated Plan is to preserve the supply of affordable rental stock. It is also a high priority of the City to retain the existing affordable rental stock. The Terman Apartment complex is the one federally subsidized rental project that is at-risk of converting to market rate housing during the next five-year period. The current HUD Section 8 contract on the 92-unit Terman Apartment complex expired in 2010, of which 72 units are subsidized units; the property owner has continued the Section 8 subsidy on a year to year basis. The City’s top priority continues to be to preserve these affordable rental units. There are an additional 281 assisted rental units in four developments potentially at-risk for conversion. However, these units are owned and operated by nonprofit entities and are considered at low risk of conversion. Conservation of the existing affordable housing stock is critical in today's economic climate. Because of the high cost of housing and lack of vacant land to construct new affordable housing, it is extremely important to preserve and protect those affordable housing units that already exist. State Housing Element Law requires communities to conduct an inventory of affordable units that might be "at-risk" of converting to market rate units within a 10-year time frame of the Housing Element. The inventory is to include all multifamily rental units that have been funded Project Name Owner/Contact Total Number of Units Units Subject to Conversion Type of Subsidy Previous or Existing Conversion Date/Sec. 8 Status Non- Elderly units Elderly units Terman Apartments 655 Arastradero Rd. Palo Alto, CA Goldrich & Kest, 5150 Overland Ave.Culver City, CA 92 Units 92 Units 221(d)(4) & Section 8 Section 8 Opt:Year to Year Lytton Gardens I, 656 Lytton Ave. Community Housing, Inc., 656 Lytton Avenue 220 Units 140 Units 236(j)(1) Section 8 Section 8 Opt: 1996-97, 1998, 2003, (now year- to-year Section 8) Elderly Colorado Park, 1141 Colorado Ave. Palo Alto, CA Colorado Park Corp., 1141 Colorado Ave. Palo Alto, CA 60 Units 37 Units 236(j)(1), Section 8 Section 8 Opt:, 1996-97, 1998. (now year-to- year Section 8) Family Lytton Gardens II, 656 Lytton Ave., Palo Alto, CA Community Housing Inc, 656 Lytton Ave., Palo Alto, CA 100 Units 100 Units Section 202 Section 8 Section 8 Opt, 1999, (now year- to-year Section 8) Elderly Arastradero Park Apts, 574 Arastradero Road, Palo Alto, CA Palo Alto Housing Corp., 725 Alma Street, Palo Alto, CA 94301 66 Units 47 Units Section 8, Sec. 236(j)(1) Section 8 Opt:2000, (now year-to-year Section 8)Page Mill Court, 2700 Ash St., Palo Alto, CA 94306 24 Units 4 Units 221 (d)(4), Section 8 2005 TOTAL 562 Units 400 Units Adults with Disabilities Source: City of Plao A lto, 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan Summary of Government Assisted Units “At Risk” for Conversion Family & Elderly For Profit Ownership (at higher risk of conversion) Family & Elderly Non-Profit Ownership (at lower risk of conversion; possible risk of higher rents if Section 8 subsidy lost) Chapter 2 63 with federal, state or local assistance. A review of multifamily units in Palo Alto indicates that the only units that are at risk are those that have been assisted with federal funds. The only State funded project is the Barker Hotel which was assisted with State of California HOME funds and the units have affordability controls until 2033. The City has a "Below Market Rate" (BMR) program that requires 15-20 percent of units to be affordable in projects of five units or more. The units in the BMR program have resale and affordability controls for 59 years and renew each time the property title is transferred and, therefore, are not at risk of converting to market rate. Expiration of Section 8 Project Based Subsidies Section 8 rental subsidies are subsidies provided directly to the project owner and the amount of the subsidy is typically determined based on the tenant's income and the rent charged. The subsidy helps tenants "afford" their monthly rent by paying a portion of the rent for them to the property owner. HUD and the property owner enter into a contract for a specified period of time during which Section 8 rental subsidy assistance will be provided. Formerly property owners were required to renew the Section 8 assistance in periods of 5-15 years, depending on the contract. Currently, HUD only renews Section 8 assistance on a year-to-year basis, subject to Congressional funding. It is not known how long this year-to-year renewal will continue. During the next decade, three projects in Palo Alto will have their current Section 8 Project Based Subsidy contracts either expiring or up for renewal. The effects of a loss of Section 8 subsidies differ depending on many factors including the underlying mortgage assistance, the percentage of households receiving rental assistance and their income levels, and each project's annual operating costs. Following is a description of the principal types of mortgage assistance which financed the affected projects. Sec. 221(d)(4) Projects The Terman Apartments complex is the only remaining project with a Section 221(d)(4) market rate mortgage with Section 8 project based subsidy. A 221(d)(4) project uses market rate mortgages with FHA insurance. This type of mortgage has no underlying mortgage prepayment restriction which requires continued affordability. Therefore, the units in this project could be rented at market rate, and there would be no requirement that the tenants be low-income. The only other Section 221(d)(4) project in Palo Alto, the Sheridan Apartments, was recently acquired by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation with assistance from the City of Palo Alto using available CDBG funds. This project is no longer considered “at-risk” of converting to market rate units. The Terman Apartments are the only remaining subsidized rental units seriously “at- risk” of conversion. Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation Program Projects Under this HUD program, HUD offered 5 to 10 year contracts for Section 8 assistance to owners of existing rental housing occupied by eligible very low- and low-income households if the owner performed at least a minimum amount of property rehabilitation. In many cases, the rehabilitation work was funded by loans from local housing programs using CDBG funds or other HUD funds. The effect of a loss of Section 8 assistance depends on the specific financial circumstances of each project, especially the degree to which the owner's ability to cover debt service and operating costs depends on the revenue from the Section 8 rental contract. The Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) owns and manages three Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation projects in Palo Alto, namely, Curtner Apartments, Emerson South Apartments, and Oak Manor Townhouses. The original Housing Assistance Payments (HAP) contracts of these properties have expired, but they are renewed annually. Chapter 2 64 The Section 8 contract assistance enables PAHC to provide affordable housing to very low-income households. Without the Section 8 assistance, PAHC would need to increase the rents paid by the tenants, which would mean that occupancy would shift to somewhat higher income households over time. However, since these properties carry relatively low amounts of amortized mortgage debt, PAHC should be able to maintain them as affordable rental units for low-income households even without the Section 8 assistance. At present, HUD continues to offer owners of 5 or more units a one year extension of their Section 8 contract. PAHC controls other projects with multi-year term Section 8 HAP contracts. They are Webster Wood Apartments, Sheridan Apartments, Arastradero Park Apartments, and Colorado Park Apartments. These projects are larger than those subsidized under the Moderate Rehabilitation Program. Colorado Park and Webster Wood were developed by PAHC in the 1970s to respond to the need for affordable housing in the City of Palo Alto. In the 1990s, PAHC acquired Arastradero Park and the Sheridan Apartments to preserve and maintain them in the City’s affordable housing stock. Projects acquired and rehabilitated by PAHC have complicated financing structures in which loans, funded from tax-exempt bonds, covered a major portion of the costs. Rental income, on par with the current Section 8 contract level, is needed for PAHC to continue to meet operating costs and repay the loans. Cost Analysis The cost to conserve the units in the developments that have Project Based Section 8 Subsidies as very low-and low-income housing is as varied as the projects themselves. Some of the developments have zoning controls or deed restrictions, some have longer term contracts and some have low mortgage debt; however, as noted previously, replacement is extremely difficult given the scarcity of available land. Most of these projects have been able to extend their Section 8 contracts on a year-to-year basis. The units most at risk are those in the Terman Apartments owned by a for-profit corporation. In 1998-99, the City of Palo Alto assisted in the purchase and conservation of Palo Alto Gardens and the Sheridan Apartments. Because the other remaining units are owned by non-profits, it is highly unlikely that they would have to be replaced or purchased at market rates. Although they are in danger of losing their Project Based Section 8 rental assistance, they would likely result in a modified mortgage arrangement with HUD and/or some increase in rents, but still remain well below market rates. In addition, because of the quality and desirable location of the projects, tenants receiving Tenant Based Section 8 Subsidies are likely to continue living in the properties for some time. Potential funding sources to pay for the cost of conserving these units are limited. Similar to the Palo Alto Gardens and Sheridan projects, City staff would assist in pursuing such funding sources as bond financing, State of California housing program funds, HOME funds, CDBG funds and City funds. Other potential funding sources might include Low Income Housing Tax Credits and Affordable Housing Program Funds from the Federal Home Loan Bank. All of these funding sources are, however, limited. 2.6 Regional Housing Needs Housing Needs Allocation Process State law requires every city and county in California to show how it will accommodate its “fair share” of the housing need for the region in which it is located. Based on regional housing need Chapter 2 65 estimates established by the State, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) has formulated estimates of housing needs by different income levels, which it assigned to each city and county in the San Francisco Bay Area through a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) process. The RHNA represents the housing need that each jurisdiction must plan for during the 2007-2014 period that is covered by the Housing Element. The allocation process used information from ABAG’s Projections 2007 as the basis for determining each jurisdiction’s fair share of the region’s housing need. The methodology includes an allocation tool that is a mathematical equation consisting of weighted factors. The allocation process considers different weighting factors such as household growth (45 percent), existing employment (22.5 percent), employment growth (22.5 percent), household growth near existing transit (5 percent), and employment growth near existing transit (5 percent) were considered in the allocation process. In addition to this data, ABAG considered the land use policies and the land use data of local governments, including the sites available for residential development and the availability of urban services. The housing need determination is primarily based on the number of households each jurisdiction is expected to plan for between 2007 and 2014. The local jurisdictions in Santa Clara County have agreed that since urbanization should take place only within the urban service areas of the cities about 75 percent of the Unincorporated County’s Sphere of Influence housing need should be allocated to the cities where these units could be better served and urban encroachments into the County would be better contained. Using available data and projections based on future employment and population trends, ABAG estimates that the total projected housing need for Santa Clara County is 60,338 new units for the 2007 to 2014 period. Palo Alto's share of that total need is 2,860 units or 4.4 percent of the County's total need. In addition to the total housing need estimate, ABAG is charged with determining the number of housing units that are needed for each of four household income levels based on County median household income. These income levels are defined as follows: Very Low-Income 0-50 percent of County median income; Low-Income 50-80 percent of County median income; Moderate-Income 80-120 percent of County median income; and, Above Moderate-Income; greater than 120 percent of County median income. The purpose of this division of housing need by income level is to more equitably distribute the type of households by income category throughout a region so that no one community is "impacted" with a particular household income group and to ensure that each jurisdiction addresses the housing needs of each economic segment in their communities. The State law recognizes that local jurisdictions are rarely involved in the actual construction of housing. The law neither requires them to produce or provide financial assistance for the units that ABAG allocates. The primary objective is for cities and counties to adopt plans that provide sites that could feasibly accommodate housing to meet its share of the regional need and to adopt and implement policies and programs that will help to make this possible. Chapter 2 66 Table 2-55 Santa Clara County Housing Needs Allocation, 2007- 2014 Table 2-56 ABAG’s New Construction Need by Household Income Level in Palo Alto, 2007-2014 Units Approved and Remaining Need Building Permit data as of December 2011 shows that 42 percent of the total ABAG/RHNA numbers have been approved or under construction. About 89 percent of the units in the above moderate income category have already been approved or entitled. Like the previous cycle, the City will have difficulty in meeting the very low, low and moderate income housing requirements stipulated by ABAG. Income Level Number of Units % of Total Need Very Low-income Households 690 24% Low-Income Households 543 19% Moderate-Income Households 641 22% Above Moderate-Income Households 986 34% TOTAL 2,860 100% Source:City of Palo Alto, RHNA Cities Very Low <50% Low <80% Moderate, <120% Above Moderate Total Campbell 199 122 158 413 892 Cupertino 341 229 243 357 1,170 Gilroy 319 217 271 808 1,615 Los Altos 98 66 79 74 317 Los Altos Hills 27 19 22 13 81 Los Gatos 154 100 122 186 562 Milpitas 689 421 441 936 2,487 Monte Sereno 13 9 11 8 41 Morgan Hill 317 249 246 500 1,312 Mountain View 571 388 488 1,152 2,599 Palo Alto 690 543 641 986 2,860 San Jose 7,751 5,322 6,198 15,450 34,721 Santa Clara 1,293 914 1,002 2,664 5,873 Saratoga 90 68 77 57 292 Sunnyvale 1,073 708 776 1,869 4,426 Unincorporated 253 192 232 413 1,090 Santa ClaraTotal 13,878 9,567 11,007 25,886 60,338 Source:San Francisco Bay Area Housing Needs Plan 2007-2014 Chapter 2 67 Table 2-57 Progress in Meeting Palo Alto’s Fair Share of the Region’s 2007-2014 Cycle Housing* Income Level Need Entitled/In Process Built/Building Permit Issued 2007-2014 Unmet Need Very Low 690 56 156 478 Low 543 30 9 504 Moderate 641 1 120 520 SUBTOTAL 1,874 87 285 1,502 Above Moderate 986 96 749 141 TOTAL 2,860 183 1,034 1,643 Source: City of Palo Alto - Entitlement and Building Permit Activity 01/01/2007 - 03/01/2013 Table 2-57a Quantified Objectives Income New Construction Rehabilitation Conservation/ Preservation Extremely Low- 45 100 Very Low- 65 175 Low- 20 75 Moderate- 10 600 92 Above Moderate- 650 2400 TOTAL 790 3350 92 As required by Section 65583 of the California Government Code, the goals, policies and actions identified in this document seek to meet quantified housing objectives. Table 2-57a summarizes these findings, which result in a total estimated construction of over 790 new housing units. The estimates for Rehabilitation and Conservation were based on City Planning and Building Department permit data. Chapter 2 68 The graph below shows a comparison between the 1999-2006 cycle and the 2007-2014 cycle achievements: Figure 2-8 Comparison of Achievements in Reaching ABAG Goals in the Past and Current Cycle by Income Level Source: City of Palo Alto, Building Permits Issued and Planning Entitled Data from 2007 to 2011 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% 180% 200% % o f A B A G G o a l s A c h i e v e d Very Low (0-50% of AMI) Low (51-80% of AMI) Moderate (81-120% of AMI) Above Moderate (over 120% of AMI) TOTAL UNITS Percentage Need Achieved As of December 2011 in 2007-2014 Cycle Percentage of Need Achieved in 1999-2006 Cycle Chapter 2 69 Table 2-58 List of Projects with Building Permit Issued and Planning Entitlement Issued by Income Categories as of December 2012 Very Low Income (0% - 50% AMI) Address Entitled/In Process Building Permit Issued 2007- 2014 901 San Antonio (Bridge/3901 Fabian) 56 1072 Tanland (addition to existing apt) 1 3445 Alma (Alma Plaza) 14 488 West Charleston (Treehouse) 35 801 Alma 50 2180 El Camino Real (JJ&F) 6 0 567-595 Maybell 50 0 TOTAL 56 156 Low Income (51% - 80% AMI) Address Entitled/In Process Building Permit Issued 2007- 2014 2051 El Camino Real 1 1072 Tanland (addition to existing apt) 2 2180 El Camino Real (JJ&F) 2 0 195 Page Mill Avenue 18 0 2811 Alma 6 567-595 Maybell 10 0 TOTAL 30 9 Moderate Income (81% - 120% AMI) Address Entitled/In Process Building Permit Issued 2007- 2014 Cottages 26 1101 E Meadow 11 4219 El Camino Real (Hyatt Rickeys) 34 3270-3290 West Bayshore (Classics) 10 901 San Antonio (TKCJL/899 Charleston) 24 1072 Tanland (addition to existing apt) 12 4329 El Camino Real (Palo Alto Bowl) 3 2080 Channing (Edgewood Plaza) 1 0 1 120 Chapter 2 70 Above Moderate Income (Above 120% AMI) Address Entitled/In Process Building Permit Issued 2007- 2014 260 Homer 2 1101 E Meadow 64 4219 El Camino Real (Hyatt Rickeys) 147 1795 El Camino Real 2 3270-3290 West Bayshore (Classics) 86 2825 - 2865 El Camino Real 2 901 San Antonio (Altaire) 103 901 San Antonio (TKCJL) 169 102 University 3 820 Ramona 1 325 Lytton 1 4249 El Camino Real (Juniper Homes) 5 455 Forest Avenue 3 4249 El Camino Real (Summerhill) 45 586 College Avenue 1 433 W Meadow 5 3445 Alma (Alma Plaza) 37 741-749 Webster -3 1128 Webster -1 420 Cambridge 4 4329 El Camino Real (Palo Alto Bowl) 23 265 Lytton Avenue 4 195 Page Mill Ave 64 0 2080 Channing (Edgewood Plaza) 9 0 2640 - 2650 Birch St 5 0 557-559 Lytton -4 718-720 La Para 1 2021 Webster 1 165 Hawthorne 1 524 Hamilton 1 4073-4111 El Camino Real 2 0 4041 El Camino Real (PA Commons) 43 797-807 Matadero (Packard/Emma Ct) 2 365 Hawthorne Ave 1 Chapter 2 71 687 Cowper St 3 0 135 Hamilton 2 0 567-595 Maybell 11 0 96 749 Source: City of Palo Alto - Entitlement and Building Permit Activity 01/01/2007 - 03/01/2013 All 251 very-low and low-income units will be/are deed restricted units. Of the 251 affordable units, 34 very low and low income rental units were created through the City’s Below Market Rate program. Those units are restricted to low income households as established by the State for Santa Clara County for a period of 59 years. The remaining 217 affordable units were created with financial assistance from the City and deed restricted to low, very low and extremely low income households. The City has loaned out over $22 million for the creation of these units. Those units carry a minimum 55-year affordability term, consistent with tax credit financing requirements. However, City documents include options to extend the affordability period. If the 251 entitled/ built low and very low income units are subtracted from the City’s need of 1,233 units, the City’s remaining need for very low and low income households is 982 housing units. State law establishes a density of 20 units per acre as the minimum density necessary to make affordable housing economically feasible in Palo Alto. The City must show that it can accommodate the remaining 982 low and very low income units on sites that have a density of 20 units per acre or higher. In the City’s Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) list, all parcels with an existing zoning density of 20 units per acre or higher have been highlighted. The total number of units provided by the highlighted parcels is 1,056. While the City does have proposed programs that will revise the Zoning Ordinance to increase densities to be consistent with Housing Element law, the City can meet its low and very low needs with existing zoning. Chapter 3 72 CHAPTER 3 HOUSING RESOURCES AND INVENTORY This chapter analyzes the resources available for development, rehabilitation, and preservation of housing in Palo Alto. This chapter of the Housing Element addresses Government Code Sections 65583 and 65583.2, requiring a parcel-specific inventory of sites that are suitable to provide housing to meet a city’s share of the need for housing for all income groups including: Vacant residentially zoned sites; Vacant sites with non-residential zoning that allow residential uses; Underutilized residentially zoned sites that could be developed at a higher density or intensity; and Non-residential zoned sites that can be redeveloped for and/or rezoned for residential use. In addition, this chapter includes an evaluation of the financial resources available to support housing activities, the administrative resources available to assist in implementing the City’s housing programs, and the opportunities for energy conservation. 3.1 LAND INVENTORY This section describes the inventory of land in Palo Alto that is suitable for residential development, including underutilized sites with the potential for redevelopment. As mentioned in earlier chapters, Palo Alto is basically a “built-out” community. Approximately 55% of Palo Alto’s total land area includes existing and designated parks, open space preserves and agricultural land conservation areas with controlled development regulations. A large portion of the City’s open space includes the Baylands Preserve, a 1,940 acre tract of undisturbed marshland, the largest remaining in the San Francisco Bay. Parks and preserves located on steep rugged unstable woodlands also comprise a significant segment of the City’s open space area Over 23% of Palo Alto’s remaining land area is designated and zoned for single family residential and contains strong existing single-family neighborhoods with distinct identities and character. This leaves less than a quarter of the City’s land area for commercial, industrial, public facilities and multifamily residential uses, and most of this remaining area is already developed. The lack of vacant land and, especially lack of vacant sites with residential zoning, has motivated an effort by the City to encourage redevelopment of parcels with commercial or industrial zoning to mixed use or multifamily residential uses. The City’s long-term policy to allow multifamily residential uses on commercially zoned parcels has resulted in the entitlement and construction of more than 1,000 residential units on sites with prior commercial uses within the current housing element cycle. However, this policy has jeopardized the economic viability of commercial areas. As a result, the City has targeted areas in the updated Housing Element that are more appropriate for multifamily housing. Strategies include limiting conversion of residential land and encouraging mixed uses (residential above retail) in commercial areas to promote residential development close to public transportation and amenities. Chapter 3 73 As detailed in Table 2-56 of Chapter 2, the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for Palo Alto is 2,860 units distributed among the following income groups: 690 very low income; 543 low income; 641 moderate income; and 986 above moderate income units. The RHNA represents the minimum number of housing units each community is required to plan for by identifying “adequate sites” for future housing development based on analysis of the adequacy and suitability of these sites to fulfill the City’s share of regional housing needs. The City intends to demonstrate its ability to accommodate its share of housing needs based on the following combination of approaches: Housing units built or with building permits issued since January 2007; Housing currently in process (discretionary review completed but building permit not yet issued); Potential housing in existing residentially zoned sites with existing non-residential uses; Potential housing in commercial zoning districts that could accommodate mixed use development. Zoning Appropriate to Accommodate Housing for Lower-Income Households State law establishes a density of 20 units/acre as the minimum density necessary to make affordable housing economically feasible in Palo Alto and other cities with a population under 100,000 that are located in a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) with a population less than 2 million. This so-called “default” density is assigned according to the population of the community and the MSA regardless of local development conditions. In Palo Alto, parcels zoned in multifamily residential zoning districts RM-30, RM-40, Residential Transition 35 (RT35) and Residential Transition 50 (RT50) allow residential densities of 20 to 40 dwelling units per acre. Commercial zoning districts Commercial Downtown (CD), Commercial Service (CS), Community Commercial (CC) also allow residential densities of 20 to 40 dwelling units per acre in mixed use projects. The Pedestrian and Transit Oriented District (PTOD) allows densities up to 40 dwelling units per acre. These densities meet or exceed the default density standard for Palo Alto. Parcels zoned in multifamily residential zoning districts RM-15 and the Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zoning district allow residential densities of up to 15 dwelling units per acre. The City’s Housing Element update proposes revising the Zoning Ordinance to allow up to 20 dwelling units per acre on CN zoned parcels listed as Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) to meet the default density standard for Palo Alto. The following table shows allowed residential densities in specific zoning districts within the City. The City does not require rezoning additional sites to meet its lower income housing need. After subtracting the 251 lower income units approved or built during the 2007-2014 cycle from the City’s low and very low requirement of 1,233 units, the City has an unmet need of 982 low and very low income units. In order to accommodate the very low and low income needs, State law requires the City to identify sites that have a density of 20 units per acre or higher, as per the density assigned to the City per State law. In the City’s Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) list, all parcels with a density of 20 units per acre or more have been highlighted. The total number provided by the highlighted parcels is 1,056 housing units. Therefore the City can accommodate its unmet low and very low income housing need for the 2007-2014 RHNA cycle by right. Chapter 3 74 While the City does have proposed programs that will revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow up to 20 dwelling units per acre for certain zoning districts, the City can meet its low and very low needs with existing zoning. In addition, an application has been submitted to rezone the site to Planned Community (PC) to allow 60 units of extremely low to low income senior affordable rental housing and 15 market rate units by right, for a total of 75 units for 595 Maybell Avenue. There are now four units on the site, so the net yield will be 71 units. This site, with the proposed rezoning will meet the criteria for accommodating the identified unaccommodated need: the zoning will allow multiple family residential uses by right, the site is large enough to accommodate more than 16 units, and the density will be about 30 units per acre. Although the City does not plan to use this property to meet its unaccommodated need requirements, the rezoning will provide additional affordable housing to help the City meet its RHNA numbers. Table 3-1 Allowed Residential Densities per Zoning District Zoning District Maximum Allowed Residential Density (du/ac) CN 15* CC 30 CS 30 CD 30-40 RM-15 15 RM-30 30 RM-40 40 Residential Transition Zoning Districts (RT) Zoning District Allowed Residential Density (du/ac)** RT-35 25-50 RT-50 25-50 * The City’s Housing Element update proposed to revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow up to 20 dwelling units per acre on CN zoned parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites (HIS). ** Residential densities and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) calculations in Residential Transition zoning districts varies depending on the type of project. Residential densities are based on maximum residential FAR and maximum average unit size of 1,250 square feet. Vacant and Infill Redevelopment Opportunities to Accommodate Residential Development Vacant Residential Land There are two vacant sites currently zoned for multifamily residential remaining in Palo Alto based on GIS and aerial photo analysis. The largest site is a remnant of the Sand Hill Road Extension Project which created a 2.5 acre parcel immediately adjacent to Stanford’s 1180 Welch Road Apartments. Although there are no current plans to develop the site, it is reasonable to expect that it could be used for an expansion of the 1180 Welch Road Apartments that is in the RM-40 zoning district and allows residential densities of up to 40 dwelling units per acre. If the site were developed for housing, the site should yield approximately 70 additional units. The other vacant site is approximately ¾ of an acre located on El Camino Real and currently zoned RM-15. Based on the zoning, the parcel could yield up to 11 units. Chapter 3 75 El Camino Real Sand Hill Rd, Welch and Pasteur Drive Chapter 3 76 Infill Redevelopment Opportunities to Accommodate Residential Development The City has had success in infill redevelopment of underutilized sites into higher density multifamily residential or mixed use development; the residential density factor of 20 dwelling units per acre assumed for sites identified in the Housing Inventory is actually lower than the average density of recent residential projects built or approved in the City, therefore, it is assumed that development on proposed HIS parcels may be higher than the 20 units used to calculate site yield. The following table illustrates the residential densities of multifamily residential or mixed use projects with 10 or more units built or approved since January of 2007. Table 3-2 Residential Densities of Multifamily Residential or Mixed Use Project Built or Approved SITE ADDRESS LOT SIZE (ac) NUMBER OF UNITS APPROVED/BUILT RESIDENTIAL DENSITY APPROVED/BUILT 1101 E. Meadow Dr. 4.36 75 17.19 4219 El Camino Real 13.80 181 13.11 3270 W Bayshore Rd. 6.46 96 14.87 901 San Antonio Ave 12.07 352 29.16 3445 Alma Street 4.22 51 12.09 4249 El Camino Real 4.13 45 10.90 200 San Antonio Ave. 3.46 45 13.02 488 W. Charleston Rd. 0.70 35 50.30 801 Alma Street 0.60 50 83.33 4239 El Camino Real 2.18 26 11.90 4041 El Camino Way 0.83 43 51.84 AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY 27.97 For purposes of identifying parcels suitable for residential or mixed use redevelopment, the following criteria were used: o Improvement on sites at least 20 years old o Site of 10,000 sq. ft. or more with a yield of 5 units or more o Site with an A/V of less than 1.5, or with A/V ratios of greater than 1.5 that were determined to have an artificially low assessed land value (parcels under the same ownership for more than 10 years), with the assessed land value is far below current market land values. The improvements on these parcels are much older and are candidates for redevelopment. o Windshield survey of underdeveloped residential or commercial sites consisting of 1 or 2 story structures. Underdeveloped commercial sites were defined as Class B office space structures or older buildings with wood construction. The above criteria were chosen based on the types of sites that had been redeveloped with mixed use or residential projects within the past several years. Chapter 3 77 In Palo Alto, the market has supported infill redevelopment and intensification of commercially zoned properties to residential or mixed uses. Staff evaluated the assessed value (A/V) ratio of the HIS parcels based on the data available from the County Assessor’s Office. This ratio compares the County Assessor’s assessed value of the improvements on the parcel to the County Assessor’s value of the land. The A/V ratio of 1.5 has been used by other jurisdictions to evaluate the redevelopment potential of property. If the ratio is less than 1.0, the improvements are worth less than the land. Of the 180 parcels identified in the Housing Inventory Sites, approximately 81% have an A/V ratio of less than 1.5 with 66% having an A/V ratio of less than 1.0. Sites with greater than 1.5 A/V ratios include parcels in the Mayfield Development agreement, which requires housing development as part of the agreement. In addition, due to the Proposition 13 assessed value restrictions, the A/V ratio on some of the commercial properties may be overestimated due to those assessment restrictions. The City’s Housing Element update also includes Program (H2.2.2) that provides incentive(s) to mixed-use developments if the project is 9 units or fewer, yields at least 20 dwelling per acre and a maximum unit size of 900 square feet to further facilitate and encourage the infill redevelopment of commercial sites with a residential component. In addition, if the Housing Inventory Site is within a quarter mile of a fixed rail station, the City will explore limited exceptions to height limits to further encourage higher density housing. The City’s approach to assessing the number of units that can be potentially achieved on most of the sites is based on a realistic density of 50 to 67% percent the maximum zoning density. The table below illustrates the current allowed residential density per zone and the density factor used to determine realistic capacity for the Housing Inventory sites. Table 3-3 “Realistic Capacity” Density Factor Compared to Allowed Residential Densities per Zoning District Zoning District Maximum Allowed Residential Density (du/ac) Realistic Capacity Density (du/ac) CN 15 20* CC 30 20 CS 30 20 CD 30-40 20 RM-15 15 20** RM-30 30 20 RM-40 40 20 Residential Transition Zoning Districts (RT) Zoning District Allowed Residential Density (du/ac)*** Realistic Capacity Density (du/ac)**** RT-35 25-50 25-30 RT-50 25-50 25-30 * The updated Housing Element proposes amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow up to 20 dwelling units per acre on CN zoned parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites (HIS). ** There is only one site identified in the HIS with an RM-15 zoning district. The site currently has a rezoning application in process requesting a zone change from RM-15 to RM-30. ***Residential Densities and Floor Area Ratio (FAR) calculations in Residential Transition zoning districts varies depending on type of development of project. Residential Densities are based on Maximum Residential FAR and Maximum Average unit size of 1,250 square feet. Exclusive Residential projects can result in higher densities than Mixed Use projects. ****Based on current development standards and rounding of figures, Realistic Capacity Density in the Residential Transition (RT) zoning districts varies depending on lot size. Realistic capacity for RT zoning districts is calculated based on development standards for mixed use projects. Chapter 3 78 Housing Inventory Sites – Mixed Use Development in Existing Commercial Zoning Districts During the preparation of this Housing Element, City staff conducted a comprehensive review of vacant and underutilized sites in the City that could accommodate residential development. As mentioned earlier in the chapter, the City’s “built out” nature, lack of vacant land, strong existing single family neighborhoods, and lack of annexation opportunities provide limited opportunities for exclusive residential development. With City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission guidance, staff focused primarily on residential and commercially zoned land that could accommodate additional residential development. These sites are typically located within one half mile radius of major transit stations, University Avenue and California Avenue Transit Stations or within a quarter mile of El Camino Real, which is served by major bus routes and is planned for future public transit intensification. In addition, the sites are generally in areas that are in proximity to or provide accessibility to urban services and jobs and are close to retail and service uses that could support their redevelopment to residential or mixed use. All but a few of the sites are occupied by one to two story, older or underutilized commercial buildings. Improvements on the identified sites are at least 20 years of age and were not significantly redeveloped since 1990. The sites have no existing residential uses and are likely to be redeveloped with higher value mixed uses with residential units in the future. Sites included in the inventory in this category have lot areas over 10,000 square feet and can potentially yield at least 5 residential units at a realistic density calculation of 20 dwelling units per acre. The City has had success in infill redevelopment in these areas on parcels with similar sizes, however, the potential for parcel consolidation could result in higher density yields. Given the lack of vacant land remaining in Palo Alto, redevelopment of such sites is an important source for future housing in the area. Many of the City’s commercially zoned parcels which allow residential uses have specific requirements, mainly that the project include a ground floor retail component. There have been many successful mixed use projects developed in the City’s commercial areas which have included ground floor retail and residential units. Following is a list of recently completed projects on smaller sites which yielded projects with residential components at densities ranging from 16 to 28 units per acre: 420 Cambridge Avenue, 4 units on 6,012 square foot parcel (28 units/acre) 2180 El Camino Real, 4 units on 22,365 square foot parcel (16 units/acre) 102 University Avenue, 3 units on 7920 square foot parcel (16 units/acre) 2051 El Camino Real, 2 units on 4800 square foot parcel (18 units/acre) The commercially zoned parcels selected in the City Housing Inventory Sites (HIS) list were based on parcels within the City’s transit corridors of El Camino Real, University Avenue and California Avenue. However, there are number of other mixed use sites throughout the City that would be equally suitable candidates for mixed use redevelopment. There have been numerous mixed use projects on similar sites that have occurred throughout the City. Based on development trends and to account for the potential for some non-residential uses (as a part of a mixed use development), the realistic capacity used in the HIS list is estimated at 66 per cent of the maximum capacity. Many of the identified sites are commercial uses along the El Camino Real and California Avenue corridors are typically low-intensity, one-story and two story buildings, surrounded by Chapter 3 79 surface parking, constructed in the late 1960’s and 1970’s with relatively little development or improvements in the past decade. These corridors have seen less development than other areas of the City, such as the University Avenue corridor. However, since many of the sites have not been improved and with the City real estate market returning to pre-2008 levels, the identified sites seem more appropriate for redevelopment opportunities. In addition, the California Avenue corridor has been designated by the City Council as a Priority Development Area, through ABAG’s FOCUS program, to provide incentives and attract greater investment in the California Avenue corridor. University Avenue Downtown Area University Avenue/ Downtown area is a thriving regional hub of commercial, residential and retail activity which includes the South of Forest Area (SOFA). The entire area is oriented around the University Avenue Multi-modal Transit Station area, the Peninsula’s busiest transit station, and should optimize the effectiveness of the multi-modal transit center and preserve nearby residential areas. The City’s vision for this area includes improving gateways to the City, improving pedestrian, bicycle, transit and auto connections, creating a major civic space at the Caltrain Station that links University Avenue/ Downtown and Stanford University, redeveloping underutilized infill parcels with a mix of uses such as retail, housing, office hotel, and medical facilities, and improving public park space. The downtown area is one of the “Growth Opportunity Areas” in the Bay Area’s “One Bay Area” Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) land use scenarios. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation for the downtown area is Community Commercial and typically provides a wider variety of uses than the neighborhood shopping areas. Most of the downtown area also falls within the Transit Oriented Residential Comprehensive Plan land use designation because of its proximity to the University Avenue/Downtown multi-modal transit station. This land use designation is intended to generate residential densities that support use of public transportation, especially the use of the Caltrain commuter rail, which provides service throughout the area, including to San Francisco to the north and to San Jose to the south. The existing zoning in the downtown area is Commercial Downtown (CD) which allows a total Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of up to 3.0 for mixed use development with residential density of up to 40 dwelling units per acre which is based on the total site area, irrespective of the percent of the site devoted to commercial use. The other Housing Inventory Sites within the downtown area are multifamily residential zoned parcels now developed with commercial uses and the South of Forest (SOFA) Phase 2 area which will all be discussed later in this section. Existing Mixed Use Projects – Downtown Palo Alto Chapter 3 80 Map of Downtown Palo Alto Chapter 3 81 California Avenue Transit Neighborhood/PTOD Area California Avenue is a second “main street” in the City and is also served by a multi-modal transit station that ranks 11th overall in ridership among the 29 Caltrain stations that serve the region. It is more local-serving than University Avenue/Downtown but is the closest business district to employees and visitors to Stanford Research Park and portions of Stanford University. It is located within the oldest part of the City, with origins dating back to the 1850s when it was the main commercial street for the town of Mayfield. This connection to the past is valued by the community and is an important part of what makes the area unique. Buildings are mostly two stories tall, with surface parking located off rear alleys. According to the Santa Clara County Assessor records, many of the structures on California Avenue were built between the late 1940’s to the early 1970’s. There has not been much development in the California Avenue corridor since that time. The scale of development provides an environment that is comfortable for pedestrians. A recent streetscape project provided a more modern street design and amenities that will support the creation of a more vibrant pedestrian and bike oriented commercial and residential district. Sites included in the inventory in this category have lot areas over 10,000 square feet and can potentially yield at least 5 residential units at a realistic density calculation of 20 dwelling units per acre; the City has had success in infill redevelopment in these area with similar or even smaller sized parcels. Housing Inventory Sites within this area consist of one to two story structures with commercial uses including but not limited to retail, eating and drinking, offices and surface parking. The area is also a designated Priority Development Area (PDA) through the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), a locally identified, infill development opportunity area within existing communities. Inclusion in the PDA avails the neighborhood to a number of financial resources to help encourage redevelopment within the PDA. Between the strong real estate market and the additional financial resources, it may encourage developers on the smaller lots to develop mixed uses. In addition, by the City designating the California Ave. neighborhood as a PDA, it signifies City acceptance for higher density developments for California Ave. PDA’s are one of the key strategies in the Bay Area’s “One Bay Area” Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) a strategy being developed by a collaboration of regional agencies, including the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). The Comprehensive Plan Land Use designations for the California Avenue area are Community Commercial, Service Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial. Service Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial land use designations both allow residential and mixed use projects. Most of the California Avenue area also falls within the Transit Oriented Residential Comprehensive Plan land use designation because of its proximity to the California Avenue transit station. This land use designation is intended to generate residential densities that support use of public transportation, especially the use of Caltrain. The existing zoning in the California Avenue area primarily includes Community Commercial (CC) and Community Service (CS) which allow a total Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for mixed use developments of up to 2.0 for CC zoned sites and 1.0 for CS zoned sites. CC and CS zoned sites both allow a residential density of up to 30 dwelling units per acre, which is calculated based upon the total site area, irrespective of the percent of the site devoted to commercial use. In addition, the California Avenue Area can Chapter 3 82 also be subject to the adopted California Avenue Pedestrian and Transit Oriented District (PTOD), which allows higher density residential dwellings on commercial, industrial and multifamily parcels within a walkable distance of the California Avenue Caltrain station. The PTOD combining district allows exclusive multifamily residential development with a total FAR of 1.0 and a residential density of up to 40 dwelling units per acre on commercially zoned parcels. A good example of a PTOD project developed on a smaller site is 420 Cambridge Ave. Four residential units were built on a 6,012 sq. ft. lot, giving a per acre yield of approximately 28 units per acre. Mixed use projects within the PTOD are allowed a total FAR of 1.25 and a residential density of up to 40 dwelling units per acre. The other Housing Inventory Sites within the California Avenue area are multifamily residential zoned parcels with commercial uses which will be discussed later in this section. Existing Mixed Use Development California Avenue Area Map of California Ave Pedestrian & Transit Oriented Development District Chapter 3 83 El Camino Real Mixed Use Transit Corridor Area El Camino Real has been historically viewed as an automobile-oriented strip with neighborhood commercial uses, and accommodates the highest volume of bus transit service in the Mid- Peninsula. Many of the parcels along the El Camino Real corridor are commercial uses are typically low-intensity, one-story and two story buildings, surrounded by surface parking, constructed in the late 1960’s and 1970’s with relatively little development or improvements in the past decade. Over time, hotel, automotive and other service commercial uses have been replaced by higher density housing along some segments of the corridor. The Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan calls for creating an environment along the corridor that is more hospitable for pedestrians and that can be identified as one or more distinct centers, rather than a commercial strip. It is envisioned to become a well-designed, compact, vital, multi-neighborhood center with diverse uses, a mix of one-, two- and three-story buildings fronting the street, and a network of pedestrian-oriented streets, creating a dynamic mixed-use corridor that serves the diverse needs of the community. The challenge for this kind of transformation is to develop a new character for both residential and commercial uses which creates an attractive environment for pedestrians, motorists and transit riders while fitting in with existing development and low density residential areas adjacent to El Camino Real. The El Camino Real Mixed-Use Transit Corridor area is another “Growth Opportunity Area” land use scenario in the Bay Area’s “One Bay Area” Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS). Similar to the land use designations for the California Avenue area, the El Camino Real Transit Corridor Comprehensive Plan land use designations are primarily Service Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial. Service Commercial and Neighborhood Commercial land use designations both allow residential and mixed use projects in appropriate locations. The existing zoning in the El Camino Real Mixed Use Transit Corridor primarily includes Community Service (CS) and Commercial Neighborhood (CN) zoning districts. As mentioned above, the CS zoning district allows a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for mixed use developments of up to 2.0 and a residential density of up to 30 dwelling units per acre. The CN zoning district allows a FAR for mixed-use development of up to 1.0 along El Camino Real and a residential density of up to 15 dwelling units per acre, which is computed based upon the total site area, irrespective of the percent of the site devoted to commercial use. The City’s updated Housing Element Program 2.2.2 proposes to revise the Zoning Ordinance, including increasing the density of up to 20 dwelling units per acre on CN-zoned parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites (HIS). Housing Inventory Sites within the El Camino Real Mixed-Use Transit Corridor also include lands that are part of a development agreement with Stanford University. Known as the “Mayfield Agreement” adopted in 2004, the agreement stipulates the construction of at least 250 units in two separate areas of the Stanford Research Park now occupied by Research and Development and office buildings. The sites include four parcels along El Camino Real totaling approximately 2.5 acres and three parcels totaling approximately 17 acres along Upper California Avenue. The agreement requires at least 50 to 70 of the 250 units (on the El Camino Real parcels) to be affordable to low income households. The City’s executed Mayfield Agreement requires the construction of 250 dwelling units on identified housing sites described in the Agreement. Of the 250 units to be developed, 70 units are required to be affordable rental units to very-low and low income households. The Chapter 3 84 Agreement with Stanford University requires that the University submit a building permit application for 185 units by the end of December 2013 with a specific requirement that an application for Architectural Review be submitted by December 2013 for the 70 affordable units. The agreement stipulates that the remaining units be proposed no later than December 2020. However, nothing precludes the University from submitting applications prior to that deadline. The Agreement establishes the absolute deadline, and the sites are now available for development. Therefore, at a minimum, the 70 affordable units will begin the permit approval process by 2014. Because the City of Palo Alto is primarily built out, the available sites for new development are limited. Over the past five years, there have been three projects on sites less than one acre that accommodated 128 units at densities ranging from 50 to 83 units per acre. These projects included a total of 85 units affordable to low income households. The City has a good history of mixed use residential developments. Of the 49 residential land use approvals since 2006, 19 of the approvals were approved as mixed use projects. Of the 19 mixed use projects, 11 of the projects were done on parcels of less than half an acre. Residential densities on the 11 projects ranged from 2 units per acre up to 28 units per acre. There was some affordable housing created on the smaller sites. One affordable rental unit was approved as part of a three residential unit development on a .18 acre parcel. And while actual affordable units would not be provided on these smaller mixed use lots, with the City proposing to lower its BMR Existing Mixed Use Development – El Camino Real Transit Corridor Chapter 3 85 threshold to three residential units, it anticipates capturing additional housing fees from these smaller developments. These fees would be used to finance future affordable housing developments. In order to encourage more dense housing yields, the City is proposing a number of lot consolidation programs. The advantages of lot consolidation include a potential higher yield of units. Typically, based on the City’s density calculations, the maximum density of a smaller lot always contain a “fractional” unit. By encouraging lot consolidation, these smaller lots would be able to add together the fractional units to create a whole unit. Also, with the removal of a setback requirement, it allows for greater site design flexibility, including parking, which would also yield more units. The City chose smaller parcels, generally less than .25 acres, as potential candidates for lot consolidation. As mentioned , the City has had a number of mixed use development on parcels less than .5 acres, however consolidating these smaller parcels provide a greater feasibility of a higher yield mixed use development. Although smaller parcels were chosen for lot consolidation, it does not preclude larger lots from consolidating. As shown in the City’s HIS maps, there are a number of adjacent sites of varying sizes throughout the City. Those sites also present good lot consolidation opportunities. The following table identifies Commercially Zoned sites in the University Avenue, California Avenue and El Camino Real Corridor that could accommodate up to 1,164 residential units in infill Mixed Use-Residential redevelopment with the current zoning designations, based on the above analysis. Chapter 3 86 Table 3-4 Table of Commercially Zoned Sites Notes: 1. Parcels highlighted in orange denotes zoning density greater than 20 units per acre; parcels with proposals for market rate housing are excluded. 2. *CN Parcels to be rezoned to 20 units per acre. 3. Parcels with an Assessed Value Ratio greater than 1.5 were determined to have an artificially low assessed land value from parcels under the same ownership for more than 10 years; the assessed land value is far below current market land values. APN SITE ADDRESS ZONING DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL DENSITY ALLOWED MAXIMUM YIELD LAND USE DESIGNATION LOT SIZE (ac) REALISTIC CAPACITY EXISTING USE ON SITE CONSTRAINTS/ OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSED VALUE RATIO 132-37-019 423 Page Mill Rd. CS(D) 30 du/ac 4 CN 0.15 2 Vacant SFD Vacant; Small lot; Consolidation Opportunity. An application has been submitted to merge these lots and develop an 8-unit multifamily project, the project will include 3 units affordable to low income residents through density bonus program 0.12 132-37-018 433Page Mill Rd. CS(D) 30 du/ac 4 CN 0.15 2 Vacant SFD 0.12 132-37-017 441 Page Mill Rd. CS(D) 30 du/ac 4 CN 0.15 2 Vacant SFD 0.26 132-37017 451 Page Mill Rd. CS(D) 30 du/ac 4 CN 0.15 2 Vacant SFD 0.27 132-41-085 3707 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 3 CN 0.18 3 1 Story Personal Service; Retail Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.99 124-32-013 470 Cambridge Av CC (2) 30 du/ac 7 CC 0.23 5 1 Story Religious Institution: Existing Non- Residential Use 1.64 Chapter 3 87 Surface Parking 124-33-005 410 Sherman Av CC (2) 30 du/ac 7 CC 0.24 5 2 Story Office Commercial Existing Commercial Use 4.17 124-29-007 251 California Av CC (2)(R)(P) 30 du/ac 7 CC 0.26 5 1 Story retail Existing Commercial Use 1.19 124-32-035 334 California Av CC (2)(R)(P) 30 du/ac 8 CC 0.27 5 2 Story Retail; Eating Drinking; Commercial Existing Commercial Use 0.74 124-33-061 479 California Av CC (2)(R)(P) 30 du/ac 7 CC 0.24 5 1 Story commercial; Financial Service Existing Commercial Use 0.55 120-15-090 595 Bryant St CD-C (GF)(P)/ 40 du/ac 8 CC 0.22 5 1 Story Retail; Eating Drinking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.75 120-03-021 581 University Av CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 10 CC 0.26 5 1 Story Financial Service Existing Commercial Use 0.73 120-03-037 578 University Av CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 8 CC 0.22 5 1 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 3.45 120-03-067 541 Cowper St CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 9 CC 0.23 5 1 Story commercial Existing Commercial Use 1.47 120-15-007 401 Waverley St CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 8 CC 0.22 5 1 Story Retail; personal Service Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 1.09 120-15-013 420 Cowper St CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 10 CC 0.25 5 2 story office Existing Commercial Use 2.12 120-26-109 542 High St CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 10 CC 0.25 5 ! Story Commerical; Retail office Existing Commercial Use 1.38 120-26-111 135 Hamilton Av CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 8 CC 0.22 5 Surface parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0 124-31-059 2101 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac* 5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Retail; Personal Existing Commercial Use; 0.91 Chapter 3 88 Service; Surface parking Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 132-40-062 480 Wilton Av CN* 15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.91 132-46-106 4112 El Camino Wy CN* 15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 2.41 137-01-116 2000 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 5 CN 0.27 5 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.13 137-08-078 3636 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.09 137-08-097 3666 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Retail: Commercial; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.44 137-11-091 3972 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 Gas Station Underground Storage Tanks; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.27 137-11-098 3780 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 5 CN 0.24 5 1 Story Retail; Commecial; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.13 Chapter 3 89 120-33-024 711 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 7 CS 0.24 5 1 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 0 132-38-011 3275 Ash St CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.27 5 1 Story Office; Commercial; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 2.47 132-38-017 460 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.22 5 Surface parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.04 132-38-018 460 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.22 5 Surface parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.04 132-38-025 455 Portage Av CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.22 5 1 Story Commercial Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 4.26 132-38-032 3159 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 7 CS 0.24 5 2 Story Commercial Existing Commercial Use 1.06 132-38-047 3260 Ash St CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.22 5 SFD Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 5.62 137-08-079 3516 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.23 5 1 Story Personal Service Existing Commercial Use 0.09 137-08-088 3508 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 7 CS 0.24 5 Automotive Service; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.16 124-28-003 2260 Park Bl CC (2) 30 du/ac 8 CC 0.29 6 Surface parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0 124-29-011 2555 Park Bl CC (2) 30 du/ac 8 CC 0.29 6 2 Story Office Commercial Existing Commercial Use 2.46 124-28-033 250 California Av CC (2)(R)(P) 30 du/ac 8 CC 0.28 6 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 0.57 124-32-034 300 California Av CC (2)(R)(P) 30 du/ac 8 CC 0.27 6 2 Story Eating Drinking; Commercial Existing Commercial Use 0.73 Chapter 3 90 120-15-045 353 University Av CD-C (GF)(P) 40 du/ac 12 CC 0.3 6 1 Story Commerical; Retail; Office Existing Commercial Use 2.95 120-16-020 635 Waverley St CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 12 CC 0.31 6 2 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 0.9 120-27-038 658 High St CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 12 CC 0.32 6 2 Story Commercial Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.89 124-30-015 1963 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 6 CN 0.28 6 Gas Station Underground Storage Tanks; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.04 132-35-045 3705 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 6 CN 0.28 6 1 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.26 120-33-004 67 Encina Av CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.27 6 1 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 1.17 132-37-055 3051 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.3 6 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.45 132-38-058 320 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.28 6 1 Story Office Commercial; Light Industrial Existing Commercial Use 6.46 132-38-060 280 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.28 6 1 Story Office Commercial; Light Industrial Existing Commercial Use 0.53 132-38-061 292 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.32 6 1 Story Office Commercial; Light Industrial Existing Commercial Use 0.93 132-39-087 455 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.32 6 1 Story Commercial Existing Commercial Use 0.56 Chapter 3 91 142-20-055 3160 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.29 6 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.03 132-31-071 2747 Park Bl GM 6 LI 0.3 6 Vacant Lot Needs Rezoning to allow Residential Use 0.51 124-32-040 414 California Av CC (2)(R)(P) 30 du/ac 11 CC 0.37 7 2 Story Financial Services; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.49 120-15-015 469 University Av CD-C (GF)(P) 40 du/ac 13 CC 0.34 7 1 Story Commercial; Retail; Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 1.7 120-15-103 360 University Av CD-C (GF)(P) 40 du/ac 13 CC 0.34 7 1 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use 1 120-16-011 630 Cowper St CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 13 CC 0.34 7 1 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 0.45 120-26-002 130 Lytton Av CD-C (P) 40 du/ac 13 CC 0.34 7 2 Level Parking Structure Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0.36 132-46-100 4115 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 7 CN 0.35 7 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.03 137-08-081 3630 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 7 CN 0.37 7 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.36 137-11-078 3700 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 7 CN 0.36 7 1 Story Personal Service; Retail; Surface Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0 Chapter 3 92 Parking 137-11-083 3896 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 7 CN 0.32 7 1 Story Retail; Eating Drinking; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.56 132-37-033 2905 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.32 7 2 Story Commercial: Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.17 132-37-052 2951 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.32 7 1 Story Retail; Commecial Existing Commercial Use 0.62 132-37-056 3001 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.33 7 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.08 132-38-048 268 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 10 CS 0.35 7 1 Story Office Commercial; Light Industrial Existing Commercial Use 0.64 132-41-088 3801 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 10 CS 0.35 7 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.14 132-46-119 4195 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 10 CS 0.35 7 1 Story Automotive Services Existing Commercial Use 0.88 132-46-120 4193 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 10 CS 0.36 7 1 Story Medical Office; Automotive Services Existing Commercial Use 0.56 120-03-030 528 University Av CD-C (GF)(P) 40 du/ac 15 CC 0.38 8 1 Story Commercial; Retail Existing Commercial Use 1.46 124-33-066 2585 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 8 CN 0.4 8 Surface parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0 Chapter 3 93 132-40-059 3609 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 8 CN 0.42 8 Gas Station Underground Storage Tanks; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0 132-41-083 3783 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 8 CN 0.42 8 1 Story Eating Drinking; Retail; Commercial: Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.33 137-01-070 2200 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 8 CN 0.41 8 Gas Station Underground Storage Tanks; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.11 132-38-027 425 Portage Av CS 30 du/ac 12 CS 0.4 8 1 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 0.31 132-38-045 3200 Ash St CS 30 du/ac 11 CS 0.39 8 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 4.6 132-38-046 3250 Ash St CS 30 du/ac 11 CS 0.38 8 2 Story Office Commercial Existing Commercial Use 1.13 148-09-010 4335 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 12 CS 0.4 8 2 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 1.21 120-34-014 98 Encina Av CC 30 du/ac 13 CC 0.44 9 Surface parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0.01 124-30-017 1921 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 9 CN 0.43 9 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.97 132-46-104 4128 El Camino Wy CN* 15 du/ac 9 CN 0.45 9 2 Story Office Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density 0.32 Chapter 3 94 is 15 du/ac 137-01-113 2280 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 9 CN 0.43 9 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.06 137-01-125 2257 Yale St CN* 15 du/ac 9 CN 0.43 9 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.23 132-38-026 435 Portage Av CS 30 du/ac 13 CS 0.45 9 1 Story Commercial Office Existing Commercial Use 0.34 132-39-071 429 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 13 CS 0.45 9 1 Story Automotive Services; Office Existing Commercial Use 0.23 167-08-036 4232 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 12 CS 0.43 9 1 Story Daycare School Existing Commercial Use 1.07 137-01-069 559 College Av CN* 15 du/ac 10 CN 0.47 10 2 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.81 124-33-067 2501 El Camino Real CN*; CC (2) 15/30 du/ac 10 CN 0.51 10 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use; Current Max Res Density is 15 du/ac on portion of lot 0.33 132-39-090 415 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 15 CS 0.51 10 1 Story Commercial Existing Commercial Use 3.44 132-41-096 3885 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 14 CS 0.47 10 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 3.51 Chapter 3 95 167-08-030 4230 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 15 CS 0.52 10 1 Story Automotive Service Existing Commercial Use 0.04 167-08-035 4200 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 14 CS 0.48 10 1 Story Automotive Service Existing Commercial Use 0 124-29-020 150 Grant Av CC (2) 30 du/ac 17 CC 0.59 12 1 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 0.23 132-38-062 435 Acacia Av CS 30 du/ac 18 CS 0.62 12 1 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 7.47 167-08-042 4256 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 17 CS 0.59 12 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 0.14 132-36-077 2675 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 13 CN 0.63 13 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.59 132-44-022 4115 El Camino Wy CN* 15 du/ac 13 CN 0.64 13 1 Story Commercial: Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.75 137-08-080 3606 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 13 CN 0.65 13 Vacant Lot Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0 120-34-001 841 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 19 CS 0.64 13 Automotive Service Existing Commercial Use 0 167-08-037 4222 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 19 CS 0.63 13 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 0.41 132-43-153 4085 El Camino Wy CN* 15 du/ac 14 CN 0.71 14 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.7 132-38-042 3201 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 20 CS 0.68 14 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.27 Chapter 3 96 132-44-100 4135 El Camino Wy CN* 15 du/ac 15 CN 0.75 15 2 Story Office; Underground Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 4.06 137-01-129 2390 El Camino Real CN* 15 du/ac 15 CN 0.76 15 2 Story Commercial Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0 132-38-065 440 Portage Av CS 30 du/ac 22 CS 0.76 15 Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 6.23 142-20-054 3150 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 22 CS 0.75 15 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 0.3 132-39-088 3399 El Camino Real CS; CN* 30/15 du/ac 15 CS;CN 0.74 15 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 0.29 142-20-013 2450 El Camino Real CS (AS1) 30 du/ac 17 CS 0.57 17 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Mayfield Agreement; per agreement, application for market rate units to be submitted 1.32 142-20-014 2470 El Camino Real CS (AS1) 30 du/ac 17 CS 0.57 17 2 Story Office; Surface Parking 0.96 142-20-047 2500 El Camino Real CS (AS1) 30 du/ac 19 CS 0.64 17 2 Story Office; Surface Parking 1.19 142-20-012 507 California Av CS (AS1) 30 du/ac 22 CS 0.75 19 1 Story Financial Service; Surface Parking 1 137-08-083 3400 El Camino Real CS (H); RM-15 30/15 du/ac 19 MF;CS 0.96 19 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 1.74 Chapter 3 97 132-38-056 430 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 30 CS 1.03 21 2 Story Office Commercial Existing Commercial Use 4.49 124-28-045 154 California Av CC (2)(R)(P) 30 du/ac 34 CC 1.14 23 2 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use 0.29 148-09-014 4291 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 34 CS 1.16 23 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 0.33 132-31-042 130 Sheridan Av GM 34 LI 1.13 34 Vacant Lot Needs Rezoning to allow Residential Use 0 142-20-035 3128 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 35 CS 1.18 24 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 0.93 142-19-006 1501 California Av RP (AS2) 30 du/ac 117 RO 3.93 55 1 to 2 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Mayfield Agreement; per agreement, application for market rate units to be submitted 16.09 142-19-007 1451 California Av RP (AS2) 30 du/ac 135 RO 4.52 55 2 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking 7.82 142-19-017 1601 California Av RP (AS2) 30 du/ac 255 RO 8.51 70 3 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Mayfield Agreement; 70 affordable units proposed 11.88 Subtotal 1,806 1,177 Chapter 3 98 South of Forest Area Coordinated Area Plan - Phase 2 (SOFA 2 CAP) South of Forest Area Coordinated Area Plan – Phase 2 (SOFA 2 CAP) is a long-term plan that addresses a specific nine block area (approximately 19 acres) bounded by Forest Avenue, Addison Avenue, Alma Street and Ramona Street. The CAP recognizes SOFA 2’s location near downtown and calls for higher density housing, mixed uses and other compatible urban development in a vibrant mixed-use area within walking distance of the train station and commercial services provided in the downtown. The SOFA 2 CAP anticipates that the Residential Transition districts in SOFA 2 will become much more of a mixed use area with substantial residential development next to or combined with office and commercial uses. The area is considered an appropriate location for higher density residential development. These are 34 sites listed on the HIS within the SOFA 2 CAP. The Housing Inventory Sites are generally larger than 10,000 square feet in lot area; however, within the SOFA 2 CAP all of the sites identified in the Housing Inventory Sites are less than 10,000 square feet in lot area. The SOFA 2 CAP allows and encourages a variety of housing types on smaller lots, including apartments, studio units, single room occupancy housing and senior housing. The SOFA 2 CAP also includes creative parking policies encouraging shared parking and reduced parking that further encourage developing these sites with housing. The existing zoning in the SOFA 2 CAP area includes Residential Transition 35 (RT35) and Residential Transition (RT50) and allows for a total FAR for mixed use developments of up to 1.15 for RT35 and 1.30 for RT50. Additional FAR bonuses may be allowed in the SOFA 2 CAP for seismic and historic rehabilitation or under the City’s Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program. RT35 and RT50 also require an average maximum unit size of 1,250 square feet for residential development which effectively results in a residential density above 20 dwellings per acre. Map of SOFA 2 Area Chapter 3 99 The following table identifies specific SOFA 2 CAP sites that could accommodate residential or mixed use redevelopment. Existing Mixed Use Project in SOFA 2 Area Chapter 3 100 Table 3-5 Table of SOFA II Housing Sites Notes: 1. Parcels highlighted in orange denotes zoning density greater than 20 units per acre; parcels with proposals for market rate housing are excluded. 2. *CN Parcels to be rezoned to 20 units per acre. 3. Parcels with an Assessed Value Ratio greater than 1.5 were determined to have an artificially low assessed land value from parcels under the same ownership for more than 10 years; the assessed land value is far below current market land values. APN SITE ADDRESS ZONING DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL DENSITY MAXIMUM YIELD LAND USE DESIGNATION LOT SIZE (ac) REALISTIC CAPACITY EXISTING USE ON SITE CONSTRAINTS/ ASSESSED ALLOWED (based on FAR) (based on avg of 35 du/ac) OPPORTUNITIES VALUE RATIO 120-27-073 718 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 2 1 Story; Automotive Service Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.53 120-28-084 918 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.08 2 1 Story; Automotive Service Small lot; consolidation opportunity 0 120-27-072 721 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.93 120-28-004 160 Homer Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.05 120-28-033 839 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Personal Service; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.02 120-28-036 825 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Personal Service; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.31 Chapter 3 101 120-28-080 943 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.11 3 1 Story Professional Office Small lot; consolidation opportunity 1.04 120-28-081 935 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.11 3 1 Story Personal Service Small lot; consolidation opportunity 0.59 120-28-082 929 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.11 3 1 Story SFD Small lot; consolidation opportunity 0.01 120-28-085 926 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.11 3 2 Story Personal Service; Office Small lot; consolidation opportunity 0.34 120-28-090 931 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 story light manufacturin g Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.19 120-28-091 925 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 5 SOFA II CAP 0.14 3 Vacant; Auto Storage Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.01 120-28-093 960 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Automotive Service Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.59 120-30-048 1027 Alma St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Professional Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.79 120-30-049 1019 Alma St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 1.25 120-28-003 815 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.13 4 1 Story Professional Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 1.55 120-28-005 160 Homer Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 5 SOFA II CAP 0.14 4 Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.02 120-28-051 190 Channing Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 6 SOFA II CAP 0.17 5 1 Story Professional Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 1.45 120-28-092 940 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 6 SOFA II CAP 0.18 5 1 story light manufacturin Small lot ; consolidation 0.62 Chapter 3 102 g opportunity 120-28-094 145 Addison Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 6 SOFA II CAP 0.17 5 1 Story Professional Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.77 120-28-099 829 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 6 SOFA II CAP 0.19 5 1 Story Personal Service; Office; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.89 120-27-048 700 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.55 120-27-049 701 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.22 6 1 Story Personal Service; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.04 120-28-040 849 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Professional Office Existing Commercial Use 0.89 120-28-050 901 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 11 SOFA II CAP 0.32 6 Vacant; Auto Storage Existing Commercial Use 0 120-28-095 999 Alma St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use 1.3 120-30-050 100 Addison Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0 120-28-097 925 Alma St RT-50 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Professional Office Existing Commercial Use 1.2 120-28-038 882 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.25 7 2 Story Personal Service; Medical Office; Existing Commercial Use 8.86 Chapter 3 103 Surface Parking 120-28-086 930 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.25 7 1 Story Automotive Service Existing Commercial Use 2.04 120-28-089 965 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 12 SOFA II CAP 0.35 9 1 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.47 120-27-046 700 High St RT-50 25-50 du/ac 12 SOFA II CAP 0.36 9 1 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 1.64 120-27-075 774 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 16 SOFA II CAP 0.48 13 1 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use 1.76 120-28-037 840 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 16 SOFA II CAP 0.48 13 Surface Parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0.03 Subtotal 220 171 Chapter 3 104 Sites in Residential Zoning Districts with Existing Commercial Uses There are approximately 19 parcels in the City zoned for multifamily residential, (RM-15, RM- 30 and RM-40), that currently have legal but non-conforming commercial uses occupying the sites. These sites are generally within the University Avenue Downtown area and the California Avenue Transit Neighborhood area. Housing Inventory Sites identified in this category are typically improved with one to two story structures with commercial uses including, but not limited to, retail, office, motel/hotel and surface parking. The RM-30 zoning district allows a total FAR of 0.6 and a residential density of up to 30 dwelling units per acre while RM 40 zoning district allow a total FAR of 1.0 and a residential density of up to 40 dwelling units per acre. The RM-15 zoning district allows a total FAR of 0.5 and a residential density of 15 dwelling units per acre. Given the restrictions for improvements and alterations on non-conforming uses and structures, coupled with the City incentives for constructing housing, it is anticipated that redevelopment of the sites to residential use will be attractive to developers once the housing market rebounds. The following table identifies specific sites in multifamily residential zoning districts with existing commercial uses that could accommodate residential redevelopment. Sites in Multifamily Residential zoning districts near University Avenue Downtown Area with existing Commercial Uses. Chapter 3 105 Table 3-6 Table of Residentially Zoned Sites with Commercial Uses Notes: 1. Parcels highlighted in orange denotes zoning density greater than 20 units per acre; parcels with proposals for market rate housing are excluded. 2. *CN Parcels to be rezoned to 20 units per acre. 3. Parcels with an Assessed Value Ratio greater than 1.5 were determined to have an artificially low assessed land value from parcels under the same ownership for more than 10 years; the assessed land value is far below current market land values. APN SITE ADDRESS ZONING DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL DENSITY ALLOWED MAXIMUM YIELD LAND USE DESIGNATION LOT SIZE (ac) REALISTIC CAPACITY EXISTING USE ON SITE CONSTRAINTS/ OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSED VALUE RATIO 132-41-025 397 Curtner Ave. RM-30 30 du/ac 6 MF 0.19 4 2 story duplex Existing Residential 0.73 003-02-021 725 University Av RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.25 5 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.4 003-02-022 489 Middlefield Rd RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.25 5 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.12 120-04-043 704 Webster St RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.22 5 1 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.67 120-16-046 720 Cowper St RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.23 5 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.49 124-27-038 2185 Park Bl RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.25 5 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.21 124-27-039 2149 Park Bl RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.25 5 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.74 120-03-038 610 University Av RM-40 40 du/ac 8 MF 0.22 5 2 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.22 Chapter 3 106 003-02-043 575 Middlefield Rd RM-30 30 du/ac 8 MF 0.28 6 2 Story Office; Podium Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.19 132-41-072 405 Curtner Av RM-30 30 du/ac 8 MF 0.28 6 Vacant Lot Portion of lot serves as a driveway to adjacent surface Parking 0 003-02-048 547 Middlefield Rd RM-30 30 du/ac 10 MF 0.36 7 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.61 124-28-043 2211 Park Bl RM-30 30 du/ac 10 MF 0.34 7 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.26 003-02-047 720 University Av RM-30 30 du/ac 12 MF 0.41 8 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.37 137-01-121 531 Stanford Av RM-30 30 du/ac 12 MF 0.4 8 2 Story Hotel: Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 4.91 120-16-041 400 Forest Av RM-40 40 du/ac 18 SOFA I CAP 0.45 9 1 Story Medical Office; Podium Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.6 120-16-042 430 Forest Av RM-40 40 du/ac 20 SOFA I CAP 0.51 10 1 Story Automotive Service Existing Commercial Use 0.91 137-37-004 4102 El Camino Real RM-30 30 du/ac 19 MF 0.64 13 1 Story Religious Institution Existing Non- Residential Use 0.02 137-24-034 4146 El Camino Real RM-15 15 du/ac 15 MF 0.77 15 Vacant Lot Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 127-15-023 4151 Middlefield Rd RM-15 15 du/ac 18 MF 0.93 18 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.46 132-42-074 3945 El Camino Real RM-30; CS 30 du/ac 26 MF;CS 0.89 18 1 to 2 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.35 132-42-073 3901 El Camino Real RM-30 30 du/ac 33 MF 1.1 22 2 Story Motel; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.39 132-38-059 340 Portage Ave RM-30 30 du/ac 374 MF 12.47 75 1 Story Commercial/Re tail Existing Commercial Use 4.68 Chapter 3 107 000-00-000 1170 Welch Rd RM-40 40 du/ac 84 RO 2.11 71 Vacant Lot Opportunity for expansion of adjacent existing multifamily residential 0 Subtotal 723 332 Total Number of Units 1,680 Parcel designated to meet the City's previously unaccommodated need from 1999-2006 Housing Element per AB2348 132-41-091 3877 El Camino Real * RM-30; CS 30 du/ac 22 MF;CS 0.75 15 1 Story Eating Drinking; Commercial; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.08 Chapter 3 108 3.2 OTHER SOURCES OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING Second Units/Cottages In 2007, the City amended its second unit ordinance and permitting process to allow second units in all single-family residential (R-1) zoned parcels that meet minimum lot size requirements. Permit approval is subject to a planning staff level review of the site and building plans to ensure compliance with lot size, maximum unit size, height, setbacks and parking requirements. In a review of online rental rates for cottages, attached and detached residential second units in Palo Alto, their rental rates are in the range of moderate income rents as determined by the Tax Credit Allocation Commission (TCAC). Therefore, the anticipated 15 second units will be listed as moderate income. Since January 2007, approximately 19 second units have been approved averaging approximate 4 second units or “cottages” a year. However, there may be numerous existing second units throughout the City that do not meet all of the zoning and building code standards. Therefore, as indicated in Chapter 4, the City is including a program in the Housing Element that will explore the feasibility of developing an amnesty program to legitimize existing illegal second units where appropriate and consistent with the character of the existing neighborhood. At this time it is premature to identify specific provisions that could be included in an amnesty program. The City expects to continue to receive applications for approximately 5 second units per year resulting in approximately 15 more units by 2014. Acquisition and Rehabilitation State law allows a jurisdiction to credit up to 25 percent of its RHNA through acquisition and rehabilitation of existing housing that will be reserved for lower-income households. Government Code Section 65583.1 (c) specifies that existing residential projects may be counted if a city commits financial assistance to substantially rehabilitate units that will be affordable for up to 55 years depending on the type of project. The criteria that projects must meet in order to receive credit include: Units must be in an existing multifamily rental housing complex, an existing non- affordable development with four or more units, or an existing assisted affordable project that is expected to convert to market rate within five years; Identification of a specific source of “committed assistance” pursuant to a legally enforceable agreement; Long term affordability covenants (20 years for substantial rehabilitation, 55 years for existing non-affordable units, and 40 years for existing assisted projects at risk of conversion to market rate). The City has been active in acquisition and rehabilitation of multifamily developments. In 2006, the City provided $1.15 million in CDBG funds for acquisition of a 10 unit apartment complex on Alma Street consisting of eight studio apartments and two one bedroom apartments that can accommodate twelve low income people. More recently, in 2011, the City recently provided funding for the acquisition of six existing units on Alma Street. The units will be rehabilitated and deed restricted for low income households with the possibility of redeveloping the site at a higher density in the future. Because of the timing of the purchase, these units are not eligible Chapter 3 109 for the 2007-2014 RHNA cycle. City staff will work with HCD to credit the current units and if redeveloped, any future units to count towards the next RHNA cycle. 3.3 AVAILABLE SITES CONCLUSIONS Residential projects in various stages of development can accommodate over 41% of Palo Alto’s 2,860 RHNA with at least 921 units built or with building permits issued since January 2007. The following table shows the City’s substantial progress towards meeting its housing needs by income category. Table 3-8 Summary of Housing Unit Production from January 2007 to December 2012 Income Level RHNA Need Entitled/In Process Built/Building Permit Issued 2007-2014 Total Very Low 690 56 156 212 Low 543 30 9 39 Moderate 641 1 120 121 Above Moderate 986 96 749 845 TOTAL 2,860 183 1,034 1,217 Palo Alto proposes to accommodate the remaining RHNA of 1,668 with the City’s Housing Inventory Sites described in detail earlier in this section. The Housing Inventory Sites can potentially accommodate 1,784 housing units. The following table summarizes the City’s approach to fulfilling its Regional Housing Needs Allocation. Chapter 3 110 Table 3-9 Summary of RHNA need and Housing Inventory Sites CATEGORY Units Regional Housing Need 2,860 Housing Built, Building Permit Issued, Entitled, or in Entitlement or Building Permit Process 1,217 Housing Inventory Sites Potential housing on existing residentially zoned sites 332 Potential housing in commercial zoning districts that could accommodate mixed use development (including, Mayfield Development Agreement sites) 1,177 Potential Housing in Residential Transition (RT) zoning districts that could accommodate exclusive residential or mixed used development (SOFA sites) 171 SUBTOTAL 1,680 TOTAL 2,897 To evaluate the adequacy of these sites to address the affordability targets established by the RHNA, the Government Code establishes “default densities” at which the development of projects affordable to lower-income households is deemed feasible. As mentioned earlier in this section, the default density for Palo Alto is 20 dwelling units per acre. Using this density as a basis for determining the realistic capacity yield of sites identified in the Housing Inventory, the available sites can accommodate the remaining need of the Very-Low and Low Income as well as the Moderate and Above Moderate income categories. The following table shows how the City will accommodate the need for housing for all income levels. Chapter 3 111 Table 3-10 Total Capacity of Housing Inventory Sites at 20 DU/AC Income Level RHNA Need Entitled/In Process Built/Building Permit Issued 2007-2014 Total Remaining Need Very Low 690 56 156 212 478 Low 543 30 9 39 504 Moderate 641 1 120 121 1,502 Above Moderate 986 96 749 845 141 TOTAL 2,860 183 1,034 1,217 1,643 TOTAL CAPACITY OF HOUSING INVENTORY SITES AT 20 DU/AC* 1,680 * All sites identified in the Housing Inventory were calculated at least 20 du/ac except for the sites identified in the Mayfield Development Agreement (Total acreage of 7 parcels = 19.50 ac and requires 250 units to be built), the 15 potential additional second unit/cottages in R-1 zoning districts, and site 137-24-034 zoned RM-15 (calculated at 15 du/ac) 3.4 FINANCIAL RESOURCES Although the level of Federal and State funding for affordable housing is lower than it was in previous years, there are a number of programs the City and affordable housing developers can use to maintain or increase the housing stock for its low and very low income residents. The following summarizes the primary financial assistance programs that have been used in the City. Federal Funds The Federal government is a major provider of funding for affordable housing, primarily through the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD, with its multiple programs, provides funding to State, cities, counties, housing authorities and affordable housing providers and direct assistance to low and moderate income households. Community Development Block Grant Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding is a HUD program that is targeted to assist low and moderate income households. Known for its ability to fund a variety of activities, the City has used the CDBG funds for acquisition of affordable housing sites, rehabilitiation of existing affordable housing developments, single family rehabilitation, public infrastructure improvements and a number of other activities. However, most recently, the City has primarily used its funds for the rehabilitation activities of existing affordable housing developments. The City has been receiving CDBG funding since 1988. Chapter 3 112 Housing Choice Voucher Program Better known as the Section 8 program, the Housing Choice Voucher Program is administered by the Santa Clara County Housing Authority. This rental voucher program subsidizes the gap between the fair market rent of the unit and what a low income household can pay for rent. This allows the voucher holder to rent a market rate rent unit and not solely rely on affordable rental developments. With the voucher, the household can move to different areas in the County and still be able to use the voucher. A number of Palo Alto residents participate in this program. There is also a project based Section 8 program in which the County Housing Authority allocates a number of vouchers to a project and not to an individual household. While not directly funding the project, it guarantees a consistent stream of cash flow for the project. Two projects in Palo Alto, the Opportunity Center and Stevenson House, receive project based Section 8 vouchers for their residents. Low Income Housing Tax Credits This program is administered through the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and a major funding source for affordable housing development. The IRS created this program with the aim of attracting investors to affordable housing developments. The IRS issues tax credits which are distributed on the state level. In California, the Tax Credit Allocation Committee in the California State Treasurer’s Office is responsible for the distribution of tax credits to affordable housing developers, The developers then sell the credits to investors who use the credits to lower their tax liability. The money received from the investors become equity in an affordable housing project. Recently built affordable housing developments, the Treehouse Apartments and Oak Court, are Palo Alto developments that were funded with tax credit financing. State Funds The State of California also has its own sources of funds in support of affordable housing. Most funds are administered through the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). HCD manages a number programs. Some of the State programs that have been used by Palo Alto affordable housing developments include: Multifamily Housing Program (MHP) MHP provides low-interest loans to developers of affordable housing. The funds may be used for multifamily rental and transitional housing projects involving new construction, rehabilitation, acquisition and rehabilitation or conversion of nonresidential structures. Fabian Way, an affordable housing development for seniors, and Oak Court Apartments have been developed using MHP funding. HOME HOME is the HOME Investment Partnership Program. HOME provides formula grants to states and localities that communities use, often in partnership with local nonprofit groups, to fund a wide range of activities that build, acquire, and/or rehabilitate affordable housing for rent or homeownership. The City must go through the State HCD program to qualify for HOME grants since it is not eligible to receive funds directly from HUD. Chapter 3 113 California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) CalHFA has suspended their Multifamily lending program however, they are responsible for administering Mental Health Services Act funding. MHSA Housing Program funds will be allocated for the development, acquisition, construction, and/or rehabilitation of permanent supportive housing. Though not a widely used funding source, as funding sources become more scarce, MSHA funds may become more popular in the future. In 2010, 801 Alma Street, a 50 unit affordable rental project for very low income households, received a MHSA grant. Local Funds City Residential Fund The City maintains a City Residential Fund to be used for affordable housing. The funding source comes from in-lieu housing fees. Typically, housing developers in Palo Alto are required to provide BMR units in the development. However, on occasion, developers are allowed to pay a fee in-lieu of providing BMR units in the development. Fees are collected in the fund to be allocated to developers with proposed affordable housing projects. The funds can be used for predevelopment, construction or permanent financing. Many affordable housing developments have received financial assistance from the City Residential Fund. City Commercial Fund The City maintains a Commercial Fund, which requires businesses when expanding their commercial space to pay a fee for affordable housing. These funds are used to finance affordable housing developments, similar to the Housing Trust Fund. The funds can also be used for predevelopment, construction and permanent financing for new construction. Local housing trusts that have provided funding assistance to Palo Alto affordable housing developments include: Housing Trust of Santa Clara County The Housing Trust of Santa Clara County (HTSCC) is a public/private trust that provides a variety of funding packages for affordable housing. Predevelopment, construction loans and permanent financing are all available through the Housing Trust. They receive a majority of their funding from corporation contributions in addition to funding from jurisdictions in the County. The City of Palo Alto has contributed $800,000 to HTSCC since its inception in 2001. The Trust Fund has funded affordable multifamily rental and special needs housing developments such as the Opportunity Center and Fabian Way Senior Apartments. They also have a first time homebuyers program and a housing grants program to prevent homelessness. Santa Clara County (Stanford Affordable Housing Trust) The Stanford Affordable Housing Fund (Stanford AHF) was established in December 2000 as a result of the approval of the Stanford University General Use Permit (GUP). The Stanford AHF contains conditions under which the University is allowed to undertake construction. The GUP requires that for each 11,763 square feet of academic development constructed, Stanford must either provide one affordable housing unit on the Stanford campus or make an appropriate cash payment in-lieu of providing the housing unit. Payments have been made since that time to a Stanford AHF maintained by the County. Two projects in Palo Alto, the Tree House and 801 Alma, have received funding from this fund. Chapter 3 114 Mortgage Credit Certificates (MCCs) Administered by Santa Clara County, MCCs provide tax credits to a first time low income homebuyer. The credits reduce income subject to federal tax thus essentially increasing their tax return amount. The money from the increased return can be applied to the mortgage payments. This essentially creates a mortgage subsidy for the homeowner. City Below Market Rate Program While this program does not provide financial assistance to develop affordable housing, it is significant in the production of affordable units. The City requires that developers make a certain percentage of their market rate units affordable to lower-income households. Since the inception of the program in 1974, 435 BMR ownership and rental units of affordable housing have been produced through this program. 3.5 OPPORTUNITIES FOR ENERGY CONSERVATION Palo Alto rates energy conservation to be a priority in the overall planning process. Conservation of energy is an important issue for all households including both owners and renters. Energy cost can be a substantial portion of monthly housing costs for some existing older housing stock in the City. The City’s interest in sustainable development, energy independence, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions is in line with new legislation such as the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). Palo Alto employs three main strategies to promote energy conservation: integrated land use and transportation planning and development; promotion of energy conservation; and the adoption of green building standards and practices. Integrated Land Use and Transportation Planning a range of affordable housing types near jobs, services, and transit can reduce commutes, traffic congestion, and thus reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and vehicle hours traveled (VHT). Since Palo Alto is nearly built out, promoting infill development with higher densities along transit corridors helps to reach the goals of energy conservation and integrating land use with transportation. The City has specific goals and requirements for built environments and transportation. The following is a list of City programs to integrate land use and transportation. Chapter 3 115 Table 3-11 List of Integrated Land Use and Transportation Programs in Palo Alto Goal and Requirements (State and Assembly Bills (SB/AB), Codes, Ordinances and Mandates) Municipal and Regional Operations (including goals and programs) * Residential (including goals and programs) * Commercial (including goals and programs) * Built Environment including urban planning, comprehensive plan, construction and demolition and green building Green Building Ordinance Demolition and Construction Diversion requirements Mitchell Park and all library projects Comprehensive plan New Construction and Retrofit Rebates Arastradero Gateway Educational Nature Center displays and building design Green Building Program Demolition and Construction Diversion program New Construction Rebate Green Building Program Demolition and Construction Diversion program New Construction Rebate Transportation including SB375 and AB32, shuttles, alternative commute, bike routes, EV and all forms of transportation SB375 AB32 Pedestrian Transit Oriented Development zones School Commute Corridor network City Employee alternative commute incentives Alternative fuel vehicles for City Fleet Biodiesel fuel program City Bike share EV charging stations at City Hall and the Bay Area Electric Vehicle Corridor Program Zip Car parking spots in City parking lots Bicycle Transportation Plan Fire Engine Exhaust filtration spec Regional planning and coordination Pedestrian and Transit-Orientated Development Safe Routes To Parks program Bay Area Air Quality Management Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) program Palo Alto Free Community shuttles Stanford Margarite Shuttles CalTrain VTA Routes Samtrans Way2go program 511.org Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee CalTrain and the CalTrain Deer Creek Shuttle VTA Routes Samtrans 511.org Source: City of Palo Alto * Related agencies and programs listed in Italics Chapter 3 116 Energy Conservation Home energy costs have become an increasingly significant factor in housing costs as energy costs have risen, particularly in the past years with the ongoing energy crisis in California. Energy costs related to housing include not only the energy required for home heating, cooling and the operation of appliances, but the energy required for transportation to and from home. There are many opportunities for conserving energy in new and existing homes. Construction of energy efficient buildings does not lower the purchase price of housing. However, housing with energy conservation features should result in reduced monthly occupancy costs, by requiring less energy to operate and maintain. Similarly, retrofitting existing structures with energy-conserving features can result in a reduction in utility costs. In new housing construction, the City encourages design of new units sensitive to energy consumption. Energy conservation is encouraged in the unit layout such as solar orientation, location of plumbing, and choice of heating system as examples. For older homes attempting to rehabilitate, the City refers to programs that provide information referral for participants to make weatherization improvements and utilize energy and water efficient appliances and fixtures. Program participants are encouraged to use the energy conservation programs provided by the City’s Utility Department. The City has outlined goals and requirements on the following topics: Climate Change and Adaptation including GHG inventories, sea level rise and mitigation measures. Energy Supply and Conservation including demand management, smart grid, alternative sources Water conservation and resource management including water quality, storm water, wastewater and bay water Natural Environment including land use issues, stewardship programs, parks, open space, biodiversity, invasive plant species contaminated sites and green purchasing practices, air quality and toxins and Waste and materials including management of ZeroWaste, reuse, recycling, composting and cradle-to-cradle initiatives These goals and requirements mirror Senate and Assembly Bills (SB/AB), Codes, Ordinances and Mandates and strictly follow the set of guidelines prescribed by regional and municipal programs. The following are the Environmental Sustainability Programs run by the City of Palo Alto for residential and commercial properties. Chapter 3 117 Table 3-12 List of Environmental Sustainability Programs in Palo Alto Goal and Requirements (State and Assembly Bills (SB/AB), Codes, Ordinances and Mandates) Municipal and Regional Operations (including goals and programs) * Residential (including goals and programs) * Commercial (including goals and programs) * Climate Change and Adaptation including GHG inventories, sea level rise and mitigation measures CCAR (2010)/ The Climate Registry (2011) AB32 – California’s Climate Plan Western Climate Initiative Renewable Portfolio Standards – Internal mandate 20% by 2012 and 33% by 2015; Governor’s executive order and proposed CARD Rules 33% by 2020 Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan targets Palo Alto Climate Protection Plan and GHG Monitoring Program Utilities Renewable energy supply goal Bay Area Climate Change Collaborative Joint Venture Silicon Valley – Climate Protection Task Force and Climate Coaching Program Sustainable Silicon Valley International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) California Municipal utilities Association (CMUA) Community Environmental Action partnership (CEAP) Utilities conservation related programs Palo Alto Green – voluntary renewable energy program Community Environmental Action partnership (CEAP) Utilities conservation related programs Palo Alto Green – voluntary renewable energy program Energy Supply and Conservation including demand management, smart grid, alternative sources California Energy Code Amendments (Titles 20 & 24) Third Party Measurement and Verification Tiered Electricity rates to promote conservation Utility Efficiency and Conservation Reporting (SB1037 and AB2021) Long Term Electric Acquisition Plan (LEAP) Gas Utility Long- Term Plan (GULP) LED Street Lights Pilot Project City facilities energy efficiency goals/projects LED Traffic Signals Photovoltaic Home energy efficiency analysis (Acterra Green@Home and on-line audits) Solar Water Heating program Photovoltaic (PV) Partners program SMART Energy rebate Program for appliances, insulation, Free Business Efficiency Analysis by CPAU Solar Water Heating program Photovoltaic (PV) Partners program Commercial Advantage Rebate Program Right Lights Plus Direct Install Program Chapter 3 118 Goal and Requirements (State and Assembly Bills (SB/AB), Codes, Ordinances and Mandates) Municipal and Regional Operations (including goals and programs) * Residential (including goals and programs) * Commercial (including goals and programs) * Energy Supply and Conservation con’t SB1 and AB920 – PV Net Metering and Rebates Act AB1470 – Solar Hot Water and Efficiency Act of 2007 demonstration projects at MSC, Baylands Nature Center, Cubberley Community Center and Arastradero Gateway Nature Center furnaces, etc. Refrigerator Replacement & Recycling Incentives Residential Energy Assistance Program (low income) Lighting Pilot Projects Home Energy Reports (fall 2010) Home Efficiency Kits Improving Efficiency and Using Technology Workshops/Semi nars Online Analysis Tools New Construction and Retrofit Rebates PACE (Property Assessed Clean Energy) Program with CalFirst Commercial & Industrial Energy Efficiency Programs Electric Efficiency Financing Program (summer 2010) Commercial Kitchens Program School District Outreach & Incentives by Utilities Plug-in Program (distributed power generation) Water conservation and resource management including water quality, storm water, waste water and bay water Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Recycled Water Ordinance California Urban Water Conservation Council’s Best Management Practices State Green Building Code (CALGreen) SBx7-7 (20%x2020) Plumbing Code CPAU Urban water Management Plan Water Conservation Implementation Plan (BAWSCA) 20%x2020 potable water use reduction EPA WaterSense Partner Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE) partner Demonstration gardens at Water wise house calls Water conservation rebate programs (landscape rebate program, ET controller rebates, high efficiency toilet rebate, & clothes washer rebate) Storm water rebates Save the Bay BAWSCA Workshops Landscape Surveys Indoor Water Surveys Storm water rebates Water conservation rebate programs (landscape rebate program, ET controller rebates, high efficiency toilet & urinal installation & rebates, Chapter 3 119 Goal and Requirements (State and Assembly Bills (SB/AB), Codes, Ordinances and Mandates) Municipal and Regional Operations (including goals and programs) * Residential (including goals and programs) * Commercial (including goals and programs) * Water conservation and resource management con’t Upcoming Gray water code Various sanitary sewer ordinances to reduce copper, heavy metals, FOG (fats, oil, grease) and other pollutants Tiered Water rates to promote conservation Once-thru cooling ordinance Ahwahnee Principles adopted by Council Recycled water encouraged for use on construction sites for dust management Mitchell Park Library and Community Center, Downtown and Main Libraries Rebates & fixture retrofits Landscape irrigation system improvements CLEAN South Bay Complete ultraviolet light water disinfection unit Mercury reduction Reducing salinity of recycled water Integrated Pest Management Program Various pollution prevention efforts: tricolosan and pharmaceutical collection Conversion of turf fields to artificial turf at four sites Expansion of use of recycled water at park and median sites Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) Workshops Bay-Friendly Workshops and program Water efficient landscape literature Our Water, Our World (less toxic pest control program at local hardware and garden centers) Pharmaceutical collection Mercury device collection School programs (Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) led and County led) commercial clothes washers, water efficient technology incentives, submeters, pre- rinse spray valves) BAWSCA, SCVWD, Bay Friendly Workshops Natural Environment including land use issues, stewardship programs, parks, open space, biodiversity, invasive plant species contaminated sites and green purchasing practices, air quality and toxins Foothills Fire management Plan Baylands Conservation Plan Tree Preservation Ordinance Wood smoke Ordinance (requirements for wood burning stoves and fireplaces) Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Urban Forest master Plan - including Street tree inventory, Tree species data base, Block Side Species Replacement list, Updated Tree Open space and trails Community gardens Junior museum Farmer’s markets (including Saturday’s Downtown market, Sunday’s Cal Ave market and the Green Business Program (run by County; facilitated for PA businesses by Public Works) Clean Bay Businesses Chapter 3 120 Goal and Requirements (State and Assembly Bills (SB/AB), Codes, Ordinances and Mandates) Municipal and Regional Operations (including goals and programs) * Residential (including goals and programs) * Commercial (including goals and programs) * Removal Process Nature and Hiking programs Special events and educational programs Nature and environmental interpretive centers and Junior Museum Open space habitat preservation Pesticide Free Parks Baylands conservation plan Foothills fire management plan Arastradero creek restoration San Francisquito Creek Flood Control Partnerships with Save The Bay, US Fish & Wildlife and Acterra for habitat restoration Downtown FarmShop) Acterra Canopy Committee for Green Foothills Environmental volunteers Friends of Foothills Park Friend of Palo Alto Parks Midpeninsula Regional Open Space district Peninsula Open space Trust (POST) Waste and materials including management of ZeroWaste, reuse, recycling, composting and cradle to cradle initiatives Demolition and Construction Diversion requirements Ordinance on Plastics, expanded polystyrene and non-recyclable food services containers Ordinance on single use bags AB 939 AB 32 Zero Waste Strategic and Operational Plan City Operations recycling and composting programs SMaRT Station Product Stewardship/ Extended producer responsibility Green purchasing policy Paper reduction initiatives (CPP dept initiatives, double sided ZeroWaste BYOBag Palo Alto Recycling Drop- off Center HHW program (drop off and appointment) City–wide Garage Sale Curbside recycling and yard trimmings program ZeroWaste Composting program for food and yard waste Business recycling program Demolition and Construction Diversion program Green Business Program BYOBag ZeroWaste Grant Program Chapter 3 121 Goal and Requirements (State and Assembly Bills (SB/AB), Codes, Ordinances and Mandates) Municipal and Regional Operations (including goals and programs) * Residential (including goals and programs) * Commercial (including goals and programs) * default, digital CMRs) Sustainable exhibits at Junior Museum Parks and Open Space Sustainable Operations Reduction of waste by facility renters at community centers Source: City of Palo Alto Related agencies and programs listed in Italics Building Design and Construction All new residential and nonresidential construction in Palo Alto must conform to the State of California’s residential building standards for energy efficiency (Title 24 of the California Administrative Code). Title 24 Standards were established in 1978 to insure that all-new construction meets a minimum level of energy efficiency standards. Standards for building energy efficiency were last updated in 2009. In order to meet and/or exceed the State energy conservation requirements, buildings can be designed and constructed to minimize energy use. Residential site design and construction techniques that can reduce the amount of energy used for space cooling would significantly reduce overall energy demand. Passive solar design keeps natural heat in during the winter and natural heat out during the summer, which reduces air conditioning and heating demands. Buildings can be oriented so that sun and wind are used to maintain a comfortable interior temperature. Landscaping features can also be used to moderate interior temperatures. In addition, technologies have been developed which can reduce energy consumption or generate renewable energy. 3.6 OTHER PROGRAMS City’s Below Market Rate Program The City requires that any new residential development of 5 units or more must provide affordable housing. The developer must provide a physical unit in the development or pay a fee in lieu of providing the physical unit. All in lieu fees are deposited in the City’s Residential Fund. Since its creation in the early 1970s, the City’s BMR program has produced 435 units of affordable ownership and rental housing. Chapter 3 122 Density Bonus The State enacted Density Bonus law in the 1970s as an incentive for developers to provide affordable housing. By providing a certain percentage of affordable housing in the development, the State law allows the developer to build a number of units beyond the existing zoning limits. In 2004, the State revised the density bonus law to provide a higher density and greater incentives to encourage the greater production of affordable housing. Concessions are also offered to developers that provide affordable housing. The concessions often provide regulatory relief from the zoning code. Although developers have not requested additional units through density bonus, developers have requested concessions in exchange for providing affordable units. If approved, applications currently going through the land use approval process would provide an additional 24 units of affordable housing. Housing Development Fee As mentioned, the City collects in lieu fees from developers when affordable units are not included in their projects, and uses those fees to finance other affordable housing developments. An advantage of the in lieu option is it allows those funds to leverage other funding sources. Many affordable housing funding sources require a local funding commitment prior to committing their funds in the project. This local commitment helps secure other funding sources. Therefore, the City’s loan may be a small percentage of the total costs; but it is able to attract many other potential lenders. Palo Alto Housing Corporation The Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) was established in 1970 with the assistance of the City. The City Council recognized that increasing housing prices were slowly forcing out fixed income households, many who were seniors. The PAHC was formed to seek ways to build affordable housing or provide rental subsidies. Since that time, PAHC has been a partner with the City in developing affordable housing. PAHC currently manages over 600 rental units and manages over 240 ownership units in the City’s BMR program. In addition, PAHC has developed their own affordable rental units, partially funded with City monies. Below Market Rate (BMR) Program Emergency Fund In 2002, the City Council established a Below Market Rate Program Emergency Fund to help prevent the loss of BMR units due to lack of adequate maintenance. The program provides emergency loans to BMR owners for mandatory homeowner association maintenance assessments of over $10,000. Since its inception, the program has provided loans to three BMR owners. As part of the Housing Element, this program is proposed to be expanded to provide financial assistance to BMR owners for maintenance of older BMR units (Program H3.1.4). Chapter 4 123 CHAPTER 4 HOUSING CONSTRAINTS The ability of any local government to provide and maintain housing to meet the needs of all economic segments of the community are affected by a variety of factors. These include matters that are outside the control of individual jurisdictions, such as real estate market conditions, construction costs, and the availability of private financing, all of which contribute to housing costs. Government policies, regulations, and programs that a local agency adopts to protect the general welfare of the community may also impede efforts to meet housing needs. This part of the Housing Element addresses both types of constraints and provides a basis for Chapter 5, which proposes a variety of programs and actions to help remove or reduce the impacts. 4.1 NON-GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS Various non-governmental factors such as the housing market, development costs, and the cost and availability of financing contribute to the cost of housing. These factors can potentially hinder the production of new affordable housing. This section analyzes these types of non- governmental constraints. Housing Market Conditions The Bay Area region was not immune to the national downturn in the real estate market. Of the nine counties that make up the Bay Area region, all counties experienced increases in foreclosures, short sales and housing price declines. However, the Bay Area was able to withstand the past few years better than many other parts of the country due to its more diversified economy and its desirable natural and cultural amenities. Although many experts believe that the downward housing market trend has finally stabilized, with the fragile economy, high number of distressed properties in the market, high unemployment and limited credit availability, the housing market recovery will be slow and sporadic. However, the Bay Area housing market, because of its economy and environment, should recover faster than other portions of the country. Even in the Bay Area, the housing market is extremely fragmented. In general, the South Bay and San Francisco areas have seen less of a decline than the East Bay. In many communities along the Peninsula, Palo Alto included, the housing market peaked in 2007, largely because of the success of its high tech industries and strong school systems. Since 2008, uncertain market conditions contributed to price decline and fluctuations in home prices. However, in the Peninsula region, because of the strength of the high-tech industries, home prices have been steadily increasing since the real estate crash. Palo Alto, like other communities in Santa Clara County, the Bay Area, California, and beyond, has experienced a drop in new housing construction in the past two years. While there was considerable housing activity during the 1980 to 1990 decade and in the early 2000’s, the rate of production of units dropped from 2007 onward. From 1999-2006, 1,713 residential units were constructed. In this current cycle, building permits were issued for 921 residential units. However, almost all received their land use approvals prior to 2007. From 2007 to 2008, only 158 residential units received land use approval. This drop in housing construction was a result Chapter 4 124 158 residential units received land use approval. This drop in housing construction was a result of a combination of factors such as shortage of financing, rise in construction costs and a poor housing market. The costs of land, hard costs (construction), and soft costs (financing, architecture, and engineering) are three major components of development costs. Construction and financing costs are, for the most part, driven by regional and, in some cases state and national conditions that are beyond the control of local jurisdictions. Land costs tend to be more reliant on local conditions and reflect the availability of developable sites as well as market demand. Land Costs Palo Alto is, for the most part, a built-out community. Developable sites are scarce and there is little vacant land suitable for development in Palo Alto--less than 0.5% of the City's developable land is vacant. Because of the lack of vacant parcels, underutilized sites or sites zoned for commercial/industrial uses have become attractive for residential re-use. However, the demand for such sites has increased their cost. Both market-rate and affordable housing developers report that acquiring sites for housing in the City is a challenge. Although the City policies encourage the integration of residential use into commercial use as mixed-use projects, the City is not supportive of sole housing proposals in non-residentially designated areas. The land cost in Palo Alto varies by location and the structure on it. Based on the information from local commercial and residential real estate brokers, the value of commercial land depends on proximity to transit and other amenities the area provides. For example, it varies from $4.5 million per acre in the California Avenue business district to $10-$15 million per acre in the commercial Downtown areas. Residential land values also vary by location. The value of multifamily residentially zoned property has more than doubled since 1996. The average land cost for multifamily residential condominium projects in 2006-2007 varied from $160 to $300 per square foot based on location. Individual single-family residential lots, if available, typically cost over $900,000 or more for a 5,000 square foot lot. Although the slowdown in the national real estate market has recently resulted in reduced construction costs, land costs in Palo Alto are still extremely high. Hard/Construction Costs A major impediment to the production of more housing is the cost of construction, which involves two factors: the cost of materials, and the cost of labor. Hard construction costs generally comprise about 45% of the total development budget. Construction costs are more stable than land costs but also influenced by market conditions. Cost of construction varies with the type of new housing and the way it is constructed. According to the Association of Bay Area Governments, wood frame construction at 20-30 units per acre is generally the most cost efficient method of residential development. However, local circumstances of land costs and market demand will impact the economic feasibility of construction types. Although the cost of building materials, which comprises a significant portion of the sales price of a home, has risen dramatically in recent years, it has not affected Palo Alto more significantly than other areas. According to the US Department of Labor, the overall cost of residential construction materials rose 22 % between 2004 and 2006, with steel costs increasing 63% and the cost of cement increasing 27%. There is some small variation in material and labor costs in different regions of the State; but, for the most part, the variation in costs are not considered Chapter 4 125 significant. Discussions with private and non-profit developers and City staff indicate that $200- $300/sq. ft. is the lower end of the scale for high-end custom new construction in Palo Alto. Multiple-family residential construction costs ranged from approximately $200-$250 or higher per square foot depending on amenities and the quality of construction materials. Even with the "economies of scale" of multifamily construction, costs are still high for those units. Because of this high rate, there is a tendency on the part of developers to build units that can be sold at the maximum the market can bear. Hence, it becomes difficult to build affordable housing with this range of construction costs. One factor that directly affects affordable housing development and not market rate housing development is prevailing wage requirements. Many affordable housing developments receive government funding and, in many instances, that funding carries the requirement that the construction employees be paid a prevailing wage as set by the government. Generally, the prevailing wage is higher than the market rate wage. Therefore, as labor costs are generally 25%-35% of the construction costs, the higher prevailing wages add to the overall construction budget. Financing/Soft Costs Soft costs, including permit fees, architectural and engineering services, and environmental reviews make up about 40%-45% of the development budget in a private development. However, in an affordable housing development, that percentage can be much higher and the effect, therefore, more significant. In order to develop housing that is affordable, especially to very low and low-income households, substantial public subsidies are routinely required because of the high cost of land and construction. Because of the deeper affordability levels, many affordable housing projects are using multiple financing sources. Since each financing source has different underwriting criteria, the administration necessary to fulfill the requirements of each financing source adds to the project soft costs causing additional time delays, leading to a longer development schedule. Financing costs are primarily dependent on national economic trends and policy decisions. The availability of financing affects a person’s ability to purchase or improve a home; the cost of borrowing money for residential development is incorporated directly into the sales price or rent. Interest rates are determined by national policies and economic conditions, and there is virtually nothing a local government can do to affect these rates. Homeowner Financing At the time this Housing Element was prepared (2011), fixed mortgage rates for single-family residential housing ranged from 4.00% to 4.75% for a 30 year fixed conforming loan as compared to 6.5% in 2006. Adjustable rate loans were slightly lower than fixed conforming loans, ranging from starting rates of 3.5% up to 4.5%. This means that financing a home has become more attractive in the last few years if the applicant has good credit and a stable income. Financing from both mortgage brokers and retail lenders (banks, savings and loans) is available in the Palo Alto area. Because of the weak housing market and more stringent lending practices, however, residential developers and homebuyers are both having difficulty obtaining financing. The availability of financing is not a significant constraint to the purchase of housing in Palo Alto, although financing for residential and mixed use development is harder to obtain. Financing costs for subsidized housing is very difficult, as the competition for the limited available funds is very severe. Chapter 4 126 Government‐insured loan programs are an option available to some households to reduce typical mortgage requirements. The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) backed insurance loan is one of the more popular government insurance loans. This loan is especially popular with lower income homebuyers that may not have the requisite down payment to qualify for a conventional loan. There are a number of homebuyer assistance programs available to lower income homebuyers on the local and federal level. With the tightening of lending requirements, lower income households have more of a challenge meeting the down payment requirements. However, there are down payment assistance programs available. The California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) provides a low interest, deferred loan as down payment assistance. The Housing Trust of Santa Clara County also offers closing cost and down payment assistance. The Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) program, administered by Santa Clara County, offers homebuyers a tax credit that they may use to reduce their taxable income. It does not help them purchase the home but with a reduced tax liability, it allows them greater disposable income to better afford the home. Under the federal Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), lending institutions are required to disclose information on the disposition of loan applications and the income, gender, and race of loan applicants. The availability of financing for a home greatly affects a person’s ability to purchase a home or invest in repairs and improvements. Under the federal Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), lending institutions are required to disclose information on the disposition of loan applications and the income, gender, and race of loan applicants. HMDA requires lending institutions to disclose information on the disposition of loan applications by income, gender, and race/ethnicity of applicants. Table 4-1 Disposition Table of Applications for Conventional Home Purchase Loans, 2007 The table above shows by income categories the purchases of one‐ to four‐unit properties, as well as manufactured homes. Over 74% of the loan applications were filed by households that reported their income as above moderate (earning greater than 120 percent of AMI). Over 40% of all loans were approved and accepted by the applicants, and 19% were denied. Above Chapter 4 127 moderate‐income households (120% or more of AMI) had the highest rates of approval. The City obtained this data from Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, 2007. Interest rates impact home construction, purchase, and improvement costs. Minor fluctuations in rates can make a significant difference in the annual income needed to qualify for a loan. Even though interest rates are currently at historically low levels throughout the Unites States, purchasing or refinancing is unavailable for many, because lenders have tightened their underwriting criteria to qualify for a loan. The increased number of foreclosures for households with sub‐prime loans, the recession, the credit crisis and limited access to finances are some major barriers to housing choice throughout the country. Currently, lenders are implementing stricter underwriting, reporting, and verification of information practices. Applicants must have credit score of 720 to 740 to qualify for a conventional home mortgage loan. Households facing difficulty in qualifying for a conventional mortgage can opt for a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loan. These loans have lower interest rates, require a low down payment of 3.5 percent, and more flexible underwriting criteria. First-Time Homebuyer Programs are another option to obtain home loans. They include down payment assistance programs such as the California Homebuyers Down payment Assistance Program (CHDAP), offering a deferred-payment junior loan of up to three percent of the purchase price or appraised value. The number of default notices filed against homeowners in Santa Clara County has increased substantially since 2007. Though there is an increase in foreclosure activity throughout the Bay Area, and throughout the country, the number of foreclosures in Palo Alto is low. Between 2006 and 2008, approximately 7,700 default notices were filed in Santa Clara County of which only three were from Palo Alto. Affordable Housing Development As the Federal and State governments reduce their budgets, funding for affordable housing development has been severely cut. On the federal level, the CDBG and HOME programs have seen a 30% and 35% reduction, respectively, in the past three years. On the state level, one of the major sources of affordable housing funding, redevelopment funds, has been eliminated. Therefore, local jurisdictions are burdened with allocating a greater amount of funding to each proposed affordable housing development. The City of Palo Alto has several funding sources it can offer to assist in funding an affordable housing development. The City maintains the Commercial Housing Fund and the Residential Housing Fund. The Commercial Housing Fund, which is funded by mitigation fees assessed based on new commercial and retail square footage, was established to develop new workforce housing. The Residential Housing Fund’s purpose is to create affordable housing throughout the City. Housing developers are required to provide affordable housing in each development; however, on occasion, some developers are allowed the option to pay a fee in lieu of providing affordable housing in the development. Those fees are deposited into the Residential Housing Fund and then used to help finance other affordable housing projects. Based on discussions with affordable housing developers, as other state and federal sources are reduced or eliminated, local jurisdictions will have to carry a larger portion of the financial burden. Chapter 4 128 While federal and state funding sources have seen their allocations reduced, there still are a number of funding sources on both levels, albeit those sources are now much more competitive for the limited funding. In many instances, affordability of the units is a deciding factor in funding allocation. However, this creates a situation where additional funding sources are needed to help fill the deeper gap. In other words, the project may be more competitive as affordability increases; however, more funds are needed to subsidize the project. Environmental Constraints The environmental setting affects the feasibility and cost of residential development. There are some areas in the City that have specific environmental issues that may constrain future residential development. Environmental issues range from the suitability of land for development, the provision of adequate infrastructure and services, as well as the cost of energy. In this section, the challenging environmental issues affecting the City’s development decisions are discussed. Seismic and Geologic Hazards Several residential sites in the foothills area of the City are within a specific earthquake fault zone area. Seismic hazards include ground shaking, fault rupture, liquefaction, land sliding, ground settlement, and seismically-induced flooding. The design of new housing projects in risk-prone areas must consider relevant geologic, seismic, flood, and fire hazards. The City strictly enforces Uniform Building Code seismic safety restrictions for all types of construction. For residential sites within the earthquake fault zone area, in-depth soils reports are required as a part of their development approval process. Although the entire City is subject to moderate to severe earth movement during a seismic event, there are standard engineering solutions to address the potential seismicity. Incentives for seismic retrofits of structures in the University Avenue/ Downtown area are available. Other geologic hazards in Palo Alto that are not associated with seismic events are landslides that may result from heavy rain, erosion, removal of vegetation, or other human activities. The Public Works Department enforces strict Municipal Code regulations to combat these natural events. They require reports from engineers and geologists reviewing the geology and soils of the hazard areas. Appropriate fees are charged to cover the cost of this review. Some areas of the City have isolated cases of pollution of the soil and groundwater that may require clean up, and the close proximity of groundwater to the surface may limit excavation or require additional foundation stabilization. Limited areas of Palo Alto are subject to flooding following unusually heavy rainfall. Flooding is typically associated with overtopping of creek banks, inadequately sized bridges and culverts, and blocked storm drains. Much of the City is outside the 100-year flood plain boundary defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). However, a substantial area is subject to flooding in a 100-year storm and designated as a Special Flood Hazard Area on FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Map. According to the City of Palo Alto Public Works Department staff, approximately 25-30% of the City is within this flood hazard zone. Structures within this zone must meet certain building requirements to reduce potential flooding impacts when expanding or improving property if the improvement cost is greater than 50% of the value of the property. Chapter 4 129 The impacts of global climate change due to rise in ocean water temperature and melting of polar ice will affect future development decisions for Palo Alto since the rise in sea level will impact the low lying bay properties. According to the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission (SFBCDC) projections, mean sea level will rise between 10 and 90 cm (12 and 36 inches) by the year 2100. BCDC online maps depict a scenario for a one-meter (100 cm) rise in sea level possible for the year 2100 (http://www.bcdc.ca.gov), which exceeds projections referenced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and 2006 California Climate Action Team (CCAT). Noise Probably the most pervasive source of noise in Palo Alto is motor vehicles. However, trains, aircraft, concerts, electrical substations, and mechanical equipment are also contributors, as are random sources like leaf blowers and construction equipment. Average noise levels are highest along Highway 101, El Camino Real, Alma Street and the railroad tracks, the Palo Alto Airport, and along major traffic corridors like Middlefield Road and Oregon Expressway. Sound walls or additional noise barriers may be required to reduce noise to acceptable levels for residential use along these corridors. These requirements could be viewed as constraints in that they increase the cost of new development and may prohibit owners from redeveloping or undertaking improvements. The City, however, has limited control over these requirements since they are primarily regulated by state and federal agencies. The City will continue its efforts to curb noise impacts from the above mentioned sources and will also take actions that prevent adverse levels of noise from being generated by new development. The City regulates noise impacts from loud vehicles and has a Noise Ordinance designed to address particular noise problems. It assists agencies that develop noise control legislation and promote enforcement of adopted standards. Infrastructure Constraints The City of Palo Alto is an older and well-established community with well-established infrastructure systems. The City owns and manages its utilities, including water, gas, wastewater, stormwater, and electrical. All of the identified sites on the Housing Inventory Sites list are surrounded by developed land and have the necessary infrastructure and services in place to support development. According to staff from the City Public Works and Utilities Departments, there are no significant infrastructure constraints that would affect anticipated residential development on these sites. Palo Alto receives potable water from the City and County of San Francisco’s regional water system, operated by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC). The amount of water available to the SFPUC’s customers is constrained by hydrology, physical facilities, and the institutional limitations that allocate available water. The City of Palo has a long-term entitlement from the SFPUC system of 17.07 million gallons per day (MGD). The City’s supply/demand balance is discussed in detail in the City of Palo Alto’s 2010 Urban Water Management Plan (2010 UWMP). Based on the long-term water use forecast in the 2010 UWMP, there are adequate normal year supplies to serve future growth in the City, including those sites identified in the Housing Element Update. The amount of water available during a drought depends on the severity of a drought and the dry year allocation agreements between the users of the regional water system. The 2010 UWMP provides details on the City’s responses to drought reductions, including specific measures and Chapter 4 130 options to address supply limitations (Section 7 - Water Shortage Contingency Plan). Although the City will need to make adjustments to normal usage patterns, the City anticipates there will be adequate supplies to meet future demand during a drought. The City’s wastewater treatment plant has a capacity of 39 million gallons per day and has sufficient capacity to serve expected residential growth. On-going maintenance and repair of existing storm drainage, water, and wastewater improvements are identified as part of the City's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Needed repairs are prioritized in the CIP and projected over a multi-year period. The City’s existing stormwater infrastructure in the areas targeted for additional housing units is generally adequate to accommodate the expected storm runoff from new housing development. While there appear to be no significant infrastructure constraints on a citywide basis, there may be constraints on a site-by-site basis depending on the site's proximity to existing utility and service lines and whether there would be a need to provide additional connections or upgrades to those lines. These types of improvements would typically be the responsibility of the property owner/developer. On-site drainage improvements, in addition to any minor modifications to the municipal storm drain system triggered by the projected future development, would be the responsibility of each individual housing developer. The developers will also be responsible for incorporating stormwater source control and treatment measures into their project designs, as required by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater discharge permit issued to Bay Area municipalities by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. Small Sites Another significant constraint to new housing development is lack of available land. Palo Alto is a built-out community with very limited developable land remaining for any kind of development. About 80 percent of the Single Family lots zoned R-1 are between 5,000-10,000 square feet in size. These parcels are established R-1 neighborhoods with little chance of rezoning or developing to multifamily development in the future. As mentioned in Chapter 3, approximately 55% of Palo Alto’s total land area includes existing and designated parks, open space preserves and agricultural land conservation areas with controlled development regulations. The remaining land is, for the most part, planned for infill development with varied lot sizes. Lack of developable land and smaller parcel size is a constraint to future development for Palo Alto. The Housing Inventory Sites selection process focused on sites with lot areas over 10,000 square feet. These lots were selected because they could potentially yield at least 5 residential units at a density calculation of 20 dwelling units per acre. Some sites identified in the SOFA area are less than 10,000 square feet. With some of the smaller sites, it may be preferable that groups of parcels consolidate under one owner in order to facilitate mixed use development to provide a reasonable housing yield; however, there have been a number of mixed used developments on these smaller lots that have provided residential units. Chapter 4 131 Schools The schools in the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) consistently rank best in the state and city residents are particularly concerned with any impacts that may affect the high quality of the schools. There is community concern that additional new housing would introduce more new students into the school district and would further impact its facilities which are already near or at capacity. 4.2 GOVERNMENTAL CONSTRAINTS Local policies and regulations can impact the price and availability of housing and in particular, the provision of affordable housing. Land use controls, site improvement requirements, fees and exactions, permit processing procedures, and various other issues may constrain the maintenance, development and improvement of housing. Land Use Controls Comprehensive Plan The 2010-2020 Comprehensive Plan is Palo Alto’s chief policy document governing and guiding the long-term development of the City. The Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan influences the production of housing along with the controls supported in the Land Use and Community Design Element. The following table describes the land use categories of the City of Palo Alto. Of the following land use categories, Single Family Residential, Multifamily Residential, Commercial and Mixed Use categories allow residential use with respective density and intensity limits for each category. Table 4-2 Existing Land Use Category Distribution of Palo Alto Land Use Categories % of Total Area** Parks / Preserve /Open Space 43.54% Single Family 21.34% Openspace/ Controlled Development 15.10% Public Facility 8.59% R&D / Limited Manufacturing 5.68% Multi Family 3.15% Commercial/Mixed Use 2.61% Vacant 0.50% ** Includes Sphere of Influence Source: City of Palo Alto Chapter 4 132 The four residential land use designations are contained in the Land Use and Community Design Element and are described below. Single-Family Residential Allows one dwelling unit on each lot as well as churches or schools (conditional uses). The typically allowed density range is 1 to 7 units per acre but the upper end of this range can be increased to 14 dwelling units per acre to accommodate second units or duplexes. Multiple-Family Residential Allows net densities ranging from 8 to 40 dwelling units per acre with more specific density limits governed by a site’s zoning district and its location. Generally, higher densities are permitted near major streets and public transit and lower densities next to single-family residential areas. Village Residential The intent of this designation is to promote housing that contributes to the harmony and pedestrian orientation of streets and neighborhoods. This designation allows a maximum density of 20 units per acre, allowing single-family housing on small lots, second units, cottage clusters, duplexes, fourplexes and small apartments. Transit-oriented Residential The intent of this designation is to allow higher density residential uses in the University Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue commercial centers within 2000 feet of a multi- modal transit station and thus support transit use. A maximum density of 50 dwelling units per acre is allowed. In addition to the residential land use designations listed above, the Comprehensive Plan allows residential development under non-residential (commercial) land use designations. A considerable portion of the City’s new housing development has been constructed in non- residential zones. New standards have been created to allow housing in these locations. These land use designations and their general development limits are described below. Neighborhood Commercial This designation typically allows smaller shopping centers with retail uses that serve nearby neighborhoods and allow housing in a mixed use configuration with housing over retail. Exclusively residential uses are generally prohibited in the Neighborhood Commercial designation, however sites designated in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan may be developed pursuant to the regulations for the multifamily zone designation (RM-15, RM-30, or RM-40) identified for the site in the Housing Element. Regional/Community Commercial This designation allows larger shopping centers intended to serve markets larger than nearby local neighborhoods, but it does not allow residential or mixed use development. Sites with this designation are much larger than neighborhood shopping centers and contain large parking areas. Although residential uses are generally prohibited in the Community Commercial zone districts, such uses are allowed where a site is designated in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Chapter 4 133 Plan. Such sites shall be developed pursuant to the regulations for the multifamily zone designation (RM-15, RM-30, or RM-40) identified for the site in the Housing Element. Service Commercial This land use designation supports citywide or regional commercial facilities for people arriving by automobile and allows mixed use development with housing and ground floor retail. Exclusively residential uses are generally prohibited in this district, however, such uses are allowed where a site is designated in the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Such sites shall be developed pursuant to the regulations for the multifamily zone designation (RM-15, RM-30, or RM-40) identified for the site in the Housing Element. Mixed Use This designation allows for combinations of Live/Work, Retail/Office, Residential/Retail and Residential/Office uses. Its purpose is to increase the types of spaces available for living and working to encourage a mix of compatible uses in certain areas, and to encourage the upgrading of certain areas with buildings designed to provide a high quality pedestrian-oriented street environment. Context-Based Design Codes The City of Palo Alto adopted form-based codes in 2006 to ensure and encourage residential development by following innovative context-based design guidelines to meet increased density needs. The code encourages creating walkable, pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods, following green building design principles and increasing density along transit corridors and in mixed-use neighborhoods. The Context-Based Design Code allows for increased density and mixed-use buildings in an appropriate and responsible way that enhances neighborhood character and walkability. Other key considerations depicted in these form-based codes include sustainability principles, tree preservation, solar orientation, historic preservation and parking design. In multi-family and mixed use zones, the development standards are presented in table format to clearly identify the setback, height, and floor area ratio requirements. In addition, the multi- family and mixed use design criteria offer a framework to guide development that is compatible with adjacent development. These guidelines provide clear direction to developers to help streamline the development review process. The guidelines are illustrated to offer examples of how parking can be integrated in to site design, appropriate locations for open space, as well as recommendations for sustainable building design. When these standards were adopted in 2007, the intent was to bring the zoning regulations into compliance with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The form-based code has led to a better building and street design coordination, more predictable urban form, a more gradual transition between adjacent areas with different development intensities, and specification of the tapering of height, bulk, massing and lot coverage of buildings toward residential and/or commercial edges. Form based codes encourage housing development in mixed-use development for Palo Alto. Chapter 4 134 Density Bonus Provisions Density bonus is an important tool in attracting and helping developers construct more affordable housing and thus assisting the City in achieving its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) numbers. Density bonus allows a developer to increase the density of the development above the base zoning and provide some regulatory relief in the form of concessions in exchange for providing affordable units in the development. In 2004, the State Legislature passed SB 1818, which significantly amended Government Code Section 65915, the state density bonus law. The amendment lowered the thresholds required to receive a density bonus and increased the number of concessions a developer can receive. Like all other cities and counties, Palo Alto is required to revise its current density bonus ordinance to conform with the statutes of Government Code Section 65915. Although staff is in the process of revising its ordinance, the amendments have been in effect since 2005. The City’s draft density bonus ordinance closely mirrors the SB 1818 amendments with some additional criteria. No developers have requested additional density bonus units in their developments. However, there have been developers who have requested concessions as part of their land use applications in exchange for providing affordable units. Second Units In the R-1 district and all R-1 sub districts, the minimum lot size for a second dwelling unit must be 35 percent greater than the minimum lot size otherwise established for the district. Since 2007, 19 second dwelling units have been constructed in Palo Alto averaging 4 units per year. About 22 percent of all R-1 lots meet the minimum lot size and are eligible for second dwelling units. However, the City does not have any record of how many of these lots already have an existing second unit, legal or otherwise. The City is including a program in the housing element that will explore an amnesty program to legitimize existing illegal or nonconforming second units where appropriate and consistent with maintaining the character of the existing neighborhood. The City’s parking requirements for second dwelling units requires one covered parking space for second units less than 450 square feet. The City requires one covered and one uncovered parking space for second units greater than 450 square feet mainly due to its potential for having more than one occupant with an automobile. The City allows “tandem” parking and parking in the side or rear setbacks to meet the uncovered parking requirement. Below Market Rate Housing Program Established in 1974, the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Program has produced over 350 units of affordable housing by requiring the developer to provide a certain percentage of units as BMR in every approved project of five units or more. Currently, the program requires that for developments on sites of less than five acres, the developer must provide 15% of the total housing units as Below Market Rate (BMR) housing units. If the site is larger than 5 acres, the developer is required to provide 20% of the units as BMR housing. While the requirement has been very important in providing BMR units, it can also be a constraint. The pricing gap between a market rate unit and a BMR unit is significant. On average, a for-sale BMR unit is priced 40%-60% below its market rate counterpart. Therefore, depending on the number of Chapter 4 135 BMR units, the amount of subsidy carried by the market rate units to cover the financial gap created by the BMR units can be substantial. Given the high cost of land in the City, coupled with the large pricing gap of the BMR units, it may discourage developers moving forward with any type of housing project. In order to provide more BMR units, this Housing Element is proposing to lower the BMR requirement threshold to 3 units or more. (H.3.1.1) Given the high land costs and availability of land suitable for residential development within Santa Clara County and adjacent San Mateo County, most communities in the area have adopted inclusionary housing programs in order to provide affordable housing options. Palo Alto has had a Below Market Rate housing program since 1973. Although this could be seen as a constraint to housing development, from 2000 to 2008, Palo Alto produced an average of 100 units per year, and permits were issued for a total of 921 housing units between 2007 and 2011. The fact that most jurisdictions in the area have similar inclusionary housing programs, and that housing, including the required BMR units, continues to be produced, the City’s BMR program does not hinder housing production. In order to evaluate the program’s impact on housing production, Program H3.1.14 has been added to evaluate the provisions of the BMR program to determine if additional incentives are needed to encourage development of housing given current market conditions. Growth Control or Similar Ordinances The City of Palo Alto does not have any growth control ordinances in place. Zoning for a Variety of Housing Multifamily Rental Housing, Senior Housing, Small Size Units and Efficiency Studios and Mobile Homes and Factory-Built Housings: Policy H2.1 of this Housing Element helps to identify a variety of strategies to increase housing density and diversity near community services, including a range of unit types. It emphasizes and encourages the development of affordable housing to support the City’s fair share of the regional housing needs. Program H2.1.2 allows increased residential densities for mixed-use developments thereby encouraging more multifamily housing to be built in areas near transit and services. Currently, multifamily housing, including rental and ownership is permitted in RM-15, RM-30 and RM-40 zoning, along with mixed-use commercial zones like CS and CN. Multifamily units in structures with 2-4 units represented 6 percent of the housing stock in 2008, and 29 percent of the housing stock consisted of structures with 5 and more units. Program H2.1.5 of this Housing Element proposes to amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage development of smaller size housing units, including units for seniors. In addition, program H3.1.7 of this Housing Element permits Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units in commercial and high-density residential zoning districts using development standards that would encourage the construction of the maximum number of units. Sites that have access to community services and public transportation are highly desired for SRO residents. Other Chapter 4 136 R-1 R-E R-2 RMD RM-15 RM-30 RM-40 Mixed-Use Single Family PPPP P(Based on Lot Size) P(Based on Lot Size) P(Based on Lot Size) Two Family PPPP P Village Residential P P(Based on Lot Size) P(Based on Lot Size) Multiple Family PP P P (As a part of mixed use development) Residential Care P PPPPP Mobile-Homes P PPPPP Emergency Shelter Single-Room Occupancy (Considered as Multi Family Housing) PPP Transitional Housing (Considered as Residential Care Facilities/Multi Family Housing) P PPPPP Farmworker Housing Not Required Not Required Not Required Not Required Not Required Not Required Supportive Housing (Considered as Residential Care Facilities/Multi Family Housing) P PPPPP 2nd Unit (Decision based on lot size only) RESIDENTIAL USE 100 % Housing Development not allowed in this Zoning District RESIDENTIAL ZONES Source: City of Palo Alto Zoning Code P(Based on Lot Size) P=Permitted, CUP=Conditional Use. Source: City of Plao Alto Zoning Ordinance changes or additions proposed in this Housing Element to promote a variety of housing includes Program H3.1.9 that supports changes to the Zoning Code to permit innovative housing types and flexible development standards while maintaining the character of the neighborhood. Although manufactured housing and mobile homes are a permitted use in all of the City’s residential zoning districts, the City of Palo Alto currently has one existing mobile home park with approximately 60 mobile homes located within the City limits. Mobile home uses are permitted in R-E, R-2, RMD, R-1, RM-15, RM-30 and RM-40 zoning district, but are not allowed on permanent foundations in historic districts of the City. Since 2000, there has been a 64 percent drop in the number of mobile homes in the City. The 60 units in the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park make up less than 0.2 percent of the City’s housing stock. Mobile homes provide affordable housing with low yard and housing maintenance, which attracts a high number of seniors and low-income households; however, given the high cost of land in the City, it is unlikely that new mobile home development will be proposed. Program H3.1.9 of this Housing Element recognizes Buena Vista Mobile Home Park as the City’s only existing mobile home park serving low and moderate-income households and encourages its preservation. Table 4-3 Housing Types Permitted by Zoning Districts Chapter 4 137 Street Side Rear Front R-1 0.35 0.45 30 16' 20' Contextual 2 spaces; 1 covered R-2 0.35 0.45 30 16' 20' 20' 1.5 spaces per unit; 1 covered RMD 0.4 0.5 35 16' 20' 20' 1.5 spaces per unit; 1 covered RM-15 0.35 0.5 30 10'-16' 10'-16' 20' 1.25-2.00 spaces per unit; 1 covered RM-30 0.4 0.6 35 10'-16' 10'-16' 20' 1.25-2.00 spaces per unit; 1 covered RM-40 0.45 1 40 10'-16' 10'-16' 0-25' 1.25-2.00 spaces per unit; 1 covered Required Parking Source:City of Palo Alto Zoning Ordinance Max. Height Limit (Feet) Minimum Yard SetbackZoning District Max. Lot Coverage Floor Area Ratio (FAR) The City's Zoning Ordinance is the primary tool used to manage the development of residential units in Palo Alto. The Residential Districts described in Palo Alto’s Zoning Ordinance include the RE: Residential Estate District, R-1: Single-Family Residence District, R-2: Two Family Residence District, RMD: Two Unit Multiple-Family Residence District, RM-15: Low Density Multiple-Family Residence District, RM-30: Medium Density Multiple-Family Residence District, RM-40: High Density Multiple-Family Residence District and the Planned Community District. Permitted densities, setback requirements, minimum lot sizes and other factors vary among the residential districts. The table below lists some of the more significant standards of each of the districts. Table 4-4 Existing Residential Development Standards RE Residential Estate District The RE District is intended to create and maintain single-family living areas in more outlying areas of the City compatible with the natural terrain and the native vegetative environment. The minimum site area is one acre. Only one residential unit, plus an accessory dwelling or guest cottage, is permitted on any site. The maximum size of the main dwelling on a conforming lot is 6,000 square feet. R-1 Single Family Residence District The R-1 district is intended for single-family residential use. Typically, only one unit is allowed per R-1 lot although, under certain conditions, accessory or second dwelling units may be allowed in addition to the primary unit. Generally, the minimum lot size for the R-1 district is 6,000 square feet. However, there are certain areas of the City where the minimum lot sizes historically have been larger than 6,000 square feet and these larger lot sizes are being maintained through the Zoning Ordinance by specific R-1 zone combining districts. Chapter 4 138 Table 4-5 R-1 Districts and Minimum Site Areas The R-1 District zoning regulations also specify lot coverage maximums (typically a maximum of 35% lot coverage is allowed) and Floor Area Ratios (the ratio of the house size to the lot size). These lot coverage and FAR limits may limit the development of second dwelling units on certain lots. In addition, there are certain height restrictions that may also limit development potential. "Daylight Plane" restrictions that apply are height limitations controlling development on residential properties. In certain areas of the City where there are predominantly single-story homes, there may also be limitations on adding second stories to single-story units. R-2 and RMD Residential Districts There are two residential districts that allow two units on a site. The R-2 Two Family Residence District allows a second dwelling unit under the same ownership as the initial dwelling unit in areas designated for single-family use with regulations that preserve the essential character of single-family use. A minimum site area of 7,500 square feet is necessary for two dwelling units in this district. The RMD Two Unit Multiple-Family Residence district also allows a second dwelling unit under the same ownership as the initial dwelling unit in areas designated for multiple-family uses. The maximum density in this district is 17 units per acre. In certain instances, the City’s site development regulations can be viewed as constraints to the development of housing. Since most of the City is planned and zoned for low residential use, the City recognizes that its residential neighborhoods are distinctive and wants to preserve and enhance their special features. Since Palo Alto is a “built-out” community, most new single- family residential redevelopment will occur in existing single-family neighborhoods through infill lots or demolition/remodeling of existing structures. The regulations guiding development are intended to ensure that much of what Palo Alto cherishes in its residential areas, such as open space areas, attractive streetscapes with mature landscaping and variety in architectural styles, is preserved and protected. Multiple-Family Density Districts The Zoning Ordinance provides three categories of multiple-family residential use: low density (RM-15), medium density (RM-30) and high density (RM-40). In the RM-15 district, the permitted density is up to 15 units per acre. The RM-30 district allows up to 30 units per acre while the RM-40 allows up to 40 units per acre. All of these districts have minimum site areas, Chapter 4 139 height limitations, lot coverage and floor area ratios. In addition, all of the multiple-family zones have open space and BMR (“Below Market Rate”) requirements. PC Planned Community District The “Planned Community District” is intended to accommodate developments on a site-specific basis for residential, commercial, professional or other activities, including a combination of uses. It allows for flexibility under controlled conditions not attainable under other zone districts. The Planned Community District is particularly intended for unified, comprehensively planned developments that are of substantial public benefit. Residential and Mixed Use Zoning Combining District The Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Development (PTOD) Combining District is intended to allow higher density residential dwellings on commercial, industrial and multifamily parcels within a walkable distance of the Caltrain stations, while protecting low density residential parcels and parcels with historical resources that may also be located in or adjacent to this area. The combining district is intended to foster densities and facilitate use of public transportation. Residential Uses in Commercial Districts Prior to the Zoning Ordinance Update in 2006, all of the City’s Zoning Districts allowed for residential development. In the 1970s and 1980s, several mixed use projects were developed in the commercial zones that included significant numbers of residential units. However, during the late 1980s and 1990s, financing of mixed use projects became more difficult and the City saw a decline in mixed use proposals. Requirements for design review of mixed use projects and restrictions in uses for commercial zones resulted in constraints on the production of housing units in commercial zones. After the adoption of the new zoning ordinance in 2006, exclusive residential use is no longer allowed in commercial districts (CS, CN, CC districts); however, new development standards in the Zoning Ordinance encourage mixed use projects and have simplified the requirements and have added incentives that encourage mixed use development in the commercial zones. Site and design review of any project is required in the (D) overlay zones and (PF) Public Facility zones. Chapter 4 140 Table 4-6 Zoning Category Distribution of Palo Alto Zoning Categories Acres % of Total Area ** Public Facilities District (PF)5,106.35 32.62% Open Space District (OS)4,262.75 27.23% Single Family Residentail District (R-1)3,545.63 22.65% Research Park District (RP)713.53 4.56% Planned Community Districts (PC)326.63 2.09% Residentail Real Estate District (RE)289.59 1.85% Medium Density Multiple Family Residential District (RM-30)271.89 1.74% Research Office Limited Manufacturing District (ROLM)197.07 1.26% Low Density Multiple Family Residential District (RM-15)148.24 0.95% Community Commercial District (CC)128.42 0.82% General Manufacturing District (GM)116.55 0.74% Seervice Commercial District (CS)116.02 0.74% Agricultural District (AC (D))92.36 0.59% Two-Family Residential District (R-2)79.87 0.51% Commercial Downtown District (CD)70.17 0.45% Neighborhood Commercial District (CN)69.90 0.45% High Density Multiple Famile Residential District (RM-40)39.15 0.25% Medical Office and Medical Research District (MOR)24.42 0.16% Two Unit Multiple Family District (RMD)23.12 0.15% Residential Transition District SOFA 2 (RT-35)16.15 0.10% Attached Multi Family District SOFA 1 (AMF)6.77 0.04% Detached ouses on Small Lots SOFA 1 (DHS)6.64 0.04% Residential Transition District SOFA 2 (RT-50)3.13 0.02% Pedestrian and Transit Oriented District (PTOD)1.04 0.01% Grand Total 15,655.39 100.00% ** Does Not Include Sphere of Influence Source: City of Palo Alto Height Limits Limitations on height can constrain a developer’s ability to achieve maximum densities especially with other development controls. Height limits in the R-1, R-2, RMD, RM-15, RM-30 vary between 30 to 35 feet. In the RM-40 zoning district, the maximum height is 40 feet, which Chapter 4 141 is enough to accommodate 3 to 4 story construction. Mixed-use development standards in CS, CN, and CC zone and Downtown Commercial zones allow a maximum height of 50 feet. Theoretically, this could accommodate 4-story construction; however, the parking requirements and construction costs for four story buildings often result in the developer choosing to construct three story developments. Therefore, height can be viewed as a constraint in achieving maximum densities. Since the City of Palo Alto is close to a built out community; the types of development occurring in the last few years is mostly infill development. For infill development, zoning, FAR and height limits sometimes pose a challenge in attaining maximum allowable density. Due to market demand in the early 2000’s, the City of Palo Alto built considerable three bedrooms town home condominiums. The large size of the units (1500-1800sqft), preclude building up to maximum allowable density. Restricting unit size and reducing parking requirements could help to achieve higher densities. Parking Parking requirements vary depending on the type of dwelling, the zoning designation and in the case of multifamily units, the number of bedrooms per unit. The basic requirement for a single-family house is two spaces, at least one covered, with underground parking generally prohibited. In the case of second dwelling units, the size of the second unit determines the parking requirement. If the unit is greater than 450 square feet, two spaces of which one must be covered are required. If the unit size is less (less than 450 sq ft) only one space covered or uncovered is required. For Multiple Family Residential districts the following parking is required: 1.25 space per studio unit, 1.5 space per 1-bedroom unit and 2 spaces per 2-bedroom or larger unit. At least one space must be covered, with tandem parking allowed for units requiring 2 spaces. Guest Parking is also required for projects that exceed three units. When residential use is allowed together with or accessory to other permitted uses, residential use requirements are applicable in addition to other nonresidential requirements, except as provided by Sections 18.52.050 and 18.52.080 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Disabled Accessible parking is provided pursuant to the requirements of Section 18.54.030 (Accessible Parking) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Excessive parking standards requirements can pose a significant constraint on housing development by increasing development costs and reducing the potential land availability for project amenities or additional units and may not be reflective of actual parking demand. While the City of Palo Alto’s parking standards tend to be workable on larger projects, they are a potential constraint to the development of small infill development. The requirement that the spaces be covered can also be viewed as a constraint, as it means that garages or carports must be factored into the cost of the project. Multifamily units in mixed-use projects are subject to requirements that cumulatively add the multiple family requirements with the commercial parking requirements portion of the project to determine the total number of spaces needed. Parking reductions may be considered; however, these reductions are considered on a case-by- Chapter 4 142 case basis. Parking requirements for multifamily housing can hinder the projects ability to achieve the maximum allowable density. The Palo Alto Zoning code does allow concessions for parking for senior housing and affordable housing projects. For Senior Housing, the total number of spaces required may be reduced, commensurate with the reduced parking demand created by the housing facility, including spaces for visitors and accessory facilities, and is subject to submittal and approval of a parking analysis justifying the reduction proposed. The total number of spaces required may be reduced for affordable housing and single room occupancy (SRO) units, where the number of spaces required is commensurate with the reduced parking demand created by the housing facility, including for visitors and accessory facilities. The reduction is further considered if it is located in proximity to transit and support services. The city may require traffic demand management measures in conjunction with any approval. For housing near transit areas, the City of Palo Alto allows a maximum reduction of 20% of the total required spaces. Table 4-7 Parking Requirements for Residential Zones 4.3 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS Fees and Exactions Chapter 4 143 Housing development is typically subject to two types of fees or exactions: Permit Processing fees for planning and zoning and Development Impact Fees or exactions imposed to defray all or a portion of the public costs related to the development project. There are four types of Development Impact fees charged by the City of Palo Alto. They are Housing Development Impact fees, Traffic Impact fees, Community Facilities Impact Fees and Parkland Dedication fees. All residential projects are exempt from Housing Development Impact fees. The City's development fee structure does not appear to be a significant impediment to residential development. Residential developments are charged fees according to the value of the project for building, planning and fire review. The fees for parks, community centers, and libraries add $13,458 to the price of a single-family dwelling unit less than 3000 square feet and $8,766 to the price of a multifamily dwelling more than 900 square feet. These fees are likely to increase the cost of a median priced single-family dwelling by about 1% and increase the cost of a median priced multifamily dwelling by about 1.3 percent. Combined with additional planning, building and other fees the City charges, Palo Alto’s fee structure adds about 2 to 3 percent to the cost of a median priced single-family dwelling and about 2 percent to the cost of a median priced multifamily dwelling. These increased costs are not significant when compared to the cost of land, labor and materials for development in Palo Alto, but they could impact affordable housing projects with limited budgets. Due to this factor, the City has exempted all 100% affordable housing projects from all development impact fees including new parks, community centers, and libraries fees. Since Palo Alto’s fee schedule is less costly for multifamily units than single-family units, this provides some incentive for the increased production of multifamily units. In addition, the fee schedule reduces the fees for multifamily units of less than 900 square feet to $4,454, approximately 50% less than the larger multifamily units. This provides an incentive for development of smaller, less expensive multifamily units. Table 4-8 Palo Alto Residential Development Impact Fees Fee Single Family Single Family over 3000 s.f. Multi-Family Multi-Family under 900 s.f. Parks 9,971$ 14,890$ 6,527$ 3,300$ Comm Ctr 2,585 3,870 1,700 858 Libraries 902 1,344 539 296 Total 13,458$ 20,104$ 8,766$ 4,454$ basis per home per home per unit per unit Fee Commercial Hotel/Motel Parks 4.234$ 1.915$ Comm Ctr 0.239$ 0.108$ Libraries 0.228$ 0.096$ Total 4.701$ 2.119$ basis per net new s.f. per net new s.f. Chapter 4 144 Table 4-9 Palo Alto Development Impact Fee Exemptions X = Exempt NOTE: When an exempt use changes to a non-exempt use, a fee is due. Exemption Housing Community Facilities Traffic: Charleston/ Arastradero Citywide Traffic Fee Traffic: San Antonio Traffic: SRP Parkland Dedication Ordinance section 16.47.030 16.58.030 16.60.040 16.59 16.46.030 16.45.050 21.50.100 Residential Exemptions Single-family home remodels or additions All residential uses exempt X X X All residential uses exempt All residential uses exempt X New home on an empty parcel Only applies if a subdivision or parcel map is required Second units Multifamily Residential Required BMR units Below Market housing beyond required units X X X 100% Affordable Housing X X X X Non-Residential Exemptions Demolition of existing building Fees may apply if replacement building has additional floor area, or in the case of the Citywide TIF, if the replacement building generates additional traffic, regardless of whether it remains the same size or not. All non- residential uses exempt Tenant improvements that do not increase building area X X X X X X Churches X Colleges and universities X Commercial recreation X Hospitals and convalescent facilities X Private clubs, lodges, and fraternal organizations X Private educational facilities X Public buildings & schools X X X X X X Retail, personal service, or automotive service 1,500 s.f. or smaller (one-time) X X X X X Non-residential use 250 s.f. or smaller X X Hazardous materials storage X X X X X X On-site cafeteria/ recreation/ childcare (employee use only) X X X X X X Thermal storage for energy conservation X X Temporary uses < 6 months X X Daycare, nursery school, preschool X X X X (Not open to general public) X (Not open to general public) Chapter 4 145 The South Bay Area Cost of Development Survey conducted by Home Builders Association of Northern California identifies Palo Alto as one of the mid-level impact/infrastructure fee charging cities for both single family and multiple family home construction. Palo Alto’s building and planning permit processing fees are comparable to similar fees charged by other jurisdictions in the Bay Area. The survey conducted by the Home Builders Association uses 2006-2007 information and compares the City of Palo Alto’s Entitlement fees with surrounding cities of Mountain View, Sunnyvale and Cupertino. Palo Alto ranks as one of the lowest entitlement fees charging cities in the south Bay Area. It should be noted, however, that the entitlement fees are designed only to cover the cost the City incurs to process these development applications and provide the support services needed by City staff. The City currently allows for waiver of existing fees for very low- and low-income housing projects. The Housing Element Programs H3.3.1 and H3.3.3 allow affordable housing projects to be exempt from infrastructure impact fees and, where appropriate, waives the imposition of development fees; however, other public service districts may charge fees that are outside of the control of the City. The most significant of these fees in Palo Alto are school impact fees. The Palo Alto Unified School District adopted a fee schedule in 2000 that specifies a fee of $2.97 per square foot for residential units. For infill and individual single-family development, the Public Works fees are minimal and estimated to be about 12 percent of the Building permit fees. For a residential subdivision, the most significant Public Works fee would be the fee for a Street Work Permit, which is 5% of the value of the street improvements. The City's Utility Department charges for gas, sewer and water hook-ups. Chapter 4 146 Table 4-10 CITY OF PALO ALTO PLANNING DIVISION APPLICATION FEE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE AUGUST 27, 2010 Chapter 4 147 Table 4-10 Continued Chapter 4 148 Table 4-10 Continued Chapter 4 149 Table 4-11 Building Permits and Other Department Fees Nexus Requirements A Jobs–Housing Nexus Analysis for the City of Palo Alto, as outlined below, was prepared by Keyser Marston Associates in 1993 and partially updated in 1995. The Nexus study was done to meet the requirements of AB1600, as amended to Government Code Section 66001 of the California Code, in support of the City’s housing linkage fee program. The nexus analysis focused on the relationships among development, growth, employment, income and housing. The analysis yielded a causal connection between new commercial/industrial construction and the need for additional affordable housing. The analysis did not address the existing housing problems or needs, nor did it suggest that development and its relationships were the only cause of housing affordability problems and the development community should bear the full cost of addressing affordability problems. The study focused on documenting and quantifying the housing needs for the new working population in the non-residential structures. The study was updated in 2002. Based on the results of the study, on March 25, 2002, the City Council approved modifications and additions to Impact Fees collected for residential and commercial development projects. The key change in the housing fee was to increase the fee from $4.21 per square foot to $15.00 per square foot applied to nonresidential development and require that an annual cost of living adjustment be made. Chapter 4 150 Parks, Community Center, and Libraries Development Fee: The City completed surveys of the number of residential and non-residential users of parks, community center, and libraries, and generated estimates of the acres or square feet of park, community center, or library space required to accommodate the residents and employees of Palo Alto. A development fee was adopted for parks, community centers and libraries based on the number of employees or residents generated by each residential or commercial project using square feet or number of units. Housing Development Fee: The City studied the number of low-income jobs generated by different types of employers. The housing impact fee is based on the cost to the City to provide affordable housing for those employees who would choose to live in Palo Alto if housing was available. As a result of the nexus study, the fee level is set to recover approximately 20% of the cost of providing such housing. Building Codes and Enforcement The City has adopted the Uniform Building Code (UBC), published by the International Conference of Building Officials, which establishes minimum construction standards. Although a locality may impose more stringent standards, it cannot adopt any that are less restrictive than those of the UBC. Thus, the City cannot modify the basic UBC requirements. Enforcement of building code standards does not constrain the production or improvement of housing in Palo Alto but serves to maintain the condition of the City’s neighborhoods. The City's code enforcement program is an important tool in maintaining its housing stock and protecting residents from unsafe conditions. This is particularly important because approximately 29% the City's current housing stock was built in the decade between 1950-60. Local enforcement is based on the State's Uniform Housing Code that sets minimum health and safety standards for buildings. The City has amended its Building Code to include more stringent requirements for green buildings and LEED certification. The City also administers certain State and Federal mandated standards in regards to energy conservation and accessibility for disabled households. The City of Palo Alto, Department of Building Inspection, implementing the Building Code, requires all new construction and rehabilitation projects to comply with the Code’s disability access requirements. In reviewing these standards, certain requirements especially in regard to disabled accessibility may be viewed as a constraint to housing production. The City has no direct control over these types of requirements. Building Division staff investigates and enforces city codes and state statutes when applicable. Violation of a code regulation can result in a warning, citation, fine, or legal action. If a code violation involves a potential emergency, officers will respond immediately; otherwise, complaints are generally followed up within one working day by visiting the site of the alleged violation, and, if necessary, beginning the process of correcting the situation. On/Off-Site Improvement Standards Site improvements are considered a necessary component of the development process. The types of improvements may include the laying of sewer, water, and streets for use by a community. Due to the “built-out” nature of the City, most of the residential areas in Palo Alto are already Chapter 4 151 served with adequate infrastructure. New construction or infill developments may require the City to extend or add to the existing infrastructure facilities. In few instances, the City’s site development regulations can be viewed as constraints to the development of new housing. The development standards described before indicate that the maximum densities allowed by each residential zoning district can readily be achieved and can produce units of a reasonable size. Lot coverage, FAR and height standards increase as densities increase to accommodate the maximum density allowed by each district. Open space standards are concomitantly reduced to accommodate these increasing densities but still allow for adequate private and communal open space. Parking standards are governed by the number of bedrooms in the case of multifamily residential development and are directly related to the number of people of driving age expected to live in these units. Residential development standards in Palo Alto are comparable with development standards in other Bay Area communities, including communities with lower housing costs such as San Jose. Given this, it appears that Palo Alto’s residential development standards are reasonable and do not significantly add to the cost of residential units in the City when compared to the high costs associated with the purchase of land, labor and construction materials. However, these extra requirements, add substantial additional cost to the already tightly budgeted affordable housing projects. Development Review Process Processing and permit procedures can pose a considerable constraint to the production and improvement of housing. Common constraints include lengthy processing time, unclear permitting procedures, layered reviews, multiple discretionary review requirements, and costly conditions of approval. These constraints increase the final cost of housing, create uncertainty in the development of the project, and overall result in financial risk assumed by the developer. In Palo Alto there are various levels of review and processing of residential development applications, depending on the size and complexity of the development. For example, single- family use applications that require a variance or home improvement exception can be handled by the Director of Planning and Community Environment but more complicated applications, such as subdivision applications or rezoning, require review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council and, in some instances, the City's Architectural Review Board. Residential development applications that fall under the responsibility of the Director of Planning are usually processed and a hearing held within 6-8 weeks of the application submittal date. This includes review by the Architectural Review Board, which is required for all residential projects except individually developed single-family houses and duplexes. Rezoning and minor subdivision applications typically have a longer time frame since they must be heard by both the Planning Commission and the City Council. Generally, an application will be heard by the Planning Commission 7-10 weeks after application submittal. Local ordinance requires the City Council to consider the Planning Commission recommendations within 30 days; therefore, there would be a maximum of 30 more days after the Planning Commission hearing for the City Council's action on these applications. If the application is for a major Site and Design or Planned Community rezoning, then the Architectural Review Board will conduct a hearing after the Planning Commission hearing and this could affect the time frame. As part of the Housing Element, in order to incentivize mixed use development, sites listed on the Housing Sites Inventory for mixed use development will not be subject to Site & Design Review if the project size is less than 9 units, the site is developed with a mixed use development of 20 DU/AC Chapter 4 152 and the maximum unit size is 900 sq. ft. For rezoning projects, the Planning and Transportation Commission reviews the project twice, before and after the Architectural Review Board recommendation and prior to the City Council action. This adds considerably to the processing timeline. Further, all of the time frames referenced above assume that all environmental assessment and/or studies have been completed for the development. Additional time will be required if there are any environmental issues that need to be studied or resolved as a result of the environmental assessment. With the exception of rezoning proposals, permit processing timelines in Palo Alto are comparable to other jurisdictions in the Bay Area. Architectural Review Board (ARB) approval is required for all residential projects except individually-developed single-family homes and duplexes. The ARB sets certain standards of design in order to keep the high quality of housing in Palo Alto. The ARB process may result in requiring a higher level of design, materials and construction, which can be a constraint to the development of housing; however, the level of review and the upgrade in materials has the long term benefit of lower maintenance and higher retention of property values. Moreover, the construction of thoughtful and well-designed multifamily housing has sustained community support for higher density projects and has resulted in community support for residential projects at all income levels. Furthermore, preferences on materials are sometimes waived for affordable housing projects. Architectural review is an important and necessary procedure to insure that new development is consistent and compatible with the existing surrounding developments. All new construction projects of 5000 square feet or more, and all multi-family projects with 3 or more units are required to be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board (ARB). A preliminary meeting with Planning staff is recommended to help streamline the process by identifying any potential issues up front. The design criteria found in the updated zoning code also provides clear guidelines for residential and mixed use projects. Generally, standards are related to measurable criteria such as setback, height and floor area. Once an application is submitted, it is routed to other City departments to obtain a comprehensive review of all code requirements. Once an application is deemed complete, it is scheduled for ARB review, and a recommendation is made. The municipal code findings for Architectural Review include that the design should be consistent with applicable elements of the comprehensive plan, consistent with the immediate environment, promote harmonious transitions in scale and character between different land uses, and that the design incorporates energy efficient elements. The final decision is made by the Planning and Community Environment Director, and this decision may be appealed to the City Council. The timeline for this process can range from 3 to 6 months. In order to expedite processing of applications, the Council recently approved a process revision that establishes that the Architectural Review Board has a maximum of three meetings to approve or deny an application. Because guidelines have been established for this process, there is a fair degree of certainty in the review process. In an effort to make the design review process in Palo Alto more efficient and predictable, the City has developed design guidelines for key areas of the City and preliminary review processes for major development projects. The design guidelines cover sensitive areas of the City and include the El Camino Real area, the Downtown, the Baylands, and the South of Forest Avenue Chapter 4 153 (SOFA) area. These guidelines describe the design issues and neighborhood sensitivities each development project in these areas must address and the types of designs and design elements that would be acceptable in these areas and, thus, ensure that new projects are compatible with existing neighborhoods while also creating and maintaining a desirable living and working environment. The City has established two preliminary review processes for significant development projects to assist developers in identifying critical issues to be addressed and potential design problems to be resolved prior to filing a formal application. A small fee is charged for this optional service but these processes can save time by proactively addressing issues that could delay construction of a project, which, ultimately, is the greatest contributor to increasing project development costs. The Preliminary Architectural Review process allows the City’s Architectural Review Board to review potential projects or project concepts and give useful direction during the initial or formative design steps of the project. Planning staff also reviews the project to ensure compliance with Zoning Code requirements and other pertinent design guidelines and planning policies. The preliminary process also provides other City departments with an opportunity to comment on the proposed project and identify concerns and requirements which the project must address. Preliminary Review is intended to prevent costly project redesigns and other potential delays that could significantly increase the cost of a project. The project issues covered include potential environmental problems and major policy issues in addition to the design issues covered in the Preliminary Architectural Review process. Planning staff and other City department staff also review the project for compliance with all pertinent City codes and guidelines. Both of these processes give the developer valuable information that will expedite development. Since processing delays can significantly increase the cost of housing construction, the City does, on an ad hoc basis, provide for preferential or priority processing for affordable housing projects. The City requires environmental review for most discretionary projects based on the nature of land use and the change of use the project proposes. Single Family home construction is exempt from the CEQA review process. Multifamily residential projects may require environmental review depending on the size and complexity of the project. Chapter 4 154 Under 3000s.f. Over 3000 s.f. Under 900 s.f.Over 900s.f. (ARB) Architectural Review Board (Major and Minor)N/A Major ARB Required only in Open Space Districts Major ARB Required only in Open Space Districts Major ARB Required only in Open Space Districts Major ARB Required Required Environmental Assessment Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)N/A N/A N/A Mitigation Monitoring (MND) Depending on Size and Magnitude of the Project Depending on Size and Magnitude of the Project Required Mitigation Monitoring (EIR) Depending on Size and Magnitude of the Project Depending on Size and Magnitude of the Project Required Categorically or Statutorily Exempt N/A N/A N/A Depending on Size and Magnitude of the Project Depending on Size and Magnitude of the Project Required Historic Review Historic Review Board (Minor and Major Project) Historic Review Board (Demolition of Historic Building) Site and Design Review (Minor and Major Project) Subdivision Review Preliminary Parcel Map and Parcel Map Review Tentative Map and Final Map Review May be Applicable Depending the Year of Construction of the Building Applicable if in the "D" Overlay Zone N/A N/A New Single Family Home on Vacant Parcel Multi Family Residentials Affordable Housing Typical Approval Requirements Single Family Home Remodels or Additions N/A May be Applicable depending on the Size of the Project N/A N/A May be Applicable Depending the Year of Construction of the Building May be Applicable depending on the Year of Construction of the Building May be Applicable depending on the Year of Construction of the Building May be Applicable depending on the Size of the Project May be Applicable depending on the Size of the Project Table 4-12 Typical Processing Procedures by Project Type Chapter 4 155 Type of Approval or Permit Typical Processing Time Building Permit Review Depends on the size and complexity of the project Conditional Use Permit 3 months (approx) General Plan Amendment Not required for housing development other than a residential PC in a commercial district Site & Design Review Only required for "Site and Design D" overlay zones, 6 months (approx) Architectural/Design Review Required for Multiple Family Housing and Single Family Housing in Open Space Districts, 3-6 months (approx) Tentative and Final Maps For Development with more than 5 units, 3-6 months for Tentative Maps and 1 month for Final Map Perliminary and Parcel Maps For Development with less than 5 units, 2 months for Preliminary Map and 1 month for Parcel Map Initial Environmental Study Environmental Impact Report Based on size and complexity of the project, 3 months to years. Source: City of Palo Alto Zoning Code Under 3000s.f. Over 3000 s.f. Under 900 s.f.Over 900s.f. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Residential Variance Home Improvement Exception (HIE) Individual Review - New Two Story Residence or addition to existing one story Applicable Applicable Applicable N/A N/A N/A Individual Review - Second Story expansion >150 s.f. Applicable Applicable Applicable Neighborhood Preservation Zone Exception Other Reviews Planned Community Zone Change Nonconforming Use Review Typical Approval Requirements Single Family Home Remodels or Additions New Single Family Home on Vacant Parcel Multi Family Residentials Affordable Housing May be Requested depending on Lot Configuration, Location and Affordability of the Housing Type. Grandfathered In Source: City of Palo Alto Zoning Code May be Applicable Depending on the Location and Zoning District of the Project May be Applicable Table 4-13 Typical Processing Procedures by Project Type Contd. Table 4-14 Timelines for Permit Procedures Chapter 4 156 4.4 CONSTRAINTS TO HOUSING FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES This section will describe any potential or actual regulatory constraints, if any, on providing housing for the disabled in Palo Alto. The City strictly enforces the Federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and state requirements to ensure that minimum housing access requirements are met. The City also enforces disabled parking standards described in its Zoning Code for all land uses. The City is not aware of any significant constraints to the provision of affordable housing for the disabled in its Zoning Code or other regulatory provisions and has approved on an ad hoc basis, regulatory changes necessary to accommodate the needs of disabled households as required by State law. A review of the City of Palo Alto’s zoning laws and permits was conducted as a part of comprehensive study of fair housing in Santa Clara County in 2002. This study was commissioned and funded by all CDBG jurisdictions in the county, including Palo Alto, to comply with HUD's requirement for cities to conduct analyses of impediments to fair housing. The report concluded that the cities' codes were in compliance with State fair housing standards, although the authors noted they did not observe how individual permits were processed. In addition, fair housing advocates interviewed for the study generally felt that local officials acted reasonably in processing applications for the siting of group homes and other zoning issues. An analysis of regulations and processes of the City of Palo Alto shows that the City conscientiously implements and monitors Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which are the regulations on access and adaptability for persons with physical disabilities. These regulations, which implement State law, apply to new construction of multiple-family units in buildings having three or more units. When there is a conflict between a Title 24 requirement and a zoning ordinance requirement (for example, the location of a disabled accessible ramp and a required building setback), the City attempts to identify the conflict early in the review process and resolves it with priority given to the Title 24 requirement. The approval is administrative, and there is no fee. Although there are no mandatory disabled accessibility requirements for single-family houses, the City assists physically disabled low-income homeowners with minor accessibility modifications to their homes by funding through the Home Access Program. The City's parking requirements ensure adequate disabled accessible parking. In addition, the City has the flexibility to reduce the overall parking requirement for a use with lower-than- normal demand, for example, in special needs housing where the occupants have fewer cars. The reduction can be approved through the Planning department, which is less stringent than the variance process used in many other cities for review of applications for parking reductions. Special Needs Housing Group homes for disabled people are allowed under Palo Alto’s code requirements as "residential care homes." Residential care homes are allowed in all residential zones including R- 1, R-2, RM-15, RM-30 and RM-40. Residential care homes with less than six units are allowed by right in all the above-mentioned zones. Residential Care Homes are allowed with a Chapter 4 157 Conditional Use Permit in PF (Public Facility) and GM (General Manufacturing) districts. Consistent with other use permits, a public hearing is required as part of the approval process. Emergency and Transitional Housing An emergency shelter is a facility that houses homeless persons on a limited, short-term basis. Under the City’s existing code, emergency homeless shelters are treated as Residential Care Facilities/Multi Family Housing. This is a permitted use in R-1, R-2, RMD, RM-15, RM-30, and RM-40 zones. Effective January 1, 2008, California SB 2 requires all jurisdictions to have a zoning district that permits at least one year-round emergency shelter without a Conditional Use Permit or any other discretionary permit requirements or the City must enter into a multi- jurisdictional agreement with neighboring jurisdictions to meet its emergency shelter need. Palo Alto currently does not meet this requirement and must identify a zone where emergency shelters are permitted by-right within one year from the adoption of the housing element. The City of Palo Alto has identified the portion of the Research, Office and Limited Manufacturing-Embarcadero (ROLM)(E) zone district east of Highway 101 as having potential sites to accommodate emergency shelters. This area is a light industrial zone, which contains such uses as office use, research facilities and light manufacturing. It is also accessible by transit, and there are retail support services located nearby. The identified area can accommodate a shelter large enough to have capacity for the City’s unmet homeless need. The City has an unmet need of 107 beds. This could translate into a shelter of 107 beds, or the need could be accommodated in two or more shelters of smaller size. Depending on the size of the site required, and other amenities provided in a homeless shelter, an adequately sized facility could be accommodated in this zone. Based on the need for 107 beds, it has been determined that a one-half acre site could accommodate the need for a shelter, or two shelters could be accommodated on smaller sites. There are several sites in this area which are one half acre or more. In addition, there are opportunities for site consolidation. The ROLM(E) district is also appropriate because the square footage costs of industrial or light manufacturing property is much less than residentially or commercial zoned parcels, making the emergency shelter use in this area more cost efficient. Also, there are existing buildings in this area which are of an appropriate size to be converted to an emergency shelter. Accessibility to the downtown from this area is available through the City’s free Palo Alto shuttle, which operates in the morning through the early evening throughout the work week. Transitional housing facilities may be configured as apartments, individual shared units, or dormitory facilities. SB 2 requires that local ordinances regulate transitional facilities in the same manner as comparable apartments or group living accommodations (e.g. convents, school dormitories, etc.). Facilities may be accessory to a public or quasi-public use such as a social service agency, religious assembly or institutional use, or other facilities operated by a nonprofit organization. In all cases, however, occupancy is for a specific term that must be more than six months. In contrast to supportive housing, it is linked to onsite or offsite services, and is occupied by a target special needs population such as low-income persons with mental disabilities, AIDS, substance abuse, or chronic health conditions. Services typically include assistance designed to meet the needs of the target population in retaining housing, living and working in the community, and/or improving health, and may include case management, mental Chapter 4 158 health treatment, and life skills. The City’s current Zoning Ordinance does not identify a separate zoning district where transitional or supportive housing are permitted uses. Instead, transitional housing is treated as Residential Care Facilities/Multi Family Housing and is a permitted use in the R-1, R-2, RMD, RM-15, RM-30, and RM-40 districts. Currently, the transitional housing demand of the City has been met through the services provided by the Opportunity Center for both individual adults and family households. Reasonable Accommodations Requests The City of Palo Alto is committed to accommodating people with disabilities. In compliance with the federal Fair Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (and implementing regulations), the requirements of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act, the City will make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford an otherwise qualified person with a disability equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling unit, including public and common use areas. The law requires the City to incur reasonable costs to accommodate applicants and residents. An accommodation is reasonable provided it does not impose undue financial and administrative burdens or constitute a fundamental alteration of the relevant housing program. This policy governs applicant and resident requests for accommodations with respect to the Below Market Rate (“BMR”) Housing Program administered by the City of Palo Alto (City) and/or PAHC Housing Services LLC (PAHC) as its designee. The policy conforms to the requirements of the federal Fair Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (and implementing regulations), and to the requirements of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and the Unruh Civil Rights Act, under which it is illegal to refuse to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services when such accommodations may be necessary to afford a person with a disability equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling unit, as well as public and common use areas. Zoning regulations may be a constraint to development or conversion of housing to make it suitable for persons with disabilities. Physical improvements needed to accommodate a person’s disability may consist of ramps, handrails elevators, lifts, or other physical improvements. Particularly when retrofitting existing housing, it may not be possible to build these improvements within the setbacks, lot coverage and other standards required in a specific zoning district. The City is proposing to amend the zoning code to provide a procedure which would allow a request for modification to these rules, standards and practices for siting, development and use of housing-related facilities to eliminate regulatory barriers and provide a person with a disability equal opportunity to housing of their choice. Building Codes and Development Regulations The State of California has adopted statewide, mandatory codes based on the International Code Council's (ICC) codes. As part of the code, the City is required to update its Building Code every three years to be consistent with the State updates. The local jurisdiction can adopt more stringent codes than required by the State. Other than some minor variations to the code updates, the City has adopted the State updates as issued. The City’s Building Codes are reasonable, Chapter 4 159 similar to the codes of neighboring jurisdictions, and would not adversely or hinder the construction of affordable housing. Chapter 5 160 CHAPTER 5 PAST ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND NEW HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS. 5.1 1999-2006 HOUSING PLAN ACCOMPLISHMENTS Progress in Meeting the 1999-2006 RHNA From 1999 to 2006, the period covered by the City’s previous Housing Element, Palo Alto successfully produced, or approved, 1,713 housing units affordable to various income groups. As shown in the table below these units represented 123 percent of the housing need that ABAG allocated to the City for the planning period. 1999-2006 Cycle’s Performance in Achieving RHNA Goal The 1,713 units that were approved, constructed and were already occupied or were ready for occupancy during the 1999-2006 planning period included more than twice (204 percent) the number of above moderate-income units ABAG allocated and 112 percent of the low-income need. However, the numbers allocated for very low and moderate income households were not achieved. Income Category 1999-2006 New Construction Need Actual New Construction Need Met in 1999-2006 Cycle* Percentage of Need Achieved in 1999- 2006 Cycle Very Low (0-50% of AMI)265 158 60% Low (51-80% of AMI)116 130 112% Moderate (81-120% of AMI)343 53 15% Above Moderate (over 120% of AMI)673 1,372 204% TOTAL UNITS 1,397 1,713 123% * Building Permits Issued in the cycle Source: City of Palo Alto, Chapter 5 161 Summary Evaluation of Past Accomplishments Under State Housing Element law, communities are required to assess the achievements under their adopted housing programs as part of their housing element update. These results should be quantified where possible, but may be qualitative where necessary. The City’s housing accomplishments during the 1999-2006 planning period are evaluated as part of the basis for developing appropriate policies and programs for the 2007-2014 planning period. A full account of the status in achieving the goals, policies and programs from the 1999-2006 planning period can be found in the Appendix of this section entitled 1999-2006 accomplishments matrix. As part of implementing the vision of the 1999-2006 Housing Element, the City provided funding for the following affordable housing projects that contributed to accomplishing the City’s RHNA goals: Oak Court Apartments Affordable Housing Project – deferred land loan assistance of $6.5 million and provided $1.9 million City loan for development costs for 53 units of very low- and low-income family-oriented rental apartments. Opportunity Center Facility Project – provided $750,000 project funding from City housing funds and $1.28 million in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for predevelopment and site acquisition for 88 units of permanent and transitional housing and a day use and service center for homeless adults and families. In 2004, the City of Palo Alto received $1,000,000 from the State Local Housing Trust Fund Program to fund the Palo Alto Family Apartments housing project on Alma Street. The City allocated that funding in conjunction with a $1.5 million City funding match to a 50 unit project for very low income families. The project received City entitlements in 2010. In 2006, the City used $1.15 million in CDBG funds to assist a non-profit acquire a 10 unit apartment complex for low income residents. The City also furthered its commitment to providing affordable housing through: Updating its Below Market Rate (BMR) Program. In 2004, the City initiated a study of its BMR Program to evaluate how the program can be more effective in helping the City achieve affordable housing objectives and increase production of affordable owner and rental units. As a result of that study, the City Council approved BMR Program changes in 2008 that improved the current BMR program by increasing the efficiency of program administration and strengthened the BMR requirement to increase overall affordable housing production. Adopting a BMR ordinance. In 2008, the City codified in the zoning code its Below Market Rate Program previously found in the Housing Element to more effectively govern and define its inclusionary housing program. Chapter 5 162 Response to AB 1233 Of the City parcels that were proposed to be rezoned in Program H-14, the City rezoned all but one parcel as specified in the City’s 1999-2006 Housing Element. The total estimated yield of the one unzoned parcel is 15 units. Therefore, the City’s unmet need is 15 units. In the Draft Housing Element in Appendix 5.3, (1999-2006 Accomplishments Matrix), the City originally reported for Program H14, that it had three unzoned parcels, rather than one. The yield of the two additional parcels originally reported to be unzoned for housing was estimated to be 20 units. Based on further research, the City has determined that the two previously reported unzoned parcels were in fact rezoned. The City will update Appendix 5.3 to reflect this. The explanation of the zoning history of the two parcels is set forth below. At the time of Housing Element adoption in 2002, the City was in the process of adopting the South of Forest Avenue Coordinated Area Plan, Phase 2 (SOFA2) in which two of the parcels are located. The parcels were rezoned from Commercial Downtown-C (community) or CD-S (service), which allowed for mixed use development, to the SOFA 2 land use designation of Residential Transition-50 (RT-50) when SOFA 2 was adopted in December 2003. The RT-50 zone also allows for mixed-use residential developments. The difference between CD and RT- 50 zoning is that CD density is measured by units per acre while RT-50 determines residential density by Floor Area Ratio (FAR). In addition, if it is a proposed residential rental development, the RT-50 zone provides a higher FAR to achieve a more dense development. However, because the City did not rezone the one parcel within the planning period, the City must meet the site suitability requirements of Government Code Section 65583.2 [AB2348]. To fulfill the requirements of AB 2348, the City has selected 3877 El Camino Real as the designated site to accommodate the 15 “carry over” units. This .75 acre site is a mix of Service Commercial (CS) and RM-30 zoning. Approximately 30% of the site (.22 acres), the area fronting El Camino Real, is covered by the CS zone district. CS zoning allows for mixed use development with a maximum density of 30 units. Using the City’s realistic capacity of 20 units per acre, the CS portion could have a capacity of 4 units. The remaining .53 acres of the parcel is zoned RM-30, which at 20 units per acre, could provide 11 residential units. The site is adjacent to a .28 acre, vacant RM-30 parcel (405 Curtner Avenue) that is currently being used as a parking lot. 405 Curtner Avenue is also on the City HIS list which could provide for the potential of a lot merger to achieve a greater yield of housing. Below is a table showing the AB 2348 requirements with an explanation of how the site at 3877 El Camino Real meets each requirement: AB 2348 Requirement 3877 El Camino Real 1. Must meet the 100 percent shortfall The City’s shortfall is 15 units. This site accommodates the entire shortfall of 15 units. 2. The zoning allows owner-occupied and rental multifamily residential uses “by right” Both the RM-30 and CS zoning allows for residential uses by right. The codes do not differentiate by tenure. 3. The site provides development that permits at least 16 units per site based on minimum density Based on the realistic capacity estimate of 20 units per acre, the site can accommodate 15 units. However, as described in page 75 of the draft Housing Element, the realistic capacity is much more conservative than the densities Chapter 5 163 achieved in built or approved developments. The average density of those developments is almost 28 units per acre. Therefore, this site could easily accommodate an additional unit to meet the 16 unit per site requirement. 4. Suburban and metropolitan jurisdictions must provide sites that allow at least 20 dwelling units per acre. Both the RM-30 and CS zoning have a maximum zoning density of 30 units per acre. However, a realistic capacity of 20 units per acre is used to estimate the potential yield for this site. 5. At least 50 percent of the low and very low-income need be accommodated on sites designated exclusively residential uses Seventy percent of the site is zoned RM-30 thus providing more than half of the unaccommodated need in exclusive residential zoning with a density of greater than 20 units per acre. 5.2 HOUSING GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS This section establishes the Vision, Goals, Policies, and Programs for the 2007-2014 planning period. It includes programs from the prior planning period (see Appendix) that have been revised as appropriate to improve the success of the program during this planning period. Vision Our housing and neighborhoods shall enhance the livable human environment for all residents, be accessible to civic and community services and sustain our natural resources. Chapter 5 151 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS H1 GOAL ENSURE THE PRESERVATION OF THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF THE CITY’S RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS H1.1 POLICY Promote the rehabilitation of deteriorating or substandard residential properties using sustainable and energy conserving approaches. H1.1.1 PROGRAM Continue the citywide property maintenance, inspection and enforcement program. Five-Year Objective: Continue to provide services which promote rehabilitation of substandard housing. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Code Enforcement Time Frame: Ongoing H1.1.2 PROGRAM Explore creating an amnesty program to legitimize existing illegal second units where appropriate and consistent with maintaining the character and quality of life of existing neighborhoods. The granting of amnesty should be contingent on compliance with minimum building, housing, and other applicable code standards and on maintaining the affordability of the second unit to very low, low or moderate-income households. Five-Year Objective: Amend the zoning code to create a second unit amnesty program to extend the life of existing affordable units. Funding Source: General Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Conduct a study within one year of adoption of Housing Element to determine how many illegal second units exist and what incentives are needed to encourage legitimizing illegal second units. H1.1.3 PROGRAM Provide incentives to developers such as reduced fees and flexible development standards to encourage the preservation of existing rental cottages and duplexes currently located in the R-1 and R-2 residential areas. Five-Year Objective: Preserve 10 rental cottages and duplexes. Funding Source: City Housing Fund Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Explore incentives within one year of Housing Element adoption H1.2 POLICY Support efforts to preserve multifamily housing units in existing neighborhoods. Chapter 5 152 H1.2.1 PROGRAM When there is a loss of rental housing due to subdivision or condominium approvals, the project shall require 25 percent BMR units. Five-Year Objective: Provide 10 additional affordable housing units on sites where rental housing will be lost. Funding Source: NA Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H1.3 POLICY Encourage community involvement in the maintenance and enhancement of public and private properties and adjacent rights-of-way in residential neighborhoods. H1.3.1 PROGRAM Create community volunteer days and park cleanups, plantings, or similar events that promote neighborhood enhancement and conduct City- sponsored cleanup campaigns for public and private properties. Five-Year Objective: Coordinate with the City’s waste and disposal hauler to conduct a cleanup campaign once a year to promote neighborhood clean-up. Funding Source: City Housing Funds Responsible Agency: Public Works Department Time Frame: Ongoing H1.4 POLICY Assure that new developments provide appropriate transitions from higher density development to single family and low density residential districts in order to preserve neighborhood character. STRATEGIES FOR NEW HOUSING H2 GOAL SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSING NEAR SCHOOLS, TRANSIT, PARKS, SHOPPING, EMPLOYMENT AND CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS H2.1 POLICY Identify and implement a variety of strategies to increase housing density and diversity, including mixed use development, near community services, including a range of unit types. Emphasize and encourage the development of affordable housing to support the City’s fair share of the regional housing needs. H2.1.1 PROGRAM Consider amending the zoning code to allow high density residential in mixed use projects in commercial areas within half a mile of fixed rail stations and to allow limited exceptions to the 50-foot height limit for Housing Inventory Sites within a quarter mile of fixed rail stations to encourage higher density residential development. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for a diverse range of housing types near fixed rail stations. Chapter 5 153 Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Consider zoning code amendments within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.1.2 PROGRAM Allow increased residential densities and mixed use development only where adequate urban services and amenities, including, traffic capacity, are available. Five-Year Objective: Make sure that adequate services are available when considering increased residential densities. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H2.1.3 PROGRAM Amend the zoning code to increase the minimum density of the RM-15 Zoning District to at least eight dwelling units per acre consistent with the multi-family land use designation under the Comprehensive Plan. Five-Year Objective: To provide opportunities for up to10 additional dwelling units on properties zoned RM-15. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.1.4 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage the development of smaller, more affordable housing units, including units for seniors, such as reduced parking requirements for units less than 900 square feet and other flexible development standards. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for 75 smaller, more affordable housing units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.1.5 PROGRAM Use sustainable neighborhood development criteria to enhance connectivity, walkability and access to amenities and to support housing diversity. Five-Year Objective: Increase connectivity and walkability in new development. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H2.1.6 PROGRAM Encourage density bonuses and/or concessions including allowing greater concessions for 100% affordable housing developments consistent with the Residential Density Bonus Ordinance. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for 100% affordable housing developments. Chapter 5 154 Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H2.1.7 PROGRAM Amend the zoning code to develop a small residential unit overlay district to allow higher densities in areas designated Pedestrian Transit Oriented Development (PTOD). Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for smaller residential units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one-year of Housing Element adoption H2.1.9 PROGRAM Explore developing a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program to encourage higher density housing in appropriate locations. Five-Year Objective: Create opportunities for higher density housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Consider program within two years of Housing Element adoption H2.1.10 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage the consolidation of smaller lots identified as Housing Inventory Sites, such as development review streamlining, reduction in required parking for smaller units, setback modifications, or graduated density when consolidated lots are over one-half acre. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for lot consolidation to increase availability of suitable sites for affordable housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.1.11 PROGRAM Promote redevelopment of underutilized sites and lot consolidation by providing information about potential housing sites on the City’s website, including the Housing Sites Inventory and information about financial resources available through City housing programs. Five-Year Objective: Provide information to developers about potential housing sites and opportunities for lot consolidation. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Post information on website within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.2 POLICY Continue to support the redevelopment of suitable lands for mixed uses containing housing to encourage compact, infill development, optimize the use of existing urban services and support transit use. Chapter 5 155 H2.2.1 PROGRAM Adopt an ordinance for density bonus concessions to promote more flexible concessions and incentives to projects that propose smaller units at a higher density, to encourage development of suitable housing sites currently planned and zoned for non-residential use with mixed use projects to contribute to the City’s fair share of the region’s housing needs. Five-Year Objective: Increase opportunities for higher density development by providing density bonus incentives. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Density Bonus Ordinance is being considered by the Planning Commission in January 2013; Council to consider adoption in early 2013 H2.2.2 PROGRAM Implement an incentive program within a year of Housing Element adoption for small properties identified as a Housing Inventory Site to encourage housing production on those sites. The incentive eliminates Site and Design Review if the project meets the following criteria: The project has 9 residential units or fewer A residential density of 20 dwelling units per acre or higher Maximum unit size of 900 sq. ft. Five-Year Objective: Streamline processing for identified Housing Inventory Sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Adopt program within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.2.3 PROGRAM Work with Stanford University to identify sites suitable for housing that may be located in the Stanford Research Park and compatible with surrounding uses. Five-Year Objective: Identify sites suitable for housing to accommodate up additional housing units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Identify sites within two years of Housing Element adoption 2.2.4 PROGRAM Use coordinated area plans and other tools to develop regulations that support the development of housing above and among commercial uses. Five-Year Objective: Explore additional opportunities to encourage housing in commercial areas. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing 2.2.5 PROGRAM Revise the Zoning Ordinance to increase the density of up to 20 units per acre on CN-zoned parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites. Chapter 5 156 Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for affordable units on CN zoned Housing Inventory Sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend zoning code within one year of Housing Element adoption. 2.2.6 PROGRAM Revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow for residential uses with the density of up to 20 units per acre on GM parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for affordable units on GM zoned Housing Inventory Sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend zoning code within one year of Housing Element adoption. 2.2.7 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage development on and consolidation of smaller lots, such as development review streamlining, reduction in required parking for smaller units, setback modifications, or graduated density when consolidated lots are over one-half acre. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for lot consolidation to increase availability of suitable sites for affordable housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of adoption of Housing Element H2.2.8 PROGRAM Rezone property at 595 Maybell Avenue from the RM-15 and R-2 zone districts to the PC zone district to allow for development of 60 units of extremely low to low income senior affordable rental housing units and 15 market rate units. Five-Year Objective: Provide an opportunity for development of 60 units affordable to extremely low and low income senior residents and 15 market rate units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.2.9 PROGRAM To maintain adequate sites are available throughout the planning period to accommodate the City’s RHNA, on a project basis, pursuant to Government Code Section 65863, the City will monitor available residential capacity and evaluate development applications on Housing Inventory Sites in mixed use zoning districts. Should an approval of development result in a reduction of capacity below the residential capacity needed to accommodate the remaining need for lower-income households, the City will identify and zone sufficient sites to Chapter 5 157 accommodate the shortfall. Five-Year Objective: Maintain Residential Capacity of sites suitable for lower income households. Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing AFFORDABLE HOUSING H3 GOAL MEET UNDERSERVED HOUSING NEEDS AND PROVIDE COMMUNITY RESOURCES TO SUPPORT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS H3.1 POLICY Encourage, foster and preserve diverse housing opportunities for very-low, low, and moderate income households. H3.1.1 PROGRAM Amend the City’s BMR ordinance to lower the BMR requirement threshold from projects of five or more units to three or more units and to modify the BMR rental section to be consistent with recent court rulings related to inclusionary rental housing. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for 4 additional BMR units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend BMR Ordinance within one year of Housing Element adoption. H3.1.2 PROGRAM Implement the City’s “Below Market Rate” (BMR) Program ordinance to reflect the City’s policy of requiring: a) At least 15 percent of all housing units in projects must be provided at below market rates to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. Projects on sites of five acres or larger must set aside 20 percent of all units as BMR units. Projects that cause the loss of existing rental housing may need to provide a 25 percent component as detailed in Program H 1.2.1. BMR units must be comparable in quality, size and mix to the other units in the development. b) Initial sales price for at least two-thirds of the BMR units must be affordable to a household making 80 to 100 percent of the Santa Clara County median income. The initial sales prices of the remaining BMR units may be set at higher levels affordable to households earning between 100 to 120 percent of the County’s median income. For the projects with a 25 percent BMR component, four-fifths of the BMR units must be affordable to households in the 80 to 100 percent of median range, and one-fifth may be in the higher price range of between 100 to 120 percent of the County’s median income. In all cases, the sales price should be sufficient to cover the estimated cost to the developer of constructing the BMR unit, including financing, but excluding land, marketing, off-site improvements, and profit. Chapter 5 158 c) If the City determines that on-site BMR units are not feasible, off-site units acceptable to the City, or vacant land determined to be suitable for affordable housing, construction, may be provided instead. Off- site units should normally be new units, but the City may accept rehabilitated existing units when significant improvement in the City’s housing stock is demonstrated. d) If the City determines that no other alternative is feasible, a cash payment to the City’ Residential Housing Fund, in lieu of providing BMR units or land, may be accepted. The in-lieu payment for projects subject to the basic 15 percent BMR requirement shall be 7.5 percent of the greater of the actual sales price or fair market value of each unit. For projects subject to the 20 percent requirement, the rate is 10 percent; for projects with a 25 percent requirement, (as described in Program 1.2.1 regarding the loss of rental housing) the rate is 12.5 percent. The fee on for-sale projects will be paid upon the sale of each market unit in the project. e) When the BMR requirement results in a fractional unit, an in-lieu payment to the City’s Residential Housing Fund may be made for the fractional unit instead of providing an actual BMR unit. The in-lieu fee percentage rate shall be the same as that otherwise required for the project (7.5 percent, 10 percent, or 12.5 percent). The fee on for-sale projects will be paid upon the sale of each market unit in the project. Larger projects of 30 or more units must provide a whole BMR unit for any fractional unit of one-half (0.50) or larger; an in-lieu fee may be paid, or equivalent alternatives provided, when the fractional unit is less than one-half. f) Within fifteen days of entering into a BMR agreement with the City for a project, the developer may request a determination that the BMR requirement, taken together with any inclusionary housing incentives, as applied the project, would legally constitute a taking of property without just compensation under the Constitution of the United States or of the State of California. The burden of proof shall be upon the developer, who shall provide such information as is reasonably requested by the City, and the initial determination shall be made by the Director of Planning and Community Environment. The procedures for the determination shall generally be those described in Chapter 18.90 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, including the right of appeal to the City council under Chapter 18.93, or such other procedures as may be adopted in a future BMR ordinance. Notice of the hearing shall be give by publication but need not be sent to nearby property owners. If the City determines that the application of the BMR requirement as applied to the project would constitute a taking of property without just compensation, then the BMR agreement for the project shall be modified, reduced or waived to the extent necessary to prevent such a taking. Chapter 5 159 g) Consider allowing smaller BMR units than the market rate units if the developer provides more than the required BMR amount in the R-1 Zoning district for new single family residential subdivisions subject to compliance with appropriate development standards. h) Revise BMR policy language to clarify the City’s BMR program priorities in producing affordable housing units including exploring the option of requiring land dedication as the default option on sites of three or more acres. i) Evaluate revising the method of calculating the number of required BMR units by basing the number of BMR units required on the maximum density allowable on the site instead of the total number of proposed units in the development. j) Conduct a nexus study to identify the impacts of market rate housing and the need for affordable housing and develop BMR rental policies based on the results of the study. Five-Year Objective: Provide 10 affordable units through implementation of the City’s BMR program. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing – implementation of existing program H3.1.3 PROGRAM Continue implementation of a Below Market Rate (BMR) Program Emergency Fund to prevent the loss of BMR units and to provide emergency loans for BMR unit owners to maintain and rehabilitate their units. Five-Year Objective: Use the BMR Program Emergency Fund to prevent the loss of up to 2 affordable units. Funding Source: BMR Emergency Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.4 PROGRAM Consider expansion of the BMR Program Emergency Fund to provide financial assistance to help BMR homeowners maintain and rehabilitate older BMR units. Five-Year Objective: Assist in maintenance and rehabilitation of 4 older BMR units. Funding Source: BMR Emergency Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Expand Program within two years of Housing Element adoption H3.1.5 PROGRAM Preserve affordable housing stock by monitoring compliance, providing tenant education, and seeking other sources of funds for affordable Chapter 5 160 housing developments at risk of market rate conversions. The City will continue to renew existing funding sources supporting rehabilitation and maintenance activities. Five-Year Objective: Prevent conversion of affordable housing to market rate and renew funding sources for rehabilitation and maintenance of housing stock. Funding Source City, CDBG funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.6 PROGRAM Encourage the use of flexible development standards including floor area ratio limits, creative architectural solutions and natural resource conservation, in the design of projects with a substantial BMR component. Five-Year Objective: Increase opportunities for BMR development through use of flexible development standards. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.7 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to allow Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units in commercial and high density residential zoning districts subject to development standards that would encourage the construction of the maximum number of units consistent with the goals of preserving the character of adjacent neighborhoods. Sites that have access to community services and public transportation for SRO residents are highly desired. Five-Year Objective: Provide affordable efficiency units on appropriate sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend the Zoning Code within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.1.8 PROGRAM Require developers of employment-generating commercial and industrial developments to contribute to the supply of low- and moderate-income housing through the provision of commercial in- lieu fees as prescribed in a nexus impact fee study. Five-Year Objective: Generate in-lieu fees to contribute toward the creation of low and moderate income housing. Funding Source: City Housing Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Continue to update the commercial in-lieu fee on an annual basis. H3.1.9 PROGRAM Ensure that the Zoning Code permits innovative housing types, such as co- housing, and provides flexible development standards that will allow such housing to be built provided the character of the neighborhoods in which they are proposed to be located is maintained. Chapter 5 161 Five-Year Objective: Review the Zoning Code and determine appropriate amendments to allow innovative housing types with flexible development standards. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Consider changes to the Zoning Code within two years of Housing Element adoption H3.1.10 PROGRAM Adopt a revised density bonus ordinance that allows up to a maximum zoning increase of 35 percent in density and grants up to three concessions or incentives. The density bonus ordinance will meet State standards for the provision of housing units for very low- and lower-income renters, seniors and moderate-income condominium buyers in compliance with Government Code Section 65915, et seq. Five-Year Objective: To provide opportunities for increased density as outlined in State law. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Density Bonus Ordinance is being considered by the Planning Commission in January 2013; Council to consider adoption in early 2013 H3.1.11 PROGRAM Recognize the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park as providing low- and moderate income housing opportunities. Any redevelopment of the site must be consistent with the City’s Mobile Home Park Conversion Ordinance adopted to preserve the existing units. To the extent feasible, the City will seek appropriate local, state and federal funding to assist in the preservation and maintenance of the existing units in the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park. Five-Year Objective: Preserve the 120 mobile home units in the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park as a low and moderate income housing resource. Funding Source: City, State and Federal Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.12 PROGRAM Continue enforcing the Condominium Conversion Ordinance. Five-Year Objective: Maintain the City’s rental housing stock. Funding Source: N/A Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.13 PROGRAM Annually monitor the City’s progress in the construction or conversion of housing for all income levels including the effectiveness of housing production in mixed use developments. Five-Year Objective: Provide information on the effectiveness of City programs. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Chapter 5 162 Time Frame: Provide annual reports H3.1.14 PROGRAM Evaluate the provisions of the Below Market Rate (BMR) Program to determine if additional incentives are needed to encourage development of housing given current market conditions. Five-Year Objective: Engage in discussions with the development community and determine if additional incentives are needed to improve the BMR Program. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Evaluate the Program within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.1.15 PROGRAM When using its Housing Development funds for residential projects, the City shall give a strong preference to those developments which serve extremely low-income (ELI) households. Five-Year Objective: Provide funding opportunities for development of housing for Extremely Low Income (ELI) households. Funding Source: City Housing Development funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.16 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to provide additional incentives to developers who provide extremely-low income (ELI) housing units, above and beyond what is required by the Below Market Rate (BMR) program, such as reduced parking requirements for smaller units, reduced landscaping requirements and reduced fees. Five-Year Objective: Provide incentives for development of housing for Extremely Low Income (ELI) households. Funding Source: City Housing funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.1.17 PROGRAM Any affordable development deemed a high risk at market rate conversion, within two years of the expiration of the affordability requirements, the City will contact the owner and explore the possibility of extending the affordability of the development. Five-Year Objective: To protect those affordable developments deemed a high risk to converting to market rate. Funding Source: City Housing funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.2 POLICY Reduce the cost of housing by continuing to promote energy efficiency, resource management, and conservation for new and existing housing. Chapter 5 163 H3.2.1 PROGRAM Continue to assist very low-income households in reducing their utility bills through the Utilities Residential Rate Assistance Program (RAP). Five-Year Objective: Provide assistance to with utility bills to 10 low income households. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Palo Alto Utilities Department Time Frame: Ongoing H3.2.2 PROGRAM Use existing agency programs such as Senior Home Repair to provide rehabilitation assistance to very low- and low-income households. Five-Year Objective: Provide rehabilitation assistance to 10 very low and low-income households. Funding Source: CDBG & General Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.3 POLICY Support the reduction of governmental and regulatory constraints and advocate for the production of affordable housing. H3.3.1 PROGRAM Where appropriate and feasible, require all City departments to expedite processes and allow waivers of development fees as a means of promoting the development of affordable housing. Five-Year Objective: Continue to reduce processing time and costs for affordable housing projects. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: All City Departments Time Frame: Ongoing, continue implementation upon adoption of Housing Element H3.3.3 PROGRAM Continue to exempt permanently affordable housing units from any infrastructure impact fees that may be adopted by the City. Five-Year Objective: Reduce costs for affordable housing projects. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.3.4 PROGRAM Promote legislative changes and funding for programs that subsidize the acquisition, rehabilitation, and operation of rental housing by housing assistance organizations, nonprofit developers, and for-profit developers. Five-Year Objective: Continue as an active member of the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California to promote legislative changes and funding for programs relating to housing. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, City Manager Time Frame: Ongoing Chapter 5 164 H3.3.5 PROGRAM Support the development and preservation of group homes and supported living facilities for persons with special housing needs by assisting local agencies and nonprofit organizations in the construction or rehabilitation of new facilities for this population. Five-Year Objective: Review existing development regulations and amend the Zoning Code to reduce regulatory obstacles to this type of housing. Funding Source: City & CDBG Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend Zoning Code within one year of Housing Element adoption. H3.3.6 PROGRAM Continue to participate in the Santa Clara County Homeless Collaborative as well as work with adjacent jurisdictions to develop additional shelter opportunities, and Five-Year Objective: Continue City staff participation as members of the Collaborative’s CDBG and Home Program Coordinators Group. Funding Source: City, CDBG & HOME funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, City Council Time Frame: Ongoing H3.3.7 PROGRAM Continue to participate with and support agencies addressing homelessness. Five-Year Objective: Continue City staff participation in prioritizing funding for County-wide programs. Funding Source: City, CDBG & HOME funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, City Council Time Frame: Ongoing H3.3.8 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to allow transitional and supportive housing by right in all multifamily zone districts which allow residential uses only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone. Five-Year Objective: Provide appropriately zoned sites for transitional and supportive housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.4 POLICY Pursue funding for the acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of housing that is affordable to very low, low, and moderate-income households. H3.4.1 PROGRAM Maintain a high priority for the acquisition of new housing sites near public transit and services, the acquisition and rehabilitation of existing housing, and the provision for housing-related services for affordable housing. Seek funding from all appropriate state and federal programs whenever they are available to support the development or rehabilitation Chapter 5 165 of housing for very low, low, or moderate-income households Five-Year Objective: Allocate CDBG funding to acquire and rehabilitate housing for very low, low, or moderate income households. Funding Source: CDBG, State Local Housing Trust Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.4.2 PROGRAM Support and expand local funding sources including the City’s Housing Development Fund, Housing Trust of Santa Clara County, CDBG Program, County of Santa Clara’s Mortgage Credit Certificate Program (MCC) or similar program. Continue to explore other mechanisms to generate revenues to increase the supply of low- and moderate-income housing. Five-Year Objective: Increase the supply of affordable housing stock. Funding Source: City Housing Development Fund, Housing Trust of Santa Clara County, CDBG, Santa Clara County MCC Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.4.3 PROGRAM Periodically review the housing nexus formula as required under Chapter 16.47 of the Municipal Code to fully reflect the impact of new jobs on housing demand and cost. Five-Year Objective: Continue to evaluate the housing nexus formula and adjust the required impact fees to account for the housing demand from new development. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.4.4 PROGRAM The City will work with affordable housing developers to pursue opportunities to acquire, rehabilitate and convert existing multi-family developments to long term affordable housing units to contribute to the City’s fair share of the region’s housing needs. Five-Year Objective: Identify potential sites for acquisition and conversion and provide this information to developers. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Identify sites within one year of Housing Element adoption. H3.5 POLICY Support the provision of emergency shelter, transitional housing and ancillary services to address homelessness. H3.5.1 PROGRAM Enter into discussions with local churches participating in the City’s year round Hotel de Zink emergency shelter program to establish a permanent Chapter 5 166 emergency shelter in each church within a year of Housing Element adoption. Five-Year Objective: To determine interest from local churches in establishing permanent emergency shelters. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Enter into discussions within two years of Housing Element adoption H3.5.2 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to allow emergency shelters by right with appropriate performance standards to accommodate the City’s unmet need for unhoused residents within an overlay of the ROLM zone district located east of Highway 101. Five-Year Objective: Provide appropriately zoned sites for emergency shelters. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.6 POLICY Support the creation of workforce housing for City and school district employees if feasible. H3.6.1 PROGRAM Conduct a nexus study to evaluate the creation of workforce housing for City and school district employees. Five-Year Objective: Create the opportunity for up to 5 units of workforce housing. Funding Source: City of Palo Alto Commercial Housing Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Conduct study within two years of Housing Element adoption. HOUSING DISCRIMINATION H4 GOAL PROMOTE AN ENVIRONMENT FREE OF DISCRIMINATION AND THE BARRIERS THAT PREVENT CHOICE IN HOUSING. H4.1 POLICY Support programs and agencies that seek to eliminate housing discrimination. H4.1.1 PROGRAM Work with appropriate state and federal agencies to ensure that fair housing laws are enforced. Five-Year Objective: Continue to coordinate with state and federal agencies to support programs to eliminate housing discrimination. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H4.1.2 PROGRAM Continue to support groups that provide fair housing services, such as Chapter 5 167 Mid-Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing. Five-Year Objective: Continue to provide financial support through CDBG funding for fair housing services such as Mid-Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing and Project Sentinel. Funding Source: CDBG funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H4.1.3 PROGRAM Continue the efforts of the Human Relations Commission to combat discrimination in rental housing, including mediation of problems between landlords and tenants. Five-Year Objective: Continue to provide mediation services for rental housing discrimination cases. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Human Relations Commission Time Frame: Ongoing H4.1.4 PROGRAM Continue implementation of the City’s ordinances and state law prohibiting discrimination in renting or leasing housing based on age, parenthood, pregnancy or the potential or actual presence of a minor child. Develop written procedures describing how Palo Alto will process and treat reasonable accommodation requests for projects proposing housing for special needs households. Five-Year Objective: Implement existing ordinances regarding discrimination and develop reasonable accommodation procedures. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Implementation – Ongoing; Establish reasonable accommodation procedure within one year of Housing Element adoption H4.1.5 PROGRAM Continue the City’s role in coordinating the actions of various support groups that are seeking to eliminate housing discrimination and in providing funding and other support for these groups to disseminate fair housing information in Palo Alto, including information on referrals to pertinent investigative or enforcement agencies in the case of fair housing complaints. Five-Year Objective: Continue to provide funding and other support for these groups to disseminate fair housing information in Palo Alto. Funding Source: City Funds, Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) Responsible Agency: Office of Human Services Time Frame: Ongoing H4.1.6 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to provide individuals with disabilities reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, practices and procedures that may be necessary to ensure reasonable access to housing. The Chapter 5 168 purpose of this program is to provide a process for individuals with disabilities to make requests for reasonable accommodation in regard to relief from the various land use, zoning, or building laws, rules, policies, practices and/or procedures of the City. Five-Year Objective: Allow for reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities in interpreting land use regulations. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Amend the Zoning Code within one year of Housing Element adoption H4.1.7 PROGRAM Continue to implement the “Action Plan” of the City of Palo Alto’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consolidated Plan or its successor documents. Five-Year Objective: Provide for increased use and support of tenant/landlord educational mediation opportunities as called for in the CDBG Action Plan. Funding Source: CDBG funds, General Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H4.2 POLICY Support housing that incorporates facilities and services to meet the health care, transit, and social service needs of households with special needs, including seniors and persons with disabilities. H4.2.1 PROGRAM Ensure that the Zoning Code facilitates the construction of housing that provides services for special needs households and provides flexible development standards for special service housing that will allow such housing to be built with access to transit and community services while preserving the character of the neighborhoods in which they are proposed to be located. Five-Year Objective: Evaluate the Zoning Code and develop flexible development standards for special service housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Evaluate the Zoning Code within one year of Housing Element adoption H4.2.2 PROGRAM Work with the San Andreas Regional Center to implement an outreach program that informs families in Palo Alto about housing and services available for persons with developmental disabilities. The program could include the development of an informational brochure, including information on services on the City’s website, and providing housing- related training for individuals/families through workshops. Five-year objective: Provide information regarding housing to families of persons with developmental disabilities. Chapter 5 169 Funding Source: General Fund Responsibility: Planning and Community Environment Time frame: Develop outreach program within two years of adoption of the Housing Element. SUSTAINABILITY IN HOUSING H5 GOAL REDUCE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF NEW AND EXISTING HOUSING. H5.1 POLICY Reduce long term energy cost and improve the efficiency and environmental performance of new and existing homes. H5.1.1 PROGRAM Periodically report to the City on the status and progress of implementing the City’s Green Building Ordinance, intended to improve indoor air quality and assess the environmental performance and efficiency of homes in the following areas: - Greenhouse gas emissions - Energy use - Water use (indoor and outdoor) - Material efficiency - Stormwater runoff - Alternative transportation - Site preservation Five-Year Objective: Prepare reports evaluating the progress of implementing the City’s Green Building Ordinance. Funding Source: City funds, Development fees Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Building Division Time Frame: Ongoing H5.1.2 PROGRAM Continue providing support to staff and public (including architects, owners, developers and contractors) through training and technical assistance in the areas listed under Program H5.1.1. Five-Year Objective: Provide educational information regarding the City’s Green Building Ordinance. Funding Source: City funds, Development fees Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Building Division Time Frame: Ongoing H5.1.3 PROGRAM Participate in regional planning efforts to ensure that the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets areas that support sustainability by reducing congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. Five-Year Objective: Provide a regional framework for sustainability in creating new housing opportunities. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Chapter 5 170 Time Frame: Ongoing H5.1.4 PROGRAM Review Federal, State, and regional programs encouraging the improvement of environmental performance and efficiency in construction of buildings and incorporate appropriate programs into Palo Alto’s policies, programs and outreach efforts. Five-Year Objective: Continue to update regulations for environmental sustainability. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Public Works & Utilities Time Frame: Ongoing H5.1.5 PROGRAM Enhance and support a proactive public outreach program to encourage Palo Alto residents to conserve resources and to share ideas about conservation. Five-Year Objective: Provide up to date information for residents regarding conservation through educational brochures available at City Hall and posted on the City’s website. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Public Works & Utilities Time Frame: Ongoing H5.1.6 PROGRAM Provide financial subsidies, recognition, or other incentives to new and existing home owners or developers to achieve performance or efficiency levels beyond minimum requirements. Five-Year Objective: Establish a program to recognize home owners and developers who achieve incorporate sustainable features beyond what is required by the Green Building Ordinance. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Building Division Time Frame: Establish program within two years of Housing Element adoption Chapter 5 171 APPENDIX 5.3 1999-2006 ACCOMPLISHMENTS MATRIX HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES Goal H-1: A Supply of Affordable and Market Rate Housing That Meets Palo Alto’s Share of Regional Housing Needs. POLICY H-1: Meet community and neighborhood needs as the supply of housing is increased. Ensure the preservation of the unique character of the City’s existing neighborhoods. POLICY H-2: Identify and implement a variety of strategies to increase housing density and diversity in appropriate locations. Emphasize and encourage the development of affordable and attainable housing. Program Accomplishments PROGRAM H-1: Increase housing density immediately surrounding commercial areas and particularly near transit stations by either increasing allowed densities or encouraging development at the higher end of the existing density range for sites within 2,000 feet of an existing or planned transit station or along two major transit corridors, El Camino Real and San Antonio Road, wherever appropriate. Progress: The City has allowed increased housing density immediately surrounding commercial areas and particularly near transit stations by either increasing allowed densities or encouraging development at the higher end of the existing density range for sites within 2,000 feet of existing or planned transit corridors, El Camino Real and San Antonio Road. Effectiveness: This program has had some success. For example, the City approved the development of a 60-unit affordable housing project on a .7 acre site near Caltrain Station resulting in 20 units more than the 40 units allowed by the existing land use designation. Appropriateness: This program has been modified to encourage higher density housing in mixed use projects near transit stations. PROGRAM H-2: Encourage development densities at the higher end of allowed density ranges in multiple family zones by using methods such as preferential or priority Progress: The City provides opportunities for higher density housing development; however, preferential or priority processing and application fee reductions are not being provided. Chapter 5 172 processing and application fee reductions for projects that propose development at the higher end of a site’s allowed density range and that provide affordable housing in excess of mandatory BMR program requirements. Consider increasing minimum density requirements in multiple family zones as well as in all Comprehensive Plan land use designations that permit housing. Effectiveness: In order for the program to be effective, minimum density requirements must be implemented. Appropriateness: The program has been modified to encourage higher density residential development in mixed use projects near transit. Minimum density requirements were evaluated and rejected by Council. PROGRAM H-3: Encourage the conversion of non-residential lands to residential use to both increase the supply of housing, particularly affordable housing, and decrease the potential for the creation of new jobs that exacerbate the need for new housing. Land use and development applications that propose the conversion of non- residential land to residential or mixed use development will be given preferential or priority processing to encourage such conversion. Progress: Conversions of non-residential land to residential use were initially encouraged to both increase the supply of housing, particularly affordable housing and decrease the potential for the creation of new jobs that exacerbate the need for new housing. However, due to concerns relating to the potential loss of commercial establishments and economic development, the City Council modified this direction and instead has supported only commercial/residential mixed use development on non- residential lands. No preferential or priority processing is given on land use and development applications that proposed the conversion of non-residential land to mixed use development. Effectiveness: Given Palo Alto’s economic need for retention of non- residential land uses, the program was modified to encourage mixed-use development. Appropriateness: This program has been modified to promote mixed-used development to increase housing opportunities in appropriate locations. PROGRAM H-4: Allow increased residential densities and mixed use development only where adequate urban services and amenities can be including traffic capacity. Progress: The City has allowed increased residential and mixed use development where adequate urban services and amenities can be provided. A number of development projects along El Camino and near downtown were the beneficiary of this program. Effectiveness: This program is effective at increasing housing density and diversity in appropriate locations. Chapter 5 173 Appropriateness: The concept of allowing increased density and mixed use development in appropriate locations is retained in the updated Housing Element. PROGRAM H-5: Consider the following modifications during the Zoning Ordinance Update currently underway and incorporate those modifications in the revised Zoning Ordinance that are conducive to increasing the production of affordable housing by the year 2004. Density Limits and Residential Uses A. Specify the range of housing densities appropriate for each commercial and industrial Comprehensive Plan land use designation and zoning district that permits housing. For proposed projects located within 2,000 feet of an existing or planned rail transit station not adjacent to a single family neighborhood with a substantial proportion of a proposed project’s units affordable to very low-, low-, or moderate- income households, development may be allowed at a higher density than that normally allowed under these land use designations and zoning districts. Development at the high end of the density range should only be permitted where it is demonstrated that the project will make significant use of existing transit facilities or other alternative modes of transportation, thereby avoiding significantly degrading existing traffic levels of service on nearby intersections. Progress: The City modified the Zoning Ordinance to specify the range of housing densities appropriate for commercial zones. In the new PTOD zoning overlay area, projects are allowed at a higher density than normally allowed if they are located within 2,000 feet of an existing or planned rail transit station, not adjacent to a single family neighborhood, with a substantial proportion of a proposed project’s units affordable to very low, low-, or moderate- income households. Effectiveness: The new Zoning Code changes reflect the City’s need to retain non-residential land for non-residential uses and allow housing in appropriate areas. Mixed use development in commercial zones is encouraged. Appropriateness: This program has been substantially changed to encourage higher density housing in mixed-use projects along transit corridors and rail transit stations. B. Consider allowing higher densities on sites that are not precisely within 2,000 feet of a rail transit station but that may Progress: This program has partially been implemented with the adoption of the pedestrian Transit Oriented Development (PTOD) land use and zoning district. Chapter 5 174 be suitable for transit oriented development due to exceptional access to other transit opportunities or alternative modes of transportation. Development of these sites should be compatible with surrounding densities and intensities of development and should be designed to preserve neighborhood character. Development of these sites at the high end of the density range should only be permitted where it is demonstrated that the project will make significant use of existing transit facilities or other alternative modes of transportation and will not significantly degrade existing traffic levels of service on nearby intersections. Effectiveness: The City Council has indicated support for the concepts in this program. Emphasis should be made on creating mixed use development in proximity to transit stations. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. C. Allow the construction of affordable housing on surplus sites designated Major Institution/Special Facilities under the Comprehensive Plan or zoned for Public Facilities, excepting those areas that are used for open space or playgrounds. Development of these sites should be compatible with surrounding densities and intensities of development and should be designed to preserve neighborhood character. Consideration should also be given to encouraging the conversion of portions of buildings or sites (e.g., religious institutions) to allow ancillary residential uses, such as caretaker quarters, by modifying pertinent sections of the Zoning Ordinance and Building Code. Progress: This program has not been implemented. Effectiveness: Since there have not been any changes to the Zoning Ordinance to allow construction of housing on sites identified for public use, the City is unable to measure its effectiveness. Appropriateness: Staff reviewed the policy and determined protection of Major Institution/Special Facilities sites is a City priority. Therefore this program will not be included in the Housing Element update. D. Allow a high or very high residential density under the Mixed Use land use designation for those sites within 2,000 feet of an existing or planned rail transit station unless adjacent to Progress: In 2007, the City modified its Zoning Ordinance to include the creation of Pedestrian and Transit Oriented development (PTOD) Combining District, which allows a high or very high residential density under the Mixed Use land use designation for those sites within 2,000 feet of an Chapter 5 175 single family neighborhoods. In areas adjacent to single family neighborhoods, require lower densities as a buffer. Development at the high end of the density range should only be permitted where it is demonstrated that the project will make significant use of existing transit facilities or other alternative modes of transportation and will not significantly degrade existing traffic levels of service on nearby intersections. existing or planned rail transit station unless adjacent to single family neighborhoods. Effectiveness: The City has recently approved the first application in the PTOD area. It does appear that this program will be effective for providing high density housing in mixed-use development in appropriate locations especially when market conditions improve. Appropriateness: The City will continue to consider further changes to the Zoning Code to implement a modified version of this program as it is deemed appropriate in increasing housing density and diversity in appropriate locations E. Restrict the size of main units under the DHS Zoning District and ensure that second units are adequate to accommodate a second household. Progress: The DHS district is only found in the South of Forest Area (SOFA) Coordinated Area Plan, which has no vacant parcels at this time; no change has been made to restrict the size of the units under the DHS Zoning District and to ensure that second units are adequate to accommodate a second household. Effectiveness: This program does not appear relevant because the DHS zoning district is limited in applicability to SOFA and sites with this zoning are fully developed. Appropriateness: This program is eliminated since the DHS zoning district is built out and only applicable in the SOFA area. F. Address the loss of housing due to the combination of single family residential lots. Consider modifying the R-1 Zoning District to create a maximum lot size to prevent the loss of housing or housing opportunities. Progress: In 2005, the City modified its R-1 Zoning District code to create a maximum lot size to prevent the loss of housing or housing opportunities. Effectiveness: The modification has been effective in preventing the loss of housing or housing opportunities. Appropriateness: The task has been completed; therefore, it will not be carried forward in the Housing Element update. G. Permit higher densities under the R-1 Zoning District to accommodate smaller lots for courtyard homes or other similar types of housing. Progress: During its update of the Zoning Ordinance the City explored the idea of permitting higher densities under the R-1 Zoning District to accommodate smaller lots for courtyard homes or other similar types of housing, however; due to other priorities, this program was not implemented. Chapter 5 176 Effectiveness: Since there has not been a change to the Zoning Ordinance, the City was unable to measure the effectiveness of this program. Appropriateness: The program continues to be relevant for inclusion in the Housing Element since the City Council has supported the concept of village residential development on small lots in the R-1 district. H. Increase the minimum density of the RM-15 Zoning District to at least eight dwelling units per acre consistent with the multi- family land use designation under the Comprehensive Plan. Progress: No change has been made to increase the minimum density of the RM-15 Zoning District to at least eight dwelling units per acre consistent with the multi-family land use designation under the Comprehensive Plan. Effectiveness: Since there have not been any changes relating to this particular section of the Zoning Ordinance, the City was unable to measure the effectiveness of this program; however, the concept should provide more housing if implemented. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. New Development Standards and Zoning Districts I. For projects that are 100% affordable, allow for increased flexibility in the application of development standards, such as parking and height, to better implement the housing programs contained in this chapter and to encourage the production of affordable housing. Progress: The 2007 Zoning Ordinance Update allows for increased flexibility in the application of development standards, such as parking and height for projects that are 100% affordable to encourage the production of affordable housing. Effectiveness: These changes have been effective in encouraging the production of affordable housing. Appropriateness: The task has been completed; therefore it will not be carried forward in the Housing Element update. The City will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the program. J. Floor area ratio limits should be made flexible for the purpose of creating affordable housing. Maximum unit sizes should also be considered to encourage the production of more affordable housing. The use of a “form” code to achieve these objectives should be considered during the Zoning Ordinance Update. Progress: The 2007 Zoning Ordinance Update allowed more flexibility in floor area ratio limits for the purpose of creating affordable housing. The Zoning Ordinance Update also incorporated the use of a “form” code for mixed use and multi-family projects. Effectiveness: The modification made to the floor area ratio limits has been effective in increasing density by providing Chapter 5 177 developers greater flexibility of floor area ratio limits. Appropriateness: This program has been partially completed; it will continue to be included in the Housing Element update to further encourage development of affordable housing. K. Create new zoning districts to implement the Transit-Oriented Residential and Village Residential land use designations and establish development standards that allow the maximum amount of housing, particularly for affordable housing projects, permitted under the allowed density range while preserving the character of adjacent neighborhoods. Progress: The 2007 Zoning Ordinance Update included the creation of a new zoning district, the Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Development (PTOD) and modified its multiple family residential zoning to allow Village Residential uses. The Update also established development standards that allow increased housing density, particularly for affordable housing projects. Effectiveness: The program’s effectiveness has not yet been measured since the City has not developed a project within the newly-created California Avenue PTOD zoning district. Appropriateness: This program has been completed; therefore, it will not be included in the Housing Element update. The City will continue to monitor the effectiveness of the program. L. Create development standards for permitted mixed residential/non-residential uses that would permit a number of dwelling units, including a minimum number of affordable housing units, to be built with each project. Mixed uses with an office component should be discouraged. The definition of mixed use development and the standards to be utilized in such developments will be addressed during the Zoning Ordinance Update. Progress: The 2007 Zoning Ordinance Updated created development standards for permitted mixed residential/non-residential uses, but did not include a standard for the minimum number of affordable housing units to be built with each project. The Zoning Ordinance Update also addressed the definition of mixed use development and the standards to be utilized in such developments. Effectiveness: The new development standards for mixed use development increases housing development at higher densities and in appropriate locations. Appropriateness: Parts of this program have been completed. However, due to State law prohibiting affordable housing programs to require affordable rental units, determining the required minimum number of affordable housing units for mixed use projects is inappropriate for the Housing Element update. This concept will be addressed by providing incentives for mixed use development for property developed at higher densities and listed on the Housing Inventory. PROGRAM H-6: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, create zoning Progress: This program has not been implemented during the planning period. Chapter 5 178 incentives that encourage the development of diverse housing types, such as smaller, more affordable units and two- and three-bedroom units suitable for families with children. Consider using a “form” code to achieve these objectives. Effectiveness: The program has the potential to provide more affordable housing units if implemented. Appropriateness: This program continues to be appropriate for the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-7: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, modify the provisions, such as parking requirements, minimum lot size, and coverage and floor area ratio limits, that govern the development of second dwelling units in single family areas to encourage the production of such units. Consider using a “form” code to achieve these objectives. Progress: In 2003 the Zoning Code was changed to allow the development of second dwelling units in single-family areas as required by State law. These changes included development standards relating to parking requirements, minimum lot size, and coverage and floor area ratio limits. Effectiveness: The City has yet to determine the effectiveness of this program since there have been very few applications for second dwelling units. Appropriateness: This program has been completed; therefore it will not be included in the Housing Element update. The City will continue to monitor the effectiveness of this program. PROGRAM H-8: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, modify the Zoning Code to allow second dwelling units that are incorporated entirely within the existing main dwelling, or that require only a small addition (200 square feet or less) and limited exterior modifications, to be approved through a ministerial permit (i.e., no design review or public hearing) on sites that meet the minimum development standards, including the parking requirement. Progress: In 2003, the Zoning Ordinance was amended to allow attached second units or small detached second units through a ministerial process as required by State law. Effectiveness: This program has had limited success. Although the Zoning Code has been modified to allow attached second units or small detached second units through ministerial process, the City has not seen significant increase in planning applications related to these changes in the Zoning Code. Appropriateness: This program has been completed; therefore, it will not be included in the Housing Element update. The City will continue to monitor the effectiveness of this program. PROGRAM H-9: Explore feasibility of establishing an amnesty program to legitimize existing illegal second units where appropriate and consistent with maintaining the character and quality of life of existing neighborhoods. The grant of amnesty should be contingent on compliance with minimum building, housing and other applicable code standards and on maintaining the affordability of the second unit to very low-, low- or Progress: This program was not implemented during the planning period. Effectiveness: The City is unable to measure the program’s effectiveness since it has yet to be implemented at this time. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. Chapter 5 179 moderate-income households. PROGRAM H-10: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, create a Planned Development zone that allows the construction of smaller lot single family units and other innovative housing types without the requirement for a public benefit finding provided that the project significantly increases the number of affordable housing units on the site over what would otherwise be allowed by existing zoning. Progress: The 2007 Zoning Ordinance Update included provisions creating a Planned Development zone that allows the construction of smaller lot single family units and other innovative housing types without the requirement for a public benefit finding provided that the project significantly increases the number of affordable housing units on the site over what would otherwise be allowed by existing zoning. Effectiveness: The City has received and approved a several applications for the construction of smaller lot single-family units in a Planned Development zone district. There have not been additional affordable units provided; therefore the public benefits have been required. Appropriateness: The program to modify the zoning code has been implemented; therefore, it will not be included in the Housing Element update. The City will continue to monitor the effectiveness of this program. PROGRAM H-11: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, amend zoning regulations to permit residential lots of less than 6,000 square feet where smaller lots would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Progress: As part of the 2007 Zoning Ordinance Update, the City amended its zoning regulations to permit residential lots of less than 6,000 square feet using the Village Residential standards where smaller lots would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Effectiveness: Although the Zoning Code has been modified to permit residential lots of less than 6,000 square feet where smaller lots would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, the City has not seen planning applications related to these changes in the Zoning Code. Appropriateness: The program to modify the zoning code has been implemented; therefore, it will not be included in the Housing Element update. The City will continue to monitor the effectiveness of this program. PROGRAM H-12: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, amend the Zoning Code to reduce parking requirements for higher density development in appropriate areas thus reducing development costs and producing housing that is more affordable. The potential consequences of reducing Progress: As part of the 2007 Zoning Ordinance Update, the Zoning Code was amended to allow reductions in parking requirements for projects located within the Pedestrian/Transit Oriented area or elsewhere in immediate proximity to public transportation facilities. Effectiveness: A number of projects near transit facilities benefited from Chapter 5 180 parking will be evaluated for particular types of projects during the Zoning Ordinance Update, but parking reductions should primarily be considered for Transit-Oriented development or developments that can demonstrate that its need for parking is less than the required parking standard called for by the Zoning the zoning amendment. Appropriateness: This program has been completed, and will not be included in the Housing Element update; however, the City will continue to monitor the effectiveness of this program. POLICY H-3: Continue to support the re-designation of suitable vacant or underutilized lands for housing or mixed uses containing housing. PROGRAM H-13: Implement the Housing Opportunities Study that identifies vacant and underutilized sites and sites with existing non-residential uses that are suitable for future housing or mixed use development focusing particularly on sites near an existing or planned transit station, along major transportation corridors with bus service, and in areas with adequate urban services and supporting retail and service uses. Progress: During the planning period, the City implemented the Housing Opportunities Study. More than 900 units were either approved or developed from the study sites. Effectiveness: The City was successful in implementing the Housing Opportunities Study, which resulted in facilitating an increase in housing stock. Appropriateness: Given the City’s significant RHNA allocation for the 2007-2014 planning period, sites from the Housing Opportunities Study appropriate for higher density housing are proposed for listing on the Housing Inventory. A. Suitable housing sites currently planned and zoned for non- residential use should be designated for residential or mixed use in sufficient quantities to accommodate the City’s fair share of the region’s housing needs. Progress: Suitable housing sites were designated for residential or mixed-used development in sufficient quantity resulting in the City’s ability to accommodate is fair share of the region’s housing needs. Effectiveness: This program has been effective in accommodating and meeting the total number of the City’s fair share of the region’s housing needs Appropriateness: The City has identified adequate sites to meet its RHNA. These sites are listed on the Housing Inventory Sites as part of the Housing Element update. B. Convert sites near transit and other major transportation facilities to higher density residential and mixed use to reinforce the City’s policies Progress: Wherever appropriate, the City has allowed the conversion of sites near transit and other major transportation facilities to higher density residential and mixed use to reinforce the City’s policies. Chapter 5 181 supporting transit use, create a pedestrian friendly environment, and reduce reliance on the automobile as well as increase the supply of housing, consistent with the City’s policies of encouraging compact, infill development and optimizing the use of existing urban services. Effectiveness: This program has been effective as part of implementing a variety of strategies to increase housing density and diversity in appropriate locations; however, the City Council has determined that conversion of non-residential land to residential is unhealthy for the City’s economy. The Council has, however, encouraged mixed use development (housing over commercial) in areas near transit. Appropriateness: The program has been modified to reflect current Council policy and is continued in the Housing Element update. C. Work with Stanford University to identify sites suitable for housing that may be located in the Stanford Research Park. Progress: As Stanford plans to expand, the City continues to work with Stanford to identify sites suitable for housing that may be located in the Stanford Research Park. In 2005, the City of Palo Alto and Stanford entered into development agreement that granted to Stanford vested right to build 250 dwelling units in the Stanford Research Park. Effectiveness: This program is effective in helping to provide the jobs/housing imbalance in the City. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-14: Rezone, where necessary, those sites identified on the Housing Sites Inventory, using appropriate residential or mixed use zoning districts, prior to 2004. Progress: All but 3 sites on the Housing Inventory were rezoned for residential or mixed use development Effectiveness: The rezoning of the sites increased the potential supply of housing and conformed to State requirements. Appropriateness: The program will continue in the Housing Element update for new sites listed on the updated Housing Inventory. As required by State law, sites that were proposed for rezoning in the previous housing element but were not rezoned during the planning period will be rezoned. Additional sites needed to accommodate the City’s fair share of the regional housing need that do not currently allow housing at an appropriate density will also be rezoned during the 2007-2014 planning period. PROGRAM H-15: Conduct a special study of the El Camino Real transportation corridor to examine in detail the potential for Progress: The City conducted a study of El Camino Real to assess the potential for locating high-density housing along the corridor as a part of the analysis for the 2007-2014 Chapter 5 182 developing higher density housing, especially affordable housing, on specific residential or non-residential sites consistent with the City’s traffic level of service policies, the City’s ability to provide urban services and amenities and the preservation of the character and quality of life of adjacent neighborhoods. Housing Element Update. Effectiveness: The study identified appropriate locations throughout the El Camino Real corridor for higher density, mixed use development. Appropriateness: This program has been completed and is not continued as part of the Housing Element update. POLICY H-4: Encourage mixed use projects as a means of increasing the housing supply while promoting diversity and neighborhood vitality. PROGRAM H-16: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, evaluate and improve existing incentives that encourage mixed use (with a residential component) and residential development on commercially zoned land and establish development standards that will encourage development of the maximum amount of housing permitted under the allowed density range, particularly for projects that provide affordable housing. Progress: The 2007 Zoning Ordinance Update included changes to the provisions of incentives that encourage mixed use (with a residential component) and residential development on commercially zoned land. In the Pedestrian and Transit Oriented Development (PTOD) District, incentives include, but are not limited to reductions in parking requirements and increases in density, Floor Area Ratio (FAR), and height for the construction of additional below market rate (BMR) housing units. The City also revised its commercial zones to allow fully residential projects in these zones for sites listed in the City’s Housing Inventory. Effectiveness: This program has been somewhat effective in attracting developers to building more housing. However, the City’s current regulations do not facilitate mixed use development. Appropriateness: This program has been modified to provide incentives for mixed use development when the property is developed at higher density and is listed on the Housing Inventory; the program will be included in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-17: Use coordinated area plans and other tools to develop regulations that support the development of housing above and among commercial uses. Progress: The City Council adopted the South of Forest Area (SOFA) Coordinated Area Plan as a planning tool to address a specific nine block area of the City comprising approximately 19 acres. The area provides increased housing opportunities convenient to shops, services, and transit. Effectiveness: The City has taken actions to support the development Chapter 5 183 of housing above and among commercial uses for this area. Other sites in the City have been identified as appropriate for Coordinated Area Plans. Appropriateness: The program is considered appropriate for inclusion in the Housing Element Update. The City will continue to monitor the number of units created through implementation of coordinated area plans. PROGRAM H-18: Encourage the development of housing on or over parking lots by adopting incentives that will lead to housing production while maintaining the required parking. Progress: The reuse of parking lots has not been evaluated. Effectiveness: Since the program has not been implemented, the City is unable to measure its effectiveness. Appropriateness: Staff reviewed the policy and determined it was not appropriate for the Housing Element update. Therefore this program will not be included in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-19: (REVISED) Eliminate the requirement for Site and Design review by the Planning Commission and City Council for mixed use projects shortly after development standards have been established for mixed use projects during the Zoning Ordinance Update expected to be completed in 2004. Progress: The City Council decided that Planning Commission and City Council review was appropriate for large scale mixed use projects but small scale mixed use projects can be processed without the two reviews. Effectiveness: This program has increased applications for small scale mixed use projects Appropriateness: This program has been completed and will not be included in the Housing Element Update. However, as an incentive for developing parcels in the Housing Inventory Sites, Site and Design review has been eliminated as part of the Housing Element update for those projects that meet the Housing Inventory Sites minimum density standards and are comprised of smaller units. POLICY H-5: Discourage the conversion of lands designated as residential to non-residential uses and the use of multiple family residential lands by non-residential uses, such as schools and churches, unless there is no net loss of housing potential on a community-wide basis. PROGRAM H-20: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, change the Zoning Code to disallow uses other than residential uses Progress: This program has not been implemented. Chapter 5 184 in a multiple-family residential zone unless the project can demonstrate an overriding benefit to the public or the project results in no net planned or existing housing loss. Planning Commission and City Council approval would be required in such instances. Effectiveness: Since there have not been any changes to the Zoning Ordinance relating to this particular element, the City is unable to measure its effectiveness. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-6: Support the reduction of governmental and regulatory constraints to the production of affordable housing. PROGRAM H-21: Where appropriate and feasible, allow waivers of development fees as a means of promoting the development of housing affordable to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. Evaluate the feasibility of waiving fees for projects that proposed affordable housing units in excess of minimum City BMR Program standards either in terms of the number of the affordable units or the household income levels that the project is targeted to serve. Progress: The City has not implemented a program that allows waivers of development, application and similar fees for affordable housing projects for very low-, low, and moderate income households. Effectiveness: Since this program has not been implemented, the City is unable to measure its effectiveness. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-22: Exempt permanently affordable housing units from any infrastructure impact fees that may be adopted by the City. Progress: The City exempts permanently affordable housing units from any infrastructure impact fees that may be adopted by the City, including impact fees for community facilities, traffic and parkland dedication. Effectiveness: The exemption has assisted a number of affordable housing projects developed by nonprofit affordable housing developers. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-23: Require all City departments to expedite all processes, including applications, related to the construction of affordable housing above minimum BMR requirements. Progress: While no requirement for expedited processing has been instituted formally, the City recognizes the importance of constructing affordable housing above minimum BMR requirements; therefore departments strive to provide greater attention to applications related to the construction of affordable housing. Effectiveness: The program has been effective in reducing processing time for affordable housing projects and, Chapter 5 185 as a result reducing overall project cost. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-7: Monitor, on a regular basis, the City’s progress in increasing the supply of housing and monitor the preservation of BMR rental units for very low- and low- income residents. PROGRAM H-24: Establish an annual monitoring program to review the progress made in the construction of housing for all income levels, the rezoning of suitable housing sites, and the implementation of policies to encourage the production of affordable housing. Progress: In 2003, the City established an annual monitoring and reporting program to review the progress made in the construction of housing for all income levels, the rezoning of suitable housing sites, and the implementation of policies to encourage the production of affordable housing. Effectiveness: The annual monitoring and reporting program allows the City to better track the progress of residential developments. Appropriateness: The program is an important tool for City officials and City staff to assess the development growth in the City and is continued in the Housing Element update. HOUSING CONSERVATION Goal H-2: Conservation and Maintenance of Palo Alto’s Existing Housing Stock and Residential Neighborhoods. POLICY H-8: Promote the rehabilitation of deteriorating or substandard residential properties. PROGRAM H-25: Continue the citywide property maintenance, inspection, and enforcement program. Progress: The City implements a citywide property maintenance, inspection and enforcement program through its Code Enforcement Unit. Effectiveness: The City has been effective in ensuring citywide property maintenance and responding to complaints as needed. Chapter 5 186 Appropriateness: Code Enforcement is an important component in promoting safe and decent living conditions and this program remains appropriate for inclusion in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-26: Enact development regulations that encourage retention and rehabilitation of historic residential buildings, older multifamily rental buildings and smaller single family residences. Progress: In 2005, through the Zoning Ordinance Update, the City enacted development regulations that encourage retention and rehabilitation of historic residential buildings, older multifamily rental buildings and smaller single family residences. The new regulations provide exemption to gross floor area requirements for historic homes and allow additional square footage and certain other exceptions for home improvements to single family residences. In addition, the Home Improvement Exception (HIE) provides incentives that encourage retention and rehabilitation of historic residential buildings. Effectiveness: The modification has been effective in promoting the rehabilitation of historic residential properties. Appropriateness: This program has been completed and will not be continued in the Housing Element update. Policy H-9: Maintain the number of multi-family housing units, including BMR rental and ownership units, in Palo Alto at no less than the number of multi-family rental and BMR units available as of December 2001 and continue to support efforts to increase the supply of these units. PROGRAM H-27: Continue implementation of the Condominium Conversion Ordinance. Progress: The City continues to implement its Condominium Conversion Ordinance. Effectiveness: This program has effectively maintained and preserved the number of available multi-family rental housing units. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-28: Implement a Below Market Rate (BMR) Program Emergency Fund to prevent the loss of BMR units and to provide emergency loans for BMR unit owners for substantial mandatory assessments. Progress: In September 2002, the City Council established a BMR program emergency fund as an ongoing permanent program to prevent the loss of BMR units and provide emergency loans for BMR unit owners for substantial mandatory assessments. The Council Chapter 5 187 approved loan program criteria and loan terms and seed money for the programs. Effectiveness: The program has been effective in assisting extremely low income BMR owners who were unable to obtain conventional financing for substantial mandatory assessments. Since the inception of the program, the City has approved three (3) loans for approximately $72,000. Appropriateness: As more BMR units become older, BMR owners could be faced with substantial maintenance costs. Therefore, it will be appropriate to continue and expand the program to prevent the loss of BMR units and it is included in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-29: Where a proposed subdivision or condominium would cause a loss of rental housing, grant approval only if at least two of the following three circumstances exist: • The project will produce at least a 100 percent increase in the number of units currently on the site and will comply with the City’s Below Market Rate (BMR) program (described in Program H-34 or 35); and/or • The number of rental units to be provided on the site is at least equal to the number of existing rental units; and/or • No less than 25 percent of the units will comply with the City’s BMR program. Progress: The City halted the implementation of the program due to its legality; the City Attorney has concluded that the program is unenforceable based on recent court decisions. Effectiveness: The program as stated cannot continue to be implemented. Appropriateness: The City has included component parts that are considered legal as part of the Housing Element Update. Policy H-10: Preserve the existing legal, non-conforming rental cottages and duplexes currently located in the R-1 and R-2 residential areas of Palo Alto, which represent a significant portion of the City’s affordable housing supply. PROGRAM H-30: Require developers of new residential projects in the R-1 and R-2 Zoning Districts to preserve and incorporate, where feasible, existing rental cottages or duplexes within the project. Explore the feasibility of requiring the developer to replace any units being demolished as a result of new construction. Progress: This program has not been implemented. Effectiveness: Since there have not been any changes to the Zoning Ordinance relating to this particular program, the City is unable to measure its effectiveness. It is also questionable whether the program can be effectively implemented as proposed. Chapter 5 188 Appropriateness: This program has been revised to identify incentives for preservation of these types of units and is continued in the Housing Element. POLICY H-11: Encourage community involvement in the maintenance and enhancement of public and private properties and adjacent rights-of-way in residential neighborhoods. PROGRAM H-31: Create community volunteer days and park cleanups, plantings, or similar events that promote neighborhood enhancement. Progress: The City teams up with local organizations and social and service clubs, such as Rotary and Kiwanis to hold park cleanups and plantings events to promote neighborhood enhancement. Effectiveness: The program has been effective in increasing community participation in the maintenance and enhancement of public and private properties and adjacent rights-of-way in residential neighborhoods. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-32: Conduct City-sponsored cleanup campaigns for public and private properties. Progress: The City’s Public Works Department sponsors the City’s Clean-up Day, a service for Palo Alto residents to dispose of extra debris and unwanted household items that may be filling garages, attics or backyards. The Clean-up Day is designed to meet the residents’ needs and schedule. Palo Alto residents living in single family homes and housing complexes of four units or less can schedule one Clean-up Day each year. Effectiveness: The program has been effective in encouraging community involvement in the maintenance and enhancement of public and private properties and adjacent rights-of-way in residential neighborhoods. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. Chapter 5 189 HOUSING DIVERSITY Goal H-3: Housing Opportunities for a Diverse Population, Including Very low-, Low- and Moderate-Income Residents, and Persons with Special Needs. POLICY H-12: Encourage, foster and preserve diverse housing opportunities for very low-, low- and moderate-income households. PROGRAM H-33: Take all actions necessary to preserve the 92-unit Terman Apartments as part of Palo Alto’s affordable housing stock and to continue the renewal of the existing HUD Section 8 rental assistance contract that provides rental subsidies for up to 72 units in the project. Progress: Terman Apartments is owned by a for-profit investor. Efforts were made to partner with nonprofit organizations to acquire and preserve the 92-unit apartments as part of Palo Alto’s affordable housing stock. However, the owner still has no intention of selling and is continuing to renew the project-based Section 8 contract annually. The City had intended to use its State Local Housing Trust Fund grant to assist a local non-profit acquire this project if the owner decided to sell or decided to terminate the Sec. 8 contracts. City staff, a local housing non-profit and the California Housing Partnership Corp investigated whether any actions of the owner had triggered a right-to-purchase under State law, whether the owner would enter into a voluntary sale & what level of subsidy funding would be needed to accomplish a non-profit purchase. The result of this study was that an acquisition would require extremely high subsidies due to the high Sec. 8 contract rents, that the owners had no interest in selling and that the owners are renewing the Sec. 8 contracts on an annual basis. Effectiveness: Due to the owner’s unwillingness to sell the property, efforts were not effective in acquiring the property. Appropriateness: The City will continue to take actions available to preserve the Terman Apartments. The Housing Element includes a program to support the renewal of Section 8 contracts. PROGRAM H-34: Provide preferential or priority processing for those residential or mixed use projects that propose more affordable housing than the minimum required under the City’s BMR Program and for 100% affordable housing projects. Progress: Preferential or priority processing for those residential or mixed use projects that propose more affordable housing than the minimum required under the City’s BMR Program and for 100% affordable housing projects has been informally instituted. The City recognizes the importance of constructing affordable housing above minimum BMR requirements; therefore, the City strives to provide greater attention Chapter 5 190 to applications related to the construction of affordable housing. Effectiveness: The program effectiveness varies depending on the number of additional affordable housing units to be constructed above the minimum BMR requirements. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-13: Provide for increased use and support of tenant/landlord educational and mediation opportunities. PROGRAM H-35: Implement the “Action Plan” of the City of Palo Alto’s Consolidated Plan or its successor documents. Progress: The City continues to implement its Annual Action Plan and to use CDBG funds to provide for increased use and support of tenant/landlord educational mediation opportunities. Effectiveness: The City of Palo Alto’s Human Service Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) funded with the General Fund allows the City to provide funding to Project Sentinel, a nonprofit organization, for support of tenant/landlord educational mediation opportunities. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-36: Implement the City’s “Below Market Rate” (BMR) Program by requiring that at least 15 percent of all housing units in projects of five units or more, be provided at below market rates to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. Projects on sites of five acres or larger must set aside 20 percent of all units as BMR units. Progress: The City continues to implement this program that requires at least 15 percent of all housing units in projects of five units or more, be provided at below market rates to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. Projects on sites of five acres or larger must set aside 20 percent of all units as BMR units. Effectiveness: Through this program, 123 BMR units have been created during the planning period, of which 105 are rental units. Appropriateness: The City will continue to implement this program as a part of the Housing Element Update to increase its affordable housing stock. The program has been modified to lower the threshold for the BMR Chapter 5 191 requirement to three units. PROGRAM H-37: Adopt an ordinance codifying and implementing the City’s “Below Market Rate” (BMR) Program. Progress: In March 2008, the City Council adopted an ordinance codifying and implementing the City’s “Below Market Rate” (BMR) Program. Effectiveness: Adoption of a BMR ordinance has been effective in increasing awareness of the BMR requirements. Appropriateness: The program has been completed and will not be continued in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-38: Adopt a revised density bonus program ordinance that allows the construction of up to three additional market rate units for each BMR unit above that normally required, up to a maximum zoning increase of 50 percent in density. Allow an equivalent increase in square footage (Floor Area Ratio) for projects under this program. The revised density bonus program will meet State standards for the provision of housing units for very low- and lower-income renters, seniors and moderate-income condominium buyers in compliance with Government Code Section 65915, et seq. Progress: This program has not been implemented. Effectiveness: Since there have not been any changes to the Zoning Ordinance to implement this program, the City is unable to measure its effectiveness. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-39: Encourage the use of flexible development standards and creative architectural solutions in the design of projects with a substantial BMR component. The intent of this program is to allow individual projects to develop individual solutions to create an attractive living environment both for the project and adjacent development and to address specific project needs, such as the provision of open space. Progress: Although greater flexibility in development standards have not been modified, the City’s Architectural Review Board and Planning and Transportation Commission continue to encourage creative architectural solutions in the design of projects with substantial BMR component. Effectiveness: This limited implementation of the program has been effective in fostering and preserving diverse housing opportunities and creating attractive living environment both for the project and adjacent development addressing specific project needs, such as the provision of open space. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-40: Consider allowing the development of duplexes in the R-1 Zoning District as the Progress: This program was not implemented during the planning period. Chapter 5 192 required BMR units for a new single family residential subdivision subject to appropriate development standards. Development standards will be prepared, evaluated, and implemented during the Zoning Ordinance Update. Effectiveness: Since the program was not implemented, the City is unable to measure the program’s effectiveness at this time. Appropriateness: The program is continued in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-41: Recognize the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park as providing low- and moderate- income housing opportunities. Any redevelopment of the site must be consistent with the City’s Mobile Home Park Conversion Ordinance adopted to preserve the existing units. To the extent feasible, the City will seek appropriate local, state and federal funding to assist in the preservation and maintenance of the existing units in the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park. Progress: Buena Vista Mobile Home Park continues to exist and provide low- and moderate-income housing opportunities. There has not been any plan to redevelop the park. Effectiveness: This program effectively preserves the existence of the only mobile home park in the City. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-14: Support agencies and organizations that provides shelter, housing, and related services to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. PROGRAM H-42: Promote legislative changes and funding for programs that facilitate and subsidize the acquisition, rehabilitation, and operation of existing rental housing by housing assistance organizations, nonprofit developers, and for-profit developers. Progress: The City of Palo Alto is an active member of the Non- Profit Housing Association of Northern California, an advocacy non-profit organization focusing on housing, and continues to collaborate with the group to promote legislative changes and funding for programs relating to housing. In addition, the City utilizes federal legislative consultants to work with the City’s federal representatives and federal departments to ensure the City receives appropriations. Since 2001, the consultants have assisted with acquiring over $4 million in appropriations. Effectiveness: This program has been effective in supporting the City, other agencies and organizations that provide housing, and related services to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. Chapter 5 193 PROGRAM H- 43: Use existing agency programs such as Senior Home Repair to provide rehabilitation assistance to very low- and low-income households. Progress: The City provides grants to agencies for programs that provide rehabilitation assistance to very low- and low income households using Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and/or General Fund monies such as the Avenidas Handyman Services and Senior Home Repair Effectiveness: Over 2,000 minor home repair jobs were completed during the planning period. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-44: Support the development and preservation of group homes and supported living facilities for persons with special housing needs by: Assisting local agencies and nonprofit organizations in the construction or rehabilitation of new facilities for this population. Reviewing existing development regulations and identifying and reducing regulatory obstacles to this type of housing during the timeframe of this Housing Element. Progress: The City supports development and preservation of group homes as part of its CDBG Consolidated Plan. The zoning code however, has not been modified to facilitate the development of these facilities. This program has not been fully implemented. Effectiveness: The CDBG program provides potential funding for group home development. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-15: Pursue funding for the construction or rehabilitation of housing that is affordable to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. Support financing techniques such as land banking, federal and state tax credits, mortgage revenue bonds, and mortgage credit certificates to subsidize the cost of housing. Chapter 5 194 PROGRAM H-45: Maintain a high priority for the acquisition of new housing sites, acquisition and rehabilitation of existing housing, and housing-related services in the allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds or similar programs. Progress: The City of Palo Alto gives housing a high priority by allocating over 60% of its Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the acquisition and rehabilitation of existing, and housing-related services each year. Effectiveness: CDBG provides funding for the construction or rehabilitation of housing that is affordable to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. Appropriateness: This program remains appropriate for inclusion in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-46: Support and expand the City’s Housing Development Fund or successor program. Progress: The City of Palo Alto supports and expands its Housing Development Funds, which are primarily composed of the following sources of fundings: federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds; local impact fees on new commercial space; Below Market Rate (BMR) in-lieu fees on residential units; and other grant funds from state and federal programs. Effectiveness: The use of the Housing Development Fund has increased the supply of affordable housing stock by 152 units during the planning period. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-47: Consider requiring 30% of all revenues generated by the Redevelopment Agency to be used for the provision of affordable housing. Progress: On July 9, 2001, the City Council approved an ordinance to establish a redevelopment agency for the City of Palo Alto. The City did not establish a Redevelopment Project Area since no area in Palo Alto was able to meet the “blight findings” requirements. Therefore, no redevelopment funds were generated. The City Redevelopment Agency was abolished in 2011. Effectiveness: The effectiveness of this program was never determined. Appropriateness: This program will not be included in the Housing Element Update. PROGRAM H-48: Continue to seek funding from all Progress: In 2003, the City was granted $1,000,000 from the Chapter 5 195 appropriate state and federal programs whenever they are available to support the development or rehabilitation of housing for very low-, low-, or moderate-income households. State’s Housing and Community Development Department through the Local Housing Trust Fund Program that has been targeted for a 60-unit very low income affordable housing project in the City. In addition, the City continues to support and work with nonprofit developers to seek additional funding from various state and federal programs, leveraging the City’s financial contribution. Effectiveness: This program has provided significant funding for developing affordable housing units in the City. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-49: Continue to support the County of Santa Clara’s Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Program to create and support homeownership opportunities for lower- and moderate-income households in Palo Alto. Progress: The City of Palo Alto continues to participate in the County of Santa Clara’s Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Program. The program provides financial assistance to first-time homebuyers for the purchase of single-family homes, townhomes, and condominiums. Effectiveness: The MCC program has helped 23 households purchase their homes during this planning period. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-50: Continue to require developers of employment-generating commercial and industrial developments to contribute to the supply of low- and moderate-income housing. Progress: Chapter 16.47 of the City’s Municipal Code requires developers of commercial projects to contribute to programs that increase the City’s low- and moderate- income housing stock by the required payment of a housing impact fee on the net increase in commercial square footage. The payments are deposited in the City’s affordable Housing Trust Fund and used for loans to affordable housing developers to enable the construction of new very low and low-income rental housing. Effectiveness: This program has been effective in increasing the supply of affordable housing. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-51: Periodically review the housing nexus formula as required under Chapter 16.47 Progress: The City periodically reviews the housing nexus formula as required by Chapter 16.47 of the Municipal Chapter 5 196 of the Municipal Code to better reflect the impact of new jobs on housing demand and cost. Code. On March 25, 2002, the City Council approved modifications and additions to Impact Fees collected for residential and commercial development projects based on a nexus study and required that an annual cost of living adjustment be made. Effectiveness: Periodic reviews of the Nexus formula allow the City to better gauge the impact of new jobs on housing demand and cost and to make necessary adjustments to the required impact fees as needed. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-16: Encourage the preservation, rehabilitation, and construction of Single Room Occupancy (SRO) hotels and SRO housing. PROGRAM H-52: Permit Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units in industrial, commercial, and high density residential zoning districts using development standards that would encourage the construction of the maximum number of units consistent with the goals of preserving the character of adjacent neighborhoods. Progress: Whenever appropriate and feasible, the City has permitted Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing units in appropriate zoning district(s). For example in 2006, the City permitted the construction of the Opportunity Center, an 89-unit affordable housing project with 70 SRO units in a commercial district. This is one of the sites identified in the previous Housing Element’s Housing Inventory list. Effectiveness: This program has been effective in encouraging the preservation, rehabilitation, and construction of Single Room Occupancy (SRO) hotels and SRO housing. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-53: Examine the Zoning Code during the current Zoning Ordinance Update (2002- 2004) to ensure that the Code facilitates shared housing or other innovative housing types and provides flexible development standards for these types of housing that will allow such housing to be built while preserving the character of the neighborhoods in which they are proposed to be located. Progress: The City did not examine this program during the update of the Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, changes were not made to the Code to implement this program. Effectiveness: The City is unable to measure the effectiveness of this program since it was not implemented. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. Chapter 5 197 POLICY H-17: Support opportunities for Shared Housing and other innovative housing forms to promote diversity and meet the needs of different household types and income levels. POLICY H-18: Support housing that incorporates facilities and services to meet the health care, transit, or social service needs of households with special needs, including seniors and persons with disabilities. PROGRAM H-54: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, develop zoning modifications, which would allow higher densities and create other incentives for projects proposing 100% affordable senior rental housing. Progress: The 2007 Zoning Update included zoning modifications which would allow higher housing densities in the Pedestrian Transit Oriented Development (PTOD), and create incentives for projects proposing 100% affordable senior housing rental housing such as a reduction in parking requirement up to 50%, Floor Area Ratio (FAR) increases and height increases. Effectiveness: This program resulted in increased density allowance for projects proposing 100% affordable senior rental housing. Appropriateness: The program has been implemented. As a result it will not be included in Housing Element update. The City will continue to monitor the impact of the ordinance on increasing the supply of affordable senior rental housing. PROGRAM H-55: Examine the Zoning Code during the current Zoning Ordinance Update (2002- 2004) to ensure that the Code facilitates the construction of housing that provides services for special needs households and provides flexible development standards for special service housing that will allow such housing to be built while preserving the character of the neighborhoods in which they are proposed to be located. Progress: Changes have not been made to the Code to implement this program. Effectiveness: The City is unable to measure the effectiveness of this program since it was not implemented. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-19: Support family housing that addresses resident needs for childcare, youth services, recreation opportunities and access to transit. Chapter 5 198 PROGRAM H-56: Provide preferential or priority processing for those residential or mixed-use projects that incorporate child care facilities, provide recreational opportunities above normal open space requirements, or that provide enhanced access to public transit. Progress: The City does not have a formal process to provide preferential or priority processing for those residential or mixed-use projects that incorporate child care facilities, provide recreational opportunities above normal open space requirements, or provide enhanced access to public transit. Effectiveness: On a case by case basis, projects with special and unique features receive additional attention and guidance during the application process. Appropriateness: This program remains appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-20: Support legislation, regulatory changes, federal funding, and local efforts for the permanent preservation of HUD-assisted very low- and low-income units at risk of conversion to market rate housing or loss of federal rental assistance. POLICY H-21: Support the provision of emergency shelter, transitional housing and ancillary services to address homelessness. PROGRAM H-57: As part of the Zoning Ordinance Update process, modify the Zoning Code to allow homeless shelters in the CS, CD and industrial zoning districts with a Conditional Use Permit. Progress: No modification has been made to the Zoning Code to allow homeless shelters in the CS, CD and industrial zoning districts with a Conditional Use Permit. Effectiveness: The City is unable to measure the effectiveness of this program at this time since it was not implemented. Appropriateness: Identification of an appropriate zoning district and modifications to the zoning code to allow homeless shelters continues to be a program necessary for inclusion in the Housing Element. Since the City has an unmet need for the provision of adequate emergency shelter for its unhoused residents, this program will be amended to identify that the zoning ordinance must be amended to identify where shelters are allowed by right. PROGRAM H-58: Create emergency homeless shelter and transitional housing location and development criteria during the timeframe Progress: The program implementation has not occurred. Chapter 5 199 of this Housing Element to aid the developers of this type of housing in understanding the standards the City will use to review these types of housing projects and to expedite the processing of Conditional Use Permits and other permits required for these types of housing. Location and development criteria for emergency homeless shelters should be based on the size and operating characteristics of the facility. Transitional housing location and development criteria should use standards comparable to traditional housing of similar size and density since transitional housing has impacts similar to traditional housing although non-traditional assistance services are provided. Effectiveness: Since this program has not been implemented, it cannot be assessed for effectiveness. Appropriateness: A modified version of this program is included in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-22: Provide leadership in addressing homelessness as a regional issue. POLICY H-23: Work closely with appropriate agencies in the region to develop and implement policies and programs relating to homelessness. PROGRAM H-59: Continue to participate in the Santa Clara County Homeless Collaborative as well as work with adjacent jurisdictions to develop additional shelter opportunities. Progress: The City of Palo Alto continues to participate in the Santa Clara County Housing and Homeless Collaborative that addresses issues of homelessness on a regional basis. The Collaborative prioritizes county applications for McKinney funding, and establishes the County’s Continuum of Care program. City staff serves as a member of the CDBG and HOME Program coordinators group of entitlement jurisdictions from throughout Santa Clara County that addresses multi-jurisdictional funding and other issues of common interest. Effectiveness: Since homelessness is a regional issue, the City’s participation in various countywide collaborative efforts has resulted in better utilization and leveraging of the City’s resources to address homelessness. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. The City of Palo Alto will continue to participate in regional efforts to address homelessness. Chapter 5 200 PROGRAM H-60: Continue to participate with and support agencies addressing homelessness. Progress: The City of Palo Alto continues to participate in the Santa Clara County Housing and Homeless Collaborative that addresses issues of homelessness on a regional basis. The Collaborative prioritizes county applications for McKinney funding, and establishes the County’s Continuum of Care program. City staff serves as a member of the CDBG and HOME Program coordinators group of entitlement jurisdictions from throughout Santa Clara County that address multi-jurisdictional funding, and other issues of common interest. Effectiveness: Since homelessness has become of a regional issue, participating in various countywide collaborative efforts has provided the City the ability to be part of the wider efforts to address homelessness. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. The City of Palo Alto will continue to participate in regional efforts to address homelessness. FAIR HOUSING Goal H-4: An End to Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Race, Religion, National Origin, Age, Sex, Sexual Orientation, Marital Status, Physical Handicap, or Other Barriers that Prevent Choice in Housing. POLICY H-24: Support programs and agencies that seek to eliminate housing discrimination. PROGRAM H-61: Work with appropriate state and federal agencies to ensure that fair housing laws are enforced. Progress: The City works with appropriate state and federal agencies to ensure that fair housing laws are enforced. Effectiveness: This program has been effective in eliminating housing discrimination. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-62: Continue to support groups that provide fair housing services, such as Mid- Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing. Progress: The City of Palo Alto continues to support groups that provide fair housing services. During the planning period, the City of Palo has provided over $200,000 in Chapter 5 201 CDBG funds to groups that provide fair housing services such as Mid-Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing and Project Sentinel. Effectiveness: This program has been effective in promoting fair housing and reducing discrimination. The City plans to continue supporting groups that provide fair housing services. Appropriateness: This program will be continued in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-63: Continue the efforts of the Human Relations Commission to combat discrimination in rental housing, including mediation of problems between landlords and tenants. Progress: The City’s Human Relations Commission is charged with the discretion to act with respect to any human relations matter when the Commission finds that any person or group does not benefit fully from public or private opportunities or resources in the community or is unfairly or differently treated due to factors of concern to the Commission. The City’s Human Relations Commission continues to hold public meetings and forums to combat discrimination in rental housing, including mediation of problems between landlords and tenants. Effectiveness: The Human Relations Commission’s efforts are effective in preventing and eliminating housing discrimination. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-64: Continue implementation of the City’s Ordinances prohibiting discrimination in renting or leasing housing based on age, parenthood, pregnancy or the potential or actual presence of a minor child. Progress: The City continues to implement the City’s ordinances prohibiting discrimination in renting or leasing housing based on age, parenthood, pregnancy or the potential or actual presence of a minor child. Effectiveness: In addition to federal and state laws against housing discrimination, the City’s ordinances have been effective in combating housing discrimination. Appropriateness: This program remains appropriate for inclusion in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-65: As part of the current (2002-2004) Zoning Code Update process, examine all Zoning Code and other pertinent development Progress: This program was not addressed as part of the Zoning Code update process. Chapter 5 202 regulations affected by the passage of Senate Bill SB520, which is designed to eliminate housing discrimination based on familial status or disability, and modify those provisions that would hamper the implementation of SB520. Develop written procedures describing how Palo Alto will process and treat reasonable accommodation requests for projects proposing housing for special needs households. Effectiveness: The City is unable to measure the effectiveness of this program since it was not implemented. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-66: Continue the City’s role in coordinating the actions of various support groups that are seeking to eliminate housing discrimination and in providing funding and other support for these groups to disseminate fair housing information in Palo Alto, including information on referrals to pertinent investigative or enforcement agencies in the case of fair housing complaints. Progress: The City’s Office of Human Services (OHS) continues to sponsor housing information and referral coordination meetings for service providers seeking to eliminate housing discrimination. Through the Human Service Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP), the City of Palo continues to provide funding and other support for these groups to disseminate fair housing information in Palo Alto. Effectiveness: The program is effective in addressing and eliminating housing discrimination and in affirmatively furthering fair housing. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-67: Continue to interpret and apply the City’s land use regulations in a manner that does not deny to person with disability the access to housing and public accommodations that they are guaranteed under state and federal law. Progress: The City continues to interpret and apply the City’s land use regulations to ensure that person with disabilities have access to housing and public accommodations as guaranteed under state and federal laws. The City of Palo Alto does not discriminate against individuals with disabilities. Effectiveness: This program ensures access to housing and public accommodations for people with disabilities. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. Chapter 5 203 ENERGY CONSERVATION AND COST REDUCTION Goal H-5: Reduced Housing Expenses for Energy POLICY H-25: Reduce the cost of housing by continuing to promote energy efficiency, resource management, and conservation for new and existing housing. PROGRAM H-68: Continue providing staff support and technical assistance in energy conservation and demand management to architects, developers, and utility customers. Progress: The City’s Development Review Committee (DRC), comprised of staffs from various departments including Utilities Department, Public Works Department, and Department of Planning and Community Environment, continues to provide support and technical assistance in energy conservation and demand management to architects, developers, and utility customers. Effectiveness: Through staff support and technical assistance, architects, developers, and utility customers are able to enhance their understanding of energy conservation and demand management measures and incorporate them into their projects, resulting in potential reduction in housing costs. Appropriateness: The program remains appropriate for inclusion in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-69: Review State programs encouraging energy efficiency and incorporate appropriate programs in Palo Alto’s energy conservation programs and outreach efforts. Progress: The City continues to review State programs encouraging energy efficiency and to incorporate appropriate programs in Palo Alto’s energy conservation programs and outreach efforts. The City’s Public Work Department, Utilities Department and Department of Planning and Community Environment work together in promoting energy efficiency, resource management and conservation for new and existing housing. Effectiveness: This program has been effective in reducing housing costs as a result of energy efficiency, resource management and conservation. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. Program H-70: Continue to develop a proactive public Progress: The City continues to develop a proactive public Chapter 5 204 outreach program to encourage Palo Alto residents to conserve energy and to share ideas regarding energy conservation. outreach program to encourage residents to conserve energy and to share ideas regarding energy conservation working in collaboration with the City’s Planning and Community Environment, Public Works and Utilities Departments. The City’s website and Development Center serve as resources for valuable information relating to energy conservation. Effectiveness: Brochures and materials relating to energy conservation are available at City Hall, recreational facilities, libraries and other public locations throughout the community to provide valuable information promoting energy conservation. Appropriateness: This program remains appropriate for inclusion in the Housing Element update. PROGRAM H-71: Encourage developers and builders to construct sustainable residential buildings that increase energy efficiency by at least 15% above the energy standards of Title 24. Progress: The City continues to encourage builders to construct sustainable residential buildings that increase energy efficiency by at least 15% above the energy standards of Title 24. Effectiveness: This program has been effective in reducing housing costs as a result of energy efficiency, resource management and conservation. Residents of new housing developments have benefited from reduced housing costs. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. POLICY H-26: Reduce the cost of housing using the Utilities Residential Rate Assistance Program (RAP). PROGRAM H-72: Continue to assist very low-income households in reducing their utility bills through the RAP. Progress: The City’s Utilities Department continues to offer utilities discounts to provide financial relief to low- income households. Qualified households receive a twenty percent (20%) discount in their utilities including, gas, water, electricity and storm drainage. Effectiveness: The program is effective in providing relief, reducing housing costs, particularly for low-income households. Over 900 households are currently enrolled in the program and receiving a utilities Chapter 5 205 discount. Appropriateness: This program is appropriate for continuation in the Housing Element update. EXHIBITS g a s d J u n i p ero S e r r a B o u l e v a r d ag e M i l l R o a d Arastradero Road E l C a m i n o R e al S a n A n t o n i o A v e n u e C harles ton Roa d O r e g o n E x p r e s Middlefield Road University A v e n Alma Street F o o t h i l l E x p r e ssway Hillview F a b i a n Sand Hill Road Embarcadero Road W i MoanaCourt Wallis Ct Donald Drive Encina Grande Drive Cereza Drive Los Robles Avenue Villa Vera Verdosa Drive Campana Drive Solana Drive Georgia Ave Ynigo Way Driscoll Ct ngArthur'Maybell Way Maybell Avenue Frandon Ct Florales Drive Georgia Avenue Amaranta Avenue Amaranta Ct MirandaGreen Foothill Expressway Ki s Court Terman Drive Baker Avenue Vista Avenue Wisteria Ln Pena Ct Coulombe Drive Cherry Oaks Pl Pomona Avenue Arastradero Road Abel Avenue Clemo Avenue Villa Real El Camino Way Curtner Avenue Ventura Avenue Maclane Emerson Street Ventura Ct Park Boulevard Magnolia Dr South El Camino Real Cypress Lane GlenbrookD Fairm ede Avenue Arastradero RoadIrven Court Los Palos Cir LosPalosPl Maybell Avenue Alta Mesa Ave Kelly Way Los Palos Avenue Suzanne Drive Suzanne Drive rive El Camino Real Suzanne Ct Lorabelle Ct McKellar Lane El Camino Way James Road Maclane Second Street Wilkie Way Camino CtWest Meadow Drive Thain Way Barclay Ct Victoria Place Interdale Way West Charleston Road Tennessee LaneWilkie Way Carolina Lane Tennessee Lane Park Boulevard Wilkie Ct Davenport Way Alma Street Roosev Monroe Drive Wilkie Way Whitclem Pl Whitclem Drive Duluth Circle Edlee Avenue Dinah's Court Cesano Court Monroe DriveMiller Avenue Whitclem Wy Whitclem Ct Ferne Avenue Ben Lomond Drive Fairfield Court Ferne Avenue Ponce Drive HemlockCourt Ferne Court Alma Street Monroe Drive San Antonio Avenue NitaAvenue Ruthelma Avenue Darlington Ct Charleston Road Lundy Lane Newberry Ct Park Boulevard George Hood Ln Alma Street eltCircle LinderoDrive Wright Place Starr King Circle Shasta Drive Mackay DriveDiablo Court Scripps Avenue Scripps Court Nelson Drive Tioga Court Creekside Drive Greenmeadow Way Ben Lomond Drive Parkside Drive Dixon Place Ely Place Dake Avenue Ferne Avenue San Antonio Court (Private) ChristopherCourt CalcaterraPlace Ely Place Ely Place Adobe PlaceNelson Court ByronStreetKeats CourtMiddlefield Road Duncan Place Carlson Court Duncan Place Mumford Place Charleston Road San Antonio Avenue East Meadow Drive Emerson Street Court Bryant Street RooseveltCircle RamonaStreet CarlsonCircle Redwood Circle South Leghorn Street Montrose Avenue Maplewood Charleston Ct Charleston Road Seminole Way Sutherland Drive Nelson Drive El Capitan Place Fabian Street Loma Verde Avenue Bryson Avenue Midtown Court Cowper Street Gary Court Waverley Street South Court Bryant Street Ramona Street Alma Street Coastland Drive Colorado Avenue Byron Street Middlefield Road Gaspar Court Moreno Avenue Coastland Drive El Carmelo Avenue Rosewood D Campesino Avenue Dymond Ct Martinsen Ct Ramona Street Bryant Street Towle Way Towle Place Wellsbury Ct AvalonCourt FlowersLane Mackall Way Loma Verde Avenue KiplingStreet Cowper Street South Court Waverley Street El Verano Avenue Wellsbury Way La Middlefield Road St Claire Drive Alger Drive Ashton Avenue St Michael Drive St Michael Drive Maureen Avenue Cowper Court Rambow Drive East Meadow Drive Ashton Court Murdoch Drive Cowper Street Murdoch Ct St Michael Court MayCourt Mayview Avenue Middlefield Road Ensign Way Bibbits DriveGailen Ct Gailen Avenue Grove Avenue San Antonio Avenue Commercial Street Industrial Avenue Bibbits Drive Charleston Road Fabian Way T East Meadow Drive Grove Avenue Christine Drive Corina Way Ross RoadCorina Way Louis Road Nathan Way Transport Street Ortega CourtEast Meadow Drive yneCourt alisman Loma Verde Avenue Allen Court Ros s C o u r t Loma Verde Pl Am e s A v e nue Rich a r d s o n C o u r t Holly Oa k Drive Am e s A v e nue CorkOakWay Middlefield Road Ames Ct Am es A v e n ue Ross Road Rorke Way RorkeWay Ston e L a n e Toyon Place Tor r e y a C o u r t Lupine Avenue Thornwood Drive DriftwoodDrive Talisman Drive Arbutus Avenue Ross Road Louis Road Asp en W ay Evergreen Drive Janice Way East Meadow Circle GreerRoad rive Ellsworth Place San Carlos Court Wintergreen Way SutterAvenue Sutter Avenue Clara Drive Price Court Stern Avenue Colorado Avenue Randers Ct Ross Road Sycamore Drive Sevyson Ct Stelling Drive Ross Road David Avenue MurrayWay Stelling Drive Stelling Ct ManchesterCourt rRoad Stockton Place Vernon Terrace Louis Road Janice Way T Loma V CliftonCourt ElbridgeWay Clara Drive BautistaCourtStockton Place Madd Piers Ct Louis Road Moraga Ct Old Page Mill Road Deer Creek Road Coyote Hill Road Hillview Avenue Porter Drive Hillview Avenue Hanover Street Foothill Expressway Arastradero Road Miranda Avenue Stanford Avenue Amherst Street Columbia Street Bowdoin Street Dartmouth Street Hanover Street College Avenue California Avenue Hanover Street Ramos Way (Private) Page Mill Road Hansen Way Hanover Street Old Adobe Road Old Trace Court Arastradero Road Miranda Avenue Mockingbird Lane Old TraceRoad Manuela Way Robb Road Manuela Court Mesa Avenue Oak Hill Avenue Manuela Avenue Miranda Avenue Laguna Ct Barron Avenue Josina Avenue Kendall Avenue Tippawingo St Julie Ct Matadero A venue Ilima Way Ilima Court Laguna Oa ks Pl Carlitos Ct La Calle Laguna Avenue El Cerrit Paradise Way Roble Ridge (Private) La MataWay Chimalus Drive Matadero Avenue oRoad Paul AvenueKendall AvenueWhitsell Avenue Barron Avenue Los Robles Avenue Laguna Way ShaunaLane La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue El Centro Street Timlott La Jennifer Way Magnolia Dr North La Donna Avenue LosRoblesAvenue Rinc Manzana Lane onCircle MesaCourt Crosby Pl Georgia Avenue Hubbartt Drive Willmar Drive Donald Drive Arastradero Road Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue La Para AvenueSan Jude Avenue Magnolia Drive Military Way Arbol Drive Orme Street Fernando Avenue Matadero Avenue Lambert Avenue Hansen Way El Camino Real Margarita Avenue Matadero Avenue Wilton Avenue Oxford Avenue Harvard Street California Avenue Wellesley Street Princeton Street Oberlin Street Cornell Street Cambridge Avenue College Avenue Williams Street Yale Street Staunton Court Oxford Avenue El Camino Real Churchill Avenue Park Boulevard Park Avenue Escobita Avenue Churchill Avenue Sequoia Avenue Mariposa Avenue Castilleja Avenue Miramonte Avenue Madrono Avenue Portola Avenue Manzanita Avenue Coleridge Avenue Leland Avenue Stanford Avenue Birch Street Ash Street Lowell Avenue Alma StreetTennyson Avenue Grant Avenue Sheridan Avenue Jacaranda Lane El Camino Real Sherman Avenue Ash Street Page Mill Road Mimosa Lane Chestnut Avenue Portage Avenue Pepper Avenue Olive Avenue Acacia Avenue Emerson Street Park Boulevard Orinda StreetBirch Street Ash Street Page Mill Road Ash Street Park Boulevard College Avenue Cambridge Avenue New Mayfield LaneBirch Street California Avenue Park Boulevard Nogal Lane Rinconada Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Park Boulevard Seale Avenue Washington Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Waverley Stree Bryant Street High Street Emerson Street Colorado Avenue Street Emerson Street Ramona Street Bryant Street South Court El Dorado Avenue Alma Street Alma Street HighStreet t Emerson Waverley Oaks Washington Avenue Bryant Street South Court Waverley Street Emerson Street Nevada Avenue North California Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Ramona Street High Street North California Avenue Oregon Expressway Marion Avenue Ramona Street Colorado Avenue Waverley Street Kipling Street South Court Cowper Street Anton Court Nevada Avenue Tasso StreetTasso Street Oregon Avenue Marion Pl Webster Street Middlefield Road Ross Road Warren Way El Cajon Way Garland Drive Louis Road Morton Street Marshall Drive Fieldin Moreno Avenue Marshall Drive Dennis Drive Agnes Way Orego Elsinore Dr El Cajon Way Nort gDrive Colorado Avenue Sycamore Drive Amar Bruce Drive CoMore Celia Drive Sandra PlaceColoradL Sand Hill Road Quarry Road Welch Road Arboretum Road Quarry Road Sand Hill Road Homer Avenue Lane 8 West Medical Foundation Way Lane 7 West Lane 7 East Embarcadero Road Encina Avenue El Camino Real Urban Lane Wells Avenue Forest Avenue High Street Emerson Street Channing Avenue Alma StreetAlma Street PaloAltoA El Camino Real venue Mitchell Lane Hawthorne Avenue 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 Ruthven Avenue Hawthorne Avenue Lane 33 PaloAltoAvenue Everett Avenue Poe Street Waverley Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Palo Alto Avenue Webster Street Everett Court Lytton Avenue Byron Street Fulton Street Middlefield Road Churchill Avenue Lowell Avenue Seale Avenue Tennyson Avenue Melville Avenue Cowper Street Tasso Street Webster Street Byron Street North California Avenue Coleridge Avenue Waverley Street Bryant Street Emerson Street Kellogg Avenue Kingsley Avenue Portal Place Ross Road Oregon Avenue Garland Drive Lane A West Lane B West Lane B East Lane D West Lane 59 East Whitman Court Kellogg Avenue Embarcadero Road Kingsley Avenue Lincoln Avenue Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue Lane D East Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilton Avenue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant Street Ramona Street Addison Avenue Scott Street Byron Street Palo Hale Street Seneca Street Lytton Avenue Guinda StreetPaloAltoAvenue Fulton Street Middlefield Road Forest Avenue Webster Street Kellogg Avenue Middlefield Road Byron Street Webster Street Cowper Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Boyce Avenue Forest Avenue Hamilton Avenue Homer Avenue Guinda Street Middlefield Road Channing Avenue AltoAvenue Chaucer Street Chaucer Street University Avenue Channing Avenue Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Regent Pl Guinda Street Lincoln Avenue Fulton Street Melville Avenue Byron Street Kingsley Avenue Melville Avenue Hamilton Avenue Hamilton Court Forest Avenue Forest Ct Marlowe Street Maple Stre Pa Somerset Pl Pitman Avenue Fife Avenue Forest AvenueDana Avenue Lincoln AvenueUniversity Avenue Coleridge Avenue Lowell Avenue Fulton Street Cowper Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Northampton Drive West Greenwich Pl Middlefield Road Newell Road Guinda Street East Greenwich Pl Southampton Drive Webster Street Kirby Pl Kent Place Tevis Pl Martin Avenue Center Drive Harriet Street Wilson Street Cedar Street Harker AvenueGreenwood Avenue Hutchinson Avenue Channing Avenue Hopkins Avenue Embarcadero Road Pitm Arcadia Place Newell Pl Sharon Ct Erstwild Court Walter Hays Drive Walnut DriveNewell Road Parkinson Avenue Pine Street Mark Twain Street Louis Road Barbara DriveEmbarcadero Road Walter Hays Drive Lois LaneJordan Pl Lois Lane Heat Bret Harte Street Stanley Way Walter Ramona Street Addison Avenue Channing Avenue Waverley Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Middlefield Road Byron Street Webster Street Marion Avenue Welch Road Sedro Lane Peral Lane McGregor Way Monroe Drive Silva Avenue Silva Court Miller Court Briarwood Way Driscoll Place Paulsen Ln Community Lane Lane 15 E Court Madeline Ct Arroyo Ct David Ct Green Ct Oregon Expressway Sheridan Avenue Page Mill Road Page Mill Road Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue Foothill Expressway Cerrito Way Emerson Street Miranda Avenue Lane 20 W Lane 20 E Oregon E University Avenue Jacob's Ct CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW Emerson Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Clark Way Durand Way Sandhill RoadSwain Way Clark Way Mosher Way Charles Marx Way Orchard Lane Vineyard Lane Oak Road Sand Hill Road Sand Hill Road Sand Hill Road Hillview Avenue Arastradero Road Lane 66 Bryant Street Ramona Street Blake Wilbur Drive West Charleston Road Palo Road Shopping Center Way Shopping Center Way Shopping Center Way London Plane Way Plum Lane Sweet Olive Way Pear Lane Lane 66 La Selva Drive Grove Ct Miranda Court Stanford Avenue Lane 12 W Lane 5 E Lasuen Street Serra Mall Escondido Road Olmsted Road Pistache Place Santa Ynez Street Lane B Lane C El Dorado Avenue Oak Creek Drive Clara Drive Bellview Dr Everett Avenue Homer Avenue La Calle Matadero Ave Los Robles Avenue Timlott Ct Vista Villa PaloAltoAvenue Lane La Donna Avenue Cass Way Kenneth Drive Fabi Page Mill Road Middlefield RoadChristine Drive Louis Road Charleston Road Chimalus Drive Hanover Street Community Lane Greenwood Avenue Harker Avenue Parkinson Avenue AvenueMaplewood Pl Mackay Drive Santa Teresa Lane Byron Street Varian Way Quail Dr Quail Paloma Dr Heron W Plover Ln Sandpiper Ln Curlew Ln Mallard LnEgret Ln Deodar StAlder Ln Spruce Ln Rickey's Ln Juniper Way Rickey's Wy Rickey's Wy Rickey's Wy Juniper Lane Emerson Street Cashel St Noble StHettinger Ln Pratt Ln Emma Court Galvez Mall Federation Way Abrams Court Allardice Way Alta Road Alvarado Ct Alvarado Row Angell Court Arguello Way Arguello Way Avery Mall Ayrshire Farm Lane Barnes Court Bonair Siding Bowdoin Street Cabrillo Avenue Cabrillo Avenue Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Dri ve Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Campus Drive Capistrano Way Casanueva Place Cathcart Way Cedro Way Cedro Way Churchill Mall Comstock Circle Aboretum Road Aboretum Road Blackwelder Court Campus Drive Cathcart Way Constanzo Street Cooksey Lane Coronado Avenue Cottrell Way Cottrell Way Cowell Ln Crothers Way Dolores Street Dolores Street Dudley Lane Duena Street Electioneer Road Escondido Mall Escondido Mall Escondido Road Escondido Road Escondido Road Esplanada Way Estudillo Road Fremont Road Frenchmans Road Frenchmans Road Galvez Mall Alvarado Row Galvez Street Galvez Street Galvez Street Gerona Road Gerona RoadEl Escarpado Gerona Road Hoskins Court Hulme Court Jenkins Court Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Junipero Serra Boulevard Knight Way Lagunita Drive Lane L Lane W Lasuen Mall Lasuen Mall Lasuen Mall Lasuen Street Lathrop Drive Lathrop Drive Lathrop Place Lathrop Drive Links Road Links Road Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Drive Lomita Court Lomita Mall Los Arboles Avenue Masters Mall Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue McFarland Court Mears Court Mears Court Memorial Way Mirada AvenueMirada Aven ue Museum Way N Service Road N Tolman Ln Nelson Mall Nelson Road North-South Axis Oberlin St Comstock Circle Escondido Mall Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Palm Drive Palm Drive Pampas Lane Panama Mall Panama Mall Panama Street Panama Street Pearce Mitchell Pl Peter Coutts Circle Peter Coutts Road Peter Coutts Road Pine Hill Court Pine Hill Road Quarry Extension Quarry Road Quillen Ct Raimundo Way R aimun d o Way Raimundo Way Roble Drive Rosse Lane Roth Way Roth Way Roth Way Running Farm Lane Ryan Court S Service Road S Tolman Ln Salvatierra Street Salvatierra St Salvatierra Walk Samuel Morris Wy San Francisco Terrace San Francisco Court San Juan St San Juan St San Rafael Pl Santa Fe Avenue Santa Maria Avenue Santa Teresa Street Santa Teresa Street Santa Ynez Street Searsville Road Sequoia Wy Serra Mall Serra Street Serra Street Serra Street Sonoma Terrace Stanford Avenue Stanford Avenue Stock Farm Road Thoburn Court Tolman Drive Valdez Place Valparaiso Street Vernier Place Via Ortega Via PalouVia Pueblo Mall Welch Road Wellesley St Wilbur Way Wing Place Yale St Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Alma Street Hawthorne Avenue Lytton Avenue Nathan Abbott Way Sam McDonald Road Sam McDonald Mall Vista Lane Bowdoin Lane Arguello Way Governors Avenue Governors Avenue Governors Avenue S Governors Lane Pasteur Drive Lagunita Drive Alma Village Lane Alma Village Circle Rese Reservoir Road Reservoir Road Ryan LaneBowling Lane Fiesta Court Marlowe Court O'Connor Lane This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend DRAFT HIS on Existing Commercial Zones DRAFT HIS on Existing Residential Transition Zones (SOFA2) DRAFT HIS on Existing Residential Zones Site designated to meet AB2348 requirement Small Lot; Consolidation Opportunity City Jurisdictional Limits abc Quarter Mile Radius from El Camino Real Half Mile Radius from Caltrain Station Caltrain Stations 0'1843' DR A F T Ho u s i n g I n v e n t o r y S i t e s ( H I S ) Ar e a M a p v0 4 1 3 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 2013 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2013-04-03 10:27:25 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) Univer d Hill Road Qu arr y Roa d W elc h R o a d A rboretum R oad Quarry Road Sand Hill Road Homer Avenue Lane 8 West Medical Foundation Way Lane 7 West Lane 7 East Embarcadero Road 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 StreetAlma Street Pal o Al t o A El Camino Real venue Mitchell Lane Hawthorne Avenue 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 Ruthven Avenue Hawthorne Avenue Lane 33 Pal o Alt o A venue Everett Avenue Poe Street Waverley Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Palo Alto Avenue Webster Street Everett Court Lytton Avenue Byron Street Fulton Street Middlefield Road Kingsley Avenue Lane A West Lane B West Lane B East Lane D West Lane 59 East Whitman Court Kingsley Avenue Lincoln Avenue Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue Lane D East Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilton Avenue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant Street Ramona Street Addison Avenue Scott Street Byron Street Lytton Avenu Fulton Street Middlefield Road Forest Aven Webster Street Middlefield Road Webster Street Cowper StreetCowper Street Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Home r Avenu Middlefield Road Channing Avenue Lincoln Aven Fulton Street Byron Street Kingsley Avenue Ramona Street Addison Aven Channing Aven Waverley Street Welch Road Paulsen Ln Lane 15 E Emerson Street Lane 20 W Lane 20 E University Avenue CalTrain ROW Emerson Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Clark Way Durand Way Sandhill Road Swain Way Clark Way Mosher Way Charles Marx Way Orchard Lane Vine yar d Lan e Sand Hill Road S a n d Hill R o a d Sand Hill Road Bryant Street Ramona Street Bla k e Wilb u r Driv e Palo Road Shopping Center Way Sh o pping C e nter W ay Shopping Center Way London Plane Way Plu m L a ne Sweet Olive Way Pear Lane Lane 12 W Lane 5 E L a su e n Stre et S err a M all Pistache Place Everett Avenue Homer Avenue Palo Alto Avenue Byron Street Varian Way Emerson Street Ar g u ello Wa y C a m p us Driv e C a m pu s D riv e Campus Drive Cam p u s D r i v e Campus Drive Campus Drive Aboretum Road Aboretum Road C roth ers W a y e n a Str e etEscondido Mall Escondido Mall G alve z M all Galvez Street G alv ez St re et G alv e z Stre et La su e n M all L a s u en M all s u e n M all La su e n Str ee t L o mita Drive L o mit a Driv e L o mita M all M e m orial W a y M u s e u m W a y N S e rvic e Ro a d Nels on Ro a d N orth -S o uth A xis E s P alm Driv e P alm Driv e P a n a m a M all P Q ua rr y E xt e n sio n Quarry Road R oth W a y R oth W ay R o t h W a y S er r a Mall S e rr a S tr e e t Via Or te g a Via P alo u Via P u e blo M all W elc h R o a d Alma Street Hawthorne Avenue Lytton Avenue Sam McDonald Road Sam McDonald Mall G overnors L ane P a ste u r Drive This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend DRAFT HIS on Existing Commercial Zones DRAFT HIS on Existing Residential Transition Zones (SOFA2) DRAFT HIS on Existing Residential Zones Small Lot; Consolidation Opportunity City Jurisdictional Limits abc Quarter Mile Radius from El Camino Real Half Mile Radius from Caltrain Station Caltrain Stations 0'700' DRAFTHousing Inventory sites (HIS)University Ave/DowntownArea Mapv0313 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 2013 City of Palo Alto RRivera, 2013-03-11 17:44:43HOS 2007 2014 downtown 0313 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\RRivera.mdb) 124-28-049 137-16-031 137-15-066 137-15-065 137-15-064 137-15-063 137-15-045 137-15-067 137-15-035 137-15-023 137-15-034 137-15-033 137-09-029 137-09-032 137-09-062 137-09-061 137-09-033 137-09-034 137-09-060 137-09-035 137-09-059 137-09-036 137-09-058 137-09-057 137-09-056 137-10-007 137-10-006 137-10-005 137-09-030 137-09-031 137-09-028 137-15-053 137-15-054 137-15-055 137-15-056 137-15-057 137-15-058 137-15-052 137-15-075 137-15-051 137-15-040 137-15-050 137-15-041 137-15-049 137-15-042 137-15-069 137-15-070137-15-072 137-10-002 137-15-068 137-15-073 137-15-074 137-15-044 137-15-047 137-15-046 137-15-059 137-15-060 137-15-061 137-15-062 137-10-120 137-10-121 137-10-003 137-10-022 137-10-010 137-10-009 137-10-008 137-10-125 137-10-011 137-10-013 137-09-017 137-09-016 137-10-019 137-10-020 137-10-021 137-09-018 137-09-019 137-09-020 137-09-021 137-09-022 137-09-024 137-09-023 137-09-069 137-09-071 137-09-068 137-09-063 137-09-064 137-09-053 137-09-054 137-09-055137-09-039 137-09-038 137-09-037 137-09-073 137-09-074 137-09-027 137-10-015 137-10-016 137-09-044 137-09-043 137-09-042 137-09-065 137-09-041 137-09-040 137-09-048 137-09-049 137-09-050 137-10-014 137-10-128 137-10-122 137-10-051 137-10-052 137-10-054 137-10-130 137-09-004 137-10-114 137-10-126 137-10-048 137-10 137-10-129 142-20-098 137-09-015 137-09-014 137-09-013 137-09-012 137-09-011 137-09-067 137-09-066 137-09-001137-09-002 137-09-009 137-09-008 137-09-007 137-09-006 137-10-053 137-08-085 137-08-053 137-08-054 137-09-003 137-08-095137-08-096 137-09-072 137-09-005 137-10-018 137-08-014 137-08-013 137-08-064 137-08-010 137-08-052 137-08-089 137-08-077 132-38-035 132-38-066 132-38-032 132-38-042 132-38-025 132-38-026 132-38-047 132-38-017 132-38-018 132-38-022 132-38-019132-38-020132-38-021 132-39-090 132-39-059 132-39-074 132-39-005 132-39-071 137-08-058 137-08-059 137-08-060 137-08-055 137-08-062 142-20-055 142-20-054 142-20-046 137-08-057 137-08-086 137-08-061 132-39-017 132-39-018 132-38-056 142-20-035 142-20-079 132-39-087 142-20-037 132-39-080 137-08-084 137-08-006 132-40-019 132-40-056 132-40-060 132-40-063 132-39-078132-39-077132-39-079 137-08-007 137-08-080 137-08-079 137-08-016 137-08-092 137-08-091 132-39-055 137-08-083 132-40-061 137-08-072 137-08-088 132-33-038 132-33-037 132-33-056132-33-039 132-33-051 132-33-052 132-33-031 132-33-034 132-39-083 132-39-049 132-39-048 132-39-047 132-39-043 132-39-042 132-39-041 132-39-040 132-39-039 132-39-038 132-39-037 132-39-035 132-39-036 132-39-050 132-39-051 132-39-052 132-39-053 132-39-034 132-39-033 132-39-031 132-39-024 132-39-025 132-39-026 132-39-081132-39-082 132-39-084 132-39-030 132-33-055 132-33-057 132-33-032 132-39-054 132-39-065 132-33-033 132-39-075 132-39-032 132-40-046 132-40-047 132-40-048 132-40-049 132-40-005 132-40-006 132-40-007 132-40-008 132-40-009 132-40-010 132-40-011 132-40-012 132-40-023 132-40-058 132-40-04 132-40 132-40-022 132-40-021 132-40-020 132-40-050 132-40-051 132-40-052 132-40-028 132-40-001 132-40-002 132-40-003 132-40-004 132-40-024 132-40-025 132-40-026 132-34-032 132-34-036 132-34-035 132-34-034 132-34-033132-34-010 132-34-009 132-34-008 132-34-007 132-34-006 132-34-005 132-34-004 132-34-016 132-34-015 132-34-014 132-34-013 132-34-012 132-34-011 132-39-046 132-39-044 132-39-045 132-40-027 132-40-055 132-40-053 132-40-054 132-34-047132-34-048132-34-049132-34-050132-34-051 132-34-023 132-34-024 132-34-031 132-34-030 132-34-029 132-34-028 132-34-027 132-34-026 132-34-025 132-34-022132-34-021 132-34-040 132-34-039 132-34-038 132-34-037 13 132-35-008 132-35-007 132-35-006 132-35-005 132-35-004 132-35-003 132-35-002 132-35-001 132-35-009 132-35-010 132-37-024 132-37-023 132-37-022 132-37-049 132-37-048 132-37-046 132-37-045 132-37-044 132-37-053 132-37-042 132-38-064 132-38-065 132-38-062 132-38-027 132-38-045 132-38-046 132-32-047 132-32-026 132-32-027 132-32-037 132-32-025 132-32-024 132-32-043 132-37-055 132-37-057132-37-054 132-37-047 132-38-059 132-38-055 132-38-011 132-33-050 132-33-028 132-33-030 132-33-041 132-33-029 132-34-017 132-34-018 132-34-019 132-38-040 132-33-042 132-38-058 132-38-041 132-38-013 132-38-057 132-38-048 132-38-043 132-38-060 132-38-061 132-26-073132-26-074 132-33-008 132-33-007 132-33-006 132-33-005 132-33-004 132-33-003 132-33-002 132-33-001 132-33-024 132-33-023 132-33-022 132-33-021 132-33-020 132-33-019 132-33-018 132-33-017 132-33-059 132-33-026 132-33-027 132-33-044 132-33-045 132-33-046 132-33-047 132-33-048 132-33-049 132-34-064132-26-064132-26-065132-26-072132-26-075132-26-052 132-33-043 132-25-028 132-25-027 132-25-024 132-25-053 132-25-023 132-25-022 132-25-021132-25-020 132-26-028 132-26-071 132-37-064 132-32-054 132-32-034 132-32-033 132-32-032 132-32-031 132-32-035 132-32-029 132-32-030 132-32-028 132-32-036 132-31-078 132-32-042 132-32-053 132-26-076 132-26-079 132-26-078 132-26-026 132-26-027 132-26-025 132-26-024 132-26-023 132-26-022 132-26-021 132-26-019 132-26-018 132-26-060 132-26-068 132-26-063 132-26-070132-26-010132-26-009132-26-008132-26-007132-26-006132-26-005132-26-004132-26-003132-26-002 132-26-001 132-26-029 132-19-050 132-19-049 132-19-048 132-19-047 132-19-046 132-19-045 132-19-044 132-19-043 132-19-042 132-19-031132-19-030132-19-029 132-26-062 132-18-057 132-18-058 132-58-001132-58-002132-58-003 132-34-020 132-34-001 132-34-002 132-34-003 132-34-062 132-34-061 132-34-059132-34-060 132-34-058 132-34-057 132-34-055132-34-056 132-34-054 132-34-053 132-34-052132-34-063 132-48-006132-48-007132-48-008 132-19-068 132-19-015132-19-016 132-19-032 132-19-033 132-19-034 132-19-035 132-19-064 132-19-065 132-19-066 132-19-041 132-26-061 132-26-013 132-48-009 132-47-030132-47-029 132-48-023 132-48-021132-48-022 132-48-010 132-48-011 132-48-012 132-48-036 132-48-037 132-48-001132-48-002132-48-003132-48-004132-48-005 132-19-014 132-19-067 132-19-059 132-19-056 132-19-058 132-19-057 132-19-060 132-19-061 132-19-063 132-48-015132-48-041 132-48-040 132-48-033 132-48-038 132-48-039 132-27-103 132-27-102 132-27-101 132-27-100 132-27-099 132-27-098 132-27-095132-27-097 132-27-055132-27-052 132-27-053 132-27-054132-27-051132-27-049 132-27-050 132-27-048 132-27-045132-27-046132-27-047 132-27-108 132-48-014 132-27-007132-27-004 132-27-042 132-21-081 132-21-080 132-27-044 132-27-005 132-27-006 132-27-043 132-21-079 132-47-055132-47-056 132-47-054 132-47-053 132-47-052 132-47-051 132-47-050 132-47-032132-47-031 132-48-034 132-48-030132-48-029 132-48-031 132-48-032132-48-028132-48-027132-48-026132-48-024 132-48-025 132-48-018132-48-019132-48-020 132-19-054132-19-053 132-19-055 132-21-082 132-47-019 132-47-018 132-47-012 132-47-058132-47-017132-47-020132-47-021 132-47-049 132-47-048 132-47-047 132-47-046 132-47-043132-47-045 132-47-044 132-47-042132-47-041132-47-039132-47-038132-47-037132-47-036 132-47-036 132-47-035132-47-034132-47-033 132-21-045132-21-043 132-21-042 132-21-041 132-21-040 132-21-039 132-21-001 132-47-011 132-47-040 132-21-046132-21-044 132-21-002 132-21-003 132-21-004 132-15-071 132-47-014132-47-013 132-47-015 132-15-073 132-15-072 132-15-075 132-15-074 132-15-038 132-15-076 132-15-00 132-15-037 132-15-077 132-15-002 132-15-035132-15-036 124-08-084 124-08-042 124-08-075 124-08-076 124-08-046 124-08-047 124-08-072 124-08-053 124-08-074 124-08-055 124-08-041 124-08-040 124-08-038 124-08-037 124-08-056 124-08-057 124-08-058 124-08-059 124-08-060 124-08-073 124-08-035 124-08-034 124-08-033 124-08-032 124-08-031 124-06-015124-06-070 124-09-001 124-09-002 124-09-045 124-09-004 124-09-027 124-09-028 124-09-029 124-09-044 124-09-042 124-09-038 124-09-037 124-09-036 124-09-035 124-09-033 124-09-031 124-09-030 124-09-034 124-09-025 124-13-001 124-08-039 124-08-036 124-02-072 124-02-071 124-08-069 124-08-030 124-08-029124-08-028 124-08-070 124-08-026 124-08-025 124-08-062 124-08-061 124-02-073124-02-074 124-02-031 124-02-032 124-06-018 124-06-017 124-09-006 124-06-013 124-06-012 124-06-011 124-06-010 124-06-009 124-06-008 124-06-007 124-06-067 124-06-066 124-09-005 124-09-007 124-09-007124-09-007 124-09-026 124-09-011 124-09-018 132-02-081 132-02-080 124-14-001 124-14-002 124-14-003 124-14-004 124-14-005 124-14-006 124-14-007 124-14-016 124-14-015 124-14-014124-14-017124-14-018124-14-019124-14-020124-14-021124-14-022 124-14-027 124-14-028 124-14-029 124-14-010 124-14-011124-14-009124-14-008 124-11-068 124-11-072 124-11-071 124-11-070 124-11-069 124-11-052 124-11-083 124-11-051 124-11-050 124-11-049 124-11-048 124-11-047 124-11-035 124-11-034 124-11-033 124-11-038124-11-037 124-11-032 124-11-031 124-11-030 124-11-029 124-11-028 124-11-027 124-11-026 124-11-025 124-11-024124-11-044124-11-043124-11-042 124-11-039 124-11-040124-11-036124-10-014 124-10-015 124-10-016 124-10-017 124-10-013 132-12-049 124-11-041 124-10-053 124-10-054 124-10-058 124-10-051 132-12-051 124-14-050 124-14-024 124-04-029124-04-030124-04-031124-06-005 124-06-004 124-10-001 124-10-002 124-10-003 124-10-004 124-10-043 124-10-044 124-10-045 124-10-009 124-10-006124-10-005 124-10-042 124-10-010 124-10-041 124-10-011 124-10-012124-10-038124-10-039124-10-040 124-10-037 124-09-012 124-11-073 124-11-067124-11-074 124-11-075 124-11-066 124-11-065 124-11-064 124-11-076 124-04-020 124-04-018124-04-019 124-10-008 124-10-007 124-11-077 124-11-079124-11-080124-11-001 124-11-023124-11-045 132-12-002 132-12-003 132-12-004 132-12-005 132-12-024 132-07-033 132-07-031 132-07-027132-07-028 132-07-026 132-07-025 132-07-046 132-07-056 132-07-021 132-07-058 132-07-018132-07-017 132-07-020132-07-019 132-07-048 132-07-054 132-02-087 132-07-055 132-07-057 132-08-024 132-08-025 132-08-031 132-08-030 132-08-029 132-08-109 132-08-110 132-08-002 132-08-003132-08-001 132-08-026 132-08-093 132-08-111 132-08-103 132-07-059132-07-061 132-08-112 132-07-052 132-07-032 124-11-022 124-11-021124-11-081 124-11-019 124-11-018 124-11-017124-11-057124-11-056124-11-053 124-11-055124-11-054 124-11-016124-11-058124-11-059124-11-060124-11-061 132-07-016132-07-060 132-07-012132-07-013132-07-014 132-07-010 132-07-009 132-07-011 132-07-001 132-02-086 132-02-085 132-02-084 132-02-083 132-02-082 132-02-091132-02-092 132-08-004 132-08-007 132-08-104 132-08-008 124-11-062124-11-063124-11-078 132-17-071 132-17-084 132-17-082 132-17-072 132-25-054 132-17-058 132-17-053 132-31-071 132-31-042 132-25-044 132-25-043 132-25-042 132-25-041 132-25-004132-25-052 132-25-001 132-25-002 132-25-050 132-25-049 132-25-047 132-25-048 132-17-080 132-17-059132-17-060 132-17-073 132-17-074 132-17-075 132-17-076 132-17-069 132-17-070 132-25-040 132-25-039 132-25-038 132-25-037 132-25-036 132-25-035 132-25-034 132-25-033 132-25-011132-25-010132-25-009132-25-008132-25-007132-25-006132-25-005 132-18-073132-18-074132-18-075 132-18-041132-18-040 132-18-077 132-18-091 132-18-092 132-18-093 132-18-094 132-18-095 132-18-076 132-17-079 124-14-066124-14-065124-14-064124-14-063124-14-062124-14-061 124-14-039 124-14-034 124-14-042 124-14-041 124-14-040 124-14-033124-14-032124-14-031 124-14-043 124-14-030 124-14-044124-14-045 124-20-017 124-20-018 124-14-067124-14-068124-14-069124-14-070 124-14-038 124-14-035 124-14-036 124-14-037 132-17-061 132-17-049 132-17-050 132-17-051 132-17-052 132-17-045 132-17-027 132-17-044 132-17-043 132-17-042 132-17-028 132-17-048 124-14-012124-14-013 132-17-029 132-17-030 132-17-031 132-17-032 132-17-041 132-17-033 132-17-039132-17-040 132-17-078 132-17-077 132-17-015 132-17-014132-17-016132-17-019 132-17-007 132-17-008 132-17-018 132-17-006132-17-004 132-17-005 132-17-021132-17-022132-17-023 132-17-003132-17-002 132-17-024 132-17-020 132-17-017 132-17-009 132-17-034 132-12-048 132-12-052 132-12-028 132-12-047 132-12-046 132-12-045 132-12-029 132-12-044 132-12-023 132-12-001 132-18-021132-18-022132-18-023132-18-024 132-18-049 132-18-050 132-18-051 132-18-052 132-18-053 132-18-054 132-18-055 132-18-056 132-18-059132-18-060132-18-061132-18-062132-18-063132-18-064132-18-065132-18-066132-18-067132-18-068132-18-069 132-25-012 132-25-055 132-25-056 132-25-014 132-25-015 132-25-016 132-25-017 132-25-018 132-25-019 132-25-029132-25-030132-25-031132-25-032 132-19-051 132-19-052 132-19-026132-19-025 132-19-027 132-13-039 132-13-040 132-13-041 132-13-052132-13-053 132-13-051132-13-054132-13-055132-13-056132-13-059 132-13-058 132-13-057 132-18-090 132-18-084 132-18-005 132-18-006 132-18-007 132-18-086 132-18-08 6 132-18-035132-18-036132-18-037132-18-038132-18-039 132-18-034 132-18-087 132-18-010 132-18-032 132-18-088 132-18-083 132-18-028132-18-029132-18-031 132-18-027 132-18-026 132-18-015132-18-014 132-18-016 132-18-017 132-18-019132-18-018 132-18-025 132-18-042 132-18-043 132-18-044 132-18-045 132-18-046 132-18-047 132-18-048 132-18-070132-18-071132-18-072 132-19-003132-19-002132-19-001 132-19-022132-19-023132-19-024 132-19-028 132-19-028 132-18-020 132-19-004 132-19-005 132-19-020 132-19-019 132-19-018 132-19-017 132-19-069132-19-010132-19-009132-19-008132-19-007132-19-006 132-19-021 132-14-024 132-14-046 132-14-045 132-14-044 132-14-028132-14-027 132-14-029 132-14-043 132-14-042 132-14-041 132-14-030 132-14-031 132-14-032 132-14-038132-14-039132-14-040132-13-050 132-13-049 132-13-048 132-13-047132-13-046132-13-045132-13-044132-13-043132-13-042 132-13-022 132-13-018132-13-019132-13-021 132-13-020 132-13-016 132-13-017 132-14-026132-14-025 132-14-001 132-14-002 132-14-003 132-14-023 132-14-022 132-14-019132-14-020132-14-021 132-17-011 132-17-013 132-18-085 132-18-089 132-13-076 132-13-077 132-12-034 132-12-041 132-12-040 132-12-036 132-12-037 132-12-038 132-12-039 132-12-035 132-12-042 132-12-033 132-12-043 132-17-012132-17-010 132-13-037 132-13-038 132-13-067 132-13-068 132-13-071 132-13-060132-13-061 132-13-034132-13-033132-13-032 132-13-072 132-13-073 132-13-006 132-13-007 132-13-027132-13-028132-13-029 132-13-030 132-13-069 132-13-070132-12-016 132-12-013 132-12-014 132-12-015 132-13-036132-13-035 132-13-031 132-12-030 132-12-031 132-12-032 132-12-012 132-12-019 132-12-010 132-12-018 132-12-009132-12-008 132-12-020132-12-021 132-12-006 132-12-022 132-12-007 132-12-017 132-12-011 132-08-019 132-08-018 132-08-094 132-08-023 132-08-014 132-08-106 132-08-015 132-08-021 132-08-022 132-08-020 132-13-026 132-13-025 132-13-024 132-13-013132-13-012 132-13-014132-13-011132-13-010132-13-008 132-13-023 132-13-015 132-08-065132-08-066132-08-067132-08-068132-08-069132-08-070132-08-071132-08-072132-08-073132-08-074132-08-075 132-08-057 132-08-058 132-08-059 132-08-060 132-08-061 132-08-062 132-08-063 132-08-064 132-09-045 132-08-044 132-13-009 132-08-076132-08-082132-08-083132-08-102 132-08-101 132-08-088 132-08-091 132-08-092 132-08-095 132-08-079 132-08-056 132-08-036132-08-097 132-08-098132-08-034132-08-108132-08-114132-08-113 132-08-045132-08-046132-08-047132-08-048132-08-049132-08-089132-08-090 132-02-073132-02-074132-02-075 132-08-009 132-08-105 132-08-010 132-08-011 132-08-013 132-14-033 132-14-034 132-14-037 132-14-035 132-14-062 132-14-055 132-14-056 132-14-057 132-14-058132-14-059132-14-060 132-14-017132-14-018 132-14-016 132-14-015 132-14-014 132-14-013 132-14-061 132-14-047132-14-010132-14-009132-14-008132-14-007 132-14-054 132-14-053 132-14-064 132-14-049 132-14-063 132-14-065 132-14-067 132-47-028 132-47-027 132-47-026 132-47-003132-47-002132-47-001 132-47-025 132-47-024 132-47-023 132-47-022 132-47-005132-47-004 132-09-047 132-09-035 132-20-174 132-20-181 132-20-172132-20-175 132-20-173 132-20-171 132-20-170 132-14-006132-14-005132-14-004 132-09-002 132-09-003132-09-001 132-09-022 132-09-023 132-09-021 132-09-020 132-09-019 132-09-018 132-09-031132-09-030132-09-025 132-09-026 132-09-027 132-09-028 132-09-029132-09-024 132-09-046 132-09-044 132-09-043 132-09-042 132-09-041 132-09-038 132-09-037132-09-039132-09-040 132-55- 132-55-009 132-55-007 132-55-006 132-55-005 132-55-004 132-55-003 132-55-002 132-08-042 132-08-041 132-08-039 132-08-040132-08-038132-08-037 132-08-043 132-55-008 132-20-127 132-20-126 132-20-128 132-09-004 132-09-005 132-09-007 132-09-009 132-09-010 132-09-011 132-09-012132-09-013132-09-014132-09-015132-09-016132-09-017 132-09-008 132-09-034132-09-033132-09-032 132-09-036 132-55-001 132-09-006 132-47-010132-47-009132-47-008132-47-007132-47-006 132-20-182 132-20-145 132-20-144 132-20-143132-20-142 132-20-134 132-20-184 132-20-140 132-20-139 132-20-178 132-20-147 132-20-148 132-20-149 132-20-150 132-20-151 132-20-152 132-20-153 132-20-154 132-20-146 132-56-062 132-20-161 132-20-165132-20-166132-20-167 132-20-163 132-20-164 132-20-162 132-20-141 132-20-135 132-20-129 132-20-180 132-15-095 132-15-137 13 132-15-138 132-20-160 132-20-159 132-20-156132-20-155 132-10-045 132-10-00 132-57-044132-57-045132-57-046 132-20-158 132-20-157 132-57-047132-57-048132-56-060132-56-061 132-20-133 132-20-183 132-20-132 132-20-131 132-56-067132-56-068 132-56-065 132-56-071 132-56-070 132-20-125 132-56-072 137-04-001 137-04-002 137-04-003 137-04-004 137-04-005 137-02-023 137-02-086 142-20-008 142-20-009 142-20-010 137-02-019 137-02-020 137-02-091 137-02-024 137-02-016 137-02-029 137-02-030 137-02-031 137-01-108 137-01-097137-01-098137-01-099 137-01-105 137-01-107 137-01-096137-01-095137-01-094 137-01-093 137-01-091 137-01-109 137-35-001137-35-002 137-01-141137-01-140 142-20-057 124-33-039 124-33-066 142-20-011 142-20-012 142-20-048 142-20-047 142-20-013 137-01-110 137-01-145 137-01-088 137-01-089 137-01-130 132-36-068 132-36-077 137-01-129 137-01-087 124-32-045 124-32-048124-32-049 124-32-019 137-01-074 137-01-075137-01-125 137-01-113 137-01-070 137-01-069 137-01-143137-01-142 137-01-104 137-01-102 137-01-103 137-01-034 137-01-035 124-32-012 137-01-086 137-01-146137-01-147 124-32-046 124-32-047 137-01-078 137-34-001137-34-002137-34-003137-34-004137-34-005 124-33-056 124-33-047 124-33-046 124-33-065 124-33-043 124-33-035 124-33-036124-33-042 124-33-037 124-33-067 124-33-026 124-33-005 124-33-007 124-33-008 124-33-006 124-33-019 124-33-018 124-33-017 124-33-016 124-33-015 124-32-043 124-32-044 124-33-025 124-33-024 124-33-012 124-33-013 124-33-014 132-50-012 132-50-011 132-50-010 132-50-009 132-50-008 132-50-007 132-50-006132-50-005 132-50-004 132-50-003 132-50-002 132-50-001132-51-001 132-51-013132-51-014 132-51-015 132-51-016 132-51-017 132-51-018 132-51-019132-51-020 132-51-021 132-51-022 132-51-023 132-51-024 132-51-012132-51-011 132-51-010 132-51-009 132-51-008 132-51-007132-51-006132-51-005 132-51-004 132-51-003 132-51-002 124-33-061 124-33-062 132-37-019 132-37-018 132-37-017 132-37-016 132-37-004 132-37-003 132-37-005 132-37-006 132-37-007 132-37-008 132-37-015 132-37-067 132-37-009 132-37-041 132-37-040 132-37-039 132-37-038 132-37-034 132-37-029 132-37-028 132-37-027 132-37-026132-37-037 132-37-036 132-37-035 132-37-025 132-37-030132-37-052132-37-033132-36-087 132-36-084132-36-031 132-37-056 142-20-080 132-37-063 132-37-062 132-37-061132-37-060 132-37-059 132-37-058 132-36-081 132-36-092 132-36-024 124-33-064 132-54-015 132-54-016 132-54-017132-54-018 132-54-019 132-54-020 132-54-021 132-54-022 132-54-023 132-54-024 132-54-025 132-54-026132-54-027 132-54-028 132-54-029 132-54-030 132-54-031132-54-032132-54-033 132-54-014 132-54-013132-54-012 132-54-011 132-54-010 132-54-009 132-54-008132-54-007 132-54-006132-54-005 132-54-001 132-54-002 132-54-003132-54-004 132-54-034 132-54-035 132-54-036 132-54-037 132-54-038 132-54-039 132-54-040132-54-041 132-54-042 132-54-043 132-54-044 132-54-045132-54-046132-54-047 132-54-048 132-54-049 132-54-050 132-54-051 132-54-052 132-54-053 132-54-054132-54-055 132-36-075 132-36-094 132-36-093 132-36-074 132-36-015 132-36-069 132-36-070 132-36-020 132-36-025 124-17-071 124-17-072 124-17-073 124-17-074 124-17-075 124-17-076 124-17-077 124-17-078 124-17-041 124-17-040 124-18-001 124-18-003 124-18-004 124-18-006 124-18-008 124-18-010 124-18-036 124-18-037 124-18-040 124-18-041 124-18-007 124-18-005 124-18-042 124-18-043 124-18-044 124-18-047 124-18-046 124-18-045 124-18-048 124-18-009 124-18-032 124-18-053 124-18-052 124-18-051 124-18-050 124-18-049 124-18-100 124-18-055 124-23-063 124-23-062 124-23-061 124-23-060 124-23-059 124-25-024 124-26-007124-26-006 124-26-004 124-26-005 124-27-001 124-27-050 124-23-058 124-18-039124-18-038 124-18-002 124-18-035 124-18-011 124-18-012 124-23-050 124-26-025 124-18-101124-34-001 124-34-002 124-34-003 124-34-004 124-17-044 124-17-088 124-17-089 124-17-084 124-17-064 124-17-067 124-17-068 124-17-069 124-17-070 124-17-066 124-17-045 124-17-065 124-17-043 124-17-042 124-17-063124-17-049 124-17-050 124-17-051 124-17-052 124-17-053 124-17-058 124-17-059 124-17-060 124-17-083 124-17-062 124-17-057 124-17-056124-17-054 124-17-055 124-18-033 124-18-034124-18-013 124-18-014 124-18-104124-18-105 124-18-016 124-08-077 124-08-078 124-17-082 124-17-085 124-17-048 124-19-098 124-19-063 124-19-062 124-19-061 124-19-099 124-19-089 124-19-064 124-19-003 124-19-001 124-19-002 124-19-055 124-19-054 124-19-053 124-19-052 124-19-049 124-19-048 124-19-047 124-19-046 124-19-042 124-19-044 124-19-043124-19-041 124-19-045 124-19-116 124-19-005 124-19-006 124-19-007 124-19-111 124-19-040 124-18-096 124-18-098 124-18-097 124-18-099 124-18-087 124-18-054 124-19-008 124-19-112 124-19-009 124-19-038124-19-010 124-19-031 124-19-034 124-19-033 124-19-032 124-19-030 124-19-035124-19-036 124-19-037 124-19-011 124-19-029 124-19-028 124-18-091 124-18-092 124-18-093 124-18-094 124-18-095 124-18-086 124-18-090 124-18-089 124-19-090 124-19-073 124-19-074 124-19-075 124-19-076 124-19-077 124-19-078 124-19-079 124-19-080 124-19-081 124-19-082 124-19-083 124-19-084124-19-085 124-19-087 124-19-088 124-19-066 124-19-065 124-19-067 124-19-068 124-19-115 124-19-071 124-19-072 124-19-086 124-14-087 124-14-054 124-14-055 124-14-056 124-14-023 124-14-053 124-14-052 124-14-051 124-14-025 124-14-049 124-14-048 124-14-047 124-14-026 124-14-046 124-10-022 124-10-021 124-10-018 124-20-008 124-19-091 124-20-034 124-20-042 124-18-056 124-18-057 124-18-059 124-18-058 124-18-085 124-18-088 124-18-077 124-18-066 124-18-065 124-18-064 124-18-110 124-18-062 124-18-061 124-18-060 124-18-084 124-18-083 124-18-082 124-18-078 124-18-080124-18-081 124-18-079 124-18-031 124-18-027 124-18-028 124-18-029 124-18-030 124-13-027124-13-052 124-19-012 124-19-013 124-19-014 124-19-015 124-19-016 124-19-114 124-19-017 124-19-113 124-19-020124-19-019 124-18-076 124-18-075 124-18-074 124-18-073 124-18-072 124-18-071124-18-069 124-18-070 124-13-043 124-08-051 124-08-050 124-08-049 124-08-048 124-18-025 124-18-024124-18-021124-18-020 124-18-018 124-18-017 124-18-107124-18-106 124-13-029 124-13-031 124-13-033 124-13-034 124-13-036 124-13-035 124-13-038 124-13-039 124-13-040 124-13-049 124-13-054124-13-055 124-13-044 124-13-045 124-13-006124-13-004 124-13-005 124-13-046 124-13-047 124-13-003 124-13-002 124-09-032 124-18-068 124-18-067 124-18-023124-18-022 124-13-030 124-13-007 124-13-010 124-13-032 124-13-008 124-13-048 124-13-050 124-13-051 124-19-027 124-19-026 124-19-025 124-19-024 124-19-023 124-19-022 124-09-014 124-10-046 124-10-047 124-10-028 124-10-030 124-10-056 124-10-027 124-10-057 124-10-060 124-10-025 124-10-024 124-10-059 124-10-036 124-10-035 124-13-053 124-13-015 124-13-025 124-13-024 124-13-059 124-13-026 124-13-019124-13-018 124-13-020 124-13-021 124-13-058 124-13-017124-13-016 124-09-022 124-09-021 124-09-023 124-09-024 124-06-006 124-09-020 124-09-019 124-09-013 124-09-010124-09-009124-09-008 124-09-043 124-10-048 124-10-049 124-13-011 124-13-012 124-13-013 124-13-009 124-09-017 124-10-050 124-31-058 124-31-060 124-31-059 124-31-055 124-31-054 124-31-063 124-31-062 124-31-061 124-31-064 124-31-065 124-31-066 124-31-053 124-31-012 124-31-026 124-31-027 124-31-013 124-31-014 124-31-015 124-31-016 124-31-017 124-31-018 137-01-131137-01-029 137-01-135 124-31-029 124-31-019124-31-021 124-31-020 124-31-022124-31-023124-31-024124-31-025 124-32-010 124-32-011 124-32-022 124-32-021 124-32-016124-32-072 124-31-050 124-31-051 124-31-052 124-31-070 124-31-069 124-31-068 124-31-067 124-31-049 124-31-080 124-31-079124-31-071 124-31-047 124-31-046 124-32-007124-32-027 124-32-026 124-32-028 124-32-029 124-32-030 124-32-031 124-32-050 124-32-025 124-32-071 124-32-009 124-32-020 124-32-013 124-32-060124-32-061124-32-062 124-32-063 124-32-065124-32-064 124-32-068124-32-067124-32-066 124-31-030 124-30-001 124-30-002 124-30-003 124-30-004 124-30-005 124-30-006 124-30-007 124-30-008 124-30-009 124-30-027 124-30-028 124-30-029 124-30-030 124-31-031 124-31-032 124-31-033 124-31-009 124-31-010 124-31-011 124-31-008 124-31-007 124-31-006 124-31-038 124-31-037 124-31-036 124-31-035 124-31-034 124-31-001 124-26-010 124-26-009 124-26-008 124-26-011 124-26-012 124-26-013 124-26-014 124-26-015 124-26-016 124-26-024 124-26-023 124-26-022 124-26-021 124-26-020 124-26-019 124-26-017 124-31-028 124-31-005 124-31-004 124-31-003 124-31-002 124-31-076 124-31-039 124-31-040 124-31-075 124-31-043 124-31-044 124-31-045 124-31-072 124-31-083 124-26-018 124-27-002 124-27-003 124-27-005 124-27-018 124-27-017 124-27-016 124-27-015 124-27-014 124-27-013 124-27-012 124-27-011 124-27-010 124-27-009 124-27-008 124-27-007 124-27-006 124-27-031 124-27-032 124-27-049 124-33-059 124-33-055 124-33-027 124-33-001 124-33-028 124-33-029 124-33-030 124-33-023124-33-022 124-33-021 124-33-020 124-32-051 124-32-035 124-32-036 124-32-037 124-32-038 124-32-039 124-32-052 124-32-053 124-32-054 124-32-055 124-32-040 124-32-041 124-32-042 124-36-036 124-36-037 124-36-038 124-36-039 124-36-040 124-36-017 124-36-018124-36-019 124-36-020124-36-021 124-36-022 124-29-008 124-29-017 132-36-073 132-31-072 132-31-081 132-31-065 132-31-074 124-36-035124-36-034 124-36-033 124-36-032 124-36-031124-36-030 124-36-029124-36-028 124-36-027124-36-026 124-36-025124-36-024 124-36-023 124-36-016 124-36-015 124-36-014124-36-013 124-36-012124-36-001 124-36-002 124-36-003124-36-004 124-36-005 124-36-011 124-36-010124-36-009 124-36-008 124-36-007 124-36-006 124-37-014 124-37-015124-37-036 124-37-059 124-37-016 124-37-013 124-37-035124-37-034124-37-033 124-37-056124-37-057124-37-058 124-37-060124-37-061 124-37-017124-37-018124-37-019124-37-020 124-37-037124-37-038124-37-039124-37-040124-37-041 124-37-055124-37-054124-37-053124-37-052124-37-051 124-37-062124-37-063124-37-064124-37-065 124-37-012124-37-011124-37-010124-37-009124-37-008124-37-007124-37-006124-37-005124-37-032124-37-031 124-37-030124-37-029 124-37-066124-37-067 124-37-068124-37-069 124-37-050124-37-049124-37-048124-37-047 124-37-042 124-37-043 124-37-044124-37-045124-37-046 124-37-028 124-37-027124-37-026124-37-025 124-37-004 124-37-024 124-37-003124-37-002 124-37-021124-37-022124-37-023 124-37-084124-37-085124-37-083124-37-082124-37-081124-37-080 124-37-070124-37-071124-37-072 124-37-073124-37-074 124-37-075124-37-076124-37-077 124-37-078 124-29-016 124-37-086124-37-079 124-28-009 124-28-010 124-28-011 124-27-027 124-27-028 124-27-029 124-32-056 124-32-033 124-32-034 124-32-005 124-32-004 124-32-003 124-32-002 124-32-001 124-32-032 124-32-006 124-31-042124-31-041 124-28-036 124-28-051 124-28-012 124-28-013 124-28-014 124-28-015 124-28-016 124-28-017 124-28-008 124-28-050 124-28-021 124-28-022 124-28-020 124-28-018 124-28-019 124-28-030 124-28-032 124-28-034124-28-035 124-28-029 124-28-028 124-28-053 124-29-004124-29-005 124-29-007 124-28-003 124-29-022 124-29-021 124-29-002124-29-001 124-28-004 124-28-045 124-28-052 124-28-033 124-28-031 124-28-027 124-27-022124-27-021 124-27-038124-27-039124-27-040124-27-041124-27-042124-27-043124-27-044124-27-045124-27-046124-27-047124-27-048 124-27-023 124-27-024 124-27-025 124-27-026 124-27-030 124-27-037 124-27-036 124-27-035 124-27-034 124-27-033 124-27-004 124-28-001 124-28-024 124-28-023 124-28-002124-27-020124-27-019 124-19-102 124-19-109 124-19-108124-19-110 124-19-056 124-19-059 124-19-058 124-19-057 124-19-107 124-19-106 124-19-105 124-19-104 124-19-103 124-19-101124-19-100 124-19-060 124-19-097 124-19-051 124-19-050 124-28-043 124-29-013 124-29-012 124-29-011 124-29-020 132-31-005 124-20-040 124-29-023 124-29-025 132-31-079 124-20-035124-20-006 124-20-009 124-20-041 124-20-003 124-20-004 124-20-002 124-20-037 124-20-036 124-20-005 124-19-096 124-19-095 124-19-094 124-19-093 124-19-092 124-20-007 124-20-001 124-20-020 124-20-021 124-20-023 124-20-022 124-20-016124-20-015124-20-014 124-20-024 124-20-013 124-20-028 124-20-027 124-20-026 124-20-025124-20-032 124-20-031124-20-033 124-20-030 124-20-029 124-20-011 124-20-012 124-20-019 124-14-085124-14-086 124-14-058 124-14-075 124-14-057 124-14-082 124-14-059 124-14-060 124-14-074 124-14-073 124-14-072 124-14-071 124-14-078 124-14-079 124-14-076 124-14-081 124-14-084124-14-083 124-14-080 124-14-077 137-07-085 137-07-051 137-07-052 137-07-053 137-07-054 137-07-055 137-07-056 137-07-057 137-07-058 137-07-065 137-07-064 137-07-066 137-07-063137-07-062137-07-061137-07-060137-07-059 137-07-069137-07-068137-07-067 137-07-003137-07-002 137-07-021 137-07-022137-07-023 137-07-024 137-07-026 137-07-001 137-07-029 137-07-028 137-07-088 137-07-087137-07-086 137-07-033 137-07-030 137-07-025 137-06-062 137-06-063 137-07-082 137-07-084 137-07-037 137-07-036 137-07-035 137-07-034 137-07-040 137-07-039 137-07-038 137-06-105 137-06-106137-06-104 137-06-108 137-06-107 137-05-074 137-07-047 137-07-048 137-07-049 137-06-053 137-06-055 137-06-054 137-06-056137-06-058 137-06-057 137-07-078137-07-079 137-07-081137-07-080137-07-077 137-06-051 137-06-052137-06-071 137-06-072 137-06-097137-06-098137-06-095137-06-096137-06-094 137-06-085137-06-069137-06-068137-06-067137-06-066 137-06-075 137-06-076 137-06-074 137-06-073 137-06-028 137-06-043 137-06-042 137-06-040 137-06-039 137-06-038 137-06-037 137-06-029 137-06-088137-06-087 137-06-111 137-06-110137-06-109 137-06-093 137-07-075 137-07-076 137-07-072137-07-071 137-07-073 137-07-015 137-07-014 137-07-013 137-07-012 137-07-011 137-07-010137-07-009137-07-008137-07-007137-07-006137-07-005 137-07-074 137-07-018 137-07-017 137-07-016 137-05-066 142-19-017 142-19-005 137-07-004 137-05-073 137-05-076 137-05-075 137-05-072 137-05-071 137-05-070 137-05-069 137-05-068 137-05-067 137-05-065 137-05-064 137-05-083 137-05-082137-05-081137-05-080137-05-079137-05-078 137-05-037 137-05-038 137-05-036 137-05-039 137-05-040137-05-041 137-05-042 137-05-028 137-05-095137-05-094 137-05-092 137-05-093 137-05-034 137-05-033137-05-035 137-05-032 137-05-031 137-05-030 137-05-029 137-05-025 142-19-009 142-19-018 142-19-007 142-19-006 137-05-043 137-05-045 137-05-089 137-05-088 137-05-046 137-05-047 137-06-079 137-06-078 137-06-032 137-06-077 137-06-030 137-06-031 137-06-036 137-06-035 137-06-034 137-06-023 137-06-025137-06-026137-06-027 137-05-048137-05-049 137-05-097 137-05-051 137-05-053 137-05-052 137-05-054 137-05-055 137-06-103 137-06-102 137-06-049 137-06-050 137-06-022 137-06-048 137-06-099 137-06-100 137-06-101 137-06-047 137-06-092 137-06-091 137-06-081137-06-080 137-06-082 137-06-001 137-06-021 137-06-020 137-06-083 137-06-019 137-06-084 137-06-090 137-06-012 137-03-075 137-05-009 137-05-090137-05-091 137-05-017137-05-016 137-05-001 137-05-087 137-05-018 137-05-019 137-05-021137-05-020 137-05-002137-05-003137-05-005137-05-006137-05-007137-05-008137-05-010 137-05-015 137-05-027 137-05-026 137-05-024 137-05-063 137-05-023 137-05-062137-05-061137-05-059 137-05-060137-05-058137-05-057137-05-056 137-04-065 137-03-041 137-03-040 137-03-037137-03-038 137-03-056137-03-055 137-03-039 137-05-011 137-05-012 137-05-013 137-05-014 137-04-058 137-04-055137-04-056137-04-083137-04-084 137-04-064 137-06-011 137-06-010 137-06-008 137-06-007 137-06-006 137-06-005 137-06-004 137-06-089 137-06-015137-06-014137-06-013 137-03-045 137-03-080137-03-079137-03-078137-03-077 137-03-067137-03-068137-03-069137-03-070137-03-071137-03-072 137-03-073 137-03-087 137-03-088 137-06-009 137-33-001 137-33-002 137-33-003 137-33-004 137-33-005 137-04-059 137-04-060 137-03-054 137-03-057 137-03-033 137-03-034 137-03-035 137-03-036137-03-096137-03-044 137-03-082137-03-081 137-03-084137-03-083 137-03-085 137-03-086 137-03-091137-03-090 137-03-061 137-03-062 137-03-063 137-03-064 137-03-065137-03-066 137-03-047 137-03-046 137-03-053 137-03-052137-03-051 137-03-048 137-03-049 137-03-050 137-03-013 137-03-014 137-03-015 137-03-089 137-03-007137-03-008 137-03-018 137-03-019 137-03-020 137-03-021 137-03-022 137-03-023 137-02-088 137-03-012 137-03-009137-03-011 137-03-010 137-04-063137-04-062137-04-073137-04-072 137-04-030137-04-031137-04-079137-04-080137-04-033137-04-034137-04-035 137-04-070 137-04-037 137-04-036 137-04-044137-04-043137-04-082137-04-081137-04-040137-04-039 137-04-018 137-04-088137-04-011137-04-012 137-04-013 137-04-014 137-04-015 137-03-093 137-03-059137-03-058 137-03-031 137-03-032 137-04-016 137-04-017 137-03-024 137-03-028 137-03-030137-03-029 137-03-025 137-03-027137-03-026 137-03-006 137-03-005 137-03-004 137-03-001 137-03-002 137-03-092 137-02-001 137-02-081 137-02-082 137-02-083137-02-040137-02-041137-02-042 137-02-002 137-02-003 137-02-004 137-02-005 137-02-039 137-02-038 137-02-037 137-02-036 137-02-035 137-02-034 137-02-033 137-02-090 137-02-089 137-02-028137-02-027137-02-026 137-02-006 137-02-025 137-04-087 137-04-074 137-04-007 137-04-006 137-04-025137-04-024137-04-023137-04-022137-04-021137-04-020137-04-019 137-04-045 137-04-046 137-04-027 137-04-026 137-04-047 137-02-073137-02-075 137-02-077 137-02-078 137-02-079 137-02-080 137-02-043 137-02-045 137-02-044 137-02-052 137-02-072 137-02-071 137-02-070 137-02-069 137-02-068 137-02-067 137-02-074 137-02-076 137-02-066137-02-065137-02-093137-02-092 137-02-063 137-02-054 137-02-055 137-02-053 137-02-008 137-02-060 137-02-059 137-02-058 137-02-057 137-02-056 137-02-061 137-02-062 137-01-128 137-01-012 137-01-013 137-01-061137-01-060 137-01-058 137-01-057 137-01-056 137-01-052137-01-053 137-01-123 137-01-059 137-30-005137-30-004137-30-003 137-30-002137-30-001 137-01-116 124-30-017 137-01-121 137-01-006 137-01-007 137-01-126 137-01-014 137-01-015 137-01-016 137-01-065137-01-064137-01-063137-01-062 137-01-051 137-01-050 137-01-049 137-30-006 137-01-138137-01-137 137-01-136 137-02-007 137-02-013 137-02-012 137-02-011 137-02-010 137-02-009 137-01-100 137-01-031 137-01-042 137-01-039 137-01-043 137-01-044 137-01-048 137-01-047 137-01-046 137-01-045 137-01-134137-01-133 137-01-139 137-36-001 137-36-002 137-36-003137-36-004 137-36-005137-36-006 137-36-007137-36-008 137-01-036 137-02-015137-02-014 137-01-101 137-01-030 137-01-037 137-01-038 137-01-004 137-01-003 137-01-002 124-30-012 124-30-014 124-30-016 124-30-015 137-01-112137-01-024137-01-132 124-35-003124-35-002124-35-001 124-25-045 124-25-044 124-23-006 124-23-007 124-23-008 17 124-23-018 124-23-019 124-23-021124-23-071124-23-073 124-23-020 124-25-007 124-25-060 124-25-059 124-25-052 124-25-054 124-25-055 124-25-057 124-25-058 124-25-043 124-25-042 124-25-041 124-25-040 124-25-009 124-25-011 124-25-012 124-25-013 124-25-014 124-25-015 124-25-039 124-25-038 124-25-037 124-25-036 124-30-040 124-30-045 124-30-047124-25-053 124-25-056 124-25-008 124-25-010 124-30-039 124-30-041 124-30-043 124-30-042 124-30-038 124-30-037124-30-051 124-30-050 124-30-049 124-30-048 124-30-052 124-30-053 124-30-054 124-30-055 124-30-056 124-30-057 124-30-036 124-30-035 124-30-034 124-30-033 124-30-058 124-30-031 124-30-032 124-30-026 124-30-025 124-30-011 124-30-019 124-30-018 124-30-020 124-30-010 124-30-024 124-30-023 124-30-022 124-30-021 124-25-027124-25-021 124-25-018 124-25-019 124-25-020 124-25-026 124-25-025 124-25-017 124-25-016 124-25-028 124-25-029 124-25-030 124-25-031 124-25-032 124-25-033 124-25-034 124-25-035 124-23-032 124-23-035 124-26-003 124-26-002 124-26-001 124-23-034 124-25-022 124-23-033 124-25-023 124-17-039 124-23-0364-23-037 124-23-029 124-23-030 124-23-031124-23-028 124-23-046124-23-045124-23-044124-23-043124-23-0421 124-23-055 124-23-054 124-23-053 124-23-052 124-23-051 124-23-047 124-23-048 -068 124-23-067 124-23-066 124-23-065 124-23-064 124-23-049 142-20-094 142-20-056 142-20-002 142-20-001 142-20-050 142-20-067 142-19-011 142-19-014 142-19-019 142-19-020 142-19-012 142-20-095 137-16-004 137-16-034 142-19-010 142-19-008 142-20-071 137-04-029 137-04-069 137-04-078 137-04-085 137-04-086 137-04-049 137-04-050137-04-052 137-04-051 137-04-068137-04-076 137-04-028 137-05-086 137-05-085 137-05-084 142-20-007 142-20-021 142-20-072 142-20-023 142-20-024 142-20-078 142-20-040 142-20-073 142-20-086 142-20-087 137-16-029 137-16-030 137-16-028 137-16-032 142-20-084 142-20-081 142-20-097 142-20-096 142-18-042 142-18-029 142-18-030 142-18-041 142-18-027 142-18-026 142-18-040 142-17-016 142-17-020 142-18-038 142-18-037 142-18-036 142-18-023 142-18-013 142-18-016 142-18-046 142-18-039 142-17-017 137-16-017 137-16-026 137-16-025 137-16-022 137-16-023 137-16-009 137-16-016 137-16 137-16-005 137-16-008 142-18-007 124-37-088124-37-089124-37-090124-37-091124-37-092124-37-093 124-37-094 124-37-095 124-37-096 124-37-097 124-37-098 124-37-099124-37-100 124-37-101124-37-102 124-37-103124-37-104 124-37-105124-37-106 124-37-107124-37-108 124-37-109124-37-110124-37-111124-37-112124-37-113124-37-114124-37-115 124-37-116 124-37-117 124-37-118 124-37-119 124-37-120 124-37-121 124-37-122124-37-123 124-37-124 124-37-125 124-37-126124-37-127124-37-128124-37-129124-37-130124-37-131124-37-132 124-37-133124-37-134 124-37-135124-37-136124-37-137 124-37-138124-37-139124-37-140 124-37-141124-37-142124-37-143124-37-144124-37-145124-37-146 124-37-147 124-37-148 124-37-149 124-37-150 124-37-151 124-37-152 124-37-153 124-37-154 124-37-155 124-37-156 124-37-157 124-37-158 124-37-159 124-37-160 124-37-161 124-18-111 132-39-089 124-30-059 124-30-0 6 0 124-30-061 137-04-093 137-04-092 137-04-095137-04-094 142-20-014 142-20-089 142-20-099 142-20-0 9 0 142-20-09 1 142-20-092 142-20-093 142-18-048 137-08-098 137-08-100 132-47-057 124-32-069 124-29-027124-29-026 124-22-046 124-28-054 124-28-055 132-31-080 132-36-096 132-36-097 132-36-098 132-36-099 132-36-100 132-36-101 132-36-102 132-36-103132-36-104 132-36-105132-36-106 132-36-107 132-36-108 132-36-109 132-36-110 132-36-111 132-36-112 132-36-113 132-36-114 132-36-115 132-36-116 132-36-117 132-36-118 132-36-119 132-36-120 132-36-121 132-36-122 132-36-123 132-36-124 132-36-125 132-36-126132-36-127 132-36-128132-36-129 132-36-130 137-07-089 124-31-082 124-31-081 124-32-070 124-09-046 124-31-084 132-39-069 132-33-058 137-15-076 137-05-096 132-38-063 132-17-083 124-30-062124-30-063 124-30-064124-30-065 137-01-148 137-01-149 142-21-002 142-21-003 000-00-000 137-38-001 137-38-004 124-08-083 124-19-117 142-27-007 142-27-001 142-27-002 147-27-003 142-27-004 147-27-005 147-27-006 147-27-008 147-27-009 147-27-010 147-27-012147-27-011 147-27-013 147-27-014 147-27-016 147-27-015 142-27-017 142-27-018 142-27-019 142-27-020 142-27-021 142-27-022 142-27-023 142-27- 024 142-27-025 142-27-026 142-27-028 142-27-027 142-27-030 142-27-029 142-27-031 142-27-032 142-27-033 142-27-034 142-27-035 142-27-036 142-27-037 142-27-038 142-27-039 124-38-003 124-38-005 124-38-002 124-38-004124-38-001 137-16-033 142-09-010 142-09-010 142-09-010 142-09-009 142-09-009 142-04-006 142-04-025 142-04-025 142-04-002 142-04-003 142-04-024 142-21-037 132-37-068132-37-069132-37-070 132-37-071 El O r e g A l ma Stree t Loma Verde Avenue Cowper Street Gary Court Waverley Street South Court Bryant Street Ramona Street Alma Street El Carmelo Avenue Dymond Ct Martinsen Ct Kipl C Porter Drive Hillview Avenue Hanover Street Stanford Avenue Amherst Street Columbia Street Bowdoin Street Dartmouth Street Hanover Street College Avenue California Avenue Hanover Street Ramos Way (Private) Page Mill Road Hansen Way Hanover Street Tippawingo St Julie Ct Matadero Avenue L a M Chimalus Drive Matadero Avenue Whitsell Av Fernando Avenue Matadero Avenue Lambert Avenue Hansen Way El Camino Real Margarita Avenue Matadero Avenue Oxford Avenue Harvard Street California Avenue Wellesley Street Princeton Street Oberlin Street Cornell Street Cambridge Avenue College Avenue Williams Street Yale Street Staunton Court Oxford Avenue El Camino Real Park Boulevard Park AvenueSequoia Avenue Mariposa Avenue stilleja Avenue Leland Avenue Stanford Avenue Birch Street Ash Street Lowell Avenue Alma Street Tennyson Avenue Grant Avenue Sheridan Avenue Jacaranda Lane El Camino Real Sherman Avenue Ash Street Page Mill Road Mimosa Lane Chestnut Avenue Portage Avenue Pepper Avenue Olive Avenue Acacia Avenue Emerson Street Park Bo Orind Birch Street Ash Street Page Mill Road Ash Street Park Boulevard College Avenue Cambridge Avenue New Mayfield Lane Birch Street California Avenue Park Boulevard Nogal Lane Rinconada Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Park Boulevard Seale Avenue Washington Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Waverley Stree Bryant Street High Street Emerson Street Colorado Avenue Street Emerson Street Ramona Street Bryant Street South Court El Dorado Avenue Alma Street Alma Street High Street t Emerson Wa v e r l e y O a k s Washin Bryant Street South Court Waverley Street Emerson Street Nevada Avenue North California Avenue Sa Ramona Street High Street North California Avenue Oreg o n Expr es sway Ramona Street Colora do Avenue Waverley Street Kipling Street South Court Cowper Street Anton Court Nevada Avenue Seale Avenue Tennyson Avenue Cowper Street Ten Se Sedro Lane Peral Lane Oregon Expressway S h erid a n A v e nu e Page Mill Road CalTrain ROW La Lane 66 Stanford Avenue Olm sted Road El Dorado Avenue Matadero Ave Page Mill Road Chimalus Drive Hanover Street Emma C Abrams Court Wa y Al varado Ct Alv ara do R o w Angell Court yrshire Farm Lane Barn es Court Bowdoin Street Cathcart Way Cedro Way Comstock Circle ackwelder Court Cathcart WayCoronado Avenu e D u d l e y L a ne Ro a d Escondido Road Escondido Road Esplanada W ay Frenchmans Road ns Cour t Hulme Court C o u rt Lathrop Dr i v e Lathrop D r i v e Mayfield Avenue Mayfield Avenue Court Mears Court Mears Court N Tolman Ln Oberlin St Comstock Circle Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Olmsted Road Peter Coutts C ir c l e Peter Coutts Road Peter Coutts Road Pine Hill Court P in e Hill Road Raimundo Way W ay Rosse Lane Running Farm Lane R yan Cou r t Salv atie rra S t San Francisco Terrace San Francis co Co ur t S a n R afa el Pl Santa Fe Avenue Sonoma T e r race Stanford Avenue Court Tolman Drive Wellesley St Yale St treet Alma Street This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend DRAFT HIS on Existing Commercial Zones DRAFT HIS on Existing Residential Transition Zones (SOFA2) DRAFT HIS on Existing Residential Zones Small Lot; Consolidation Opportunity City Jurisdictional Limits abc Quarter Mile Radius from El Camino Real Half Mile Radius from Caltrain Station Caltrain Stations 0'700' DRAFTHousing Inventory Sites (HIS)California AvenueArea Mapv0413 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 2013 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2013-04-03 10:36:25 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) 167-10-033 167-10-034 167-10-035 167-10-026 167-10-025 167-10-024 167-10-023 167-10-022167-10-021 167-10-094 167-10-099 167-10-016 167-10-011167-10-012167-10-013167-10-015 167-10-014167-10-017 167-10-018167-10-019167-10-020 167-10-036 167-10-037 167-10-038 167-10-039 167-10-040 167-10-041 167-10-042 167-10-043 167-10-044 167-10-045 167-10-075 167-10-076 167-10-077 167-10-074 167-10-073 167-10-078 167-10-079 167-10-080 167-10-081 167-10-082 167-10-083 167-10-084 167-10-059 167-10-060 167-10-061167-10-062 167-10-063 167-10-064 167-10-065 167-10-066 167-10-067 167-10-068167-10-069 167-10-070 167-10-071 167-10-072 167-10-103 167-10-104 167-10-046 167-10-047 167-10-049 167-10-050 167-10-051 137-18-015 137-18-012 137-18-013 137-18-014 137-18-052 137-18-055 137-18-078137-18-079 137-18-080 137-18-076 137-18-077 137-18-058137-18-059 137-18-060 137-18-063 137-18-065 137-18-064 137-18-062 137-18-056137-18-054137-18-053 137-18-069 137-18-068 137-18-066 137-18-061 137-19-023 137-19-024 137-19-018 137-19-019 137-19-020 137-19-022137-18-057 137-19-021 137-17-026137-17-009 137-17-022 137-18-067 137-19-017 137-18-096 137-18-024 137-18-023 137-18-022 137-18-021 137-18-020 137-18-019 137-18-018 137-18-017 137-18-016 137-18-075 137-18-071 137-18-074 137-18-073 137-18-072 137-18-090 137-18-093 137-18-095 137-18-002 137-18-003 137-18-004 137-18-007 137-18-005 137-18-008 137-18-009 137-18-010 137-18-011 137-18-100 137-18-070 137-18-101 137-18-037 137-17-005 137-17-011 137-18-099 137-18-098 137-18-097 137-17-006 137-17-025 137-17-018 137-18-026 137-18-006 137-19-065 137-19-064 137-19-075 137-19-052 137-19-053 137-19-054 137-19-015 137-19-002 137-19-003 137-19-014 137-19-004 137-19-080 137-19-010 137-19-081 137-19-013 137-19-005 137-19-007 137-19-008 137-19-009 137-19-035 137-19-030 137-19-031 137-19-033 137-19-034 137-19-032 137-19-026 137-19-025 137-18-044 137-18-045 137-19-066 137-20-004137-20-003137-20-002137-20-001 137-19-027 137-19-051 137-19-006 137-19-039 137-19-048 137-19-047 137-19-049 137-19-050 137-19-076 137-19-077 137-18-051 137-18-082 137-18-083 137-18-050 137-18-042 137-18-085 137-18-086 137-18-049 137-18-048 137-18-047 137-18-046 137-14-039 137-20-022 137-20-021 137-20-026 137-20-024 137-20-023 137-20-025 137-20-020137-14-016 137-14-015 137-14-014 137-14-017 137-14-018 137-14-011 137-14-010 137-14-012 137-14-009 137-14-008 137-20-046 137-14-038 137-14-037 137-17-007 137-14-167 137-14-166 137-17-015 137-17-002 137-14-173 137-17-016 137-17-017 137-17-027 137-17-019 137-18-025 137-18-001 137-14-069 137-14-055 137-14-054 137-14-053 137-14-068 137-14-067 137-14-056 137-17-013 137-17-014 137-17-001 137-16-015 137-17-012 137-14-078 137-15-020 137-15-019 137-15-017 137-15-016 137-15-015 137-15-014 137-15-013 137-15-009 137-15-002 137-15-003 137-15-004 137-15-006 137-15-007 137-15-008 137-15-012 137-15-011 137-15-010 137-14-081 137-14-079 137-14-080 137-14-077 137-14-076 137-14-075137-14-074137-14-073 137-14-179 137-14-071 137-14-070 137-14-066 137-14-065 137-14-064 137-14-063 137-14-062 137-14-061 137-14-057 137-14-098 137-14-099 137-14-100 137-14-101137-14-085 137-14-082 137-14-083 137-14-084 137-14-086 137-14-088 137-15-018 137-14-058 137-14-036 137-14-040 137-14-041 137-14-042 137-14-043 137-14-044 137-14-045 137-14-035 137-14-034 137-14-033 137-14-032 137-14-031 137-14-030137-14-046 137-14-143 137-14-152 137-14-153 137-14-172 137-14-156 137-14-157137-14-020 137-14-007 137-14-021 137-14-006 137-14-022 137-14-127 137-14-128 137-14-151137-14-150 137-14-168 137-14-004 137-14-169 137-14-003 137-14-025 137-14-060 137-14-059 137-14-165 137-14-164 137-14-162 137-14-163 137-14-109 137-14-108 137-14-107 137-14-106 137-14-105 137-14-104 137-14-103 137-14-102 137-14-129 137-14-155 137-14-142 137-14-136 137-14-176 137-14-141137-14-132 137-14-140137-14-133 137-14-134 137-14-177137-14-135 137-13-074 137-14-048 137-14-026 137-14-027137-14-160 137-14-161 137-14-112 137-13-073 137-14-170 137-13-072 137-13-070 137-14-171 137-13-071 137-14-154 137-14-139 137-19-055 137-19-056 137-19-059137-19-060 137-19-062 137-19-061 137-20-010 137-20-009 137-20-006 137-20-007 137-20-008 137-20-005 137-20-011 137-20-012 137-20-013137-20-014137-20-015137-20-016137-20-017137-20-018137-20-019 137-20-027 137-20-028 137-20-029 137-20-030 137-20-031 137-20-035137-20-034137-20-033 137-20-039137-20-040 137-20-038 137-20-061 137-27-056 137-27-057 137-27-058 137-27-059 137-27-060 137-27-065 137-27-064 137-27-063 137-27-062 137-27-061 137-27-067 137-27-066 137-27-046 137-27-038137-27-039137-27-040 137-27-044 137-27-042 137-27-041 137-27-043 137-26-013 137-26-012 137-26-011137-26-010 137-26-038 137-26-113 137-26-115137-26-116 137-26-032 137-20-032 137-20-036 137-19-057 137-19-046 137-20-057 137-19-058 137-19-045 137-21-034 137-21-033 137-21-004 137-21-003 137-21-002 137-21-001 137-20-045 137-20-042 137-20-043 137-20-044 137-20-047 137-20-050 137-20-062 137-20-049 137-20-048 137-14-124 137-14-123 137-14-122 137-14-146 137-14-145 137-14-144 137-14-028 137-13-088 137-13-114 137-13-113 137-13-090 137-13-091 137-13-092 137-13-093 137-13-068 137-13-069 137-13-115 137-13-116 137-13-112 137-13-111 137-13-155 137-21-064 137-21-062 137-21-063 137-21-065 137-21-066 137-21-067 137-21-068 137-21-069 137-21-070 137-21-083 137-21-084 137-21-085 137-21-086 137-21-087 137-21-088 137-21-041 137-21-042 137-21-054 137-21-061 137-21-035 137-21-036 137-21-059 137-21-060 137-21-058 137-21-040 137-21-039 137-21-038 137-21-037 137-21-057 137-21-056 137-21-055 137-21-046 137-21-045 137-21-044 137-21-043 137-21-053 137-21-052 137-21-051 137-21-050 137-21-023 137-21-022 137-21-010 137-21-011 137-21-009 137-21-027 137-21-007 137-21-028 137-21-008 137-21-024 137-21-025 137-21-026 137-21-006 137-21-029 137-21-032 137-21-031 137-21-030137-21-005 137-20-041 137-22-001 137-22-002 137-20-052 137-20-053 137-20-054 137-20-055 137-20-056 137-13-109 137-21-048137-21-047 137-13-154 137-27-075 137-27-082 137-27-074 137-27-073 137-28-037 137-27-114 137-27-071 137-28-036 137-28-001 137-28-028137-28-029 137-28-030 137-28-031 137-28-032 137-28-033 137-28-034 137-28-035 137-28-049 137-28-048 137-28-047 137-28-046 137-28-045 137-28-044 137-28-043 137-28-042 137-28-041 137-28-040 137-28-039 137-28-038 142-17-032 137-27-070 137-27-069 137-27-068 137-27-076 137-27-077 137-19-037137-19-036 137-19-044 137-19-072 137-19-069 137-19-043 137-19-071 137-19-029 137-19-028 137-29-001 137-28-027 137-28-026 137-28-025 137-28-024 137-28-023 137-28-022 137-28-021 137-28-020 137-28-014 137-28-013 137-28-012 137-28-011 137-28-010 137-28-009 137-28-008 137-28-007 137-28-004 137-28-003 137-27-094 137-27-093 137-27-092 137-27-107 137-27-106 137-27-105 137-27-104 137-27-091 137-27-111 137-27-110 137-27-109 137-27-108 137-27-090 137-29-002 137-29-003 137-29-004 137-29-005 137-29-006 137-29-007 137-29-008 137-29-009 137-29-010 137-29-028 137-29-047 137-29-046 137-29-045 137-29-044 137-29-043 137-29-042 137-29-036 137-29-037 137-29-035 137-29-030 137-29-029 137-29-041 137-29-040 137-29-039 137-29-038 137-28-050 137-28-002 137-27-133 137-27-087 137-27-084 137-27-132 137-27-126 137-27-027 137-27-026 137-27-025 137-27-112 137-27-113 137-27-083 137-27-089 137-27-081 137-27-078 137-27-049 137-27-050137-27-051 137-27-055 137-27-054 137-27-085 137-27-086 137-27-115 137-27-079 137-27-080 137-27-103 137-27-102 137-27-101 137-27-100 137-27-099 137-27-097 137-27-096 137-27-095 137-27-098 137-27-021 137-27-022 137-27-020 137-27-019 137-28-015 137-28-016 137-28-017 137-28-018 137-28-019 167-05-021 167-05-022 167-05-025 167-05-026 167-04-014 167-04-013 167-05-020 137-27-053 137-27-052 137-27-047 137-27-117 137-27-037 137-27-024 137-27-023 137-27-130 137-27-016137-27-015 137-27-014 137-27-013 137-27-127 137-27-033 137-27-034 137-27-120 137-27-036 137-27-121 137-26-045 137-26-096 137-26-044 137-26-111 137-26-110 137-26-082 137-26-083 137-26-040 137-26-039 137-26-035 137-26-034 137-27-032 137-27-116 137-27-031 137-27-012 137-27-011 137-27-045 137-27-088 137-27-017 137-27-010 137-26-043 137-27-009 167-05-024 167-05-023 167-05-031 167-05-028 167-05-003 167-05-030 167-05-007 167-05-008 167-05-009 167-05-010 167-05-006 167-05-011 167-05-012 167-05-013 167-05-014 167-05-015 167-05-016 167-05-018 167-05-017 167-06-008 167-06-007 167-06-006 167-06-005 167-06-004 167-06-003 167-06-002 167-06-001 167-06-049 167-06-038 167-06-039 167-06-040 167-06-044 167-06-045 167-06-048 167-06-047 167-06-046 167-06-062 167-06-052 167-06-053 167-06-054 167-06-055 167-06-057 167-06-056 167-05-005 167-06-059 167-06-058 137-27-131 137-27-004 137-27-008 137-27-007 137-27-006 137-27-005 137-26-069 137-26-066 137-26-068 137-26-065 137-26-063 137-26-062 137-26-061 137-26-059 137-26-060 137-26-064 137-26-049 137-26-050 137-26-051 137-26-052 137-26-053 137-26-048 137-26-046 137-26-090 137-26-103 137-26-106 137-26-107 137-26-108 137-26-109 137-26-104 167-06-026 167-06-027 167-06-012 167-06-013 167-06-060 167-06-061 167-06-009 167-06-010 167-06-011 167-06-016 137-27-118 137-27-003 137-27-119 137-26-097137-26-102 137-26-091 137-26-105 167-06-041 167-06-042 167-06-043 167-06-037 167-06-028 167-06-029 167-06-030 167-06-031 167-06-025 167-06-024 167-06-035167-06-034167-06-033 167-06-032 167-07-029 167-07-030 167-07-031 167-07-008 167-07-007 167-07-006 167-07-005 167-07-004 167-07-003 167-07-002 167-07-001 167-06-036 167-06-020 167-06-019 167-06-018 167-06-017 167-06-022 167-06-023 167-06-021 167-07-064 167-07-065 167-07-066 167-07-067 167-07-068 167-07-069 167-07-039 167-07-038 167-07-040167-07-041167-07-042167-07-043167-07-044167-07-045167-07-046167-07-047167-07-061 167-07-015 167-07-016 167-07-018 167-07-019 167-07-020 167-07-021 167-07-022 167-07-023 167-07-024 167-07-025 167-07-026 167-07-027 167-07-028 167-07-017 167-07-032 167-07-033 167-07-034 167-07-035 167-07-092 167-07-085167-07-084 167-07-087 167-07-086 167-07-073167-07-074167-07-075 167-07-093 167-07-094 167-07-095 167-07-097 167-07-096 167-07-098 167-07-099 167-07-072 167-07-014 167-07-012 167-07-011 167-07-010 167-07-009 167-08-001 167-07-013 137-26-018 137-26-020 137-26-019 137-26-017 137-26-016 137-26-015 137-26-014 137-26-022 137-26-023 137-26-024 137-26-028 137-26-027 137-26-026 137-26-025 137-26-029 137-26-030 137-26-001137-26-002137-26-003 137-26-004 137-26-008 137-26-007 137-26-006 137-26-005 137-26-009 137-26-036 137-25-088 137-25-063 137-25-065 137-25-066 137-25-067 137-26-033 137-26-031 137-26-080 137-26-021 137-25-068 137-21-071 137-21-072 137-21-080 137-21-081 137-21-082 137-22-005 137-22-004 137-22-003 137-25-062 137-22-049 137-21-073 137-21-078 137-21-079 137-22-048 137-22-047 137-22-046 137-22-061137-22-060137-22-059 137-22-058137-22-057 137-22-051 137-22-050 137-22-030 137-22-018 137-22-017 137-22-016 137-22-015 137-22-014 137-22-013 137-22-012 137-22-011 137-22-010 137-22-009 137-22-008 137-22-007 137-22-006 137-25-064 137-25-072 137-25-073 137-25-074 137-25-075 137-25-076 137-25-077 137-25-046 137-25-048 137-25-047 137-25-049 137-25-050 137-25-056 137-25-061 137-25-060 137-25-059 137-25-058 137-25-057 137-25-055 137-25-053 137-25-052 137-25-051 137-25-054 137-21-074 137-21-077 137-21-075 137-21-076 167-07-063 167-07-048 167-07-060 167-07-049 167-07-050 167-07-051 167-07-059 167-07-058 167-07-091 167-07-057 167-07-056 167-07-055 167-07-054 167-07-089 167-07-082167-07-081167-07-080 167-07-079 167-07-083167-07-078 167-07-076167-07-077 167-08-030 167-08-036 167-08-032 167-08-031 167-08-038 167-08-007 167-08-006 167-08-005 167-08-004 167-08-003 167-08-002 137-25-106 137-25-109 167-07-062 137-22-022 137-22-021 137-22-020 137-22-019 137-25-085 137-25-086 137-25-087 137-25-084 137-25-069 137-25-078 137-25-079 137-25-080 137-25-081 137-25-082 137-25-083 137-25-044 137-25-043 137-25-042 137-25-041 137-25-040 137-25-039 137-25-038 137-25-125 137-25-124 137-25-123137-25-122 137-25-120 137-25-119 137-25-118 137-25-117 137-25-090 137-25-045 137-25-029 137-25-030 137-25-031 137-25-108 137-25-070 137-25-071 137-25-110 137-25-112 137-25-098 137-25-099 137-25-018 137-25-017 137-25-100 137-25-096 137-25-095 137-25-094137-25-008 137-25-007 137-25-006 137-25-005137-25-034 137-25-033 137-25-032 137-25-010 137-25-011 137-25-012 137-25-013 137-25-014 137-25-015 137-25-016 137-25-114 137-25-113 167-08-011 167-08-028 167-08-035 167-08-039 167-08-040 167-08-037 167-08-010 137-25-093 137-25-127 137-25-126 137-24-015 137-24-029 137-24-019 137-24-022 137-24-035137-24-036137-24-037 137-24-038 137-24-039 137-24-040 137-24-041 137-24-042 132-46-068 132-46-069 132-46-070 132-46-072 132-46-065 132-46-066 132-46-022 132-46-021132-46-020 148-01-001 132-62-051 132-46-119 132-46-120 132-61-001 132-61-002 132-61-003 132-61-004 132-61-005 132-61-006 132-61-007 132-61-008 137-14-118 137-16-031 137-14-091 137-14-093 137-14-090 137-15-022 137-15-025 137-15-029 137-15-028 137-15-027 137-15-026 137-15-021 137-14-094 137-14-095 137-14-096 137-14-097 137-14-087 137-14-089 137-15-001 137-15-005 137-14-175137-14-174 137-15-066 137-15-065 137-15-064 137-15-063 137-15-045 137-15-067 137-13-132 137-13-131 137-15-035 137-13-118 137-13-117 137-13-020 137-13-019 137-15-023 137-15-024 137-15-034 137-15-033 137-15-032 137-15-031 137-15-030 137-13-022 137-13-023 137-13-024 137-13-026 137-10-036 137-10-033 137-10-034 137-10-035 137-13-025 137-13-078 137-13-075 137-13-017 137-13-016 137-13-015 137-13-014 137-13-013 137-13-012 137-13-011 137-13-010 137-13-032 137-13-029 137-13-030 137-13-031 137-13-028 137-13-027 137-13-076 137-13-077 137-13-137 137-13-138 137-09-029 137-09-032 137-09-062 137-09-061 137-09-033 137-09-034 137-09-060 137-09-035 137-09-059 137-09-036 137-09-058 137-09-057 137-09-056 137-10-029 137-10-007 137-10-006 137-10-005 137-09-030 137-09-031 137-09-028 137-15-053 137-15-054 137-15-055 137-15-056 137-15-057 137-15-058 137-15-052 137-15-075 137-15-051 137-15-040 137-15-050 137-15-041 137-15-049 137-15-042 137-15-069 137-15-070137-15-072 137-10-002 137-15-068 137-15-073 137-15-074 137-15-044 137-15-047 137-15-046 137-15-059 137-15-060 137-15-061 137-15-062 137-10-120 137-10-121 137-10-003 137-10-073 137-10-072 137-10-037 137-10-038 137-10-039 137-10-040 137-10-032137-10-031137-10-030 137-10-028 137-10-027 137-10-026 137-10-025 137-10-024 137-10-023 137-10-022 137-10-010 137-10-009 137-10-008 137-10-125 137-10-011 137-10-013 137-09-017 137-09-016 137-10-019 137-10-020 137-10-021 137-09-018 137-09-019 137-09-020 137-09-021 137-09-022 137-09-024 137-09-023 137-09-069 137-09-071 137-09-068 137-09-063 137-09-064 137-09-053 137-09-054 137-09-055137-09-039 137-09-038 137-09-037 137-09-073 137-09-074 137-09-027 137-10-015 137-10-016 137-09-044 137-09-043 137-09-042 137-09-065 137-09-041 137-09-040 137-09-048 137-09-049 137-09-050 137-10-014 137-10-128 137-13-038 137-13-037 137-10-041 137-10-042 137-10-067 137-10-068 137-10-069 137-10-070 137-10-071 137-10-081 137-10-080 137-10-079 137-10-078 137-10-077 137-10-076 137-10-075 137-10-074 137-10-093 137-10-092 137-10-091 137-10-090 137-10-089 137-10-088 137-10-087 137-13-130 137-12-022 137-13-129 137-13-128 137-13-001 137-13-042 137-13-143 137-13-142 137-13-040 137-13-039 137-13-151137-13-150 137-13-141 137-13-140 137-13-033 137-13-034 137-13-035137-13-036 137-13-007 137-13-008 137-13-009 137-10-086 137-10-085 137-10-059 137-10-122 137-10-058 137-10-051 137-10-052 137-10-054 137-10-130 137-10-113 137-09-004 137-10-062 137-10-114 137-10-126 137-10-048 137-10-047 137-10-045 137-10-046 137-10-063 137-10-064 137-10-065 137-10-044 137-10-043 137-10-066 137-10-094 137-10-129 137-10-127 137-10-123 137-10-124 137-08-101 137-08-049137-08-050 137-12-024 137-12-025 137-10-083 137-10-082 137-12-029 137-12-028 137-12-027 137-12-026 137-12-023 137-12-032 137-08-074 137-08-044 137-08-045 137-08-073 137-10-100 137-10-099 137-10-098 137-10-097 137-10-096 137-10-133 137-10-112 137-10-110 137-10-108 137-10-107 137-10-134 137-10-101 137-10-102 137-10-103 137-10-104 137-10-105 137-10-084 137-08-076 137-10-109 137-13-006 137-13-080 137-13-079 137-13-052 137-13-053 137-13-054 137-13-055 137-13-056 137-13-082 137-13-084 137-13-083 137-13-051 137-13-050 137-13-049 137-13-086 137-13-085 137-13-048 137-13-047 137-13-157 137-13-063 137-13-147 137-13-149137-13-148 137-13-065 137-13-044 137-13-045 137-13-046 137-13-081 137-13-066 137-13-067 137-21-012 137-21-013 137-21-014 137-21-021 137-21-020 137-21-019 137-21-018137-21-017 137-21-016 137-21-015 137-22-053 137-22-073 137-22-074 137-22-075 137-13-095 137-13-096 137-13-106 137-13-105 137-13-097 137-13-098 137-13-061 137-13-060 137-13-059 137-12-010 137-12-074 137-12-073 137-12-008 137-12-006 137-12-068 137-12-003 137-12-004 137-12-002 137-13-058 137-13-144137-13-135 137-13-133 137-13-099 137-13-103137-13-102 137-12-001 137-13-094 137-13-153 137-13-152 137-13-107 137-12-069 137-13-057 137-12-036 137-12-037 137-12-038 137-12-039 137-12-040 137-12-033 137-12-035137-12-034 137-11-025 137-11-024 137-11-023 137-11-022 137-11-021 137-11-026 137-13-005 137-12-021 137-12-020 137-12-019 137-12-018 137-12-017 137-12-016 137-12-015 137-12-014 137-12-011137-12-012 137-12-013 137-13-003 137-13-004 137-13-087 137-12-030 137-12-031 137-11-030 137-11-031 137-11-020 137-11-029 137-11-027 137-08-042 137-08-043 137-11-049 137-11-048 137-11-014137-11-008137-11-007 137-11-009 137-11-010 137-11-011 137-11-012 137-11-013 137-11-005 137-11-004 137-11-003 137-11-002 137-11-001 137-11-032 137-11-033 137-11-034 137-11-006 137-11-028 137-11-084137-11-087137-11-083137-11-082137-11-081137-11-077 137-11-095137-11-094 137-11-089137-11-075 137-11-016 137-11-042 137-11-039 137-11-044137-11-046 137-11-045137-11-047 137-11-019 137-12-061 137-12-062 137-12-063 137-12-064 137-12-065 137-12-066 137-12-067 137-11-040 137-12-076 137-12-055 137-12-056 137-12-057 137-12-058 137-12-059 137-12-060 137-12-041 137-12-051 137-12-050 137-12-049 137-12-048 137-12-047 137-12-052 137-12-075 137-11-043 137-11-097 137-11-096 137-12-044 137-11-038 137-11-099 137-11-100 137-12-071 137-12-042 137-12-043 137-12-072142-20-098 137-09-015 137-09-014 137-09-013 137-09-012 137-09-011 137-09-067 137-09-066 137-09-001137-09-002 137-09-009 137-09-008 137-09-007 137-09-006 137-10-053 137-08-085 137-08-053 137-08-054 137-09-003 137-08-095137-08-096 137-09-072 137-09-005 137-10-018 137-08-014 137-08-013 137-08-064 137-08-010 137-08-052 137-08-089 137-08-029 137-08-077 137-08-070 137-08-069 137-08-081 137-08-090 132-38-035 132-38-066 132-38-032 132-38-042 132-38-025 132-38-026 132-38-047 132-38-017 132-38-018 132-38-022 132-38-019132-38-020132-38-021 132-39-090 132-39-059 132-39-074 132-39-005 132-39-071 137-08-058 137-08-059 137-08-060 137-08-055 137-08-062 142-20-055 142-20-054 142-20-046 137-08-057 137-08-086 137-08-061 132-39-017 132-39-018 132-38-056 142-20-035 142-20-079 132-39-087 142-20-037 132-39-080 137-08-084 137-08-006 132-40-019 132-40-056 132-40-060 132-40-063 132-39-078132-39-077132-39-079 137-08-007 137-08-080 137-08-079 137-08-016 137-08-092 137-08-091 132-39-055 137-08-083 132-40-061 137-08-072 137-08-088 132-33-038 132-33-037 132-33-056132-33-039 132-33-051 132-33-052 132-33-031 132-33-034 132-39-083 132-39-049 132-39-048 132-39-047 132-39-043 132-39-042 132-39-041 132-39-040 132-39-039 132-39-038 132-39-037 132-39-035 132-39-036 132-39-050 132-39-051 132-39-052 132-39-053 132-39-034 132-39-033 132-39-031 132-39-024 132-39-025 132-39-026 132-39-081132-39-082 132-39-084 132-39-030 132-33-055132-33-057 132-33-032 132-39-054 132-39-065 132-33-033 132-39-075 132-39-032 137-08-078 137-08-031 137-08-030 137-08-033 137-08-032 137-11-078 137-11-051137-11-052137-11-053 137-08-041 137-08-040 137-08-039 137-08-038 137-08-037 137-08-097 132-41-089 132-41-072 132-41-027 132-41-091132-41-025 132-41-096 132-41-048 132-41-028 132-35-045 132-41-020 132-41-083 137-11-074 137-11-098137-11-079137-11-093 137-11-050 132-41-088 132-41-085 132-41-084 137-11-015 137-11-041 132-40-046 132-40-047 132-40-048 132-40-049 132-40-005 132-40-006 132-40-007 132-40-008 132-40-009 132-40-010 132-40-011 132-40-012 132-40-023 132-40-058 132-40-045 132-40-044 132-40-038 132-40-039 132-40-022 132-40-021 132-40-020 132-40-062 132-40-059 132-40-037 132-40-036 132-40-035 132-40-050 132-40-051 132-40-052 132-40-028 132-40-001 132-40-002 132-40-003 132-40-004 132-40-024 132-40-025 132-40-026 132-34-032 132-34-036 132-34-035 132-34-034 132-34-033132-34-010 132-34-009 132-34-008 132-34-007 132-34-006 132-34-005 132-34-004 132-34-016 132-34-015 132-34-014 132-34-013 132-34-012 132-34-011 132-39-046 132-39-044 132-39-045 132-40-027 132-40-029 132-40-055 132-35-019 132-41-019 132-35-026 132-35-025 132-35-024 132-41-016 132-41-017 132-41-029 132-41-018 132-41-078 132-41-011 132-41-010 132-41-009 132-41-070 132-35-027 132-35-028 132-35-029 132-35-030 132-35-031 132-35-032 132-35-033 132-35-048 132-35-049 132-35-035 132-35-036 132-35-037 132-40-034 132-40-033 132-40-032 132-40-031 132-40-030 132-40-053 132-40-054 132-34-047132-34-048132-34-049132-34-050132-34-051 132-34-023 132-34-024 132-34-031 132-34-030 132-34-029 132-34-028 132-34-027 132-34-026 132-34-025 132-34-022132-34-021 132-34-040 132-34-039 132-34-038 132-34-037 132-34-046 132-34-045 132-34-044 132-34-043 132-34-042 132-34-041 132-35-008 132-35-012 132-35-013 132-35-014 132-35-015 132-35-016 132-35-017 132-35-007 132-35-006 132-35-005 132-35-004 132-35-003 132-35-002 132-35-018 132-35-020 132-35-001 132-35-009 132-35-043 132-35-038 132-35-039 132-35-040 132-35-041 132-35-042 132-35-010 132-35-011 132-41-007 137-22-056137-22-055137-22-054 137-22-052 137-22-037 137-22-072 137-22-071 137-22-069 137-22-070 137-21-049 137-22-023 137-22-045 137-22-032 137-22-031 137-32-011 137-32-010 137-32-009 137-32-008 137-32-007 137-32-006 137-32-005 137-32-004 137-32-003 137-32-002 137-32-001 137-32-022 137-32-021 137-32-020 137-32-019 137-32-018 137-32-017 137-32-016 137-32-015 137-32-014 137-32-013 137-32-012 137-32-033137-32-032137-32-031 137-32-030 137-32-029 137-32-028137-32-027 137-32-026137-32-025137-32-024 137-32-023 137-32-065 137-32-064 137-32-063 137-32-062 137-32-061 137-32-060 137-32-059 137-32-058 137-32-057 137-32-055 137-32-054 137-32-053 137-32-052 137-32-051 137-32-050 137-32-049 137-32-048 137-32-047137-32-046 137-32-045137-32-044137-32-043137-32-042 137-32-041137-32-040 137-32-039 137-32-038137-32-037 137-32-036 137-32-035137-32-034 137-32-056 137-31-004 137-31-005 137-31-017137-31-016 137-31-015 137-31-014 137-31-006137-31-007 137-31-009 137-31-010137-31-011 137-31-018 137-31-019 137-22-033137-22-034137-22-035137-22-036 137-22-044137-22-043137-22-042 137-22-041137-22-040137-22-039137-22-038 137-22-062 137-22-064137-22-065137-22-067 137-22-066 137-22-063 137-22-028137-22-029 137-31-026137-31-025 137-31-013 137-31-012 137-31-001137-31-002 137-31-008 137-31-024 137-31-023137-31-022137-31-021 137-31-020 137-22-027 137-22-026 137-22-025 137-22-024 137-23-066 137-23-067 137-23-065 137-23-064 137-23-063 137-23-056 137-23-057 137-23-058 137-23-059 137-23-060 137-23-061 137-23-062 137-23-049 137-23-050 137-23-051 137-23-052 137-23-053137-23-055 137-23-054 137-23-048 137-22-068 137-22-078 137-22-077 137-22-076 132-42-069 137-11-091 137-23-073 137-11-071 137-11-080137-11-085 137-23-047 137-23-042137-23-043137-23-044137-23-045137-23-046 132-42-074 132-42-067 132-42-070132-42-068 137-23-068 137-23-072 137-23-039 137-23-035137-23-036137-23-037137-23-038 137-23-071137-23-069 137-23-070137-23-040 137-23-041 132-43-164 132-43-163 132-43-162 132-43-161 132-43-160 132-43-159 132-43-158 132-43-157 132-43-156 132-43-120 132-43-149 132-43-139 132-43-141 132-46-107 132-43-134 137-23-022 137-23-025 132-43-154 132-43-052 132-43-051 132-43-165 132-43-166 132-43-167 132-43-168 132-43-169 132-43-170 132-43-171 132-43-172 132-43-173 132-43-174 132-46-109 137-24-034 132-46-102 132-46-063 132-46-025 132-46-024 132-46-015 132-46-018 132-46-016132-46-011 132-46-013 132-46-014 132-46-077 132-46-019 132-46-010 132-46-009 132-46-006 132-46-007 132-46-008 132-46-005 132-46-004 132-46-079 132-46-078 132-46-026 132-45-049 132-60-027132-60-026132-60-025132-60-024132-60-023132-60-022 132-60-021132-60-020132-60-019132-60-018 132-60-017132-60-016132-60-015132-60-014132-60-013132-60-012132-60-011132-60-010 132-60-009132-60-008132-60-007132-60-006132-60-005132-60-004132-60-003132-60-002132-60-001 132-60-028132-60-029 132-60-030132-60-031 132-60-032 132-60-033 132-60-034132-60-035 132-60-036132-60-037 132-60-038132-60-039132-60-040132-60-041132-60-042132-60-043 132-60-044132-60-045132-60-046132-60-047132-60-048 132-60-049132-60-050132-60-051132-60-052 132-60-053132-60-054 132-62-001132-62-002132-62-003132-62-004132-62-005 132-62-006132-62-007 132-62-009 132-62-010 132-62-020 132-62-050 132-62-049 132-62-048 132-62-047 132-62-046132-62-045 132-62-044 132-62-043 132-62-042 132-62-041 132-62-040 132-62-039 132-62-038132-62-037132-62-036 132-62-035 132-62-034 132-62-033 132-62-032 132-62-031 132-62-030 132-62-029 132-62-028 132-62-027 132-62-026 132-62-025 132-62-024132-62-023132-62-022132-62-021 132-62-019 132-62-018132-62-017132-62-016132-62-015 132-62-008 132-62-014 132-62-013 132-62-012 132-62-011 132-46-115 132-46-116 132-46-100 132-44-100 132-46-105 132-46-090 132-46-103 132-44-010 132-44-012 132-44-022132-43-153 132-46-104 132-46-106 132-44-090 132-53-011 132-53-010 132-53-009 132-53-008 132-53-007 132-53-006132-53-005132-53-004132-53-003132-53-002132-53-001 132-43-062 132-43-121 132-43-175 132-43-176 132-43-146 132-43-103 132-43-102 132-43-114 132-43-101 132-43-100 132-43-061 132-43-105 132-43-104132-43-106 132-43-143 132-43-111132-43-110132-43-116132-43-109132-43-108132-43-115 132-43-118 132-43-112 132-43-117 132-43-060 132-43-054 132-43-055 132-43-056 132-43-057 132-43-058 132-43-059 132-43-050 132-43-041 132-43-039132-43-040 132-43-063 132-43-064 132-43-065 132-43-066 132-43-142 132-44-096 132-44-099 132-44-061 132-44-060 132-44-059 132-44-093 132-46-082 132-46-081 132-46-080 132-44-109132-44-108 132-44-081 132-44-083 132-44-082132-44-088 132-46-012 132-46-003 132-46-002132-46-001 132-44-084 132-44-076 132-44-077 132-44-078 132-44-079 132-44-075 132-44-080 132-45-029 132-45-028 132-45-027 132-45-026 132-45-045 132-45-044 132-45-046132-45-047132-45-048132-45-025 132-45-022 132-45-021 132-45-020 132-45-019 132-45-018 132-45-017 132-45-016 132-45-023132-45-024 132-44-073 132-44-072 132-44-071 132-44-070 132-44-069 132-44-086132-44-066 132-44-065 132-44-064 132-44-087 132-44-043 132-44-044 132-44-047 132-44-048 132-44-046 132-44-045 132-44-049 132-44-057 132-44-058 132-44-052 132-44-053 132-44-054 132-44-056 132-44-055 132-44-029132-44-030132-44-031132-44-041 132-44-032132-44-033132-44-034132-44-035132-44-036132-44-037132-44-038132-44-039132-44-040 132-29-061 132-29-062 132-29-064132-29-063 132-43-038 132-43-032 132-43-033 132-43-037 132-43-036 132-43-035 132-43-034 132-44-068132-44-074 132-44-085 132-43-125 132-44-050 132-44-051 132-44-067 132-42-011132-42-010132-42-009 132-42-006 132-42-073 132-42-072 132-42-082 132-41-042 132-41-043 132-41-067 132-41-058 132-41-060 132-41-061 132-41-059 132-41-086 132-41-031 132-41-030 132-41-047 132-52-016132-52-015 132-52-014132-52-013 132-52-012132-52-011 132-52-010132-52-009 132-52-001132-52-002132-52-003132-52-004132-52-005132-52-006132-52-007132-52-008 132-41-069 132-59-002132-59-001 132-59-005132-59-003132-59-004 132-27-062 132-27-110132-27-111132-27-092 132-27-107 132-27-104 132-27-112 132-27-114 132-41-005 132-41-073 132-41-092132-41-093132-41-003132-41-002 132-41-036 132-41-076132-41-001 132-41-032 132-41-074 132-41-064 132-41-068 132-41-090 132-42-032 132-42-020 132-42-018132-42-019 132-42-017 132-42-016 132-42-015 132-42-013132-42-012 132-43-022 132-43-021 132-43-020 132-43-019 132-43-018 132-43-048 132-43-049 132-43-047 132-42-058 132-43-016132-42-080 132-42-051 132-42-052 132-42-081 132-43-017 132-42-077 132-43-123 132-43-124 132-43-042132-43-043 132-43-031132-43-030 132-43-001 132-29-056 132-29-057 132-29-058 132-29-027 132-29-025 132-29-030 132-29-024 132-29-023 132-29-022 132-29-021 132-29-059 132-29-055 132-29-052 132-29-053 132-29-054 132-29-026 132-28-078 132-28-028132-28-025 132-28-026 132-28-027 132-43-024 132-43-023 132-43-044132-43-045 132-43-029132-43-028132-43-027132-43-026132-43-025 132-43-130 132-43-128 132-43-012 132-43-002132-43-003132-43-004132-43-005132-43-006132-43-007132-43-008132-43-009132-43-010132-43-011 132-42-021 132-42-079 132-42-040 132-42-039 132-42-038132-42-049132-42-048132-42-050132-42-057132-42-065 132-42-031132-42-030132-42-029132-42-028 132-42-025 132-42-024 132-42-027132-42-026 132-28-080 132-41-077 132-42-054 132-28-037 132-28-046132-28-045 132-28-055 132-28-054 132-28-053 132-28-001 132-28-002 132-28-057132-28-058 132-22-124132-22-127 132-27-063 132-27-069132-27-068 132-27-026 132-27-070132-27-064 132-27-065 132-27-066 132-27-067 132-27-081 132-27-072 132-27-028132-27-031 132-27-029132-27-030 132-27-024132-27-021 132-27-022 132-28-038132-28-077 132-28-044 132-28-004 132-28-056 132-27-113132-27-077 132-27-106132-27-080 132-28-049132-28-047 132-28-040 132-28-048 132-27-105 132-28-050 132-28-039 132-27-071 132-28-043 132-43-131 132-22-086 132-22-087 132-22-088 132-22-089 132-22-090 132-22-091 132-22-092 132-22-093 132-22-098132-22-099132-22-100132-22-101132-22-102132-22-103132-22-104132-22-105132-22-106132-22-107132-22-108 132-28-076 132-28-075 132-28-024132-28-023132-28-022 132-28-067132-28-066 132-28-068 132-28-017132-28-018132-28-019132-28-020 132-28-014132-28-013132-28-012132-28-011132-28-010 132-28-016 132-28-015 132-28-021 132-29-051 132-29-050 132-22-096 132-23-069 132-23-068 132-28-062132-28-061132-28-072 132-22-072 132-22-073 132-22-114 132-22-113 132-22-112 132-22-109132-22-110132-22-111 132-22-079132-22-078132-22-077132-22-076132-22-074 132-22-117 132-22-115132-22-116132-22-118132-22-119132-22-121 132-22-120132-22-122132-22-123 132-22-071132-22-070132-22-069132-22-068132-22-067 132-28-065132-28-064132-28-063 132-28-005 132-28-006 132-28-007 132-28-052 132-22-085132-22-084132-22-083132-22-082132-22-081132-22-080 132-37-024 132-37-023 132-37-022 132-37-049 132-37-048 132-37-046 132-37-045 132-37-044 132-37-053 132-37-042 132-38-064 132-38-065 132-38-062 132-38-027 132-38-045 132-38-046 132-32-047 132-32-026 132-32-027 132-32-037 132-32-025 132-32-024 132-32-043 132-37-055 132-37-057132-37-054 132-37-047 132-38-059 132-38-055 132-38-011 132-33-050 132-33-028 132-33-030 132-33-041 132-33-029 132-34-017 132-34-018 132-34-019 132-38-040 132-33-042 132-38-058 132-38-041 132-38-013 132-38-057 132-38-048 132-38-043 132-38-060 132-38-061 132-26-073132-26-074 132-33-008 132-33-007 132-33-006 132-33-005 132-33-004 132-33-003 132-33-002 132-33-001132-33-024 132-33-023 132-33-022 132-33-021 132-33-020 132-33-019 132-33-018 132-33-017 132-33-059 132-33-026 132-33-027 132-33-044 132-33-045 132-33-046 132-33-047 132-33-048 132-33-049 132-34-064132-26-064132-26-065132-26-072132-26-075132-26-052 132-33-043 132-25-028 132-25-027 132-25-024 132-25-053 132-25-023 132-25-022 132-25-021132-25-020 132-26-028 132-26-071 132-32-034 132-32-033 132-32-032 132-32-031 132-32-035 132-32-029 132-32-030 132-32-028 132-32-036 132-32-042 132-32-053 132-26-076 132-26-079 132-26-078 132-26-026 132-26-027 132-26-025 132-26-024 132-26-023 132-26-022 132-26-021 132-26-019 132-26-018 132-26-060 132-26-068 132-26-063 132-26-070132-26-010132-26-009132-26-008132-26-007132-26-006132-26-005132-26-004132-26-003132-26-002 132-26-001 132-26-029 132-19-050 132-19-049 132-19-048 132-19-047 132-19-046 132-19-045 132-19-044 132-19-043 132-19-042 132-19-031132-19-030132-19-029 132-26-062 132-18-057 132-18-058 132-58-001132-58-002 132-58-003 132-34-020 132-34-001 132-34-002 132-34-003 132-34-062 132-34-061 132-34-059132-34-060 132-34-058 132-34-057 132-34-055132-34-056 132-34-054 132-34-053 132-34-052132-34-063 132-48-006132-48-007132-48-008 132-19-068 132-19-015132-19-016 132-19-032 132-19-033 132-19-034 132-19-035 132-19-064 132-19-065 132-19-066 132-19-041 132-26-061 132-26-013 132-48-009 132-48-023 132-48-021132-48-022 132-48-010 132-48-011 132-48-012 132-48-036 132-48-037 132-48-001132-48-002132-48-003132-48-004132-48-005 132-19-014 132-19-067 132-19-059 132-19-056 132-19-058 132-19-057 132-19-060 132-19-061 132-19-063 132-48-015132-48-041 132-48-040 132-48-033 132-48-038 132-48-039 132-27-103 132-27-102 132-27-101 132-27-100 132-27-099 132-27-098 132-27-095132-27-097 132-27-096 132-27-094 132-27-055132-27-052 132-27-053 132-27-054132-27-051132-27-049 132-27-050 132-27-048 132-27-045132-27-046132-27-047 132-27-108 132-48-014 132-27-093 132-27-056 132-27-057 132-27-058 132-27-060 132-27-034 132-27-015 132-27-033132-27-035 132-27-014132-27-013 132-27-036 132-27-011132-27-010 132-27-039 132-27-038 132-27-037 132-27-012132-27-009 132-27-040 132-27-008132-27-007132-27-004 132-27-032 132-27-061 132-27-041132-27-042 132-21-081 132-21-080 132-21-078 132-21-077 132-21-076 132-21-075 132-27-044 132-27-005 132-27-006 132-27-043 132-21-047 132-21-048 132-27-059 132-21-079 132-21-050132-21-049 132-48-034 132-48-030132-48-029 132-48-031 132-48-032132-48-028132-48-027132-48-026132-48-024 132-48-025 132-48-018132-48-019132-48-020 132-19-054132-19-053 132-19-055 132-21-082 132-21-045132-21-043 132-21-046132-21-044 132-27-017 132-27-018 132-27-019 132-27-020132-27-016 132-21-059 132-21-060 132-21-061 132-21-062 132-21-063132-21-064132-21-065132-21-066132-21-067132-21-068132-21-069 132-22-064 132-22-065 132-22-066 132-28-003 132-27-025132-27-027 132-27-023 132-21-072132-21-073132-21-074 132-21-051 132-21-052 132-21-057 132-21-058132-21-056132-21-055132-21-054132-21-053 132-21-071 132-21-070 132-22-075 132-25-038132-25-037 132-25-036 132-25-035 132-25-034 132-25-033 132-25-011132-25-010132-25-009 132-18-021132-18-022132-18-023132-18-024 132-18-049 132-18-050 132-18-051 132-18-052 132-18-053 132-18-054 132-18-055 132-18-056 132-18-059132-18-060132-18-061132-18-062132-18-063132-18-064132-18-065132-18-066132-18-067132-18-068132-18-069 132-25-012 132-25-055 132-25-056 132-25-014 132-25-015 132-25-016 132-25-017 132-25-018 132-25-019 132-25-029132-25-030132-25-031132-25-032 132-19-051 132-19-052 132-19-026132-19-025 132-19-027 132-18-007 132-18-086 132-18-0 8 6 132-18-035 132-18-034 132-18-087 132-18-010 132-18-032 132-18-088 132-18-083 132-18-028132-18-029132-18-031 132-18-027 132-18-026 132-18-015132-18-014 132-18-016 132-18-017 132-18-019132-18-018 132-18-025 132-18-044 132-18-045 132-18-046 132-18-047 132-18-048 132-18-070132-18-071132-18-072 132-19-003132-19-002132-19-001 132-19-022132-19-023132-19-024 132-19-028 132-19-028 132-18-020 132-19-004 132-19-005 132-19-020 132-19-019 132-19-018 132-19-017 132-19-069132-19-010132-19-009132-19-008132-19-007132-19-006 132-19-021 142-20-057 132-37-004 132-37-003 132-37-005 132-37-006 132-37-007 132-37-008 132-37-009 132-37-041 132-37-040 132-37-039 132-37-038 132-37-034 132-37-029 132-37-028 132-37-027 132-37-026132-37-037 132-37-036 132-37-035 132-37-025 132-37-030132-37-052132-37-033 132-37-056 142-20-080 6362 132-37-061132-37-060 132-37-059 132-37-058 148-10-022 148-10-021 148-10-020148-10-019148-10-018 148-09-019 148-09-020 148-09-021 148-09-022 148-09-023 148-09-012 148-09-010 148-09-013 148-09-011 148-08-042 148-08-041148-08-040 148-08-039 148-08-038 148-08-037 148-08-036 148-08-035 148-08-034 148-08-033 148-08-032 148-08-031148-08-030148-08-029148-08-028 148-08-027148-08-026 148-08-025 148-08-024 148-08-023 148-08-022 148-08-021 148-08-020 148-08-019 148-08-018 148-08-017 148-08-016148-08-015148-08-014 148-08-013148-08-012 148-08-011 148-08-010 148-08-009 148-08-008 148-08-007 148-08-006 148-08-005 148-08-004 148-08-003148-08-002148-08-001 148-01-016 148-01-006 167-08-042 167-08-043 148-05-001 148-05-014 148-05-031 148-05-032 148-05-033 148-05-034 148-05-035 148-05-036 148-05-024 148-05-030 148-09-016 148-05-037 148-05-025 148-05-015 148-05-016 148-05-017 148-05-018 148-05-019 148-05-002 148-05-003 148-05-004 148-05-005 148-05-007 148-05-006 148-05-028 148-05-027 148-05-026 148-09-014 148-10-015 148-05-039 148-05-038 148-10-017148-10-016 148-09-017 148-09-018 148-06-035 148-06-020 148-06-021 148-06-023 148-06-019 148-02-057 148-01-015 148-01-010 148-01-011 148-01-012 148-01-014 148-01-013 148-05-009 148-05-023 148-05-020 148-05-021 148-05-022 148-05-008 148-05-010 148-05-011 148-05-013 148-05-012 148-05-029 148-06-039 148-06-038 148-06-037 148-06-040 148-06-036 148-06-024 148-12-023 148-12-024 148-12-026 148-12-025 148-12-027 148-10-001148-10-002148-10-003148-10-004148-10-005148-10-006 148-10-026 148-10-024 148-10-025148-05-041 148-05-040 148-10-008 148-10-009 148-10-010 148-10-011 148-10-012 148-10-013148-10-014 148-12-022 148-12-021 148-10-023 148-10-007 148-12-029 148-06-002 148-06-004 148-06-003 148-06-005 148-06-008 148-06-007 148-06-006 148-06-009 148-06-010 148-06-011 148-06-012 148-06-013 148-06-014 148-06-015 148-12-015 148-12-014 148-12-012 148-12-013 148-12-017 148-12-016148-12-018 148-12-020 148-12-019 148-12-005 148-12-004 148-12-003 148-06-016 148-06-017 148-06-018 148-06-001 148-12-028 148-02-099 148-02-098 148-02-001 148-02-100 148-02-101 148-02-071 148-02-092 148-02-096 132-45-083 132-45-082 132-45-081 132-45-084 132-45-080 132-45-079 132-45-078 132-45-077 132-45-076 132-45-055 132-45-054 132-45-053 132-45-052 132-45-051 132-45-050 132-46-023 132-46-064 148-01-037 148-01-005 148-02-097 132-46-067 132-46-017 148-02-095 132-45-059 132-45-058 132-45-057 132-45-056 132-45-038 132-45-039 132-45-040 132-45-041 132-45-037132-45-036132-45-035 132-45-033 132-45-032 132-45-031 132-45-030 132-45-043 132-45-042 148-02-062 148-02-063 148-02-066 148-02-061 148-02-060 148-02-059 148-06-025148-06-032 148-06-031 148-06-030 148-06-029 148-01-009 148-02-102 148-02-067 148-06-041 148-06-033 148-06-034 148-06-022 148-02-069 148-02-068 148-02-056 148-02-051 148-02-050 148-02-049148-02-038 148-02-040 148-02-039 148-02-048 148-02-047 148-02-046 148-02-029 148-02-030 148-02-087 148-02-085 148-02-084 148-02-025 148-02-026 148-02-027 148-02-028 148-02-055 148-02-054 148-02-053 148-02-052148-02-035 148-02-036 148-02-031 148-02-033 148-02-034 148-02-064 148-02-065 148-02-072 148-02-073 148-02-074 148-02-075 148-02-076 148-02-077 148-02-083 148-02-082 148-02-081 148-02-079 148-02-078 148-02-070 148-02-086 148-02-037 148-02-032 148-02-080 148-06-027 148-06-026 148-06-028 148-12-011 148-12-009 148-12-008 148-12-007 148-12-006 148-12-010 147-26-045 148-03-021 148-03-020 148-02-088148-02-089 148-02-091 148-02-090 148-02-094 148-02-093 148-02-002 148-02-003 148-02-004 148-02-005 148-02-006 148-02-007 148-02-008 148-02-009 148-02-024 148-02-023 148-02-021 148-02-022148-02-020 148-02-019148-02-018148-02-017148-02-016148-02-015148-02-014148-02-013 148-03-049 148-03-050 148-03-051 148-03-062 148-02-044 148-03-022 148-03-012148-03-011 148-03-023 148-03-024 148-03-025 148-03-026 148-03-027 148-03-028 148-03-029 148-03-030 148-03-031 148-03-032 148-03-052 148-03-053 148-03-059 148-03-058 148-03-057 148-03-056 148-03-055 148-02-045 148-02-041 148-02-042 148-02-043 132-45-087 132-45-088 132-45-086 132-45-074 132-45-075 148-02-012148-02-011148-02-010 148-03-060 148-03-003148-03-002148-03-001148-03-061 148-03-036 148-03-035 148-03-034 148-03-033 148-03-040 148-03-041 148-03-042 148-03-037 148-03-038 148-03-039 148-03-043 148-03-044 148-03-045 148-03-046 148-03-047 148-03-048 147-30-042 132-45-005 132-45-004 132-45-003 132-45-002 132-45-072 148-03-010148-03-009148-03-008148-03-007148-03-006148-03-005148-03-004 148-03-054 147-25-008 147-30-026 147-30-034 147-30-033 147-30-040 147-30-031 147-30-046 147-30-047 147-30-029 147-30-030147-30-043 147-31-023 147-31-055 147-31-056 147-26-007 147-26-006147-26-005147-26-004 147-26-008 147-26-023 147-26-022 147-26-010 147-26-011 147-26-012 147-26-021 147-26-024 147-26-025 147-26-026 147-26-027 147-26-028 147-26-009 147-26-003 147-27-006 147-27-023 148-03-013 148-03-014 148-03-015 148-03-016 148-03-017 148-03-018 148-03-019 147-56-025 147-56-012147-56-013147-56-014147-56-015147-56-016147-56-017 147-56-022 147-56-002147-56-003147-56-004147-56-005 147-56-009 147-56-010147-56-011 147-59-001 147-59-002 147-59-003 147-59-004 147-59-005 147-59-006 147-59-007 147-59-008 147-59-009 147-59-010147-59-011147-59-012147-59-013147-59-014 147-31-026 147-31-021 147-31-022 147-25-042 147-30-016 147-30-020 147-30-019 147-30-018 147-30-053 147-30-014 147-30-013 147-30-039 147-30-032 147-30-038 147-30-037147-30-036147-30-035 147-31-025 147-31-013 147-31-015 147-31-019 147-31-020 147-31-016 147-31-014 147-31-018 147-25-024 147-25-012 147-30-017 147-25-041 147-31-017 147-31-053 147-31-060 147-31-063 147-31-029 147-31-028 147-31-027 147-31-032 147-31-031 147-31-061 147-31-059 147-31-064 147-31-062 147-31-058 147-31-057 147-31-052 147-31-051 147-31-050 147-31-049 147-31-054 147-26-013 147-26-014147-31-030147-31-012 132-29-071 132-29-084 132-29-083 132-29-082 132-29-085 132-29-070 132-29-067 132-29-068 132-29-069 132-29-086 132-29-087 132-29-066 132-29-065 132-29-072 132-29-015 132-29-017 132-29-018 132-29-019 132-29-073 132-29-088 132-30-003 132-30-005 132-30-006 132-30-007 132-30-002 132-30-001 132-30-004 132-45-034 132-45-015 132-45-014132-45-013 132-45-006132-45-007132-45-008132-45-009132-45-010132-45-011132-44-028 132-44-027 132-45-012132-44-026 132-29-016 132-44-014 132-44-104 132-29-060 132-29-014 132-29-034 132-29-036 132-29-035 132-29-037 132-29-013 132-29-038 132-29-033 132-29-020 132-29-031 132-29-049 132-29-048 132-29-046 132-29-047 132-29-029 132-29-011 132-29-010 132-29-009 132-29-040 132-29-012 132-29-032 132-29-039 132-29-080 132-29-079 132-29-074 132-29-075 132-29-076 132-29-081 132-29-078 132-29-077 132-30-029 132-30-028 132-30-027 132-30-026 132-30-025 132-30-018 132-30-019 132-30-020132-30-021 132-30-022 132-30-023 132-30-037 132-30-038 132-30-034 132-30-008 132-30-009 132-30-011 132-30-010 132-30-014 132-30-013 132-30-036 132-30-017 132-30-012 132-30-035 132-23-052 132-23-053 132-23-054 132-23-049 132-23-051 132-23-050 132-24-012 132-24-013 132-24-014 132-24-015 132-24-016 132-30-024 132-29-028 132-29-001 132-23-067 132-23-035 132-23-034132-22-094 132-22-095 132-22-097 132-29-045 132-29-044 132-29-042 132-29-008 132-29-002 132-29-003 132-29-004 132-29-005 132-29-006 132-29-007 132-29-041 132-23-066 132-23-065 132-23-062 132-23-063 132-23-064 1 132-23 132-23-055 132-23-056132-23-057 13 132-29-043 132-23-037 132-23-036 147-25-021 147-25-011147-25-010 147-25-004 147-25-003 147-25-002 147-25-007 147-25-005 147-25-006 147-30-023 147-30-024 147-30-021147-30-022 147-30-025 147-30-005 147-30-049 147-30-050 147-30-045147-30-044 132-30-041 132-30-040 132-30-039 132-30-016 132-30-015 132-30-033 147-25-020147-25-019147-25-018 147-25-017 147-25-016 147-25-015 147-25-014 147-25-031147-25-032 147-25-001 147-25-009 147-30-051 147-25-023 147-25-022 147-25-030 147-25-029 147-25-028 147-25-027 147-25-026 147-25-025 147-31-011 147-31-010 132-30-030 132-30-031 132-30-032 132-30-042 132-30-044 132-30-045 132-30-046 132-30-043 132-30-047 132-30-048 132-30-049 132-24-037 132-24-040 132-24-039132-24-038 132-24-041 132-24-007 132-24-008 132-24-009 132-24-010132-24-011 132-24-005 147-19-001 147-19-010 132-24-006 132-24-036 132-24-035 147-27-029 147-27-001 147-27-011 147-27-010 147-27-009 147-27-025 147-27-026 147-27-027 147-27-028 147-27-002 147-27-003 147-27-004 147-26-017 147-26-020 147-26-019 147-26-018147-26-015 147-26-016 147-28-016 147-27-012 142-20-050 142-20-067 142-20-095 137-16-004 137-16-034 142-20-071 142-20-072 142-20-023 142-20-024 142-20-078 142-20-040 142-20-073 142-20-086 142-20-087 137-16-029 137-16-030 137-16-028 137-16-032 142-20-084 142-20-081 142-20-097 142-20-096 147-32-028 147-32-023 147-32-024 147-32-029 147-32-050 147-32-048 147-32-049 147-60-017 147-32-015 147-32-013 147-76-016 147-76-015 147-76-014 147-76-013 147-76-012 147-76-011 147-76-010 147-76-009 147-76-001 147-76-002 147-76-003 147-76-004 147-76-005147-76-006 147-76-007 147-76-008 147-32-057 147-32-058 147-32-059 147-32-060 147-32-035147-32-034 147-32-027 147-32-026 147-32-025 147-60-016 147-60-013 147-60-012 147-60-015 147-60-014 147-32-043 147-32-044 147-32-047 147-27-016 147-27-015 147-27-014 147-27-013 147-27-008 147-27-007 147-27-017 147-27-018147-27-019147-27-020147-27-021147-27-022 147-27-024 147-26-033 147-26-039 147-26-038 147-26-037 147-26-036 147-26-035 147-26-034 147-26-032147-26-031147-26-030147-26-029 147-32-045 147-27-005 147-32-046 147-28-014 147-28-007 147-28-015 147-28-005 147-32-040 147-32-039 147-32-038 147-32-037 147-32-036 147-32-033147-32-032147-32-031 147-32-030 147-28-006 147-32-041 147-32-042 147-26-041 147-26-040 147-28-008 147-28-017 147-28 147-28-022 167-04-011 167-04-012 167-04-015 167-04-002 167-04-001 137-17-004 142-17-016 137-17-003142-17-017 137-16-017 137-16-021 137-16-026 137-16-025 137-16-022 137-16-023 137-16-009 137-16-016 137-16-018 137-16-013 137-16-012 137-16-005 137-16-008 137-16-020 132-39-089 132-59-006132-59-008132-59-009132-59-007 137-37-003 137-37-001 137-37-004 137-37-022137-37-021137-37-020137-37-018137-37-017 137-37-019 137-37-023 137-37-024 137-37-025137-37-026 137-37-007137-37-006137-37-005 137-37-027 137-37-028 137-37-030137-37-029 137-37-016137-37-015137-37-014137-37-013137-37-012137-37-011 137-37-010 137-37-009137-37-008 142-20-092 142-20-093 142-18-048 148-02-058 148-09-015 167-09-0 1 8 167-09-017 167-09-014 167-09-015 167-09-016 167-09-005 167-09-006 167-09-007 167-09-008 167-09-01 3 167-09-012 167-09-011 167-09-010 167-09-009 167-09-019 137-27-136 137-27-1 3 5 137-27-134 137-19-078 137-19-079 137-14-013 167-04-010 137-08-098 137-08-100 137-37-031 137-37-032 137-37-033 137-37-034 137-37-035 137-37-036 137-37-037 137-37-038137-37-039137-37-040137-37-041137-37-042 137-25-128 137-25-129 137-25-130 137-25-131 137-24-045 137-24-046 137-24-044 148-07-042 148-01-007 132-43-096 132-41-094 132-41-095 132-42-083 132-42-084 132-44-110 132-44-111 148-03-063 148-03-064 147-56-026 147-56-024 147-56-028147-56-027 167-09-003 167-55-020167-55-059 167-55-021167-55-060167-55-098 167-55-022167-55-061167-55-099 167-55-023167-55-062167-55-100 167-55-026 167-55-065 167-55-103 167-55-027167-55-066167-55-104 167-55-024167-55-063167-55-101 167-55-025167-55-064167-55-102 167-55-050 167-55-089 167-55-012167-55-051 167-55-090 167-55-013167-55-052 167-55-091167-55-114 167-55-014 167-55-053 167-55-092 167-55-115 167-55-015167-55-054167-55-093167-55-116 167-55-017167-55-056167-55-095 167-55-018167-55-057167-55-096 167-55-019167-55-058167-55-097 167-55-016167-55-055167-55-094167-55-117 167-55-029167-55-068167-55-106 167-55-028167-55-067167-55-105 167-55-038167-55-077 167-55-113 167-55-037167-55-076167-55-112 167-55-069 167-55-036167-55-075167-55-111167-55-031167-55-070 167-55-032167-55-071167-55-107 167-55-033167-55-072167-55-108167-55-034167-55-073 167-55-109167-55-035167-55-074167-55-110 137-11-102 137-11-101 000-00-000 167-55-011 167-55-030 167-04-008 167-05-029 167-55-079 167-55-041167-55-080 167-55-001167-55-039 167-55-078 167-55-002167-55-040 167-55-003167-55-042167-55-081 167-55-004167-55-043 167-55-082167-55-005167-55-044167-55-083 167-55-006167-55-045167-55-084 167-55-007167-55-046167-55-085 167-55-008167-55-047167-55-086 167-55-009167-55-048167-55-087 167-55-010 167-55-049167-55-088 137-25-133 000-00-000 132-60-059132-60-060132-60-061 132-60-068 137-18-081 137-26-112 137-25-132 147-47-999 132-39-069 132-33-058 137-15-076 148-01-028 148-01-019 148-01-020148-01-021148-01-022148-01-023148-01-024148-01-025148-01-026148-01-027 148-01-018 132-38-063 148-01-030 148-01-031 148-01-032 148-42-136148-42-135148-42-134148-42-133 148-42-132 148-42-142 148-42-141 148-42-140 148-42-139148-42-138 148-42-137 148-42-148148-42-147148-42-146148-42-145148-42-144148-42-143 148-42-150 148-42-149 148-42-151148-42-152148-42-153148-42-154 148-42-001 148-42-002 148-42-003 148-42-004 148-42-006 148-42-012 148-42-011 148-42-010 148-42-009 148-42-008 148-42-007 148-42-013 148-42-014 148-42-015 148-42-016 148-42-017 148-42-018 148-42-024 148-42-036 148-42-022 148-42-021 148-42-035148-42-037 148-42-020 148-42-038 148-42-039 148-42-040 148-42-019 148-42-044148-42-043148-42-042148-42-041 148-42-045148-42-046148-42-047148-42-048148-42-049148-42-050148-42-051148-42-052148-42-053 148-42-054148-42-055148-42-056 148-42-057 148-42-058148-42-059148-42-060 148-42-023 148-42-070148-42-071148-42-072148-42-073148-42-074148-42-075148-42-076 148-42-077148-42-078148-42-079 148-42-080148-42-081148-42-082148-42-083 148-42-090148-42-091148-42-092148-42-093148-42-094148-42-095148-42-096 148-42-097148-42-098148-42-099 148-42-100 148-42-101148-42-102148-42-103148-42-104 148-42-025 148-42-026148-42-027148-42-028148-42-029 148-42-030 148-42-031148-42-032148-42-033148-42-034 148-42-061 148-42-062 148-42-063 148-42-064 148-42-065 148-42-066 148-42-084 148-42-085 148-42-086148-42-087 148-42-088 148-42-089 148-42-067148-42-068148-42-069 148-42-118 148-42-119 148-42-117 148-42-116 148-42-115 148-42-114 148-42-113 148-42-126 148-42-125 148-42-123 148-42-122 148-42-121148-42-120 148-42-124 148-42-112 148-42-111 148-42-110 148-42-109 148-42-108 148-42-107 148-42-106 148-42-105 148-42-130 148-42-129 148-42-128 148-42-127 148-42-156 148-42-172 148-42-157 148-42-171148-42-170148-42-169 148-42-168148-42-167148-42-166148-42-165148-42-164 148-42-158 148-42-159148-42-160148-42-161148-42-162148-42-163 148-42-005 148-12-030 132-60-066132-60-067 132-60-069 132-60-065132-60-064132-60-063132-60-062 132-60-055132-60-056 132-60-057132-60-058 148-01-034 148-01-035 132-63-001 132-63-002 132-63-003 132-63-004 132-63-005 132-63-007 132-63-006 137-38-001 137-38-002 137-38-003 137-38-004 148-10-037 148-43-001 148-43-002 148-43-003 148-43-004 148-43-005 148-43-006 148-43-007 148-43-008 148-43-009 148-43-010 148-43-011 148-43-012 148-43-013 148-43-014 148-43-015 148-43-016 148-43-017 148-43-018148-43-019 148-43-020 148-43-021 148-43-022 148-43-023 148-43-024 148-43-025 148-43-026 148-43-027148-43-028 148-43-029148-43-030 148-43-031148-43-032 148-43-033 148-43-034 148-43-042 148-43-035 148-43-043 148-43-036 148-43-037148-43-038 148-43-039 148-43-040 148-43-041 148-43-044 148-43-045 132-28-081 132-28-082 132-28-083 132-28-084 132-28-085 132-28-086 132-28-087 132-28-088 132-28-089 132-28-090 132-28-091132-28-092132-28-093 132-28-094 132-28-095 132-28-096 132-28-097 132-28-098 132-28-099132-28-100 132-28-101 132-28-102 132-28-103132-28-104 132-28-105 132-28-106 132-28-107 132-28-108 132-28-109 132-28-110132-28-111 132-28-112 132-28-113 132-28-114 132-28-115 132-28-116 132-28-117132-28-118 132-28-119 132-28-120 132-28-123 132-28-122 132-64-001 132-64-002 132-64-006 132-64-005 132-64-004 132-64-003 148-01-036 137-13-156 000-00-000 137-31-003 137-16-033 137-14-178 132-28-124 132-28-125 167-10-029 167-10-100 167-10-028 167-10-027 167-10-030 167-10-088167-10-087 167-10-031 167-10-032 167-10-054167-10-052 167-10-053 167-10-048 167-10-056 167-10-057 167-10-092 167-10-055 167-10-055 167-14-006 167-14-009 167-14-069 167-14-068 167-14-005 167-14-004 167-14-001 167-14-002 167-14-003 167-14-010 167-14-070 167-14-013 167-14-075 167-14-064 167-14-074 167-14-076 167-14-073 167-14-072 167-14-018 167-14-071 167-14-022 167-14-023 167-14-024 167-14-027 167-14-017 167-14-036 167-14-066 167-14-034 167-14-033 167-14-032 167-14-031 167-14-030 167-14--028 167-14-029 167-14-037 167-14-038 167-14-039 167-14-040 167-14-041 167-14-042 167-14-043 167-14-044 167-14-045 167-14-047 167-14-046 167-14-048 167-14-049 167-14-050 167-14-052 167-14-051 167-14-054 167-14-055 167-14-056 167-14-058 167-14-061 167-14-060 167-14-059 167-14-062 167-14-057 167-14-053 167-18-071 167-19-001 167-19-002 167-19-004 167-19-003 167-18-072 167-18-061 167-180-60 167-18-070 167-18-069 167-18-068 167-19-006 167-19-005 167-19-007 167-19-008 167-18-062 167-19-015 167-19-014 167-19-012 167-19-013 167-19-011 167-19-010 167-19-022 167-19-020 167-19-021 167-19-024 167-19-023 167-11-046 167-11-053 167-11-054 167-11-057167-11-013 167-11-010167-11-009167-11-008167-11-007167-11-043 167-11-042 167-11-052 167-11-051 167-11-050 167-11-049167-11-047 167-11-027 167-11-025 167-11-028 167-11-026 167-13-045 167-13-037 167-13-036 167-13-036 167-13-042 167-13-040 167-13-041 167-13-039 167-13-038 167-13-032 167-13-031 167-13-029167-13-028 167-13-027 167-13-026 167-13-025 167-13-048 167-13-049167-13-050 167-13-051 167-13-021 167-13-022 167-13-024 167-13-033 167-13-030 167-13-023 167-13-016 167-13-014 167-13-012 167-13-010 167-13-015 167-13-013 167-13-011 167-15-040 167-15-006 167-15-008 167-15-009 167-15-007 167-15-041 167-15-003 167-15-032 167-15-001 167-15-034 167-15-004 167-15-033 167-18-059 167-18-058 E l C a m in o R e a l Ch a r e et Wallis C t D o n ald D riv e Encina Grande Drive Cereza Drive Los Robles Avenue Villa Vera Verdosa Drive Campana Drive Solana Drive G e o rgia A v e Ynigo Way Driscoll Ct ng Ar thur'Maybell Way Ma ybell Avenue Frandon Ct Florales Drive Georgia Avenue Amaranta Avenue Amaranta Ct Ki s Cou r t Terman Drive Baker Avenue Vista Avenue Wisteria Ln Pena Ct Coulombe Drive Cherry Oaks Pl Pomona Avenue Arastradero Road Abel Avenue Clemo Avenue Villa Real El Camino Way Curtner Avenue Ventura Avenue Maclane Emerson Street Ventura Ct Park Boulevard Magnolia Dr South El Camino Real Cypress Lane GlenbrookD Fairmede Avenue Arastradero RoadIrven Court Los Palos Cir Los PalosPl Maybell Avenue Alta Mesa Ave Kelly Way Los Palos Avenue Suzanne Drive Suzanne Drive r i v e El Camino Real Suzanne Ct Lorabelle Ct McKellar Lane El Camino Way James Road Maclane Second Street Wilkie Way Camino CtWest Meadow Drive Thain Way Barclay Ct Victoria Place Interdale Way West Charleston Road Tennessee Lane Wilkie Way Carolina Lane Tennessee Lane Park Boulevard Wilkie Ct Davenport Way Alma Street Roose v Monroe Drive Wilkie Way Whitclem Pl Whitclem Drive Duluth C ircle Edlee Avenue Dinah's Court Cesano Court Monroe DriveMiller Avenue Whitclem Wy Whitclem Ct Ferne Avenue Ben Lomond Drive HemlockFerne Court Alma Street Monroe Drive Ruthelma Avenue Darlington Ct Charleston Ro ad Lundy Lane Newberry Ct Park Boulevard George Hood Ln Alma Street e lt Circle LinderoDrive Wright Place Starr Ki n g C ircle Scripps Avenue Scripps Court Creekside Drive Greenmeadow Way Ben Lomond Drive Parkside Drive Dixon Place Ely Place Ely Place Mumford Place East Meadow Drive Emerson Street Roosev elt Ci rcle Ramona Street Ramona Street Alma Street El C Cam Ramona Street Bryant StreetEl V os Way (Private) Page Mill Road Hansen Way Hanover Street Laguna Ct Barron Avenue Josina Avenue Kendall Avenue Tippawingo St Julie Ct Matadero Avenue Ilima Way Ilima Court Laguna Oaks Pl Carlitos Ct La Calle Laguna Avenue El Cerrit Paradise Way Roble Ridge (Private) L a MataWay Chimalus Drive Matadero Avenue o Road Paul Avenue Kendall Avenue Whitsell Avenue Barron Avenue Los Robles Avenue Laguna Way Sha una Lane La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue El Centro Street Timlott La Jennifer Way Magnolia Dr North La Donna Avenue LosRobles Av enu e Rinc Manzana Lane on Circle b y Pl Georgia Avenue H u b b artt D riv e Willmar Drive Donald Drive La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue Magnolia Drive Military Way Arbol Drive Orme Street Fernando Avenue Matadero Avenue Lambert Avenue Hansen Way El Camino Real Margarita Avenue Matadero Avenue Wilton Avenue Chestnut Avenue Portage Avenue Pepper Avenue Olive Avenue Acacia Avenue Emerson Street Park Boulevard Orinda Street Birch Street Ash Street Ash Street Park Boulevard Emerson Street Ramona Street Alma Street McGregor Way Monroe Drive Silva Avenue Sil v a C o u r t Mi lle r C ou rt Briarwood Way Driscoll Place Madeline Ct Page Mill Road Cerrito Way Ja c o b ' s C t CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW Lane 66 West Charleston Ro ad Lane 66 La Selva Drive El D o r a d o A v e n u e La Calle Matadero Ave Los Robles Avenue Timlott Ct Vista Villa Lane La Donna Avenue Cass Way Page Chimalus Drive Hanover Street Ma c k a Deodar StAlder Ln Spruce Ln Rickey's Ln Juniper Way Ric key's Wy Rickey's Wy Rickey's Wy Juniper Lane Cashel St Noble StHettinger Ln Pratt Ln Emma Court Alma Street Alma Village Lane Alma Village Circle Ryan LaneBowling Lane Fiesta Court Marl o we Co u rt This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend DRAFT HIS on Existing Commercial Zones DRAFT HIS on Existing Residential Transition Zones (SOFA2) DRAFT HIS on Existing Residential Zones Small Lot; Consolidation Opportunity City Jurisdictional Limits abc Quarter Mile Radius from El Camino Real Half Mile Radius from Caltrain Station Caltrain Stations 0'700' DR A F T Ho u s i n g I n v e n t o r y S i t e s ( H I S ) El C a m i n o R e a l Ar e a M a p v0 4 1 3 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 2013 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2013-04-03 10:42:19HOS 2007 2014 ECR 0313 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) 1996-2006 Housing Element NO CHANGE REVISED MERGED REMOVED 2007-14 Housing Element See H2.1 Policy H-1:X See Goal H-1 Policy H-2:X See H2.1 Program H-1 X See H2.1.1 Program H-2 X See H2.1.2 and H3.3.1 Program H-3 X See H2.2.1 Program H-4 X See H2.1.2 Program H-5 X See H2.1.1 Program H-5-A X See H2.1.1 Program H-5-B X X See H.2.1.1 and H2.1.8 Program H-5-C X See H3.3.2 Program H-5-D X See H.2.1.1 and H2.1.8 Program H-5-E X Deleted Program H-5-F X Completed Program H-5-G X See H2.1.2 Program H-5-H X See H2.1.3 Program H-5-I X Completed Program H-5-J X See H3.1.6 Program H-5-K X Completed (SEE 2.1.3 AND 2.1.9) Program H-5-L X Deleted Program H-6 X See H2.1.5 Program H-7 X Completed Program H-8 X Completed Program H-9 X H1.1.2 Program H-10 X Completed Program H-11 X Completed Program H-12 X Completed Policy H-3:X See Policy H2.2 Program H-13 X See H.2.2.1 Program H-13-A X See H.2.2.2 Program H-13-B X See H.2.2.2 Program H-13-C X See H.2.2.3 Program H-14 X See H.21.4 Program H-15 X Deleted Policy H-4:X See Policy H2.1 and Program H2.2.1 Program H-16 X See H2.1.11 Program H-17 X See H2.2.4 Program H-18 X See H2.1.4 Program H-19 X Completed Policy H-5:X See H2.3 Program H-20 X SeeH2.3.1 Policy H-6:X See H3.3 Program H-21 X See H3.3.1 Program H-22 X See H3.3.3 Program H-23 X See H3.3.1 Policy H-7:X See H3.1.14 Program H-24 X See H3.1.14 See H1 HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE GOALS, POLICIES AND PROGRAMS DISPOSITION GOAL H-1: A Supply of Affordable and Market Rate Housing That Meets Palo Alto’s Share of Regional Housing Needs GOAL H-2: Conservation and Maintenance of Palo Alto’s Existing Housing Stock and Residential Neighborhoods. Page 1 of 3 1996-2006 Housing Element NO CHANGE REVISED MERGED REMOVED 2007-14 Housing Element Policy H-8: X See H1.1 Program H-25 X See H1.1.1 Program H-26 X Completed Policy H-9: X See H1.2 Program H-27 X See H.3.1.13 Program H-28 X See H3.1.3 Program H-29 X See H1.2.1 Policy H-10: X See H1.1.3 Program H-30 X See H1.1.3 Policy H-11: X See Policy H1.3 Program H-31 X See H1.3.1 Program H-32 X See H1.3.1 See H3 Policy H-12: X See H3.1 Program H-33 X See H3.1.5 Program H-34 X See H3.3.1 Policy H-13: X See H4.1.3 Program H-35 X See H4.1.7 Program H-36 X See H3.1.2 Program H-37 X Completed Program H-38 X See H3.1.10 Program H-39 X See H3.1.6 Program H-40 X See H3.1.2.g Program H-41 X See H3.1.11 Policy H-14: See Policy H3.1 and Program 3.3.7 Program H-42 X See H3.3.4 Program H-43 X See H3.2.2 Program H-44 X See H3.3.5 Policy H-15: X See H3.1 and Program H3.4.2 Program H-45 X See H3.4.1and H3.4.2 Program H-46 X See H3.4.2 Program H-47 X Deleted Program H-48 X See H3.4.1 Program H-49 X See H3.4.2 Program H-50 X See H3.1.8 Program H-51 X See H3.4.3 Policy H-16: X See H3.1.7 Program H-52 X See H3.1.7 Program H-53 X See H3.1.9 Policy H-17: X See H3.1.9 Policy H-18: X See H4.2 Program H-54 X See H2.1.5 Program H-55 X See H4.2.1 Policy H-19: X See H2.1.2 Program H-56 X See H2.1.2 Policy H-20: X Deleted Policy H-21: X See H3.5 Program H-57 X See H3.5.1 Program H-58 X See H3.5.1 Policy H-22: X Deleted Policy H-23: X See H3.3.7 Program H-59 X See H3.3.6 Program H-60 X See H3.3.7 GOAL H-3: Housing Opportunities for a Diverse Population, Including Very low-, Low- and Moderate-Income Residents, and Persons with Special Needs. Page 2 of 3 1996-2006 Housing Element NO CHANGE REVISED MERGED REMOVED 2007-14 Housing Element See H4 Policy H-24: X See H4.1 Program H-61 X See H4.1.1 Program H-62 X See H4.1.2 Program H-63 X See H4.1.3 Program H-64 X See H4.1.4 Program H-65 X See H4.1.4 Program H-66 X See H4.1.5 Program H-67 X See H4.1.6 See Goal H5 and Policy H3.2 Policy H-25:X See Policy H5.1 Program H-68 X See H5.1.2 Program H-69 X See H5.1.4 Program H-70 X See H5.1.5 Program H-71 X See H5.1.6 Policy H-26: X See H3.2.1 Program H-72 X See H3.2.1 GOAL H-5: Reduced Housing Expenses for Energy GOAL H-4: An End to Housing Discrimination on the Basis of Race, Religion, National Origin, Age, Sex, Sexual Orientation, Marital Status, Physical Handicap, or Other Barriers that Prevent Choice in Housing. Page 3 of 3 S:\PLAN\PLADIV\Advance Planning\Housing Element2007_2014\HE TAG\TAG Names Only Updated 2-2-10.doc Housing Element Technical Advisory Group (TAG) Updated on February 2, 2010 Stakeholder / Expertise / Organization Name of Representative Planning & Transportation (PTC) Commissioner Susan Fineberg Human Relations (HRC) Commissioner PAUSD Board Member Melissa Baten Caswell Palo Alto Parents (PTA Members / Parents) Vacant* Palo Alto Parents (PTA Members / Parents) Vacant* PAN (Palo Alto residential neighborhood associations) North Palo Alto Representative Tom Jordan PAN (Palo Alto residential neighborhood associations) South Palo Alto Representative Sherrie Furman PAN (Palo Alto residential neighborhood associations) Barron Park & West Palo Alto Representative Doug Moran Local Business representative Deborah Pappas Local Real Estate representative Adam Montgomery League of Women Voters Housing Team Janet Owens Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) Board member Jean McCown Alliance for a Livable Palo Alto representative Steve Raney Mixed Use Housing Developer (with experience in Palo Alto) Tony Carrasco Affordable Housing Expert and City resident Vacant Housing Advocate and City resident Carol Lamont Housing Expert (Senior, Family, Affordable, Mixed Income) Fran Wagstaff * Holly Ward resigned on: _________________ PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS H1 GOAL ENSURE THE PRESERVATION OF THE UNIQUE CHARACTER OF THE CITY’S RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS H1.1 POLICY Promote the rehabilitation of deteriorating or substandard residential properties using sustainable and energy conserving approaches. H1.1.1 PROGRAM Continue the citywide property maintenance, inspection and enforcement program. Five-Year Objective: Continue to provide services which promote rehabilitation of substandard housing. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Code Enforcement Time Frame: Ongoing H1.1.2 PROGRAM Explore creating an amnesty program to legitimize existing illegal second units where appropriate and consistent with maintaining the character and quality of life of existing neighborhoods. The granting of amnesty should be contingent on compliance with minimum building, housing, and other applicable code standards and on maintaining the affordability of the second unit to very low, low or moderate-income households. Five-Year Objective: Amend the zoning code to create a second unit amnesty program to extend the life of existing affordable units. Funding Source: General Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Conduct a study within one year of adoption of Housing Element to determine how many illegal second units exist and what incentives are needed to encourage legitimizing illegal second units. H1.1.3 PROGRAM Provide incentives to developers such as reduced fees and flexible development standards to encourage the preservation of existing rental cottages and duplexes currently located in the R-1 and R-2 residential areas. Five-Year Objective: Preserve 10 rental cottages and duplexes. Funding Source: City Housing Fund Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Explore incentives within one year of Housing Element adoption H1.2 POLICY Support efforts to preserve multifamily housing units in existing neighborhoods. H1.2.1 PROGRAM When there is a loss of rental housing due to subdivision or condominium approvals, the project shall require 25 percent BMR units. Five-Year Objective: Provide 10 additional affordable housing units on sites where rental housing will be lost. Funding Source: NA Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 2 of 2 H1.3 POLICY Encourage community involvement in the maintenance and enhancement of public and private properties and adjacent rights-of-way in residential neighborhoods. H1.3.1 PROGRAM Create community volunteer days and park cleanups, plantings, or similar events that promote neighborhood enhancement and conduct City-sponsored cleanup campaigns for public and private properties. Five-Year Objective: Coordinate with the City’s waste and disposal hauler to conduct a cleanup campaign once a year to promote neighborhood clean-up. Funding Source: City Housing Funds Responsible Agency: Public Works Department Time Frame: Ongoing H1.4 POLICY Assure that new developments provide appropriate transitions from higher density development to single family and low density residential districts in order to preserve neighborhood character. STRATEGIES FOR NEW HOUSING H2 GOAL SUPPORT THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSING NEAR SCHOOLS, TRANSIT, PARKS, SHOPPING, EMPLOYMENT AND CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS H2.1 POLICY Identify and implement a variety of strategies to increase housing density and diversity, including mixed use development, near community services, including a range of unit types. Emphasize and encourage the development of affordable housing to support the City’s fair share of the regional housing needs. H2.1.1 PROGRAM Consider amending the zoning code to allow high density residential in mixed use projects in commercial areas within half a mile of fixed rail stations and to allow limited exceptions to the 50-foot height limit for Housing Inventory Sites within a quarter mile of fixed rail stations to encourage higher density residential development. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for a diverse range of housing types near fixed rail stations. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Consider zoning code amendments within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.1.2 PROGRAM Allow increased residential densities and mixed use development only where adequate urban services and amenities, including, traffic capacity, are available. Five-Year Objective: Make sure that adequate services are available when considering increased residential densities. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 3 of 3 H2.1.3 PROGRAM Amend the zoning code to increase the minimum density of the RM-15 Zoning District to at least eight dwelling units per acre consistent with the multi-family land use designation under the Comprehensive Plan. Five-Year Objective: To provide opportunities for up to10 additional dwelling units on properties zoned RM- 15. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.1.4 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage the development of smaller, more affordable housing units, including units for seniors, such as reduced parking requirements for units less than 900 square feet and other flexible development standards. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for 75 smaller, more affordable housing units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.1.5 PROGRAM Use sustainable neighborhood development criteria to enhance connectivity, walkability and access to amenities and to support housing diversity. Five-Year Objective: Increase connectivity and walkability in new development. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H2.1.6 PROGRAM Encourage density bonuses and/or concessions including allowing greater concessions for 100% affordable housing developments consistent with the Residential Density Bonus Ordinance. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for 100% affordable housing developments. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H2.1.7 PROGRAM Amend the zoning code to develop a small residential unit overlay district to allow higher densities in areas designated Pedestrian Transit Oriented Development (PTOD). Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for smaller residential units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one-year of Housing Element adoption PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 4 of 4 H2.1.9 PROGRAM Explore developing a Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program to encourage higher density housing in appropriate locations. Five-Year Objective: Create opportunities for higher density housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Consider program within two years of Housing Element adoption H2.1.10 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage the consolidation of smaller lots identified as Housing Inventory Sites, such as development review streamlining, reduction in required parking for smaller units, setback modifications, or graduated density when consolidated lots are over one-half acre. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for lot consolidation to increase availability of suitable sites for affordable housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.1.11 PROGRAM Promote redevelopment of underutilized sites and lot consolidation by providing information about potential housing sites on the City’s website, including the Housing Sites Inventory and information about financial resources available through City housing programs. Five-Year Objective: Provide information to developers about potential housing sites and opportunities for lot consolidation. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Post information on website within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.2 POLICY Continue to support the redevelopment of suitable lands for mixed uses containing housing to encourage compact, infill development, optimize the use of existing urban services and support transit use. H2.2.1 PROGRAM Adopt an ordinance for density bonus concessions to promote more flexible concessions and incentives to projects that propose smaller units at a higher density, to encourage development of suitable housing sites currently planned and zoned for non-residential use with mixed use projects to contribute to the City’s fair share of the region’s housing needs. Five-Year Objective: Increase opportunities for higher density development by providing density bonus incentives. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 5 of 5 Time Frame: Density Bonus Ordinance is being considered by the Planning Commission in January 2013; Council to consider adoption in early 2013 H2.2.2 PROGRAM Implement an incentive program within a year of Housing Element adoption for small properties identified as a Housing Inventory Site to encourage housing production on those sites. The incentive eliminates Site and Design Review if the project meets the following criteria: • The project has 9 residential units or fewer • A residential density of 20 dwelling units per acre or higher • Maximum unit size of 900 sq. ft. Five-Year Objective: Streamline processing for identified Housing Inventory Sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Adopt program within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.2.3 PROGRAM Work with Stanford University to identify sites suitable for housing that may be located in the Stanford Research Park and compatible with surrounding uses. Five-Year Objective: Identify sites suitable for housing to accommodate up additional housing units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Identify sites within two years of Housing Element adoption 2.2.4 PROGRAM Use coordinated area plans and other tools to develop regulations that support the development of housing above and among commercial uses. Five-Year Objective: Explore additional opportunities to encourage housing in commercial areas. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing 2.2.5 PROGRAM Revise the Zoning Ordinance to increase the density of up to 20 units per acre on CN- zoned parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for affordable units on CN zoned Housing Inventory Sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend zoning code within one year of Housing Element adoption. 2.2.6 PROGRAM Revise the Zoning Ordinance to allow for residential uses with the density of up to 20 units per acre on GM parcels included in the Housing Inventory Sites. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for affordable units on GM zoned Housing Inventory Sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend zoning code within one year of Housing Element adoption. PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 6 of 6 2.2.7 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to create zoning incentives that encourage development on and consolidation of smaller lots, such as development review streamlining, reduction in required parking for smaller units, setback modifications, or graduated density when consolidated lots are over one-half acre. Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for lot consolidation to increase availability of suitable sites for affordable housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of adoption of Housing Element H2.2.8 PROGRAM Rezone property at 595 Maybell Avenue from the RM-15 and R-2 zone districts to the PC zone district to allow for development of 60 units of extremely low to low income senior affordable rental housing units and 15 market rate units. Five-Year Objective: Provide an opportunity for development of 60 units affordable to extremely low and low income senior residents and 15 market rate units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H2.2.9 PROGRAM To maintain adequate sites are available throughout the planning period to accommodate the City’s RHNA, on a project basis, pursuant to Government Code Section 65863, the City will monitor available residential capacity and evaluate development applications on Housing Inventory Sites in mixed use zoning districts. Should an approval of development result in a reduction of capacity below the residential capacity needed to accommodate the remaining need for lower-income households, the City will identify and zone sufficient sites to accommodate the shortfall. Five-Year Objective: Maintain Residential Capacity of sites suitable for lower income households. Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing AFFORDABLE HOUSING H3 GOAL MEET UNDERSERVED HOUSING NEEDS AND PROVIDE COMMUNITY RESOURCES TO SUPPORT OUR NEIGHBORHOODS H3.1 POLICY Encourage, foster and preserve diverse housing opportunities for very-low, low, and moderate income households. H3.1.1 PROGRAM Amend the City’s BMR ordinance to lower the BMR requirement threshold from projects of five or more units to three or more units and to modify the BMR rental section to be consistent with recent court rulings related to inclusionary rental housing. PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 7 of 7 Five-Year Objective: Provide opportunities for 4 additional BMR units. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend BMR Ordinance within one year of Housing Element adoption. H3.1.2 PROGRAM Implement the City’s “Below Market Rate” (BMR) Program ordinance to reflect the City’s policy of requiring: a) At least 15 percent of all housing units in projects must be provided at below market rates to very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. Projects on sites of five acres or larger must set aside 20 percent of all units as BMR units. Projects that cause the loss of existing rental housing may need to provide a 25 percent component as detailed in Program H 1.2.1. BMR units must be comparable in quality, size and mix to the other units in the development. b) Initial sales price for at least two-thirds of the BMR units must be affordable to a household making 80 to 100 percent of the Santa Clara County median income. The initial sales prices of the remaining BMR units may be set at higher levels affordable to households earning between 100 to 120 percent of the County’s median income. For the projects with a 25 percent BMR component, four-fifths of the BMR units must be affordable to households in the 80 to 100 percent of median range, and one- fifth may be in the higher price range of between 100 to 120 percent of the County’s median income. In all cases, the sales price should be sufficient to cover the estimated cost to the developer of constructing the BMR unit, including financing, but excluding land, marketing, off-site improvements, and profit. c) If the City determines that on-site BMR units are not feasible, off-site units acceptable to the City, or vacant land determined to be suitable for affordable housing, construction, may be provided instead. Off-site units should normally be new units, but the City may accept rehabilitated existing units when significant improvement in the City’s housing stock is demonstrated. d) If the City determines that no other alternative is feasible, a cash payment to the City’ Residential Housing Fund, in lieu of providing BMR units or land, may be accepted. The in-lieu payment for projects subject to the basic 15 percent BMR requirement shall be 7.5 percent of the greater of the actual sales price or fair market value of each unit. For projects subject to the 20 percent requirement, the rate is 10 percent; for projects with a 25 percent requirement, (as described in Program 1.2.1 regarding the loss of rental housing) the rate is 12.5 percent. The fee on for-sale projects will be paid upon the sale of each market unit in the project. e) When the BMR requirement results in a fractional unit, an in-lieu payment to the City’s Residential Housing Fund may be made for the fractional unit instead of providing an actual BMR unit. The in-lieu fee percentage rate shall be the same as that otherwise required for the project (7.5 percent, 10 percent, or 12.5 percent). The fee on for-sale projects will be paid upon the sale of each market unit in the project. Larger projects of 30 or more units must provide a whole BMR unit for any fractional PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 8 of 8 unit of one-half (0.50) or larger; an in-lieu fee may be paid, or equivalent alternatives provided, when the fractional unit is less than one-half. f) Within fifteen days of entering into a BMR agreement with the City for a project, the developer may request a determination that the BMR requirement, taken together with any inclusionary housing incentives, as applied the project, would legally constitute a taking of property without just compensation under the Constitution of the United States or of the State of California. The burden of proof shall be upon the developer, who shall provide such information as is reasonably requested by the City, and the initial determination shall be made by the Director of Planning and Community Environment. The procedures for the determination shall generally be those described in Chapter 18.90 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, including the right of appeal to the City council under Chapter 18.93, or such other procedures as may be adopted in a future BMR ordinance. Notice of the hearing shall be give by publication but need not be sent to nearby property owners. If the City determines that the application of the BMR requirement as applied to the project would constitute a taking of property without just compensation, then the BMR agreement for the project shall be modified, reduced or waived to the extent necessary to prevent such a taking. g) Consider allowing smaller BMR units than the market rate units if the developer provides more than the required BMR amount in the R-1 Zoning district for new single family residential subdivisions subject to compliance with appropriate development standards. h) Revise BMR policy language to clarify the City’s BMR program priorities in producing affordable housing units including exploring the option of requiring land dedication as the default option on sites of three or more acres. i) Evaluate revising the method of calculating the number of required BMR units by basing the number of BMR units required on the maximum density allowable on the site instead of the total number of proposed units in the development. j) Conduct a nexus study to identify the impacts of market rate housing and the need for affordable housing and develop BMR rental policies based on the results of the study. Five-Year Objective: Provide 10 affordable units through implementation of the City’s BMR program. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing – implementation of existing program H3.1.3 PROGRAM Continue implementation of a Below Market Rate (BMR) Program Emergency Fund to prevent the loss of BMR units and to provide emergency loans for BMR unit owners to maintain and rehabilitate their units. Five-Year Objective: Use the BMR Program Emergency Fund to prevent the loss of up to 2 affordable units. Funding Source: BMR Emergency Fund PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 9 of 9 Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.4 PROGRAM Consider expansion of the BMR Program Emergency Fund to provide financial assistance to help BMR homeowners maintain and rehabilitate older BMR units. Five-Year Objective: Assist in maintenance and rehabilitation of 4 older BMR units. Funding Source: BMR Emergency Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Expand Program within two years of Housing Element adoption H3.1.5 PROGRAM Preserve affordable housing stock by monitoring compliance, providing tenant education, and seeking other sources of funds for affordable housing developments at risk of market rate conversions. The City will continue to renew existing funding sources supporting rehabilitation and maintenance activities. Five-Year Objective: Prevent conversion of affordable housing to market rate and renew funding sources for rehabilitation and maintenance of housing stock. Funding Source City, CDBG funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 10 of 10 H3.1.6 PROGRAM Encourage the use of flexible development standards including floor area ratio limits, creative architectural solutions and natural resource conservation, in the design of projects with a substantial BMR component. Five-Year Objective: Increase opportunities for BMR development through use of flexible development standards. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.7 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to allow Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units in commercial and high density residential zoning districts subject to development standards that would encourage the construction of the maximum number of units consistent with the goals of preserving the character of adjacent neighborhoods. Sites that have access to community services and public transportation for SRO residents are highly desired. Five-Year Objective: Provide affordable efficiency units on appropriate sites. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Amend the Zoning Code within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.1.8 PROGRAM Require developers of employment-generating commercial and industrial developments to contribute to the supply of low- and moderate-income housing through the provision of commercial in- lieu fees as prescribed in a nexus impact fee study. Five-Year Objective: Generate in-lieu fees to contribute toward the creation of low and moderate income housing. Funding Source: City Housing Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Continue to update the commercial in-lieu fee on an annual basis. H3.1.9 PROGRAM Ensure that the Zoning Code permits innovative housing types, such as co-housing, and provides flexible development standards that will allow such housing to be built provided the character of the neighborhoods in which they are proposed to be located is maintained. Five-Year Objective: Review the Zoning Code and determine appropriate amendments to allow innovative housing types with flexible development standards. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Consider changes to the Zoning Code within two years of Housing Element adoption PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 11 of 11 H3.1.10 PROGRAM Adopt a revised density bonus ordinance that allows up to a maximum zoning increase of 35 percent in density and grants up to three concessions or incentives. The density bonus ordinance will meet State standards for the provision of housing units for very low- and lower-income renters, seniors and moderate-income condominium buyers in compliance with Government Code Section 65915, et seq. Five-Year Objective: To provide opportunities for increased density as outlined in State law. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Density Bonus Ordinance is being considered by the Planning Commission in January 2013; Council to consider adoption in early 2013 H3.1.11 PROGRAM Recognize the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park as providing low- and moderate income housing opportunities. Any redevelopment of the site must be consistent with the City’s Mobile Home Park Conversion Ordinance adopted to preserve the existing units. To the extent feasible, the City will seek appropriate local, state and federal funding to assist in the preservation and maintenance of the existing units in the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park. Five-Year Objective: Preserve the 120 mobile home units in the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park as a low and moderate income housing resource. Funding Source: City, State and Federal Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.12 PROGRAM Continue enforcing the Condominium Conversion Ordinance. Five-Year Objective: Maintain the City’s rental housing stock. Funding Source: N/A Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.13 PROGRAM Annually monitor the City’s progress in the construction or conversion of housing for all income levels including the effectiveness of housing production in mixed use developments. Five-Year Objective: Provide information on the effectiveness of City programs. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Provide annual reports PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 12 of 12 H3.1.14 PROGRAM Evaluate the provisions of the Below Market Rate (BMR) Program to determine if additional incentives are needed to encourage development of housing given current market conditions. Five-Year Objective: Engage in discussions with the development community and determine if additional incentives are needed to improve the BMR Program. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Evaluate the Program within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.1.15 PROGRAM When using its Housing Development funds for residential projects, the City shall give a strong preference to those developments which serve extremely low-income (ELI) households. Five-Year Objective: Provide funding opportunities for development of housing for Extremely Low Income (ELI) households. Funding Source: City Housing Development funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.1.16 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to provide additional incentives to developers who provide extremely-low income (ELI) housing units, above and beyond what is required by the Below Market Rate (BMR) program, such as reduced parking requirements for smaller units, reduced landscaping requirements and reduced fees. Five-Year Objective: Provide incentives for development of housing for Extremely Low Income (ELI) households. Funding Source: City Housing funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.1.17 PROGRAM Any affordable development deemed a high risk at market rate conversion, within two years of the expiration of the affordability requirements, the City will contact the owner and explore the possibility of extending the affordability of the development. Five-Year Objective: To protect those affordable developments deemed a high risk to converting to market rate. Funding Source: City Housing funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.2 POLICY Reduce the cost of housing by continuing to promote energy efficiency, resource management, and conservation for new and existing housing. PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 13 of 13 H3.2.1 PROGRAM Continue to assist very low-income households in reducing their utility bills through the Utilities Residential Rate Assistance Program (RAP). Five-Year Objective: Provide assistance to with utility bills to 10 low income households. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Palo Alto Utilities Department Time Frame: Ongoing PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 14 of 14 H3.2.2 PROGRAM Use existing agency programs such as Senior Home Repair to provide rehabilitation assistance to very low- and low-income households. Five-Year Objective: Provide rehabilitation assistance to 10 very low and low-income households. Funding Source: CDBG & General Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.3 POLICY Support the reduction of governmental and regulatory constraints and advocate for the production of affordable housing. H3.3.1 PROGRAM Where appropriate and feasible, require all City departments to expedite processes and allow waivers of development fees as a means of promoting the development of affordable housing. Five-Year Objective: Continue to reduce processing time and costs for affordable housing projects. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: All City Departments Time Frame: Ongoing, continue implementation upon adoption of Housing Element H3.3.3 PROGRAM Continue to exempt permanently affordable housing units from any infrastructure impact fees that may be adopted by the City. Five-Year Objective: Reduce costs for affordable housing projects. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.3.4 PROGRAM Promote legislative changes and funding for programs that subsidize the acquisition, rehabilitation, and operation of rental housing by housing assistance organizations, nonprofit developers, and for-profit developers. Five-Year Objective: Continue as an active member of the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California to promote legislative changes and funding for programs relating to housing. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, City Manager Time Frame: Ongoing H3.3.5 PROGRAM Support the development and preservation of group homes and supported living facilities for persons with special housing needs by assisting local agencies and nonprofit organizations in the construction or rehabilitation of new facilities for this population. Five-Year Objective: Review existing development regulations and amend the Zoning Code to reduce regulatory obstacles to this type of housing. Funding Source: City & CDBG Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 15 of 15 Time Frame: Amend Zoning Code within one year of Housing Element adoption. H3.3.6 PROGRAM Continue to participate in the Santa Clara County Homeless Collaborative as well as work with adjacent jurisdictions to develop additional shelter opportunities, and Five-Year Objective: Continue City staff participation as members of the Collaborative’s CDBG and Home Program Coordinators Group. Funding Source: City, CDBG & HOME funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, City Council Time Frame: Ongoing H3.3.7 PROGRAM Continue to participate with and support agencies addressing homelessness. Five-Year Objective: Continue City staff participation in prioritizing funding for County-wide programs. Funding Source: City, CDBG & HOME funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, City Council Time Frame: Ongoing H3.3.8 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to allow transitional and supportive housing by right in all multifamily zone districts which allow residential uses only subject to those restrictions that apply to other residential uses of the same type in the same zone. Five-Year Objective: Provide appropriately zoned sites for transitional and supportive housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.4 POLICY Pursue funding for the acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of housing that is affordable to very low, low, and moderate-income households. H3.4.1 PROGRAM Maintain a high priority for the acquisition of new housing sites near public transit and services, the acquisition and rehabilitation of existing housing, and the provision for housing-related services for affordable housing. Seek funding from all appropriate state and federal programs whenever they are available to support the development or rehabilitation of housing for very low, low, or moderate-income households Five-Year Objective: Allocate CDBG funding to acquire and rehabilitate housing for very low, low, or moderate income households. Funding Source: CDBG, State Local Housing Trust Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 16 of 16 H3.4.2 PROGRAM Support and expand local funding sources including the City’s Housing Development Fund, Housing Trust of Santa Clara County, CDBG Program, County of Santa Clara’s Mortgage Credit Certificate Program (MCC) or similar program. Continue to explore other mechanisms to generate revenues to increase the supply of low- and moderate- income housing. Five-Year Objective: Increase the supply of affordable housing stock. Funding Source: City Housing Development Fund, Housing Trust of Santa Clara County, CDBG, Santa Clara County MCC Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.4.3 PROGRAM Periodically review the housing nexus formula as required under Chapter 16.47 of the Municipal Code to fully reflect the impact of new jobs on housing demand and cost. Five-Year Objective: Continue to evaluate the housing nexus formula and adjust the required impact fees to account for the housing demand from new development. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H3.4.4 PROGRAM The City will work with affordable housing developers to pursue opportunities to acquire, rehabilitate and convert existing multi-family developments to long term affordable housing units to contribute to the City’s fair share of the region’s housing needs. Five-Year Objective: Identify potential sites for acquisition and conversion and provide this information to developers. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Identify sites within one year of Housing Element adoption. H3.5 POLICY Support the provision of emergency shelter, transitional housing and ancillary services to address homelessness. H3.5.1 PROGRAM Enter into discussions with local churches participating in the City’s year round Hotel de Zink emergency shelter program to establish a permanent emergency shelter in each church within a year of Housing Element adoption. Five-Year Objective: To determine interest from local churches in establishing permanent emergency shelters. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Enter into discussions within two years of Housing Element adoption PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 17 of 17 H3.5.2 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to allow emergency shelters by right with appropriate performance standards to accommodate the City’s unmet need for unhoused residents within an overlay of the ROLM zone district located east of Highway 101. Five-Year Objective: Provide appropriately zoned sites for emergency shelters. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Within one year of Housing Element adoption H3.6 POLICY Support the creation of workforce housing for City and school district employees if feasible. H3.6.1 PROGRAM Conduct a nexus study to evaluate the creation of workforce housing for City and school district employees. Five-Year Objective: Create the opportunity for up to 5 units of workforce housing. Funding Source: City of Palo Alto Commercial Housing Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Conduct study within two years of Housing Element adoption. HOUSING DISCRIMINATION H4 GOAL PROMOTE AN ENVIRONMENT FREE OF DISCRIMINATION AND THE BARRIERS THAT PREVENT CHOICE IN HOUSING. H4.1 POLICY Support programs and agencies that seek to eliminate housing discrimination. H4.1.1 PROGRAM Work with appropriate state and federal agencies to ensure that fair housing laws are enforced. Five-Year Objective: Continue to coordinate with state and federal agencies to support programs to eliminate housing discrimination. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H4.1.2 PROGRAM Continue to support groups that provide fair housing services, such as Mid-Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing. Five-Year Objective: Continue to provide financial support through CDBG funding for fair housing services such as Mid-Peninsula Citizens for Fair Housing and Project Sentinel. Funding Source: CDBG funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 18 of 18 H4.1.3 PROGRAM Continue the efforts of the Human Relations Commission to combat discrimination in rental housing, including mediation of problems between landlords and tenants. Five-Year Objective: Continue to provide mediation services for rental housing discrimination cases. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Human Relations Commission Time Frame: Ongoing H4.1.4 PROGRAM Continue implementation of the City’s ordinances and state law prohibiting discrimination in renting or leasing housing based on age, parenthood, pregnancy or the potential or actual presence of a minor child. Develop written procedures describing how Palo Alto will process and treat reasonable accommodation requests for projects proposing housing for special needs households. Five-Year Objective: Implement existing ordinances regarding discrimination and develop reasonable accommodation procedures. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Implementation – Ongoing; Establish reasonable accommodation procedure within one year of Housing Element adoption H4.1.5 PROGRAM Continue the City’s role in coordinating the actions of various support groups that are seeking to eliminate housing discrimination and in providing funding and other support for these groups to disseminate fair housing information in Palo Alto, including information on referrals to pertinent investigative or enforcement agencies in the case of fair housing complaints. Five-Year Objective: Continue to provide funding and other support for these groups to disseminate fair housing information in Palo Alto. Funding Source: City Funds, Human Services Resource Allocation Process (HSRAP) Responsible Agency: Office of Human Services Time Frame: Ongoing H4.1.6 PROGRAM Amend the Zoning Code to provide individuals with disabilities reasonable accommodation in rules, policies, practices and procedures that may be necessary to ensure reasonable access to housing. The purpose of this program is to provide a process for individuals with disabilities to make requests for reasonable accommodation in regard to relief from the various land use, zoning, or building laws, rules, policies, practices and/or procedures of the City. Five-Year Objective: Allow for reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities in interpreting land use regulations. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning and Community Environment Time Frame: Amend the Zoning Code within one year of Housing Element adoption PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 19 of 19 H4.1.7 PROGRAM Continue to implement the “Action Plan” of the City of Palo Alto’s Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consolidated Plan or its successor documents. Five-Year Objective: Provide for increased use and support of tenant/landlord educational mediation opportunities as called for in the CDBG Action Plan. Funding Source: CDBG funds, General Fund Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing H4.2 POLICY Support housing that incorporates facilities and services to meet the health care, transit, and social service needs of households with special needs, including seniors and persons with disabilities. H4.2.1 PROGRAM Ensure that the Zoning Code facilitates the construction of housing that provides services for special needs households and provides flexible development standards for special service housing that will allow such housing to be built with access to transit and community services while preserving the character of the neighborhoods in which they are proposed to be located. Five-Year Objective: Evaluate the Zoning Code and develop flexible development standards for special service housing. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Evaluate the Zoning Code within one year of Housing Element adoption H4.2.2 PROGRAM Work with the San Andreas Regional Center to implement an outreach program that informs families in Palo Alto about housing and services available for persons with developmental disabilities. The program could include the development of an informational brochure, including information on services on the City’s website, and providing housing-related training for individuals/families through workshops. Five-year objective: Provide information regarding housing to families of persons with developmental disabilities. Funding Source: General Fund Responsibility: Planning and Community Environment Time frame: Develop outreach program within two years of adoption of the Housing Element. PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 20 of 20 SUSTAINABILITY IN HOUSING H5 GOAL REDUCE THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF NEW AND EXISTING HOUSING. H5.1 POLICY Reduce long term energy cost and improve the efficiency and environmental performance of new and existing homes. H5.1.1 PROGRAM Periodically report to the City on the status and progress of implementing the City’s Green Building Ordinance, intended to improve indoor air quality and assess the environmental performance and efficiency of homes in the following areas: - Greenhouse gas emissions - Energy use - Water use (indoor and outdoor) - Material efficiency - Stormwater runoff - Alternative transportation - Site preservation Five-Year Objective: Prepare reports evaluating the progress of implementing the City’s Green Building Ordinance. Funding Source: City funds, Development fees Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Building Division Time Frame: Ongoing H5.1.2 PROGRAM Continue providing support to staff and public (including architects, owners, developers and contractors) through training and technical assistance in the areas listed under Program H5.1.1. Five-Year Objective: Provide educational information regarding the City’s Green Building Ordinance. Funding Source: City funds, Development fees Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Building Division Time Frame: Ongoing H5.1.3 PROGRAM Participate in regional planning efforts to ensure that the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets areas that support sustainability by reducing congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. Five-Year Objective: Provide a regional framework for sustainability in creating new housing opportunities. Funding Source: City Funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment Time Frame: Ongoing PALO ALTO REVISED DRAFT HOUSING ELEMENT 5.2 HOUSING GOALS POLICIES AND PROGRAMS March 26, 2013 Page 21 of 21 H5.1.4 PROGRAM Review Federal, State, and regional programs encouraging the improvement of environmental performance and efficiency in construction of buildings and incorporate appropriate programs into Palo Alto’s policies, programs and outreach efforts. Five-Year Objective: Continue to update regulations for environmental sustainability. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Public Works & Utilities Time Frame: Ongoing H5.1.5 PROGRAM Enhance and support a proactive public outreach program to encourage Palo Alto residents to conserve resources and to share ideas about conservation. Five-Year Objective: Provide up to date information for residents regarding conservation through educational brochures available at City Hall and posted on the City’s website. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Public Works & Utilities Time Frame: Ongoing H5.1.6 PROGRAM Provide financial subsidies, recognition, or other incentives to new and existing home owners or developers to achieve performance or efficiency levels beyond minimum requirements. Five-Year Objective: Establish a program to recognize home owners and developers who achieve incorporate sustainable features beyond what is required by the Green Building Ordinance. Funding Source: City funds Responsible Agency: Planning & Community Environment, Building Division Time Frame: Establish program within two years of Housing Element adoption Housing Element Housing Sites Inventory March 26, 2013 Page 1 of 7 ZONING_RESIDENTIAL LAND_USE_LOT_REALISTIC ON_SITE_CONSTRAINTS/ OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSED_ APN SITE_ADDRESS DISTRICT DENSITY MAXIMUM YIELD DESIGNATION SIZE_(ac)CAPACITY EXISTING USE VALUE_ ALLOWED RATIO 132-37-019 423 Page Mill Rd.CS(D)30 du/ac 4 CN 0.15 2 Vacant SFD 0.12 132-37-018 433Page Mill Rd.CS(D)30 du/ac 4 CN 0.15 2 Vacant SFD 0.12 132-37-017 441 Page Mill Rd.CS(D)30 du/ac 4 CN 0.15 2 Vacant SFD 0.26 132-37017 451 Page Mill Rd.CS(D)30 du/ac 4 CN 0.15 2 Vacant SFD 0.27 132-41-085 3707 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 3 CN 0.18 3 1 Story Personal Service; Retail Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.99 124-32-013 470 Cambridge Av CC (2)30 du/ac 7 CC 0.23 5 1 Story Religious Institution: Surface Parking Existing Non-Residential Use 1.64 124-33-005 410 Sherman Av CC (2)30 du/ac 7 CC 0.24 5 2 Story Office Commercial Existing Commercial Use 4.17 124-29-007 251 California Av CC (2)(R)(P)30 du/ac 7 CC 0.26 5 1 Story retail Existing Commercial Use 1.19 124-32-035 334 California Av CC (2)(R)(P)30 du/ac 8 CC 0.27 5 2 Story Retail; Eating Drinking; Commercial Existing Commercial Use 0.74 124-33-061 479 California Av CC (2)(R)(P)30 du/ac 7 CC 0.24 5 1 Story commercial; Financial Service Existing Commercial Use 0.55 120-15-090 595 Bryant St CD-C (GF)(P)/40 du/ac 8 CC 0.22 5 1 Story Retail; Eating Drinking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.75 120-03-021 581 University Av CD-C (P)40 du/ac 10 CC 0.26 5 1 Story Financial Service Existing Commercial Use 0.73 120-03-037 578 University Av CD-C (P)40 du/ac 8 CC 0.22 5 1 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 3.45 120-03-067 541 Cowper St CD-C (P)40 du/ac 9 CC 0.23 5 1 Story commercial Existing Commercial Use 1.47 120-15-007 401 Waverley St CD-C (P)40 du/ac 8 CC 0.22 5 1 Story Retail; personal Service Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 1.09 120-15-013 420 Cowper St CD-C (P)40 du/ac 10 CC 0.25 5 2 story office Existing Commercial Use 2.12 120-26-109 542 High St CD-C (P)40 du/ac 10 CC 0.25 5 ! Story Commerical; Retail office Existing Commercial Use 1.38 120-26-111 135 Hamilton Av CD-C (P)40 du/ac 8 CC 0.22 5 Surface parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0 124-31-059 2101 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac*5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Retail; Personal Service; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.91 132-40-062 480 Wilton Av CN*15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.91 132-46-106 4112 El Camino Wy CN*15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 2.41 137-01-116 2000 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 5 CN 0.27 5 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.13 137-08-078 3636 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.09 137-08-097 3666 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 1 Story Retail: Commercial; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.44 137-11-091 3972 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 5 CN 0.25 5 Gas Station Underground Storage Tanks; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.27 137-11-098 3780 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 5 CN 0.24 5 1 Story Retail; Commecial; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.13 120-33-024 711 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 7 CS 0.24 5 1 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 0 132-38-011 3275 Ash St CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.27 5 1 Story Office; Commercial; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 2.47 132-38-017 460 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.22 5 Surface parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.04 Vacant; Small lot; Consolidation Opportunity. An application has been submitted to merge these lots and develop an 8-unit multifamily project, the project will include 3 units affordable to low inclome residents through density bonus program Table 3-7 Table of Commercially Zoned Sites 2. *CN Parcels to be rezoned to 20 units per acre. 1. Parcels highlighted in orange denotes zoning density greater than 20 units per acre; parcels with proposals for market rate housing are excluded. Notes: 3. Parcels with an Assessed Value Ratio greater than 1.5 were determined to have an artificially low assessed land value from parcels under the same ownership for more than 10 years; the assessed land value is far below current market land values. Housing Element Housing Sites Inventory March 26, 2013 Page 2 of 7 ZONING_RESIDENTIAL LAND_USE_LOT_REALISTIC ON_SITE_CONSTRAINTS/ OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSED_ APN SITE_ADDRESS DISTRICT DENSITY MAXIMUM YIELD DESIGNATION SIZE_(ac)CAPACITY EXISTING USE VALUE_ ALLOWED RATIO 132-38-018 460 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.22 5 Surface parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.04 132-38-025 455 Portage Av CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.22 5 1 Story Commercial Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 4.26 132-38-032 3159 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 7 CS 0.24 5 2 Story Commercial Existing Commercial Use 1.06 132-38-047 3260 Ash St CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.22 5 SFD Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 5.62 137-08-079 3516 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 6 CS 0.23 5 1 Story Personal Service Existing Commercial Use 0.09 137-08-088 3508 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 7 CS 0.24 5 Automotive Service; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.16 124-28-003 2260 Park Bl CC (2)30 du/ac 8 CC 0.29 6 Surface parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0 124-29-011 2555 Park Bl CC (2)30 du/ac 8 CC 0.29 6 2 Story Office Commercial Existing Commercial Use 2.46 124-28-033 250 California Av CC (2)(R)(P)30 du/ac 8 CC 0.28 6 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 0.57 124-32-034 300 California Av CC (2)(R)(P)30 du/ac 8 CC 0.27 6 2 Story Eating Drinking; Commercial Existing Commercial Use 0.73 120-15-045 353 University Av CD-C (GF)(P)40 du/ac 12 CC 0.3 6 1 Story Commerical; Retail; Office Existing Commercial Use 2.95 120-16-020 635 Waverley St CD-C (P)40 du/ac 12 CC 0.31 6 2 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 0.9 120-27-038 658 High St CD-C (P)40 du/ac 12 CC 0.32 6 2 Story Commercial Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.89 124-30-015 1963 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 6 CN 0.28 6 Gas Station Underground Storage Tanks; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.04 132-35-045 3705 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 6 CN 0.28 6 1 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.26 120-33-004 67 Encina Av CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.27 6 1 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 1.17 132-37-055 3051 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.3 6 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.45 132-38-058 320 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.28 6 1 Story Office Commercial; Light Industrial Existing Commercial Use 6.46 132-38-060 280 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.28 6 1 Story Office Commercial; Light Industrial Existing Commercial Use 0.53 132-38-061 292 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.32 6 1 Story Office Commercial; Light Industrial Existing Commercial Use 0.93 132-39-087 455 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.32 6 1 Story Commercial Existing Commercial Use 0.56 142-20-055 3160 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 8 CS 0.29 6 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.03 132-31-071 2747 Park Bl GM 6 LI 0.3 6 Vacant Lot Needs Rezoning to allow Residential Use 0.51 124-32-040 414 California Av CC (2)(R)(P)30 du/ac 11 CC 0.37 7 2 Story Financial Services; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.49 120-15-015 469 University Av CD-C (GF)(P)40 du/ac 13 CC 0.34 7 1 Story Commercial; Retail; Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 1.7 120-15-103 360 University Av CD-C (GF)(P)40 du/ac 13 CC 0.34 7 1 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use 1 120-16-011 630 Cowper St CD-C (P)40 du/ac 13 CC 0.34 7 1 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 0.45 120-26-002 130 Lytton Av CD-C (P)40 du/ac 13 CC 0.34 7 2 Level Parking Structure Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0.36 132-46-100 4115 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 7 CN 0.35 7 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.03 137-08-081 3630 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 7 CN 0.37 7 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.36 137-11-078 3700 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 7 CN 0.36 7 1 Story Personal Service; Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0 137-11-083 3896 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 7 CN 0.32 7 1 Story Retail; Eating Drinking; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.56 132-37-033 2905 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.32 7 2 Story Commercial: Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.17 132-37-052 2951 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.32 7 1 Story Retail; Commecial Existing Commercial Use 0.62 132-37-056 3001 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 9 CS 0.33 7 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.08 Housing Element Housing Sites Inventory March 26, 2013 Page 3 of 7 ZONING_RESIDENTIAL LAND_USE_LOT_REALISTIC ON_SITE_CONSTRAINTS/ OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSED_ APN SITE_ADDRESS DISTRICT DENSITY MAXIMUM YIELD DESIGNATION SIZE_(ac)CAPACITY EXISTING USE VALUE_ ALLOWED RATIO 132-38-048 268 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 10 CS 0.35 7 1 Story Office Commercial; Light Industrial Existing Commercial Use 0.64 132-41-088 3801 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 10 CS 0.35 7 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.14 132-46-119 4195 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 10 CS 0.35 7 1 Story Automotive Services Existing Commercial Use 0.88 132-46-120 4193 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 10 CS 0.36 7 1 Story Medical Office; Automotive Services Existing Commercial Use 0.56 120-03-030 528 University Av CD-C (GF)(P)40 du/ac 15 CC 0.38 8 1 Story Commercial; Retail Existing Commercial Use 1.46 124-33-066 2585 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 8 CN 0.4 8 Surface parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0 132-40-059 3609 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 8 CN 0.42 8 Gas Station Underground Storage Tanks; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0 132-41-083 3783 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 8 CN 0.42 8 1 Story Eating Drinking; Retail; Commercial: Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.33 137-01-070 2200 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 8 CN 0.41 8 Gas Station Underground Storage Tanks; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.11 132-38-027 425 Portage Av CS 30 du/ac 12 CS 0.4 8 1 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 0.31 132-38-045 3200 Ash St CS 30 du/ac 11 CS 0.39 8 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 4.6 132-38-046 3250 Ash St CS 30 du/ac 11 CS 0.38 8 2 Story Office Commercial Existing Commercial Use 1.13 148-09-010 4335 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 12 CS 0.4 8 2 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 1.21 120-34-014 98 Encina Av CC 30 du/ac 13 CC 0.44 9 Surface parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0.01 124-30-017 1921 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 9 CN 0.43 9 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.97 132-46-104 4128 El Camino Wy CN*15 du/ac 9 CN 0.45 9 2 Story Office Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.32 137-01-113 2280 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 9 CN 0.43 9 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.06 137-01-125 2257 Yale St CN*15 du/ac 9 CN 0.43 9 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.23 132-38-026 435 Portage Av CS 30 du/ac 13 CS 0.45 9 1 Story Commercial Office Existing Commercial Use 0.34 132-39-071 429 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 13 CS 0.45 9 1 Story Automotive Services; Office Existing Commercial Use 0.23 167-08-036 4232 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 12 CS 0.43 9 1 Story Daycare School Existing Commercial Use 1.07 137-01-069 559 College Av CN*15 du/ac 10 CN 0.47 10 2 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 1.81 124-33-067 2501 El Camino Real CN*; CC (2)15/30 du/ac 10 CN 0.51 10 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use; Current Max Res Density is 15 du/ac on portion of lot 0.33 132-39-090 415 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 15 CS 0.51 10 1 Story Commercial Existing Commercial Use 3.44 132-41-096 3885 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 14 CS 0.47 10 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 3.51 167-08-030 4230 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 15 CS 0.52 10 1 Story Automative Service Existing Commercial Use 0.04 167-08-035 4200 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 14 CS 0.48 10 1 Story Automotive Service Existing Commercial Use 0 124-29-020 150 Grant Av CC (2)30 du/ac 17 CC 0.59 12 1 Story Commercial; Office Existing Commercial Use 0.23 132-38-062 435 Acacia Av CS 30 du/ac 18 CS 0.62 12 1 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 7.47 167-08-042 4256 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 17 CS 0.59 12 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 0.14 132-36-077 2675 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 13 CN 0.63 13 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.59 132-44-022 4115 El Camino Wy CN*15 du/ac 13 CN 0.64 13 1 Story Commercial: Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.75 137-08-080 3606 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 13 CN 0.65 13 Vacant Lot Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0 120-34-001 841 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 19 CS 0.64 13 Automotive Service Existing Commercial Use 0 167-08-037 4222 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 19 CS 0.63 13 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 0.41 Housing Element Housing Sites Inventory March 26, 2013 Page 4 of 7 ZONING_RESIDENTIAL LAND_USE_LOT_REALISTIC ON_SITE_CONSTRAINTS/ OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSED_ APN SITE_ADDRESS DISTRICT DENSITY MAXIMUM YIELD DESIGNATION SIZE_(ac)CAPACITY EXISTING USE VALUE_ ALLOWED RATIO 132-43-153 4085 El Camino Wy CN*15 du/ac 14 CN 0.71 14 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0.7 132-38-042 3201 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 20 CS 0.68 14 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.27 132-44-100 4135 El Camino Wy CN*15 du/ac 15 CN 0.75 15 2 Story Office; Underground Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 4.06 137-01-129 2390 El Camino Real CN*15 du/ac 15 CN 0.76 15 2 Story Commercial Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 0 132-38-065 440 Portage Av CS 30 du/ac 22 CS 0.76 15 Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 6.23 142-20-054 3150 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 22 CS 0.75 15 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 0.3 132-39-088 3399 El Camino Real CS; CN*30/15 du/ac 15 CS;CN 0.74 15 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 0.29 142-20-013 2450 El Camino Real CS (AS1)30 du/ac 17 CS 0.57 17 2 Story Office; Surface Parking 1.32 142-20-014 2470 El Camino Real CS (AS1)30 du/ac 17 CS 0.57 17 2 Story Office; Surface Parking 0.96 142-20-047 2500 El Camino Real CS (AS1)30 du/ac 19 CS 0.64 17 2 Story Office; Surface Parking 1.19 142-20-012 507 California Av CS (AS1)30 du/ac 22 CS 0.75 19 1 Story Financial Service; Surface Parking 1 137-08-083 3400 El Camino Real CS (H); RM-15 30/15 du/ac 19 MF;CS 0.96 19 1 Story Eating Drinking Existing Commercial Use 1.74 132-38-056 430 Lambert Av CS 30 du/ac 30 CS 1.03 21 2 Story Office Commercial Existing Commercial Use 4.49 124-28-045 154 California Av CC (2)(R)(P)30 du/ac 34 CC 1.14 23 2 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use 0.29 148-09-014 4291 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 34 CS 1.16 23 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 0.33 132-31-042 130 Sheridan Av GM 34 LI 1.13 34 Vacant Lot Needs Rezoning to allow Residential Use 0 142-20-035 3128 El Camino Real CS 30 du/ac 35 CS 1.18 24 1 Story Eating Drinking; Surface parking Existing Commercial Use 0.93 142-19-006 1501 California Av RP (AS2)30 du/ac 117 RO 3.93 55 1 to 2 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking 16.09 142-19-007 1451 California Av RP (AS2)30 du/ac 135 RO 4.52 55 2 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking 7.82 142-19-017 1601 California Av RP (AS2)30 du/ac 255 RO 8.51 70 3 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use; Mayfield Agreement; 70 affordable units proposed 11.88 Subtotal 1,806 1,177 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY MAXIMUM YIELD ON SITE CONSTRAINTS/ASSESSED ALLOWED (based on FAR) (based on avg of 35 du/ac)OPPORTUNITIES VALUE RATIO 120-27-073 718 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 2 1 Story; Automotive Service Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.53 120-28-084 918 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.08 2 1 Story; Automotive Service Small lot; consolidation opportunity 0 120-27-072 721 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.93 120-28-004 160 Homer Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.05 120-28-033 839 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Personal Service; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.02 120-28-036 825 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Personal Service; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.31 LAND USE DESIGNATION Existing Commercial Use; Mayfield Agreement; per agreement, application for market rate units to be submitted Existing Commercial Use; Mayfield Agreement; per agreement, application for market rate units to be submitted 3. Parcels with an Assessed Value Ratio greater than 1.5 were determined to have an artificially low assessed land value from parcels under the same ownership for more than 10 years; the assessed land value is far below current market land values. 2. *CN Parcels to be rezoned to 20 units per acre. Table 3-5 Table of SOFA II Housing Sites 1. Parcels highlighted in orange denotes zoning density greater than 20 units per acre; parcels with proposals for market rate housing are excluded. Notes: EXISTING USEZONING DISTRICTSITE ADDRESSAPN REALISTIC CAPACITYLOT SIZE (ac) Housing Element Housing Sites Inventory March 26, 2013 Page 5 of 7 ZONING_RESIDENTIAL LAND_USE_LOT_REALISTIC ON_SITE_CONSTRAINTS/ OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSED_ APN SITE_ADDRESS DISTRICT DENSITY MAXIMUM YIELD DESIGNATION SIZE_(ac)CAPACITY EXISTING USE VALUE_ ALLOWED RATIO 120-28-080 943 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.11 3 1 Story Professional Office Small lot; consolidation opportunity 1.04 120-28-081 935 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.11 3 1 Story Personal Service Small lot; consolidation opportunity 0.59 120-28-082 929 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.11 3 1 Story SFD Small lot; consolidation opportunity 0.01 120-28-085 926 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 3 SOFA II CAP 0.11 3 2 Story Personal Service; Office Small lot; consolidation opportunity 0.34 120-28-090 931 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 story light manufacturing Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.19 120-28-091 925 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 5 SOFA II CAP 0.14 3 Vacant; Auto Storage Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.01 120-28-093 960 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Automotive Service Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.59 120-30-048 1027 Alma St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Professional Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.79 120-30-049 1019 Alma St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.12 3 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 1.25 120-28-003 815 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 4 SOFA II CAP 0.13 4 1 Story Professional Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 1.55 120-28-005 160 Homer Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 5 SOFA II CAP 0.14 4 Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.02 120-28-051 190 Channing Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 6 SOFA II CAP 0.17 5 1 Story Professional Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 1.45 120-28-092 940 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 6 SOFA II CAP 0.18 5 1 story light manufacturing Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.62 120-28-094 145 Addison Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 6 SOFA II CAP 0.17 5 1 Story Professional Office Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.77 120-28-099 829 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 6 SOFA II CAP 0.19 5 1 Story Personal Service; Office; Surface Parking Small lot ; consolidation opportunity 0.89 120-27-048 700 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.55 120-27-049 701 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.22 6 1 Story Personal Service; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.04 120-28-040 849 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Professional Office Existing Commercial Use 0.89 120-28-050 901 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 11 SOFA II CAP 0.32 6 Vacant; Auto Storage Existing Commercial Use 0 120-28-095 999 Alma St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use 1.3 120-30-050 100 Addison Av RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Retail; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0 120-28-097 925 Alma St RT-50 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.24 6 1 Story Professional Office Existing Commercial Use 1.2 120-28-038 882 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.25 7 2 Story Personal Service; Medical Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 8.86 120-28-086 930 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 8 SOFA II CAP 0.25 7 1 Story Automotive Service Existing Commercial Use 2.04 120-28-089 965 High St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 12 SOFA II CAP 0.35 9 1 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.47 120-27-046 700 High St RT-50 25-50 du/ac 12 SOFA II CAP 0.36 9 1 Story Office Existing Commercial Use 1.64 120-27-075 774 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 16 SOFA II CAP 0.48 13 1 Story Retail Existing Commercial Use 1.76 120-28-037 840 Emerson St RT-35 25-50 du/ac 16 SOFA II CAP 0.48 13 Surface Parking Parking serving adjacent commercial uses 0.03 Subtotal 220 171 Housing Element Housing Sites Inventory March 26, 2013 Page 6 of 7 ZONING_RESIDENTIAL LAND_USE_LOT_REALISTIC ON_SITE_CONSTRAINTS/ OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSED_ APN SITE_ADDRESS DISTRICT DENSITY MAXIMUM YIELD DESIGNATION SIZE_(ac)CAPACITY EXISTING USE VALUE_ ALLOWED RATIO 132-41-025 397 Curtner Ave.RM-30 30 du/ac 6 MF 0.19 4 2 story duplex Existing Residential 0.73 003-02-021 725 University Av RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.25 5 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.4 003-02-022 489 Middlefield Rd RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.25 5 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.12 120-04-043 704 Webster St RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.22 5 1 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.67 120-16-046 720 Cowper St RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.23 5 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.49 124-27-038 2185 Park Bl RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.25 5 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.21 124-27-039 2149 Park Bl RM-30 30 du/ac 7 MF 0.25 5 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.74 120-03-038 610 University Av RM-40 40 du/ac 8 MF 0.22 5 2 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.22 003-02-043 575 Middlefield Rd RM-30 30 du/ac 8 MF 0.28 6 2 Story Office; Podium Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.19 132-41-072 405 Curtner Av RM-30 30 du/ac 8 MF 0.28 6 Vacant Lot Portion of lot serves as a driveway to adjacent surface Parking 0 003-02-048 547 Middlefield Rd RM-30 30 du/ac 10 MF 0.36 7 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.61 124-28-043 2211 Park Bl RM-30 30 du/ac 10 MF 0.34 7 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.26 003-02-047 720 University Av RM-30 30 du/ac 12 MF 0.41 8 1 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.37 137-01-121 531 Stanford Av RM-30 30 du/ac 12 MF 0.4 8 2 Story Hotel: Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 4.91 120-16-041 400 Forest Av RM-40 40 du/ac 18 SOFA I CAP 0.45 9 1 Story Medical Office; Podium Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.6 120-16-042 430 Forest Av RM-40 40 du/ac 20 SOFA I CAP 0.51 10 1 Story Automotive Service Existing Commercial Use 0.91 137-37-004 4102 El Camino Real RM-30 30 du/ac 19 MF 0.64 13 1 Story Religious Institution Existing Non-Residential Use 0.02 137-24-034 4146 El Camino Real RM-15 15 du/ac 15 MF 0.77 15 Vacant Lot Current Maximum Residential Density is 15 du/ac 127-15-023 4151 Middlefield Rd RM-15 15 du/ac 18 MF 0.93 18 2 Story Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.46 132-42-074 3945 El Camino Real RM-30; CS 30 du/ac 26 MF;CS 0.89 18 1 to 2 Story Professional Office; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.35 132-42-073 3901 El Camino Real RM-30 30 du/ac 33 MF 1.1 22 2 Story Motel; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 1.39 132-38-059 340 Portage Ave RM-30 30 du/ac 374 MF 12.47 75 1 Story Commercial/Retail Existing Commercial Use 4.68 000-00-000 1170 Welch Rd RM-40 40 du/ac 84 RO 2.11 71 Vacant Lot Opportunity for expansion of adjacent existing multifamily residential 0 Subtotal 723 332 Total Number of Units 1,680 1. Parcels highlighted in orange denotes zoning density greater than 20 units per acre; parcels with proposals for market rate housing are excluded. 2. *CN Parcels to be rezoned to 20 units per acre. Table 3-6 Table of Residentially Zoned Sites with Commercial Uses 3. Parcels with an Assessed Value Ratio greater than 1.5 were determined to have an artificially low assessed land value from parcels under the same ownership for more than 10 years; the assessed land value is far below current market land values. Notes: Housing Element Housing Sites Inventory March 26, 2013 Page 7 of 7 ZONING_RESIDENTIAL LAND_USE_LOT_REALISTIC ON_SITE_CONSTRAINTS/ OPPORTUNITIES ASSESSED_ APN SITE_ADDRESS DISTRICT DENSITY MAXIMUM YIELD DESIGNATION SIZE_(ac)CAPACITY EXISTING USE VALUE_ ALLOWED RATIO 132-41-091 3877 El Camino Real * RM-30; CS 30 du/ac 22 MF;CS 0.75 15 1 Story Eating Drinking; Commercial; Surface Parking Existing Commercial Use 0.08 Parcel designated to meet the City's previously unaccommodated need from 1999-2006 Housing Element per AB2348 From: Sam Tepperman-Gelfant [mailto:stepperman-gelfant@publicadvocates.org] Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 5:21 PM To: Paul McDougall; Melinda Coy Cc: Richard Marcantonio Subject: Palo Alto Draft Housing Element Hi Melinda and Paul, Our review of Palo Alto’s draft Housing Element has left us with a lot of serious questions. Since the City has asked you for an expedited review, we are sharing some of those with you, and hope that we can set up a time to discuss these and other concerns by phone. Table 3-10 tells us that the City has a remaining lower-income (VLI/LI) need of 1,044 units, but does not include AB 1233 units. The draft notes that its rezoning program in the prior element (program H-14) was not implemented as to 3 sites on the inventory, and that “As required by State law, sites that were proposed for rezoning in the previous housing element but were not rezoned during the planning period will be rezoned.” (Draft, p. 172.) The draft, however, does not quantify or address the portion of the lower-income RHNA that carries over into this planning period. Since the draft does not differentiate VLI and LI site capacity from capacity on sites on which the remaining moderate and above-moderate income need will be met (another 624 units), it is impossible to tell which sites will accommodate what portion of the need at what income level. Table 3-10 goes on to tell us that “total capacity of housing inventory sites at 20 DU/AC” of 1,784 units. In a footnote, the draft then tells us that, actually, most of the Mayfield development is not at 20 DU/AC, and also that 15 units attributed to APN 137-24-034 and the 15 second units are not zoned at that density. Actually, that does not begin to tell the full story about these purported 1,784 units: • This total includes at least 347 units on at least 35 sites that do not currently allow residential development at 20 du/acre, and therefore cannot be claimed to accommodate lower-income housing needs. (There does not even appear to be a rezoning program for these sites – while a “Program 2.2.2” is referenced in the text on page 81, no such program actually appears in the Element. In any event, the implied rezoning with respect to these sites would not meet the requirements of AB 2348 since nearly all of the sites are mixed-use, there do not appear to be minimum densities proposed, and few, if any, of the sites would accommodate a minimum project size of 16 units.) • The inventory includes 250 units in the Mayfield Development. There are a number of problems with this. First, it seems unlikely that all of these units can be constructed by the end of the planning period -- the development agreement contemplates a development proposal for just 185 of these units by the end of 2013, with the remainder to be proposed no later than 2020. Second, even if all 250 units are constructed by the end of the planning period, between 180-200 of these units are planned to be market-rate units, and the affordability level of the remaining 50-70 BMR units is unspecified. • The inventory includes 113 units of capacity through the inclusion of condominiums in hotel projects, calculating that number as 25% of the units in 3 hotel projects that have already been proposed. No evidence is provided, however, that the developers of these projects actually plan to include condo units, or if so, at what affordability levels. • The inventory relies very heavily on very small sites – 137 sites are less than ½ acre (accounting for 850 units, nearly half of the claimed inventory capacity), and an additional 29 sites are between ½ and 1 acre (accounting for 412 units). Of the 507 units supposedly accommodated on sites larger than 1 acre, 75 would require rezoning and 69 are theoretical condominium units in hotel projects discussed above. • The City claims it will permit another 15 second units by the end of the planning period, despite having produced only 13 second units in the first five years of the planning period. Moreover, all 13 of those prior second units were affordable at the moderate income level. (See 2011 Annual Report, p. 3 of 5.) There is no reason to expect that any second units will count toward the lower-income RHNA share. Obviously, the City has a lot of work to do before we can say definitively what its true unmet RHNA (including AB 1233 units) is, and how much can be accommodated on the inventoried sites. But from what we can see in the draft, it looks like a lot of these sites are not actually suitable for lower-income units. In fact, it’s not clear that the inventory is even sufficient to meet the total RHNA at all income levels. Please let me know if there is a good time for you to check in with you this week about these issues. Thanks, Sam Sam Tepperman-Gelfant Senior Staff Attorney 131 Steuart Street | Suite 300 | San Francisco CA 94105 415.431.7430 x324 stepperman-gelfant@publicadvocates.org Public Advocates Inc. | Making Rights Real | www.publicadvocates.org CONFIDENTIAL COMMUNICATION This email message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee named above and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly prohibited. If you received this email message in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this email message or by telephone. Thank you. ********************************************************* This email and any files attached are intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately. This email and the attachments have been electronically scanned for email content security threats, including but not limited to viruses. PUBLIC INTEREST LAW FIRM Oficina Legal de Interés Público Law Foundation of Silicon Valley 152 North Third Street, 3rd Floor San Jose, California 95112 Telephone (408) 293-4790 • Fax (408) 293-0106 www.lawfoundation.org September 24, 2012 SENT VIA E-MAIL ONLY: tim.wong@cityofpaloalto.org. Tim Wong. Senior Planner City of Palo Alto, Planning & Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: City of Palo Alto Draft 2007-2014 Housing Element Dear Mr. Wong: I write to provide comments regarding the City of Palo Alto’s draft housing element1 on behalf of Public Interest Law Firm (PILF), a project of the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley. PILF’s mission is to protect the human rights of individuals and groups in the Silicon Valley area who face barriers to adequate representation in the civil justice system, using impact litigation and advocacy. One of our advocacy priorities is ensuring access to affordable housing throughout Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties. We acknowledge the work that the City has done in the preparation of its draft housing element. However, the draft housing element has a number of serious deficiencies, as discussed in detail below. Programs The draft housing element’s programs section lacks sufficient detail to ensure that that the programs will be effective in meeting their stated objectives. Many of the programs fail to set forth any concrete actions; few indicate which agency or agencies of the city will be responsible for implementing the program; and none has a specific timeline in which actions must be taken. According to HCD, each program should set forth: • Definite time frames for implementation (e.g., by June 2009, ongoing, annually during the planning period, upon adoption of general plan amendment, etc.). 1 All references to the draft housing element refer to City of Palo Alto Housing Element, available at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/30833 [last accessed Sept. 22, 2012]. 2 • Identification of agencies and officials responsible for implementation (e.g., planning department, redevelopment agency, county community development department, city building official, housing manager, public housing authority, etc.). • Description of the local government’s specific role in program implementation (e.g. a description of how the City will market the availability of rehabilitation funds). • Description of the specific action steps to implement the program. • Proposed measurable outcomes (e.g., the number of units created, completion of a study, development of a homeless shelter, initiation of a rezone program, preservation of at-risk units, annexation of land within a sphere of influence). • Demonstration of a firm commitment to implement (e.g., the City will apply for HOME funds by June 2009). • Identification of specific funding sources, where appropriate (e.g., dollar amounts of annual funding entitlements or allocations – CDBG, HOME, ESG, HOPWA, Continuum of Care, redevelopment agency’s low/moderate-income housing funds, bond proceeds, tax credit allocations, and other federal, State and local resources).2 In contrast, the draft housing element’s programs tend to be only one or two sentences, with very little in the way of concrete actions or timelines. In light of the fact that Palo Alto is finalizing its housing element so near the end of the planning period, it is imperative that every program includes clear actions and timelines to ensure that programs are completed in a timely manner. A particularly stark example of the program section’s inadequacy is the program for preservation of affordable units, which reads, simply: “Preserve affordable housing stock and continue to renew existing funding sources supporting rehabilitation and maintenance activities.”3 State law requires a much higher level of detail in the preservation program: the program must contain a discussion of funding sources for affordable housing preservation, and the statute also encourages cities to include strategies for preserving at- risk developments.4 Given that Palo Alto is at risk of losing 400 affordable units during the planning period,5 its housing element should include a more robust program regarding preservation of those units. Site Inventory We agree with the concerns regarding the draft housing element’s site inventory raised by Sam Tepperman-Gelfant of Public Advocates in his earlier correspondence. Additionally, we note that the City appears to rely on many sites with existing uses to 2 HCD, “Program Overview and Quantified Objectives,” available at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing_element2/PRO_overview.php. 3 Draft housing element, supra, at p. 156. 4 Gov. Code, § 65583, subd. (c)(6). 5 Draft housing element, supra, at pp. 60-61. 3 meet its housing need.6 However, the draft housing element does not provide information or analysis regarding these sites’ potential for redevelopment. According to HCD, “[t]he inventory must consider the impact of existing development when calculating realistic development capacity.”7 The analysis of sites with existing uses should include whether existing uses are expected to continue, whether those uses are compatible with housing development, and the likelihood that housing will be developed on those sites within the planning period. Claiming Credit for Already-Permitted Units The draft housing element seeks to credit 1206 units that have been permitted, entitled, and/or constructed since the beginning of the planning period toward its RHNA obligation.8 This total includes 325 units at the very low-, low-, and moderate-income levels.9 However, to credit already-permitted units toward its lower income RHNA obligation, the housing element must demonstrate the affordability of those units through one or more of the following: • subsidies, financing or other mechanisms that ensure affordability (e.g., MHP, HOME, or LIHTC financed projects, inclusionary units or RDA requirements); • actual rents; and • actual sales prices.10 The City should amend its housing element to include this information about the units it seeks to credit toward its lower-income housing need. If this information is unavailable for particular units, those units should be counted toward Palo Alto’s above-moderate- income housing need. If doing so increases Palo Alto’s unmet RHNA need for lower- income households, the City may need to amend its programs and site inventory to ensure that it will be able to meet that need during the planning period. Governmental Constraints The draft housing element identifies second units as a potential source of affordable housing during the planning period. However, the City’s parking requirements for second units are relatively restrictive: “one covered and one uncovered parking space for second units greater than 450 square feet.”11 The housing element should analyze whether these restrictions constrain the development of second units. 6 Draft housing element, supra, at pp. 83-88. 7 HCD, “Analysis of Sites and Zoning,” available at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing_element2/SIA_zoning.php. 8 Draft housing element, supra, at p. 66. 9 Ibid. 10 HCD, “Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA),” available at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing_element2/HN_PHN_regional.php. 11 Draft housing element, supra, at p. 124. 4 Along the same lines, the housing element should evaluate whether site and design review in the D and PF zones constraints the development of housing in those zones.12 It should also describe any input it received from developers regarding fees, permitting procedures, land use controls, or other potential constraints.13 Constraints to the Development of Housing for People with Disabilities The housing element should include a more comprehensive analysis of constraints to the development of housing for people with disabilities. While the draft housing element notes that Palo Alto properly allows residential care facilities for six or fewer individuals by right in all residential districts,14 it does not indicate how larger residential care facilities are treated. The housing element should discuss larger residential care facilities, including whether any of the zoning requirements for these facilities constrain their development. While the draft housing element indicates that the City grants reasonable accommodations to facilitate the development of housing for people with disabilities,15 it does not state whether or not the City has a reasonable accommodation policy or ordinance. If the City does not have a formal reasonable accommodation policy, we encourage it to include adoption (and advertisement) of such a policy as a program in its housing element. Non-Governmental Constraints The draft housing element suggests that new housing development in Palo Alto faces opposition from the community.16 However, it fails to identify community opposition as a non-governmental constraint to the development of new housing. 12 Draft housing element, supra, at p. 129. 13 See HCD, “Fees and Exactions,” available at http://www.hcd.ca.gov/hpd/housing_element2/CON_fees.php. 14 Draft housing element, supra, at pp. 145-146. 15 Draft housing element, supra, at pp. 146-147. 16 See draft housing element, supra, at p. 121 (“There is community concern that additional new housing would introduce more new students into the school district and would further impact its facilities which are already near or at capacity.”) 5 Conclusion Thank you very much for considering these comments regarding Palo Alto’s draft housing element. I would be happy to speak with the City regarding the concerns described above. If you would like to set up a time to talk, please call me at (408) 280- 2429 or email me at melissam@lawfoundation.org. Sincerely, /s/ Melissa A. Morris Senior Attorney cc: Melinda Coy, HCD Sam Tepperman-Gelfant, Public Advocates City of Palo Alto Page 1 Planning and Transportation Commission 1 Verbatim Minutes 2 April 10, 2013 3 DRAFT 4 EXCERPT 5 6 Public Hearing 7 8 Housing Element Update: Review and recommendation to City Council regarding the Draft 9 Comprehensive Plan Housing Element for the 2007-2014 Housing Cycle. 10 11 Chair Martinez: With the Commission’s consent to that we will move forth with Agenda Item 12 Number 1 and that is to review the Draft Housing Amendment, excuse me, Housing Element as 13 approved by the California Department of Housing Community Development (HCD) and receive 14 our comment and recommendation for approval and incorporation into the Comprehensive Plan. 15 Let me start with a couple words. When the Chair of the Planning Transportation Commission 16 asks you to volunteer to serve on a subcommittee pay careful attention. I was asked by former 17 Chair Garber to serve on the Comprehensive Plan Subcommittee in 2009. We thought it was a 18 slam dunk. Housing Element was our first task to consider. We thought we’d be done in three 19 months and (slapping sound) note for the record the Chair kind of slapping his hands as to clear 20 the dust, but it takes longer than that. 21 22 We’re pleased that we have before us tonight the approved Draft Housing Element and we will 23 begin with a presentation by staff. Let me add, well, I’ll come back to it. I really want to try to 24 give new members of the Commission a chance to talk about the Housing Element and weigh in, 25 provide their comments. We are under limitation however that we have very limited ability to 26 change the Housing Element as it now has been approved. Nevertheless you should have the 27 opportunity to ask questions and comment and perhaps recommendations for next time. So we’ll 28 have a chance to do that. I’m sure there are members of the public that would care to hear those 29 comments as well, so that time will be well served. But let’s begin with the staff report and then 30 we’ll go to open the public hearing. Staff? 31 32 Aaron Aknin, Assistant Director: Thank you. You stole my thunder a little bit. I was about to 33 say similar things to what you just said. In the context of tonight’s conversation the Chair 34 actually provided staff with a number of questions which I think act as a good foundation for 35 tonight’s discussion. I believe there were about 10 questions here that were distributed to the 36 Commission along with initial staff answers here and those are also back for the public on the 37 table in back. And I think they do provide a good framework for discussion tonight. 38 39 The City Attorney could go a little bit more into what are some of the constraints of tonight’s 40 discussion, but I think there’s two overall things that could be answered tonight. Number one, 41 answer some of the questions that the public is asking in general about housing elements. And 42 Number two, to point out policies and programs and things that you like about this housing 43 element that could help as we go in transition to the next Housing Element Cycle, which is just 44 around the corner. So at this point I’ll turn it to Cara. 45 46 Cara Silver, Sr. Assistant City Attorney: Thank you. Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City 47 Attorney. We have discussed the Housing Element several times in the past and as you all know 48 City of Palo Alto Page 2 we are now at the home stretch of approving the 2007 through 2014 Housing Element. There are 1 a couple of legal issues that we’ve discussed in the past, but it does bear repeating. And that is 2 that the significance of having an effective certified Housing Element is very important. If the 3 City does not have a certified Housing Element there is a potential that applicants could sue the 4 City for noncompliance and the remedies for not having a certified Housing Element are 5 extremely stringent. They include a possible moratorium on all development in the City. It 6 includes of course attorney’s fees and there could be other remedies imposed as well that limit 7 the City’s land use authority. So it is extremely important to bring this across the finish line as 8 quickly as possible. 9 10 Second ramification that we’ve talked about in the past about not having a certified Housing 11 Element, and in particular not getting this particular Element certified before the next cycle 12 begins is the potential for a carry over. And that is that any unfulfilled housing units that are not 13 built in this current cycle are in fact by statute carried over to the next cycle and we would have 14 to find additional housing sites for those carryover units as well in the event that we were not to 15 get this Element certified by the end of the cycle. 16 17 So those are the important issues. This Housing Element has been conditionally approved by 18 HCD. They have, we’ve gone through several rounds of negotiations with them. They’re very 19 familiar with all of the programs and policies and they took a special look at the inventory sites 20 and any changes or modifications will be obviously scrutinized by HCD. That does not mean 21 that the City does not have the discretion to make changes at this late stage, but it does 22 jeopardize City’s ability to get it finally certified by HCD. Thank you. And with that, Tim are 23 you going to give an additional presentation? 24 25 Tim Wong, Senior Planner, Affordable Housing: So good evening. I’m Tim Wong, Senior 26 Planner and I have a brief presentation for you. As Aaron and Cara both noted, yeah we’re 27 getting to the end of a very long process. And let’s go ahead, just some basic information about 28 Housing Element. It’s updated or it’s supposed to be updated every five years. We’re a little 29 behind with that. But one of the unique things about the Housing Element is it’s the only State 30 mandated element that requires State approval. 31 32 As part of the Housing Element as Cara was mentioning it must provide, it must identify 33 sufficient sites for the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) cycle. And so for the 2007-34 2014 RHNA cycle the City had to find sufficient sites to accommodate 2,860 units. That doesn’t 35 necessarily mean the City has to build, it just means that it has to zone or accommodate for that 36 number during, between 2007 and 2014. And again as Cara mentioned there are some legal 37 implications if the Housing Element is not certified; again, subject to lawsuit and also the 38 potential for carryover for the next cycle. 39 40 Just a quick timeline of where we came from. Last time the Planning and Transportation 41 Commission (PTC) reviewed the draft Housing Element was in April of 2012. The City Council 42 in July 2012 approved it being submitted for HCD review and it was submitted to HCD in 43 August 2012. We received our response letter from HCD about some of their concerns about the 44 draft Housing Element, which I’ll be going into later. And the City responded to the HCD 45 response letter in January 29 of this year and with some back and forth, additional back and 46 forth, the City submitted its final response to HCD on March 26th and on the 29th is when HCD 47 mailed their letter stating that the City with these proposed programs would be in compliance 48 with State Housing Element law and now it’s in front of the PTC for review. 49 City of Palo Alto Page 3 1 I would like, there were many, a number of revisions made to the Housing Element based on 2 HCD’s comments. However a majority of the changes were to the Housing Inventory Sites and 3 also with the programs. Many programs were revised and a number of programs were added so 4 this presentation will focus on that. To start with the Housing Inventory Sites, again our 5 allocation was 2,860 units and as of March of 2013 the City has either a process, units in 6 building permit stage or built 1,217 units which meant that the City had to find the sites to 7 accommodate 1,643 sites or units, excuse me. 1,643 units. And based on Council direction 8 given in May of 2010 these sites were primarily focused on California Ave., that corridor, El 9 Camino Real, and University Avenue. And they also gave the direction that there would be no 10 rezoning of commercial sites to residential. No loss of retail sites. 11 12 In addition staff when selecting certain sites looked at lots larger than 10,000 square feet with 13 minimum density of 20 units per acre. And the final product which you have before you is a 14 Housing Inventory Sites list of 1,680 units. So we have a “surplus” of 37 units currently at this 15 time. 16 17 Just to refer to the HCD letter dated October 18th. They had a number of comments. I believe 18 the letter is in your staff report as Attachment C, but you have their response. There were a 19 number of comments, but I’ll only highlight the significant comments that they made. One of 20 their comments was about realistic capacity. HCD had a concern that since many of our 21 identified sites were commercial or mixed use we’re depending for a lot of mixed use to fulfill 22 our RHNA allocation. Therefore they were concerned about the viability of mixed use and also 23 the size of lots seeing how we’re looking at lots down to 10,000 square feet. And so as part of 24 the City’s response we created Program 2.2.7, which we will look into providing incentives for 25 lot consolidation to try to get a greater yield from these smaller lots and also to help incentivize 26 or increase the probability of these mixed use developments on the smaller lots. 27 28 In addition, staff added Program 2.2.9, which monitors the development of the properties on the 29 Housing Inventory Sites. HCD again was concerned about our, since our surplus was so small 30 and if a couple of the Housing Inventory Sites were not developed at their realistic capacity at 20 31 units per acre they were concerned that we would not be able to fulfill our requirements therefore 32 this monitoring program has been implemented or will be implemented to make sure that if the 33 existing sites are not developed at 20 units per acre staff will look for other sites to backfill that 34 shortage. And lastly additional review and greater analysis of each site was done to help meet, 35 help satisfy HCD’s concerns in regards to those sites. 36 37 Another significant comment was about emergency shelters. In State law requires that each 38 jurisdiction designate a zone or zones to help accommodate an emergency shelter. And the 39 shelter with whatever zone is designated must be done by right. In other words a ministerial type 40 permit and no discretionary action or Conditional Use Permit (CUP) could be required of the 41 emergency shelter. The City’s unmet need right now is 107 beds, which we calculated a shelter 42 would need approximately 107 beds. Therefore, we designated, staff has designated the 43 Research Office and Limited Manufacturing Embarcadero ROLM (E) Zone District as the zone 44 district to accommodate the emergency shelter. Therefore staff also added Program 3.5.2, which 45 will amend the ROLME Zone District to allow emergency shelter by right. 46 47 And smaller, another issue was a previous unaccommodated need. This kind of refers back to 48 Cara in that there was a small rollover from our current Housing Element. There was one parcel 49 City of Palo Alto Page 4 in the previous Housing Inventory list that was not rezoned. Therefore we had unaccommodated 1 need of 15 units. Therefore as part of this Housing Element we had to find a site that would 2 accommodate 15 units in addition to the 2,860 that were required of this Housing Element and as 3 part of that staff has designated 3877 El Camino Real as the site to help fulfill our AB2348 4 requirement. 5 6 And just moving on last, couple more comments that HCD made is that they wanted clear 7 identifiable objectives for each of the City’s programs. And each program as they suggested 8 should include the City’s role in implementation, implementation timelines, objectives, and 9 identification of responsible agencies. So as a response staff has included a five year objective, a 10 funding source of how the implementation would be funded, who the responsible City agency 11 would be in implementing the program, and a timeframe, and that has also met with HCD’s 12 approval. 13 14 Let’s see… and also there were a couple other comments. Hotel condominiums. What had 15 happened is after PTC had reviewed the draft Housing Element in 2012 when the Council 16 reviewed the Housing Element they had also requested that hotel condominiums be included as 17 part of the Housing Inventory Sites, but after review it was found that they would, hotel 18 condominiums do not meet the definition of housing units. They don’t have a kitchen. 19 Therefore those have been removed from the previous draft Housing Element. And also there 20 was also a State law that cities must analyze housing needs for persons with developmental 21 disabilities so that additional text has been added. 22 23 Couple last things, a little less significant. HCD had requested further explanation about the 24 City’s agreement, the Mayfield agreement and how just additional details about what, how many 25 units were for affordable, how many for market, and also what the timeline is in developing 26 those additional 250 units. And lastly, rezoning programs. Those weren’t included. There are 27 some CN zoned parcels in the Housing Inventory Sites. Currently CN zones have a maximum of 28 15 units per acre and all those CZ zoned parcels in the Housing Inventory Sites will be up zoned 29 to 20 units per acre. In addition there are a couple GM zoned sites that will be rezoned to allow 30 for residential uses. 31 32 And we have received comments from a couple law firms, Public Advocates and the Public 33 Interest Law Firm. And staff has worked closely with them and their comments were many of 34 HCD’s comments were driven by these two law firm’s comments including they were concerned 35 about reliance on small sites, talking about the previous unaccommodated need and about the 36 Mayfield agreement. So pretty much whatever comments Public Advocates and the Public 37 Interest Law Firm made were rolled into HCD’s comments. So both the law firm’s comments 38 have been addressed as part of these revisions. 39 40 And the next steps. It’s anticipated that staff will take the revised Housing Element to the 41 Regional Housing Mandate Committee in May with a possible date with the City Council in 42 June. And we’re anticipating HCD certification also in June. From June 2013 staff has one year 43 to implement many of the zoning changes as listed in the programs. And finally it’s time to gear 44 up for the 2015 to 2022 Housing Element, which they’re looking at a deadline of December of 45 2014. So that concludes staff’s presentation. 46 47 Chair Martinez: Great, thank you Tim. Let’s open the public hearing. There aren’t any members 48 of the public that wish to speak… pardon? We do have some cards. Vice-Chair. 49 City of Palo Alto Page 5 1 Vice-Chair Michael: We have a speaker, Patricia Saffir, and you’ll have three minutes. Thank 2 you very much. 3 4 Patricia Saffir: Good evening. My name is Patricia Saffir and I’m speaking tonight on behalf of 5 the League of Women Voters of Palo Alto. Chairman Martinez and Members of the 6 Commission, the League of Women Voters is very pleased as you’ve stated that you were that 7 you have before you tonight a Housing Element proposal that has received the approval of the 8 State Department of Housing and Community Development and they found it fulfilled the 9 requirements of the Housing Development law. We appreciate the hard work of the staff and the 10 Commission in getting us finally to this point. The League generally supports the contents of the 11 document although we still believe the vision statement should include a sentence concerning 12 our desire that our neighborhood supply adequate diverse housing and be free of discrimination. 13 We are however happy that the document now clearly states the City’s intention to do its part to 14 work to fulfill the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) fair share housing mandates. 15 16 We approve the new programs added at the behest of the State HCD and believe they will help 17 towards meeting the goals of the Housing Element. We also like the addition of the five year 18 objectives, funding sources, responsible agency, and timeframe for each program. This greatly 19 clarifies the needed actions. We recognize that the Housing Element has been written over a 20 long time and is a complicated document. It would be helpful however if more of the tables and 21 charts were dated to indicate when they were prepared. 22 23 In conclusion, we urge you to approve the Housing Element before you tonight so we can soon 24 be in compliance with State law and therefore be eligible for housing, transportation, and 25 infrastructure funding programs from the State. Thank you very much for listening. Good 26 evening. 27 28 Chair Martinez: Thank you. 29 30 Vice-Chair Michael: And our next speak will be Bob Moss. 31 32 Robert Moss: I’m all done. Thank you Chair Martinez and Commissioners. I think the Housing 33 Element that you have so far is about the best compromise we can come up with, but there are a 34 few aspects of developing Palo Alto that I did not see really discussed or emphasized and I don’t 35 want them to be overlooked. The first one is Palo Alto housing is one of the four or five most 36 expensive in the entire country. During the collapse from the Great Recession a couple of years 37 ago typical housing prices nationwide went down between 30 and 50 percent. In Palo Alto the 38 worst they did was drop 13 percent. We have now recovered all of that plus an additional 8 to 10 39 percent. So when they talk about low income or affordable housing in Palo Alto unless the 40 people who are asking for it are willing to come up with the money it isn’t going to happen. 41 42 So one of the first things to point out is that Palo Alto was the first city, as far as I know, in this 43 State that required a proportion of developments to include low income housing. Subsidized 44 Below Market Rate (BMR) units originally started at 40 percent. That didn’t last too long 45 because nobody would build any housing 20 units or more. In fact the first development that 46 was built when the City adopted that is kitty-corner across the street. 19 units so they wouldn’t 47 have to put any BMR units in. So they cut that down to 10 percent and they cut the threshold to 48 five units. But that being said we are not going to be able to build the amount of housing that 49 City of Palo Alto Page 6 they’re talking about, the amount of affordable housing they’re talking about unless somebody 1 else comes up with a lot of money. 2 3 Second I notice there were some complaints because most of the areas which were identified for 4 housing increases were already occupied. Like upper store commercial buildings. Well that’s 5 what we’ve got in Palo Alto. That’s all we have to build on. There is no vacant land. So it 6 should be emphasized that we’re doing what we can to identify those sites. But if nobody wants 7 to tear down existing perfectly valid commercial building and build multifamily on it that’s their 8 choice, not ours. 9 10 Finally one of the things that you keep in mind that is overlooked frequently is every housing 11 unit which is built in Palo Alto, especially multifamily units cost the City between $1,600 and 12 $2,000 per year more for services than it pays in taxes. So at some point when you build an 13 additional 2,000 or 3,000 units our budget is taking a hit. So there are real problems both with 14 area and with costs building a large amount of housing in Palo Alto. 15 16 Chair Martinez: Thank you Mr. Moss. We shall leave the public hearing open in case 17 Commissioners have questions of those speakers. So the way in which I wanted to frame our 18 discussion tonight Commissioners is that we permit ourselves the luxury of talking about the 19 Housing Element in terms of what we would like to have seen, questions we have about how 20 we’ve undertaken this; really to help ourselves and help the public sort of understand how we’ve 21 come to tonight’s place in proposing to recommend the Housing Element and in recognition that 22 there are several Commissioners who didn’t have the chance to participate at all in the draft of 23 this Element. 24 25 The second thing that I wanted to do is give us a chance to look ahead and talk about sort of 26 where we go from here and how we make it more effective and questions about housing that Mr. 27 Moss raised in Palo Alto that really are germane to us having a workable housing policy. And 28 third I wanted us to reserve a period of time where we focus on the environmental review. so 29 rather than going back and forth from questions about the environmental document from one 30 Commissioner to move to questions of policy I’d like us to focus on the environmental review 31 portion of our recommendation for our third round. 32 33 So let’s see if that works, I’m not sure I’m clear, if you need clarifications. So commissioners 34 let’s start with a round of five minutes each. You don’t have to participate, but if you have 35 questions or comments about the Housing Element presented tonight let’s start with that. And 36 I’m going to start with Commissioner Panelli. Surprise. So as a new Commissioner if you have 37 questions about sort of how we got to where we are or questions about why we have a Housing 38 Element or anything of a nature of the process, I think this is a fair time for us to discuss in 39 general or specifically your questions or your concerns about our Housing Element. 40 41 Commissioner Panelli: So we’re going to talk about process and policy now and reserve 42 (interrupted) 43 44 Chair Martinez: Yes. Let’s see how that goes. Start a great (interrupted) 45 46 Commissioner Panelli: Ok, thank you Mr. Chair. I want to first just before I launch into a couple 47 of questions echo the sentiments of our esteemed Chair that the way to position this is what can 48 we do better for the next one. I think we’re sort of backs up against the wall; we’ve got to get 49 City of Palo Alto Page 7 this thing done, and it’s very good. But I do have a couple of questions. One is just a simple 1 question. Tim, you’d mentioned that we have a little bit more than we’re required. Do we get to 2 carry credits over? Is it only that we get to carry forward debits so to speak? 3 4 Mr. Wong: No, any of the parcels that are not developed we can carryover. So right now we’ve 5 identified approximately 1,600 units on X amount of parcels. If those don’t get developed within 6 the next year or so those can be carried over to the 2015-2022 cycle. 7 8 Commissioner Panelli: Maybe I, sorry. I probably mischaracterized the way I was phrasing it. 9 You had mentioned there were something like 37 units more than we would’ve been required to 10 have. Assuming all of those got developed, would we get to carry over that 37 or no? 11 12 Mr. Wong: Oh, I don’t think we can with the 37. 13 14 Mr. Aknin: No at that point they would just be kind of frozen within this cycle. You only get 15 credit for things that you’re planning for in the future that haven’t been built already. 16 17 Commissioner Panelli: Things that are entitled but not developed? That’s what gets carried over 18 to future (interrupted) 19 20 Mr. Aknin: No, not even entitled, things that are zoned. Sorry, things that are zoned not entitled. 21 22 Commissioner Panelli: Things that are zoned, not entitled, not developed. 23 24 Mr. Aknin: Correct. 25 26 Commissioner Panelli: Get carried over? 27 28 Mr. Aknin: Correct. 29 30 Commissioner Panelli: Ok. My next question is can you talk a little bit about how HCD, just 31 give, I know some of it, but I think it would be helpful for all of us as well as members of the 32 public who are interested to understand how HCD works together, comes up with their numbers 33 for what’s required in the State and then parcels that out and how that jives with what ABAG 34 sort of pushes on us. 35 36 Mr. Aknin: Ok, I’ll try to give the simplest answer possible because it’s somewhat complicated. 37 So the Department of Finance (DOF) creates population projections. And the way that State law 38 is formulated it says those DOF population projections then are created to household projections 39 and HCD is supposed to base their household projections on those population projections. So 40 then HCD says statewide we have to have X number of units built and then they distribute those 41 to each one of the regional agencies. So ABAG gets an allocation from HCD based on those 42 numbers. Then ABAG then distributes the units to either sub regions or to individual cities. 43 44 Commissioner Panelli: And then just building off of that though is it parceled out equally 45 meaning if the State says we need to have 11 percent more units to accommodate the population 46 growth does that mean every region gets 11 percent, or do they say these guys get more? Is it 47 percentage based, is it numbers based, is it… are there policies that say we want to promote more 48 City of Palo Alto Page 8 density in smaller areas or we want to promote continued conversion of farmland into suburbs? 1 What, can you help a little bit there? 2 3 Mr. Aknin: So the way it works now is they do population projected based on certain regions. 4 And then the way it is now SB375, which is basically the Land Use and Transportation Element 5 of AB32, which was the law that the Commission knows is aimed to reduce greenhouse gasses. 6 The law as its stated now states that it basically is encouraging higher density housing 7 development near transit locations to reduce the need for single occupancy vehicle trips long 8 distances. So what we’re seeing now is the trend to require cities that have additional transit 9 stops that are located near higher employment areas, higher employment regions to take on more 10 of a share of the overall housing. 11 12 Commissioner Panelli: Ok, so one last… so I kind of set you up a little bit there because what I 13 was trying to get at is my final question, which is if HSR goes through as planned and if Palo 14 Alto becomes one of the, what is it? The four stops in between San Jose and the city; does that 15 mean that we’re going to start to bear a greater share of housing units because of the transit 16 oriented housing policy that we see, we observed? 17 18 Mr. Aknin: I don’t know exactly how the methodology works, but I would say no. I think it has 19 to do more with how local rail stations work and local commuting rail station works and it’s 20 actually even more tied to what regions have additional job growth. So it’s not exactly how 21 many jobs does Palo Alto have. For instance, how many jobs does Santa Clara County projected 22 to have within a certain amount of time frame and then how many housing units are to follow 23 after that. 24 25 Commissioner Panelli: I’ll let some of the other Commissioners build off of my questions if they 26 choose. 27 28 Chair Martinez: Thank you Commissioner. Commissioner King. 29 30 Commissioner King: Thank you. So real basic question, can you define a housing unit? I know 31 that you presented that the hotel condominium because they do not have a kitchen were not 32 acceptable as a housing unit, but I’m curious for instance the Opportunity Center, the housing 33 there, is that a housing unit? And are there any income limits associated, you’re giving us a 34 gross required housing units. Are those broken down by income or is it just any additional 35 housing units you zoned for meet the criteria? 36 37 Mr. Wong: Commissioner King those numbers are broken down into income categories: very 38 low, low, moderate, and above moderate incomes. And I believe that is in Chapter 2 or Chapter 39 3, but there is a breakdown. 40 41 Commissioner King: And how are we then measured? Do they measure and say, “Oh, you.” 42 What happens the next round then if we don’t meet those? Let’s say we only have above 43 moderate income housing units developed and no below market units developed. Then what 44 would happen? 45 46 Mr. Wong: There isn’t really a penalty per se. For example, in our current we produced over 150 47 percent of what is allocated for above moderate, but we fell short in our very low and low, but 48 City of Palo Alto Page 9 there isn’t any legal penalty or anything from there. There is no rollover as far as I’m concerned 1 (interrupted) 2 3 Commissioner King: So you’re not really measured, it’s a goal, but you’re not measured on that 4 outcome? 5 6 Mr. Aknin: Correct. What I would think would happen is that during the next housing cycle 7 HCD would pay more attention to what type of affordable housing policies you have within your 8 Housing Element and be more focused on creating policies which is going to encourage the level 9 of affordability that’s needed. 10 11 Commissioner King: Thank you. And then just to finish then could you clarify any, is there a 12 size limit or type of occupancy other than human that’s specific to housing unit? What defines 13 that? 14 15 Mr. Wong: No there is no minimum size, but a kitchen is definitely part of the definition of a 16 housing unit and I believe they have to be separate, sorry. 17 18 Commissioner King: Separate entry maybe? 19 20 Mr. Wong: Yeah, a separate entry to access the kitchen also. In other words group quarters are 21 not considered living units. 22 23 Commissioner King: Such as a dorm room or something with one kitchen? Ok, ok thank you. 24 And then let’s see, then you had a comment in there on your PowerPoint it said one of the 25 Council’s directions was no rezoning of commercial to housing, but I thought you used the word 26 actual “retail.” Was that specific to retail or all types of commercial to housing were not to be 27 converted? 28 29 Mr. Wong: Excuse me, yeah. It’s all types of commercial, not just specifically retail. 30 31 Commissioner King: Ok. 32 33 Mr. Wong: Nonresidential. 34 35 Commissioner King: Ok thanks. I’ll come back I think in the later sessions. And then the other 36 question I’ve got is regarding the carryover. So there’s no penalty now, let me back up. We 37 haven’t met our goal of actually developing or having built what we zoned for for this Housing 38 Element. So now we’ll have a new Housing Element requirement number of units for the next 39 period. Does that, does the fact that we didn’t actually build those units get factored into our 40 allocation next time at all? 41 42 Mr. Wong: Not for the number themselves, no. so if we’re, for example, a 100 we did not, we’re 43 100 units short of low income, those 100 units will not be carried over to the new. We will not 44 have to plan for 100 more units of low income units for the next cycle. 45 46 Commissioner King: So that new number is completely independent of what happened in the 47 past? 48 49 City of Palo Alto Page 10 Mr. Wong: That is correct. 1 2 Commissioner King: Got it. And so that’s a quirk. Obviously I guess the reason why the 3 realistic capacity comes in is they don’t, the game the City could play is zoning things that will 4 never get built and then if none get built they just get to carry them over to the next time, the next 5 time if they don’t actually get built. So I guess that’s the tug of war with HCD is they want to 6 make sure they’re realistic. Ok. And then it introduces a whole bunch of potentially strange 7 behaviors on the part of the City such as slowing down approval times so that, because you really 8 want to carry, if you were gaming the system you’d really want to carry over those units to the 9 next time. And also then if you exceed as Commissioner Panelli asked you’re sort of it’s that no 10 good deed goes unpunished. You don’t get to carry those over for your success, is that right? 11 12 Mr. Wong: That is correct. 13 14 Commissioner King: Ok. Thank you. 15 16 Chair Martinez: Commissioner Alcheck. 17 18 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. I want to start by saying that I thought the staff report was 19 excellent. I think it’s the best staff report that we’ve have in the seven months that I’ve been 20 here. It was a really well organized and very, very clear. I also think that the Housing Element 21 is an excellent read. I think that it’s really informative and I think if more community members 22 read it they’d really understand what we’re dealing with here. 23 24 I want to mention one thing real quick before it gets away from me, which is that you said in 25 your presentation and it’s a bullet point in slide two that there’s no requirement to approve or 26 build the units. And that seems to suggest that down the road there will be greater oversight and 27 discretion and I believe there will be. So quick question, doesn’t the process, doesn’t this 28 process and the rezoning that will result sort of pave the way for an approval free development 29 process for projects that comply with the new zoning? 30 31 Ms. Silver: Yes, Commissioner Alcheck I did want to correct one statement there. if a particular 32 site is on the Housing Inventory and an applicant comes forward the City either needs to approve 33 the project at the density as set forth on the inventory or if the City decides to exercise its 34 discretion not to approve the project if there is some discretionary permit that is in play and the 35 City decides not to approve the project then the City needs to actually substitute another site for 36 that site in order to stay within its allocated number on the inventory. So that slide may have 37 been a little bit misleading in terms of (interrupted) 38 39 Commissioner Alcheck: Thank you because I just want to make sure that we appreciate that if 40 density is coming in these rezoned parcels it’s going to come, it won’t necessarily be because we 41 want it or we don’t want it. There is going to be some automatic intensity, more intense 42 development as a result of the rezoning effort and I know that there’s a lot of I think fear about 43 that and I want to make sure that it’s not directed at the wrong place. 44 45 I want to make another point. I did a little research before tonight’s meeting. I’ll say at the 46 beginning here that the numbers I received from staff, so if you question them… in 1950 Palo 47 Alto’s population was approximately 25,000 residents. And there were 8,800 units. In the 10 48 years that followed the population increased by 27,000 and the housing units increased by, 49 City of Palo Alto Page 11 excuse me, the housing units increased by approximately 10,000. That’s in 10 years. In the 50 1 years from 1960 to 2010, in the 50 years since that period the population has increased 12,000. 2 Over 50 years. And the housing units have increased by 10,000. In 50 years. I make that point 3 because I think the likelihood of us missing a credit, if you will, or a debit, whatever one it is is 4 really unlikely. We are not going to exceed in five years our allocation. And we may not exceed 5 it in 20 years. And I mention that because we are developed. There is very little open land to 6 develop. And I think those numbers are really impressive. The notion that our City doubled in 7 10 years from 1950 to 1960 and since then has increased, since 1990 to 2010 there’s been 3,000 8 units is sort of astonishing. 9 10 The legal requirement to have a Housing Element is actually well articulated here and there is an 11 obligation to make room. And I think that increasing our, making an effort to create the 12 opportunity for these developments is important. There are environmental justifications for it, 13 there are moral justifications for it, and I know that there’s a lot of controversy involved in this 14 process, but I think that the notion that our City will change dramatically as a result of our effort 15 to comply with the State law is inaccurate. And so I certainly will not stand in the way of 16 supporting a Motion to recommend the approval of this Housing Element. 17 18 Chair Martinez: Ok, thank you. Commissioner Keller. 19 20 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. So I think it’s apt that the City Attorney used the expression 21 that we’re in the home stretch because I think it’s certainly a stretch for Palo Alto to absorb the 22 number of housing units that are in the Housing Element if they were fully built. Especially with 23 the new Housing Element that we’ll have to do coming in, starting in 2015 that we’ll start 24 working on in December 2014. It’s sort of like the Golden Gate Bridge. Once you’ve finished 25 painting one end you start at the beginning and paint it again. 26 27 So there is, I assume that we can control the maximum unit size so if we want to have, zone for 28 more units we could have smaller unit sizes as being maximum allowed? Would that make 29 sense? 30 31 Mr. Wong: I don’t think you can control, you can provide incentives for certain unit sizes, but to 32 control the maximum unit size I don’t think is (interrupted) 33 34 Commissioner Keller: Through our zoning ordinance? 35 36 Ms. Silver: You can’t control the occupants. The number, the maximum number of occupants, 37 but I think you can control the unit size. Although that’s not a program we’re proposing in this 38 particular Housing Element. 39 40 Commissioner Keller: I understand, but we’re talking about the future so I just asked that. And 41 in terms of the emergency shelter in the Embarcadero region is that in existing buildings or in a 42 new building? 43 44 Mr. Wong: That is up to the developer. This program is just to make an emergency shelter 45 permitted by right, but if it’s vacant land in the ROLME district or if it’s existing that’s up to the 46 developer. 47 48 City of Palo Alto Page 12 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. So in terms of substituting sites there was a question as to if a 1 site is built by City forcing a developer, preventing a developer from building on that site with 2 housing when the Housing Inventory has housing on it. If a developer comes along and for a site 3 on the Housing Inventory and chooses not to develop housing does the City also have to find 4 additional places on the Housing Inventory to cover those sites, the number of units that are not 5 built? 6 7 Ms. Silver: Yes, unfortunately we do. 8 9 Commissioner Keller: So it doesn’t matter whether it’s the developer that comes along or the 10 City. In either case we have to do that. Ok. Another thing is that during the previous Housing 11 Element in ancient history we had a Housing Element that I think was 1999 to 2007 I believe, or 12 2006. And that Housing Element we were allocated about 1,400 housing units. We built about 13 2,100 housing units in that period of time. So I’m not, and at that time we were not allowed to 14 carry, I think at one point in time it was counted as 2,500, I’m not sure how the number was, but 15 we were not allowed to carry forward that excess of housing built in that old Housing Element to 16 the current Housing Element we were working on if I remember correctly. Although apparently 17 there was some fudges that were done. and also if you, that there were some things that were 18 counted and some things we could count to this Housing Element, but essentially we did not get 19 credit for the excess housing that was built in the last Housing Element. 20 21 Also the issue is that if we, is that if you talk about to address the issue that Commissioner 22 Panelli brought up, the data from Natural [unintelligible] and Transportation Commission is that 23 jobs near transit is twice as transit use inducing as housing near transit. And so therefore it 24 makes sense because to build jobs near transit and housing near transit people can actually drive 25 to transit or other ways to transit but near, on the other end it’s hard to get from the transit to 26 your work unless there’s facilities for doing that. 27 28 I agree with the concept of no good deed goes unpunished. The more housing that’s built, the 29 more that we have to build. Part of the reason that our ABAG RHNA allocation is high this time 30 is because we were so successful at building housing between 1999 and 2006 and they’re saying 31 you’re good at it, do more of it now. And the less housing we build, it actually that’s part of the 32 feedback loop in how much housing we get in the RHNA. So that’s another thing to consider. 33 34 A very minor thing is you pasted as an image Excel tables into Word rather than pasting it as 35 content and that’s why they are kind of squeezed and not readable. So just a, I can tell you about 36 that if you want to know more for next time. 37 38 And I’ll close my comments with an idea that I’ve been kicking around for a while now. And 39 that is, may I? May I finish? 40 41 Chair Martinez: Yes, of course. 42 43 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. And that idea is that essentially Market Rate housing crowds 44 out Below Market Rate housing. And if we allow more Market Rate housing to be built then the 45 RHNA allocation of Market Rate housing then essentially it makes Below Market Rate housing 46 less economic because it has to compete with land values for Market Rate housing. So if we 47 instead have a rule that throttles the amount of Market Rate housing that can be built to no more 48 than the RHNA allocation of Market Rate housing for the eight year period and you know 49 City of Palo Alto Page 13 ratably over a period of time and if you under build you can build more next time. If there are 1 more requests for permits then you can auction it off with the extra money going for Below 2 Market Rate housing to subsidize that and promote the building of very low income housing 3 which is not built through Market Rate Housing inclusionary zoning. 4 5 And you exempt all Below Market Rate housing from this cap and if a housing development is a 6 least 50 percent Below Market Rate in terms of units and square footage and no more than 50 7 percent for Market Rate, for example, the project that’s being developed at Maybell is an 8 example of that. That could be built and those 15 units or so would not be counted towards the 9 Market Rate cap. Then you have a system that would essentially promote Below Market Rate 10 housing. It would preserve land for Below Market Rate housing and it would allow our Market 11 Rate Housing to be built at a rate that we could absorb more appropriately then the free for all 12 that’s happening now. So I would encourage us to seriously consider adopting such a plan for 13 the next Housing Element and I’m wondering if our City Attorney has any comments about the, 14 that she’d like to offer at this point about the legality of such an approach to the extent that 15 you’ve studied it. 16 17 Ms. Silver: Cities are starting to explore programs like that and I know that this program was 18 looked at for this Housing Element cycle as well and frankly I can’t recall if we included that as 19 something that we would study in this Housing Element cycle, but it’s certainly something that is 20 worth pursuing. We would have to look at it more closely in terms of legal limits on growth 21 control because there are some constraints in that area. 22 23 Commissioner Keller: I think I proposed it as a study item and it was taken out by a Council 24 Member. 25 26 Chair Martinez: Ok Commissioner. You’re encroaching on, now the Vice-Chair only has two 27 minutes. Can I do a brief follow up on that before? Excuse me. How would that be received by 28 HCD and in terms of ABAG’s RHNA goals to say this is how we’re going to do it, we’re going 29 to do a cap on housing? To me it, the cap on housing, to me it doesn’t seem like that’s what they 30 want to hear. Can I get any response on that? 31 32 Mr. Aknin: In general, yes. I mean things that are going to slow down housing projection are not 33 looked upon favorably by HCD. I think they would like to see goals and polices that both 34 promote Market Rate housing as well as BMR housing. 35 36 Chair Martinez: Ok, thank you. Vice-Chair Michael. 37 38 Vice-Chair Michael: So hearing the comments from my esteemed colleagues about the mandate 39 from the State and the regional authorities and the operation of the free market I wonder what 40 Margaret Thatcher would say about what we’re doing here? When the Housing Element came 41 up for the Planning Commission most recently we were not looking at a 200 page book, which is 42 quite impressive and thanks for all the hard work. But instead we were focused on the material 43 which is primarily on pages 163 to 170 in the draft plan, which is the vision, goals, policies, and 44 programs. And I wondered if you could just give us a quick tutorial as to the relationship 45 between what the City is proposing to adopt in terms of its vision, goals, policies, and programs 46 versus what is in Chapter 3 of the document in terms of the hard numbers for the allocation of 47 the units. Because we have this quantitative target, but we have this qualitative ambition in 48 City of Palo Alto Page 14 terms of our vision for the City and the housing and whatnot and how do those two things work 1 together? 2 3 Mr. Wong: I’d be happy. The programs that are being proposed help expedite or incentivize 4 some of the development to possibly achieve the production of affordable housing and housing 5 in general. For example, there is a policy that if you build units of a certain size of nine units or 6 less it provides the incentive that you will be able to “skip” site and design. So that’s trying to 7 help incentivize multifamily production of a certain size. In addition we have our programs for 8 lot consolidation that if they take advantage of a lot consolidation program then the City may 9 achieve a higher yield from those smaller lots. So these programs are to help implement or 10 achieve some of those numbers. In addition the BMR policies have been slightly revised to try 11 to get additional low income housing production. So these programs again are to help meet 12 some of those RHNA numbers. 13 14 Vice-Chair Michael: Excuse me. My next question is that the, on the Commission and on the 15 Council and in the community we have a lot of very thoughtful and analytical people who have 16 been skeptical of the forecasts that come down from the State Department of Finance and ABAG 17 and whatnot. And so we have also an ongoing activity, the Regional Housing Mandate 18 Committee, which includes four members of the Council, two members of the School Board, and 19 one representative of the Planning and Transportation Commission. To the extent that this is an 20 ongoing challenge for Palo Alto to both understand or maybe challenge the assumptions relating 21 to what would be a realistic set of targets how do we stand in terms of making sure that we do 22 the best we can in the future to have a realistic target for Palo Alto what we can actually do and 23 what we should do in terms of our land use planning. 24 25 Mr. Aknin: That’s a multi-level answer. I mean I think, and this was brought up at the last 26 Regional Housing Mandate Committee and the Mayor brought this up. These allocations are 27 handed down to us by the State and that is the system that’s set up right now. That seems to be 28 the system that’s going to be there for the foreseeable future. ABAG recently released their One 29 Bay Area Plan that projects growth out to 2040 and it shows increased, I mean the way they, 30 their methodology shows increased growth even more than the 2014 to 2022 housing cycle 31 where Palo Alto was allocated about 20, a little bit more than 2,179 units. So right now that’s 32 the system in place. We do have ongoing conversations with our local State legislators to see if 33 there can be changes within the system to have a more realistic forecast. 34 35 I think the thing that is set up there is that on a positive side is that you do get the rollover units. 36 So if we do zone for units and the market isn’t there to create those units you do get a credit 37 towards the next cycle. For instance, as Tim pointed out right now we’re estimating about 1,600 38 units, 1,600 sites that have not been built. Well if we have a requirement in the next housing 39 cycle of 2,179 units we’re already 1,600 units of 2,179 on our way there. So we really only have 40 to find 579 more housing sites. So there is kind of that built in mechanism there where if the 41 market demand isn’t there it doesn’t count against you. 42 43 Chair Martinez: So I have two areas that I want to try to take over and talk about in my five 44 minutes. One is the sort of what our City Attorney called the “home stretch” and the second is 45 about the Comprehensive Plan itself. The latter is kind of easy, so I’ll save that. It seems to me 46 like once you’ve gotten to know me a bit that the most important thing that this body does is look 47 at policy. So here we are in the home stretch. We spent four years of our lives really being 48 City of Palo Alto Page 15 intimately involved in the dialogue about the Housing Element. We’ve taken it very seriously all 1 of us and I’ve enjoyed working with all of you. 2 3 But the home stretch, you get a letter from HCD it says, “What about this and that?” And you 4 get together and you respond back to them says, “Well, we can do this.” And they said, “What 5 about this?” And then you said, “Well, we can do this.” Where’s the sort of public process in 6 that? I was, not that I so much disagree with all of what you’ve proposed. I think largely I agree 7 with it, but I’m a little bit, a lot concerned that as hard as we worked as a group that the staff has 8 taken upon itself to propose policies and programs that are different than what came before us. 9 And it’s not so great, but some of it is like providing incentives like reusing parking for mixed 10 use housing. Well, parking is a big issue right now in our town and I think it needed some input 11 from us. 12 13 So in the home stretch I think we kind of left our process, our public process and moved quickly. 14 And I understand why you wanted to do it quickly, but looking ahead and looking at this and 15 what we’re going to recommend to the Council I feel sort of like abandoned that there should 16 have been built in some time for the Planning Commission to weigh in on this. And I think it’s a 17 great oversight that these important policies and programs that were altered were not run by your 18 Planning Commission for our support for it. I’m sure you would have gotten it for most of it, but 19 I’m sure there’s a couple of us that would’ve asked them to be stated a little bit differently. So 20 what’s done is done. We’re approved; great job for that. But I don’t want to see that, because 21 that’s the most important thing we can help with. 22 23 Ms. Silver: Chair Martinez, may I respond to that briefly? 24 25 Chair Martinez: Sure. 26 27 Ms. Silver: I think that’s very good feedback and we had some internal discussions about that 28 process. From a staff perspective I think that if we were in the early years of this process that 29 that’s what would, that would be the best protocol. But if we were to stop the negotiation with 30 HCD to bring each, to hold public hearings on each of those items it just simply would not have 31 been feasible to get this approved by the end of the cycle. However, this is the time for the 32 Planning Commission to weigh in and so there certainly is that opportunity and so staff used its 33 professional judgment on recommending to you programs that it thinks will be viewed in a 34 favorable light by HCD but if you don’t agree with those programs of course now is the time to 35 weigh in. 36 37 And also I would say that maybe for the next housing cycle what we might want to do is think 38 about forming a subcommittee, a Planning Commission subcommittee that would be more 39 involved in those negotiations with HCD if the body as a whole felt comfortable delegating that 40 authority. But in very time sensitive issues like this it’s very hard to go before all three boards 41 and actually get responded to HCD in a timely fashion. 42 43 Chair Martinez: I understand that. I’ll save my second part for the next round. I understand that 44 and there’s no way that I believe this body would jeopardize what’s been achieved by saying 45 well we want to pull back and hold a public hearing on this or propose significant changes. 46 Because in addition as important as the City’s liability is on having a certified Housing Element 47 to me the most important thing is that we have a Housing Element that, the most important thing 48 going forward as the our speaker from the League of Women Voters is to be proud that we 49 City of Palo Alto Page 16 achieved this and it’s the right thing to do. So I’m going to actually in the interest of time just 1 wait on the Comp Plan issue and I’ll pick it up if I get a chance to speak next time. 2 3 Commissioners do you want to carry on a discussion or further comment on this item? Yes, 4 Commissioner Alcheck and then Commissioner Keller. 5 6 Commissioner Alcheck: I don’t want you to take this the wrong way, but what was the 7 bottleneck you think that got us to a point where we’re approving a plan that will essentially 8 lapse in 2014 in 2013? And have we taken the steps you think to make sure that the next 9 Housing Element is approved sort of early in the cycle so that we’re not sort of in this situation 10 again? And can you kind of elaborate on that a little bit? 11 12 Steven Turner, Advance Planning Manager: Well I think certainly, Steven Turner, Advance 13 Planning Manager. I think certainly what we would like to complete the update sooner than 14 later. Alright excuse me. Steven Turner, Advance Planning Manager. Certainly the length of 15 time to prepare this Element exceeded our expectations. I think probably as part, actually a very 16 good accomplishment by the City for this Element is that essentially was done in house. We did 17 use some consultants to assist us on the technical aspects of the report. But for a large part the 18 City saved I think quite a bit of money actually doing this in house and building upon our 19 analysis on the technical portions of the chapter utilizing a PTC subcommittee for the goals, 20 policies, and programs, doing the outreach that we did with the volunteer group, the Technical 21 Advisory Group that was involved in very early stage development and review. That was a very 22 public process and the Technical Advisory Group had how many members Tim? 23 24 Mr. Wong: Approximately 15. 25 26 Mr. Turner: 15 members of the community from representing various disciplines participated in 27 the review of and preparation of this document. And so we had a very extensive public process 28 at the beginning kind of through the early draft stages involving the Planning Commission again 29 in the goals, policies, and programs and essentially doing this all in house I think extended the 30 timeline. I think we are ahead of the game for the next Element. One of the benefits of 31 completing this current cycle’s Housing Element near the end of the cycle is that it will allow us 32 to move forward I think that much more quickly while the issues and topics are still fresh in our 33 minds, still very much of a public issue and concern, that we can move forward I think very 34 quickly and meet the initial deadlines that have been established for us. 35 36 Chair Martinez: Thank you. Commissioner Keller. 37 38 Commissioner Keller: Yes, couple of quick things, just cleaning up. It was not mentioned that 39 the One Bay Area Grant program eligibility is to some extent conditioned on having an approved 40 Housing Element. Is that correct? 41 42 Mr. Wong: That is correct. However, they offered extensions for eligibility for One Bay Area 43 Grants and the City applied and received extensions that we have until January 30th of 2014 now 44 I believe to get our Housing Element Certified. 45 46 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. So that’s one more reason to have it done. The second thing 47 is I just want to clarify units that are proposed by developer, but not yet approved are considered 48 under the old Housing Element; in other words, not rolled over to the next time. Is that correct? 49 City of Palo Alto Page 17 1 Mr. Wong: Sorry, one more time? 2 3 Commissioner Keller: Let’s suppose that a developer comes along in 2014 and proposes a 4 housing development on one of the Housing Inventory Sites. 5 6 Mr. Wong: Ok. 7 8 Commissioner Keller: That development is considered as if it was built and because it’s being 9 proposed isn’t rolled over to the new Housing Element from 2015 to 2022. 10 11 Mr. Wong: I believe we can roll it over. Yeah. 12 13 Mr. Aknin: No, the only way it gets counted towards the current housing cycle is if it’s entitled. 14 15 Commissioner Keller: Ok. 16 17 Mr. Aknin: Without those entitlements it has the same weight as not being proposed. 18 19 Commissioner Keller: And two other things quickly. We do have a Housing Element 20 subcommittee. I believe I’m on it. So that could have been consulted in terms of these 21 questions. And the second thing is regarding the expansion that happened from 1950 to 1960 22 there was a lot of vacant farmland in Palo Alto south of Oregon Expressway that has since gotten 23 filled between 1950 and 1960. So that’s one of the reasons why there was a great expansion. 24 There also at one point and time 24 elementary schools and about close to half of those were 25 closed and often sites sold off. So while the School District once had over 15,000 students at its 26 peak we’re approaching that but with a lot fewer school sites to have students to attend our 27 schools. 28 29 Chair Martinez: Anyone else on this round before we… yes, Vice-Chair? I wanted to spend a 30 little time talking about the environmental review of the… Ok. Vice-Chair Michael. 31 32 Vice-Chair Michael: So I have a question that goes back to the Regional Housing Needs 33 Allocation and how that affects Palo Alto. When the Regional Housing Mandate Committee last 34 met there was a presentation from Stephen Levy who is the Director for the Center for 35 Continuing Study of the California Economy and he helped clarify exactly what the process was 36 in terms of the forecasting by the State and by ABAG. And what I took away from Mr. Levy’s 37 presentation, which was excellent, was that the biggest driver of population increase is jobs. So 38 when population increases there’s the need for housing. So what we’re seeing is an allocation of 39 what’s believed to be the share that Palo Alto should create or contribute or enable relative to 40 housing, which is driven by jobs, dives population. And currently Palo Alto has sort of more 41 jobs. We have a bigger daytime population than we have a nighttime population. So our 42 daytime population is about 110,000 more or less and our nighttime population is 65,000 more or 43 less. And we have a goal that we’d like to continue to stimulate the vibrant Palo Alto economy 44 and create more jobs. So this situation is in many ways desirable, but it leads to this deficit of 45 more housing or the deficit in housing relative to jobs. And when people aren’t close, aren’t able 46 to live close to the jobs then they have to have transportation to get to the jobs and that creates 47 our issues with traffic and transportation and parking, which is a great concern. 48 49 City of Palo Alto Page 18 So one of my questions is are we learning anything, sort of out of the box thinking other than sort 1 of acknowledging that we have this built out city, this wonderful city, this quality of life and 2 great community character, but because we’re driving with all this innovation and economic 3 vitality to have a lot of jobs in excess of housing, is there something about the future that’s going 4 to… is there going to be a breakthrough in terms of how we might approach this opportunity or 5 this challenge different from what we’ve seen in the past? 6 7 Mr. Aknin: That’s another good question. There’s no, I think the answer, you know, a lot of 8 cities have the same challenges as Palo Alto, especially along the peninsula. We’re constrained 9 by a bay on one side and we’re constrained by a mountain range on the other side so and then we 10 had the typical suburban type development pattern during the 1950’s and 1960’s which really 11 leaves us little land to work with. I think the general state as I had stated before, the general 12 State policy goals is that you build higher density developments, whether that be office or 13 housing near transit so that people don’t have to drive in their cars and they can get from… I 14 think there’s a, you know, the term jobs/housing balance was used a lot. It’s used a little bit less 15 at this point, but I think the idea is that if you don’t have jobs right next to housing and people I 16 think it’s unrealistic to think that everyone’s going to live in the exact same community that they 17 work. But I think that what we’re going for as planners as well as transit planners is that we set 18 up a transportation network and a housing network that is connection based so that even if you 19 live in another region you’re able to take the train and able to take another form of transportation 20 in to get to your office space or to get to your back home. So I think it’s really looking at these 21 connections between transit and housing is the way that we’re going to have to grow as a region. 22 23 Chair Martinez: I’m going to take the opportunity to come back to my final part of my 24 questions/comments. In the last stretch the HCD focused a lot on our goals, policies, programs 25 and cited them as the reason they support certification of our Housing Element. And I think staff 26 should be commended for the hard work of getting that together. But it also points how 27 important those goals, policies, programs are to our Comprehensive Plan. So in the questions I 28 sent out to you I asked well can we accept the certification of that Housing Element document 29 but reorganize in the Comprehensive Plan our goals, policies, and programs so they provide that 30 kind of readability, transparency, ease of use that we’re reaching for in the update. Not changing 31 any language, not changing any substance, but trying to get it to work in the same manner that 32 the other six elements work. And I think the response I got was are you asking can we change 33 the Element? And my response is no. So I’m going to ask the question again: can we accept the 34 certified Housing Element in that bound document that you gave us, but also use it as part of our 35 Comprehensive Plan and the way in which we have designed it for the 2014 update or whatever 36 the date is? Steven? 37 38 Mr. Turner: Yes. As you’re aware one of the improvements that we’re looking to make with this 39 Comprehensive Plan update is to make this element or this document more accessible, more 40 usable to members of the public and City staff and boards and commissions. We’re looking to 41 achieve that in a number of different ways. One of them is to reformat each element so that a lot 42 of the narrative discussion occurs at the beginning of the element followed by a simple list of 43 goals, policies, and programs that we want to achieve over the long term. I think that we can do 44 that with the Housing Element as well. This is our Housing Element and its part of the 45 Comprehensive Plan. It’s the only element that the State requires certification or approval of at 46 the State level so it has to contain certain elements. But for the purposes of our public, our staff, 47 our boards and commissions I think we can create a document that retains the goals, policies, and 48 programs, retains the narratives that are contained in here that provide that context for our goals, 49 City of Palo Alto Page 19 policies, and programs over the long term and still create a useable, readable document. So I 1 think we can adapt this document. 2 3 This document is our Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan, but I think for public 4 consumption and public ease of use we can certainly create a tool or a document that is more 5 easily assessable. And then as you’re aware we are trying to also determine a good way to make 6 this available online through a searchable tool, through an application where folks who have a 7 particular interest in the Comprehensive Plan or a specific part or chapter of the Comprehensive 8 Plan that they can have easy access to that. So I think because we’re offering the Comprehensive 9 Plan up in a variety of different ways for people to consume, I think we can create products that I 10 think can be accessible by most people. 11 12 Chair Martinez: Thank you for that. And then my last comment in this section; one of the nice 13 things in the report was the assessment of the success of the previous Housing Element. I 14 thought that was very useful. It would have been nice to have it earlier so that we could also use 15 it in sort of going forward with our new programs and policies. But it also would be, will be a 16 useful tool in future years for all of the elements. When staff comes to the Planning Commission 17 and asks for our input in starting an update to have an evaluation of how successful the 18 Transportation Element goals, policies, and programs have been I just think it said so much 19 about what we needed to have worked on. So going forward I would really like to, I don’t know 20 who’s going to be here in 2022 or whatever it is, but to consider that as a vehicle for really 21 looking at where we’ve been successful and where we haven’t been. 22 23 So I’d like us to spend our remaining time talking about the environmental review of the 24 Housing Element and perhaps our City Attorney might give us some insight of why this is 25 required. Thank you. 26 27 Ms. Silver: Sure. The adoption of a Housing Element is a discretionary action that invokes 28 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and so some type of environmental review is 29 required. And what you do when you decide on what level of environmental review is 30 appropriate is you look at the type of land use changes are anticipated by this Element. And for 31 the most part this Element takes advantage of existing zoning to accommodate the land use, the 32 housing sites. And there are some rezonings that are going to be required and those are the 33 commercial zones that will be up zoned to allow for greater residential density. And so since 34 that’s the major land use that’s anticipated in this Housing Element cycle that’s what the 35 environmental review focused on. 36 37 And so it’s a Negative Declaration is being proposed and there really weren’t any impacts 38 associated with some modest up zoning in those commercial sites that were identified in the 39 Negative Declaration. And so it’s relatively straightforward for this particular Housing Element. 40 In the next cycle we will have to accommodate a few hundred more units and so we would again 41 look at whether a higher level of environmental review is required. But at this level there were 42 not any significant environmental impacts that were identified. 43 44 Chair Martinez: Ok, and if I may ask in other situations where we are reviewing an area plan or a 45 study you have said these, we’re not proposing a project and so there is no environmental impact 46 for us to weigh in or something like that without putting words in your mouth. Is that the general 47 nature here that the impact is really the future projects that come forward and at this point it’s 48 really a review of a plan? 49 City of Palo Alto Page 20 1 Ms. Silver: Yes. We do do environmental review for area plans, but the level of environmental 2 review is much broader. We look at the plan level we look at, we try to look at the maximum 3 density that would be contemplated in the plan and but then as particular projects come online 4 we also do an additional level of environmental analysis and it may be that as we go from the 5 overall plan policy level to the more micro project level you do start to see additional 6 environmental impacts that are exposed as you drill down further. For instance, as you start to 7 look at particular footprints for where a project will or a building will be located a particular, 8 there might be a groundwater plume for instance that you want to drill down further and look at. 9 Or there may be some kind of particular aesthetic component or impact based on the proximity 10 of the building vis-à-vis other buildings. And so it is more typical at a project level 11 environmental review to get more specific. And thank you for that clarification. 12 13 Chair Martinez: And then one last and I’ll stop. What if we, can we arbitrarily decide to set the 14 bar higher for environmental review? For example, could we say we’re going to under land use 15 planning focus more on the category of potential impact, significant impact if not mitigated and 16 say that’s where we are going to make sure we address measures that need to be followed or is 17 there something in environmental law that limits us from taking that kind of posture? Does that 18 make sense to you? 19 20 Ms. Silver: Yes. I think you’re talking about the local thresholds of significance? 21 22 Chair Martinez: Yes. 23 24 Ms. Silver: So the CEQA statute and the guidelines provide some general thresholds of 25 significance. There is a checklist that’s contained in the State law and for the most part cities 26 rely on the State mandated or State recommended thresholds of significance. So for instance, 27 there are certain key areas like transportation and greenhouse gas impacts and aesthetic impacts 28 that CEQA contains recommended ways to analyze those impacts. Local agencies do have the 29 ability though to adopt their own local thresholds and, as long as they comply with the minimum 30 State thresholds and some agencies do have more area specific thresholds and sometimes those 31 thresholds are more stringent than the State. Palo Alto has some thresholds that were adopted 32 through a formal process a number of years ago and more recently though we have some 33 thresholds that we’ve been using in larger projects that have been updated at an administrative 34 level. They have not been formally adopted by this body or by the Council, but they are in 35 practice. We have been using them fairly consistently. And those local thresholds that we have 36 been using are largely consistent with the State law, but there are some areas where they are a 37 little bit different, perhaps a bit stricter than State law. 38 39 Chair Martinez: Thank you. Commissioner Keller you want to begin? 40 41 Commissioner Keller: Yes, thank you. So I read the Negative Declaration as basically saying 42 that there are no impacts because the barn door has been opened and all the horses have left and 43 not many horses will leave in the next year and a half. That’s my interpretation. And the reason 44 I believe that is because in the previous Comp Plan and the Housing Element the Comp Plan 45 remember was from 1998 and the Housing Element being from 1999 to 2006, that studied 2,400 46 housing units if I remember correctly. And we far exceed that without any analysis of exceeding 47 that. And it’s true that we have zoning, we have, that we’re limited by zoning, but the reason 48 that the impacts are useful to look at from a broad perspective as opposed to project by project is 49 City of Palo Alto Page 21 because of cumulative impacts. And you can’t really effectively, we don’t really effective, 1 maybe you can, but we don’t really effectively study cumulative impacts on a project by project 2 basis. So looking at the Housing Element overall is how you look at cumulative impacts. And 3 it’s essentially on a year and a half not much is going to happen is the answer. So I think that 4 when we get to the next Housing Element I hope that we do an adequate CEQA review that 5 looks at the cumulative impacts of all the housing that could be built based on that and we 6 understand what the effect of that is and then we appropriately mitigate it as needed. 7 8 One thing that we are precluded from unfortunately and correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe 9 we’re not allowed to consider school impacts under CEQA. And that’s because school impacts 10 are supposedly fully mitigated by the pitiful amount that developers are required to pay under 11 State law, which doesn’t cover the amount that the impact is on our schools based on the price of 12 land and the price of construction in Palo Alto. So essentially unless we form an assessment 13 district or things like that we’re kind of stuck in that regard. 14 15 The other, the last thing is that in terms of these impacts and thinking about where people are 16 going to live there’s really a thresholding effect. And that is that the average commute based on 17 the latest data, which is from 2004 data from 2000 census and we should be getting data from 18 DC in 2014. Next year we’ll be getting some, the new data from the 2010 census. But that data 19 shows that the average Palo Alto resident commutes 11 miles each way to work. Now a lot of 20 them are commuting less, some of them are commuting more and the average person who works 21 in Palo Alto commutes 16 miles to work. And so there’s not a lot of commuting going on to and 22 from Palo Alto. There’s a handful of people coming from San Francisco and things like that. 23 There’s more commuting into Stanford. But there’s not, the distances are not really that great. 24 But what happens is the people who commute into Palo Alto are commuting from Mountain 25 View and Sunnyvale and Menlo Park and such and a lot of them are taking, a significant number 26 of them are taking bicycling and things like that. But essentially that means that the people who 27 live in Mountain View would be pushed out further. So essentially there are these rings of where 28 people live and where people work. And so people in Palo Alto tend to, tend to not all of them 29 but tend to make more money and they tend to live closer, but that essentially pushes people 30 further out if they’re living further out. So that’s essentially the pattern that we have. 31 32 So essentially there’s a big ecosystem that’s going on and so when you look at the environmental 33 impacts there’s different layers that you can think of it. There’s the layer for Palo Alto, there’s 34 the effect of what happens in Palo Alto and how it affects other cities, and there’s the cumulative 35 effects here. We can consider the cumulative effects here, but it’s hard to consider the 36 cumulative effects elsewhere. 37 38 Just closing on one thought, which is interesting about this phenomenon. When a commercial 39 building is built, like for example when Stanford did its, the Stanford Medical Center expansion, 40 they said that a certain percentage of those people who live in Palo Alto and a certain percentage 41 of those people who live elsewhere. We can only consider the impact of the people living in 42 Palo Alto, who would live in Palo Alto. And developments that happen in Menlo Park from 43 Facebook causes developments in Palo Alto, but we don’t consider them. So essentially there’s 44 this cumulative impact that gets technically and legally ignored. That’s unfortunate, but 45 essentially it’s a system for considering impacts that both limits the amount we can consider and 46 ignores certain impacts as well. Thank you. 47 48 City of Palo Alto Page 22 Chair Martinez: Commissioner Panelli, comment? You good? To the other end, Commissioner 1 Alcheck? 2 3 Commissioner Alcheck: I share Commissioner Keller’s sentiments on the, on my opinion on the 4 Negative Declaration and its, I guess I don’t want to say relevance, but significance particularly 5 because of the time frame. I want to add though I think it’s, I don’t know what the right word is, 6 it’s peculiar for me the discussion about environmental impact of what I would consider infill 7 housing. I know that we’re specifically talking about Palo Alto and that is the context, but it is 8 significantly more environmentally friendly to develop in this town than it is to continue 9 developing all the way from one side of 680 to the other. And that is essentially what all of the 10 Bay Area municipalities have to consider is that the development that doesn’t occur in their 11 neighborhoods will just move farther and farther out into the abyss. And those commutes will 12 increase. I know that that’s not a component of this environmental analysis, but again, I just 13 think there’s an irony in suggesting that the environmental impact of infill housing is so 14 significant that it justifies not developing as opposed to the development of housing in areas 15 where the environmental impact is just so significant it shouldn’t be ignored. But that’s a side 16 note. 17 18 Chair Martinez: Thank you for that. Commissioner King? Ok, Vice-Chair Michael? 19 20 Vice-Chair Michael: So I’m not really an expert on the nuances of the environmental impact 21 analysis, but one of the things I’m coming to appreciate about the work of the Planning 22 Commission as we take up this topic of the Housing Element is that it relates to a lot of the other 23 things that we work on in the course of our meetings. If you have sort of a holistic view of the 24 scope of topics that we consider and I’ll shortly give you a list, I am curious how this plays into 25 the environmental impacts which relate to things like traffic and parking and impact on schools 26 and infrastructure and the biology and natural resources of the area and wildlife, and so on. Air 27 quality, water, public works, and so on. But among the topics that we have taken up a very 28 serious study include the Rail Corridor Study, the Bicycle Pedestrian Master Plan, obviously 29 there’s a lot of tension on the possibility of High Speed Rail, El Camino transit, the Grand 30 Boulevard. We’re, on our upcoming agenda we’ll see the California Avenue Concept Plan. 31 We’ll see the Downtown Development Cap and maybe more work on the Arts and Innovation 32 District proposal. 33 34 There’s concern about, in the Housing Element, about Below Market Rate housing. Assistant 35 Director Aknin talked about in response to an earlier question that you have sort of, that housing 36 relates to jobs/population imbalance relates to the importance of regional connections, proximity 37 to transit, housing proximity to transit, jobs proximity to transit. And all of this kind of goes to, I 38 mean the environmental impact is really a very focused analytical study, but it goes to the quality 39 of life and the character of the community. And so and I’m imagining that although 40 Commissioner Alcheck had the data about the extent to which changes happened in the past or 41 didn’t happen at different times in the past, I suspect that we’re going to see more changes in the 42 future and hopefully those are going to be positive changes and changes that we manage 43 successfully. So I guess my question about the environmental impact is if there’s any sensible 44 way to look at it not in isolation as it relates to housing, but how it relates to these other 45 important concerns to the community along these other master plans and studies and concept 46 plans and so on that we and the Council and staff work so hard on? 47 48 City of Palo Alto Page 23 Chair Martinez: So where was I going with my question about what are the impacts? You know 1 I understand that we want to move on beyond our Housing Element and having this Neg Dec is 2 an important part of it. But this is also one of the places where we can have a discussion about 3 what would it be like if we were building 2,000 housing units downtown, Cal Avenue, El 4 Camino Real, and not skirt away from well less than significant to it’s only a study, it’s a plan, 5 it’s on paper, it’ll never happen, probably never happen, we don’t have to do this. But I think 6 what it would do is that it would inform the discussion for the next cycle and with HCD and with 7 ABAG that this is what we would really have to do to meet our housing allocation. 8 9 So what I’m trying to say is that maybe this is the place. Let’s move the category over to the left 10 and say this under land use planning this could have significant impact without these kinds of 11 mitigations if we built 1,000 units downtown we would have to do something about 12 transportation and this is what the impacts could be. The impact on our schools, the impact on 13 our sewer… it could be theoretically large, but it also points to the unlikeliness that this would 14 happen and so we go into the next cycle with another 2,000 units that we have to spend the time 15 and effort to prepare a plan which goes into the next one and it gives us the opportunity to begin 16 a dialogue with HCD and ABAG that says there’s got to be a better way for One Bay Area 17 community to address commuting and housing needs and where people work that’s more 18 reasoned than this; that this is not taking us to where we need to be. 19 20 And I’ve suggested maybe it’s, we’re going to continue to be a job center, but Mountain View is 21 much better at building housing for us and that’s half of the commute from San Jose and so the 22 way we look at jobs to housing imbalances is really more regionally and not on what can we do 23 with the cost of land and the limit, supply of vacant land and so maybe it isn’t environmental 24 review. Maybe we need to put that to rest, but it’s one possibility. And rather each time where 25 we can say, “Well, it’s less than significant, let’s close it out,” let’s take the opportunity, the 26 challenge to say, “Well it could be significant,” and therefore we need to say here is what it 27 could be and what the conversation should be going forward for the next round, the next time we 28 have to do this. Because we’ve all agreed and you will all agree that we don’t, the likelihood of 29 us building housing of that nature in this cycle is very, very remote and we need to find another 30 way in which we can do this. So Commissioners… yes, Assistant Director Aknin. 31 32 Mr. Aknin: I would just like to clarify one thing. When doing a cumulative impact analysis 33 within an environmental document you do have to take into consideration things that are going 34 on in nearby communities and that’s something that we do look at within our documents. So if 35 something’s going on on the other side of the border on Menlo Park that impacts traffic along the 36 El Camino Real that is something that we have to look at within an environmental document and 37 something that’s not ignored. 38 39 And the second thing I’d like to touch upon is with CEQA and doing the environmental analysis 40 I have a feeling by the time we get to our next Housing Element cycle there’s going to be 41 changes within CEQA and that’s something that we do have to track closely as a city. And my 42 guess is that, you know, there’s been a lot of talk especially related to infill housing and potential 43 categorical exemptions for infill housing and I think the general theory behind that and why 44 there’s a lot of pressure to categorically exempt or create laws at the State level that categorically 45 exempt local infill housing is that they believe the intent behind the law is that any localized 46 impact is far less of an impact then the regional impact the large commutes are having within 47 regions within California. So I think that’s something that we’ll end up seeing and end up 48 City of Palo Alto Page 24 participating in a discussion at the local and State level on is that as CEQA legislation is 1 proposed. 2 3 Chair Martinez: Thank you. Commissioner Panelli. 4 5 MOTION 6 7 Commissioner Panelli: I’m going to take this opportunity to make a Motion to approve or I’m 8 sorry, to recommend. Pardon me; I need to be very clear about that. A Motion to recommend 9 the adoption of this HCD approved Housing Element. I’m going to speak to this Motion though. 10 11 SECOND 12 13 Chair Martinez: Can we get a second? Motion by Commissioner Panelli and second by 14 Commissioner Keller. 15 16 Commissioner Panelli: Thank you. 17 18 Ms. Silver: And just as clarification I assume you also include the recommendation of the 19 Negative Declaration. 20 21 Commissioner Panelli: Yes, I’m also making a Motion to approve the Negative Declaration as 22 part of this recommendation that we adopt. It’s interesting to talk about this in the Housing 23 Element of the Comprehensive Plan. I’m sort of used to thinking of a plan as something you, to 24 map out the future and this is more of a, well it’s five and a half years of historical record and 25 maybe a year and a half of planning. And I understand there are things that are contributed to 26 that. I sincerely hope that we can achieve this goal of as I understand it submittal by December 27 2014 (interrupted) 28 29 Mr. Aknin: It’s approval actually. 30 31 Commissioner Panelli: Yeah, I know. I understand that. That seems, given what we’ve 32 experienced already that seems ambitious. But I like that ambition. I’m hesitant for us, there are 33 many reasons to approve it. It’s a good package. I also think it’s a poor use of resources to 34 continue to spend time on something that is effectively a historical record now. I’d rather see us 35 focus our time, staff’s time, on the future, which is the 2015 to 2022 plan. I also think it’s a 36 really interesting timing issue in that the next Housing Element can be done in conjunction or in 37 parallel with the development and finalization of some of the specific plans with downtown and 38 California Avenue as well as hopefully a little bit more clarity around things like High Speed 39 Rail. So I think it actually, the timing works out really well. So I’d just rather spend more time 40 on what I think our esteemed Chairman has said before, which is I want to spend more time on or 41 we should spend more time on policy and holistic planning. And I think focusing our energies 42 on that is, there’s a better return on our investment. 43 44 Chair Martinez: Commissioner Keller on your second? 45 46 Commissioner Keller: Thank you. So I have taught computer programming and one of the 47 things I’ve taught my students is that spending more time on planning reduces the 48 implementation time, but I think this is taking it to a little bit of extreme. But, I think that this is 49 City of Palo Alto Page 25 an excellent report and it produces, it represents excellent work by staff and by members of the 1 public that contributed and by the various members over a period of time by the Commission and 2 by the Council and other bodies that have reviewed it. So I think that this is something that we 3 should at this point approve and certainly not approving it as we’ve pointed out is too onerous a 4 thing to do even if we were, even if we thought it was not a great thing. And I’m not saying we 5 do think it’s not a great thing, but even if that were the case it would be too onerous not to 6 approve at this point. 7 8 So I hope that next time we do earlier planning so we have more time to see the effects of the 9 Comp Plan, I mean of the Housing Element over the planning cycle and that we as suggested by 10 the Chair actually do a more thorough analysis of what the cumulative impacts are and what 11 things would be like if we built it to that level. And I think that that exercise will be very 12 instructive when we get to the Comp Plan, the Housing Element that starts in I guess 2023, that 13 that exercise will feed into what we do for the, to our input to ABAG for the next RHNA and 14 those policies and I think that that will be a valuable exercise in that cycle. So at this point I’m 15 pleased to recommend approval to the Council of the Housing Element and recommend approval 16 to the Council of the Negative Declaration for the 2007 and 2014 Housing Element update. 17 Thank you. 18 19 VOTE 20 21 Chair Martinez: Thank you. Commissioners, the vote. Those in favor of the Motion say aye 22 (Aye). Ok, the Motion passes unanimously with Commissioner Tanaka absent. Thank you very 23 much. 24 25 MOTION PASSED (6-0-1, Commissioner Tanaka absent) 26 27 I would like to see if the members, the applicant is here for 2035 and anybody else that wishes to 28 speak on it before we take a break? Let’s give the staff a minute to organize for this and then 29 we’ll move right into the next item. The third item in place of the second item if it’s… no, we’re 30 going to just. Let’s go for that. We’ll take a break after this next item if you don’t mind. Ok. 31 Thank you. 32 33 And by the way did I close the public hearing on item number and if not? I did now. Thank you. 34 35 Commission Action: Recommended approval of Housing Element as recommended by staff, 36 Motion by Commissioner Panelli, second by Commissioner King (6-0-1, Commissioner Tanaka 37 absent) 38