HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-10-20 City Council Agenda PacketCITY OF PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL October 20, 2014
Regular Meeting
Council Chambers
6:00 PM
Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the
Council Chambers on the Thursday preceding the meeting.
1 October 20, 2014
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public may speak to agendized items; up to three minutes per speaker, to be determined by the presiding officer. If you wish to address the Council on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to
discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the
Council, but it is very helpful.
TIME ESTIMATES
Time estimates are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times
are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to
another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur
in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item is called.
HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW Applications and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their
remarks and up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken.
Call to Order
Study Session 6:00-7:00 PM
1.Joint Study Session of the City Council and Planning and
Transportation Commission
Special Orders of the Day
7:00-7:10 PM
2.Proclamation of the City Council Proclaiming October 23, 2014 as Unity
Day
7:10-7:20 PM
3.Public/Private Partnership Presentation: Palo Alto/Menlo Park Parent’s
Club - Annual Report
4.This Item has Been Removed From the Agenda
REVISED
2 October 20, 2014
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
City Manager Comments 7:20-7:30 PM
Oral Communications 7:30-7:45 PM
Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of
Oral Communications period to 30 minutes.
Approval of Minutes 7:45-7:50 PM
August 18, 2014
Consent Calendar 7:50-7:55 PM
Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members.
5.Finance Committee Recommends Approval of Fiscal Year 2014
Reappropriation Requests to be Carried Forward Into Fiscal Year 2015
6.Adoption of Two Resolutions Approving and Accepting a total of
$75,000 in Funds From the Santa Clara Valley Water District Under the
2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program Agreement and
Authorizing the City Manager or his Designee to Execute Such an
Agreement to be Used By the Utilities Department to Support its
Business Water Report Pilot Program and Real-Time Water Use
Monitoring Pilot Program, and Adoption of a Related Budget
Amendment Ordinance for Fiscal Year 2015 to Provide Appropriation in
the Amount of $100,000
7.Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the City
Auditor's Office Fiscal Year 2015 Proposed Work Plan
8.Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Adopt an
Ordinance to Amend Section 2.08.130 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Office and Duties of the City Auditor, to Reflect Changes in Audit
Practices and Clarify the Requirements for Reporting Work Products of
the Office of the City Auditor
9.Adoption of an Ordinance Approving and Adopting a Plan for
Improvements to El Camino Park; Approval of and Authorization for
the City Manager or his Designee to Execute Contract Amendment No.
3 to Contract C10131396 in the Amount of $47,850 with CDM Smith,
for the El Camino Park Restoration Project; and Adoption of a Budget
Amendment Ordinance to Consolidate Existing Funds Totaling
3 October 20, 2014
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
$4,395,286 into Capital Improvement Program PE-13016 from the El
Camino Park Playing Fields and Amenities Project PG-13002 and from
the El Camino Park Expanded Parking Lot and New Restroom Project
PE-13016, and to Retitle PE-13016 to “El Camino Park Restoration
Project”
10.Approval of Contract No. C15155841 With Anderson Pacific
Engineering Construction, Inc. in the Total Amount Not to Exceed
$1,067,000 for the Facility Repair & Retrofit Project No. 3 at the
Regional Water Quality Control Plant Capital Improvement Program
Project WQ-04011
11.SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing
Underground Utility District No. 46 (Arastradero Road/ El Camino Real/
W. Charleston Road) by Amending Section 12.16.02 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code (First Reading: October 6, 2014 PASSED: 8-0 Klein
absent)
Study Session 7:55-8:55 PM
12.Palo Alto Grade Separation and Trenching Study
Action Items
Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials,
Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 8:55-10:10 PM
13.Council Review of Possible Financing Methods for Construction of One
or More New Parking Garages in Downtown and Direction to Staff
Regarding Next Steps
10:10-10:40 PM
14.Review of City Hall Remodel Project
Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements 10:40-10:50 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.
Additional Information
4 October 20, 2014
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Additional Information
Standing Committee Meetings
Finance Committee Meeting Cancellation
Policy and Services Committee Meeting, Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Schedule of Meetings
Schedule of Meetings
Tentative Agenda
Tentative Agenda
Informational Report
City of Palo Alto Utilities Quarterly Update for the Fourth Quarter of Fiscal
Year 2014
Election Officers Needed for November 4, 2014 Election
Adoption of a Resolution Amending Water, Gas and Wastewater
Connection and Capacity Fees and Miscellaneous Utility Charges (Utility
Rate Schedules S-5, G-5, W-5 and C-1)
Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency Drought Update
Public Letters to Council
SET 1
Council Appointed Officer's Meeting, Tuesday, October 21, 2014
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5158)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 10/20/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Joint CC/PTC
Title: Joint Study Session of the City Council and Planning and Transportation
Commission
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
This is a joint session of the City Council and the Planning & Transportation Commission
intended to discuss issues of interest within the purview of the Commission. No action is
recommended.
Executive Summary
The City Council and the Planning & Transportation Commission periodically meet in joint
session to discuss issues of interest within the purview of the Commission. In advance of
tonight’s joint session, the Chair of the Planning & Transportation Commission has prepared an
annual report (attached), and posed a number of discussion questions as follows:
How can we improve the PTC’s process for making recommendation and the Council’s
ability to rely on such work?
How should the PTC respond to key issues related to Palo Alto’s land use, development,
and transportation trends?
What should be the PTC’s on-going role in completing the Comprehensive Plan update?
Are there better ways for the PTC to engage with the public?
Tonight’s discussion is likely to focus on these questions and touch on ongoing planning efforts
such as the Comprehensive Plan Update and Planned Community (PC) zoning reform.
Attachments:
Attachment A : Planning & Transportation Commission Annual Report to Council (PDF)
PALO ALTO PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
2013‐2014 REPORT TO COUNCIL
October 20, 2014
Dear Mayor Shepherd and Council Members:
Each year the Chair of the Planning & Transportation Commission (PTC or Commission)
makes a report to the City Council (Council). The style and format of this report has varied.
It may be useful to begin by describing the duties and responsibilities of the PTC, namely:
"what are we supposed to do" and "how do we operate." This leads to "what we did."
Finally, we have highlighted some "next steps" and suggestions for potential improvements
to the Commission's role in City governance.
I. Background
Looking to the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the PTC is an advisory body composed of seven
members appointed by the Council that makes recommendations to the Council. The
duties and powers of the PTC are described in PAMC Section 2.20.050:
"The Commission is an advisory commission. In addition to the duties set forth for
the Planning Commission in Titles 18 [Zoning] and 19 [Master Plan] of this code, it
shall, as requested by the Council, the City Manager, or the Director of Planning and
Community Environment ("Director") provide advice on any matter pertaining to
land use planning and transportation systems affecting the City."
The City of Palo Alto's (City) website summarizes the PTC's primary responsibilities as
including:
Preparing and making recommendations to the Council on the City's Comprehensive
Plan regarding development, public facilities and transportation in Palo Alto
Considering and making recommendations to the Council on zoning map and
ordinance changes
Reviewing and making recommendations to the Council on subdivisions, on appeals
on variances and use permits
Considering other policies and programs affecting development and land use in Palo
Alto for Council action
Reviewing and making recommendations on individual projects such as Planned
Community Zones, Open Space development, and those other projects as are
ATTACHMENT A
directed by the zoning code, staff and Council
The PTC has an explicit responsibility for the City's Comprehensive Plan, as set forth in
PAMC Section 19.04.010, which states:
"The Planning Commission shall have the primary duty to prepare, adopt and
recommend to the Council for their adoption, a long‐range, comprehensive general
plan to guide the future development of Palo Alto and of any land outside of its
boundaries which in the commission's judgment bears relation to its planning. Such
plan may contain basic recommendations as to the distribution of land use areas
within the City, each logically and properly related to each other, standards for
population distribution and density, and standards and recommendations for
circulation routes as between the various land use areas and through and around
the City. In addition to the above, the general plan may contain other elements
including a recreation plan, a transportation plan, a community design plan, a
housing plan and such additional plans, which in the Commission's judgment relate
to the physical development of the City. The comprehensive general plan may
comprise any, all, or any combination of these plans."
Other statutory responsibilities of the PTC include:
Review of general plan ‐‐ the Planning Commission shall annually review the
general plan and recommend to the City Council such extensions, changes or
additions to the plan as the Commission may consider necessary in the view of any
change in conditions (PAMC Section 19.04.030)
Review of the capital improvement program ‐‐ the general plan shall be the guide
for the capital improvement program insofar as the capital improvement program
affects the physical development of the city. The Planning Commission shall submit
an annual report to the Council regarding the capital improvement program, which
shall review each project for its conformity to the master plan; review the program
as a whole in order to suggest any improvement in economy or efficiency which
might be effected through the combining of various projects; and suggest any
needed improvements which do not appear in the program (PAMC Section
19.04.040)
Monitoring physical development of the city and conformity with master plan
‐‐ all matters affecting the physical development of the City shall be submitted to the
Commission for a report to the Council as to conformity to the master plan (PAMC
Section 19.04.050)
Initiation of Planned Community District ‐‐ prior to recommending approval by
the City Council of any PC district application, the Planning Commission must
determine that:
1. application of existing zoning will not provide sufficient flexibility to allow the
proposed development;
2. public benefits not otherwise attainable will result from using a planned
community district; and
3. the use(s) permitted will be consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan
and compatible with uses of adjacent sites (PAMC Section 18.38.060)
Additional duties of the Planning Commission may be prescribed by the
ordinances of the City or resolutions and motions of the Council (PAMC Section
19.04.070)
The PTC's bylaws are posted on the City's website. In addition to the duties described
above, the bylaws note that the PTC will have officers, consisting of a Chair, Vice Chair and
Secretary. Such officers are elected annually. The Chair (or Vice Chair) presides over
meetings. The chair may appoint special committees as required or desired. Mark Michael
is currently Chair and Arthur Keller is currently Vice Chair of the Commission. Robin Ellner
serves as Secretary.
Currently, members of the PTC serve as representatives of the Commission on the Regional
Housing Mandate Committee (RHMC) and on the Housing Element Community Panel. The
PTC designates one of its members to serve as liaison to the Council each month, on a
rotating basis.
II. PTC Processes
Regular public meetings of the PTC are typically held bi‐monthly on Wednesday evening in
the second and last weeks of each month. The Chair and Vice Chair, together with the
Director and other staff members, including the senior assistant city attorney, attend a pre‐
commission meeting. A tentative agenda listing is prepared by the Director, in consultation
with the Chair that includes descriptions of matters expected to be on the agenda of future
PTC meetings. This list seeks to project the timing of agenda items up to six months in
advance. Some matters on the PTC agenda relate to current planning applications and
other matters concern long‐range planning.
Whereas the PTC has previously created ad hoc or special subcommittees for such
purposes as reviewing the capital improvement program or updating drafts of elements of
the Comprehensive Plan, there are currently no subcommittees of the PTC and all agenda
items come directly to the full Commission.
In a recent discussion by the PTC of its priorities and effectiveness, the Vice Chair noted
that the PTC functions in three different modes, namely: reactive, proactive and integrative.
Using this terminology, the PTC is reactive when it receives and acts upon staff reports that
may include data, analysis and recommendations. Likewise, if and when the Council makes
a request to the PTC, the Commission would respond to such direction. When not
responding to a staff report or council direction, the PTC may proactively engage in
research, analysis and discussion of topics related to its responsibilities. For example, one
or more commissioners may generate a colleagues memo that may be discussed in a
subsequent PTC study session. Integrative work of the PTC is exemplified best by the work
undertaken in subcommittees and the full Commission to review draft elements of the
Comprehensive Plan, in collaboration with the staff and prior to submitting a
recommendation to the Council.
III. Productivity
Since the last PTC report to the Council on September 1, 2013, the Commission has held
approximately 23 meetings. Public hearings or study sessions were held or are scheduled
on the following matters:
2080 Channing Avenue — review certification of Final Environmental Impact
Report and amendment to Planned Community zoning
2755 El Camino Real — initiation of Planned Community zone district
Parking Exemptions Code Review ‐‐ eliminate the "exempt floor area" parking
exemption and review interim ordinance
Transportation Element — review draft vision statement, goals, policies and
programs
On‐Street Accessible Parking Space Policy — review proposed policy
Urban Forest Master Plan — review and comment on draft master plan
Matadero‐Margarita Bicycle Boulevard — review Matadero‐Margarita Avenue
bicycle boulevard project and phasing plan
California Avenue Streetscape — update on planned construction schedule
California Avenue/Fry's Area Concept Plan — review and provide recommendation
of incorporating revised draft area concept plan into the draft Comprehensive Plan
Traffic Impact Analysis Methodology — study session on traffic impact analysis and
methodologies
Housing Element — review zone code changes for implementation of the 2007‐2014
Housing Element programs
Business & Economics Element — review draft of updated Business & Economics
Element of the Comprehensive Plan
441 Page Mill Road — review application for State density bonus concessions and
design enhancement exception
Governance Element — review draft Governance Element
Draft Ordinance Modifying Building Setbacks in the CN and CS District — review
draft ordinance regarding build‐to‐line standard and context‐based design criteria,
including allowable Floor Area Ratio on CN‐zoned sites
PTC Retreat — Our Palo Alto Initiative, Planning Department Work Plan, and PTC
priorities and schedule of major projects
Building Setbacks and Sidewalk Width — review draft ordinance addressing
building setbacks, sidewalk width along El Camino Real and to reduce allowable
Floor Area Ratio on CN‐zoned sites
Grand Boulevard Initiative — study session and update on Grand Boulevard
initiative
Our Palo Alto — update on public engagement related to updating the
Comprehensive Plan and the Our Palo Alto Initiative
Capital Improvement Program — review 2015‐2019 proposed Capital Improvement
Program for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan
Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan — update on active projects
Housing Element Update — study session on proposed housing sites inventory and
program revisions for the 2015‐2023 Housing Element update
1451‐1601 California Ave — review application by Stanford University for Tentative
Map for subdivision arising from Mayfield Agreement
Downtown Development Cap — study session on Phase 1 of Downtown
Development Cap Study
441 Page Mill Road — site and design review, including State density bonus
concessions and design enhancement exceptions
Residential Permit Parking — study session and update on Downtown RPP program
Comprehensive Plan Update — discussion of "alternative futures" and issues for
consideration in the Environmental Impact Report scoping meeting
PTC priorities — study session on commission priorities for 2nd half of 2014
Draft Modifications to Build‐To‐Line Requirements — review proposed revisions to
ordinance
Planned Community Reform — study session
405 Curtner Avenue — tentative map
Shuttle Services — information item on new shuttle services for Palo Alto, East Palo
Alto, and potentially North Bayshore area of Mountain View
RPP Program status update — study session on Citywide and Downtown RPP
programs
Housing Element update review
Annual report from PTC to Council and Joint Session with Council
Future topics will include: study sessions for 2555 Park Blvd. Draft EIR,
Transportation Demand Management and Matadero Creek Trail; status report on
Bike Boulevards; update on Downtown Development Cap; and, public hearings on
Build‐To‐Line Ordinance and RPP Recommendation to Council
IV. Organizational Changes
During the last year there were notable organizational changes and transitions. Former
Chair Eduardo Martinez resigned, due to serious health issues, and subsequently passed
away. Also, former Commissioner Panelli resigned. Council appointed Commissioners Eric
Rosenblum and Przemek Gardias to fill the unexpired term of these vacancies. Hillary
Gitelman joined the Department as the new director. Recently, the Assistant Director
position became vacant, to be filled by Jonathan Lait. Shortly after Director Gitelman joined
the staff, she created a Department work plan that the PTC has used to guide certain
commission priorities.
V. Year In Review
A major focus of the PTC during 2013‐2014 has related to efforts of the Commission, staff
and Council to complete the update of the Comprehensive Plan. Indeed, the Municipal Code
makes this task the primary duty of the PTC. Currently, this effort is moving ahead on
parallel tracks: (i) drafts of all elements except for Governance have been completed and
forwarded to the Council; (ii) preliminary work is underway on the program EIR for the
Comprehensive Plan update; and (iii) outreach to and engagement with the public is being
done via the Our Palo Alto Initiative. Completion of the update was expected by the end of
2015.
Planning issues have become of increasing concern to the residents of the City. Perennial
frustrations with traffic congestion and parking issues have escalated into broader debates
and conversations about quality of life and livability of neighborhoods. While Palo Alto has
enjoyed the benefits of recovery from the Great Recession of 2008‐2009, with a
strengthening local economy, the associated growth in jobs, demand for housing, increased
traffic, and other pressures are perceived by many as threatening the qualities and values
that residents enjoy and that attract new people, including visitors and employees, to the
City.
As the City nears certification of the 2015‐2023 Housing Element, it may be worthy of
reflecting on Palo Alto's relationship to the broader Bay Area region. Forecasting long‐
term growth in population and jobs in the region necessarily involves estimates and
assumptions. Economic forecasts are far from perfect. For better or worse, Palo Alto is
centrally located in one of the most dynamic and fastest growing metropolitan areas in the
United States. This area is a magnet for creative, talented and entrepreneurial people from
around the world. Adapting to and managing inevitable changes to or impacts upon our
community may be best served if the City could undertake more prompt and regular
updates, not just for housing, but for all elements of the City's long‐range planning policies.
Following the Measure D referendum, a temporary time out on Planned Community zoning
was adopted, thereby providing an opportunity for the Department staff, the Commission
and the Council to study and consider potential reforms to the Planned Community
ordinance. While, at the margins, there may be a debate between "no growth", "slow
growth" or "development", analyzing the data about how PC zones have been used in the
City illustrates the beneficial potential of flexible zoning tools to effectuate good land use.
The practical impact of such flexibility is underscored by the protracted nature of updating
the City's Comprehensive Plan and zoning map. Balancing the complexity of competing
interests is a challenge that arises in virtually every current and long‐range planning effort.
Funding for the City's Capital Improvement Program has been increased as a result of the
stronger budget conditions. While the PTC's duty with respect to the CIP program focuses
on reviewing the proposal for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the City has been
able to allocate more funds for maintenance of infrastructure. This goal was analyzed by
the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission's report in December 2011 as "catching up,
keeping up and moving ahead." However, one might query whether the PTC has been fully
engaged on the question of how the CIP program affects the physical development of the
City. Notably, the PTC requested the addition of a study of tidal flooding, as a similar study
was performed in Mountain View in 2012 and the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers
Authority for East Palo Alto and Menlo Park is initiating studies. The last time the PTC
requested an additional CIP item was in 2009 for a study of a bicycle and pedestrian bridge
over U.S. 101 in the vicinity of Adobe Creek.
VI. Next Steps
Throughout the year, the PTC has continued an inquiry regarding how we operate and
whether the Commission can be more effective. Such challenges necessarily and
appropriately relate to the role of the PTC as an advisory body that makes
recommendations to the Council. We also function in close collaboration with the staff of
the Department. When the PTC uses subcommittees or circulates colleagues memos that
analyze specific issues, such activities necessarily require an allocation of staff resources.
The PTC is mindful of its role in providing a forum for residents to participate, observe and
otherwise engage in local governance regarding planning and transportation matters. At
stake is nothing less than the "future development of the City" including all elements of the
Comprehensive Plan. We understand that this is a major responsibility, one that deserves
public scrutiny and will hopefully earn public trust. In the relationship of the PTC to the
Council, we intend to be a trusted partner whose recommendations and advice are
practical, insightful and useful.
The Council establishes policies for the City. Whereas boards and commissions serve in an
advisory capacity and make recommendations, Council is vested with sole power to take
action and make decisions. Planning matters typically come to Council in the form of
"action items" and begin with a staff report, much like the reports from staff to the PTC.
Members of the public may submit speaker cards and be recognized to deliver remarks on
the agenda topic. Often, even on important or controversial topics, there may be minimal
public turnout at the PTC for discussion of a matter that draws a large crowd to the
subsequent Council deliberations. Because of the back‐end loaded public focus on the
Council discussion, it may be difficult to manage time effectively at well‐attended or over‐
crowded Council sessions. Paradoxically, this precludes robust public participation. More
often, it forces strict time limits on both public speakers and Council members. Some
important topics are continued to later meetings, or delayed. And, the time and energy of
the Council is constrained in making the most important decisions and debating the key
City policies. Perception of dysfunction may contribute to residents' cynicism or distrust
regarding local governance, lead to grassroots referendum campaigns, and other
contentious issues.
There may be a better way.
The PTC's recent discussions of the Commission's effectiveness have identified areas in
which the PTC may be more proactive (i.e., provide thought leadership on planning and
transportation issues and other matters for which the PTC is responsible) and integrative.
With the recent changes in membership of the PTC and changes in the senior staff of the
Department, we are beginning to explore opportunities for enhancing the value of our
work.
Among the opportunities and challenges within the PTC's jurisdiction might include
increased attention to:
Long‐range transportation challenges (e.g., traffic congestion, parking deficit,
neighborhood parking intrusion, TDM. TMA, transit, shuttle service, CalTrain, etc.)
Housing (e.g., growth, density, mixed use, PTOD, size of units, affordability, height
restrictions)
Retail (e.g., changing nature of retail and community need for services)
Improving data and analysis of PTC issues (e.g., traffic model, parking studies,
demographic trends, cost/benefit analysis, developer pro forma or other financial
disclosure)
Engagement with public (e.g., planning related visuals, early dissemination of
meeting materials, on‐line public participation, use of infographics, etc.)
Additional topics (e.g., completion of Comp Plan update, specific plans, Downtown
Development Cap, PC Zoning reform, bicycle/pedestrian planning, … )
When it may be appropriate for the PTC to increase its understanding of such issues, the
colleagues memo process can be a tool for issue identification, proceeding to collection of
relevant data, analysis, research and then synthesis of a well‐structured discussion. A
colleagues memo may become the basis for a study session, and it may also be the
opportunity for virtual engagement with the public using readily available and proven on‐
line tools (such as Google Moderator). Engagement with the public can be broadened to
include both the traditional open public meetings of the PTC and newer and more flexible
mechanisms for public input through open and transparent public communication, while
being mindful of Brown Act requirements and limits on staff time.
Consistent with the PTC bylaws, and sensitive to limited staff resources, the Commission
may make better use of special and ad hoc subcommittees to conduct preliminary
investigations before coming to the full commission. A subcommittee should be created
when there is a clear purpose, with a well understood objective or deliverable. Examples of
such subcommittees might include: (i) completion of the Comprehensive Plan update, (ii)
development of neighborhood or district specific plans, (iii) analyzing transportation
solutions, or even (iv) reviewing the Capital Improvement Program.
VII. Reporting to Council
The current protocol, when a matter is heard first by the PTC and then referred to Council,
relies on providing Council with verbatim minutes of sometimes lengthy hearings that include
testimony from public speakers, multiple rounds of comments and questions from the
Commission, followed by motions, debate and voting on a potential recommendation to
Council. The undigested mass of such materials may not be particularly useful or efficient for
Council members to use as a basis for subsequent action. Consequently, the Council hearing on
the same matter may take the form of starting over: presentation is made by staff, public
speakers are heard, questions and comments from Council members are voiced, followed by
motions and voting. There is little benefit from, much less force or effect, of the prior PTC
hearing, notwithstanding many of the public speakers are the same and factoring in the
diligence and subject‐matter expertise of the PTC. This process inevitably burdens staff when
they are asked to deliver what is essentially the same report twice, to different audiences, and
attend duplicate meetings often late into the night.
Observant and concerned members of the public may simply bypass the earlier stage of a PTC
hearing, and come directly to Council, thereby precluding the Commission from hearing the full
range of public questions and comments. On matters with the most public interest, high levels
of attendance at Council meetings and large number of speaker cards create a challenge for
Council to conduct its public hearing in a timely and efficient manner.
On a recent topic ‐‐ considering potential reforms to the PC zoning ordinance ‐‐ staff and the
PTC prepared an executive summary of the PTC discussion and recommendations. If Council
finds this useful, such summaries could become a regular addition to staff reports to Council
following a PTC review.
Another option for better informing the Council about the PTC's prior review would be to
include a new section in the staff report that sets forth: the final motion considered by the PTC,
the vote by commissioners, the relevant factors and evidence cited by commissioners pro or
con, and substantive points raised by public speakers. When and if Council may have questions
about the PTC record, either staff or the PTC liaison to Council should be available to respond.
Given that Council sets City policy, and when projects or applications are properly reviewed by
the PTC pursuant to such Council‐set policies, the resulting recommendation by the PTC may be
placed on the Council's consent calendar. In that situation, Council members may request
shifting a matter to the action calendar when appropriate.
If these suggested changes to the reporting process are implemented, the public interest in
diligent and transparent consideration of land use and zoning matters will be fully respected
and the Council's valuable time and attention may be focused on the highest priority policy
setting and decision making.
Respectfully submitted,
Mark D. Michael, Chair
Planning & Transportation Commission
CITY OF PALO ALTO
PROCLAMATION
Unity Day – October 23, 2014
Recognizing the Need to Create Safe, Welcoming Schools and Communities
WHEREAS, October is National Bully Prevention Month and more than 13 million children in the
United States (U.S.) a year are affected by bullying every year and approximately 30 percent of students in the U.S. are involved in bullying on a regular basis, either as a victim, a bully or both; and
WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto will join the Palo Alto Unified School District in celebrating Unity
Day, a celebration of safe and welcoming schools; and
WHEREAS, as civic leaders of Palo Alto, we can and must use our resources to effect positive
changes in our community; and
WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto has joined forces with the U.S. Conference of Mayors and The Bully Project in the Campaign to end bullying, which builds resolve to improve school climate and create safer schools; and
WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto will work with the Palo Alto Unified School District, the District Safe and Welcoming Schools Committee, the Palo Alto Youth Council and Project Safety Net to engage
the community in creating welcoming and inclusive environments for students that are safe and will allow students to reach their potential academically, socially and emotionally; and
WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto and its partners pledge to raise awareness around this issue by hosting events that bring together key decision makers and community members who work to change the
culture in our schools and communities so that tolerance, kindness and safety are top priorities.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Nancy Shepherd, Mayor of the City of Palo Alto, on behalf of the City
Council do hereby proclaim October 23, 2014 as Unity Day to bring awareness to the issue of bully prevention and to work to create safe and supportive environments for all students and community
members.
Presented: October 20, 2014
______________________________ Nancy Shepherd
Mayor
City of Palo Alto (ID # 4695)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Special Orders of the Day Meeting Date: 10/20/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Palo Alto Parent's Club Partnership Presentation
Title: Public/Private Partnership Presentation: Palo Alto/Menlo Park Parent’s
Club - Annual Report
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Community Services
Executive Summary
This is an informational Public/Private Partnership presentation by the Palo Alto-Menlo
Park Parent’s Club on their accomplishments during the past year (Attachment A).
No Council action is requested.
Attachments:
Attachment A - Parent's Club Annual Report (PDF)
“Enriching the lives of families with young children, both within our club and our community since 1991”
2013
PO Box 155, Menlo Park, CA 94026 | info@pampclub.org | www.pampclub.org
TA
B
L
E
O
F
C
O
N
T
E
N
T
S
LETTER FROM THE BOARD
ABOUT US
BOARD OF DIRECTORS & STAFF
2013 IN REVIEW
MEMBER SURVEY
MEMBERSHIP DEMOGRAPHICS
BUDGET
KEY SPONSORS
The Parents' Club of Palo Alto and
Menlo Park (PAMP) is pleased to
present its 2013 Annual Report. !
2013 was a great year for PAMP!
This year we focused on increasing
benefits to our members through
events, online content, discounts and
community-building activities. !
PAMP’s board would like to share with
our members some of the key
successes of 2013: !
Membership!!
In 2013 PAMP experienced a 3%
increase in new members. We are
hoping to build on this trend and
reach out to more parents who live on
the Peninsula to build an even
stronger community in 2014. !
Events!!
In 2013 PAMP offered activities and
classes to 341 kids, which is a 60%
increase over 2012. Our members
enjoyed weekly classes in swimming,
art, gymnastics, science and music.
We also introduced a very popular
soccer class and a sold-out Buckaroo
Yoga class where kids exercise their
bodies while connecting with horses! !
At PAMP we continue to look for one-
of-a-kind exclusive activities for our
members to enjoy. Events like the
Menlo Park Firehouse Tour and
Hidden Villa hike are wonderful
opportunities to explore the great
treasures of the Peninsula. !
The very popular “Blanket Babies”
meet-ups have gone up by 55%!
Parents from all across the Peninsula
get together on a weekly basis to
meet others and share their
experiences of early parenthood. !
PAMP also hosts four large events
each year:
Rummage Sale (Spring)
Family Day (Summer)
Moon Festival (Fall)
Preschool Fair (Winter) !
In 2013 we listened to your feedback
from previous years and made sure
our members had more space to
interact with other people and enjoy
the activities. We were pleased to
see record attendance for a number
of the events! !
Online content!!
PAMP’s online presence made
tremendous progress in 2013. At the
end of the year we launched our new
and improved online communication
format. Instead of a separate monthly
newsletter and a weekly news e-mail,
our members can now enjoy all
content under one weekly e-mail. It
includes anything from articles written
by experts and fellow parents to
news, updates and information on all
upcoming PAMP events. Our online
forum continues to be a key resource
for members to connect with other
families, seek advice or just sell/buy
used items. !!!!
2013 was a year of growth
!
Moon
Festival
LE
T
T
E
R
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
B
O
A
R
D
Volunteering!!
Our volunteers are the heart of
PAMP. Without them we couldn’t
have had such an incredible year.
Volunteering for PAMP gives
members an opportunity to further
strengthen the bonds and
connections with other members
and our communities. We are
proud to say that in 2013 we had
less than 5% attrition compared to
75% only 3 years ago! We will
continue to make volunteering for
PAMP a truly rewarding
experience. !
Looking ahead…!!
2013 was a year of growth. We
increased the number of events
and activities; offered more member
benefits and discounts; our
leadership team expanded and our
volunteers are more dedicated than
ever! !!
But our work is just starting. The
results of our membership survey
indicate that PAMP members want
even more opportunities to connect
and build relationships. In 2014,
the PAMP board intends to focus its
efforts on building better platforms
for our members to connect as well
as optimizing our programming and
offerings to better meet our
members' needs.
... continued
!
LE
T
T
E
R
F
R
O
M
T
H
E
B
O
A
R
D
Family Day
Learn about our volunteer
opportunities online or write to us at
volunteer@pampclub.org and tell us
about yourself - we may not even
know we need you until you apply!
Do you have suggestions for activities or
events you'd like to see us offer? Any
new businesses you think we should add
to the discount program? Any other ideas
you’d like to share with the PAMP
leadership? Forward them along to:
suggestionbox@pampclub.org
PAMP is a diverse group of parents who have
come together to form a volunteer-led, non-
profit organization to offer community,
resources, knowledge, and support on
common interests.
PAMP is the largest parent organization on the
Peninsula. Founded in 1991 by a small group
of mothers, today our membership extends
up and down the Peninsula, San Francisco
Bay Area, and South Bay.
Our mission is to enrich the lives of families
with young children, both within our club and
our community. PAMP is all about making
connections for yourself and your children, by
exchanging ideas and information in an open
dialogue among a trusted community of
peers, and tapping into resources that will
strengthen your family.
Ultimately PAMP’s goal is to build a happier,
healthier and more bonded community of
parents in the Bay Area.
PAMP is all about making connections, sharing ideas and tapping into resources.
Family Day, Preschool Fair
AB
O
U
T
U
S
HIdden Villa
Hike
Our volunteers never drop the ball!
Join the team volunteer@pampclub.org
20
1
3
B
O
A
R
D
O
F
D
I
R
E
C
T
O
R
S
Masumi Patel Chair!
Chanden Moya President!
Lori McCormick Secretary!
Jacquie Kush Treasurer!
Tatyana Ventura VP Volunteer Relations!
Emiliano Martinez VP Legal!
Wendy Yang & Amy Meese Co-VP Large Events!
Shirley Chen VP Small Events!
Maya Herstein VP Communications!
Sabina Kroes VP Membership!
20
1
3
S
T
A
F
F
Amourence Lee Executive Director!
Kristen Podulka Membership Manager!
Willow Lune Newsletter Managing Editor!
Tai Clyde Small Events Manager!
Alison Lee Development Coordinator!
Kim Hix Bookkeeper!
20
1
3
I
N
R
E
V
I
E
W
!!
SMALL EVENTS!
341 Kids Activities & Classes
5 Family Dinner Playdate/New Member Socials
10 Mom’s Night Out Events
153 Blanket Babies Meet-Ups !
LARGE EVENTS
3/10 Rummage Sale
6/1 Family Day
9/14 Children’s Moon Festival
11/3 Preschool Fair !
MEMBER BENEFITS!
112 Member Discounts Offered
81 Newsletter Articles Published Online
53 Subgroups
17 Playgroups!!
LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT!
63 Members of the Leadership Team
105 Volunteers Mobilized for Large Events
3 Volunteer Appreciation Events !!!!!
HIGHLIGHTS
Family Dinner
Playdate
(Meet & Eat)
ME
M
B
E
R
S
U
R
V
E
Y
Why join PAMP?% responses
Online Community 24%
Events & Activities 17%
Meet New Families 14%
Playgroups 13%
Member Discounts 10%
Subgroups 7%
New to the Area 7%
Other 4%
Currently Expecting 3%
- Shannon, Los Altos
- Laura, Sunnyvale
“PAMP made things
m
u
c
h
easier for me by provi
d
i
n
g
valuable advice, trust
e
d
recommendations, su
p
e
r
support and enriching
activities for my daugh
t
e
r
that I never would hav
e
known about were it n
o
t
f
o
r
PAMP”
- PAMP member
- PAMP member
“I am not overstating
that PAMP is a
lifeline”
ME
M
B
E
R
D
E
M
O
G
R
A
P
H
I
C
S
Speak a foreign Language % responses
Yes 54%
No 46%
Age (primary member)% responses
35-39 35%
30-34 26%
40-44 25%
45-49 8%
25-29 3%
50+2%
Number of Children % responses
1 45%
2 43%
3 10%
0 2%
4 1%
Age of Children % responses
1 18%
6 16%
5 15%
2 14%
4 13%
3 12%
0 10%
6+3%
Household Income % responses
$250k+57%
$100k+36%
<$100k 7%
Work Outside Home % responses
Yes, Full-time 52%
Yes, Part-time 26%
No 22%
Education % responses
Masters or JD 50%
4-year College 28%
Ph.D. or MD 17%
Post-Doctorate 3%
2-year College 2%
High School 1%
City % responses
Palo Alto 29%
Menlo Park 22%
Mountain View 11%
Los Altos/Hills 10%
Redwood City 7%
Sunnyvale 3%
Atherton/Woodside 2%
Portola Vally/Stanford 2%
Other 14%
Data based on responses to optional demographic questions.
Small Events
5%
Large Events
13%
Newsletter Sponsorship
18%
Membership Dues
64%
Communications!
5%Sponsorship!
6%
General Administrative!
12%
Insurance!
1%
Volunteer & Member Development!
10%
Charity Donation!
3%
Small Events!
19%
Large Events!
31%
Newsletter!
13%
Results for Year Ended December 31, 2012
INCOME: $204,757
EXPENSES: $159,420
BU
D
G
E
T
SP
O
N
S
O
R
S
H
I
P
P
R
O
G
R
A
M
!
Children’s Health Council
Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital
DayOne
Studio Kicks
UrbanSitter
Lucile Packard Foundation for Children’s Health
International School of the Peninsula
Jefunira Camp
Daddy & Company
Harrell Remodeling - Design + Build
India Education Method
Honeycombers
German American International School
Sacred Heart Schools
Menlo Swim and Sport
The Harker School
KEY SPONSORS
Thank you to each of the 57 sponsors that supported our mission
through the Sponsorship Program. !
The following generous sponsors contributed over $1,000 in 2013:
Excludes event sponsors and donors.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5129)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/20/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Approval of Fiscal Year 2014 Reappropriation Requests to be
Carried Forward into Fiscal Year 2015
Title: Finance Committee Recommends Approval of Fiscal Year 2014
Reappropriation Requests to be Carried Forward Into Fiscal Year 2015
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Administrative Services
Recommendation
The Finance Committee and staff recommend that the City Council preliminarily approve the
Fiscal Year 2014 reappropriations to be carried forward into Fiscal Year 2015.
Background
As part of the fiscal year-end process, staff reviews the City’s unencumbered and unspent
appropriations of the fiscal year just ended, along with the City’s spending plans. Encumbered
amounts are those subject to the legal claims of other parties due to contractual obligations
(for example, commitments made through purchase orders). The City has a process for carrying
forward encumbrances from one fiscal year to the next.
However, each year there are a small number of important projects the City carries forward
into the next year with unencumbered funds. The reappropriations process is used for these
projects, which are generally one-time needs. Although the Municipal Code also requires that
the Council provide final approval once the accounting books are closed, the Council is
requested to provide a preliminary approval at this time to allow the reappropriations to move
forward.
Discussion
On September 16, the Finance Committee recommended that the City Council approve the
Fiscal Year 2014 reappropriations as identified in Finance Committee staff report (see
Attachment A). The projects for which reappropriations are recommended can generally be
grouped into the following categories:
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Timing and Workload Delays- Certain projects were delayed due to competing
workload demands, appropriation of funds late in the fiscal year, or other unanticipated
delays. Examples of projects in this category include the Police Utilization Study, Airport
Legal Outside Counsel, Comprehensive Plan, Business Registry Certificate Program,
Ecological Footprint Analysis, Virtual Private Network Upgrade, Virtual Private Clout, and
Council Chambers Voting System Replacement.
Capital Projects with no Expenditures in FY 2014 or FY 2013- A limited number of
capital projects have not had funds expended for two years, however staff still intends
to complete the project. As mentioned in the attached report to the Finance
Committee, appropriation of capital improvement funds, per the existing Municipal
Code, are to remain in full force and effect until the purpose for which each was made
has been accomplished or abandoned. The purpose of any capital appropriation is
deemed abandoned if two years pass without any expenditure from the appropriation.
There are two projects that fall into this category (Municipal Services Center Facilities
Study and Long Range CCTV Cameras). It is anticipated that work will commence on
these projects during FY 2015.
Library Materials- Savings were realized in the area of Library Materials in FY 2014 in
anticipation of the 2015 openings of Mitchell Park Library and the Rinconada Library.
These funds, from the Palo Alto Library Foundation, will allow for the library to purchase
publications and materials for library patrons.
Teen Programs- At the June 2, 2014 City Council meeting, the City Council approved a
recommendation from the Policy and Services Committee to use the net revenue
collected from 455 Bryant Street in Fiscal Years 2009 through 2013 ($213,834) to fund
Teen Programs. Per City Council action/direction, the net revenue from prior years in
the amount of $213,834 in addition to $84,000 for Fiscal Year 2014 for a total of
$297,834 is to be brought forward for reappropriation. A long term expenditure plan
will be brought to the City Council in fall 2014, including the use of estimated Fiscal Year
2015 revenue of $84,000.
Management and Professional Development funds- A number of City employees, as
part of their compensation plan, are eligible for certain self-improvement activities.
These funds are available to certain employees for civic and professional association
memberships, conference participation and travel, educational programs, certain tuition
costs, and professional and trade journal subscriptions, and are recommended to be
carried over to Fiscal Year 2015 to improve and supplement the job and professional
skills of employees.
Finance Committee Review and Recommendation
At the September 16 Finance Committee meeting, after addressing the Committee’s questions,
the Finance Committee unanimously approved (3-0, Council Member Holman absent) staff’s
City of Palo Alto Page 3
recommendation (see Attachment B for the Minutes) to carry forward staff’s reappropriation
requests.
Resource Impact
The requested items have been previously reviewed and approved by City Council as part of
annual budget processes. Staff has determined that sufficient funds exist to allow for the
approval of the attached Fiscal Year 2014 reappropriations list (see Attachment A of the
attached Finance Committee report). For Fiscal Year 2015, staff recommends $1.6 million in
carryover funds in the General Fund and $0.8 million in all other funds with a total of $2.4
million citywide.
Policy Implications
This recommendation is consistent with adopted Council policy.
Environmental Review (If Applicable)
The action recommended is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental
Quality Act.
Attachments:
ATTACHMENT A: Reappropriations to FY 2015 Report, Finance Committee, Sept. 16,
2014 (PDF)
Attachment B_ 9-16-14 FCMINUTES (PDF)
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5043)
Finance Committee Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/16/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Approval of Fiscal Year 2014 Reappropriation Requests to be
Carried Forward into Fiscal Year 2015
Title: Approval of Fiscal Year 2014 Reappropriation Requests to be Carried
Forward Into Fiscal Year 2015
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Administrative Services
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Finance Committee preliminarily approve the Fiscal Year 2014
reappropriations to be carried forward into Fiscal Year 2015 and direct staff to forward the
Finance Committee’s recommendation to the City Council.
Background
As a part of the fiscal year-end process, staff reviews the City’s unencumbered and unspent
appropriations of the fiscal year just ended, along with the City’s spending plans. Encumbered
amounts are those subject to the legal claims of other parties due to contractual obligations
(for example, commitments made through purchase orders). The City has a process for carrying
forward encumbrances from one fiscal year to the next.
However, each year there are a small number of important projects the City carries forward
into the next year with unencumbered funds. The reappropriations process is used for these
projects, which are generally one-time needs. Although the Municipal Code also requires that
the Council provide final approval once the accounting books are closed, the Council must
provide a preliminary approval at this time to allow the reappropriations to move forward.
In 1995, the Municipal Code was amended to allow the Council to preliminarily approve the
reappropriations (Chapter 2.28, Section 2.28.090) because projects may need funding in the
first part of the fiscal year. The Municipal Code also states that unless amended by Council, the
appropriations of capital improvement funds for project expenditures shall continue in full
force and effect until the purpose for which each was made has been accomplished or
abandoned. The purpose of any capital appropriation is deemed abandoned if two years pass
Attachment A
City of Palo Alto Page 2
without any expenditure from the appropriation. On August 18, 2014, the Finance Committee
approved a recommendation to amend Chapter 2.28, Section 2.28.090 of the Municipal Code to
eliminate the provision allowing for the automatic reappropriation of capital improvement
funds. The City Council is scheduled to approve this change in to the Municipal Code at the
September 22, 2014 City Council meeting. If this ordinance change is approved by the City
Council, staff will bring forth a second reading of the ordinance and the ordinance will become
effective 30 days after the second reading. Therefore, this change would not affect the FY 2014
reappropriation process.
Discussion
As noted above, the Municipal Code requires the “preliminary” approval of reappropriations,
with final approval by the City Council at the same time as the normal year-end closing
ordinance. Attachment A identifies those reappropriation requests that staff recommends for
preliminary approval, including any capital projects that have had no expenditures within the
last two years. The projects for which reappropriations are recommended can generally be put
in the following categories:
Timing and Workload Delays- Certain projects were delayed due to competing
workload demands, appropriation of funds late in the fiscal year, or other unanticipated
delays. Examples of projects in this category include the Police Utilization Study, Airport
Legal Outside Counsel, Comprehensive Plan, Business Registry Certificate Program,
Ecological Footprint Analysis, Virtual Private Network Upgrade, Virtual Private Clout, and
Council Chambers Voting System Replacement.
Capital Projects with no Expenditures in FY 2014 or FY 2013- A limited number of
capital projects have not had funds expended for two years, however staff still intends
to complete the project. As mentioned previously in the report, appropriation of capital
improvement funds, per the existing Municipal Code, are to remain in full force and
effect until the purpose for which each was made has been accomplished or
abandoned. The purpose of any capital appropriation is deemed abandoned if two years
pass without any expenditure from the appropriation. There are two projects that fall
into this category (Municipal Services Center Facilities Study and Long Range CCTV
Cameras). It is anticipated that work will commence on these projects during FY 2015.
Library Materials- Savings were realized in the area of Library Materials in FY 2014 in
anticipation of the 2015 openings of Mitchell Park Library and the Rinconada Library.
These funds, from the Palo Alto Library Foundation, will allow for the library to purchase
publications and materials for library patrons.
Teen Programs- At the June 2, 2014 City Council meeting, the City Council approved a
recommendation from the Policy and Services Committee to use the net revenue
collected from 455 Bryant Street in Fiscal Years 2009 through 2013 ($213,834) to fund
Attachment A
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Teen Programs. Per City Council action/direction, the net revenue from prior years in
the amount of $213,834 in addition to $84,000 for Fiscal Year 2014 for a total of
$297,834 is to brought forward for reappropriation. A long term expenditure plan will
be brought to the City Council in fall 2014, including the use of estimated Fiscal Year
2015 revenue of $84,000.
Management and Professional Development funds- A number of City employees, as
part of their compensation plan, are eligible for certain self-improvement activities.
These funds are available to certain employees for civic and professional association
memberships, conference participation and travel, educational programs, certain tuition
costs, and professional and trade journal subscriptions, and are recommended to be
carried over to Fiscal Year 2015 to improve and supplement the job and professional
skills of employees.
Resource Impact
The requested items have been previously reviewed and approved by City Council as part of
annual budget processes. Staff has determined that sufficient funds exist to allow for the
approval of the attached Fiscal Year 2014 reappropriations list (Attachment A). For Fiscal Year
2015, staff recommends $1.6 million in carryover funds in the General Fund, and $0.8 million
across all other funds.
Policy Implications
This recommendation is consistent with adopted Council policy.
Environmental Review (If Applicable)
The action recommended is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental
Quality Act.
Attachments:
ATTACHMENT A: Reappropriations to FY 2015 CMR (XLSX)
Attachment A
2014 Reappropriations
Attachment A
General Fund
Department Fund
Amount
Recommended Reappropriation Justification
City Manager's Office General
Fund
35,000 Business Registry Certificate Program: At the April 29, 2014 City Council meeting, the Council
approved a recommendation to fund a Business Registry Certificate (BRC) Ordinance and Fee
Program as a full cost-recovery replacement/enhancement of the existing Use Certificate Process,
with funds from the City Council Contingency. These funds were to be used for start-up costs
including outreach, training, and program/ technology development; however, staff was not able to
work on this project due to other competing priorities and the funding becoming available late in the
fiscal year. Staff committed to return to Council before December 30, 2014 for approval of the BRC
ordinance and program implementation and launch.
City Manager's Office General
Fund
25,000 Electric Vehicle Consultant:At the May 13, 2014 Policy and Services Committee Meeting, an
ordinance was approved requiring all new multi-family residential and non-residential construction to
provide for current or future installation of electric vehicle (EV) chargers at the recommendation of
the Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment Task Force. Funding was allocated on June 12, 2014 from
the City Manager's Contingency to hire a consultant to implement this direction and guide
developers in technical equipment decision making as well as provide training to staff during the
review process; however, since this was not approved until the end of Fiscal Year 2014, staff could
not complete the contract before the end of the fiscal year. On June 16, the City Council approved
the ordinance change.
City Manager's Office General
Fund
25,000 Ecological Footprint Analysis:A study is needed to assess the demand and consumption of
resources by the City as a whole compared to the availability of resources in the ecosystem
surrounding and supporting the City. The results will provide a Palo Alto Consumption Land Use
Matrix (CLUM) and the data from the CLUM will be used for the subsequent Climate Action Plan,
which was presented to the CIty Council on August 11, 2014. Funding was allocated from the City
Manager's Contingency in FY 2014 to conduct this study; however, staff was not able to complete
the project in Fiscal Year 2014.
11503.xlsx 1 9/17/2014,9:20 AM
Attachment A
2014 Reappropriations
Department Fund
Amount
Recommended Reappropriation Justification
Community Services General
Fund
297,834 Teen Programs:At the June 2, 2014 City Council meeting, the Council approved a
recommendation from the Policy and Services Committee to use the net revenue collected from
455 Bryant Street in Fiscal Years 2009 through 2013 ($213,834) to fund Teen Programs for Fiscal
Year 2015. Per Council action, the fund balance of $213,834 is to be reappropriated in addition to
the $84,000 in Fiscal Year 2014 proceeds for a total of $297,834. A long-term expenditure plan will
be brought to Council in fall 2014, including use the estimated revenue for Fiscal Year 2015 of
$84,000.
Development
Services/Fire
General
Fund
50,000 Digitize Fire Prevention Records: This funding will be used to digitize historical records in the
Fire Prevention Bureau (FPB) and implement an electronic records management system for
historical and future documents with collaboration from the Information Technology (IT)
Department. This funding was appropriated in the Fire Department as part of the Fiscal Year 2014
Operating Budget; however, the IT Department is still developing a citywide electronic records
management strategy. As part of the Fiscal Year 2015 Operating Budget, FPB was moved from the
Fire Department to the Development Services Department. Reappropriation of these funds to the
Development Services Department will allow the FPB to move forward with the digitizaton of their
records and move the electronic records into a records management system once IT implements a
citywide solution.
Library General
Fund
600,000 Library Publications: In Fiscal Year 2012, the library received a donation of $1.9 million from the
Palo Alto Library Foundation, of which $1.4 million was appropriated to the CIP and the balance of
$500,000 was appropriated to the General Fund for the purchase of library collection materials
(CMR 2258). The remaining General Fund balance of $100,000 has been reappropriated through
Fiscal Year 2014 in anticipation of the completion of the new Mitchell Park library. In addition, a
second donation of $1.2 million was received from the Palo Alto Library Foundation in Fiscal Year
2014 (CMR 4092) of which $500,000 is requested for reappropriation in anticipation of completion
of the new Rinconada library in Fiscal Year 2015. The balance of $100,000 from CMR 2258 and
$500,000 from CMR 4092, for a total of $600,000, will be used for the purchase of collection
materials in Fiscal Year 2015 in order to provide library patrons with the most current publications
and productions.
People Strategy and
Operations
General
Fund
50,000 Temporary Salaries: Two employees, one working as a Human Resources Assistant and one
working as a Labor Relations Manager will be out on maternity leave for approximately six months
in Fiscal Year 2015. Reappropriating Fiscal Year 2014 vacancy savings will allow PSO to hire
temporary staff to backfill for the vacancies in Fiscal Year 2015.
11503.xlsx 2 9/17/2014,9:20 AM
Attachment A
2014 Reappropriations
Department Fund
Amount
Recommended Reappropriation Justification
People Strategy and
Operations
General
Fund
165,000 Management Development: Savings from Fiscal Year 2013 was carried forward to Fiscal Year
2014 to develop a citywide management training program; however, staffing resources were not
available in Fiscal Year 2014 in PSO to fully implement the program. PSO is fully staffed going into
Fiscal Year 2015, so this funding ($85,000 in savings from FY 2013 and $80,000 from FY 2014) will
be used for training programs in the following areas: Civics and Citizen Engagement, Leadership
and Talent Exchange, Budget, Finance and Procurement, Interpersonal communication, Ethics and
legal awareness, Presentation Skills, Business Writing, Time Management, Project management,
Change Management, SkillSoft for Computer skills, Safety & Security and Personal and
Professional Development.
People Strategy and
Operations
General
Fund
25,000 Wellness Program: Funding will be used to hire a third party vendor to create a holistic, accessible
and fun employee wellness program that encourages and supports healthy eating, work life
balance, and an active lifestyle. The vendor will be responsible for managing a wellness website for
City staff, organizing training seminars, coordinating coaching, organizing team challenges,
organizing an incentive program, coordinating biometric screening, and reporting on the overall
program. The City launched an RFP in Fiscal Year 2014 and received several responses; however,
a vendor was unable to be selected before the end of FY 2014. The Department is currently in the
process of reviewing the proposals and anticipates seletcing a vendor prior to the City's Health and
Wellness Fair in early October 2014.
Planning &
Community
Environment
General
Fund
256,596 Comprehensive Plan:The Comprehensive Plan update is a large project involving significant
community engagement. The Plan is scheduled for completion at the end of 2015. Funds were
budgeted in FY 2014 and $56,596 is available for reapproriation in addition to the Council approved
a BAO on March 17, 2014 for an additional $200,000. These expenses include meetings,
advertising, supplies, note taking, and additional professional services to address unanticipated
events and needs.
Police General
Fund
78,000 Police Utilization Study:In Fiscal Year 2013, funding was allocated for the department to hire a
consultant to conduct a utilization study of overall police operations; however the study was not
completed due to competing workload demands. The funds were reappropriated to Fiscal Year
2014 to conduct the study; however, the Technical Services Division had many other projects that
took precedence (Tri-City Computer Aided Dispatch, Records Management System, Patrol Vehicle
Mobile Audio Video, etc.) and were again unable to conduct the utilization study. Reappropriation of
these funds will allow Technical Services staff to determine the scope of the study, integrate it into
their workload, and hire a consultant to conduct the study in Fiscal Year 2015.
1,607,430$ Total General Fund Reappropriations
11503.xlsx 3 9/17/2014,9:20 AM
Attachment A
2014 Reappropriations
Department Fund
Amount
Recommended Reappropriation Justification
Other Funds
Fund Fund Rec. Amount Reappropriation Justification
Airport Fund 530 50,000 Airport Legal Outside Counsel: On August 11, 2014 the City Council approved the City's
takeover of the Alto Airport, three years sooner than the end of the lease (2017) with the County of
Santa Clara.The 2015 Adopted Operating Budget has assumed a Fiscal Year 2015 takeover.
There were numerous documents that needed to be written, negotiated, and approved by the City
Council prior to the City taking back ownership of the operations. This reappropriation will support
outside legal counsel required due to the workload of the City Attorney's Office and specific
expertise needed in this transaction. Due to the volume and complexity of the work associated with
the takeover, it is anticipated that additional resources, above and beyond this $50,000, will be
required for Airport related outside legal counsel for Fiscal Year 2015.
Capital Improvement
Fund
471 249,780 Municipal Services Center Facilities Study:This project will study options for relocating City
functions, personnel, and equipment currently operating out of the Municipal Services Center (MSC)
and Animal Services Center (ASC), and then repurposing the sites to produce long term economic
benefits for the City. Over the past year, staff has developed a scope of services that could be
performed by a consultant team to advance the project, but the preparation and issuance of an RFP
has yet to be completed. Public Works staff plans to advance this project in Fiscal Year 2015.
Capital Improvement
Fund
471 65,000 Long Range CCTV Cameras: Reappropriating these funds will allow the Fire Department to
purchase a fire weather camera to replace the current outdated camera that is mounted by Fire
Station 8 in Foothill Park. This funding was originally appropriated as part of the FD-13000 CIP to
replace the existing fire weather camera and add a second camera with thermal detection
capabilities to act as an early warning system for fires in the foothills south of Palo Alto. The
technology needs for the project were reevaluated in Fiscal Year 2014, and it was determined that
the current funding will only be able fund the replacement of the fire weather camera.
Reappropriation of these funds will allow for the purchase of the replacement camera in Fiscal Year
2015. The second thermal detection camera is expected to be brought back for Council
consideration in the future as a separate CIP.
11503.xlsx 4 9/17/2014,9:20 AM
Attachment A
2014 Reappropriations
Department Fund
Amount
Recommended Reappropriation Justification
Storm Drainage Fund 528 45,000 Storm Drainage Pump Station:This reappropriation will allow for a repair to one of the 24' pumps
at the Storm Pump Station located at the Airport. During a routine inspection, it was recently
discovered that water was leading from one of the pumps, which could lead to larger damages.
The repair was not completed in Fiscal Year 2014 as a portion of the funding was used for design
and configuration of storm software, a maintenance contract for storm software, and debris
disposal. Funding will be used, in conjunction with Fiscal Year 2015 approved funding, to repair the
pump in Fiscal Year 2015.
Technology Fund 682 35,000 Council Chambers Voting System Replacement:Reappropriating these funds will allow for the
replacement of the existing analog voting system in the Council Chambers, which is over 20 years
old and no longer supported by the manufacturer. This project was unable to be completed in
Fiscal Year 2014 due to other infrastructure and technology related projects that took precedence.
Technology Fund 682 50,000 Virtual Private Network Upgrade: Reappropriating these funds will allow the IT Department to
complete upgrades to the Virtual Private Network (VPN) in order to enhance the security and
scalability of the computing network, create additional functionality and access of mobile devices to
the network, and ensure the City can upgrade to the most current operating system. This project
was approved as part of the application replacement funding in the Fiscal Year 2014 Budget;
however, IT was unable to be complete the project due to other infrastructure and technology
related projects that took precedence.
Technology Fund 682 275,000 Virtual Private Cloud: Reappropriating these funds will allow the IT Department to implement a
primary and redundant storage area network through the Virtual Private Cloud. This project was
approved as part of the infrastructure replacement funding in the Fiscal Year 2014 Budget, and the
Department was going to award the project prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2014; however, a vendor
could not be selected to meet that deadline. This funding will allow the project to be awarded in
Fiscal Year 2015.
769,780$ Total Other Funds Reappropriations
2,377,210$ Total- All Reappropriations
11503.xlsx 5 9/17/2014,9:20 AM
Attachment A
FINANCE COMMITTEE
MINUTES
Regular Meeting
September 16, 2014
Chairperson Berman called the meeting to order at 7:04 P.M. in the Council
Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California.
Present: Berman (Chair), Burt, Kniss
Absent: Holman
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
AGENDA ITEMS
Chair Berman encouraged the community and public watching to apply for
the Architectural Review Board, Historic Resource Board, and the Planning &
Transportation Commission.
1. Approval of Fiscal Year 2014 Reappropriation Requests to be Carried
Forward Into Fiscal Year 2015.
Walter Rossmann, Budget Director, requested the Finance Committee
(Committee) recommend the full Council approve the annual process of carrying funds forward from Fiscal Year (FY) 2014 to FY 2015. The funds
were generally for projects that could not be completed within the initial
Fiscal Year either due to contractual issues or the Request for Proposal (RFP)
process was delayed. The amount being requested to carry forward was $1.6
million in the General Fund and $800,000 in other Funds.
Vice Mayor Kniss asked why there were question marks on the Staff Report.
Mr. Rossmann explained the areas darkened and with question marks were
Staff’s working areas and were inadvertently printed. The City Manager had
approved the reappropriation of funds for the People, Strategy and
Operations (PSO) for training and for the Comprehensive Plan.
Council Member Burt asked for a status update on the reallocation of funds
associated with the business registry. The Staff report noted there were
Page 1 of 10
MINUTES
other competing priorities where the business registry was unable to be
worked on. The business registry was a Council priority and he felt other
actions would be informed by the business registry process.
Mr. Rossmann stated the business registry certificate program was
scheduled to go before the Council on September 22nd. The issue was the
Funds did not become available until later in the FY14 so Staff was unable to
encumber the funds in time and recommends that the funds be carried
forward to FY15.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Burt that
that the Finance Committee preliminarily approve the Fiscal Year 2014
reappropriations to be carried forward into Fiscal Year 2015 and direct Staff
to forward the Finance Committee’s recommendation to the City Council.
MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Holman absent
2. Utilities Advisory Recommendation that the Finance Committee
Recommend that the City Council Approve Design Guidelines for the
2014 Water Utility Drought Rate Cost of Service Study.
Jon Abendschein, Senior Resources Planner, informed the Finance
Committee (Committee) of the proposed drought plans for the City. The San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) has asked for a voluntary 10
percent reduction from all of their wholesale customers. Palo Alto residents
and businesses have responded positively to the recommendation with a 15
percent reduction in usage and the City facilities have made a 25 percent
reduction. Staff proposed designing drought rate guidelines in the event the
drought continued and there was a need for revenue. The Utilities
Department felt updating the 2012 Cost of Service Study to include rates for
drought conditions was more cost effective than requesting a new study.
Staff understood altering a Cost of Services Study was difficult once it was
completed; therefore, they were seeking policy guidance. There were a few
reasons for having a drought rate available: 1) preserve the Utilities financial
position and 2) to send a price signal to make some contribution toward
water conservation goals. Drought rates modified or replaced normal rates:
1) there could be a separate set of rates that replaced normal rates or 2)
there could be a surcharge on normal year rates. The rates could be
implemented when the SFPUC declared a Stage 2 drought alert and could be
deactivated when the restrictions were removed.
Council Member Burt said depending on which mandated reduction SFPUC
implemented the corresponding costs would reflect on the rates.
Page 2 of 10
Finance Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes 9/16/2014
MINUTES
Mr. Abendschein stated yes, that was the goal. If the household or business
met the reduction goal their bills would not reflect a change.
Vice Mayor Kniss stated Staff mentioned the SFPUC worked with an 8.5 year
design drought. She asked where Palo Alto was within that cycle.
Mr. Abendschein believed the City was in the second year of the design
drought.
Vice Mayor Kniss recalled in the early 1990’s there was a long term plan in
place and the City was not as sophisticated in dealing with the situation. She
asked whether Staff was reviewing the past to learn from the errors made.
Council Member Burt noted a lesson learned by SFPUC was not to waste
water burning inexpensive hydro in the middle of a drought.
Mr. Abendschein acknowledged the SFPUC had made changes and continued
to maximize the water benefits rather than the hydro benefits. Staff had an
archive of past events and they had been reviewing them for reference.
Vice Mayor Kniss stated the drought in the 1990’s was significant and she
was pleased Staff was reviewing the events to avoid a reoccurrence.
Mr. Abendschein presented a hypothetical customer bill with and without the
drought reductions.
Vice Mayor Kniss asked what the starting usage point was for determining
the customer usage baseline.
Mr. Abendschein said the average baseline was the first calendar year prior
to the drought. He noted there was a difference in indoor and outdoor water
usage.
Vice Mayor Kniss shared a concern from a customer who had been
conserving for the sake of being prepared so when the review process occurs
their rate would not be reflective of a normal use.
Chair Berman asked Committee Members to refrain from asking questions
until after the presentation because some of the questions may be
answered.
Page 3 of 10
Finance Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes 9/16/2014
MINUTES
Mr. Abendschein stated tier 1 users would need to reduce by 9 percent, tier
2 users would need to reduce by 15 percent and tier 3 users would need to
reduce by 30 percent. He discussed various reduction rate options for
residential and non-residential. He explained the timeline was to receive
feedback from the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) and the Committee
then provide said feedback to the Consultant to begin the analysis during the
month of September. Return to the UAC and the Committee with a draft rate
schedule and request preliminary approval in December.
Herb Borock understood the role of the Committee was to advice Council and not provide advice to Staff. He recalled a few years back Council did not
approve a three tier process.
John Foster, Utilities Advisory Commission Chair, addressed a point of
variation between the UAC and Staff recommendations. Fundamentally there
were three points the UAC discussed changing of the Staff recommendation.
The first change was agreed upon by the Staff and was made; therefore,
was no longer an issue. The second was Staff allowing the Cost of Services
Analysis to review three tiers. The third was individual allocations for
residential customers. The UAC recommendation was to drop the three tier
language and not to recommend the individual residential allocations.
Chair Berman clarified the language recommended by the UAC would not
preclude three tiers; it was a bit more general.
Mr. Foster stated that was correct. The Staff recommendation had the firm
providing the Cost of Service Study to look at three tiers. The question was
whether or not the firm could review the process without the language and
the reply was yes.
Vice Mayor Kniss asked if there was a new normal as far as water
consumption. She understood that was not a discussion for the table;
although she requested the matter be broached.
Mr. Foster agreed with the need for a new normal consumption usage. He,
the UAC and Staff had discussed the subject of recycled water usage. One of
the challenges with that option was the pipe systems.
Valerie Fong, Director of Utilities, noted the City Manager was requesting
Staff make recycled water a higher priority. Staff was researching available
funding sources for such a project.
Page 4 of 10
Finance Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes 9/16/2014
MINUTES
Council Member Burt mentioned the City had a preliminary study on running
a recycled water pipeline up Page Mill Road; there was already one installed
running down to Shoreline Road. The Page Mill Road project was put on hold
five years ago because of objections from the Stanford Research Park with
concerns with the total dissolved solids and the salinity of the water. The
City had driven their Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) down principally because it
was discovered the incoming pipes from Shoreline Road had holes in them
and the City was treating salt water. The current TDS was at a level of water
quality that there should not be objections for using the water for landscaping. The scheduled TDS for 2015 were comparable to other cities
drinking water. The Page Mill Road project was a Public Works project and
not that of Utilities.
Ms. Fong believed the pipes portion of the project belonged to Utilities
although the treatment portion was Public Works.
Council Member Burt stated the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVLWD)
were interested in contributing to the capital costs of recycled system in
ways similar to where they have in other areas of the Water District. The
outstanding question was whether to perform reverse osmosis treatment
rendering the water basically drinkable which was what the City of San Jose
had just begun. The decision was a major policy discussion that would
approve or prevent the moving forward.
Vice Mayor Kniss agreed the discussion was not the issue but the decision o
use water in the correct way.
Council Member Burt said although the recycled water projects may not
affect the current recommendations it was a subject that needed to be on
the table. He asked whether there was a decision made on right-of-way tree
watering during droughts.
Mr. Abendschein stated he would research and return an answer to the
Committee at a later date.
Council Member Burt requested Staff provide the response to the full Council
via electronic. He asked about indoor reduction opportunities. The primary
reduction opportunity was outdoor landscaping but he asked whether Staff
reviewed what reductions there might be with best practices including
changed in appliances.
Page 5 of 10
Finance Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes 9/16/2014
MINUTES
Mr. Abendschein stated there were quite a few programs in the area of
appliance exchange.
Catherine Elvert, Communications Manager, noted it would be difficult to
determine a percent reduction for indoor water use versus outdoor without
further analysis. Staff discussed with the Council how the population had
increased by approximately 14 percent with a reduced water usage of 4 to 6
percent.
Council Member Burt corrected the water reduction had been closer to 35
percent.
Ms. Elvert explained there were a variety of efficiency programs for indoor
water use including rebates and free surveys. The programs were offered to
residential and commercial customers. Staff could review the total citywide
aggregate water use for indoor consumption versus outdoor and return to
the Committee with further analysis with the potential. She noted there
would likely be a greater potential in the residential sector then the
commercial.
Council Member Burt agreed there was an interest and felt there would be
interest in different levels of implementation. He believed there was a good
amount of indoor opportunity for reduction but he was unaware of the
percentage and what it would take to achieve it. Whether there was a new
normal of available water, which may or may not happen, the City should be
thinking of a new standard on their own of the amount of water consumed
for other reasons; less damage to natural water ways or other reasons to
state these were sustainability goals of Palo Alto. He asked out of 20 years
we have had what percentage increase in the population in the City, what
percentage reduction in potable water use and also what percentage
reduction per capita.
Jane Ratchye, Assistant Director of Utilities, stated the 2015 Urban Water
Management Plan was being released soon and many of the questioned
being asked including the analysis would be performed in the Plan.
Council Member Burt asked if the Plan was the appropriate place to bring up
matters such as gray water and billing code related changes.
Ms. Ratchye stated yes, the Plan should cover all of the potential water
sources discussed.
Page 6 of 10
Finance Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes 9/16/2014
MINUTES
Council Member Burt was pleased the information included in the utility bill
was reflective of the context of reduction and conservativeness I simple
terms.
Chair Berman asked for clarification on the law stating the City could only
account for 30 percent of fixed costs through fixed fees.
Mr. Abendschein clarified it was not a law although it was a best
management practice from the California Urban Water Conservation Council
which the City was a signatory of.
Chair Berman asked was it because of that the fixed costs do not change and as the variable amounts of water use changes needed to be accounted
for in the fixed rates.
Ms. Fong explained basically all costs were fixed. The City recovered the
costs through part volumetric and part fixed cost rates. The goal was to
balance through a conservation signal and still recover all of the costs which
were fixed.
Chair Berman attempted to sum up the Utility strategy. The first tier of
water used tended to be for indoor water usage. There was not a large
amount of opportunity to cut usage, and because of that there would not be
a significant cut. The next tier was outdoor use which had a greater
opportunity to cut through certain available measures; therefore, the cost
was increased in the third tier. The idea of the size of the lot did not
correlate to the usage of water which was the driving force for the three tier
approach.
Mr. Abendschein agreed Chair Berman relayed the process correctly.
Council Member Burt misunderstood the comment of the entire City’s costs
were fixed. He believed the rates were set by SFPUC for the commodity.
Ms. Fong acknowledged she may have over simplified; although, even the
SFPUC costs were fixed.
Council Member Burt agreed the SFPUC costs were fixed but the City’s costs
from there were not.
Ms. Fong said that was correct.
Page 7 of 10
Finance Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes 9/16/2014
MINUTES
Ms. Ratchye expanded on the fixed rates from SFPUC. Whether the fees
were paid in advance or later the costs were fixed. San Francisco’s costs
were fixed if people used a lower amount the City paid those costs to San
Francisco.
Council Member Burt asked if the City had no reduction in usage and San
Francisco increased the rates, if San Francisco increased the rates and all
customers had a proportionate across the board reduction of 13 percent;
based on the 10 to 15 percent rate increase, the commodity rates remained
the same. If the consumption was dropped by 25 percent in Palo Alto but only 5 percent in another city Palo Alto would have a lower commodity cost.
Ms. Ratchye agreed, the cost related to the amount of savings Palo Alto had
relative to other cities. But, if all of the cities saved the same amount it was
fixed.
Council Member Burt agreed the SFPUC costs were fixed although how they
allocated the fees was based on the cities consumption.
Vice Mayor Kniss said water was a scarce recourse but she expressed the
considered 8 year drought may not be over at that anticipated time. She
stated the water conservation needed to be looked at on a regional level and
her understanding was Palo Alto was doing well.
Mr. Abendschein stated over the past decade the Palo Alto residents has
decreased consumption by more than other Bay Area cities.
Vice Mayor Kniss understood where the City needed to go although she
expressed there would be residents speaking out about their conservation
versus higher rates.
Ms. Fong was aware of the conflict between rates and consumption. During
the review of the Cost of Service Study Staff would be looking at the users
who used the least and the goal would be to impact them the least.
Vice Mayor Kniss suggested a Public Relations campaign to personalize the
acknowledgement of consumption.
Council Member Burt noted Council Member Klein made the assertion that
even though the City had greater reductions than other jurisdictions, on a
per capita basis Palo Alto was still at the higher end of SFPUC customers.
Page 8 of 10
Finance Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes 9/16/2014
MINUTES
Which did not necessarily give clarity on whether Palo Altans were water
guzzlers or not. He was not certain what Council Member Klein was referring
to when looking at total water versus night time population when the City
had a much higher daytime population than other jurisdictions. He would be
interested in the upcoming Master Plan meeting so that Council and the
Community began to understand context, and what the true baseline
comparison was versus other cities in the region.
Ms. Ratchye explained the per capita number was based on residential usage
only. The calculation was residential usage divided by the nighttime population. She believed there were only 4 other cities higher than Palo Alto.
Palo Alto also had higher than normal lot sizes.
Council Member Burt felt Redwood City and Menlo Park would be valid
comparisons for water usage, lot sizes and house size.
Chair Berman asked the percentage the City cuts its usage of water in the
past year.
Mr. Abendschein stated 25 percent cumulative savings over the previous
year since February of 2014.
Chair Berman said that was City operations. He felt it was notable the City
was reducing water usage as they were requesting the community to.
Mr. Abendschein mentioned the City began utilizing recycled water at the
Municipal Golf Course and exchanged plantings for drought resistant
greenery. Those were two examples of how the City improved their water
consumption.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Kniss moved, seconded by Chair Berman to
recommend the City Council approve the proposed Design Guidelines for the
2014 Water Utility Drought Rate Cost of Service Study as shown in
Attachment A of the Staff report.
MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Holman absent
FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS
Lalo Perez, Director of Administrative Services stated the next meeting was
October 7, 2014.
Page 9 of 10
Finance Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes 9/16/2014
MINUTES
ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned at 8:19 P.M.
Page 10 of 10
Finance Committee Regular Meeting
Minutes 9/16/2014
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5025)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/20/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Santa Clara Valley Water District Grant Awards for Efficiency
Programs
Title: Adoption of Two Resolutions Approving and Accepting a total of
$75,000 in Funds From the Santa Clara Valley Water District Under the 2014
Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program Agreement and Authorizing the
City Manager or his Designee to Execute Such an Agreement to be Used By
the Utilities Department to Support its Business Water Report Pilot Program
and Real-Time Water Use Monitoring Pilot Program, and Adoption of a
Related Budget Amendment Ordinance for Fiscal Year 2015 to Provide
Appropriation in the Amount of $100,000
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
Recommended Motion
Staff recommends that Council consider the following motion to:
1. Adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) ratifying the City’s staff decision to apply for grant
funding from the Santa Clara Valley Water District (“SCVWD” or the “District) and
approving the 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program Agreement (“Grant
Agreement”) substantially in the form included as part of Attachment A, with such other
changes thereto as may be approved by the City Attorney and Authorizing the City
Manager or his Designee to Execute such Grant Agreement , for a total of $45,000 in
funding from the SCVWD’s 2014 Safe Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Priority
A – Water Conservation Research Grant Program (“SCVWD Grant Program”) to support
75% of the costs of a “Business Water Report Pilot Program” for Palo Alto customers.
2. Adopt a Resolution (Attachment B) ratifying the City’s staff decision to apply for grant
funding from the SCVWD and approving the Grant Agreement substantially in the form
included as part of Attachment A, with such other changes thereto as may be approved
by the City Attorney and Authorizing the City Manager or his Designee to Execute such
Grant Agreement, for a total of $30,000 in funding from the SCVWD Grant Program to
City of Palo Alto Page 2
support 75% of the costs of a “Real-Time Water Use Monitoring Pilot Program” for Palo
Alto customers.
3. Adopt a Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment C) to appropriate $100,000 to
execute the two water conservation pilot programs, increase the estimate for Local
Revenue by $75,000, and decrease the Water Fund Ending Fund Balance by $25,000.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council approve two resolutions authorizing the City Manager or his
designee to execute the Grant Agreement substantially in the form included as part of
Attachment A and Attachment B, with such other changes thereto as may be approved by the
City Attorney, for a total of $75,000 in grant funding from SCVWD, to support the City of Palo
Alto Utilities Department’s (CPAU) “Real Time Water Use Monitoring Pilot Program” ($30,000),
and the “Business Water Report Pilot Program” ($45,000) (collectively, the “CPAU Pilot
Programs”). The total cost for both pilot programs is $100,000, and CPAU will provide a 25%
match to cover both programs, totaling $25,000. Staff also recommends reducing the Water
Fund Ending Fund Balance by $25,000 to fund the City’s 25% share of the total $100,000 cost of
the pilot programs.
Executive Summary
CPAU actively pursues grant funding opportunities, and recently submitted two grant
applications for business water efficiency programs to the District. The SCVWD grant is part of
the District’s Safe, Clean Water and Flood Protection Program and is funded through a parcel
tax approved in 2012. The minimum grant application qualifications for water conservation
research projects requires that grantees provide a cost sharing match of at least 25% of the
total grant amount. The total cost of the two CPAU Pilot Programs is $100,000. The District has
selected both programs to receive grant funding, totaling $75,000. CPAU will co-fund both
programs with a $25,000 matching contribution from the Water Fund Ending Fund Balance, for
a total budget of $100,000 for the two programs.
The District’s has asked that its grantee’s governing boards adopt a resolution accepting the
grant funding for each program.
Background
California is currently experiencing drought conditions, and the State Water Resources Control
Board has adopted emergency regulations for urban water conservation, requiring mandatory
water use restrictions in all cities, specifically targeting outdoor water use.
On January 31, 2014, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC), the City’s water
supplier, called for a 10% voluntary reduction in water use for its retail and wholesale
customers. On June 23, 2014, the SFPUC renewed its 10% voluntary reduction request and is
expected to continue the request through at least the end of 2014. If the drought continues
through the upcoming winter, the SFPUC may mandate additional reductions.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
The SCVWD is the water wholesaler to most cities and water retailers in Santa Clara County.
While Palo Alto receives water supplies from the SFPUC, the City works closely with SCVWD on
Palo Alto property tax-funded water conservation programs. The SCVWD has asked its water
retailers to reduce water use by 20% and expanded their water efficiency programs, services
and grants throughout the County.
Discussion
Both CPAU Pilot Programs are water efficiency programs that target customer behavior and
practices that are considered the next frontier for resource conservation programs. With the
current drought situation in California, there is big push to implement new, innovative, and
replicable programs throughout the State. CPAU is currently running residential energy and
water programs that use this behavior driven approach that have been proven to reduce
energy and water usage. The two CPAU Pilot Programs that will be funded by the SCVWD
grants will expand on CPAU’s residential conservation programs by targeting business and
commercial customers. The District grant program aims to achieve innovation in water
conservation, and replicate the programs statewide.
In response to a SCVWD solicitation for water efficient demonstration programs, staff
submitted two grant applications to SCVWD:
1) Business Water Reports Pilot Program
Commercial water use accounts for about one-fifth of total water demand in the City of Palo
Alto. While CPAU does provide individualized technical assistance to large commercial and
industrial accounts to reduce water use through CPAU’s Key Accounts Program, staffing
constraints do not permit individual outreach to many of the small and medium sized
businesses in the city.
Palo Alto residential households have already started receiving individualized Home Water
Reports, in addition to their Home Energy Reports, comparing their usage to a group of similar
properties. Such “Behavior Modification Programs” have achieved up to a 5% reduction in
water use when compared to a statistically-equivalent control group.
The Business Water Reports Pilot Program will create a similar program to encourage water
conservation among small and medium sized businesses through direct-mail targeted
messaging to drive behavior change, reduce consumption, and increase participation in water
conservation programs. The total cost of the program ($60,000) is co-funded with SCVWD grant
funding ($45,000), and 25% of the costs of the program ($15,000) will be funded by CPAU.
Consistent with the requirements of section 2.30 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, CPAU plans
to issue an informal Request For Proposal (RFP) to identify and select a vendor to implement
and manage the program. The scope of work performed by the vendor will include program set
up, hardware purchase, portal and software set up, training, and printing and mailing of the
reports to program participants. The program will begin as soon as the vendor has been
City of Palo Alto Page 4
selected, with an anticipated start date in early November 2014 and concluding by June 30,
2016. The selected contractor will provide ongoing metrics and a final report to CPAU and the
SCVWD. The final report will include key insights from the project to help CPAU staff design
future outreach. The report will also provide final results from the pilot project including
findings from post-pilot interviews.
2) Real-Time Water Use Monitoring Pilot Program
Since the summer of 2012, CPAU has tested the effectiveness of using real-time water use
information with selected customers to motivate them to actively engage in water reduction
measures. That pilot program tested a simple, relatively low cost technology that enabled
standard water meters to track consumption similar to a smart water meter. A wireless device
attached to the water meter transmits real-time data to a cloud-based software platform.
Customers securely log into an online dashboard to view prior water use data on a minute-
interval basis. CPAU engaged several large water customers to use the new online tool to
identify leaks or other anomalies in water use. The customer benefit was that rather than
waiting for the end of a billing cycle, customers could identify and address issues before they
became maintenance and billing misfortunes. The technology elicited favorable response from
large facility and property managers and, after two years, the overall water use among all
program participants was reduced by approximately 8%.
The Real-Time Water Use Monitoring Pilot Program will allow CPAU to expand its offering and
installation of this technology to small and medium-sized business customers willing to actively
monitor their consumption and take immediate action to control their water systems. The total
cost of the program ($40,000) is co-funded with the SCVWD grant funding ($30,000), and CPAU
funding of 25% of program costs ($10,000).
Consistent with the requirements of section 2.30 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, CPAU will
issue a second informal RFP to identify and select a vendor that will help implement and
manage the program. The scope of work performed by the vendor will include program set up,
hardware purchase, portal and software set up, and training. The program will begin as soon as
the vendor has been selected with an anticipated start date in early November 2014 and
concluding by June 30, 2016. The selected contractor will provide a final report to CPAU and
SCVWD. The report will include key insights from the project to help CPAU staff evaluate similar
technology programs, including potential future smart meter installation. The report will also
provide final results from the pilot project including findings from post-pilot interviews.
Award of Grant
Successful receipt of the grant awards requires multiple actions by the City, including City the
District’s request that the Council adopt resolutions approving receipt of the grants, and the
solicitation, identification, negotiation and selection of vendors for program implementation.
Resource Impact
City of Palo Alto Page 5
A Budget Amendment Ordinance is recommended to appropriate $100,000 to fund two
professional service contracts for two water conservation pilot programs. A majority of the
cost of the programs will funded by two grants from the SCVWD totaling $75,000. Per grant
requirement, the City will match the grants with $25,000, or a 25% grant match. An increase to
Local Revenue of $75,000 will offset part of the program expenditures, and a reduction to the
Water Fund Ending Fund Balance of $25,000 will offset the remainder of the costs. The City is
currently conducting informal solicitations to find two qualified third party program
administrators to conduct all key aspects of the scope of work for the two grant agreements
with the SCVWD.
Policy Implications
There are no policy implications.
Environmental Review
Neither the adoption of the Resolutions authorizing the City Manager or his designee to
execute the Grant Agreement in order to secure grant funding from SCVWD to support CPAU
Pilot Programs, nor the adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance meet the definition of a
“project” set forth in section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code and are therefore
not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Attachments:
Attachment A: Santa Clara Valley Water District Resolution Business Water Report
(PDF)
Attachment B: Santa Clara Valley Water District Resolution Real time Water monitoring
(PDF)
Attachment C: BAO - Water District Grant (PDF)
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 1
Resolution No. _________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to Approve and
Authorize the Execution of a Grant Funding Agreement with the Santa
Clara Valley Water District Related to the City’s Business Water Reports
Pilot Program
A. The Santa Clara Valley Water District (“District”) has enacted the 2014 Safe,
Clean Water Priority A Grant Program (the “Grant”), which provides funds for testing new and
innovative water conservation programs and technologies.
B. On January 31, 2014, the City of Palo Alto (“City”) submitted a grant application
to the District for the Business Water Reports Pilot program (the “Project”).
C. On March 19, 2014, the District’s Water Conservation Unit selected the City to
receive the Grant funding for the Project.
D. The District has requested that the City certify by resolution the approval of the
City to accept grant funds.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council hereby ratifies the City’s staff decision to apply for the Grant,
and accepts and approves, and delegates to the City Manager or his designee the authority to
accept on behalf of the City, the allocation of the District’s grant funds.
SECTION 2. The City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to negotiate and
execute the 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program Agreement (“Grant Funding
Agreement”) with the District substantially in the form attached hereto as Attachment A, with
such other changes thereto as may be approved by the City Attorney, for and on behalf of the
City. The City Manager, or his designee, is further authorized to negotiate and/or execute any
and all additional documents necessary to secure the grant of funding to the City.
SECTION 3. In conjunction with the execution of the Grant Funding Agreement, the
City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to provide to the District, on behalf of the
City, any necessary substantiation and/or related information which may be required by the
District as a condition for disbursement of grant funds.
SECTION 4. The City has the capability to provide the amount of funding and/or in-
kind contributions specified in the Grant Funding Agreement.
SECTION 5. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution, approving the
execution of one or more grant agreements and other documents in connection with the
receipt of District funds relating to the Project does not meet the definition of “project” set
forth in section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code, and is therefore not subject to
ATTACHMENT A
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 2
California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Council finds that the City of Palo Alto
Utilities has presented sufficient evidence and other information with specificity to support the
basis of the claimed inapplicability of CEQA.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Senior Deputy City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative
Services
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 3
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program
2014 SAFE, CLEAN WATER PRIORITY A GRANT PROGRAM
This 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program Agreement (Agreement), effective upon
full execution, is entered into by and between the SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT,
a California special district (District) and [GRANTEE NAME], a [public entity] (Grantee). District
and Grantee may be referred to individually as a “Party” or collectively as the “Parties” or the
“Parties to this Agreement.” This Agreement provides for funding to support Grantee’s
[PROJECT NAME] (Project).
RECITALS:
A. The District’s mission is to provide Silicon Valley safe, clean water for a healthy life,
environment, and economy.
B. In November 2012, the voters of Santa Clara County passed Measure B establishing
a special tax to fund the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection program (Safe,
Clean Water).
C. The Safe, Clean Water Program special tax provides funding for activities consistent
with this 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program (Grant Program), focused on
ensuring a safe, reliable water supply for the future.
D. On October 8, 2013, the District’s Board of Directors approved the use of District funds
for the Grant Program and authorized the District’s Chief Executive Officer to execute
grant agreements.
E. On [RESOLUTION DATE], the Grantee’s [Board of Trustees] adopted a Resolution
authorizing Grantee’s application for Grant Program funding and acceptance of the
grant, if awarded, for Grantee’s [PROJECT NAME] (see Appendix D, Resolution).
F. Grantee submitted an application to the District’s Grant Program for its [PROJECT
NAME] to conduct certain innovative water conservation related activities.
G. In February 2014, the District Chief Executive Officer approved the [PROJECT NAME],
allocating the Project Grant Amount not to exceed [DOLLAR AMOUNT ($0.00)] to
Grantee.
H. Consistent with application submitted, Grantee has secured funding from Santa Clara
Valley Water District in the amount of [DOLLAR AMOUNT ($0.00)] and any additional
funds necessary to complete the Project will be supplied by the [NAME OF
ORGANIZATION].
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 4
The Parties agree to the following terms and conditions:
Section 1. General Provisions
A. Definitions
1. Agreement: this contract between the District and the Grantee specifying
the payment of funds by the District for the performance of the Project
Scope within the Project Performance Period by the Grantee.
2. Application: the 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program
application and accompanying attachments submitted to the District for
the District’s Grant Program.
3. District: Santa Clara Valley Water District.
4. Grant Program: 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program.
5. Project: Grantee’s Project as described in Appendix A, Project Scope,
approved for a grant award by the District’s Board.
6. Project Completion: Project completion per requirements stated in
Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion.
7. Project Grant Amount: The amount of Grant funds allocated by the
District’s Chief Executive Officer to Grantee for the Project.
8. Project Performance Period: The Project period commencing with full
execution of this Agreement by both Parties and expiring as stated in
Section 1. General Provisions, H. Agreement Term.
9. Safe, Clean Water: The District’s Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood
Protection Program special tax approved by Santa Clara County voters in
November 2012.
10. Total Project Cost: The full cost of the Project, including funds from all
funding sources, as identified in Appendix B, Project Schedule and
Budget.
B. Project Execution
1. District hereby grants to Grantee the Project Grant Amount, in
consideration of, and on condition that, the sum be expended for the sole
purpose of carrying out the objectives as set forth in the Project as
identified in Appendix A, Project Scope, consistent with the terms and
conditions set forth in this Agreement.
2. Grantee is responsible for securing all other necessary funds to
accomplish the Project. Any significant modification or alteration to the
Project Scope is subject to prior consideration and approval of the
District. Such request must be submitted in writing to the District Contact,
per Section 3. Miscellaneous Provisions, A. Miscellaneous Provisions,
Item 5 of this Agreement. District’s disbursement of Grant funds is
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 5
dependent on District approval of changes the District deems are
significant.
3. Grantee will complete the Project in accordance with Appendix A, Project
Scope and Appendix B, Project Schedule and Budget.
4. Project Scope and Project Schedule and Budget may only be adjusted
pursuant to a written amendment to this Agreement, signed by both
Grantee and District in advance of such adjustment. Project Schedule
adjustments that do not impact the expiration date of this Agreement may
be approved by District without the necessity of a formal amendment to
this Agreement.
5. Grantee must comply with all applicable federal, state, and local codes,
statutes, laws, regulations, and ordinances, including, but not limited to,
financial requirements, legal requirements for construction contracts,
building codes, health and safety codes, laws and codes pertaining to
individuals with disabilities, and the California Environmental Quality Act
(Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et. seq., Title 14, California
Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et. Seq.).
C. Project Administration/Reporting Requirements
1. Grantee shall provide written quarterly reports (on a fiscal year schedule),
using the District’s standard form presented in Appendix C, Quarterly
Progress and Request for Payment Form. Status reports shall include an
update per task as included in Appendix A, Project Scope.
2. Grantee shall provide one hard copy and one electronic version of items
listed in Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion.
3. All reports submitted to the District must include the following certification
page signed by an officer of Grantee’s organization:
“I certify, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California,
that the Quarterly/Monthly Status Report and all attachments, signed on
[DATE], on behalf of Grantee, were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to ensure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based
on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those
persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information
submitted is to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and
complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting
false information, including the loss of the current and future Grant
Funding.”
4. Quarterly reporting will end with submittal of Project Completion packet
(see Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion).
D. Termination of the Agreement
1. Grantee may unilaterally terminate this Agreement at any time prior to
District disbursement of Grant Program funds by providing 30 days
written notice to District.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 6
2. Failure by Grantee to comply with the terms of this Agreement may be
cause for suspension or termination of funding by the District.
Additionally, in the event of failure to complete Project, Grantee may be
required to repay District for funds received, including interest earned at
the District’s pooled portfolio monthly interest yield corresponding to the
month(s) the funds were due to the District.
E. Indemnification
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, Grantee agrees to
defend, hold harmless and indemnify District, its officers and employees, and
each and every one of them, from and against any and all actions, damages,
costs, liabilities, claims, demands, losses, judgments, penalties, costs and
expenses of every type and description, including, but not limited to, any fees
and/or costs, reasonable attorney fees, and any fees and expenses incurred in
enforcing this provision (hereafter collectively referred to as “Liabilities”),
including but not limited to Liabilities arising from personal injury or death,
damage to personal, real or intellectual property or the environment, contractual
or other economic damages, or regulatory penalties, to the extent any of the
Liabilities arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the Grantee’s performance of this
Agreement or obligations stated herein, whether or not (i) such Liabilities are
caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder or (ii) such Liabilities are
litigated, settled or reduced to judgment; provided that the foregoing indemnity
does not apply to liability for any damage or expense for death or bodily injury to
persons or damage to property to the extent arising from the negligence or willful
misconduct of the District. The foregoing does not limit any strict liability imposed
onto the Grantee by law.
F. Nondiscrimination
Anti-Discrimination—The District is an equal opportunity employer and requires
all parties it contracts with to have and adhere to a policy of equal opportunity
and non-discrimination. In the performance of the Agreement, the Grantee will
comply with all applicable federal, state, local laws and regulations, and will not
discriminate against any sub-consultant, employee, or applicant for employment,
in the recruitment, selection for training including apprenticeship, hiring,
employment, utilization, promotion, layoff rates of pay, or other forms of
compensation, or against any other person, on the basis of race, color, religion,
ancestry, gender, national origin, age (over 40), marital status, medical condition
(including cancer), pregnancy, parental status, the exercise of family care leave
rights, political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, special disabled
veteran status, Vietnam Era veteran and all other Veteran status, or because of a
physical or mental disability (including, HIV and AIDS). The Grantee’s policy
must conform with applicable state and federal guidelines including the Federal
Equal Opportunity Clause, “Section 60-1.4 of Title 41, Part 60 of the Code of
American Disabilities Act of 1990; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Sections 503
and 504); California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code
Section 12900 et. Seq.); and California Labor Code Sections 1101 and 1102.”
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 7
G. Project Completion
1. After Grantee completes the Project by meeting all requirements stated in
Appendix A, Project Scope, Grantee must submit the Project Completion
packet detailed in a-c below to the District Contact and it must include:
a. Final Payment Request/Invoice
b. Final Report, including documentation of accomplishments, water
savings achieved, and reliability of the Project.
c. Written communication from Grantee stating that Project is
complete, including list of tasks completed and signature by
authorized representative.
2. District conducts final on-site Project inspection as deemed necessary.
3. District processes Grantee’s invoice for final payment.
H. Agreement Term
1. The term of this Agreement commences upon full execution by the
Parties. Approval of this Agreement by both parties is necessary for any
disbursement of Grant funds. This Agreement expires upon the earliest
of: Project Completion in accordance with Section 1. General Provisions,
G. Project Completion; or June 30, 2016.
I. Insurance Provisions
1. During the entire term of the Agreement, Grantee must maintain the
insurance coverage described in Appendix E. Insurance Requirements.
Section 2. Financial Provisions
A. Accounting and Audit Requirements
1. Grantee must maintain an accounting system that accurately reflects
fiscal transactions, with the necessary controls and safeguards. Grantee
should provide clear audit trails, especially the source of original
documents such as, but not limited to, receipts, progress payments,
invoices, time cards, etc. AVOID AUDIT EXCEPTIONS—KEEP
ACCURATE RECORDS.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 8
2. Grantee agrees that District, or its agent, has the right to review, obtain,
and copy all records pertaining to performance of this Agreement.
Grantee agrees to provide District, or its agent, with any relevant
information requested and will permit District, or its agent, access to its
premises, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours for the
purpose of interviewing employees and inspecting or copying books,
records, accounts, computerized records, and other materials that may be
relevant to the matter under investigation for the purpose of determining
compliance with this Agreement. Consultant further agrees to maintain
such records for a period of three (3) years after final payment under this
Agreement.
3. Grantee’s detailed budget is included as Appendix B, Project Schedule
and Budget and is consistent with Grantee’s Project Proposal. The
Project Budget will be used by District as the basis for evaluating
Grantee’s invoices for Grant funds. In cases where invoices are
inconsistent with the Project Budget, invoices must either be revised for
consistency or an amendment to this Agreement may be necessary to
align the Project Budget with the actual reimbursable expenditures for the
Project.
4. Grantee must document its eligibility for award and receipt of Safe, Clean
Water Grant Funds by verifying it is not included in any current Federal
List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement or Non-procurement
Programs. Exclusion of Grantee from this list, verified at
http://www.arnet.gov/epls, demonstrates the Grantee’s good status
regarding suspension and debarment and eligibility for Grant Program
funds.
5. Grantee is responsible for repayment to District of any disallowed cost.
Disallowed costs may be identified through audits, monitoring, or other
sources of information that become available to the District after the
District has satisfied an invoice from Grantee and disbursed Safe, Clean
Water Grant funds.
B. Eligible Costs
1. Total Project Grant Amount is not-to-exceed that amount identified in
Recital G of this Agreement, and will be disbursed to Grantee according to the
terms and conditions as stated in Section 2. Financial Provisions, C. Payment
Request Process and D. Invoicing.
1. Only Project related costs incurred during the Project Performance
Period, excluding costs incurred prior to and during preparation of the
Grant application, specified in this Agreement are eligible for
reimbursement. All such costs must be supported by appropriate
documentation, including but not limited to subcontractor invoices and
receipts.
2. Personnel or Employee Services—Services of the Grantee’s employees
engaged in project execution are eligible costs. These direct labor costs
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 9
must be computed according to the Grantee’s prevailing wage or salary
scales and may include fringe benefit costs such as vacation, sick leave
and social security contributions that are customarily charged to the
Grantee’s various projects for which the Grantee has submitted a Benefit
Rate Calculation to the District. Indirect overhead is limited to 10% of
Salary plus Benefits. Costs charged to the project must be computed on
actual time spent on a project, and supported by time and attendance
records describing the work performed on the project. Overtime costs
may be allowed under the Grantee’s established policy; provided that the
regular work time was devoted to the same project.
3. Salaries and wages claimed for employees working on grant funded
projects must not exceed the Grantee’s established rates for similar
positions.
4. Consultant Services—The costs of consultant services necessary for the
project are eligible. Consultants must be paid by the customary or
established method and rate of the Grantee. No consultant fee may be
paid to the Grantee’s own employees.
5. Signs and Interpretive Aids—The cost of signs, display boards, or other
minor interpretive aids relating to the Project are eligible.
6. Other Expenditures—In addition to the major categories of expenditures,
reimbursements may be made for miscellaneous costs necessary for
execution of the Project. Examples of such costs include:
a. Postage; and
b. Transportation costs for moving equipment and/or personnel.
C. Payment Request Process
This Grant Agreement is based on a reimbursement model with specific details
as noted below.
1. Grantee may submit multiple Request for Payment Forms as necessary,
but not more often than monthly.
2. After Grantee completes the Project, Grantee submits the Project
Completion Packet (see Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project
Completion) and the Quarterly Progress and Request for Payment Form
(Appendix C) for the final payment.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 10
PAYMENT REQUEST PROCESS
PAYMENT TYPE WHEN TO SUBMIT IT SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION TO
SEND TO PROJECT OFFICER
Payment Request
Reimbursement
(up to 90% of the total
Project Grant Amount)
Once Grantee can provide
evidence to show significant
progress toward completing
Project tasks.
• Quarterly Progress and Request for
Payment Form (Appendix C)
• For direct expenses, copies of invoices
with all attachments shall be submitted
• For labor costs, copies of Timesheets shall
be submitted
• For Benefits Costs, a Benefits Rate
Calculation will be submitted
• Documentation of accomplishments (i.e.,
draft and final plans, designs, etc.)
Final (10%) After Grantee has completed
the Project
• Project Completion packet (see Section 1.
General Provisions, G. Project
Completion)
D. Invoicing
1. Grantee shall submit a completed Quarterly Progress and Request for
Payment Form (Appendix C) and shall incorporate Grantee name and
remittance address, a description/itemization of goods or services, dollar
amount of goods or services, invoice date and number, and Agreement
number. Work performed shall be determined on a per task basis as
outlined in the Project Scope (Appendix A) and Project Schedule and
Budget (Appendix B). All requests for reimbursements will be
accompanied by materials providing evidence of significant Project
progress accomplishments commensurate with level of reimbursement
requested.
2. District will review Grantee’s invoice within ten working days from receipt
and advise Grantee of any disputed items. District will review and
approve undisputed invoices within ten working days from receipt and
issue payment within forty-five calendar days from receipt. District will
pay invoices within forty-five calendar days from date invoice is approved
by District’s Project Manager.
3. Grantee’s invoice must include invoices from subcontractors documenting
task, task budget, percentage complete, prior billing if any, current billing,
and total billed. Documentation supporting Grantee’s invoice(s) must
document work performed consistent with the frequency of Grantee’s
invoices to District.
Section 3. Miscellaneous Provisions
A. Miscellaneous Provisions
1. Grantee’s waiver of any term, condition, covenant, or breach of any term,
condition or covenant shall not be construed as a waiver of any other
term, condition, or covenant or breach by any other term, condition or
covenant.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 11
2. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between District and
Grantee relating to the Project. Any prior agreements, promises,
negotiations, or representations not expressly set forth in this Agreement
are of no force or effect.
3. This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of California.
4. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and will be binding as
executed.
5. Grantee’s request(s) for modification(s) to the Project Scope, and Project
Schedule and Budget must be submitted in writing, prior to the expiration
of this Agreement, and will be considered for approval by the District’s
executive management responsible for the Safe, Clean Water Grant
Program provided:
a. The Grant award by the District’s Board did not impose a
restriction on such revisions; and
b. No additional Grant funds are requested. All such requests will be
considered by the District’s executive management responsible for
the Safe, Clean Water Grant Program.
6. Revisions to the Project Scope, and Project Schedule and Budget are
subject to review and prior approval of the District.
7. An extension to the term of this Agreement for a period up to twelve
(12) months beyond the current expiration date may be approved by
District. Requests for term extensions must be submitted in writing and
received no later than sixty (60) calendar days prior to the expiration of
this Agreement. Grantee must submit sufficient documentation in support
of its request to enable the District’s executive management to evaluate
Grantee’s request. The District’s executive management will consider
criteria such as the following:
a. The amount of Grant funds not yet disbursed to Grantee;
b. Grantee’s progress in completing the Project Scope and the
reasons supporting any delays;
c. Whether Grantee has the dedicated human and financial
resources to continue to complete the Project Scope during the
extension period; and
d. Whether such extension is in the best interest of the District.
8. An amendment to this Agreement, extending its Term, must be executed
in full prior to the original expiration date as stated in Section 1. General
Provisions, H. Agreement Term. If this Agreement is not extended prior
to its expiration, any unexpended Grant funds will be retained by the
District and unavailable to the Grantee for the Project.
9. All Appendices, A (Project Scope), B (Project Schedule and Budget),
C (Quarterly Progress and Request for Payment Form), D (Resolution),
and E (Insurance Requirements) are hereby incorporated herein by this
reference and made a part hereof, as though set forth in full.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 12
10. Severability—if any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, that
invalidity shall not affect other provisions of the Agreement which can be
given effect without the invalid provision, and to this end the provisions of
this Agreement are severable.
2. 11. Survival—Section 2. Financial Provisions, B. Eligible Costs, C.
Payment Request Process, and D. Invoicing, shall survive termination or
expiration of this Agreement such that any Eligible Costs incurred during
the Project Performance Period may be invoiced by Grantee and paid by
the District provided invoices, including final invoice, are submitted prior
to the expiration date of this Agreement as stated in Section 2. General
Provisions, H. Agreement Term, item 1.
B. Notices
All notices and other communication required or permitted to be given under this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally serviced or mailed, postage
prepaid and return receipt requested, addressed to the respective parties as
follows:
Contact: Jerry De La Piedra
Program Administrator
Water Conservation Unit
Santa Clara Valley Water District
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
Phone: (408) 630-2257
E-mail: gdelapiedra@valleywater.org
Grantee
Contact:
[GRANTEE ORGANIZATION]
Date: By:
[Print name of authorized representative]
[Title]
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT
Date:
By:
Beau Goldie
Chief Executive Officer
140929 mf 6053003 13
APPENDIX A
PROJECT SCOPE
(Replace with Project information)
The District’s 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program is based on a reimbursement
model, and as such will require a detailed Project scope that includes a general description,
response to evaluation criteria and tasks and subtasks for measuring and auditing progress and
the subsequent allocation of funds to Grantee. The description and possible attachments
should include, but is not limited to:
A. General Description
3. Specific description of Project tasks, including deliverables and milestones
4. Specific staff (working titles at a minimum) proposed for the Project team
B. Tasks and Subtasks
1. Tasks and subtasks should be identified for the Project Scope in such a way that the
District may monitor Grantee’s progress on the approved project.
2. Separate tasks and subtasks shall include cost estimates (see Appendix B) and shall
be the basis for reimbursement in invoicing.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 14
APPENDIX B
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND BUDGET
(Replace with Project information)
A. Project Schedule shall include the following:
1. List of tasks consistent with Project Scope
2. Project start date
3. Project end date (no later than June 30, 2016)
4. Start and end dates for each task
5. Estimated cost for each task
6. Estimated costs for quarterly report, draft final report, and final report
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 15
APPENDIX C
QUARTERLY PROGRESS AND REQUEST FOR PAYMENT FORM
GRANT:
2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program
AGREEMENT NO.:
GRANTEE:
PROJECT TITLE:
1. TYPE OF PAYMENT: Reimbursement Final
2. PAYMENT INFORMATION (Round all figures to the nearest dollar):
a. Project Amount $
b. Funds Received to Date $
c. Available (a. minus b.) $
d. Amount of This Request $
e. Remaining Funds After This Payment (c. minus d.) $
3. SEND PAYMENT TO:
Grantee Name
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Attention
4. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF PERSON AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION: Title
5. SIGNATURE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION: Date
FOR SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT USE ONLY
6. PAYMENT APPROVAL SIGNATURE:Date
140929 mf 6053003 16
PAYMENT REQUEST FORM INSTRUCTIONS
The following instructions correspond to items on the Payment Request Form:
Agreement Number—As shown on page 1 of the Agreement following execution of the
Agreement by both Parties.
Grantee—GRANTEE name as shown on the Grant Agreement.
Project Title—Title of Project for which payment is requested.
1. Type of Payment—Check appropriate box, and submit this form:
Reimbursement—When Grantee has periodically spent funds to implement the Project,
and is requesting reimbursement; or
Final—When Grantee has completed the Project, and is requesting the final payment.
2. Payment Information:
a. Project Grant Amount—The amount of District grant funds allocated to this
Project
b. Funds Received to Date—Total amount already received for this Project
c. Available—(a. minus b.)
d. Amount of This Payment Request—Amount that is requested
e. Remaining Funds After This Payment—(c. minus d.)
3. Send Payment to: Grantee Name, Address, and Contact Person
4. Typed or printed name of person authorized by Resolution.
5. Signature of person authorized by Resolution.
6. Payment approval signature and date—For District staff.
Additional Information to supply with Payment Request Form:
Summary of work completed during billing period, by task.
Attached documentation to support charges (i.e., subcontractor invoices, receipts, etc.).
Determination if project is on schedule to meet completion date.
Any other relevant findings.
140929 mf 6053003 17
APPENDIX D
RESOLUTION
(Replace with Project Resolution)
Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program
2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program
Resolution No. _____
RESOLUTION OF THE ________________________________________
(Title of Grantee’s Governing Body)
APPROVING THE APPLICANT TO APPLY FOR GRANT FUNDS UNDER
THE SAFE, CLEAN WATER AND NATURAL FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM OF 2012
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara Valley Water District has enacted the 2014 Safe, Clean Water
Priority A Grant Program, which provides funds for testing new and innovative water
conservation programs and technologies; and
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara Valley Water District’s Water Conservation Unit has been
delegated the responsibility for the administration of the grant program, setting up necessary
procedures; and
WHEREAS, said procedures established by the Santa Clara Valley Water District require
Grantee’s Governing Body to certify by resolution the approval of Grantee to apply for and
accept grant program funds; and
WHEREAS, Grantee will enter into an Agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the ______________________________ hereby:
(Grantee’s Governing Body)
1. Approves the submission of an Application for local assistance funds from the Priority A
Grant Program under the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program of
2012 to complete the Project;
2. Approves the acceptance of grant funds from the Priority A Grant Program under the
Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program of 2012, upon approval of
grant funding for the Project by the District’s Chief Executive Officer;
3. Certifies that the Applicant has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the
Project(s);
4. Certifies that the Applicant will review and agree to the Special Provisions, General
Provisions and Financial Provisions contained in the Agreement; and
140929 mf 6053003 18
5. Appoints the (designated person) ____________________ as agent to conduct all
negotiations, execute and submit all documents including, but not limited to Applications,
agreements, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion
of the Project.
Approved and Adopted on the _______ day of ___________, 2014.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
_____________________________ following a roll call vote:
(Applicant’s Governing Body)
AYES
NOES
ABSENT
__________________________________
(Clerk)
19
140929 mf 6053003
APPENDIX E
INSURANCE- CONTRACTOR-No Construction Risk
Please refer to the insurance requirements listed below.
Without limiting the Contractor's indemnification of, or liability to, the Santa Clara Valley Water
District (“District”), the Contractor must provide and maintain at its own expense, during the term of
this Agreement, or as may be further required herein, the following insurance coverages and
provisions:
Contractor must provide its insurance broker(s)/agent(s) with a copy of these requirements and
warrants that these requirements have been reviewed by Contractor’s insurance agent(s) and/or
broker(s), who have been instructed by Contractor to procure the insurance coverage required
herein.
In addition to certificates, Contractor must furnish District with copies of original endorsements
affecting coverage required by this Appendix. The certificates and endorsements are to be
signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements
and certificates are to be received and approved by District before the contract
commences. In the event of a claim or dispute, District has the right to require Contractor's
insurer to provide complete, certified copies of all required pertinent insurance policies, including
endorsements affecting the coverage required by this Appendix.
Contractor must, at its sole cost and expense, procure and maintain during the entire period of
this Agreement the following insurance coverage(s).
Required Coverages
1. Commercial General/Business Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated:
$1,000,000 per occurrence / $1,000,000 aggregate limits for bodily injury and property
damage
$1,000,000 Products/Completed Operations aggregate (to be maintained for at least
three (3) years following acceptance of the work by District.
General Liability insurance must include:
a. Coverage that is at least as broad as that found in the standard ISO Form CG 00 01.
b. Contractual Liability expressly including liability assumed under this contract.
c. If Contractor will be working within fifty (50) feet of a railroad or light rail operation,
any exclusion as to performance of operations within the vicinity of any railroad
bridge, trestle, track, roadbed, tunnel, overpass, underpass, or crossway must be
deleted, or a railroad protective policy in the above amounts provided.
d. Severability of Interest
e. Broad Form Property Damage liability
f. If the standard ISO Form wording for "OTHER INSURANCE," or other comparable
wording, is not contained in Contractor's liability insurance policy, an endorsement
must be provided that said insurance will be primary insurance and any insurance or
20
140929 mf 6053003
self-insurance maintained by District, its Directors, officers, employees, agents or
volunteers will be in excess of Contractor's insurance and will not contribute to it.
2. Business Auto Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated:
$1,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage per occurrence,
covering all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles.
3. Workers' Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance
Statutory California Workers’ Compensation coverage covering all work to be performed
for the District.
Employer Liability coverage for not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.
General Requirements
With respect to all coverages noted above, the following additional requirements apply:
1. Additional Insured Endorsement(s) Contractor must provide an additional insured
endorsement for Commercial General/Business Liability and Business Automobile
liability coverage naming the Santa Clara Valley Water District, its Directors, officers,
employees, and agents, individually and collectively, as additional insureds, and
must provide coverage for acts, omissions, etc. arising out of the named insureds’
activities and work. Other public entities may also be added to the additional insured
endorsement as applicable and the Contractor will be notified of such requirement(s) by
the District.
(NOTE: Additional insured language on the Certificate of Insurance is NOT acceptable
without a separate endorsement such as Form CG 20 10, CG 2033, CG 2037. Note:
Editions dated 07/04 are not acceptable)
2. Primacy Clause: Contractor’s insurance must be primary with respect to any other
insurance which may be carried by the District, its officer, agents and employees, and
the District’s coverage must not be called upon to contribute or share in the loss.
3. Cancellation Clause Revision: The Certificate of Insurance MUST provide 30 days
notice of cancellation, (10 days notice for non-payment of premium). NOTE: The
standard wording in the ISO Certificate of Insurance is not acceptable. The
following words must be crossed out or deleted from the standard cancellation clause:
"...endeavor to..." AND "...but failure to mail such notice must impose no obligation or
liability of any kind upon the company, its agents or representatives."
4. Acceptability of Insurers: All coverages must be issued by companies admitted to conduct
business in the State of California, which hold a current policy holder's alphabetic and
financial size category rating of not less than A- V, according to the current Best's Key
Rating Guide or a company of equal financial stability that is approved by the District’s Risk
Management Administrator.
21
140929 mf 6053003
Self-Insured Retentions or Deductibles: Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be
declared to and approved by the District. At the option of the District, either: the insurer
shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the
District, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall provide a
financial guarantee satisfactory to the Entity guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses.
6. Subcontractors: Should any of the work under this Agreement be sublet, the
Contractor must require each of its subcontractors of any tier to carry the
aforementioned coverages, or Contractors may insure subcontractors under its own
policies.
7. Amount of Liability not Limited to Amount of Insurance: The insurance procured by
Contractor for the benefit of the District must not be deemed to release or limit any
liability of Contractor. Damages recoverable by the District for any liability of Contractor
must, in any event, not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.
8. Coverage to be Occurrence Based: All coverage must be occurrence-based
coverage. Claims-made coverage is not allowed.
9. Waiver of Subrogation: Contractor agrees on to waive subrogation against the District
to the extent any loss suffered by Contractor is covered by any Commercial General
Liability policy, Automobile policy, or Workers’ Compensation policy, described in
Required Coverages above. Contractor agrees to advise its broker/agent/insurer about
this provision and obtain any endorsements, if needed, necessary to ensure the insurer
agrees.
10. Non-compliance: The District reserves the right to withhold payments to the Contractor
in the event of material noncompliance with the insurance requirements outlined above.
11. Please mail the certificates and endorsements to:
Contract Administrator
Santa Clara Valley Water District
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
IMPORTANT: On the certificate of insurance, please note either the name of the
project or the name of the District contact person or unit for the
contract.
If your insurance broker has any questions please advise him/her to call Mr. David Cahen,
District Risk Management Administrator at (408) 265-2607, extension 2213.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 1
Resolution No. _________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to Approve and Authorize the
Execution of a Grant Funding Agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District
Related to the City’s Real-Time Water Use Monitoring Pilot Program
A. The Santa Clara Valley Water District (“District”) has enacted the 2014 Safe,
Clean Water Priority A Grant Program (the “Grant”), which provides funds for testing new and
innovative water conservation programs and technologies.
B. On January 31, 2014, the City of Palo Alto (“City”) submitted a grant application
to the District Request for the Real-time Water Use Monitoring Pilot program (the “Project”).
C. On March 19, 2014, the District’s Water Conservation Unit selected the City to
receive the Grant funding for the Project.
D. The District has requested that the City certify by resolution the approval of the
City to accept grant funds.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council hereby ratifies the City’s staff decision to apply for the Grant,
and accepts and approves, and delegates to the City Manager or his designee the authority to
accept on behalf of the City, the allocation of the District’s grant funds.
SECTION 2. The City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to negotiate and
execute the 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program Agreement (“Grant Funding
Agreement”) with the District substantially in the form attached hereto as Attachment A, with
such other changes thereto as may be approved by the City Attorney, for and on behalf of the
City. The City Manager, or his designee, is further authorized to negotiate and/or execute any
and all additional documents necessary to secure the grant of funding to the City.
SECTION 3. In conjunction with the execution of the Grant Funding Agreement, the
City Manager, or his designee, is hereby authorized to provide to the District, on behalf of the
City, any necessary substantiation and/or related information which may be required by the
District as a condition for disbursement of grant funds
SECTION 4. The City has the capability to provide the amount of funding and/or in-
kind contributions specified in the Grant Funding Agreement.
SECTION 5. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution, approving the
execution of one or more grant agreements and other documents in connection with the
receipt of District funds relating to the Project does not meet the definition of “project” set
ATTACHMENT B
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 2
forth in section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code and is therefore not subject to
the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The Council finds that the City of Palo Alto
Utilities has presented sufficient evidence and other information with specificity to support the
basis of the claimed inapplicability of CEQA.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Deputy City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative
Services
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 3
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program
2014 SAFE, CLEAN WATER PRIORITY A GRANT PROGRAM
This 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program Agreement (Agreement), effective upon
full execution, is entered into by and between the SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT,
a California special district (District) and [GRANTEE NAME], a [public entity] (Grantee). District
and Grantee may be referred to individually as a “Party” or collectively as the “Parties” or the
“Parties to this Agreement.” This Agreement provides for funding to support Grantee’s
[PROJECT NAME] (Project).
RECITALS:
A. The District’s mission is to provide Silicon Valley safe, clean water for a healthy life,
environment, and economy.
B. In November 2012, the voters of Santa Clara County passed Measure B establishing
a special tax to fund the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection program (Safe,
Clean Water).
C. The Safe, Clean Water Program special tax provides funding for activities consistent
with this 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program (Grant Program), focused on
ensuring a safe, reliable water supply for the future.
D. On October 8, 2013, the District’s Board of Directors approved the use of District funds
for the Grant Program and authorized the District’s Chief Executive Officer to execute
grant agreements.
E. On [RESOLUTION DATE], the Grantee’s [Board of Trustees] adopted a Resolution
authorizing Grantee’s application for Grant Program funding and acceptance of the
grant, if awarded, for Grantee’s [PROJECT NAME] (see Appendix D, Resolution).
F. Grantee submitted an application to the District’s Grant Program for its [PROJECT
NAME] to conduct certain innovative water conservation related activities.
G. In February 2014, the District Chief Executive Officer approved the [PROJECT NAME],
allocating the Project Grant Amount not to exceed [DOLLAR AMOUNT ($0.00)] to
Grantee.
H. Consistent with application submitted, Grantee has secured funding from Santa Clara
Valley Water District in the amount of [DOLLAR AMOUNT ($0.00)] and any additional
funds necessary to complete the Project will be supplied by the [NAME OF
ORGANIZATION].
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 4
The Parties agree to the following terms and conditions:
Section 1. General Provisions
A. Definitions
1. Agreement: this contract between the District and the Grantee specifying
the payment of funds by the District for the performance of the Project
Scope within the Project Performance Period by the Grantee.
2. Application: the 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program
application and accompanying attachments submitted to the District for
the District’s Grant Program.
3. District: Santa Clara Valley Water District.
4. Grant Program: 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program.
5. Project: Grantee’s Project as described in Appendix A, Project Scope,
approved for a grant award by the District’s Board.
6. Project Completion: Project completion per requirements stated in
Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion.
7. Project Grant Amount: The amount of Grant funds allocated by the
District’s Chief Executive Officer to Grantee for the Project.
8. Project Performance Period: The Project period commencing with full
execution of this Agreement by both Parties and expiring as stated in
Section 1. General Provisions, H. Agreement Term.
9. Safe, Clean Water: The District’s Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood
Protection Program special tax approved by Santa Clara County voters in
November 2012.
10. Total Project Cost: The full cost of the Project, including funds from all
funding sources, as identified in Appendix B, Project Schedule and
Budget.
B. Project Execution
1. District hereby grants to Grantee the Project Grant Amount, in
consideration of, and on condition that, the sum be expended for the sole
purpose of carrying out the objectives as set forth in the Project as
identified in Appendix A, Project Scope, consistent with the terms and
conditions set forth in this Agreement.
2. Grantee is responsible for securing all other necessary funds to
accomplish the Project. Any significant modification or alteration to the
Project Scope is subject to prior consideration and approval of the
District. Such request must be submitted in writing to the District Contact,
per Section 3. Miscellaneous Provisions, A. Miscellaneous Provisions,
Item 5 of this Agreement. District’s disbursement of Grant funds is
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 5
dependent on District approval of changes the District deems are
significant.
3. Grantee will complete the Project in accordance with Appendix A, Project
Scope and Appendix B, Project Schedule and Budget.
4. Project Scope and Project Schedule and Budget may only be adjusted
pursuant to a written amendment to this Agreement, signed by both
Grantee and District in advance of such adjustment. Project Schedule
adjustments that do not impact the expiration date of this Agreement may
be approved by District without the necessity of a formal amendment to
this Agreement.
5. Grantee must comply with all applicable federal, state, and local codes,
statutes, laws, regulations, and ordinances, including, but not limited to,
financial requirements, legal requirements for construction contracts,
building codes, health and safety codes, laws and codes pertaining to
individuals with disabilities, and the California Environmental Quality Act
(Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et. seq., Title 14, California
Code of Regulations, Section 15000 et. Seq.).
C. Project Administration/Reporting Requirements
1. Grantee shall provide written quarterly reports (on a fiscal year schedule),
using the District’s standard form presented in Appendix C, Quarterly
Progress and Request for Payment Form. Status reports shall include an
update per task as included in Appendix A, Project Scope.
2. Grantee shall provide one hard copy and one electronic version of items
listed in Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion.
3. All reports submitted to the District must include the following certification
page signed by an officer of Grantee’s organization:
“I certify, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California,
that the Quarterly/Monthly Status Report and all attachments, signed on
[DATE], on behalf of Grantee, were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to ensure that qualified
personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based
on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or those
persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information
submitted is to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and
complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting
false information, including the loss of the current and future Grant
Funding.”
4. Quarterly reporting will end with submittal of Project Completion packet
(see Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project Completion).
D. Termination of the Agreement
1. Grantee may unilaterally terminate this Agreement at any time prior to
District disbursement of Grant Program funds by providing 30 days
written notice to District.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 6
2. Failure by Grantee to comply with the terms of this Agreement may be
cause for suspension or termination of funding by the District.
Additionally, in the event of failure to complete Project, Grantee may be
required to repay District for funds received, including interest earned at
the District’s pooled portfolio monthly interest yield corresponding to the
month(s) the funds were due to the District.
E. Indemnification
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, Grantee agrees to
defend, hold harmless and indemnify District, its officers and employees, and
each and every one of them, from and against any and all actions, damages,
costs, liabilities, claims, demands, losses, judgments, penalties, costs and
expenses of every type and description, including, but not limited to, any fees
and/or costs, reasonable attorney fees, and any fees and expenses incurred in
enforcing this provision (hereafter collectively referred to as “Liabilities”),
including but not limited to Liabilities arising from personal injury or death,
damage to personal, real or intellectual property or the environment, contractual
or other economic damages, or regulatory penalties, to the extent any of the
Liabilities arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the Grantee’s performance of this
Agreement or obligations stated herein, whether or not (i) such Liabilities are
caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder or (ii) such Liabilities are
litigated, settled or reduced to judgment; provided that the foregoing indemnity
does not apply to liability for any damage or expense for death or bodily injury to
persons or damage to property to the extent arising from the negligence or willful
misconduct of the District. The foregoing does not limit any strict liability imposed
onto the Grantee by law.
F. Nondiscrimination
Anti-Discrimination—The District is an equal opportunity employer and requires
all parties it contracts with to have and adhere to a policy of equal opportunity
and non-discrimination. In the performance of the Agreement, the Grantee will
comply with all applicable federal, state, local laws and regulations, and will not
discriminate against any sub-consultant, employee, or applicant for employment,
in the recruitment, selection for training including apprenticeship, hiring,
employment, utilization, promotion, layoff rates of pay, or other forms of
compensation, or against any other person, on the basis of race, color, religion,
ancestry, gender, national origin, age (over 40), marital status, medical condition
(including cancer), pregnancy, parental status, the exercise of family care leave
rights, political affiliation, sexual orientation, gender identity, special disabled
veteran status, Vietnam Era veteran and all other Veteran status, or because of a
physical or mental disability (including, HIV and AIDS). The Grantee’s policy
must conform with applicable state and federal guidelines including the Federal
Equal Opportunity Clause, “Section 60-1.4 of Title 41, Part 60 of the Code of
American Disabilities Act of 1990; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Sections 503
and 504); California Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code
Section 12900 et. Seq.); and California Labor Code Sections 1101 and 1102.”
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 7
G. Project Completion
1. After Grantee completes the Project by meeting all requirements stated in
Appendix A, Project Scope, Grantee must submit the Project Completion
packet detailed in a-c below to the District Contact and it must include:
a. Final Payment Request/Invoice
b. Final Report, including documentation of accomplishments, water
savings achieved, and reliability of the Project.
c. Written communication from Grantee stating that Project is
complete, including list of tasks completed and signature by
authorized representative.
2. District conducts final on-site Project inspection as deemed necessary.
3. District processes Grantee’s invoice for final payment.
H. Agreement Term
1. The term of this Agreement commences upon full execution by the
Parties. Approval of this Agreement by both parties is necessary for any
disbursement of Grant funds. This Agreement expires upon the earliest
of: Project Completion in accordance with Section 1. General Provisions,
G. Project Completion; or June 30, 2016.
I. Insurance Provisions
1. During the entire term of the Agreement, Grantee must maintain the
insurance coverage described in Appendix E. Insurance Requirements.
Section 2. Financial Provisions
A. Accounting and Audit Requirements
1. Grantee must maintain an accounting system that accurately reflects
fiscal transactions, with the necessary controls and safeguards. Grantee
should provide clear audit trails, especially the source of original
documents such as, but not limited to, receipts, progress payments,
invoices, time cards, etc. AVOID AUDIT EXCEPTIONS—KEEP
ACCURATE RECORDS.
2. Grantee agrees that District, or its agent, has the right to review, obtain,
and copy all records pertaining to performance of this Agreement.
Grantee agrees to provide District, or its agent, with any relevant
information requested and will permit District, or its agent, access to its
premises, upon reasonable notice, during normal business hours for the
purpose of interviewing employees and inspecting or copying books,
records, accounts, computerized records, and other materials that may be
relevant to the matter under investigation for the purpose of determining
compliance with this Agreement. Consultant further agrees to maintain
such records for a period of three (3) years after final payment under this
Agreement.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 8
3. Grantee’s detailed budget is included as Appendix B, Project Schedule
and Budget and is consistent with Grantee’s Project Proposal. The
Project Budget will be used by District as the basis for evaluating
Grantee’s invoices for Grant funds. In cases where invoices are
inconsistent with the Project Budget, invoices must either be revised for
consistency or an amendment to this Agreement may be necessary to
align the Project Budget with the actual reimbursable expenditures for the
Project.
4. Grantee must document its eligibility for award and receipt of Safe, Clean
Water Grant Funds by verifying it is not included in any current Federal
List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement or Non-procurement
Programs. Exclusion of Grantee from this list, verified at
http://www.arnet.gov/epls, demonstrates the Grantee’s good status
regarding suspension and debarment and eligibility for Grant Program
funds.
5. Grantee is responsible for repayment to District of any disallowed cost.
Disallowed costs may be identified through audits, monitoring, or other
sources of information that become available to the District after the
District has satisfied an invoice from Grantee and disbursed Safe, Clean
Water Grant funds.
B. Eligible Costs
Total Project Grant Amount is not-to-exceed that amount identified in Recital G of
this Agreement, and will be disbursed to Grantee according to the terms and
conditions as stated in Section 2. Financial Provisions, C. Payment Request
Process and D. Invoicing.
1. Only Project related costs incurred during the Project Performance
Period, excluding costs incurred prior to and during preparation of the
Grant application, specified in this Agreement are eligible for
reimbursement. All such costs must be supported by appropriate
documentation, including but not limited to subcontractor invoices and
receipts.
2. Personnel or Employee Services—Services of the Grantee’s employees
engaged in project execution are eligible costs. These direct labor costs
must be computed according to the Grantee’s prevailing wage or salary
scales and may include fringe benefit costs such as vacation, sick leave
and social security contributions that are customarily charged to the
Grantee’s various projects for which the Grantee has submitted a Benefit
Rate Calculation to the District. Indirect overhead is limited to 10% of
Salary plus Benefits. Costs charged to the project must be computed on
actual time spent on a project, and supported by time and attendance
records describing the work performed on the project. Overtime costs
may be allowed under the Grantee’s established policy; provided that the
regular work time was devoted to the same project.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 9
3. Salaries and wages claimed for employees working on grant funded
projects must not exceed the Grantee’s established rates for similar
positions.
4. Consultant Services—The costs of consultant services necessary for the
project are eligible. Consultants must be paid by the customary or
established method and rate of the Grantee. No consultant fee may be
paid to the Grantee’s own employees.
5. Signs and Interpretive Aids—The cost of signs, display boards, or other
minor interpretive aids relating to the Project are eligible.
6. Other Expenditures—In addition to the major categories of expenditures,
reimbursements may be made for miscellaneous costs necessary for
execution of the Project. Examples of such costs include:
a. Postage; and
b. Transportation costs for moving equipment and/or personnel.
C. Payment Request Process
This Grant Agreement is based on a reimbursement model with specific details
as noted below.
1. Grantee may submit multiple Request for Payment Forms as necessary,
but not more often than monthly.
2. After Grantee completes the Project, Grantee submits the Project
Completion Packet (see Section 1. General Provisions, G. Project
Completion) and the Quarterly Progress and Request for Payment Form
(Appendix C) for the final payment.
PAYMENT REQUEST PROCESS
PAYMENT TYPE WHEN TO SUBMIT IT SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION TO
SEND TO PROJECT OFFICER
Payment Request
Reimbursement
(up to 90% of the total
Project Grant Amount)
Once Grantee can provide
evidence to show significant
progress toward completing
Project tasks.
• Quarterly Progress and Request for
Payment Form (Appendix C)
• For direct expenses, copies of invoices
with all attachments shall be submitted
• For labor costs, copies of Timesheets shall
be submitted
• For Benefits Costs, a Benefits Rate
Calculation will be submitted
• Documentation of accomplishments (i.e.,
draft and final plans, designs, etc.)
Final (10%) After Grantee has completed
the Project
• Project Completion packet (see Section 1.
General Provisions, G. Project
Completion)
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 10
D. Invoicing
1. Grantee shall submit a completed Quarterly Progress and Request for
Payment Form (Appendix C) and shall incorporate Grantee name and
remittance address, a description/itemization of goods or services, dollar
amount of goods or services, invoice date and number, and Agreement
number. Work performed shall be determined on a per task basis as
outlined in the Project Scope (Appendix A) and Project Schedule and
Budget (Appendix B). All requests for reimbursements will be
accompanied by materials providing evidence of significant Project
progress accomplishments commensurate with level of reimbursement
requested.
2. District will review Grantee’s invoice within ten working days from receipt
and advise Grantee of any disputed items. District will review and
approve undisputed invoices within ten working days from receipt and
issue payment within forty-five calendar days from receipt. District will
pay invoices within forty-five calendar days from date invoice is approved
by District’s Project Manager.
3. Grantee’s invoice must include invoices from subcontractors documenting
task, task budget, percentage complete, prior billing if any, current billing,
and total billed. Documentation supporting Grantee’s invoice(s) must
document work performed consistent with the frequency of Grantee’s
invoices to District.
Section 3. Miscellaneous Provisions
A. Miscellaneous Provisions
1. Grantee’s waiver of any term, condition, covenant, or breach of any term,
condition or covenant shall not be construed as a waiver of any other
term, condition, or covenant or breach by any other term, condition or
covenant.
2. This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between District and
Grantee relating to the Project. Any prior agreements, promises,
negotiations, or representations not expressly set forth in this Agreement
are of no force or effect.
3. This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of California.
4. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and will be binding as
executed.
5. Grantee’s request(s) for modification(s) to the Project Scope, and Project
Schedule and Budget must be submitted in writing, prior to the expiration
of this Agreement, and will be considered for approval by the District’s
executive management responsible for the Safe, Clean Water Grant
Program provided:
a. The Grant award by the District’s Board did not impose a
restriction on such revisions; and
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 11
b. No additional Grant funds are requested. All such requests will be
considered by the District’s executive management responsible for
the Safe, Clean Water Grant Program.
6. Revisions to the Project Scope, and Project Schedule and Budget are
subject to review and prior approval of the District.
7. An extension to the term of this Agreement for a period up to twelve
(12) months beyond the current expiration date may be approved by
District. Requests for term extensions must be submitted in writing and
received no later than sixty (60) calendar days prior to the expiration of
this Agreement. Grantee must submit sufficient documentation in support
of its request to enable the District’s executive management to evaluate
Grantee’s request. The District’s executive management will consider
criteria such as the following:
a. The amount of Grant funds not yet disbursed to Grantee;
b. Grantee’s progress in completing the Project Scope and the
reasons supporting any delays;
c. Whether Grantee has the dedicated human and financial
resources to continue to complete the Project Scope during the
extension period; and
d. Whether such extension is in the best interest of the District.
8. An amendment to this Agreement, extending its Term, must be executed
in full prior to the original expiration date as stated in Section 1. General
Provisions, H. Agreement Term. If this Agreement is not extended prior
to its expiration, any unexpended Grant funds will be retained by the
District and unavailable to the Grantee for the Project.
9. All Appendices, A (Project Scope), B (Project Schedule and Budget),
C (Quarterly Progress and Request for Payment Form), D (Resolution),
and E (Insurance Requirements) are hereby incorporated herein by this
reference and made a part hereof, as though set forth in full.
10. Severability—if any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, that
invalidity shall not affect other provisions of the Agreement which can be
given effect without the invalid provision, and to this end the provisions of
this Agreement are severable.
11. Survival—Section 2. Financial Provisions, B. Eligible Costs, C. Payment
Request Process, and D. Invoicing, shall survive termination or expiration
of this Agreement such that any Eligible Costs incurred during the Project
Performance Period may be invoiced by Grantee and paid by the District
provided invoices, including final invoice, are submitted prior to the
expiration date of this Agreement as stated in Section 2. General
Provisions, H. Agreement Term, item 1.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 12
B. Notices
All notices and other communication required or permitted to be given under this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally serviced or mailed, postage
prepaid and return receipt requested, addressed to the respective parties as
follows:
Contact: Jerry De La Piedra
Program Administrator
Water Conservation Unit
Santa Clara Valley Water District
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
Phone: (408) 630-2257
E-mail: gdelapiedra@valleywater.org
Grantee
Contact:
[GRANTEE ORGANIZATION]
Date: By:
[Print name of authorized representative]
[Title]
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER
DISTRICT
Date:
By:
Beau Goldie
Chief Executive Officer
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 13
APPENDIX A
PROJECT SCOPE
(Replace with Project information)
The District’s 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program is based on a reimbursement
model, and as such will require a detailed Project scope that includes a general description,
response to evaluation criteria and tasks and subtasks for measuring and auditing progress and
the subsequent allocation of funds to Grantee. The description and possible attachments
should include, but is not limited to:
A. General Description
1. Specific description of Project tasks, including deliverables and milestones
2. Specific staff (working titles at a minimum) proposed for the Project team
B. Tasks and Subtasks
1. Tasks and subtasks should be identified for the Project Scope in such a way that the
District may monitor Grantee’s progress on the approved project.
2. Separate tasks and subtasks shall include cost estimates (see Appendix B) and shall
be the basis for reimbursement in invoicing.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 14
APPENDIX B
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND BUDGET
(Replace with Project information)
A. Project Schedule shall include the following:
1. List of tasks consistent with Project Scope
2. Project start date
3. Project end date (no later than June 30, 2016)
4. Start and end dates for each task
5. Estimated cost for each task
6. Estimated costs for quarterly report, draft final report, and final report
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 15
APPENDIX C
QUARTERLY PROGRESS AND REQUEST FOR PAYMENT FORM
GRANT:
2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program
AGREEMENT NO.:
GRANTEE:
PROJECT TITLE:
1. TYPE OF PAYMENT: Reimbursement Final
2. PAYMENT INFORMATION (Round all figures to the nearest dollar):
a. Project Amount $
b. Funds Received to Date $
c. Available (a. minus b.) $
d. Amount of This Request $
e. Remaining Funds After This Payment (c. minus d.) $
3. SEND PAYMENT TO:
Grantee Name
Street Address
City, State, Zip Code
Attention
4. TYPED OR PRINTED NAME OF PERSON AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION: Title
5. SIGNATURE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED BY RESOLUTION: Date
FOR SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT USE ONLY
6. PAYMENT APPROVAL SIGNATURE:Date
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 16
PAYMENT REQUEST FORM INSTRUCTIONS
The following instructions correspond to items on the Payment Request Form:
Agreement Number—As shown on page 1 of the Agreement following execution of the
Agreement by both Parties.
Grantee—GRANTEE name as shown on the Grant Agreement.
Project Title—Title of Project for which payment is requested.
1. Type of Payment—Check appropriate box, and submit this form:
Reimbursement—When Grantee has periodically spent funds to implement the Project,
and is requesting reimbursement; or
Final—When Grantee has completed the Project, and is requesting the final payment.
2. Payment Information:
a. Project Grant Amount—The amount of District grant funds allocated to this
Project
b. Funds Received to Date—Total amount already received for this Project
c. Available—(a. minus b.)
d. Amount of This Payment Request—Amount that is requested
e. Remaining Funds After This Payment—(c. minus d.)
3. Send Payment to: Grantee Name, Address, and Contact Person
4. Typed or printed name of person authorized by Resolution.
5. Signature of person authorized by Resolution.
6. Payment approval signature and date—For District staff.
Additional Information to supply with Payment Request Form:
Summary of work completed during billing period, by task.
Attached documentation to support charges (i.e., subcontractor invoices, receipts, etc.).
Determination if project is on schedule to meet completion date.
Any other relevant findings.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 17
APPENDIX D
RESOLUTION
(Replace with Project Resolution)
Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program
2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A Grant Program
Resolution No. _____
RESOLUTION OF THE ________________________________________
(Title of Grantee’s Governing Body)
APPROVING THE APPLICANT TO APPLY FOR GRANT FUNDS UNDER
THE SAFE, CLEAN WATER AND NATURAL FLOOD PROTECTION PROGRAM OF 2012
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara Valley Water District has enacted the 2014 Safe, Clean Water
Priority A Grant Program, which provides funds for testing new and innovative water
conservation programs and technologies; and
WHEREAS, the Santa Clara Valley Water District’s Water Conservation Unit has been
delegated the responsibility for the administration of the grant program, setting up necessary
procedures; and
WHEREAS, said procedures established by the Santa Clara Valley Water District require
Grantee’s Governing Body to certify by resolution the approval of Grantee to apply for and
accept grant program funds; and
WHEREAS, Grantee will enter into an Agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Water District;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the ______________________________ hereby:
(Grantee’s Governing Body)
1. Approves the submission of an Application for local assistance funds from the Priority A
Grant Program under the Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program of
2012 to complete the Project;
2. Approves the acceptance of grant funds from the Priority A Grant Program under the
Safe, Clean Water and Natural Flood Protection Program of 2012, upon approval of
grant funding for the Project by the District’s Chief Executive Officer;
3. Certifies that the Applicant has or will have sufficient funds to operate and maintain the
Project(s);
4. Certifies that the Applicant will review and agree to the Special Provisions, General
Provisions and Financial Provisions contained in the Agreement; and
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 18
5. Appoints the (designated person) ____________________ as agent to conduct all
negotiations, execute and submit all documents including, but not limited to Applications,
agreements, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the completion
of the Project.
Approved and Adopted on the _______ day of ___________, 2014.
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
_____________________________ following a roll call vote:
(Applicant’s Governing Body)
AYES
NOES
ABSENT
__________________________________
(Clerk)
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 19
APPENDIX E
INSURANCE- CONTRACTOR-No Construction Risk
Please refer to the insurance requirements listed below.
Without limiting the Contractor's indemnification of, or liability to, the Santa Clara Valley Water
District (“District”), the Contractor must provide and maintain at its own expense, during the term of
this Agreement, or as may be further required herein, the following insurance coverages and
provisions:
Contractor must provide its insurance broker(s)/agent(s) with a copy of these requirements and
warrants that these requirements have been reviewed by Contractor’s insurance agent(s) and/or
broker(s), who have been instructed by Contractor to procure the insurance coverage required
herein.
In addition to certificates, Contractor must furnish District with copies of original endorsements
affecting coverage required by this Appendix. The certificates and endorsements are to be
signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. All endorsements
and certificates are to be received and approved by District before the contract
commences. In the event of a claim or dispute, District has the right to require Contractor's
insurer to provide complete, certified copies of all required pertinent insurance policies, including
endorsements affecting the coverage required by this Appendix.
Contractor must, at its sole cost and expense, procure and maintain during the entire period of
this Agreement the following insurance coverage(s).
Required Coverages
1. Commercial General/Business Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated:
$1,000,000 per occurrence / $1,000,000 aggregate limits for bodily injury and property
damage
$1,000,000 Products/Completed Operations aggregate (to be maintained for at least
three (3) years following acceptance of the work by District.
General Liability insurance must include:
a. Coverage that is at least as broad as that found in the standard ISO Form CG 00 01.
b. Contractual Liability expressly including liability assumed under this contract.
c. If Contractor will be working within fifty (50) feet of a railroad or light rail operation,
any exclusion as to performance of operations within the vicinity of any railroad
bridge, trestle, track, roadbed, tunnel, overpass, underpass, or crossway must be
deleted, or a railroad protective policy in the above amounts provided.
d. Severability of Interest
e. Broad Form Property Damage liability
f. If the standard ISO Form wording for "OTHER INSURANCE," or other comparable
wording, is not contained in Contractor's liability insurance policy, an endorsement
must be provided that said insurance will be primary insurance and any insurance or
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 20
self-insurance maintained by District, its Directors, officers, employees, agents or
volunteers will be in excess of Contractor's insurance and will not contribute to it.
2. Business Auto Liability Insurance with coverage as indicated:
$1,000,000 combined single limit for bodily injury and property damage per occurrence,
covering all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles.
3. Workers' Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance
Statutory California Workers’ Compensation coverage covering all work to be performed
for the District.
Employer Liability coverage for not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence.
General Requirements
With respect to all coverages noted above, the following additional requirements apply:
1. Additional Insured Endorsement(s) Contractor must provide an additional insured
endorsement for Commercial General/Business Liability and Business Automobile
liability coverage naming the Santa Clara Valley Water District, its Directors, officers,
employees, and agents, individually and collectively, as additional insureds, and
must provide coverage for acts, omissions, etc. arising out of the named insureds’
activities and work. Other public entities may also be added to the additional insured
endorsement as applicable and the Contractor will be notified of such requirement(s) by
the District.
(NOTE: Additional insured language on the Certificate of Insurance is NOT acceptable
without a separate endorsement such as Form CG 20 10, CG 2033, CG 2037. Note:
Editions dated 07/04 are not acceptable)
2. Primacy Clause: Contractor’s insurance must be primary with respect to any other
insurance which may be carried by the District, its officer, agents and employees, and
the District’s coverage must not be called upon to contribute or share in the loss.
3. Cancellation Clause Revision: The Certificate of Insurance MUST provide 30 days
notice of cancellation, (10 days notice for non-payment of premium). NOTE: The
standard wording in the ISO Certificate of Insurance is not acceptable. The
following words must be crossed out or deleted from the standard cancellation clause:
"...endeavor to..." AND "...but failure to mail such notice must impose no obligation or
liability of any kind upon the company, its agents or representatives."
4. Acceptability of Insurers: All coverages must be issued by companies admitted to conduct
business in the State of California, which hold a current policy holder's alphabetic and
financial size category rating of not less than A- V, according to the current Best's Key
Rating Guide or a company of equal financial stability that is approved by the District’s Risk
Management Administrator.
NOT YET APPROVED
140929 mf 6053003 21
Self-Insured Retentions or Deductibles: Any deductibles or self-insured retentions must be
declared to and approved by the District. At the option of the District, either: the insurer
shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self-insured retentions as respects the
District, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers; or the Contractor shall provide a
financial guarantee satisfactory to the Entity guaranteeing payment of losses and related
investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses.
6. Subcontractors: Should any of the work under this Agreement be sublet, the
Contractor must require each of its subcontractors of any tier to carry the
aforementioned coverages, or Contractors may insure subcontractors under its own
policies.
7. Amount of Liability not Limited to Amount of Insurance: The insurance procured by
Contractor for the benefit of the District must not be deemed to release or limit any
liability of Contractor. Damages recoverable by the District for any liability of Contractor
must, in any event, not be limited by the amount of the required insurance coverage.
8. Coverage to be Occurrence Based: All coverage must be occurrence-based
coverage. Claims-made coverage is not allowed.
9. Waiver of Subrogation: Contractor agrees on to waive subrogation against the District
to the extent any loss suffered by Contractor is covered by any Commercial General
Liability policy, Automobile policy, or Workers’ Compensation policy, described in
Required Coverages above. Contractor agrees to advise its broker/agent/insurer about
this provision and obtain any endorsements, if needed, necessary to ensure the insurer
agrees.
10. Non-compliance: The District reserves the right to withhold payments to the Contractor
in the event of material noncompliance with the insurance requirements outlined above.
11. Please mail the certificates and endorsements to:
Contract Administrator
Santa Clara Valley Water District
5750 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
IMPORTANT: On the certificate of insurance, please note either the name of the
project or the name of the District contact person or unit for the
contract.
If your insurance broker has any questions please advise him/her to call Mr. David Cahen,
District Risk Management Administrator at (408) 265-2607, extension 2213.
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2015 IN THE
WATER FUND TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATION OF $100,000 TO
EXECUTE TWO WATER CONSERVATION PILOT PROGRAMS, A
BUSINESS WATER REPORT PILOT PROGRAM AND A REAL-TIME
WATER USE MONITORING PILOT PROGRAM, AND TO INCREASE
THE ESTIMATE FOR LOCAL REVENUE IN THE AMOUNT OF
$75,000 TO REFLECT GRANT FUNDS TO BE RECEIVED FROM
THE SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 2014 SAFE
CLEAN WATER AND NATURAL FLOOD PROTECTION PRIORITY A
–WATER CONSERVATION RESEARCH GRANT PROGRAM, AND TO
DECREASE THE WATER FUND ENDING FUND BALANCE BY
$25,000 TO FUND THE CITY’S 25 PERCENT MATCHING
PORTION OF THE GRANT.
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 16, 2014
did adopt a budget for fiscal year 2015; and
B. On January 31, 2014, the Utilities Department, on behalf of
the City of Palo Alto, submitted grant applications to fund two
pilot programs, Business Water Reports and Real-time Water Use
Monitoring, to the Santa Clara Valley Water District (District)
under the 2014 Safe, Clean Water Priority A – Water Conservation
Grant Program, which provides funds for testing new and innovative
water conservation programs and technologies; and
C. On March 19, 2014, the District awarded grants to the City
in the amount of $45,000 for the Business Water Reports Pilot
Program and $30,000 for the Real-time Water Use Monitoring Pilot
Program; and
D. Seventy-Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000) is available based
on notification from the District; and
E. City Council authorization is needed to amend the 2015
budget as hereinafter set forth.
ATTACHMENT C
SECTION 2. The sum of One-Hundred Thousand ($100,000) is
hereby appropriated for the water conservation pilot programs, the
estimate for Local Revenue is increased by $75,000, and the Water
Fund Ending Fund Balance is reduced by $25,000.
SECTION 3. 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 4. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon
adoption.
SECTION 5. The actions taken in this ordinance do not
constitute a project requiring environmental review under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Manager
City Attorney Director of Utilities
Director of Administrative
Services
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR
October 20, 2014
The Honorable City Council
Palo Alto, California
Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Accept the City
Auditor's Office Fiscal Year 2015 Proposed Work Plan
At its meeting on September 9, 2014, the Policy and Services Committee unanimously
recommended the City Council accept the City Auditor’s Office Fiscal Year 2015 Proposed Work
Plan. The Auditor’s Office will be issuing quarterly reports describing the status and progress of
the work plan. The Policy and Services Committee minutes are included in this packet.
Respectfully submitted,
Harriet Richardson
City Auditor
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: City Auditor's Office Fiscal Year 2015 Proposed Work Plan (PDF)
Attachment B: Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes Excerpt (September 9,
2014) (PDF)
Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor
Page 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR
September 9, 2014
The Honorable City Council
Attention: Policy & Services Committee
Palo Alto, California
City Auditor's Office Fiscal Year 2015 Proposed Work Plan
Recommendation
The Office of the City Auditor recommends that the Policy and Services Committee review and
recommend to the City Council approval of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 Proposed Audit Work Plan.
Background
The mission of the Office of the City Auditor is to promote honest, efficient, effective and fully
accountable City government. To fulfill this mission, the Office of the City Auditor conducts
performance audits of City departments, programs, and services. The purpose of these audits is
to provide the City Council, City management, the residents of Palo Alto, and other
stakeholders with independent and objective analysis as to whether management is using its
financial, physical, and informational resources effectively, efficiently, and economically, and in
compliance with laws, regulations, contract and grant requirements, and City policies and
procedures.
The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires the City Auditor to submit an annual work plan to the
City Council for review and approval. The proposed FY 15 audit work plan is based upon Council
priorities, risk, and the City Auditor’s professional judgment. The attached report presents the
proposed audit work plan for FY 2015.
Next Steps
As audit work proceeds, we will issue quarterly reports summarizing the status and progress of
each of the approved assignments. The quarterly reports will be issued to the City Council and
discussed with the Policy and Services Committee as defined in the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
Respectfully submitted,
Harriet Richardson, CPA, CIA, CGAP, CRMA
City Auditor
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Fiscal Year 2015 Proposed Audit Work Plan (PDF)
Attachment A
Page 2
Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor
Attachment A
Page 3
Attachment A
“Promoting hon
Offic
est, efficient,
Fis
ce of t
, effective, an
scal Ye
the Ci
nd fully accou
ear 20
ity Au
ntable city go
015 A
uditor
overnment.”
Audit Workk Plann
Attachment A
2
Overview
The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires the City Auditor to submit an annual audit work plan to the City Council
for approval. This proposed audit work plan represents ongoing administrative responsibilities of the Office of
the City Auditor, as well as required audit responsibilities. It estimates approximately 8,100 hours of direct
time1 for 5.5 staff. It accounts for one performance auditor returning to half‐time effective July 1, 2014, after a
temporary increase to 75 percent time in FY 2014; plans for increasing the use of the administrative assistant
to assist on audits; and plans for increased efficiencies in conducting performance audits.
The proposed audit work plan considers several factors:
Council Priorities – Does the audit have the potential to address one or more Council priorities as
stated in the Council’s 2014 Work Plan?
Relevance – Does the audit have the potential to affect Council or City management decision‐making
or impact City residents?
Best Practices – Does the audit provide the opportunity to compare current performance to best
practices?
Return on Investment – Does the audit have the potential for cost savings, cost avoidance, or revenue
generation?
Improvement – Does the audit have the potential to result in meaningful improvement in how the City
does its business?
Actionable – Is it likely that the audit will produce actionable recommendations that are feasible and
practical?
Manageable – Is the audit scope narrow enough in scope to ensure it is completed in a timely manner?
In addition, the proposed audit work plan considers risk factors that, if addressed, will provide opportunities
for mitigation of those risks and improved operations:
Customer Service – Are City services delivered in the most efficient, effective, economical, and
equitable manner possible?
Financial – Is there an opportunity to improve how the City manages, invests, spends, and accounts for
its financial resources?
Health and Safety – Are City services delivered in a manner that protects our residents and employees
from injury or unnecessary exposure to factors that can affect an individual’s health?
Information Security – Is City, resident, and employee information (electronic or physical) protected
against unauthorized access, use, disclosure, disruption, modification, inspection, recording, or
destruction?
Operational – Are City programs and activities performed in the most efficient, effective, and
economical manner possible?
The audit work plan also considers numerous risk areas related to the major functions within the Utilities
Department. Based on a 2011 Utilities Risk Assessment and a 2013 Utilities Organizational Assessment,
conducted by external consultants, some of the most significant risks are identified and included in the
planned audits.
1 The estimated hours consider available time after accounting for holidays, vacation, required training, and administrative time.
Attachment A
3
Special and Ongoing Projects
The following table lists special and ongoing projects for the FY 2015 audit work plan:
Project Scope FY 2015
Planned Hours
National Citizen Survey Annual. The Office of the City Auditor contracts with the National
Research Center (NRC) to conduct The National Citizen Survey™. The
survey contains a series of standardized questions that the NRC uses to
benchmark Palo Alto residents’ opinions of City services against other
jurisdictions. We will conduct additional analysis on the results of this
year’s survey to try to determine what demographics, if any, affect how
residents respond to individual questions.
200
Annual Citizen Centric Report Annual. The Office of the City Auditor prepares an annual four‐page
summary of highlights from the annual Performance Report, financial
data, and an overview of our City's economic outlook. The Citizen Centric
Report follows the Association of Government Accountants'
recommended report format, which is designed to be visually appealing
and to provide understandable information to the public about the
financial condition and performance of our local government.
40
Sales Tax Allocation Reviews Ongoing. Identify misallocations of local sales and use tax through in‐
house monitoring and a contract with an outside vendor (currently
MuniServices, LLC). We also look for opportunities for direct allocation of
sales and use tax on large commercial construction projects. The Office of
the City Auditor reports sales and use tax recoveries in quarterly reports to
Council, and also provides a quarterly sales and use tax information report
which includes information from MuniServices, LLC.
400
Administration of the Fraud, Waste,
and Abuse Hotline
Ongoing. The Office of the City Auditor receives notification of complaints
filed through the hotline, replies to the complainant, routes and monitors
cases for investigation, and convenes the Hotline Review Committee (City
Manager, City Attorney, and City Auditor) to determine the routing of
cases and their closing upon completion of an investigation.
75
Annual External Financial Audit Annual. The Palo Alto Municipal Code requires the Office of the City
Auditor to contract with an independent certified public accounting firm
(currently Macias, Gini, & O’Connell, LLP) to conduct the annual external
audit of the City’s financial statements. The firm also conducts the
federally required Single Audit.
60
Review and Monitor Implementation
Status of Prior Audit
Recommendations
Ongoing. Review and provide feedback to departments on their reports of
the implementation status of prior audit recommendations. Include a
summary of the status in the Office of the City Auditor Quarterly Reports.
160
Office of the City Auditor Quarterly
Reports
Quarterly. In accordance with the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the City
Auditor prepares and issues quarterly reports to the City Council
describing the status and progress toward completion of the Office of the
City Auditor’s annual work plan.
60
Advisory Roles Ongoing. The City Auditor is a nonvoting, advisory member of the Utilities
Risk Oversight Committee, the Library Bond Oversight Committee, the
Information Technology Governance Review Board, and the Information
Security Steering Committee.
20
Update Audit Policies and Procedures
Manual
One‐time. The City Auditor will update the Office of the City Auditor’s
Audit Policies and Procedures Manual to reflect changes in the 2011
revision of the Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller
General of the United States. The updates will also add and revise
procedures to improve the office’s consistency and efficiency in
conducting audits.
80
Attachment A
4
Project Scope FY 2015
Planned Hours
Update Section 2.08.130 of the Palo
Alto Municipal Code, Office and Duties
of the City Auditor
One‐time. The City Auditor will update Section 2.08.130 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code to reflect changes in the Government Auditing Standards
in 2002, 2003, 2007, and 2011; current auditing practices; and changes
requested by the Policy and Services Committee.
40
Internal Control Training One‐time. Coordinate with the Department of Administrative Services to
conduct internal control training, with a focus on the recently revised
publications, “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government”
and “Internal Control: Integrated Framework.” Changes in federal grant
requirements now require recipients and sub‐recipients of federal grant
dollars to comply with both sets of requirements.
20
Triennial External Peer Review Every Three Years. The Government Auditing Standards require the Office
of the City Auditor to obtain an external peer review every three years to
evaluate its quality control and compliance with the Government Auditing
Standards. This project includes preparation of the required
documentation for the peer review and coordination with the peer review
team. The peer review is scheduled for November 3 through 7, 2014. It
also anticipates that the Office of the City Auditor will participate in two
peer reviews of other jurisdictions to meet our reciprocity requirements.
200
Total Hours for Special and Ongoing Projects 1,355
Performance Audits
The following table lists the audits proposed for the FY 2015 audit work plan:
Audit Department Council Priority
Area(s) for
2014
Risk Areas Preliminary Scope2 FY 2015
Planned
Hours2
Annual
Performance
Report (Service
Efforts and
Accomplishments)
Citywide Finance,
Infrastructure,
Technology,
Transportation
N/A Annual. The Office of the City Auditor prepares
the annual performance report to provide the
City Council, City staff, Palo Alto residents, and
other stakeholders with relevant information
and data regarding the performance of City
programs, functions, and activities.
1,200
Parking Funds Planning and
Community
Environment
Department and
Administrative
Services
Department
Finance,
Transportation
Customer
Service,
Financial
In progress. Determine if the City’s parking
funds are properly collected, accounted for, and
used in compliance with applicable laws,
regulations, policies, and governing documents.
The audit will focus on the University Avenue
and California Avenue Parking Permit Funds, the
Residential Parking Permit Fund, and the Parking
In‐Lieu Fund.
500
Utility Meters:
Procurement,
Inventory, and
Retirement
Utilities
Department
Infrastructure Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
In progress. Determine if proper procedures
were followed to procure, manage, and retire
utility meters. This audit resulted from issues
identified in the prior citywide inventory
management audit.
500
2 The preliminary scope and planned hours may change after completing the planning phase of the audit.
Attachment A
5
Audit Department Council Priority
Area(s) for
2014
Risk Areas Preliminary Scope2 FY 2015
Planned
Hours2
Cable Franchise
Fees
Information
Technology
Department and
Administrative
Services
Department
Finance Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
In progress. Determine if the cable franchisees
have accurately calculated and remitted
franchise fees in accordance with the Palo Alto
Municipal Code and whether the City has
adequate controls to discharge its
responsibilities to administer and enforce state
franchises. This audit is being conducted with
the assistance of a consultant.
400
Utilities Customer
Service – Rate and
Billing Accuracy
Utilities
Department
Finance,
Technology
Customer
Service,
Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
Carryover from FY 2014. Evaluate whether the
Utilities Department properly implements rates
and accurately bills customers.
700
Public Benefits Planning and
Community
Environment
Department
Land Use,
Infrastructure,
Finance
Financial,
Operational
From the FY 2014 Work Plan, Audit Horizon.
Evaluate whether benefits and funds are
properly accounted for; if funds are used in
accordance with relevant regulations, policies,
and governing documents; and if the use of
funds generated the anticipated benefits.
600
Disability Rates
and Workers’
Compensation
People, Strategies,
and Operations
Department
Finance,
Technology
Financial,
Health and
Safety
From the FY 2014 Work Plan, Audit Horizon.
Assess the effectiveness of activities to manage
and minimize disability retirements and
workers’ compensation claims. Review of
processes to ensure employee safety, tracking
and reporting activities, contract administration,
and efficiency of claim processing.
600
Procurement
Processes
Administrative
Services
Department
Finance,
Technology
Customer
Service,
Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
From the FY 2014 Work Plan, Audit Horizon;
requested by the City Manager. Assess the
efficiency and effectiveness of the procurement
process. Audit will focus on efficiency,
consistency in application of processes,
compliance with City regulations and policies,
and use of best practices.
700
Animal Services Police Department Finance,
Technology
Customer
Service,
Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
New in FY 2015. Evaluate and compare with
best practices the efficiency and effectiveness of
services provided, including whether Animal
Services receives all revenue to which it is
entitled (e.g., license and other fees, fines, and
permits), and whether improvements can be
made in operations to allow the program to
break even with the cost of services provided.
400
Fee Schedules Citywide Finance Customer
Service,
Financial,
Operational
New in FY 2015. Evaluate City processes for
establishing fees to determine if the fees cover
the cost of services provided when that is
expected and best practices for efficient and
effective service delivery. The specific fees to be
reviewed will be narrowed down during the
planning phase of the audit.
750
Attachment A
6
Audit Department Council Priority
Area(s) for
2014
Risk Areas Preliminary Scope2 FY 2015
Planned
Hours2
Meter Routes Utilities
Department
Finance,
Technology
Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
New in FY 2015. Evaluate the process for
establishing routes and assigning them to meter
readers to determine if the process optimizes
available resources and uses them efficiently.
400
Total Hours for Performance Audits 6,750
An audit of software and license management was listed on the revised Fiscal Year 2014 audit work plan but is not
carried forward to Fiscal Year 2015 because the Information Technology Department is working on a project to ensure
the City is in compliance with all licensing agreements.
On the Horizon
The following list of audits topics are expected to be on the Fiscal Year 2016 or Fiscal Year 2017 audit work
plans or to be moved into Fiscal Year 2015 if circumstances warrant eliminating an approved audit on the
Fiscal Year 2015 audit work plan:
Audit Department Council Priority
Area(s) for
20143
Risk Areas Preliminary Scope4 Planned
Hours3
Sustainable
Purchasing
Practices
Citywide Environment Health and
Safety
Assess the City's purchasing practices to
determine if environmental sustainability is
adequately considered in all purchases as
appropriate.
400
Impact Fees Planning and
Community
Environment
Department and
Development
Services
Department
Land Use &
Transportation
Customer
Service,
Financial,
Operational
Evaluate the processes for determining the
amount of each type of fee and who should be
assessed the fee. Evaluate the processes for
assessing and collecting established impact fees
to determine if they are collected as required,
are assessed fairly among those required to pay,
and if they achieve the intended benefits.
700
Payroll Processes Administrative
Services
Department
Finance Customer
Service,
Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
Evaluate the effectiveness of payroll processes
to ensure that payroll calculations and
deductions are accurate and in compliance with
federal and state laws and relevant labor
agreements, and that appropriate security
controls are in place to prevent unauthorized
access to the payroll system and employee data.
800
Information
Technology (IT)
Vendor
Management
Information
Technology
Department
Technology Customer
Service,
Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
Evaluate controls over contract management for
critical IT vendors to ensure vendors are
completing contracted services on time and
within budget in accordance with contract
requirements, that the contracts are needed or
still necessary given the advances in technology,
and that awarded contracts do not result in
unnecessary overlaps in services.
600
3 Topics may change depending on Council priorities set for 2015.
4 The preliminary scope and planned hours may change after completing the planning phase of the audit.
Attachment A
7
Audit Department Council Priority
Area(s) for
20143
Risk Areas Preliminary Scope4 Planned
Hours3
Mobile Device
Utilization and
Security
Information
Technology
Department
Technology Information
Security,
Operational
Identify the existence and effectiveness of
security controls over selected mobile devices
used to access City data, and to assess the
adequacy of the City's mobile computing
security policies and procedures, governance,
and the City's risk assessments of these devices.
400
Application
Controls for Critical
City Applications
Information
Technology
Department
Technology Information
Security,
Operational
Evaluate the effectiveness of controls in critical
applications relative to authorization, data
integrity, data availability, data privacy, and
segregation of duties.
500
Utilities Asset
Management
Utilities
Department
Infrastructure,
Technology
Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
Evaluate the effectiveness of the Utilities
Department’s asset management practices,
including whether the department effectively
implements best practices in infrastructure
asset management and whether its practices
allow efficient identification of the location and
condition of its physical assets.
700
Allocated Charges Administrative
Services
Department
Finance Customer
Service,
Financial,
Information
Security,
Operational
Evaluate the accuracy and use of allocated
charges within the budgeting process to ensure
charges are allocated equitably based on the
benefit each department receives for
centralized City services.
700
Utilities Staffing Utilities
Department
Finance Customer
Service,
Financial,
Operational
Assess the effectiveness of staffing decisions as
they relate to specific projects and ongoing
work to determine if work can be performed
more efficiently and effectively with different
staffing levels. Assessment will include an
evaluation of the ratio of supervisors and
managers to staff.
800
Data Reliability Citywide Technology Finance,
Information
Security,
Operational
Assess data obtained from critical systems to
ensure it is complete, accurate, and relevant to
the Council’s and management’s decision‐
making processes.
800
Total Hours for Future Performance Audits 6,400
Project Scope Planned
Hours
Performance Measurement and
Management Training (Nonaudit
Service)
Provide training to key staff on developing performance goals that are specific,
measurable, achievable, relevant, and time‐bound; evaluate the results; and use
the results to improve policies, programs, and outcomes.
80
Total Hours for Future Performance Audits/Nonaudit Services 80
Attachment A
POLICY AND SERVICES COMMITTEE
DRAFT MINUTES
Page 1 of 6
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
Chairperson Price called the meeting to order at 6:02 P.M. in the Council
Conference Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California.
Present: Klein, Price (Chair), Scharff, Schmid
Absent:
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
AGENDA ITEMS
4. City Auditor's Office Fiscal Year 2015 Proposed Work Plan.
Harriet Richardson, City Auditor, proposed audits that would comply with the
City Auditor's Mission Statement. The prior City Auditor compiled a list of
approximately 150 topics for her review. She talked with Council Members
to obtain their views on important topics. She based the work plan on that
information, Council Priorities, and general risk areas. The work plan would
require approximately 8,100 hours for 5 1/2 Staff to perform direct audit
work. The administrative assistant would be assisting with audit work as he
had the ability and capacity. She wanted to ensure audits would affect
Council or City Manager decision making or would impact City residents.
She wanted to ensure the City had the opportunity to compare its
performance with other cities and industry best practices. She considered
return on investment, cost savings, cost avoidance, and revenue generation
in selecting audits. She wished to ensure audits produced actionable
recommendations that were feasible and practical and could be completed
timely. Audits could mitigate risk factors and result in improved operations.
She reviewed a 2011 Utilities risk assessment and a 2013 Utilities
organization assessment in order to propose an audit for the Utilities
Department. The Staff Report contained a listing of routine work performed
by the City Auditor's Office. One-time tasks included an update of the
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 2 of 6
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
Policies and Procedures Manual, an update of the Municipal Code, internal
control training, and an external peer review.
Council Member Schmid calculated 70 percent of Staff time would be spent
for audit work, 10 percent for holidays and vacations, and 20 percent for
training and administrative time. That did not fit with goals of effective and
efficient work.
Ms. Richardson estimated 70 percent of the administrative assistant's time
would be spent on audit work, which was included in total hours. Total
hours did not include time for all professional training requirements and
reciprocal peer review requirements.
Council Member Schmid noted the work plan proposed 11 audits; whereas,
the Council usually received four audit reports each year. He assumed more
audits could be accomplished because audits would require fewer hours than
in previous years.
Ms. Richardson advised that several audits were currently in progress.
Council Member Schmid inquired about the number of audits that could be
completed in Fiscal Year 2015.
Ms. Richardson reported audits of parking funds, utility meters, cable
franchise fees, and the Annual Performance Report should be delivered by
the end of the calendar year. She anticipated at least three more audits
being completed before the end of the fiscal year and two or three additional
audits beginning before the end of the fiscal year.
Council Member Schmid reiterated that six audits should be completed by
the end of the fiscal year. The audit of sales tax allocation consumed 400
man hours at a cost of approximately $30,000. He asked if the annual
return from that could be between $20,000 and $40,000.
Ms. Richardson indicated the amount recovered in Fiscal Year 2014 totaled
approximately $169,000.
Council Member Schmid inquired whether the return on investment for audit
of sales tax allocations was worthwhile.
Ms. Richardson answered yes. In addition, Muni Services contracted with
the City for recovery of sales tax allocations and received a percentage of
the amount of funds it recovered.
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 3 of 6
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
Council Member Schmid requested the amount of funds Muni Services
recovered.
Ms. Richardson replied approximately a third of the $169,000.
Council Member Schmid supported audits of public benefits and impact fees,
use of Council Priorities, and goals of return on investment and actionable
recommendations. Associating audits with issues under Council discussion
was important.
Council Member Klein was comfortable with the plan. He suggested audits
of accounts payable and software contracts.
Ms. Richardson reported several Council Members and the City Manager
requested an audit of procurement processes. An audit of payroll processes
could be done the following year along with accounts payable. She was
trying to balance out the audits and not overload one department. There
were more concerns regarding payroll. Software contracts could be covered
in an audit of information technology vendor management.
Council Member Klein wished to determine not only whether software
contracts overlapped but also whether discrete contracts were needed.
Chair Price added whether contracts were duplicative.
Council Member Klein wanted to know if the number of contracts were
necessary given the advances in technology.
Council Member Scharff want to understand why the City Auditor considered
Council Priorities in proposing a work plan and how Priorities pertained to
audits.
Council Member Klein agreed with Council Member Scharff's comments.
Council Member Schmid disagreed.
Chair Price remarked that Priorities had some structural relationship to
audits, but did not hamper or affect the work plan.
Ms. Richardson did not omit an audit because it was outside Priorities. She
considered audits in relation to high level categories of Priorities. Priorities
provided some structure for the direction of audits.
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 4 of 6
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
Council Member Scharff clarified that Priorities had no effect on the audits
proposed in the work plan.
Ms. Richardson concurred.
Council Member Scharff asked if the City Auditor weighted one audit over
another because it met a Priority.
Ms. Richardson responded no.
Council Member Scharff felt consideration of the Priorities in selecting audits
provided the community with a false message and was not good
government. He inquired about the review period of the audit of parking
funds.
Ms. Richardson reported the audit would review records for the previous five
years.
Council Member Scharff reported in 2012 the Parking In-Lieu Fund contained
$75,000. The Fund currently contained almost $5 million. He questioned
whether Staff had not been correctly collecting those fees prior to 2012 or if
there was another issue.
Ms. Richardson advised that there were no projects to generate fees for the
Parking In-Lieu Fund. She asked if the Policy and Services Committee
(Committee) wished to move any audits from the horizon to the work plan.
Chair Price asked if Staff had the capacity to add audits to the work plan.
Ms. Richardson would substitute audits rather than add audits. The Annual
Performance Report required a significant number of work hours, and she
was not completely clear how it was used. The results of the National
Citizen Survey were used extensively, and she planned to perform more
analysis of data from that survey.
Council Member Scharff was most interested in the Utilities staffing audit.
Chair Price inquired whether the Annual Performance Report could yield
information similar to the Service Efforts and Accomplishments (SEA) report
while reducing the number of hours required to obtain that information.
Ms. Richardson suggested Staff include a disclaimer that they did not verify
every number but were relying on information from Departments. That
could significantly reduce the number of hours.
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 5 of 6
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
Chair Price did not believe the Committee could direct Staff to do that, but it
could recommend the Council authorize a reduced effort.
Ms. Richardson explained that the majority of Staff time was spent checking
data and removing extra information from graphics.
Chair Price felt prior reports were too busy and contained too much
information.
Ms. Richardson advised that Staff could eliminate some graphics without
reducing information and combine graphics to tell a story.
Council Member Scharff concurred. Collection of the information should be
standardized.
Ms. Richardson had consulted with Mr. Rossmann regarding aligning
information collected for budget purposes with information collected for
performance measures. Audit Staff could review processes for collecting
information.
Council Member Schmid commented that the SEA report was unique in that
it was cumulative and provided a ten-year perspective. Data was associated
with performance measures. The Council should utilize performance
measures effectively.
Ms. Richardson would like to see Departments provide their goals along with
performance numbers.
Council Member Schmid agreed.
Chair Price inquired whether assisting Departments was within the City
Auditor's technical advisory role.
Ms. Richardson could do that work. The reasons for Departments not
meeting their goals could lead to an audit.
Chair Price asked if that topic could be included in the work plan.
Ms. Richardson recommended it be included as training on performance
measurement and management. She would add that to the horizon for the
following year.
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 6 of 6
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Chair Price that the
Policy and Services Committee recommend the City Council approve the
Fiscal Year 2015 Proposed Audit Work Plan and add to the IT Vendor
Management audit “and are they needed/still necessary given advances in
technology.”
MOTION PASSED: 4-0
FUTURE MEETINGS AND AGENDAS
September 23, October 14 and 21, 2014.
ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 9:18 P.M.
Attachment B
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR
October 20, 2014
The Honorable City Council
Palo Alto, California
Policy and Services Committee Recommendation to Adopt an
Ordinance to Amend Section 2.08.130 of the Palo Alto Municipal
Code, Office and Duties of the City Auditor, to Reflect Changes in Audit
Practices and Clarify the Requirements for Reporting Work Products of
the Office of the City Auditor
At its meeting on September 9, 2014, the Policy and Services Committee unanimously
recommended the City Council approve an Ordinance to Amend Section 2.08.130 of the Palo
Alto Municipal Code, Office and Duties of the City Auditor, to Reflect Changes in Auditing
Practices and Clarify the Requirements for Reporting Work Products of the Office of the City
Auditor. The Policy and Services Committee minutes are included in this packet.
Respectfully submitted,
Harriet Richardson
City Auditor
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Amendment to Ordinance 2.08.130 (PDF)
Attachment B: Policy and Services Committee Meeting Minutes Excerpt (September 9,
2014) (PDF)
Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor
Page 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY AUDITOR
September 9, 2014
The Honorable City Council
Attention: Policy & Services Committee
Palo Alto, California
Recommend Approval of an Ordinance to Amend Section 2.08.130 of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Office and Duties of the City Auditor, to
Reflect Changes in Auditing Practices and Clarify the Requirements for
Reporting Work Products of the Office of the City Auditor
Recommendation
The City Auditor recommends that the Policy and Services Committee review and recommend
to the full City Council adoption of an ordinance to amend Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC)
Section 2.08.130, Office and Duties of the City Auditor.
Executive Summary
On May 13, 2014, the Palo Alto Policy and Services Committee passed a motion for the City
Auditor to come back to the Committee with a proposed amendment to the PAMC to clarify
which committee of the Council should receive which work products from the Office of the City
Auditor. The City Auditor presented proposed changes to the PAMC at the Policy and Services
Committee meeting on August 12, 2014. At that time, the Policy and Services Committee
passed a motion for additional changes to PAMC Section 2.08.130. This report addresses the
Committee’s motions and also proposes other updates to PAMC 2.08.130, Office and Duties of
the City Auditor, to reflect current auditing practices.
Background
Historically, the City Auditor has used judgment regarding the distribution of work products to
each of the City Council committees. That judgment was based on general guidance that unless
an item was scheduled for a study session with the full City Council, audits that primarily
affected enterprise funds (currently the Electric, Gas, Water, Wastewater Collection,
Wastewater Treatment, Refuse, Storm Drain, and Airport funds) or financial matters would be
presented to the Finance Committee, and all remaining items would be presented to the Policy
and Services Committee. The Policy and Services Committee has requested that it receive most
of the Office of the City Auditor work products.
In addition to the changes requested by the Policy and Services Committee, the City Auditor is
proposing other changes to PAMC 2.08.130, last updated in 1999. Since then, the Comptroller
General of the United States has issued four major revisions to the Government Auditing
Standards. The proposed amendment to the PAMC incorporates the intent of those revisions.
In some areas, the proposed language is less specific than it previously was to minimize the
need to update the PAMC each time the Government Auditing Standards are revised.
Attachment A
Page 2
Discussion
In response to the Policy and Services Committee’s direction, the City Auditor has drafted the
following proposed language as paragraph (g) in PAMC 2.08.130:
(g) Audit reports and other work products of the office of the city auditor will be placed
on the agenda of the city council or appropriate city council committee consistent with
the following general guidelines:
(1) Informational reports that will be discussed in a study session will be placed on the
council agenda.
(2) The financial and federal single audit reports will be placed on the finance committee
agenda.
(3) All other audit reports and audit work products will be placed on the policy and
services committee agenda.
The Comptroller General of the United States issued revisions to the Government Auditing
Standards in 2002, 2003, 2007, and 2011 that affect existing language in PAMC 2.08.130. The
2002 and 2011 revisions significantly changed the independence standard, and the 2011
revision established a framework for evaluating auditor independence when conducting audits
and providing nonaudit services. Because of the frequency of revisions to the standards, the
proposed changes to the PAMC eliminate some of the previous detail to minimize the need to
update the PAMC each time the Government Auditing Standards are revised. For example,
instead of providing details regarding what information must be included in each audit report,
the proposed language states, “The reports shall meet the reporting requirements specified in
Government Auditing Standards, including the requirement for reporting the views of
responsible officials.”
PAMC 2.08.130(b)(2) currently requires audits to be conducted in accordance with Government
Auditing Standards, issued by the United States General Accounting Office, as well as the
Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, issued by The Institute of Internal
Auditors. Historically, the Office of the City Auditor has followed only the Government Auditing
Standards and has cited only those standards in its audit reports. Requiring the Office of the
City Auditor to comply with two sets of standards adds requirements that could increase both
the total hours and lapsed time on each audit without adding value to the audited
departments. The proposed language would eliminate the reference to the Standards for the
Professional Practice of Internal Auditing to reflect the historical practices of the Office of the
City Auditor and to help ensure a clear and efficient audit process.
Resource Impact
The proposed ordinance does not require an expenditure of City funds.
Environmental Review
This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.
Attachment A
Page 3
Respectfully submitted,
Harriet Richardson
City Auditor
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Amendment to Ordinance 2.08.130 (PDF)
Department Head: Harriet Richardson, City Auditor
Attachment A
Page 4
Attachment A
NOT YET APPROVED
ATTACHMENT A
Ordinance No. ______
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 2.08.130
(Office and duties of the city auditor) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Reflect
Changes in Auditing Practices and Clarify the Requirements for Reporting Work
Products of the Office of the City Auditor
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings.
A. The 2002, 2003, 2007, and 2011 revisions to the Government Auditing
Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, United States
Government Accountability Office, have resulted in changes in auditing
practices. These standards, first published in 1972, provide the foundation for
government auditors to lead by example in the areas of independence,
transparency, accountability, and quality throughout the audit process.
B. Changes in the Government Auditing Standards have established a framework
that auditors must use to evaluate whether providing a nonaudit service would
create a threat to auditor independence, either by itself or in aggregate with
other nonaudit services provided, with respect to any audit the office of the city
auditor performs.
C. The office of the city auditor has historically used and referenced only the
Government Auditing Standards it its work. Eliminating the requirement to also
apply the Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, established
by the Institute of Internal Auditors, will not reduce the quality or credibility of
the work of the office of the city auditor.
D. Clarification is needed regarding which council committees should receive
reports issued by the office of the city auditor.
SECTION 2. Section 2.08.130 of Chapter 2.08 of Title 2 of the Palo Alto Municipal
Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
2.08.130 Office and duties of the city auditor.
(a) The office of the city auditor shall be under the direction of the city auditor who shall be
accountable to the city council. The city auditor shall:
(1) Be knowledgeable in operational and financialconducting performance auditsing under
Government Auditing Standards, as established by the Comptroller General of the United
States; public administration,; public policy; and public financial and fiscal practices;
Attachment A
NOT YET APPROVED
(2) Be a licensed certified public accountant (CPA) or certified internal auditor (CIA); and
(3) Establish an organizational structure appropriate to carrying out the responsibilities and
functions of this section.; and
(4) Set and maintain a tone for ethical behavior, establish a positive ethical environment for the
office of the city auditor, and conduct audit work in accordance with the principles of integrity,
objectivity, confidentiality, and competency.
(b) The mission of the office of the city auditor is to promote honest, efficient, effective,
economical, and fully accountable and transparent city government. To fulfill this mission, the
office of the city auditor shall conduct performance audits and examinations and perform
nonaudit services of any city department, program, service, or activity as approved by the city
council. The purpose of these audits and examinations is to provide the city council, and city
management, the residents of Palo Alto, and other stakeholders with independent and
objective information and evaluations regardinganalysis as to whether management is using its
financial, physical, and informational resourcesthe effectivelyness, and efficientlycy,
economically, ethically, and equitably, and in compliance with laws, regulations, contract and
grant requirements, and with which city resources are employed, the adequacy of the system
of internal controls, and compliance with city policies and procedures and regulatory
requirements. Specifically:
(1) The city auditor shall conduct operational and financial audits and other audit work as
requested by the city council. This will include independently determining and evaluating:
(A) The soundness, adequacy, and application of accounting, financial, and other operating
controls towards promoting effective control at a reasonable cost.
(B) The extent of compliance with applicable laws and regulations and with established policies
and procedures.
(C) The extent to which city assets are accounted for and safeguarded from losses of any kind.
(D) The sufficiency, validity and reliability of accounting and statistical data developed within
the organization.
(E) The economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of city departments, programs, services, and
activities.(2) Audits shall be conducted and nonaudit services provided in accordance with
Government Auditing Standards, as established by the Comptroller General of the United
States, General Accounting Government Accountability Office. and the Standards for the
Professional Practice of Internal Auditing, established by the Institute of Internal Auditors
(c) In addition to the aforementioned responsibilities, the office of the city auditor shall:
(1) Select and recommend to the city council for approval an independent certified public
accounting firm to conduct the city’s Coordinate an annual external financial audit for the city
Attachment A
NOT YET APPROVED
with an independent certified public accounting firm selected by the city council and coordinate
the annual external financial audit with the approved firm.
(2) Provide consulting services to city operating departments as requested by the city council or
city manager in their efforts to re‐engineer their operating practices and processes.
(3) Provide consulting services to the city council, as requested, regarding the accuracy and
financial impact of information provided to the city council.
(42) Perform other auditing functions consistent with the provisions of this section.
(d) At the beginning of each fiscal year, the city auditor shall submit prepare an annual audit
plan forto the city council for approval. The plan will be issued on the office of the city auditor
website, with written notification to the city council, and be placed on the appropriate
committee agenda. The plan shall identify the preliminary objectives of each audit to be
performed, reflecting the purpose of the engagement and a preliminary description of the
areas which that may be addressed. The city auditor will review the plan and consult with the
city manager prior to submitting it to the appropriate committee of the city council for
approval. The city manager shall may identify areas where the city will benefit from operational
and financialperformance audits or a nonaudit service. The city auditor will may review the plan
with and seek the advice of the city attorney prior to submitting it to the appropriate
committee of the city council for approval. The annual audit plan may be amended during the
fiscal year with approval of the city council.
(e) The office of the city auditor will issueshall prepare quarterly reports to the city council
describing the status and progress towards completing the audits. The reports will be issued on
the office of the city auditor website, with written notification to the city council, and be placed
on the appropriate committee agenda.The annual audit plan may be amended during the year
with the approval of the city council.
(ef) (1) The city auditor shall prepare a written report of the results of each audit conducted
and will be responsible for retaining a copy as a permanent record. The reports shall meet the
reporting requirements specified in the Government Auditing Standards and the views of the
city manager.
(1) Within two weeks after receiving the final draft report, the city manager, or his or her
designee, will prepare an official written response to the findings and recommendations
contained within the report and provide the response to the office of the city auditor. The city
auditor and city manager may agree to an extension of the two‐week time frame if requested
by the city manager. If a response is not received within the established timeframe, the office
of the city auditor will issue the audit report without management’s response.
(2) Each audit report shall include:
(A) A statement of audit objectives and a description of the audit scope and methodology.
Attachment A
NOT YET APPROVED
(B) A full discussion of audit findings and conclusions.
(C) Recommendations for necessary or desirable action.
(D) A response from the city manager or the highest official of the audited entity, except as
described in the audit report processing (subsection (f)(4), below).
(f) (1) Upon completion of the final draft of an audit report, and prior to submission of the
report to the city council, tThe office of the city auditor shall transmit also provide a copy of the
draft report to the city manager or the highest official of the audited entity, to the city attorney
for review and comment, including legal advice relating to disclosure of information contained
in the report,; and to other appropriate officials as determined by the city auditor.
(2) Within five weeks after receiving the report, the city manager or the highest official of the
audited entity will prepare an official written response to the findings and recommendations
contained within the report and transmit the response to the city auditor. The report will be
issued to the city council within four weeks of receipt of the response.
(3) The official written response will be included verbatim in the audit report issued to the city
council by the city auditor.
(4) If a response is not received within the established five weeks, as described in subsection
(f)(2), above, the audit report will be issued to the city council without management response.
(5g) The aAudit reports and other work products of the office of the city auditor will be placed
on the agenda of the city council or appropriate city council committee within forty‐five
calendar days after the audit report issued to the city council.consistent with the following
general guidelines:
(1) Information items and items that will be discussed in a study session will be placed on the
council agenda.
(2) Audit reports and other audit work products will be placed on the finance committee
agenda when the subject matter focuses primarily on enterprise fund departments, functions,
or activities, or is concerned primarily with financial matters.
(3) All other audit reports and audit work products will be placed on the policy and services
committee agenda.
(gh) The city auditor will prepare and issue an annual report on the status of recommendations
made in completed audits. The report will reflect the status as reported by the city manager or
the highest official of the audited entityhis or her designee. The report will be issued on the
office of the city auditor website, with written notification to the city council, in the first quarter
of the fiscal year and be placed on the finance appropriate committee agenda. Further follow‐
up audits will be conducted as determined and recommended by the city auditor and approved
by the city council.
Attachment A
NOT YET APPROVED
(hi) (1) Unless prohibited by law, Tthe office of the city auditor will have unrestricted access to
all sources of information, property, and personnel relevant to 1) the performance of a council‐
approved audit or 2) the identification of potential risks when developing the annual audit plan,
unless prohibited by law. Department management and staff will not intentionally withhold,
hide, or destroy any information or property that may be potential evidence in a planned or
ongoing audit. Nothing in this section shall authorize the office of the city auditor to have
access to documents, records, and information related to the office of any elected official.
(2) The office of the city auditor will handle Ddocuments and information will be handled
received with the same prudence exercised by those normally accountable for them and
consistent with the standards established by the Institute of Internal Auditorsappropriate
policies and regulations and the ethical principles cited in the Government Auditing Standards.
(j) To the extent possible, the office of the city auditor will accommodate an area’s daily
operations in scheduling and conducting such audits. Nothing in this section shall authorize
access to documents, records, and information related in any way to the office of any elected
official.
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective upon the commencement of the
thirty‐first day after the date of its adoption.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
___________________________________ ___________________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________________ ___________________________________
Senior Assistant City Attorney City Auditor
Attachment A
POLICY AND SERVICES COMMITTEE
DRAFT MINUTES
Page 1 of 8
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
Chairperson Price called the meeting to order at 6:02 P.M. in the Council
Conference Room, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California.
Present: Klein, Price (Chair), Scharff, Schmid
Absent:
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None.
AGENDA ITEMS
3. Recommend Approval of an Ordinance to Amend Section 2.08.130 of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Office and Duties of the City Auditor, to
Reflect Changes in Auditing Practices and Clarify the Requirements for
Reporting Work Products of the Office of the City Auditor.
Harriet Richardson, City Auditor, recalled the Policy and Services
Committee's (Committee) directions to revise the Palo Alto Municipal Code
on May 13 and August 12, 2014. Informational reports discussed in a Study
Session would be presented to the Council. Financial and federal single-
audit reports would be presented to the Finance Committee. All other audit
reports and audit work products would be presented to the Committee. The
Committee would make recommendations to the Council regarding audit
reports and audit work products. The City Attorney would review the work
plan and advise the City Auditor of any issues prior to submission of the
work plan to the Committee. In Paragraph Number 4, ethical requirements
for the City Auditor would follow the ethical principles established in
Government Auditing Standards. Six months after the Council approved an
audit report and every six months thereafter, Departments would report to
the Committee regarding the status of each audit recommendation. The City
Auditor's quarterly report would include the status of all audit reports.
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 2 of 8
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
Council Member Scharff asked if the City Charter required a licensed
Certified Public Accountant (CPA) or Certified Internal Auditor (CIA).
Ms. Richardson answered no. The Municipal Code required those
certifications.
Council Member Scharff asked if the City Auditor should be a CPA as the
position conducted performance audits rather than financial audits.
Ms. Richardson replied no.
Council Member Scharff inquired whether that requirement was useful.
Ms. Richardson explained that the requirement limited the number of
candidates for the position of City Auditor and would typically draw financial
auditors rather than performance auditors. She included language listing
the types of degrees typically held by audit directors handling performance
audits.
Council Member Scharff asked if the CPA requirement should be eliminated.
Ms. Richardson felt it could be eliminated. The Council could determine
requirements for the position prior to recruiting for a City Auditor.
Council Member Scharff believed listing additional degrees further limited the
field of candidates. He would prefer to delete Subsection (a)(2) regarding
CPA and CIA.
Chair Price inquired about degree and certification requirements in other
communities.
Ms. Richardson had seen a mix of requirements. Some communities
required a CPA to handle compliance audits. A CIA designation
demonstrated a broader knowledge of operational performance audits;
however, it usually was not a specific requirement.
Council Member Scharff seemed to recall the City Charter required a CPA or
CIA designation for the City Auditor.
Council Member Schmid reiterated that financial and federal-single audit
reports would be presented to the Finance Committee; however, later the
Staff report indicated only the finance reports of the external auditor would
be presented to the Finance Committee.
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 3 of 8
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
Ms. Richardson clarified that the external auditor performed both the
financial statement and the single audit report.
Council Member Schmid indicated the requirement for the City Auditor to
comply with Standards for the Professional Practice of Internal Auditing was
deleted.
Ms. Richardson explained that following two sets of standards placed
additional requirements on Staff. She wanted to work efficiently and provide
audits more quickly.
Council Member Schmid inquired whether the standard of practice was the
Government Auditing Standards.
Ms. Richardson responded yes. Typically local governments utilized the
Government Auditing Standards.
Council Member Schmid asked if the material on page 2 of the Ordinance
would fall under Section 1E of the Ordinance.
Ms. Richardson advised that the material began with Paragraph (g), audit
reports and other work products.
Council Member Schmid asked if it was correct to say clarification was
needed.
Ms. Richardson remarked that the Committee requested she clarify the
procedure.
Council Member Schmid inquired whether the language in Section 1 was
contained within the Ordinance.
Ms. Richardson replied no. The Ordinance began with Section 2.
Council Member Schmid noted Staff previously responded to audit reports
within five weeks. The proposed change was two weeks.
Ms. Richardson believed five weeks was too long to wait for a response;
however, extensions to the two-week period were possible. She discussed
the change with the City Manager.
Council Member Schmid remarked that the City Auditor made the decision to
grant an extension.
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 4 of 8
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
Ms. Richardson would be reasonable in responding to requests for extension.
Council Member Schmid inquired whether status reports on audit
recommendations would be presented six months after the Council approved
audit reports or whether status reports would accumulate and be presented
at one time. Status reports could be placed on the Council Agenda monthly.
Ms. Richardson advised that status reports would not accumulate, but would
be presented six months after approval of the audit report. Again, she
coordinated the language with the City Manager.
Council Member Schmid understood the Council could have three or four
audit updates every month.
Ms. Richardson explained that City Auditor Staff would review Departments'
reports before presentation to the Council and determine whether a finding
was closed. The Council could have a report every month.
Council Member Schmid inquired about the additional burden placed on
Departments to provide updates.
Ms. Richardson believed the burden would be the same for Departments. If
Departments had to report more often, then perhaps they would complete
recommendations more quickly to avoid additional reporting.
Council Member Klein asked who was the responsible official referenced in
Section 2.08.130(2)(f).
Ms. Richardson clarified that the responsible official was the person
responsible for implementing the recommendation.
Council Member Klein questioned whether the City should have its own
definition. He asked if the responsible official was always the City Manager.
Ms. Richardson referred to Section 2.08.130(2)(h) regarding the City
Manager or his designee being responsible for reporting. Ultimately the City
Manager was the responsible official, but he could delegate that
responsibility to the Department responsible for that function of work.
Council Member Klein felt that was a loophole for the City Manager to place
blame on someone else.
Ms. Richardson asked if the Committee preferred to delete language
regarding the City Manager's designee. Previously the language referred to
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 5 of 8
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
the highest official of the audited entity. She could modify the language if
the Committee wished.
Council Member Klein stated the City Manager was the responsible official in
the eyes of the City Council.
Chair Price asked if Council Member Klein wished to propose specific
language.
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member
Scharff to recommend to the City Council to replace the verbiage “The
reports shall meet the reporting requirements specified in Government
Auditing Standards, including the requirement for reporting the views of
responsible officials the City Manager” on page 3 of section (f).
MOTION PASSED: 4-0
Ms. Richardson asked if the Committee wished to remove "his or her
designee" from Subsection (f)(1).
Council Member Klein replied no. He inquired about the meaning of non-
audit services in the context of Subsection (b).
Ms. Richardson explained that non-audit services was the term for work that
was not an audit. For example, City Auditor Staff could provide technical
advice regarding proper procedures.
Chair Price inquired whether Council Member Klein wished to include
technical advice in the language.
Council Member Klein answered no.
MOTION: Council Member Klein moved, seconded by Council Member
Scharff to recommend the City Council remove “through an annual work
plan”; “To fulfill this mission, the office of the City Auditor shall conduct
performance audits and examinations, perform non-audit services of any
City department, program, service or activity as approved by the City
Council. through an annual work plan” on page 2, section (b).
MOTION PASSED: 4-0
MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member
Schmid that the Policy and Services Committee recommend the City Council
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 6 of 8
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
adopt an Ordinance amending the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section
2.08.130, Office and Duties of the City Auditor with the following changes;
o “The reports shall meet the reporting requirements specified in
Government Auditing Standards, including the requirement for
reporting the views of responsible officials the City Manager.”
o “To fulfill this mission, the office of the City Auditor shall conduct
performance audits and examinations perform nonaudit services of
any city department, program, service or activity as approved by
the City Council. through an annual work plan”
Council Member Scharff suggested deleting Subsection (a)(2) regarding both
degree and certification requirements.
Council Member Klein believed the lack of an educational requirement would
be unusual for an important job. He could not imagine the Council would
hire someone without one of the degrees listed.
Council Member Scharff proposed requiring a bachelor's degree.
Council Member Klein understood Council Member Scharff wished to delete
the CPA requirement.
Council Member Scharff responded yes. It was not necessary to the job.
Council Member Klein stated a Certified Internal Auditor designation was
necessary to the job.
Chair Price agreed with Council Member Klein. Some detail would be useful.
Council Member Scharff reported the requirement limited the field of
candidates in a way that was not relevant to the job. Experience was more
relevant than a degree.
Council Member Klein would agree to delete the specific degrees. He
inquired about qualifications that should be required for the job.
Ms. Richardson advised that candidates should have a bachelor's degree at
the minimum. The CPA designation leaned more toward financial auditing,
which the City Auditor did not perform. CIA was more relevant to the job,
but was not necessarily a requirement for the position. Quite a few audit
directors around the country were not CIAs.
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 7 of 8
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
Council Member Klein asked what degrees and certifications they did hold.
Ms. Richardson indicated they generally held the types of degrees listed in
the proposed language.
Council Member Scharff commented that he was uncertain whether the City
Auditor was a licensed professional.
Ms. Richardson reported that no university offered a degree in performance
auditing. Some universities offered a performance auditing certificate in
conjunction with a degree. The Association of Local Government Auditors
was working with universities to develop a program for performance
auditors.
Council Member Klein preferred to limit the field of candidates in order to
eliminate candidates who did not meet minimum qualifications.
Chair Price remarked that candidates without sufficient qualifications would
not survive the screening process.
Council Member Scharff did not want to screen out good candidates because
they did not hold a CPA or CIA designation.
Khashayar Alaee, Senior Management Analyst, noted recruitments for
executive level positions included a statement that a master's degree was
preferred. The City could require a certification within a certain time period
after hiring a candidate.
Council Member Scharff did not wish to burden the Council with an Agenda
Item if the Committee could not reach consensus on the one issue.
Council Member Klein agreed to removing the list of degrees, but wanted to
retain CIA.
Council Member Scharff advised that retaining only CIA made the
requirement even more restrictive.
Council Member Klein agreed to retain CPA as well.
Council Member Schmid supported the Motion.
Chair Price agreed with Council Member Klein.
Attachment B
MINUTES
Page 8 of 8
Policy and Services Committee Regular Meeting
Draft Minutes 9/09/14
Council Member Scharff advised the City Auditor to retain CPA or CIA in
Subsection (a)(2).
MOTION PASSED: 4-0
Attachment B
City of Palo Alto (ID # 4578)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/20/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Adoption of Park Improvement & Elimination and Defunding
of Capital Improvement Program Project
Title: Adoption of an Ordinance Approving and Adopting a Plan for
Improvements to El Camino Park; Approval of and Authorization for the City
Manager or his Designee to Execute Contract Amendment No. 3 to Contract
C10131396 in the Amount of $47,850 with CDM Smith, for the El Camino Park
Restoration Project; and Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance to
Consolidate Existing Funds Totaling $4,395,286 into Capital Improvement
Program PE-13016 from the El Camino Park Playing Fields and Amenities
Project PG-13002 and from the El Camino Park Expanded Parking Lot and
New Restroom Project PE-13016, and to Retitle PE-13016 to “El Camino Park
Restoration Project”
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Public Works
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council:
1.Adopt an Ordinance Approving and Adopting a Plan for Improvements to El
Camino Park,including the addition of north field lighting (Attachment A);
2.Approve and Authorize the City Manager or his Designee to Execute
Contract Amendment No. 3 to Contract C10131396 in the Amount of
$47,850 with Camp Dresser McKee Smith (CDM Smith) for a new not to
exceed amount of $6,348,652, for the combined El Camino Park Emergency
Water Reservoir and El Camino Park Restoration Projects (Attachment B);
and
City of Palo Alto Page 2
3.Adopt a Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment C) to Consolidate
Existing Funds Totaling $4,395,286 into Capital Improvement Program PE-
13016 from the El Camino Park Playing Fields and Amenities project PG-
13002 ($3,435,286) and from the El Camino Park Expanded Parking Lot and
New Restroom project PE-13016 ($960,000), and retitle the El Camino
Expanded Parking Lot and New Restroom project to El Camino Park
Restoration Project.
Executive Summary
Since June 2010, staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) have
engaged in extensive discussions of park improvements at El Camino Park. The
opportunity to upgrade this park was presented when the construction of the
underground El Camino Park Emergency Water Reservoir Project (CIP WS-08002)
necessitated the removal of the original park improvements.With extensive
input from the PRC, the City has put together an upgrade plan containing the
following key improvements:
·New synthetic turf athletic field (soccer/lacrosse), which replaces a natural
turf playing field at the north end of the park;
·The addition of four new field lights for the synthetic turf field permitting
evening play;
·Natural turf athletic field (softball/lacrosse/soccer) for the south field to
replace the former natural turf playing field.Four replacement field lights
to replace the four old field lights on the natural turf field, plus two new
field lights to make use of the southern-most part of the natural turf field;
·New restroom facility, scorekeeper booth and twelve new single loop
bicycle racks accommodating twenty-four bicycles;;
·Expanded parking lot with 22 additional spaces (total of 68 spaces); and
·Resurface the existing bike path to Class 1 width standards improving the
sub-regional trail route to Menlo Park and the Palo Alto Intermodal Transit
Center at University Avenue.
The current estimated total project cost for the El Camino Park Restoration
Project is $5.53 million, with $1.64 million coming from the Water Fund (which is
responsible for the cost of restoring El Camino Park to its original condition) and
$2.28 million from Park Development Impact fees to fund the components of the
project that were beyond the cost of restoring the park to its original condition.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Funding of $0.51 million is from the Infrastructure Reserve. Based on updated
estimates there may be an estimated funding shortfall of $1.13 million depending
on the bid prices. As a result, staff will bid some of the components as alternates
to provide maximum policy flexibility for the Council.
Staff expects to issue a notice inviting bids for the construction phase in
November 2014 and to return to Council in December for award of the
construction contract.Staff recommends that the project budget not be adjusted
at this time, and that a Budget Amendment Ordinance providing for any
additional appropriation increases, if necessary, accompany the award of
construction.
Background
Since June 2010, staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC)have
engaged in extensive discussions of park improvements at El Camino Park that
would coincide with construction of the Utilities Department’s El Camino Park
Emergency Water Reservoir Project (CIP WS-08002). The El Camino Park
Emergency Water Reservoir Project was completed in January 2014. In order to
allow for that project to be completed, El Camino Park needed to be
deconstructed, with the Water Fund being responsible for the cost of restoring El
Camino Park to its original condition.
The Utilities and Community Services Departments have been working on the
conceptual design of the restored park and playing fields since August 2010. The
PRC has been closely involved with design of the park, including eleven public
meetings between June 2010 and April 2012 to receive input from the public, field
users, neighbors and other stakeholders on the design of fields, parking, a dog
exercise area and other amenities of the park. On April 23, 2012, the City Council
approved the revised design of El Camino Park and authorized the allocation of
$2,275,796 of Park Development Impact fees to fund the components of the
project that were beyond the cost of restoring the park to its original condition
(Staff report #2411). These components included artificial turf, new field lighting
foundations and conduits, an expanded parking lot, a new restroom, a possible
dog exercise area,and new pathways. At that time, Council also directed staff to
conduct an environmental assessment for a potential dog exercise area.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
City staff consulted with Thomas Reid and Associates (contractor that specializes
in environmental permitting) to discuss any required mitigations concerning the
dog run. Staff was informed that because of the proximity to San Francisquito
Creek, which contains steelhead trout habitat,there is a required 100’ set-back
from the creek. The setback requirement renders the proposed site unusable for
a dog park. The PRC concluded that relocating a dog park elsewhere in El Camino
Park would result in a loss of picnic and essential passive-use areas of the park,
and the dog park idea was not carried forward into the park design.
The project funding also included $1,641,790 from the Water Fund to pay for the
estimated construction cost of in-kind park replacement, and $510,000 from the
Infrastructure Reserve. The funding for restoration of El Camino Park, as
approved in the FY 2013 Capital Budget,was allocated to the two CIP projects
shown in Table 1 below.
CIP Funding Source Funding Amount
PE-13016, El Camino Park Expanded Parking Lot and
New Restroom
Infrastructure Reserve $510,000
Dev. Impact Fees $450,000
PG-13002, El Camino Park Playing Fields and
Amenities
Water Fund $1,641,790
Dev. Impact Fees $1,793,496
Total:$4,395,286
Over the next few months, it became evident that the Utilities reservoir project
was experiencing construction delays, and the estimated reservoir completion
date was moved to January 2013, with the park restoration expected to begin in
March 2013. During this time in 2012,staff began its review of the potential dog
park as well as consideration of options for relocating the Julia Morgan Hostess
House into the park. These aspects of the park design were discussed at one
council and seven PRC meetings resulting in the postponement of the finalized
conceptual design from May 2012 to August 2013 (staff report #3610). At this
point, the preliminary park design was initiated.The project’s 35% plans were
approved by the ARB in December 2013. Also in December 2013, at a joint
PRC/Council study session, Council directed staff to investigate the community
support and budgetary impacts of additional lighting for the north athletic field.
At the January 21, 2014 PRC meeting, staff presented a draft lighting plan for the
synthetic turf field. On February 19, 2014, staff held a community meeting to
discuss the lighting plan for the synthetic turf field. The meeting participants
City of Palo Alto Page 5
included field users and representatives from the 101 Alma condominiums.The
participants agreed that the proposed lighting plan is appropriate for the site.
Staff answered questions and verified that the field lights would be on no later
than 10pm, and that it will be an automated lighting system that staff can
program remotely. With the community support for the lighting plan, completion
of the final construction documents proceeded. Please see Attachment D for a
detailed chronology of project milestones.
Discussion
Park Improvement Ordinance for El Camino Park
The City Charter and Section 22.08.005 of the City’s Municipal Code require that,
before any substantial building, construction, reconstruction or development is
approved on dedicated park land, the Council must first approve and adopt a plan
covering the proposed improvements. On May 21, 2007, Council adopted a Park
Improvement Ordinance for the underground reservoir and pump station
improvements at El Camino Park.
This second Park Improvement Ordinance (Attachment A) covers the additional El
Camino Park improvements proposed by the Community Services Department in
coordination with the PRC and the community over the past four years.
CDM Smith and Siegfried Engineering Inc.(sub-consultant) incorporated the
Council,ARB,Commission, community and staff’s recommendations regarding
site features to create a final site design for improvements at El Camino Park. The
design includes:
•New synthetic turf athletic field (soccer/lacrosse), which replaces a natural turf
playing field at the north end of the park, and the addition of four new field
lights for the synthetic turf field
•Natural turf athletic field (softball/lacrosse/soccer) for the south field to
replace the former natural turf playing field. Four replacement field lights to
replace the four old field lights on the natural turf field, plus two new field
lights to make use of the southern-most part of the natural turf field
•New restroom facility; replaces the old restroom facility
• New storage building for maintenance equipment
• New scorekeeper booth
•Expanded parking lot with 22 additional spaces (total of 68 spaces), a
City of Palo Alto Page 6
loading/unloading area, and a trash enclosure
• New soccer catchment fencing on north field
• New bicycle racks
• New decomposed granite pathway and pathway lights, and three picnic tables
• New landscaping, trees, fencing, benches and other amenities
• Resurface the existing bike path
• Removal of three trees; two small liquid amber trees, and one Monterey Pine
tree, for safety reasons
Throughout the numerous public meetings the community, ARB, Commission, and
Council raised questions and made comments and suggestions for design
improvements including pedestrian/bike access to the park, replacement
restroom location (specifically related to safety and access), tree protection
efforts, maximizing parking spaces to accommodate the expansion of field and
recreational use,and lighting improvements. In addition to this guidance on
design features, Recreation staff has collected insight from various field user
groups (during the annual field booking process) regarding preferred field design
features such as synthetic turf, field size, and multi-use designs to accommodate
growing interest in sports such as lacrosse. This input along with the analysis of an
environmental product for the artificial turf provided direction for the final design
as identified in the attached park improvement ordinance.
Design Contract
Amendment No. 3 to CDM Smith Contract:
The scope of work for both the El Camino Park Expanded Parking Lot and New
Restroom CIP (PE-13016)and the El Camino Park Playing Fields and Amenities CIP
(PG-13002)was included in Contract Amendment No. 1 (Staff report #2979) of
the Utilities Department’s El Camino Park Emergency Water Reservoir Project
contract with CDM Smith. The El Camino Park design included $397,000 for pre-
design, design, and construction administration and additional services for the
restoration phase. Amendment No. 3 in the amount $47,850 funds the additional
design of the field lighting and environmental infill for the artificial turf, public
outreach and a community meeting, printing for full size plan sets, additional
construction administration for the field lighting and reimbursable expenses.
Staff has administratively transferred funding from other tasks in the CDM Smith
contract to complete most of the work contained in Amendment No. 3 in order to
City of Palo Alto Page 7
avoid further project delays, and Amendment No. 3 is now needed to reimburse
those tasks.
Resolution of Unplanned, Additional Pre-Design Costs and Additional Utilities
Contributions:
The Emergency Water Reservoir Project has been paying the expenses for the
pre-design and design for the El Camino Park Restoration Project (Staff report
#2979). The extensive number of meetings with the PRC entailed consideration
and initial conceptual design of many project alternatives, and in combination
with additional percolation testing needs resulted in $230,736 in pre-design costs
that were not planned and not part of the $397,000 included in CDM Smith
Contract Amendment No. 2. At the conclusion of the pre-design phase, Utilities
and Community Services (CSD) Departments staff met to discuss the increased
costs and the scope of work that had been included in the original construction
cost contribution by Utilities for “in-kind” restoration of the park. Utilities and
CSD agreed that the Utilities contribution to the project should be increased to
account for park design costs not included in the original construction estimate,
ADA compliance upgrades that should have been required in an in-kind
restoration but were not included in the original construction estimate,
construction management services, and the cost for replacement of trees
damaged during the reservoir project. These additional Utilities contributions
total $267,400. The increased pre-design costs, increased Utilities contributions,
and reimbursement of Utilities for Amendment No. 2 design work paid by the
Reservoir project were addressed through an interdepartmental transfer. The
remaining CDM Smith contract work for the project is being paid directly by the El
Camino Park Restoration CIP project (PE-13016).
Budget Amendment Ordinance
Staff is recommending consolidation of existing funds in the amount of
$3,198,792 from CIP PG-13002, El Camino Park Playing Fields and Amenities, into
CIP PE-13016,El Camino Park Expanded Parking Lot and New Restroom,for a total
project budget allocation of $4,395,286. Consolidation of funds and elimination
of PG-13002 will allow for simpler and more streamlined management of the
project. Staff is also recommending that PE-13016 be retitled to “El Camino Park
Restoration Project” to reflect that it contains the scope for the entire El Camino
Park restoration. The changes to PE-13016 are reflected in Attachment C.
City of Palo Alto Page 8
As described above, the total project budget for the El Camino Park Restoration
Project is $4,395,286. The most recent engineer’s estimate for the construction
cost of these improvements is $4.4 million, an increase of approximately $1.0
million from the 2012 construction cost estimate primarily due to the factors
outlined in the table below.
Project Addition Source of Addition Estimated
Construction
Cost
North Field Lighting bid
alternate
Council request for lighting
consideration in December 2013
$295,000
Upgraded Class 1
Bike/Pedestrian Path bid
alternate
Component of the Bicycle/Pedestrian
Transportation Plan; omitted from
original scope
$86,000
Pathway Lights (27)&
upgrade pathway and
parking lot lights to LED
Building Code requirement; omitted
from original scope
$144,000
Environmental Artificial
Turf Infill
CEQA analysis and addendum to
ensure that there are no significant
environmental impacts caused by the
use of artificial turf
$400,000
Total:$925,000
This estimate includes the additional construction cost of adding 6 new field
lights, upgrades to meet Class 1 bike path standards along the west side of the
park, and the addition of Edel Grass TPE option totaling $925,000. While the field
lighting and upgraded bike paths are optional scope increases that could be left
out of the project or deferred, the pathway lighting was identified during the
design process as a code-required item that had been omitted from the original
construction cost estimate for the project. The separate bike path widened to
Class 1 standards provides recreation and improves transportation connections to
Menlo Park and the Palo Alto Intermodal Transit Center. The additional cost for
the environmentally-preferred artificial turf is required to address concerns about
potential impacts to field users and the environment. The specified product has
been tested by the City and compared to relevant regulatory standards pertaining
to human ingestion, drinking water protection and stormwater runoff as part of a
City of Palo Alto Page 9
CEQA addendum process addressing the artificial turf and new field lighting.
The current estimated total project cost is $5.53 million, indicating an estimated
funding shortfall of $1.13 million depending on the bid prices and the award of
the north field lighting bid alternate. Staff expects to issue a notice inviting bids
for the project in November 2014 and to return to Council in December for award
of the construction contract. Staff recommends that the project budget not be
adjusted at this time, and that a Budget Amendment Ordinance providing for any
additional appropriation increases accompany the award of construction contract
Council action in December, once the final costs for the project are known. Staff
intends to include the north field lighting addition, which has an estimated cost of
$295,000, as a bid alternate item, so that Council will have the option of
approving funds for this addition at the time of construction contract award. The
Class 1 Bike/Pedestrian Path will also be included as a bid alternate.There is
currently $205,000 available in the Parks Development Impact Fee Fund that
could be used to cover increased costs for the project. This amount is net of the
$2.761 million in Parks Development Impact Fees that was approved by Council
for Byxbee Park improvements as part of Council’s June 2014 Infrastructure
Funding Plan. In addition, existing funds from PL-04010, Bicycle & Pedestrian
Transportation Plan Projects, can be used to pay for the cost of the Class 1
Bike/Pedestrian Path upgrade. The remaining potential funding increase would
have to be covered from the Infrastructure Reserve.
Project Timeline
The schedule for completion of the El Camino Park Restoration project is as
follows:
·100% Construction Plans Submittal to Building Department –9/22/2014
·Council action on first reading of PIO, BAO adoption, and CDM contract
amendment –10/20/2014
·Council second reading of PIO –11/3/2014
·Bid opening –November 2014
·Council approval of construction and construction management contracts –
December 2014
·Construction begins –January 2015
·Project completion – Fall 2015
City of Palo Alto Page 10
Resource Impact
The Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) is necessary to consolidate all existing
funding for the El Camino Park Restoration Project into a single CIP, and to
appropriately rename that CIP to reflect the Project’s scope. At this time, staff is
not recommending increases to this project.
Depending on the construction bids received this winter, additional funding is
anticipated for the estimated $925,000 combined cost of the north field lighting
bid alternate, code upgrades for the Class 1 bike path, pathway and parking lot
LED lighting, and environmentally preferred artificial turf. These additional items,
the consultant amendment of $47,850 and miscellaneous increases for
construction such as testing and permitting fees are estimated at $1.13 million
and will likely require a budget adjustment.As described above, the north field
lighting and Class 1 bike path additions will be included as optional add-alternate
items in the bid package, and there are some funds available in the Parks
Development Impact Fee Fund that could be used to cover the project cost
increase. In formulating a recommendation to Council at the time of the
construction contract award in December, staff will carefully consider the funds
available in the Infrastructure Reserve and any impact of the recommendation on
funding that has been designated for infrastructure projects as part of the City
Council approved Infrastructure Plan.
Policy Implications
The proposed park improvements are consistent with Policy C-26 of the
Community Services element of the Comprehensive Plan that encourages
maintaining park facilities as safe and healthy community assets; and Policy C-22
that encourages new community facilities to have flexible functions to ensure
adaptability to the changing needs of the community.
The proposed project is consistent with the goals of the 2002 Athletic Fields
Report.
Environmental Review
The Utilities Department’s El Camino Park Reservoir Project was subject to
environmental review under provisions of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). A Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this project was
prepared and circulated on November 8, 2006, and a Final Environmental Impact
City of Palo Alto Page 11
Report for this project was prepared and circulated on February 8, 2007. Council
certified the adequacy of the Final EIR in March 2007. An addendum to the EIR
(Attachment E) has been prepared to incorporate any additional park
improvements described in this report that present potential new and/or
significant environmental impacts not contemplated by the original EIR.The EIR
addendum applies criteria for ground and surface water quality and human health
standards to guide the selection of the artificial turf product and provides an
analysis on the proposed lighting levels for the north athletic field. The north
athletic field lighting allows for evening use. The artificial turf allows for more
playing time (day and evening), requires less maintenance and watering and is
preferred over natural grass.The EIR addendum reflects all park improvements
and is also described by the Park Improvement Ordinance (Attachment A).
Attachments:
·A-00710471A ORDN El Camino Park PIO.final (DOCX)
·B -C10131396_CDM Smith Contract Amendment No 3.final (PDF)
·C -BAO XXXX -El Camino Park Funding Consolidation (DOC)
·D -Chronology (DOCX)
·E -El Camino Park CEQA Addendum with Attachments (PDF)
*NOT YET APPROVED* Attachment A
1
141015 mf00710471
ORDINANCE NO. _____
Ordinance of The Council Of The City Of Palo Alto Approving And
Adopting Plans For Sports-Related Improvements And Associated
Facilities Located Within El Camino Park
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings. The City Council finds and declares that:
(a)Article VIII of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and Section 22.08.005 of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code require that, before any substantial building, construction,
reconstruction or development is commenced or approved, upon or with respect to any land
held by the City for park purposes, the Council shall first cause to be prepared and by ordinance
approve and adopt a plan therefor.
(b)El Camino Park is dedicated to park purposes.
(c)On May 21, 2007, Council adopted a Park Improvement Ordinance No. 4952
for the underground reservoir and pump station improvements at El Camino Park. The
ordinance referenced installing a 2.5 million gallon water storage reservoir, modifying the
Lytton Station (the existing pump station at El Camino Park) by constructing a below grade
pump station and well facilities, replacing the existing above-grade structure with a similarly
sized structure, and replacing and upgrading the existing turnout and pumping equipment. The
ordinance noted that the construction would require the temporary closure of all or a part of
the park for up to a two-year period, and that upon completion of construction, the park would
be restored and improved with new facilities. It also noted that there would be no reduction in
park area and no part of the park will be used for a non-park usage, other than that which is
already occupied by the Lytton Station.
(d)The City intends to authorize construction of certain additional park
improvements within El Camino Park, as shown in Exhibit “A”. Construction and installation of
these additional park improvements are being coordinated with the City’s Utilities Department
staff in order to avoid any conflict with the completion of the reservoir and pump station
project.
(e)The following additional sports-related improvements and associated
facilities within El Camino Park have been proposed by the Community Services Department in
coordination with the Parks and Recreation Commission:
(1)Construction of a new synthetic turf athletic field (soccer/lacrosse), which
replaces the existing natural turf playing field.
(2)Construction of a natural turf athletic field (softball/lacrosse/soccer), which
replaces the original natural turf playing field.
(3)Construction of a new restroom facility, which replaces the old restroom
facility.
*NOT YET APPROVED* Attachment A
2
141015 mf00710471
(4)Construction of a new storage building for maintenance equipment.
(5)Construction of a new scorekeeper booth.
(6)Construction of an expanded parking lot with twenty-two additional spaces
and a trash enclosure.
(7)Installation of four new field lights on the north field.
(8)Installation of two new field lights on the south field.
(9)Installation of lighting conduit and footings for all new lights on the south
field,which will replace the old lights.
(10)Installation of new pathway lights.
(11)Construction of soccer catchment fencing on the north field.
(12)Installation of twelve single loop bicycle racks which will fit up to twenty
four bicycles.
(13)The removal of three trees due to poor health and/or a conflict with the
new park improvements.
(14)Installation of a new decomposed granite pathway and three picnic tables.
(15)Installation of new landscaping, trees, fencing, benches and other amenities.
(16)Installation of a widened bike path, signage and other pathway
improvements.
(f)The improvements will avoid existing protected trees located along the
perimeter of the park.
(g)The improvements described above and as more specifically described in
Exhibit "A" are consistent with park and conservation purposes.
(h)The Council desires to approve the improvements described above and as
more specifically described in Exhibit "A”.
SECTION 2. The Council hereby approves the Plan for replacement and construction
of improvements in El Camino Park and hereby adopts the Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A"
as part of the official plan for the construction of improvements in El Camino Park.
SECTION 3. The Council finds that the Utilities Department’s El Camino Park
Reservoir Project was subject to environmental review under provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Draft Environmental Impact Report for that Project was
prepared and circulated on November 8, 2006, and a Final Environmental Impact Report (”Final
EIR”) was prepared and circulated on February 8, 2007. Council certified the adequacy of the
Final EIR in March 2007. An addendum to the Final EIR has been prepared to incorporate the
Project modifications described in this ordinance. The Project refinements,as described above,
for the site improvements to El Camino Park would not result in new significant environmental
impacts beyond those already identified in the Final EIR, and would not increase the severity of
any significant impact previously identified.
*NOT YET APPROVED* Attachment A
3
141015 mf00710471
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of
its adoption.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
________________________________________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:APPROVED:
________________________________________________________
Senior Asst.City Attorney City Manager
____________________________
Director of Community Services
____________________________
Director of Administrative Services
1 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO CONTRACT NO. C10131396
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND
CDM SMITH, INC.
This Amendment No. 3 to Contract No. C10131396 (“Contract”) is entered into on September 24, 2014, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”),
and CDM SMITH, INC., a Massachusetts Corporation, located at 100 Pringle Ave., Suite 300, Walnut
Creek, California 94596 (“CONSULTANT”).
R E C I T A L S
A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of professional consulting design services for the El Camino Park Restoration Project (“Project”).
B. The parties wish to amend the Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree:
SECTION 1. Section 1, SCOPE OF SERVICES is hereby amended to add the following:
Consultant shall perform the services described in Exhibit “A” as revised in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the
reasonable satisfaction of the CITY.
SECTION 2. Section 3, SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE, is hereby amended to add the
following:
Time is of the essence in the performance of services. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in
Exhibit “B”, as revised, attached to and made part of this Agreement. Any Services for
which times for performance are not specified in the 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 the CONSULTANT.
SECTION 3. Section 4, NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION, is hereby amended to read as follows:
The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described
above and in Exhibit “A”, including payment for both professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Six Million Three Hundred Forty- Four Thousand
Three Hundred Two Dollars ($6,344,302.00). In the event Additional Services are authorized,
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
2 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
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 Forty-Eight Thousand Three Hundred Fifty-Two Dollars ($6,348,652.00). The
applicable rates and schedule of payments are set out in Exhibit “C” and “C-1”, as revised, 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 “A” and 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 4. Section 12, SUBCONTRACTING, is hereby amended to read as follows:
Notwithstanding Section 11 above, CITY agrees that sub-consultants may be used to complete the
Services. The sub-consultants authorized by CITY to perform work on this Project are:
1. Siegfried Engineering, Inc. - Landscape Architect
CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any sub-consultants and for
any compensation due to sub-consultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever
concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a sub- consultant. CONSTULANT shall change or add sub-consultants only with the
prior approval of the city manager or his designee. “
SECTION 5. Section 13, PROJECT MANAGEMENT, is hereby amended to read as follows:
CONSULTANT will assign Arvind Akela as the project director to have supervisory responsibility
for the performance, progress and execution of the Services and Bill Brick 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 person or property.
The CITY’s project manager is Elizabeth Ames, Public Works Department, Engineering Division,
at Box 10250, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone: 650.329.2502. The project manager will be the
point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. The project engineer is Hung Nguyen, Telephone: 650.329.2548. The CITY may designate an alternate project
manager from time to time.
SECTION 6. The following exhibit(s) to the Contract are hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
3 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
a. Exhibit “A” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES AND COMPENSATION”.
b. Exhibit “B” entitled “SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE”.
c. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”.
d. Exhibit “C-1” entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE”.
SECTION 7. 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 WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this
Amendment on the date first above written.
APPROVED:
City Manager APPROVED AS TO
FORM: Senior Asst. City
Attorney
CDM SMITH, INC.
By:
Name:
Title:
Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF SERVICES AND
COMPENSATION EXHIBIT "B": PROJECT SCHEDULE
EXHIBIT "C": COMPENSATION EXHIBIT "C-1": HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
Cient Service Leader
Arvind Akela
4 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
EXHIBIT A
Scope of Services for the El Camino Park Restoration Project
City of Palo Alto
CDM Smith Amendment No. 3
This revised scope of services amends Exhibit “A” entitled ‘SCOPE OF SERVICES” in Amendment No. Two to Contract No. C10131396 dated September 10, 2012. The following
addition to the scope of services is necessary to address changes to the project since work began on the project in 2012.
Background
The El Camino Park Restoration Project (a.k.a. Phase 2 Project) will restore and improve
various park and landscaping elements at El Camino Park immediately following completion of the City’s El Camino Park Reservoir, Lytton Pump Station, and Well Project – Phase 1 (a.k.a.
Phase 1 Project) construction activities. During development of the El Camino Park Reservoir, Lytton Pump Station, and Well Project – Phase 1 design package, the City decided to make several additional improvements to El Camino Park, rather than have it be replaced in-kind after
Phase 1 Project construction, to improve its value and usefulness to the community.
Utilities Department was the lead for the Phase 1 Project. Public Works Engineering Division is
the lead for the Phase 2 Project. The CITY’s Phase 2 Project Manager is Elizabeth Ames, Public Works Department, and Engineering Division, at P.O. Box 10250, Palo Alto, CA
94303, Telephone: 650.329.2502. The project manager will be the point of contact with
respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. The project engineer is Hung Nguyen, Telephone: 650.329.2548.
Several potential park restoration and improvement concepts were developed by the design team and presented to the City and the Parks and Recreation Commission for feedback. As a
result, it was decided that the following elements would be included in the design of the El
Camino Park Restoration Project: synthetic turf north soccer/lacrosse playing field; restoration of the existing natural turf south softball/multi use playing field; new storage building for
maintenance equipment; new scorekeeper booth attached to storage building; new restroom facility; expanded parking lot with trash enclosure; lighting conduit and footings for all new lights on north field; lighting conduit and footings for all new lights on south field; mulch for non-turf
areas; soccer catchment safety netting; limited tree removal; new decomposed granite pathway with future lighting and three picnic tables.
The basis for the layout and design of all El Camino Park Restoration Project elements shall be the package provided for the City Council Meeting held on April 23, 2012, and the Architectural Review Board (ARB) Study Session held on May 3, 2012 (during which only minor comments
were received).
The entire park shall be available for the contractor’s use during construction as the soccer and
baseball field activities shall be temporarily relocated by the City to another location. Following construction, the contractor shall warrant the facilities for one year following substantial
completion.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
5 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Engineering services for this project shall include: site surveying as necessary to support the
design elements, final design, preparation of construction drawings and specifications, bid period services, and construction phase design support services.
Scope of Services
The scope of services is divided into the following tasks. 1. Predesign 2. Design 3. Pre-Construction
4. Engineering Services During Construction 5. Reimbursable Expenses 6. Additional Services
1. Predesign
CONSULTANT shall perform the following work under this task:
Revisions to Phase 2 landscaping alternative layouts and associated cost estimates as
may be required prior to presentation of materials by Park’s Department at a future City’s Parks & Recreation Division or City Council Meeting.
Revisions to final base grades in Phase 1 Project civil drawings, in the form of a Phase 1 construction change order, due to revised size and location of the synthetic field to be
located on the north half of El Camino Park.
Assumptions:
CONSULTANT shall meet with City Parks and Recreation Division staff to confirm the City’s desired size, use, and features for the new north field synthetic turf surfacing and
other new park buildings and amenities.
Deliverables:
Landscaping and architectural layout plans, renderings, and related materials will be
emailed in pdf format to the City for review and comment in preparation for the
associated meetings in which the material shall be presented.
2. Design
Project Meetings
CONSULTANT shall plan for meetings with the City’s Architectural Review Board (ARB) and
with other members of City’s departments (User Group Meetings) during the design process, in addition to holding internal coordination meetings with CONSULTANT’s design team members.
Consultant shall assist the City with a Public Meeting.
Approach:
CONSULTANT shall prepare drawings, including architectural renderings in plan and profile, of
the above ground structures and landscaping for presentation to the ARB. Two meetings are planned: One to introduce the 65% design elements to the ARB and receive their suggestions,
and a second presentation to confirm CONSULTANT’s incorporation of suggestions into the 100% design and hear any final comments prior to completing the Bid Set. Attendance at additional public meetings such as City Council, and the Parks and Recreation Commission are
excluded.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
6 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Up to four User Group workshops are planned during the design phase. Workshops are anticipated to include the following: Project Kick-off Meeting; 65% User Group Meeting; 90%
User Group Meeting; and 100% User Group Meeting. The Consultant shall determine which
members of its design team will be present at the User Group workshops.
The CONSULTANT shall assist with developing materials to support a Public Meeting for presentation of the El Camino Park Restoration Project.
CONSULTANT shall prepare a power point presentation and up to 9 presentation boards for a public meeting to present the current park design and the lighting design.
One (1) of the nine (9) boards will reflect park sports field photometric design showing lighting levels with all less than 50 feet tall and lighting levels with 70 feet tall poles.
Consultant shall prepare an exhibit with field lighting design for four pole-mounted lights as presented to the ARB at the meeting held on 12/19/2013.
CONSULTANT shall attend one (1) public meeting with City staff.
Assumptions:
The City’s User Group will include project management from the Community Services Department, a utilities engineering representative, construction, operations, maintenance, traffic,
planning, public works storm division, and water quality staff. City staff will prepare meeting summaries and action item lists.
Deliverables:
Proposed agenda prior to each workshop – electronic and paper copies.
Draft versions of the public meeting materials shall be emailed in pdf format to the City for review and comment prior to the meeting. Final versions shall be emailed to the City
or brought by CONSULTANT to the meeting.
65 Percent Design Submittal
The objective of this task is to provide the City with an interim set of documents at approximately 65 percent through the design process. With these documents the City shall be
able to confirm that its understanding of the project facilities from the preliminary design work is
being appropriately implemented.
Approach:
Drawings and specifications shall be in progress and will not be complete. However, it is important for the City to review the concepts and approaches shown thereon before the design
progresses significantly further.
This submittal packages shall contain:
Symbol, abbreviation, and standard legend drawings.
Civil grading and drainage site plans.
Civil yard and irrigation piping site plans.
Building plan views for architectural, structural, and mechanical disciplines.
Electrical site plans with major duct bank routing and outdoor lighting locations.
Electrical single line drawings.
Typical details for civil, structural, architectural, and electrical disciplines.
Other drawings in progress that would be useful for review.
Lists of drawings and specification sections anticipated for the Bid Set.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
7 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Specifications in progress.
Project construction schedule (provided 2 weeks following delivery of the design
package).
Updated preliminary construction cost estimate (provided 2 weeks following delivery of
the design package).
List of specific questions for City review and response.
One User Group workshop shall be held in conjunction with the delivery of this submittal. It shall be facilitated by CONSULTANT and shall serve to introduce the construction documents to the
submittal reviewers.
The City shall review and provide consolidated written comments upon this submittal to
CONSULTANT. These comments shall be provided in a Microsoft Word. CONSULTANT shall
write responses to all City comments and incorporate these comments into the next design submittal.
CONSULTANT shall complete an internal quality assurance and quality control review at this stage concurrent with the City’s review. Results of this review shall be incorporated into the next
design progress submittal.
Assumptions:
It is assumed that the El Camino Park Restoration Project shall include the design of the following principal facilities:
1. Synthetic turf north soccer playing field; 2. Natural turf south softball/lacrosse playing field;
3. New restroom facility ; 4. New storage building for maintenance equipment;
5. New scorekeeper booth, attached to storage building;
6. Expanded parking lot with trash enclosure; 7. Lighting conduit and footings for all new lights on north field and new pathways;
8. Lighting conduit and footings for all new lights on south field; 9. Mulch for non-turf areas; 10. Soccer catchment fencing;
11. Bike racks; 12. Limited tree removal;
13. New decomposed granite pathway and three picnic tables;
14. Arboretum design.
Additional assumptions include:
The basis for the layout and design of all El Camino Park Restoration Project elements
shall be the package provided for the ARB Study Session held on May 3, 2012 (during
which only minor comments were received), which includes the El Camino Park site plan graphics package prepared for the City Council Meeting on April 23, 2012.
Consultant shall analyze the existing loading of the existing park electric service and
transformer to determine if the existing transformer can support the additional lighting
load. If the loads exceeded the capacity of the existing transformer, Consultant will
provide the calculated loads to City. The City shall coordinate the replacement of the
transformer with CPA’s Utilities. However, Consultant’s scope of this task shall also
include sizing for the main switch gear.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
8 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Consultant shall prepare the field lighting design for 4 pole-mounted lights as presented
to the City’s Architectural Review Board (ARB) at the meeting held on 12/19/13.
Consultant shall prepare a final photometric plan representing the lighting levels on the
field as well as the limits of spill-over lighting based on staff, community, board and
commission feedback. The lighting levels will be represented in foot candles as both
spot levels and contours.
Consultant shall work with the City and the proposed field lighting manufacturer, to
specify a lighting control scheme and product line.
Based on City-provided information and expectations for the interpretive signage and
plant materials for the Arboretum, CONSULTANT shall provide complete detailing and
specifications for the design packages.
Consultant shall assume up to 10 new trees may need irrigation valves and bubblers.
This scope of work shall not include layout or design of the dog park area or other
improvements that the City plans to locate north of Alma Street.
This design submittal shall be reviewed by the City’s User Group.
Drawings and specifications shall be prepared to CONSULTANT standard format, layering and fonts; City’s standard border shall be used if provided.
City shall be responsible for developing the Division 0 contracting document associated with the project (contracting conditions, General Construction, Special Provisions, etc).
Drawings shall be prepared in Autocad 2011.
The City shall provide one consolidated set of review comments (paper and electronic copy) on the 65 percent submittal within 14 calendar days of submission. CONSULTANT may continue to work on the design during this interim period.
The City shall provide an electronic copy of its current and standard specification Division 0 and 1 sections for CONSULTANT to edit for this project. CONSULTANT shall
add Division 1 specification sections for this project.
The contract documents shall be based upon a competitive, public works bidding
process.
The estimated construction schedule shall be prepared using Microsoft Project®
software.
The existing El Camino restroom and other facilities for demolition do not contain
hazardous materials such as lead paint, asbestos, PCBs, PCB caulking, heavy metals,
VOC or petroleum contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater etc. that needs to be tested, treated, or remediated as part of the field services, design, or construction of this
project. If requested, these materials can be tested using Additional Services task.
Traffic control plan, if required, shall be provided by the construction contractor.
Materials used for building walls and roof will be similar to those used for the Lytton Pump Station.
All buildings shall be ventilated by natural/passive means. Forced ventilation and air conditioned heating and cooling are not included.
Restrooms will not have heated water.
Parking lot drainage patterns will be consistent with existing drainage patterns (i.e., from
west to east where it ponds until it evaporates).
Design does not include extension or improvements to existing storm drains.
Design will not improve existing sanitary sewer capacity or materials; no sewer connection capacity or other sewer connection calculations or documents are required.
No traffic counts or modeling will be provided; the study will be based solely on historic counts and capacities provided by the City.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
9 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Deliverables:
Five full size set drawings; one electronic copy of the drawings on USB drive or CD-
ROM.
Five sets of bound half-size drawings.
Five sets of bound specifications; one electronic copy of the specifications on USB drive or CDROM.
One paper and one electronic copy of response to City review comments.
90 Percent Design Submittal
The purpose of the 90 percent submittal is to demonstrate that all City comments from the 65 percent submittal have been appropriately addressed. This is to be essentially the complete
draft of the bid plans and specifications.
Approach: This submittal package shall include:
All drawings required for the construction documents.
All specification sections, excluding those Division 0 contractual documents prepared by
the City.
List of specific questions for City review and response.
A User Group workshop shall be held in conjunction with the delivery of this submittal. It shall be
facilitated by CONSULTANT and shall serve to present the construction documents to the reviewers.
The City shall review and provide consolidated written comments upon this submittal to
CONSULTANT. These comments shall be provided in a Microsoft Word. CONSULTANT shall write responses to all City comments and incorporate these comments into the next design
submittal.
An updated construction schedule and construction cost estimate shall be provided with the 90
percent submittal.
Assumptions:
This submittal shall be reviewed by the City’s User Group.
The City shall provide one consolidated set of City review comments (paper and electronic copy) on the 90 percent submittal within 14 calendar days of submission. CONSULTANT shall continue to work on the design during this interim period.
Deliverables:
Five full size set drawings; one electronic copy of the drawings on USB drive or CD-
ROM.
Five sets of bound half-size drawings.
Five sets of bound specifications; one electronic copy of the specifications on USB drive or CD-ROM.
Agenda for one User Group workshop.
One paper and one electronic copy of response to City review comments.
100 Percent Design Submittal
The purpose of the 100 percent submittal is to demonstrate that all City comments from the 90
percent submittal have been appropriately addressed, and that the documents are ready for City
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
10 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Building Department Review. This is to be essentially the complete draft of the bid plans and
specifications. The Building Department submittal shall be sealed by the responsible engineer/architect and signed by California PE or architect as appropriate.
Approach: This submittal package shall include:
All drawings required for the construction documents.
All specification sections, excluding those Division 0 contractual documents prepared by the City.
List of specific questions for City review and response.
A User Group workshop shall be held in conjunction with the delivery of this submittal. It shall be
facilitated by CONSULTANT and shall serve to present the construction documents to the reviewers.
The City shall review and provide consolidated written comments upon this submittal to CONSULTANT. These comments will be provided in a Microsoft Word. CONSULTANT shall
write responses to all City comments and incorporate these comments into the building permit
submittal.
Assumptions:
This submittal shall be reviewed by the City’s User Group.
The City shall provide one consolidated set of City review comments (paper and electronic copy) on the 90 percent submittal within 14 calendar days of submission.
CONSULTANT shall continue to work on the design during this interim period.
Deliverables:
Five full size set of drawings; one electronic copy of the drawings on USB drive or CD- ROM.
Five sets of bound half-size drawings.
Five sets of bound specifications; one electronic copy of the specifications on USB drive
or CD-ROM.
Agenda for one User Group workshop.
One paper and one electronic copy of response to City review comments.
Bid Set Submittal
This subtask includes the remaining work to complete the project construction documents.
Approach: The Bid Set submittal shall be sealed by the responsible engineer/architect and signed by
California PE or architect as appropriate, and shall comprise complete biddable construction
document originals with all comments addressed from the 100 Percent design submittal.
Assumptions:
CONSULTANT shall print the construction documents for bidding and will retain ten sets for CONSULTANT’s use during the bid period.
Deliverables:
Five full size set of drawings; one electronic copy of the drawings on USB drive or CD-
ROM.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
11 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Five sets of half-size drawings and specifications.
Two electronic copies of the drawings and specifications on USB drive or CD-ROM.
One paper and one electronic copy of the final construction cost estimate.
One paper and one electronic copy of the final project construction schedule.
3. Pre-Construction
During the pre-construction (bid) period, the City will receive questions and general inquiries
from general contractors, subcontractors, and vendors on specific aspects of the construction documents. These questions and inquiries often require written clarification to further
communicate the project’s requirements. Additionally, one pre-bid conferences and job walk shall be held to provide bidders with a formal opportunity to familiarize themselves with the project sites. The purpose of this task is to answer bid period questions and assist the City in
conducting the pre-bid conferences and pre-bid site visits.
Approach:
CONSULTANT’s pre-construction period services shall consist of the following work:
Review and respond to bidder (general contractors, subcontractors, and vendors)
questions as directed by the City.
As required, prepare and distribute to the City for distribution by the City, addenda
describing clarifications and revisions to the contract documents.
Attend and assist at the pre-bid site visit.
Assumptions:
The City shall distribute contract documents to potential bidders, maintain the bidders
list, copy and distribute addenda, arrange and direct the pre-bid conference and job walk, and conduct the bid openings.
One pre-bid conference which shall include a job walk.
Deliverables: Original camera ready copy of addenda, as required.
4. Engineering Services During Construction
CONSULTANT shall work directly with the City and the Construction Manager during the
construction phase of the project on an as-needed basis and as described below.
CONSULTANT’s work shall not include construction management, resident engineering,
startup, testing, construction inspection, special inspection services, or punchlist generation.
CONSULTANT’s contract shall not include subcontractors for special inspection services, geotechnical testing, materials testing, or arborist services.
Submittal Review
The purpose of this subtask is to provide the review of shop drawings, product data, and
samples submitted by the contractor to the City.
Approach:
The Construction Manager (CM) shall transmit to CONSULTANT all technical submittals provided by the general contractor for CONSULTANT’s review, comments, and recommendations as to how to respond to each submittal. In so doing, CONSULTANT shall
select from the four review categories listed in the City’s standard specifications: 1) No
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
12 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Exceptions Taken; 2) Make Corrections Noted; 3) Revise & Resubmit; 4) Rejected.
CONSULTANT shall maintain a log of submittals in a Microsoft Excel® spreadsheet for internal management and coordination with the Construction Manager.
Assumptions:
The number of submittals and re-submittals shall be no more than 56.
CONSULTANT shall write a summary memorandum of comments rather than annotate
all copies of the submittal wherever possible. Only a very few submittals will require direct annotations (for example, some rebar placement drawings).
CONSULTANT shall not be required to track submittal review labor hours or costs for
individual submittals.
The Construction Manager shall review schedule, progress payment, and contractual
issue submittals from the general contractor. The general contractor shall not be allowed to submit multiple submittals for the same basic topic that unnecessarily increase the
number of submittals (for example, guardrail embeds locations separately from the
guardrails).
Submittal review shall determine if the items covered by the submittals will, after installation or
incorporation in the work, conform to the requirements of the construction documents and be compatible with the design concept of the completed project as a functioning whole as indicated
in the construction contract documents. Submittal review and approval shall not extend to means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction (except where a particular means, method, technique, sequence or procedure of construction is specifically and
expressly called for by the construction contract documents) or to safety precautions or
programs incident thereto.
Deliverables: One copy of review comments for each submittal.
Site Visits and Meeting Attendance
Periodic site visits, meeting attendance, and telephone conference calls shall be required to
complete intermittent technical review, specialty inspection, understand the progress of the
construction, aid in resolution of requests for information and requests for clarifications, view architectural finishes, and to coordinate work with the Construction Manager. The deliverables
listed below shall be prepared and submitted.
Approach:
CONSULTANT shall make periodic site visits to observe the work and advise the
Construction Manager if the work observed during the visit is being conducted so that the completed work of the construction contractor will in general conform to the design.
CONSULTANT shall answer questions on the construction documents from City or Construction Manager.
CONSULTANT shall attend progress meetings and attend special technical meetings
with the Construction Manager and construction contractor, when requested and within the limits of the task budget.
Assumptions:
Up to 20 person trips shall be required for weekly progress meetings and attend special
technical meetings (assuming a 6 hour average trip).
Meeting minutes for all meetings with be taken and prepared by others.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
13 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Except to the extent specifically identified elsewhere in the Agreement, CONSULTANT shall not during site visits during the construction phase, supervise, direct, of have control over any
Contractor’s work nor shall CONSULTANT have authority over or responsibility for the means,
methods, techniques, sequences, or procedures of construction selected by Contractor, for safety precautions and procedures and programs incident to the work of the Contractor, or for
any failure of Contractor to comply with laws, rules, regulations, ordinances, codes, or orders
applicable to Contractor furnishing and performing their work.
Deliverables: None.
Clarifications Review
During the construction period, the general contractor will ask questions on details of the contract, substitutions, and alternative approaches. Change orders may be required to address
unforeseen conditions and provide clarifications of the contract documents. The purpose of this
subtask is to review general contractor questions and provide written clarifications for City review and use by the Construction Manager. The deliverables listed below shall be prepared
and submitted by CONSULTANT.
Approach:
CONSULTANT shall interpret the contract documents, review unforeseen site conditions, and review alternative proposals by the construction contractor presented in Requests for Information (RFI’s) or Requests for Clarifications (RFC’s). Activities shall typically include
receiving and logging the request (email, letter, fax, or telephoned questions), researching the question, preparation of a written response, and coordination with construction management
staff.
Assumptions:
The number of clarification requests shall be no more than 24.
Clarification requests related to the general contractor’s means and methods shall be
returned with the comment that the general contractor is responsible for means and methods.
The goal is to respond to clarification requests within 7 calendar days. Approximately 10 percent of the total, designated as high priority, shall be answered within 2 working days.
Responses will typically be emailed to the Construction Manager.
Deliverables:
Memoranda or forms with responses to clarifications. These shall be emailed to the Construction Manager.
Change Order Preparation and Review
During the construction period, construction change orders may be required to address
unforeseen conditions, new information, and resolve inconsistencies within the contract
documents. The City may also wish to add work to this project for a variety of reasons. The Construction Manager will ask questions about the project and discuss issues with
CONSULTANT. The purpose of this subtask is to provide support in construction issues, construction change orders and related activities.
Approach:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
14 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Design, write, and review change order documentation. Anticipated assignments may include:
assistance in preparing requests to the general contractor for proposals for extra or changed work; assistance in research or contract documents to determine if work proposed by the general contractors for inclusion in a change order should be considered extra work for which a
change order is appropriate; review of design calculations and intent; discussions with City staff; and review of cost estimates.
Assumptions:
Construction change orders shall solely be to support the project scope of work at bid
date.
Change order documentation shall not be drawn in computer generated form if hand
drawn sketches or markups shall adequately describe the work required.
A total of 4 construction changes of varying size are assumed.
Deliverables:
Emails and memoranda on contractor requests that work be considered “extra.”
Change order documentation – drawings, sketches, specifications.
Supporting documentation of reasons to accept, modify, or refuse to issue contractor requested change orders.
5. 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. The City shall
reimburse the CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost not to exceed the
total amount shown below. Examples of the Reimbursable Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are any items were not included in the Contract and Amendment Nos. 1, 2
& 3:
Outside service printing/copying of drawings and documents.
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
Sub-consultant 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.
6. Additional Services
Approach:
CONSULTANT shall provide the following additional services on an if- and as requested basis within the limits of the available budget:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
15 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Testing for hazardous materials such as lead paint, asbestos, PCBs, PCB caulking, heavy metals, VOC or petroleum contaminated soil, contaminated groundwater etc. at the project sites or existing facilities.
Potholing (non-destructive excavation) to determine location of underground utilities.
Review of additional submittals, RFIs, attendance at additional meetings beyond the budget allocated above.
Other project-related work that is not included above.
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 below. The City may, at its sole discretion, decline to authorize any or all work described herein.
Exceptions to the El Camino Park Restoration Project Scope:
It is understood that the following are not included in the services scoped above: a. Design of City-power distribution (primary conduits) to the park transformer, b. Phase I Environmental Assessment, Phase II Subsurface Investigation, and asbestos
and lead containing material investigation and report, c. Geotechnical investigation, report and monitoring,
d. Environmental impact report or other CEQA-related updates,
e. Potholing to determine location and/or elevation of underground utilities, f. Permit applications and fees,
g. Construction management, inspection, supervision and scheduling, and
h. Interpretive signage design
Compensation
Compensation for the additional services will be on a time and materials basis according to
CONSULTANT’s Billing Rate Schedule attached to the Agreement. The total cost for the services described herein is summarized below.
Amendment No. 3 Costs Breakdown
Tasks Amount
Credit for Change Order No. 3 Predesign to
Add Julia Morgan Building -$4,250
Credit for Change Order No. 3 Project
Meetings to Add Julia Morgan Building -$4,250
Added Scope – Assistance with Public Meeting $10,500
Added Scope – North Soccer Field Lighting
Design $26,000
Added Scope – Arboretum Design (offset
w/credit from Alma St. X-Walk design) $0
Added Scope – 25 Full Size Drawings $3,000
Added Scope – Engineering Services During
Construction for Field Lighting Elements $6,250
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
16 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Added Scope - Engineering Services During
Construction for Arboretum Elements $1,250
Reimbursable Expenses $5,000
Additional Services for unforeseen issues $4,350
TOTAL $47,850
Revised Total Contract Amount
Tasks Amount
Original Contract Total w/ Contingency
(CMR:424:09) $3,828,680
Amendment One (Staff Report ID #2979) $1,299,122
Amendment Two (Staff Report ID #3815) $1,173,000
Amendment Three $47,850
TOTAL $6,348,652
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
Task Name Duration Start Finish
El Camino Park Restoration 8 days Wed 8/28/13 Mon 9/9/13 Project status meeting/Kickoff Phase 2 0 days Wed 8/28/13 Wed 8/28/13
Authorization to proceed 0 days Mon 9/9/13 Mon 9/9/13
Improvement plans and approvals 560 days Mon 9/9/13 Fri 10/30/15
ARB submittal and approval 138 days Mon 9/9/13 Thu 3/20/14
Prepare ARB plans and finishes per ARB checklist 25 days Mon 9/9/13 Fri 10/11/13
Submit materials for ARB approval 0 days Mon 10/14/13 Mon 10/14/13
Stanford approval submittal and review 39 days Mon 10/14/13 Thu 12/5/13
Planning prepare EIR amendment 35 days Mon 10/14/13 Fri 11/29/13
Revise/Resubmit Plans per DRC comments 1 day Mon 12/2/13 Mon 12/2/13
ARB approval meeting (1st and 3rd Thurs) 0 days Thu 12/19/13 Thu 12/19/13
ARB Sub-committee meeting 0 days Thu 3/20/14 Thu 3/20/14
PIO approvals 270 days Mon 9/9/13 Mon 9/22/14
Staff prepare PIO 10 days Mon 9/9/13 Fri 9/20/13
Submit materials for Park Commission 0 days Wed 1/15/14 Wed 1/15/14
Park Commission meeting (4th Tues) 0 days Tue 1/21/14 Tue 1/21/14
Public meeting 1 day Wed 2/19/14 Wed 2/19/14
Submit materials for Park Commission 0 days Mon 3/17/14 Mon 3/17/14
Park Commission meeting (4th Tues) 0 days Tue 3/25/14 Tue 3/25/14
Prepare staff report to Council for PIO & EIR amendment 33 days Mon 3/3/14 Wed 4/16/14
City Council 1st reading of PIO & Amend CDM Contract 0 days Mon 9/8/14 Mon 9/8/14
City Council 2nd reading of PIO 0 days Mon 9/22/14 Mon 9/22/14
Construction Documents 65% submittal 118 days Tue 11/5/13 Thu 4/17/14
Prepare 65% PS & E 85 days Tue 11/5/13 Mon 3/3/14
65% submittal 0 days Tue 3/4/14 Tue 3/4/14
City Review 32 days Wed 3/5/14 Thu 4/17/14
Meet with City to clarify comments 0 days Thu 4/17/14 Thu 4/17/14
Construction Documents 90% Submittal 55 days Thu 4/17/14 Thu 7/3/14
Prepare 90% PS & E 42 days Thu 4/17/14 Fri 6/13/14
90% Submittal 0 days Fri 6/13/14 Fri 6/13/14
City Review 13 days Mon 6/16/14 Wed 7/2/14
Meet with City to clarify comments 0 days Thu 7/3/14 Thu 7/3/14
Construction Documents 100% Submittal 83 days Mon 7/7/14 Wed 10/29/14
Prepare 100% PS & E 15 days Mon 7/7/14 Fri 7/25/14
100% Submittal 0 days Thu 7/31/14 Thu 7/31/14
City Review 13 days Fri 8/1/14 Tue 8/19/14
Address comments & submit for Building Dept. Plan Check 21 days Wed 8/20/14 Wed 9/17/14
Building Dept./C3/Parks/Agency Plan Check 30 days Thu 9/18/14 Wed 10/29/14
Bid set submittal 27 days Thu 9/18/14 Fri 10/24/14
Prepare bid set 22 days Thu 9/18/14 Fri 10/17/14
Final agency approval 5 days Mon 10/20/14 Fri 10/24/14
Bid Period 35 days Mon 10/27/14 Mon 12/15/14
Release IFB 0 days Mon 10/27/14 Mon 10/27/14
Bidding period 22 days Mon 10/27/14 Tue 11/25/14
Council approval and Final award 0 days Mon 12/15/14 Mon 12/15/14
Construction Manager (CM) RFP 80 days Mon 8/25/14 Mon 12/15/14
Staff prepare RFP 35 days Mon 8/25/14 Fri 10/10/14
Release RFP 0 days Mon 10/13/14 Mon 10/13/14
RFP Due 21 days Tue 10/14/14 Tue 11/11/14
Select CM 1 day Mon 11/24/14 Mon 11/24/14
Council approval 0 days Mon 12/15/14 Mon 12/15/14
Construction 215 days Mon 1/5/15 Fri 10/30/15
NTP to contractor 0 days Mon 1/5/15 Mon 1/5/15
Contractor prepares and submit NOI and WDID# 4 days Tue 1/6/15 Fri 1/9/15
Construction 180 days Mon 1/12/15 Fri 9/18/15
Rain day allowance 20 days Mon 9/21/15 Fri 10/16/15
Substantial completion 0 days Mon 10/19/15 Mon 10/19/15
Punch list items 10 days Mon 10/19/15 Fri 10/30/15
Final completion 1 day Fri 10/30/15 Fri 10/30/15
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
18 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
ATTACHMENT C
COMPENSATION
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, electronic document services, and photographic documentation services, the City agrees to make payment 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.
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 three hundred forty-four thousand three hundred two dollars ($6,344,302). 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 forty-eight thousand six hundred fifty-two dollars ($6,348,652). Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to
the provisions of Exhibit “A” and 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”.
The total cost for the services for Amendment No. 3 is summarized below.
Amendment No. 3 Costs Breakdown
Tasks Amount
Credit for Change Order No. 3 Predesign to
Add Julia Morgan Building -$4,250
Credit for Change Order No. 3 Project
Meetings to Add Julia Morgan Building -$4,250
Added Scope – Assistance with Public Meeting $10,500
Added Scope – North Soccer Field Lighting
Design $26,000
Added Scope – Arboretum Design (offset
w/credit from Alma St. X-Walk design) $0
Added Scope – 25 Full Size Drawings $3,000
Added Scope – Engineering Services During
Construction for Field Lighting Elements $6,250
Added Scope - Engineering Services During $1,250
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
19 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Construction for Arboretum Elements
Reimbursable Expenses $5,000
Additional Services for unforeseen issues $4,350
TOTAL $47,850
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
20 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
ATTACHMENT C-1
HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE
CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION
CDM Smith Inc.
Billing Rate Schedule – City of Palo Alto
Effective April 1, 2014
PROFESSIONAL AND SUPPORT SERVICES HOURLY RATES
Vice President/Senior Vice President (Grade 9 and 10) (Toyoda) $75.00 – 100.00
Principal, Associate & Engineer (Grade 7 & 8) (Brick, Warriner, Chen)
Senior Engineer/Technician (Grade 6) (Soohoo, Akela,
Marandi)
55.00 – 90.00
50.00 – 80.00
Engineer/Technician (Grade 4 & 5) 38.00 – 71.00
Staff Engineer/Scientist (Grade 1, 2, & 3) 28.00 – 45.00
Draftsperson/Designer 22.00 – 54.00
Contract Administrator 28.00 – 55.00
Technical Editor 28.00 -- 49.00
Secretary/Word Processor 22.00 -- 42.00
Administrative Assistant 17.00 – 39.00
Technician/Clerk 17.00 -- 27.00
Hourly rates will be multiplied by 2.95 for billing purposes. Costs in excess of 40 hrs. per week
will be billed at straight time.
The above are based on regular rates current at the time of execution of this Agreement. If the
regular rates of the employee are increased during the life of this Agreement, billing and payment will be at the increased regular rates for the applicable period of time. The ranges in this rate schedule will be revised annually, at an incremental rate not to exceed 4% per annum.
Other Direct Costs
Other reimbursable direct costs shall be billed at 1.05 times actual cost. These reimbursable
costs include, but are not limited to:
Travel: Air Fare, Auto Rental, Local Mileage (using current IRS limit)
Subsistence: Lodging and Meals
Communications: Conference call phone charges, and express package delivery and courier Services, cell phones for full-time field staff.
Materials, including internal printing at $0.65/sheet color, $0.10/sheet B&W; Outside Printing
Services at invoiced cost plus 5%.
Equipment Rental
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
20 of 20 AMENDMENT NO. 3 CONTRACT NO. 10131396
Subcontractor Services Subcontractor services shall be billed at 1.1 times actual costs to cover the costs of general
administrative services and handling.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 34192B33-0C83-4CFD-9456-72FCEF81D793
Attachment C
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 IN THE
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND, REDUCING THE EL CAMINO
PARK PLAYING FIELDS AND AMENITIES PROJECT (PG-
13002) BY $3,198,792, AND INCREASING THE EL CAMINO
PARK EXPANDED PARKING LOT AND NEW RESTROOM PROJECT
(PE-13016) BY $3,198,792 WITH NO NET IMPACT TO THE
FUND. THE EL CAMINO PARK EXPANDED PARKING LOT AND
NEW RESTROOM PROJECT (PE-13016) WILL BE RETITLED EL
CAMINO RESTORATION PROJECT TO REFLECT THE WORK
BEING DONE WITH THE FUNDING.
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 16, 2014 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2015; and
B.Since June 2010; City staff and the Parks and
Recreation Commission have engaged in discussions about park
improvements at El Camino Park that would coincide with the
construction of the Utilities Department’s El Camino Park
Emergency Water Reservoir project. In order to allow for the
project to be completed, El Camino Park needed to be
deconstructed, with the Water Fund being responsible for
returning the park to its original condition; and
C. The Utilities and Community Services Departments have
been working on the conceptual design of the restored park and
playing fields since August 2010; and
D. The Park and Recreation Commission has been closely
involved with design of the park, including twelve public
meetings between June 2010 and April 2012 to receive input
from the public, field users, neighbors and other
stakeholders on the design of fields, parking, a dog
exercise area and other amenities of the park; and
E. On April 23, 2012, the City Council approved the
revised design of El Camino Park and authorized the allocation
of $2,275,796 of Park Development Impact fees to fund the
components of the project that were beyond the cost of
restoring the park to its original condition; and
F. Subsequent to the appropriation of Park Development
Impact Fees, several delays were experienced, as outlined to
the City Council in August 2013.
G. In December 2013, at a joint Parks and Recreation
Commission (PRC) and City Council meeting, the City Council
directed staff to investigate the community support and
budgetary impacts of additional lighting for the north
athletic field; and
H. Therefore, at the January 21, 2014 PRC meeting, staff
presented a draft lighting plan for the synthetic turf field
and on February 19, 2014, staff held a community meeting to
discuss the lighting plan for the synthetic turf field. The
meeting participants included field users and representatives
from the 101 Alma condominiums. The participants agreed that
the proposed lighting plan is appropriate for the site. Staff
answered questions and verified that the field lights would be
on no later than 10 p.m.controlled by an automated lighting
system that staff can program remotely.
SECTION 2.The net sum of Three Million, One Hundred
Ninety Eight Thousand, Seven Hundred and Ninety Two Dollars is
hereby reduced from the El Camino Park Playing Fields and
Amenities project (PG-13002) and added to the El Camino Park
Expanded Parking Lot and New Restroom project (PE-13016). The
El Camino Park Expanded Parking Lot and New Restroom project
PE-13016)is hereby retitled to El Camino Park Restoration
Project Phase II to more accurately reflect the work to be
completed with the funding.
SECTION 4. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo
Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective
upon adoption.
SECTION 5.The Utilities Department’s El Camino Park
Reservoir Project was subject to environmental review under
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
A Draft Environmental Impact Report for this project was
prepared and circulated on November 8, 2006, and a Final
Environmental Impact Report for this project was prepared and
circulated on February 8, 2007. Council certified the
adequacy of the Final EIR in March 2007. An addendum to the
EIR has been prepared to incorporate any additional park
improvements described in this report that present potential
new and/or significant environmental impacts not contemplated
by the original EIR.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Manager
City Attorney Director of Public Works
Director of Administrative
Services
ATTACHMENT D
EL CAMINO PARK CHRONOLOGY
2010
·June 22 PRC-Utilities Department project managers presented to the
Commission an update on the El Camino Park Reservoir Project. Meeting
outcome:The Commission agreed with staff this was an opportunity to
improve the park and significantly expand recreational and sports
opportunities in the north part of Palo Alto (as recommended in the
2002 Field Report)
·June 29 PRC special meeting at park-Staff, Commissioners and members
of the public brain-stormed ideas for possible improvements for the
park. Meeting outcome:These ideas included synthetic turf fields, new
public bathroom, improved pathways and many other creative
suggestions such as an outdoor volleyball court or a BMX bike track.
·July 27 PRC-The Commission made a motion to ask staff to submit its list
of improvement ideas to Siegfried Engineering Inc., the landscape
architect firm designing the Project, to evaluate feasibility and possible
design and construction costs.
·September 28 PRC-Many of the Commission’s suggested park
improvements were included in the draft park project design. Meeting
outcome:The Commission offered additional feedback on the draft
design. The Commission sent a memo to the City Council recommending
that Council find a way to fund park improvements at El Camino Park as
opposed to simply rebuilding the park as it was prior to the reservoir
project.
·October 26 PRC-Siegfried presented the Commission with an update on
the conceptual design of the Project. The Commission provided
additional input on the design.
2011
·January 25 PRC-Siegfried presented the Commission with five refined
design options with varying pathway, parking, amenity and field
configurations for their consideration. Meeting outcome:The
Commission asked to see a combination of three of the refined designs,
and highlighted the importance of expanding public parking to
accommodate the anticipated significant expansion of field and park use
generated by the redesign of the park.
·February 22 PRC-Staff presented a conceptual design incorporating the
Commission’s feedback, and presented two options for the use of impact
fee to fund the improvements (discussed in detail below)
·May 2 Council Meeting-Council approves use $1.36 million of Park
Development Impact Fees for El Camino Park.
·June 13 Council Meeting-Staff presented the Council with a
recommendation for using impact fees to fund improvements at El
Camino Park (CMR 1746; Attachment C). Meeting outcome:The Council
approved the motion 8-1 (Price opposed) of using $1,420,500 of impact
fees for the Commission and staff’s recommendation of improvements at
El Camino Park with six amendments. The Council instructed staff to:
o Pursue connectivity at the north (across Alma Street to the
pathway) and south end of the park (past the train station) for
pedestrians and bicycles. (See the bike/pedestrian page on
Attachment A)
o Return to the Parks and Recreation Commission for final design
approval. (The Commission reviewed and approved the final
design recommendation on September 27, 2011.)
o Incorporate bike racks into the final design. (Fifteen bike racks
have been added to the design-each rack supports two bikes)
o Return within 90 days with an alternative to the current PF zoning
that would be more restrictive or restricted to recreational uses so
as to create a disincentive for other uses in the future. (Staff has
confirmed that the PF zoning is the most restrictive zoning
available for this property.)
o Incorporate into the final design some type of dog exercise area
and provide more details on public parking to ensure that there
will be no overflow parking into the adjoining neighborhood. (A
dog park and additional parking are included in the recommended
design; however, staff proposes deferring the final design and
construction of the dog exercise area portion until impact fee
funds have replenished and an environmental assessment is
completed to address Stanford University’s environmental
concerns.)
o Pursue an extended term lease with Stanford University for El
Camino Park beyond the current June 2033 expiration date. (City
staff is in discussion with Stanford University regarding a possible
nine year extension for the lease for El Camino Park to 2042.)
·June 21 PRC-Staff returned to the Commission to discuss the options for
dog exercise area locations as directed by Council on June 13, 2011. Staff
presented the Commission with five options for possible dog exercise
area locations for their consideration.Meeting outcome:The
Commission voted 3:2 to recommend installing a dog exercise area in the
north side of the El Camino Park between Palo Alto Avenue/Alma Street
and San Francisquito Creek in an unimproved section of El Camino Park.
One of the dissenting Commissioners favored a dog park at the south
end of the park; the other dissenting Commissioner preferred creating a
shared ball field and dog exercise area rather than a new area in the
north part of the park.
·July 26 PRC-Staff returned to the Commission to discuss the options for
additional parking as directed by the Council on June 13, 2011. Staff
presented five options for their consideration.Meeting outcome:The
Commission concurred with staff and chose to recommend Option E,
which added an additional 29 parking spaces (for a total of 71 spaces).
During the review the Commission highlighted the need to include
improvements for a convenient passenger loading/unloading area into
the parking lot design. (After adding the loading and unloading area to
the final parking lot design, there are an additional 26 parking spaces, for
a total of 68 spaces.)
·August 1 Council Meeting-Council approves the El Camino Park Phase 1
Reservoir construction contract.
·September 27 PRC-Staff returned to the Commission to seek their
recommendation to the Council for the final design (as directed by the
Council on June 13, 2011). Meeting outcome:The Commission stated
that they support the revised design; however, they felt funding for the
dog exercise area ($207,000 plus contingency) and the expanded parking
lot ($450,000 plus contingency) should come from some source other
than Park Development Impact fees. The Commission agreed that
expanding the parking lot at El Camino Park is critically important. They
also noted that the dog exercise area is a nice, but non-essential feature
at this time.
·October 19 -Park Closes /reservoir project starts
2012
·March 5 Council Meeting –Council authorized preliminary design review
of the 27 University project, including potential relocation of the Julia
Morgan Hostess House.
·April PRC-End public /commission meetings (11 total)on park design
concepts.
·April 23 Council Meeting -Council reviewed and approved design of El
Camino Park. Meeting outcome:Council authorized the allocation of
$2,275,796 of Park Development Impact fees to fund the components of
the project that were beyond the Utilities budget for simply restoring the
park as-is (Staff report #2411). Staff estimated time for completion of the
project:
o September 2011 -Begin Phase 1 Construction (reservoir, pump
station, etc.)
o June 2012 -Architectural Review Board Review Phase 2 Park
improvements
o January 2013 -Complete Phase 1 (reservoir, pump station, etc.)
o February-March 2013 -Begin Phase 2 (park improvement
construction)
o March 2014 -Complete Phase 2 (park re-opens to the public)
·May-Staff begins study of incorporation of Julian Morgan Hostess
House.
·May 3-ARB reviewed the design
·May 22 PRC-PRC discussed possible relocation ideas for the Julia
Morgan building, currently located at 27 University Ave, Palo Alto.
Meeting outcome:The Commission agreed that the Julia Morgan
building should not be moved to El Camino Park, and formed an Ad Hoc
Committee to discuss appropriate locations.
·September 10 Council Meeting-Council approval of El Camino
Park/Mayfield Pump Station Consultant Amendment #1 with CDM for
park design services and Hostess House study.
·September 24 Council Meeting -The 27 University Project is discussed at
Council, and the El Camino Park Design goes through modifications to
allow for the possibility for the Julia Morgan Building located at 27
University to move into the Park –September 24
·October 23 PRC-Commissioner Markevitch handed out a draft matrix of
7 possible options for relocating the Julia Morgan building. Meeting
outcome:Because Council planned to discuss the 27 University Ave
project in November prior to the Commission discussing this matter
further a representative from the PRC commission will be at the meeting
if questions are asked by the Council. Staff de Geus noted that the City
Manager’s Office and Planning staff are strongly leaning towards El
Camino Park has the preferred option.
·November 27 PRC-Presentation on 27 University project and discussion
on park and recreation related impacts and the possible relocation of the
Julia Morgan building. Meeting Outcome:Consultant Bruce Guchi, City
staff Amy French, and Deputy City Manager, Steve Emslie presented the
proposed design of the 27 University project and the concerns affecting
El Camino Park, moving the JP Morgan Building, and the impact on Palo
Alto.
·November-Estimated completion date of El Camino Reservoir
2013
·January-Anticipated completion of the reservoir project
·March-Anticipated start date for park improvements (based on the park
concept approval in April 2012)
·March 26 PRC-the Commission reviewed and commented on El Camino
Park re-design.Meeting Outcome:The design had to be modified from
the original approved by Council and Commission design for two
reasons:1. By Council direction the Commission was to find an area for a
possible dog park. The area that was selected went through
environmental review and found that the set-back requirement could
not be met and the area by El Palo Alto under consideration was not
viable.2. Consideration of the potential 27 University project required
study of the possibility of moving the Julia Morgan Building (hostess
house) inside El Camino Park. Design consultants (Siegfried) presented
the modified designs to the Commission. The Commission provided their
comments and questions.
·April 8 Council Meeting-Council approval of El Camino Park/Mayfield
Pump Station Consultant Amendment #2 with CDM for park design
services
·April 23 PRC-PRC meeting El Camino Park Ad hoc Committee
recommendation to Council regarding potential design changes to El
Camino Park.Meeting Outcome:The ad hoc Committee presented their
recommendation to move forward with El Camino Park now without
waiting for the outcome the potential 27 University project. Accordingly,
there are two options: 1) to go forward with the previously approved
design and not design a land bank for the possible relocation of the
building. In this case the committee’s recommendation is that there is
insufficient space for a dog park. or 2) if council votes to land bank for
the possible building relocation, other park features have to be removed
to have any open space in the park at all.
·May-Staff completes study of incorporation of Julian Morgan Hostess
House.
·May 28 PRC-PRC concluded Julia Morgan building is not compatible with
conceptual park design
·June 24 Council Meeting-El Camino Park Design update and staff
requesting direction from Council to consider Dog Park and the Julia
Morgan Building options
·August 12 -Staff was permitted to complete the park design precluding
the Julia Morgan Building (due to uncertainty about where the building
might be moved), the dog off-leash area (due to set back requirements
from the Creek), and the Alma pedestrian crossing (deemed unsafe after
consultants review)
·August-Staff begins 35% design
·October 22 PRC-PRC meeting Ad Hoc Committee discussed the status of
El Camino Park and requested that it be discussed at the joint PRC and
Council meeting in December.
·December 2 Joint PRC and Council meeting-Staff was directed to
proceed with the design and outreach necessary to add the lighting
fixtures to the synthetic turf field.
·December 19-The Architectural Review Board approved the project with
the details of the new lighting, photometric plan and interpretive signage
to be returned to subcommittee for approval after community outreach.
2014
·January 31-Revised Construction Completion Date -Reservoir project
Ends.
·January 21 PRC-PRC meeting for lighting north field.
·February 19-Public outreach to the community regarding park
improvements, addition of north field lighting and artificial turf at El
Camino Park.
·March 25 PRC -Commission meetings to review and recommend Council
to approve PIO and review of lighting concepts and design. Meeting
outcome: Staff shared this revised project timeline:
Council 1st reading of PIO and approval of amended CDM Contract –
4/21/2014
o Council 2nd reading of PIO –5/5/2014
o Submittal of 100% Construction Plans –June 2014
o Bid opening –October 2014
o Council approval of construction & CM contracts –October 2014
o Project completed –Fall/2015
·March-Staff receives 65% design documents.
·April 17-Architectural Review Board Review subcommittee reviewed
and approved project lighting and pavers sample
·December through April-Staff studies addition of lighting to the north
field and completes community outreach/approvals.
·May 6-Palo Alto Bicycle Advisory Committee reviewed and provided
comments to improve the Class I bike/pedestrian pathway.
·May-Anticipated PIO and addendum to the EIR approval.
·May 22-Revised Completion Date -Phase one Reservoir’s Notice of
Completion filed with County.
·June-Staff receives 90% design documents.
·August-Anticipated start date of park improvements (based on direction
of dog park and Hostess House in August 2013)
·May through September-Staff studies natural rubber product
considered for artificial turf requested by Planning and completes the
environmental study/addendum to the EIR necessary for the PIO
·September-Staff receives 100% design documents
·September-Staff submits plans to Building Department for permits
CEQA Addendum
for the
City of Palo Alto
Emergency Water Supply and Storage Project
Date: September 30, 2014
Project Name: City of Palo Alto Emergency Water Supply and Storage Project
SCH # 2006022038 (typo on EIR reads as 2066022038)
Project Location: 100‐103 El Camino Real, City of Palo Alto
Applicant: City of Palo Alto, Public Works Engineering
Contact: Elizabeth Ames, Project Engineer
Owner: City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
In 2007, the City certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Palo Alto Emergency
Water Supply and Storage Project. One of the components of this larger project was the site
selection and construction of a new emergency water storage facility for 2.5 million gallons
(MG) of water. The selected site for this facility was El Camino Park and, after fully
developing the improvement plans, additional project details that were not known in 2007
have been identified for this piece of the project.
This memo serves as an Addendum to the adopted (March 5, 2007) EIR and has been
prepared to address proposed modifications of the site improvements of El Camino Park.
The project changes would not result in new or more severe significant impacts per CEQA
Guidelines Section 15162(a)(1); there have been no changes in circumstances (15162(a)(2));
and there is no new information of substantial importance that would change the
conclusions of the original analysis (15162(a)(3)). Pursuant to Section 15162, the proposed
modifications are considered minor and have been determined to not create any additional
impacts beyond those previously identified in the 2007 EIR.
2007 EIR PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The 2007 EIR described the Water Supply and Storage Project in detail, including its many
component parts (see Chapter 2 of the EIR.) The EIR summarized this description as
follows:
Page 2 of 6
The City of Palo Alto relies on the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) Hetch
Hetchy system for its water supply. According to the California Department of Health
Services (DHS), the City does not have enough water to meet normal and emergency
demands in the event of a temporary shutdown of the SFPUC aqueducts. The DHS
recommendations for an emergency water supply are three‐fold: (1) a stand‐alone system;
(2) that could supply eight hours of maximum day water demand; (3) while maintaining
firefighting reserves.
The City owns five groundwater wells, which are available for limited use during a drought
or emergency. The proposed Emergency Water Supply and Storage Project is intended to
correct the deficiency in the City’s emergency water supply. The proposed project would
support a minimum of eight hours of normal water use at the maximum day demand level
and four hours of fire suppression at the design fire duration level, and would be capable of
providing water supplies for up to 30 days. The proposed groundwater system may also be
used to a limited extent for water supply during drought conditions (up to 1,500 acre feet),
and potentially for up to an average day supply during extended shutdowns of the SFPUC
system. The proposed project would provide 11,000 gallons per minute (gpm) of reliable
well capacity and 2.5 million gallons (MG) of water storage for emergency use by
accomplishing the following:
1. Rehabilitation of the existing five City wells: Hale well, Rinconada Park well, Fernando
well, Peers Park well, and the Matadero well.
2. Construction of up to three new wells (two located at sites listed below and one
located proximate to the selected new reservoir site as listed in the following #3):
Eleanor Pardee Park – northeast area of the park away from the demonstration
gardens
Main Library/Community Gardens – northwest corner of the community gardens
Heritage Park – Waverly Street to the north, Bryant Street to the south, Homer
Street to the west, and Channing Street to the east
Middlefield site – south side of Middlefield Avenue at a vacant lot between Lincoln
and Kingsley Streets
Downtown Parking Lots – exact location not yet determined
California Avenue Parking Lots – exact location not yet determined
Construction of a new 2.5 MG storage reservoir, associated pump station and new well at El
Camino Park – between El Camino Real and Alma Street.
3. Upgrade the existing Mayfield Pump Station.
Page 3 of 6
EL CAMINO PARK: RESTORATION OF PARK IMPROVEMENTS
As currently defined, the El Camino Park reservoir site development will be generally
consistent with the 2007 EIR project description, which states that El Camino Park will be
restored to conditions similar to existing conditions. Project details are summarized below,
and have been the subject of review by the City’s Architectural Review Board (ARB):
South Field (see Sheet ARB 5.0 of Attachment A):
1. Installation of a natural turf softball field above the new water reservoir;
2. Installation of permanent eight foot tall chain‐link fencing along the perimeter of the left
and right outfields;
3. Installation of two dugouts and softball backstop;
4. Installation of a removable four foot tall mesh fence system in the outfield;
5. Relocation of the existing aluminum portable bleachers;
6. Installation of two new 70 foot tall pole‐mounted sport field lights and replacement of
fixture heads on the existing six light poles;
7. Construction of the scorekeeper and storage building behind the backstop.
North Field (see Sheet ARB 5.1 of Attachment A):
1. Installation of a synthetic turf field striped for soccer and lacrosse games;
2. Installation of player seating on both sides of the mid‐field;
3. Installation of soccer ball protection fencing around the majority of the field perimeter
(14 foot tall chain‐link fence with 12 feet of additional netting);
4. Installation of four 70 foot tall pole‐mounted sports field lights;
5. Installation of a multi‐purpose lawn area at the north end of the park; and
6. Addition of three new picnic areas with tables around the multi‐purpose lawn.
General Improvements:
1. Expansion of the asphalt parking lot from 46 spaces to 68 spaces;
2. Construction of replacement restrooms;
3. Installation of a ‘no parking loading/unloading’ zone next to the new restroom facility;
4. Installation of porous pavement for a portion of the parking lot to facilitate water
infiltration to the nearby existing trees;
5. Construction of a new trash enclosure;
6. Installation of two 42 inch tall fold‐down bollards to secure the maintenance vehicle
route;
7. Relocation of the emergency phone close to the new restroom building;
8. Installation of decomposed granite pathways around the entire park;
9. Installation of security lighting throughout the park with 14 foot tall pole‐mounted
lights;
10. Installation of nine bike racks (three near the restroom and six by the soccer field);
Page 4 of 6
11. Installation of new landscaping throughout the park that includes trees of various sizes,
shrubs, grasses, vines, and ground cover.
The new structures (restroom, scorekeeper & storage, trash enclosure) have been designed
in a style that is consistent with the already constructed pump station building. Similar
materials and colors have been selected for the new structures so as to maintain a
complementary and cohesive style for the park. The basic materials proposed are concrete
block (CMU) with the color to match the pump station and a dark grey standing‐seam metal
roof.
The project includes upgrades to the field lighting with fixture replacements on the existing
poles and added field light poles (as described above). Providing no other sources of light
are on in the project vicinity, the light spill‐over from the nighttime use of both play areas is
anticipated to be up to one foot‐candle of light on El Camino Real and a portion of the
parking lot at the Stanford Shopping Center, as well as portions of Alma Street and adjacent
sidewalk. However, due to the existing nighttime lighting conditions along El Camino Real,
Alma Street, and the mall parking lot, with street and parking lot lights and vehicle lights, it
is anticipated that the spillover lighting from the project would not be perceived; the
multiple existing sources of light would negate the light generated by the project.
The one aspect of the project that is different than originally analyzed is the proposal to
restore the north playing field by using synthetic, rather than natural turf. Specifically, the
project now proposes to replace the natural turf with synthetic turf for a new soccer and
lacrosse field (360’ x 215’). For all intents and purposes, the synthetic turf field aesthetically
and functionally would perform the same as a natural turf field. However City staff
considered whether users of the synthetic turf field could be exposed to potentially
hazardous materials, and whether runoff from the field could potentially impact water
quality.
The use of synthetic turf, when it has been in‐filled with recycled rubber from tires, has
been recognized as being potentially hazardous to people when there is continuous
exposure1. This is because recycled tires accumulate lead and other toxic materials, which
can in turn be absorbed by users of the field. For the proposed project, recycled tire
products will not be used and only virgin material will be utilized. With this approach, the
potential health concerns associated with the use of recycled tires would be eliminated. To
further ensure the project does not have any health and safety impacts, performance
measures will be implemented for the selection and installation of synthetic turf. The
standards listed below have been researched and compiled by Dudek, a professional
environmental consulting firm, hired by the City to review the environmental concerns of
1 Sierra Club Yodeler. “Sierra Club Sues City to Stop Beach Chalet Soccer Fields Project.” theyodeler.org. Sierra Club.
7 Feb. 2013. Web.17 Mar. 2014. http://theyodeler.org/?p=6704.
Page 5 of 6
using synthetic turf of this project. Only turf products that meet the acceptable safety
standards discussed below will be used for the project.
1. Product samples will be analyzed for constituents that could potentially be used in their
manufacture that commonly impact water quality/human health. Metals, volatile
organic compounds (VOCs), and semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) would be the
most likely constituents to impact water quality and/or human health through leaching
or direct contact with the synthetic turf. Thus, to evaluate potential impacts to human
health from direct contact, the turf sample results will be compared to EPA Regional
Screening Levels and Cal‐EPA California Human Health Screening Levels, which test for
these constituents.
2. To evaluate potential impacts to groundwater, concentrations that could leach from the
turf material will be compared to the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). The MCL is
established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and lists the maximum
concentration of a chemical that is allowed in public drinking water systems. The same
criteria are used to evaluate groundwater quality.
3. An estimation of the potential concentration that could leach from the turf will be
obtained by analyzing an extract of the sample obtained using the synthetic
precipitation leaching procedure (SPLP). The SPLP extraction simulates leaching that
could occur when the product material is exposed to rainfall. Therefore, the SPLP
extraction best evaluates leaching during normal use.
4. To evaluate potential impacts to stormwater, and thus to surrounding surface water,
concentrations that could leach from the turf will be compared to the RWQCB
Environmental Screening Levels for fresh water habitats. Again, for this screening, an
estimate of the concentration that could leach from the turf will be obtained using SPLP
extract analysis.
FINDINGS
The project refinements as described above for the site improvements to El Camino Park
would not result in new significant environmental impacts beyond those already identified
in the 2007 EIR, and would not increase the severity of any significant impact previously
identified. The site improvements are consistent with typical park improvement activities,
and mitigation measures identified in the 2007 EIR would remain in effect, and would be
implemented pursuant to the adopted mitigation monitoring plan.
It is the finding of the Planning Division that the previous environmental document as
herein amended may be used to fulfill the environmental review requirements of the
current project. Because the current project meets the conditions for the application of
Page 6 of 6
State CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, preparation of a new EIR or Negative Declaration is
not required for the issue areas discussed above.
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines 15164(c), “an Addendum need not be circulated for
public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted Negative
Declaration.” This Addendum shall become public record as an attachment to the adopted
2007 EIR. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 Recirculation is not required as the
project changes do not create new significant environmental impacts or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified effects as further detailed in the attached
project plans and lighting analysis.
Prepared By: /Clare Campbell/ 09/30/2014
Clare Campbell, Senior Planner Date
ATTACHMENTS
A. Plans Titled “El Camino Park Restoration Project Phase 2,” received December 10, 2013
B. Field Lighting Photometrics, January 14, 2014, prepared by Siegfried
C. Artificial Turf Analytical Results – El Camino Parks Athletic Fields Memo, September 16,
2014, prepared by Dudek
LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
VAN
VAN
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES DEPARTMENT
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PROJECT
PHASE 2
CITY PROJECT NUMBERS PE-13016 & PG-13002
ARB 1.0COVER SHEET
PROJECT CONTACTS:
OWNER CIVIL ENGINEER LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
INDEX OF SHEETS:
NO.DESCRIPTION
ARB 1.0 COVER SHEET
ARB 2.0 VICINITY MAP & SITE CONTEXT
ARB 3.0 PHASE 1 SITE CONTEXT
ARB 4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS - SOUTH
ARB 4.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS - NORTH
ARB 5.0 SITE PLAN-SOFTBALL FIELD & PARKING LOT
ARB 5.1 SITE PLAN-SOCCER FIELD
ARB 6.0 GRADING, DRAINAGE, & UTILITY PLAN - SOFTBALL FIELD &
PARKING LOT
ARB 6.1 GRADING, DRAINAGE, & UTILITY PLAN - SOCCER FIELD
ARB 7.0 PAVING PLAN SOFTBALL PARKING
ARB 7.1 PAVING PLAN SOCCER FIELD
ARB 8.0 SITE CROSS SECTIONS & DETAILS
ARB 8.1 SITE AMENITIES & MATERIALS
ARB 9.0 SITE CIRCULATION PLAN
ARB 10.0 PHOTOMETRICS PLAN
ARB 10.1 LIGHTING CUT SHEETS
ARB 11.0 SPECIAL TREE PROTECTION INSTRUCTION SHEET
ARB 11.1 TREE PROTECTION AND MODIFICATION PLAN - SOUTH
ARB 11.2 TREE PROTECTION AND MODIFICATION PLAN - NORTH
ARB 12.0 PLANTING PLAN - SOUTH
ARB 12.1 PLANTING PLAN - NORTH
ARB 12.2 TREE PALETTE
ARB 12.3 SHRUB PALETTE
ARB 13.0 RESTROOM PLANS
ARB 14.0 SCORE KEEPERS BOOTH & STORAGE SHED PLAN
NO.DESCRIPTION
VICINITY MAP
NOT TO SCALE
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 2.0VICINITY MAP & SITE CONTEXT
STANFORD
UNIVERSITY
EL CAMINO PARK
PROJECT SITE
EXISTING NATURAL TURF
SOFTBALL FIELD
NEW UNDERGROUND
RESERVOIR
(PER PACKAGE #1)
NEW PUMP STATION AREA
(PER PACKAGE #1)
EXISTING
CALTRAIN
TRANSFER
STATION
EXISTING NATURAL TURF SOCCER FIELD.
PROPOSED SYNTHETIC FIELD
STANFORD SHOPPING CENTER
NEW UNDERGROUND
RESERVOIR
(PER PACKAGE #1)
NEW PUMP STATION AREA
(PER PACKAGE #1)
EXISTING CALTRAIN
TRANSFER STATION
EXISTING NATURAL
TURF SOCCER FIELD
STANFORD SHOPPING
CENTER
EXISTING RESTROOMS EXISTING PARKING LOT EXISTING SOFTBALL INFIELD EXISTING SOCCER FIELD EXISTING SOFTBALL FIELDEXISTING SOFTBALL OUTFIELD FENCE
AERIAL DATE: 2008
AERIAL DATE: 2008
AERIAL DATE: 2013
PACKAGE #1 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
PHASE I
SCALE: 1" = 60'
EXISTING UNDERGROUND RESERVOIR ACCESS HATCH
INSTALLED PACKAGE #1
EXISTING PUMP STATION
INSTALLED PACKAGE #1
ARB 3.0PHASE 1 SITE CONTEXT
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
O
H
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
T
E
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
T
E
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
ARB 4.0EXISTING CONDITIONS - SOUTH
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
CALTRAIN
TRANSFER
STATION
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
EXISTING
PARKING
LOT
NOTE:
OH
OH
OH
ARB 4.1EXISTING CONDITIONS - NORTH
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ALM
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
NOTE:
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
VAN
VAN
TE
L
E
T
E
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
T
E
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 5.0SITE PLAN-SOFTBALL FIELD & PARKING LOT
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
22
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
6
7
7
7
10
11
11
11
12
15
17
17
18
19
19
20
20
21
22
22
22 22 22
22
24
26
27 28
29
PARKING SUMMARY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
SITE AMENITIES LEGEND
31
32
33
33
5
7
23
23
23
23
23
23
23 23
23
23
23
23
23
23
523
23
20
20
23
9
23
93423
10
26
23
VAN
VAN
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 5.1SITE PLAN-SOCCER FIELD
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
ALM
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
9
2
3
3
33
4
4
4
4
5 5 7
7
7
7 8
8
8
10
11
13
14
16
16
16
23
23
23
23 23
23 23 23
23
2323
23
25
23
26
26 23
25
25
30
23
23
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
SITE AMENITIES LEGEND
35
35
1
34
5
23
22
22
22
22 3
3
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
O
H
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
OH
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
T
E
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
T
E
L
E
T
E
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 6.0GRADING, DRAINAGE, & UTILITY PLAN -
SOFTBALL FIELD & PARKING LOT
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
LEGEND
PARKING LOT FRENCH DRAIN
NOT TO SCALE1
1
6.1
VAN
VAN
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 6.1GRADING, DRAINAGE, & UTILITY PLAN -
SOCCER FIELD
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
ALM
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
SECTION A-A
NOT TO SCALE1
IMPERVIOUS AREA AND
STORM WATER TREATMENT CALCULATIONS
LEGEND
TE
L
E
T
E
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
T
E
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
TE
L
E
LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
VAN
VAN
,%'%.$
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 7.0PAVING PLAN SOFTBALL PARKING
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
VAN
VAN
,%'%.$
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 7.1PAVING PLAN SOCCER FIELD
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
ALM
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 8.0SITE CROSS SECTIONS & DETAILS
POROUS CONCRETE WALKWAY
NO SCALE2
4"
DECOMPOSED GRANITE PATHWAY SECTION
NO SCALE1
DECOMPOSED
GRANITE FINES WITH
STABILIZER, PLACE
IN 2" LIFTS,
COMPACT TO 95%
RELATIVE DENSITY
FINISH GRADE
SUBGRADE
COMPACTED TO 90%
RELATIVE DENSITY
CASE A - NOT WITHIN TREE DRIPLINE
DECOMPOSED GRANITE FINES
WITH STABILIZER, PLACE
2" LIFT, COMPACT TO
85% RELATIVE DENSITY
FINISH GRADE
NATIVE SOIL AND
TREE ROOT ZONE TO
BE UNDISTRUBED
CASE B - WITHIN TREE DRIPLINE
4"
EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION
4" CRUSHED ROCK. INITIAL 2" LIFT IS 3/4"
CRUSHED ROCK AND THE SECOND 2"
LIFT WILL BE A CRUSHED ROCK WITH
MAX AGGREGATE OF 3/8" DOWN TO THE
NO. 40 SIEVE
MIRAFI 140N NON WOVEN
FILTER FABRIC OR APPROVED
EQUAL
34" DIAMETER X
18" METAL
STAKE
METAL HEADER
OR CONCRETE
MOW BAND 34" DIA. X 24"
METAL STAKE
METAL HEADER OR CONCRETE
MOW BAND
4" POROUS CONCRETE 38" MAX
AGGREGATE FINISH GRADE
NATIVE SOIL AND
TREE ROOT ZONE TO
BE UNDISTRUBED
EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION
4" CRUSHED ROCK. 3/4" CRUSHED
ROCK MIRAFI 140N NON WOVEN
FILTER FABRIC OR APPROVED
EQUAL
2-3" OF NATIVE
MATERIAL
UNCOMPACTED
VEHICLE POROUS PAVER SECTION
NO SCALE3
NATIVE SOIL AND
TREE ROOT ZONE TO
BE UNDISTRUBED
EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION
12" WIDE
CONCRETE BAND
4-6" LAYER OF CITY
RECYCLED BARK
MULCH
CONCRETE PAVERS:
80MM PERMEABLE PAVER SYSTEM OVER 8"
OF 3/4" CRUSHED ROCK OVER MIRAFI 140N
FILTER FABRIC.
MIRAFI FABRIC GEOTEXTILE 140N BOTTOM OF
OPEN GRADED BASE.
8"PARKING LOT
STRUCTURAL
SECTION
ROLLED CURB WITH
REVERSE GUTTER
PAN
16"
EXISTING PARKING
LOT ASPHALT
ELEVATION
ASPHALT WALKWAY OVERLAY
NO SCALE4
2" ASPHALT OVERLAY OVER
PETROMAT. 12" AGGREGATE
NATIVE SOIL AND
TREE ROOT ZONE TO
BE UNDISTRUBED
EXISTING GROUND
ELEVATION
EXISTING ASPHALT PATHWAY
PETROMAT OR APPROVED
EQUAL
4-6" LAYER OF CITY RECYCLED
BARK MULCH
4-6" LAYER OF CITY
RECYCLED BARK
MULCH
2-3" OF NATIVE
MATERIAL
UNCOMPACTED
4-6" LAYER OF CITY
RECYCLED BARK
MULCH
2-3" OF NATIVE MATERIAL
UNCOMPACTED
NOTE:
1. ALL EXISTING ASPHALT TO BE REMOVED AT
THE BASE OF TREES SHALL BE REMOVED BY
HAND.
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
NEW FOLD-DOWN BOLLARDS
EXISTING FENCELINE ALONG EL CAMINO REAL
(AT SOFTBALL FIELD AREA)
EXISTING BLEACHERS
EXISTING FENCELINE ALONG EL CAMINO REAL
(AT SOCCER FIELD AREA)
NEW BALL FIELD BACKSTOP CAGE
EXISTING EMERGENCY PHONE
EXISTING PARK SIGN EXISTING ASPHALT BIKE PATH
NEW PICNIC TABLES
NEW PATHWAY SECURITY LIGHTING
NEW MUSCO SPORTS LIGHTING AT SOFTBALL FIELD NEW SOFTBALL SMARTSTAKE REMOVABLE FENCE SYSTEM
NEW SOCCER FIELD FENCING
NEW SOCCER FIELD FENCING
NEW NATURAL TURF PARK LAWN & SOFTBALL OUTFIELD
NEW SYNTHETIC TURF SOCCER FIELD
NEW SOFTBALL SMARTSTAKE REMOVABLE FENCE SYSTEM
NEW BIKE RACKSEXISTING PARK BENCHES
NEW SOCCER FIELD FENCING
ARB 8.1SITE AMENITIES & MATERIALS
LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 9.0SITE CIRCULATION PLAN
0'
LEGEND AND NOTES:
LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 10.0PHOTOMETRICS PLAN
0'
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
ALM
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
ALMA STREET
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 10.1LIGHTING CUT SHEETS
PROPOSED PATHWAY LIGHT AND PARKING LOT LIGHTPROPOSED MUSCO SPRTS FIELD LIGHTING PACKAGE
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 11.0SPECIAL TREE PROTECTION INSTRUCTION SHEET
ARB 11.1TREE PROTECTION AND MODIFICATION PLAN - SOUTH
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
CALTRAIN
TRANSFER
STATION
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
EXISTING
PARKING
LOT
TREES BEING REMOVED:TREES WITHIN CONSERVATION AREAS UNDER SUPERVISION OF PROJECT ARBORIST:TREE PROTECTION NOTES
1. BEFORE WORKING IN REGULATED TREE AREAS, CONTACT THE PROJECT SITE
ARBORIST AT 1-650-964-7664.
2. REMOVAL OF A CITY OWNED TREE (I.E. RIGHT-OF-WAY) URBAN FORESTRY SECTION
REQUIREMENTS (6450-496-5953; http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/pwd/trees/default.asp) :
a. TREE REMOVAL POSTING .
EACH TREE TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE VISIBLY POSTED WITH A COMPLETED
TREE REMOVAL NOTICE FORM (8.5"x11", SEALED IN PROTECTIVE PLASTIC) NO
LESS THAN 14 CALENDAR DAYS FROM THE DATE OF POSTING.
b. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT .
A COMPLETED AND APPROVED APPLICATION FOR THE PROJECT STREET WORK
(INCLUDING REMOVALS) ISSUED BY THE URBAN FORESTRY SECTION MUST BE
AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE.
ARBORIST NOTES:NOTES:
LEGEND:
TREE MAINTENCE LEGEND:
IRRIGATION DURING CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
(MIN.)
PATH LANDSCAPELANDSCAPE
4'
8'
OVERHEAD
CLEARANCE
(MIN.)
ROADWAYLANDSCAPE
16'
OVERHEADCLEARANCE
(MIN.)
SIDELINESLANDSCAPE
12'
SOCCER FIELD
SYNTHETIC TURF
NO
OVERHEAD
LIMBS
ALLOWED
ARB 11.2TREE PROTECTION AND MODIFICATION PLAN - NORTH
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ALM
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
TREES BEING REMOVED:TREES WITHIN CONSERVATION AREA UNDER SUPERVISION OF PROJECT ARBORIST:
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
TREE PROTECTION NOTES
1. BEFORE WORKING IN REGULATED TREE AREAS, CONTACT THE PROJECT SITE
ARBORIST, RAY MORNEAU AT 1-650-964-7664.
2. REMOVAL OF A CITY OWNED TREE (I.E. RIGHT-OF-WAY) URBAN FORESTRY SECTION
REQUIREMENTS (6450-496-5953; http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/pwd/trees/default.asp) :
a. TREE REMOVAL POSTING .
EACH TREE TO BE REMOVED SHALL BE VISIBLY POSTED WITH A COMPLETED
TREE REMOVAL NOTICE FORM (8.5"x11", SEALED IN PROTECTIVE PLASTIC) NO
LESS THAN 14 CALENDAR DAYS FROM THE DATE OF POSTING.
b. TREE REMOVAL PERMIT .
A COMPLETED AND APPROVED APPLICATION FOR THE PROJECT STREET WORK
(INCLUDING REMOVALS) ISSUED BY THE URBAN FORESTRY SECTION MUST BE
AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE.
NOTE:
ARBORIST NOTES:
LEGEND:
TREE MAINTENCE LEGEND:
IRRIGATION DURING CONSTRUCTION NOTES:
OVERHEAD CLEARENCE - SOCCER FIELD
NO SCALE3
OVERHEAD CLEARANCE - ROADWAY
NO SCALE2
OVERHEAD CLEARANCE - PATHWAY
NO SCALE1
LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
PLANT LEGEND
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 12.0PLANTING PLAN - SOUTH
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
1. IF A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THESE PLANS AND ACTUAL ON-SITE
CONDITIONS OCCURS, THE CONTRACTOR IS TO NOTIFY THE OWNER
IMMEDIATELY, BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH WORK, FOR A DECISION.
2. ALL WORK SHALL BE COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF
PALO ALTO STANDARDS.
3. ALL PLANTS BROUGHT ONTO THE SITE SHALL BE WATERED AND
PROTECTED FROM EXCESSIVE WIND, SUN, FROST, PHYSICAL DAMAGE
AND THEFT UNTIL PLANTED.
4. ALL ASPHALT, BASE COURSE AND OTHER DEBRIS ARE TO BE REMOVED
COMPLETELY BELOW PLANTING AREAS TO NATIVE SOIL LEVEL.
5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR POSITIVE SURFACE
DRAINAGE AT 2% MINIMUM IN PLANTING AREAS EXCEPT WHERE
SHOWN.
6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH AND APPLY THE APPROPRIATE
PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDE AT RATES PRESCRIBED BY LAW AND THE
MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. 'SURFLAN 75W' IS
RECOMMENDED FOR GROUND COVER AND SHRUB AREAS. ALL
PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDES SHALL BE APPLIED BY LICENSED
OPERATORS UNDER FAVORABLE WEATHER CONDITIONS.
7. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE ROTOTILLED (OR HAND CULTIVATED
UNDER EXISTING TREES) TO A DEPTH OF 8". TAKE CARE NOT TO
DAMAGE ROOTS.
8. THE CONTRACTOR TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING A SOILS TEST
AND PROVIDING THE APPROPRIATE AMENDMENTS BASED ON THE
TEST RESULTS.
9. FINISH GRADE OF PLANTED AREAS TO BE ONE (1) INCH BELOW PAVING.
WATER SOIL THOROUGHLY BEFORE PLANTING. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE
SET AT SUCH A LEVEL THAT AFTER SETTLING THEY BEAR THE SAME
RELATIONSHIP TO THE SURROUNDING FINISH GRADE AS THEY BORE
TO THE SOIL LINE GRADE IN THE CONTAINER, UNLESS OTHERWISE
NOTED.
10. IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE
ADEQUATE DRAINAGE OF ALL PLANTINGS, SUFFICIENT TO INSURE
HEALTHY GROWTH.
11. COVER ALL PLANTING AREAS WITH A 3" DEPTH OF APPROVED BARK
MULCH AFTER FINAL SHAPING OF SAUCERS AND DRESS OFF NEATLY.
12. TREES ARE TO BE STAKED PER DETAIL. INSTALL 8 LF. OF
ROOTBARRIER CENTERED ON TREES (MODEL #UB24-2) WITHIN 5 FEET
OF WALKS, WALLS OR BUILDINGS.
13. TRIANGULAR SPACING FOR GROUND COVER PLANTING BEDS.
1. THE OBJECTIVE OF THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN IS TO IMPROVE THE AESTHETICS
OF THE PARK BY REFRESHING AND ENHANCING THE PLANT MATERIAL AND
PLANTING BEDS. SECURITY MEASURES WILL BE MET BY MAINTAINING PROPER
PLANT HEIGHT AND DISTANCES.
2. EXISTING OPEN SPACE AREAS UNDER MATURE TREES, ESPECIALLY OAKS, WILL
CONTINUE TO BE MAINTAINED OPEN AND WITH BARK MULCH.
3. PROPER SIGNAGE WILL PROVIDE PROPER WAY-FINDING.
4. THE LANDSCAPE PLANTING PALETTE SHALL CONTAIN DROUGHT TOLERANT
SPECIES AND SHALL BE SUITABLE FOR THE SOIL AND CLIMATIC CONDITIONS
SPECIFIC TO THE SITE.
5. THE LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF PALO
ALTO REQUIREMENTS AND THE CRITERIA OF THE AB 1881 STATE ORDINANCE.
ALL REQUIREMENTS WILL BE APPLIED ACCORDINGLY FOR THE EFFICIENT USE
OF WATER WITHIN THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM.
6. CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS FOR LANDSCAPE WILL BE MET BY
COMPLYING WITH CDWR WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE
(5.304.1-WATER BUDGET), INSTALLING A SEPARATE LANDSCAPE WATER METER
(5.304.2-OUTDOOR POTABLE WATER USE), INSTALLING WEATHER-BASED E.T.
IRRIGATION CONTROLLER (5.304.3-IRRIGATION DESIGN), DRIP IRRIGATION FOR
THE TREE, SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVERS (5.407.2.1-SPRINKLERS), AND TREE
PLANTING INSTALLED TO SHADE OVER 50% OF THE HARDSCAPE WITHIN 5 YEARS
OF OCCUPANCY (5.106.11-HEAT ISLAND EFFECT).
STATEMENT OF DESIGN INTENTPLANTING NOTES
1. EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN AND BE PROTECTED DURING CONSTRUCTION.
CARE SHOULD BE TAKEN WHEN GRADING OCCURS WITHIN THE DRIPLINE OF
THE TREE.
2. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT IMMEDIATELY IF ANY
DISCREPANCIES OR QUESTIONS OF GRADING OR THE TREE PROTECTION
OCCUR AT TIME CONSTRUCTION.
3. ALL WORK WITHIN THE EXISTING TREE ROOT ZONES SHALL BE DONE USING
ALL POSSIBLE CARE TO AVOID INJURY TO ROOTS.
4. NO ROOTS LARGER THAN 2" SHALL BE CUT WITHOUT APPROVAL. CONTACT
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND PROJECT ARBORIST IF PLANT MATERIAL
PLACEMENT IS IN CONFLICT WITH EXISTING ROOTS.
5. FILLS INSIDE THE TREE ROOT ZONE SHOULD NOT EXCEED 3".
6. ROOT BARRIER,TO BE INSTALLED WHEN TREE IS WITHIN 5' OF SIDEWALKS,
ROADWAYS, BUILDING OR CURBS.
GENERAL NOTES
PLANT LEGEND
VAN
VAN
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
N
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 12.1PLANTING PLAN - NORTH
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
ALM
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
0'
FO
R
C
O
N
T
I
N
U
A
T
I
O
N
S
E
E
S
H
E
E
T
1. THE OBJECTIVE OF THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN IS TO IMPROVE THE AESTHETICS
OF THE PARK BY REFRESHING AND ENHANCING THE PLANT MATERIAL AND
PLANTING BEDS. SECURITY MEASURES WILL BE MET BY MAINTAINING PROPER
PLANT HEIGHT AND DISTANCES.
2. EXISTING OPEN SPACE AREAS UNDER MATURE TREES, ESPECIALLY OAKS, WILL
CONTINUE TO BE MAINTAINED OPEN AND WITH BARK MULCH.
3. PROPER SIGNAGE WILL PROVIDE PROPER WAY-FINDING.
4. THE LANDSCAPE PLANTING PALETTE SHALL CONTAIN DROUGHT TOLERANT
SPECIES AND SHALL BE SUITABLE FOR THE SOIL AND CLIMATIC CONDITIONS
SPECIFIC TO THE SITE.
5. THE LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF PALO
ALTO REQUIREMENTS AND THE CRITERIA OF THE AB 1881 STATE ORDINANCE.
ALL REQUIREMENTS WILL BE APPLIED ACCORDINGLY FOR THE EFFICIENT USE
OF WATER WITHIN THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM.
6. CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS FOR LANDSCAPE WILL BE MET BY
COMPLYING WITH CDWR WATER EFFICIENCY LANDSCAPE ORDINANCE
(5.304.1-WATER BUDGET), INSTALLING A SEPARATE LANDSCAPE WATER METER
(5.304.2-OUTDOOR POTABLE WATER USE), INSTALLING WEATHER-BASED E.T.
IRRIGATION CONTROLLER (5.304.3-IRRIGATION DESIGN), DRIP IRRIGATION FOR
THE TREE, SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVERS (5.407.2.1-SPRINKLERS), AND TREE
PLANTING INSTALLED TO SHADE OVER 50% OF THE HARDSCAPE WITHIN 5 YEARS
OF OCCUPANCY (5.106.11-HEAT ISLAND EFFECT).
STATEMENT OF DESIGN INTENT
PLANT LEGEND - INTERPRETIVE TRAIL AREA
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 12.2TREE PALETTE
Acer rubrum `October Glory`
October Glory Maple
Quercus frainetto `Forest Green`
Forest Green Oak
Quercus velutina
Black Oak
Tilia tomentosa
Silver Linden
LARGE PARKING LOT SHADE TREE MEDIUM SHADE TREE
Arbutus x `Marina`
Arbutus Standard
Lyonothamnus floribundus
Catalina Ironwood
Pistacia chinensis `Keith Davey`
Chinese Pistache
CONIFER SCREEN TREES
Cedrus atlantica `Glauca`
Blue Atlas Cedar
Sequoia sempervirens
Coast Redwood
SPORTS FIELD SCREEN TREE
Carpinus betulus `Fastigiata`
Pyramidal European Hornbean
Myrica californica
Pacific Wax Myrtle
Tristania laurina `Elegant`
Water Gum
SMALL ACCENT TREE
Cercis occidentalis
Western Redbud
Lagerstroemia x `Tuscarora`
Red Crape Myrtle
Prunus serrulata `Kwanzan`
Flowering Cherry
INTERPRETIVE TRAIL TREE COLLECTION
Calocedrus decurrens
Incense Cedar
Acer macrophyllum
Big Leaf Maple
Aesculus californica
California Buckeye
Arbutus x `Marina`
Arbutus Standard
Arctostaphylos x
`Lester Rowntree`
Lester Rowntree Manzanita
Cornus nuttallii
Western Flowering Dogwood
Ginkgo biloba
Maidenhair Tree
Metasequoia glyptostroboides
Dawn Redwood
Platanus racemosa
California Sycamore
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
ARB 12.3SHRUB PALETTE
MEDIUM SHRUBS & GRASSES
Cistus ladanifer
Crimson Spot Rockrose
Dietes bicolor
Fortnight Lily
Lavandula angustifolia
English Lavender
Miscanthus sinensis
`Morning Light`
Eulalia Grass
Nassella tenuissima
Texas Needle Grass
Salvia leucantha `Santa
Barbara`
Mexican Bush Sage
Westringia fruticosa
Coast Rosemary
Cistus pulverulentus
`Sunset` Rockrose
Eriogonum grande rubescens
Red Buckwheat
Grindelia stricta platyphylla
Spreading Grindelia
Penstemon heterophyllus
`Margarita BOP`
Beard Tongue
Rosa x `Flower Carpet Pink`
Rose
Teucrium x lucidrys
Hedge Germander
Festuca x `Bolero Plus`
Bolero Fescue
SOD LAWN VINES
Distictis x `Rivers`
Royal Trumpet Vine
SMALL ACCENT SHRUBS & GRASSES
Arctostaphylos x `Emerald Carpet`
Emerald Carpet Manzanita
Ceanothus griseus
horizontalis `Yankee Point`
California Lilac
Festuca amethystina
`Superba`
Rainbow Fescue
Baccharis p. 'Twin Peaks'
Twin Peaks Coyote Bush
Rosmarinus officinalis
`Prostratus`
Dwarf Rosemary UNDER OAKS/DRY SHADE
Festuca amethystina
`Superba`
Rainbow Fescue
Mimulus aurantiacus
Sticky Monkey Flower
Muhlenbergia capillaris
`Lenca`
Regal Mist Pink Muhly
Salvia spathacea
Hummingbird Sage
GROUNDCOVER
INTERPRETIVE TRAIL SHRUBS
Berberis x `Golden Abundance`
Golden Abundance Barberry
Carpenteria californica
Bush Anemone
Ceanothus x `Concha
California Lilac
Cistus salviifolius `Prostratus`
Sageleaf Rockrose
Epilobium californicum
California Fuchsia
Mahonia aquifolium
Oregon Grape
Romneya coulteri
Matilija Poppy
Rosa californica
California Wild Rose
Arctostaphylos uva-ursi
`Point Reyes`
Kinnikinnick
Epilobium canum canum
`U.C. Hybrid`
Hummingbird Trumpet
9'-
0
"
RESTROOM FLOOR PLAN
SCALE :
WEST ELEVATION
SCALE :
13
'
-
9
"
SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE :
NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE :
SECTION - TYPICAL
A
-
A 1/4" = 1'-0"1/4" = 1'-0"
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/4" = 1'-0"1/4" = 1'-0"
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT
STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF
MATERIALS PALETTEEXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE
SCALE : NTS
KALWALL INSULATED TRANSLUCENT PANEL
S T O C K T O N . S A C R A M E N T O ARB 13.0RESTROOM PLANS
WALL MOUNTED "GREEN
SCREEN" OR APPROVED EQUAL
TRELLIS WITH STAND OFF
BRACKETS. TO BE VINE
PLANTED.
SOUTH-EAST PERSPECTIVE
SCALE :NTS
PRE-FINISHED
STANDING SEAM
METAL ROOF TO
MATCH ADJACENT
PUMP STATION
CMU TO MATCH
ADJACENT
PUMP STATION
CHANNELS - PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT PUMP
STATION (DARK GRAY)
SHEET METAL FLASHING -
PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT
PUMP STATION (LIGHT GRAY)
NOTES:
1. PRE-FINISHED SOFFIT PANELS @ UNDERSIDE OF
ROOF DECK TO MATCH ADJACENT PUMP STATION.
2. THERE WILL BE NO EQUIPMENT MOUNTED TO THE
ROOF.
DOORS AND FRAMES
(DARK GRAY)
KALWALL SKYLIGHTS
WALL MOUNTED "GREEN
SCREEN" OR APPROVED
EQUAL TRELLIS WITH STAND
OFF BRACKETS. TO BE VINE
PLANTED.
LOUVER
WALL MOUNTED "GREEN
SCREEN" OR APPROVED
EQUAL TRELLIS WITH STAND
OFF BRACKETS. TO BE VINE
PLANTED.WALL MOUNTED "GREEN
SCREEN" OR APPROVED
EQUAL TRELLIS WITH STAND
OFF BRACKETS. TO BE VINE
PLANTED.
DRINKING FOUNTAIN
SCOREKEEPER/ STORAGE PLAN
SCALE :
NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE :
14
'
-
8
"WEST ELEVATION
SCALE :
EAST ELEVATION
SCALE :
SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE :
8'-
4
"
20'-0"
8'-
0
"
SLOPE
CONC.
3" DIA. POSTS
TRASH ENCLOSURE FLOOR PLAN
SCALE :
10
'
-
7
"
9'-
3
"
NORTH ELEVATION
SCALE :
SOUTH ELEVATION
SCALE :
WEST ELEVATION
SCALE :
EAST ELEVATION
SCALE :
SLOPE
CONC.
2
12
2
12
2
12
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/4" = 1'-0"1/4" = 1'-0"
1/4" = 1'-0"1/4" = 1'-0"
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/4" = 1'-0"
1/4" = 1'-0"1/4" = 1'-0"
City of Palo Alto
City Project Numbers
PE-13016 & PG-13002
ST OCK T ON - SA N J OSE - SA CRA ME N T O
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Phase 2
PRE-FINISHED STANDING SEAM
METAL ROOF TO MATCH ADJACENT
PUMP STATION
CMU TO MATCH ADJACENT
PUMP STATION
IRON GATES - PAINT TO MATCH
MTL. CHANNELS @ ADJACENT
PUMP STATION (DARK GRAY)
CHANNELS & POSTS - PAINT TO MATCH
ADJACENT PUMP STATION (DARK GRAY)
SHEET METAL FLASHING -
PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT
PUMP STATION (LIGHT GRAY)
NOTE: PRE-FINISHED SOFFIT
PANELS @ UNDERSIDE OF ROOF
DECK TO MATCH ADJACENT PUMP
STATION
CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT
STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF
MATERIALS PALETTE
EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE
EXTERIOR PERSPECTIVE
PRE-FINISHED STANDING SEAM
METAL ROOF TO MATCH ADJACENT
PUMP STATION
CMU TO MATCH ADJACENT
PUMP STATION
ROLL-UP DOORS
(DARK GRAY)
CHANNELS - PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT
PUMP STATION (DARK GRAY)
SHEET METAL FLASHING -
PAINT TO MATCH ADJACENT
PUMP STATION (LIGHT GRAY)
NOTE: PRE-FINISHED SOFFIT
PANELS @ UNDERSIDE OF ROOF
DECK TO MATCH ADJACENT PUMP
STATION
S T O C K T O N . S A C R A M E N T O ARB 14.0SCORE KEEPERS BOOTH & STORAGE SHED PLAN
NTSSCALE :
NTSSCALE :
(2) 4 CU. YD.
CONTAINERS PER
CITY REQUIREMENTS
LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
VAN
VANVAN
VAN
LOADING / UNLOADING ONLY
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
ALM
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
ALMA STREET
0'
3 2 4 4 B r o o k s i d e R o a d ,S u i t e 1 0 0 S t o c k t o n , C a l i f o r n i a 9 5 2 1 9
2 0 9 - 9 4 3 - 2 0 2 1 w w w . s i e g f r i e d e n g .c o m F x :2 0 9 - 9 4 2 - 0 2 1 4
STANFORD MALL
PARKING LOT SIDEWALK EL CAMINO REAL BIKE
PATH
SOCCER FIELD PLAYER SEATING
AREA
PLAYER
SEATING AREA
PATH CAL TRAIN ALMA STREET EXISTING CONDOMINIUM
APARTMENTS
PROPOSED SPORTS FIELD
LIGHTING
LIGHTI
N
G
C
O
V
E
R
A
G
E
A
N
G
L
E
LIGHTIN
G
C
O
V
E
R
A
G
E
A
N
G
L
E
EXISTING
AND
PROPOSED
PARK
SCREENING
TREES
PROPOSED SPORTS
FIELD LIGHTING
EXISTING
MATURE
TREES
EXISTING
6 FOOT HIGH
RAILROAD FENCE
EXISTING
6 FOOT HIGH
PARK FENCE
PROPERTY
LINE
FIELD LIGHTING COVERAGE AREA
30.0 FC AVG.- FIELD
0.1 FC - PERIMETER
EXISTING
MATURE TREES
(50-65 FEET HIGH)EXISTING MATURE
PARK STREET
SCREENING TREES
0'SECTION DETAIL A-A
0'
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
ALM
A
S
T
R
E
E
T
ALMA STREET
PHOTOMETRICS - PLAN VIEW
PERSPECTIVE 1 - PROPOSED PARK IMPROVEMENTS
3 2 4 4 B r o o k s i d e R o a d , S u i t e 1 0 0 S t o c k t o n , C a l i f o r n i a 9 5 2 1 9
2 0 9 - 9 4 3 - 2 0 2 1 w w w . s i e g f r i e d e n g .c o m F x : 2 0 9 - 9 4 2 - 0 2 1 4
PERSPECTIVE 2 - VIEW FROM APARTMENTSDESIGN - EXISTING VIEWS
2
A
A
10TH FLOOR VIEW WEST 6TH FLOOR VIEW WEST
2ND FLOOR VIEW WEST
PALO ALTO CONDOMINIUM APARTMENTS - 101 ALMA STREET
2
1
STREET VIEW ACROSS ALMA STREET
STANFORD MALL
PARKING LOT SIDEWALK EL CAMINO REAL BIKE
PATH
SOCCER FIELD PLAYER SEATING
AREA
PLAYER
SEATING AREA
PATH CAL TRAIN ALMA STREET EXISTING CONDOMINIUM
APARTMENTS
PROPOSED SPORTS FIELD
LIGHTING
LIGHT R
E
F
L
E
C
T
A
N
C
E
EXISTING AND
PROPOSED PARK
SCREENING TREES
BLOCK LIGHT
REFLECTION
PROPOSED SPORTS
FIELD LIGHTING
EXISTING
MATURE
TREES
PROPERTY
LINE
EXISTING
MATURE TREES
(50-65 FEET HIGH)EXISTING MATURE
PARK STREET
SCREENING TREES
0'LIGHT REFLECTION THEORY
3 2 4 4 B r o o k s i d e R o a d , S u i t e 1 0 0 S t o c k t o n , C a l i f o r n i a 9 5 2 1 9
2 0 9 - 9 4 3 - 2 0 2 1 w w w . s i e g f r i e d e n g .c o m F x : 2 0 9 - 9 4 2 - 0 2 1 4
LIGHTING TECHNOLOGY
DESIGN - POLE HEIGHT DESIGN - SPILL LIGHT CONTROL
El Camino Park Restoration Project
Field Lighting Photometrics – 70 foot Poles
MEMORANDUM
To: Elizabeth Ames
Hung Nguyen
City of Palo Alto
From: Darcey Rosenblatt
Subject: Artificial Turf Analytical Results – El Camino Parks Athletic Fields
Date: September 16, 2014
cc: Elizabeth Ames
Recommendation for Testing Artificial Turf Products – El Camino Parks Athletic Fields
The City requested that Dudek sample materials proposed for use in the restoration of playing
fields at El Camino Park. Dudek’s recommendations for testing these products are as follows:
The samples should be analyzed to evaluate the potential for the turf materials to adversely
affect human health or water quality through their normal use. To complete this analysis the
samples should be analyzed for constituents that could potentially be used in their manufacture
that commonly impact water quality/human health. Metals, volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and semi‐volatile organic compounds (SVOCs) would be the most likely constituents to
impact water quality and/or human health through leaching or direct contact with the synthetic
turf. Thus, to evaluate potential impacts to human health from direct contact, the turf sample
results should be compared to EPA Regional Screening Levels and Cal‐EPA California Human
Health Screening Levels, which test for these constituents.
To evaluate potential impacts to groundwater, concentrations that could leach from the turf
material should be compared to the maximum contaminant levels (MCLs). The MCL is
established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and lists the maximum
concentration of a chemical that is allowed in public drinking water systems. The same criteria
are used to evaluate groundwater quality.
Estimation of the potential concentration that could leach from the turf should be obtained by
analyzing an extract of the sample obtained using the synthetic precipitation leaching
procedure (SPLP). The SPLP extraction simulates leaching that could occur when the product
material is exposed to rainfall. Therefore, the SPLP extraction best evaluates leaching during
normal use.
Memorandum
Subject: Artificial Turf Testing Recommendations
8511
2 August 2014
To evaluate potential impacts to stormwater, and thus to surrounding surface water,
concentrations that could leach from the turf should be compared to the RWQCB
Environmental Screening Levels for fresh water habitats. Again, for this screening, an estimate
of the concentration that could leach from the turf should be obtained using SPLP extract
analysis.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5125)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 10/20/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Facilities Repair & Retrofit Project No. 3 Construction
Contract
Title: Approval of Contract No. C15155841 With Anderson Pacific Engineering
Construction, Inc. in the Total Amount Not to Exceed $1,067,000 for the
Facility Repair & Retrofit Project No. 3 at the Regional Water Quality Control
Plant Capital Improvement Program Project WQ-04011
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Public Works
Recommended Motion
Staff recommends that Council consider the following motion:
1.Approve,and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute,the
attached contract with Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc.
(APEC), (Attachment A), in the total amount of $970,000 for the Facility
Repair & Retrofit Project No. 3 at the Regional Water Quality Control Plant
(RWQCP), Facility Equipment Assessment and Retrofit Program (WQ-
04011); and
2.Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or
more change orders to the contract with Anderson Pacific Engineering
Construction, Inc. (APEC)for related, additional but unforeseen work which
may develop during the project, the total value of which shall not exceed
$97,000.
Background
The RWQCP treats wastewater from approximately 230,000 residents generated
by Los Altos, Mountain View, Palo Alto, Los Altos Hills, East Palo Alto Sanitary
District, and Stanford University. The City owns and operates the RWQCP with
City of Palo Alto Page 2
operating and capital costs shared by participating agencies. Much of the RWQCP
was built in 1972 at the site of the pre-existing Palo Alto Treatment Plant built in
1934. The Plant was upgraded to tertiary treatment in 1980; plant capacity was
increased in 1988. Structures from each of the capital additions are in use today.
This project is consistent with the Plant’s Long Range Facilities Plan (LRFP)
completed October 2012 and accepted by Council on July 2, 2012 (staff report
ID#2914).The LRFP identified the need to use ongoing CIP wastewater treatment
projects to rehabilitate these facilities, and to keep these facilities in a state of
proper maintenance and operational readiness.
The City contracted with Kennedy/Jenks Consultants to prepare a Facility
Condition Assessment for the RWQCP. The study, completed in 2006, evaluated
the condition of the existing buildings, tanks and other structures, and
recommended repairs, retrofits and/or further investigation to correct
deterioration or damage sustained in the normal course of aging and industrial
wear-and-tear.
The City then contracted with Carollo Engineers (staff report ID# 2517)to design
the corrective repairs and retrofits and develop bid and construction packages
based on RWQCP’s priorities. The repairs were planned to be constructed in
phases over a 5-year period. This is the third facilities repair and retrofit project
(FRRP).
FRRP 1 was completed in 2010. The work under FRRP1 contract was to replace
handrails at secondary clarifiers and repair platforms & handrails in incinerator
building for personal safety.
FRRP 2 was completed in 2012. The work under FRRP2 contract was to replace
safety guardrails around the aeration tanks, repair concrete at various locations in
the plant, coat steel members, replace gratings, repair supports, install seismic
bracing in the raw sewage pumping plant, and replace floating covers in the
recycled water system.
Discussion
The work to be performed under this (FRRP 3) contract is to repair concrete at
various locations in the plant, replace and/or re-coat process piping with
City of Palo Alto Page 3
industrial paint, provide a protective industrial coating to steel members, replace
gratings and re-coat access hatches, repair support braces, reseat several sluice
gates to stop leaks and re-coat these gates, and repair rooftop damage to Plant
buildings. These repairs are required to assure the operational reliability of the
treatment plant.
Summary of Bid Process
Bid Name/Number Facility Repair & Retrofit Project No. 3
(IFB #155841)
Proposed Length of Project 12 months
Number of Bids Mailed to Contractors 15
Number of Bids Mailed to Builder’s
Exchanges
12
Total Days to Respond to Bid 29
Pre-Bid Meeting Yes
Number of Company Attendees at Pre-
Bid Meeting
21
Number of *Bids Received:4
Bid Price Range From a low of $970,000 to a high of
$1,249,560.
*Bid summary provided in Attachment B.
Staff has reviewed all bids submitted and recommends that the bid of $970,000
submitted by Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. (APEC) be accepted
and that Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. (APEC)be declared the
lowest responsible bidder. The bid is 3.6% above the engineer's estimate of
$936,000. The change order amount of $97,000 (which equals 10% of the total
contract) is requested for related, additional but unforeseen work which may
develop during the project.
Staff confirmed with the Contractor's State License Board that the contractor has
an active general engineering construction license on file. Staff also checked
references supplied by the contractor for previous work performed, including
other work with the City, as well as a project currently in progress at the RWQCP,
and found no significant complaints.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Timeline
The work is planned to be completed by October 15, 2015.
Resource Impact
Funding for this contract is included in the FY 2015 Wastewater Treatment Fund
Capital Improvement Program project Facility Equipment Assessment and Retrofit
(WQ-04011).
Policy Implications
This recommendation does not represent any change to existing City policies.
Environmental Review
The recommended action is categorically exempt from review under the
California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301
(b), which includes maintenance of publicly-owned wastewater facilities involving
negligible expansion.
Attachments:
·A -Construction Contract Facilities Repair (PDF)
·B -Bid Summary Facilities Repair and Retrofit Project No. 3(PDF)
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 1 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Contract No. 155841
City of Palo Alto
And
Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc.
PROJECT
Facilities Repair and Retrofit Project No. 3
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 2 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY. ...................................................................................................... 7
SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. ................................................................................................................. 7
6.1 Time Is of Essence. .............................................................................................................................. 7
6.2 Commencement of Work. ................................................................................................................ 7
6.3 Contract Time. ...................................................................................................................................... 7
6.4 Liquidated Damages. .......................................................................................................................... 8
6.4.1 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. ............................................................................................... 9
SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS............................................................................... 10
SECTION 13 NOTICES ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
13.1 Method of Notice ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10
13.2 Notice Recipents ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….10
13.3 Change of Address. ........................................................................................................................... 11
SECTION 14 DEFAULT. ......................................................................................................................... 11
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 3 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
14.1 Notice of Default. .............................................................................................................................. 11
14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. ........................................................................................................ 11
SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. ...................................................................................... 12
15.1 Remedies Upon Default. ................................................................................................................. 12
15.1.1 Delete Certain Services. .......................................................................................... 12
15.1.2 Perform and Withhold. ........................................................................................... 12
15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. .................................................................... 12
15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. ............................................................................. 12
15.1.6 Additional Provisions. ............................................................................................. 12
15.2 Delays by Sureties. ............................................................................................................................ 12
15.3 Damages to City. ................................................................................................................................ 13
15.3.1 For Contractor's Default. ........................................................................................ 13
15.3.2 Compensation for Losses. ...................................................................................... 13
15.4 Suspension by City ............................................................................................................................ 13
15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience. .......................................................................................... 13
15.5 Termination Without Cause. ......................................................................................................... 14
15.5.1 Compensation. ......................................................................................................... 14
15.5.2 Subcontractors. ........................................................................................................ 14
15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. ..................................................................................... 14
SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. ...................................................................... 15
16.1 Contractor’s Remedies. ................................................................................................................... 15
16.1.1 For Work Stoppage. ................................................................................................. 15
16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment. ......................................................................................... 15
16.2 Damages to Contractor. .................................................................................................................. 15
SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. ................................................................................................ 15
17.1 Financial Management and City Access. ................................................................................... 15
17.2 Compliance with City Requests. ................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. ................................................................................................. 16
SECTION 19 NUISANCE. ...................................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES. ................................................................................................ 16
SECTION 21 WAIVER. .......................................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE....................................................................................... 16
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 4 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. ................................................................................................ 17
SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. ............................................................................................... 17
SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES. ...................................................................................................... 17
SECTION 26 NON APPROPRIATION. ................................................................................................... 17
SECTION 27 AUTHORITY. .................................................................................................................... 17
SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS .............................................................................................................. 18
SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY. ................................................................................................................. 18
SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES . ............................................................. 18
SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION. ................................................................ 18
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 5 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on October 7, 2014 (“Execution Date”) by and between the
CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and ANDERSON PACIFIC
ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, 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 245215. 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 Tuesday, August 11, 2014 City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the Facilities
Repair and Retrofit Project No. 3 (“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 Contract 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 Facilities Repair and Retrofit Project No. 3 Project, located at the RWQCP, 2501
Embarcadero Way, Palo Alto 94301. ("Project").
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 6 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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) Instructions to Bidders
10) Invitation for Bids
11) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Affidavit
12) Reports listed in the Contract Documents
13) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications (most current version at
time of Bid)
14) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards (most current
version at time of Bid)
15) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements
16) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations
17) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre-
Qualification Checklist (if applicable)
18) Performance and Payment Bonds
3.2 Order of Precedence.
For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the
provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the
preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 7 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY.
Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work required for the Project, as specified in the Contract
Documents, all of which are fully incorporated herein. Contractor shall provide, furnish, and supply all
things necessary and incidental for the timely performance and completion of the Work, including, but not
limited to, provision of all necessary labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and utilities, unless
otherwise specified in the Contract Documents. Contractor also agrees to use its best efforts to complete
the Work in a professional and expeditious manner and to meet or exceed the performance standards
required by the Contract Documents.
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 Contract
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 October 15, 2015.
within calendar days () after the commencement date specified in City’s Notice to
Proceed.
By executing this Construction Contract, Contractor expressly waives any claim for delayed early
completion.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 8 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
6.4 Liquidated Damages.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.85, 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 Five Hundred dollars ($500.00) 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.
6.4.1 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 Nine Hundred and Seventy Thousand Dollars
($970,000.00).
[This amount includes the Base Bid of Seven Hundred Ninety-Seven Thousand
Dollars ($797,000) and Additive Alternate A for Forty-Three Thousand Dollars
($43,000), and Additive Alternate B for One Hundred and Thirty Thousand
Dollars ($130,000).]
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, except as expressly provided herein. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted
for Change Orders approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 9 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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.
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 individually referred to as an “Indemnitee” and collectively referred to as
"Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and liability, loss,
damage, claims, expenses (including, without limitation, attorney fees, expert witness fees,
paralegal fees, and fees and costs of litigation or arbitration) (collectively, “Liability”) of every
nature arising out of or in connection with the acts or omissions of Contractor, its employees,
Subcontractors, representatives, or agents, in performing the Work or its failure to comply with
any of its obligations under the Contract, except such Liability caused by the active negligence,
sole negligence, or willful misconduct of an Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs
City incurs to enforce this provision. Except as provided in Section 9.2 below, 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.
Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of
any third-party claim relating to the Contract.
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.
Within ten (10) business days following issuance of the Notice of Award, Contractor shall provide City with
evidence that it has obtained insurance and shall submit Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all
requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 10 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS.
City is entering into this Construction Contract in reliance 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, Change Order Requests and
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
Regional Water Quality Control Plant
2501 Embarcadero Way
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Attn: Tom Kapushinski
AND
City of Palo Alto
Utilities Engineering
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 11 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Attn:
In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided
to the following:
Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office
250 Hamilton Avenue
P.O. Box 10250
Palo Alto, California 94303
All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail.
All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to:
Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc.
1390 Norman Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Attn: Peter E. Anderson
13.3 Change of Address.
In advance of any change of address, Contractor shall notify City 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 DEFAULT.
14.1 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, with a copy to
Contractor’s performance bond surety.
14.2 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.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 12 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.
15.1 Remedies Upon Default.
If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth
above in Section 14, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including,
without limitation, the following:
15.1.1 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.
15.1.2 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.
15.1.3 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.
15.1.4 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 14. 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.
15.1.5 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.
15.1.6 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.
15.2 Delays by Sureties.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 13 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Time being of the essence in the performance of the Work, if Contractor’s surety fails to arrange
for completion of the Work in accordance with the Performance Bond, within seven (7) calendar
days from the date of the notice of termination, Contractor’s surety shall be deemed to have
waived its right to complete the Work under the Contract, and City may immediately make
arrangements for the completion of the Work through use of its own forces, by hiring a
replacement contractor, or by any other means that City determines advisable under the
circumstances. Contractor and its surety shall be jointly and severally liable for any additional cost
incurred by City to complete the Work following termination. In addition, City shall have the right
to use any materials, supplies, and equipment belonging to Contractor and located at the
Worksite for the purposes of completing the remaining Work.
15.3 Damages to City.
15.3.1 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.
15.3.2 Compensation for Losses.
In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City
shall be entitled to deduct the cost of such Losses from monies otherwise payable to Contractor.
If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount payable, Contractor shall be liable to City for the
difference and shall promptly remit same to City.
15.4 Suspension by City
15.4.1 Suspension 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.
15.4.2 Suspension for Cause.
In addition to all other remedies available to City, if Contractor fails to perform or correct work in
accordance with the Contract Documents, City may immediately order the Work, or any portion
thereof, suspended until the cause for the suspension has been eliminated to City’s satisfaction.
Contractor shall not be entitled to an increase in Contract Time or Contract Price for a suspension
occasioned by Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents. City’s right to
suspend the Work shall not give rise to a duty to suspend the Work, and City’s failure to suspend
the Work shall not constitute a defense to Contractor’s failure to comply with the requirements of
the Contract Documents.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 14 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
15.5 Termination Without Cause.
City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or
in whole upon written notice to Contractor. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall, at City’s
expense, comply with the notice and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs to close out and
demobilize. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 15.5 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.
15.5.1 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 15.5.1, 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
(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.
15.5.2 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.
15.6 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
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 15 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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.
Upon termination, whether for cause or for convenience, the provisions of the Contract
Documents remain in effect as to any Claim, indemnity obligation, warranties, guarantees,
submittals of as-built drawings, instructions, or manuals, or other such rights and obligations
arising prior to the termination date.
SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.
16.1 Contractor’s Remedies.
Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the
following:
16.1.1 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.
16.1.2 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.
16.2 Damages to Contractor.
In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided
for in Paragraph 15.5.1 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 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS.
17.1 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
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 16 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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.
17.2 Compliance with City Requests.
Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 17 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 17.1 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 18 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.
SECTION 19 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 20 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 21 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 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE.
This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of
California, and venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Santa Clara, and no
other place.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 17 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 23 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 24 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 25 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. This Project remains subject to all
other applicable provisions of the California Labor Code and regulations promulgated thereunder.
Or
The Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the
California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has
obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work
in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this
Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. Copies of these rates may be obtained
at 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 26 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 27 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.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 18 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS
This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties,
constitute a single binding agreement.
SECTION 29 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.
SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES.
With respect to any amendments to any statutes or regulations referenced in these Contract Documents,
the reference is deemed to be the version in effect on the date that the Contract was awarded by City,
unless otherwise required by law.
SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION.
Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, by signing this Contract, Contractor certifies as follows: “I am aware
of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against
liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that
code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work on this
Contract.”
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed the
date and year first above written.
CITY OF PALO ALTO
____________________________
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
Senior Asst. City Attorney
APPROVED:
____________________________
Public Works Director
ANDERSON PACIFIC ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION,
INC.
By:___________________________
Name:________________________
Title:__________________________
Bid Item Description Engineer's
Estimate
Anderson
Pacific CA Plus Olympos
Painting
Monterey
Mechanical
Base Various Tasks $936,000 $797,000 $898,000 $1,150,000 $1,058,560
Add
Alternates Aeration Basins work $173,000 $250,000 $38,000 $191,000
Total Bid $936,000 $970,000 $1,148,000 $1,188,000 $1,249,560
Remarks Apparent low
bidder Highest bidder
Bid Summary for Facilities Repair & Retrofit Project No. 3 (FRRP3), (IFB-155841)
CIP WQ-04011 Plant Equipment Replacement
City of Palo Alto, Public Works Department - RWQCP
Attachment B
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
October 20, 2014
The Honorable City Council
Palo Alto, California
SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing
Underground Utility District No. 46 (Arastradero Road/ El Camino
Real/ W. Charleston Road) by Amending Section 12.16.02 of the Palo
Alto Municipal Code (First Reading: October 6, 2014 PASSED: 8-0 Klein
absent)
This is a second reading of an Ordinance that was heard and passed by the City Council on
October 6, 2014.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: UUD Ordinance (PDF)
Department Head: Donna Grider, City Clerk
Page 2
NOT YET APPROVED
Ordinance No. __________
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing
Underground Utility District No. 46 (portions of Arastadero, El Camino,
W. Charleston) by Amending Section 12.16.020 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code
R E C I T A L S
A. This Council, on June 23, 2014, adopted Resolution No. 9439 declaring its
intention to establish Underground Utility District No. 46 in the City by amending Section
12.16.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and by such Resolution appointed Monday, October
6, 2014, at the hour of 6:00 o'clock p.m., in the Council Chambers, City Hall, at 250 Hamilton
Avenue, Palo Alto, California, as the time and place of hearing protests and receiving evidence
for and against the proposed action and notice of direction; and
B. Notice was given of the time and place for the public hearing stated in the
manner provided by law, as appears from the affidavits on file in the office of the City Clerk;
and
C. Said matter came on regularly for hearing at the time fixed; and
D. All written protests and other written communications were publicly read at
said meeting and evidence duly taken and all persons desiring to be heard were fully heard.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. The public necessity, health and safety require the removal of poles
and overhead lines and associated overhead structures from that certain area described in
Resolution No. 9439.
SECTION 2. Section 12.16.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is amended by
amending Subsection (46) thereof to read:
“(46) District No. 46. All of the area in the County of Santa Clara, City of Palo Alto,
encompassing portions of the following avenues, roads, and streets: Arastadero
Rd., El Camino, W. Charleston all as more particularly described on that certain map
entitled “Underground District No. 46 Boundary Map” on file in the office of the
City Clerk.”
SECTION 3. The "Underground Utility District Maps" referred to in Section
12.16.020 shall be amended to add to the areas shown on the map those referred to in Resolu-
tion No. 9439.
SECTION 4. The City Council hereby finds that the adoption of this ordinance is
categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15302
1
140918 jrm 0180071
EXHIBIT A
NOT YET APPROVED
of Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations (conversion of overhead
electric distribution facilities to underground).
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective upon the expiration of thirty (30)
days from its passage.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
______________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager
__________________________ ______________________________
Senior Deputy City Attorney Director of Utilities
2
140918 jrm 0180071
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5175)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 10/20/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Palo Alto Grade Separation and Trenching Study
Title: Palo Alto Grade Separation and Trenching Study
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
On Thursday, October 9, 2014, this CMR was released early for the Monday, October 20, 2014
City Council meeting, to allow additional review time.
Since the release, the City’s engineering consultant, Hatch Mott McDonald (HMM), discovered
there were discrepancies between their original memo, dated October 7, 2014, and the
associated attachment to that memo titled Alternative Cost Estimates.
Therefore, HMM has provided an updated memo, dated October 13, 2014, to account for those
discrepancies, however, the information provided in the original staff report and the original
Alternative Cost Estimates attachment to the original memo, have not changed.
That said, staff has received some initial feedback on the staff report since its release and has
taken the opportunity to address some of that feedback by providing an addendum to the
original report (Attachment B).
Recommendation
This study session provides the City Council an opportunity to discuss findings in the attached
report by Hatch Mott McDonald (HMM) and provide direction on next steps. No action is
recommended at this time.
Executive Summary
HMM, a consulting firm specializing in construction engineering, was hired at the direction of
the Palo Alto City Council to study conceptual grade separation alternatives for a portion of the
Caltrain right of way encompassing three existing at-grade crossings (Charleston, Meadow, and
Churchill). This study provides preliminary information on the potential impacts and cost of
construction (by order of magnitude) for various roadway submersion and trenching
alternatives.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
This information is intended to facilitate community dialogue on the issue and ultimately to
help form a policy position on grade separations. The study is not definitive in determining an
ultimate configuration, but does provide a starting point for dialogue on the issue. Specifically,
the study indicates that the roadway submersion alternatives would require significant
property acquisitions, while the trenching alternatives would not. Also, the trenching
alternatives would maintain turning movements along Alma Street, while not all of the roadway
submersion alternatives would do so.
For example, the two percent (2%) grade trenching alternative would grade separate
Charleston and Meadow for around $488 million and require zero property acquisitions versus
the alternative that submerges the roadway beneath the railroad tracks at Charleston and
Meadow and maintains turning movements on and off of Alma which would cost approximately
$320 million and require acquisition of 32 full parcels and seven partial parcels.
Background
At the November 4, 2013 City Council meeting, HMM was authorized, at a cost of $59,790, to
move forward with Phase I of an analysis that delivered a conceptual cost estimate for a
number of preliminary grade separation alternatives south of the California Avenue Caltrain
Station. The most important information obtained from this analysis was intended to be a
clearer understanding of the differences in cost and construction impacts between submerging
the roadway and trenching the railroad at certain intersections in Palo Alto. The reason
trenching was only studied south of Oregon Expressway is that because if it was determined
that trenching was cost prohibitive south of Oregon Expressway it certainly would be north of
Oregon Expressway where trenching the corridor would require the complete reconstruction of
the City’s three existing grade separated crossings (Oregon Expressway, Embarcadero, and
University) and submerging the City’s two Caltrain stations (California Avenue and Palo Alto), in
addition to complications posed by San Francisquito Creek.
Phase I of the analysis, as presented in this report, evaluates the preliminary alternatives by
evaluating construction feasibility, right of way impacts (i.e. property acquisitions), and concept
level cost estimates for comparison purposes.
Phase II of the analysis would develop the City’s selected preliminary alternatives to a final
concept level, produce concept design exhibits, and provide refined order of magnitude project
costs and assessments of feasibility. The cost of Phase II would be an additional $67,760 and
staff is interested in hearing from the Council whether this additional work is needed to provide
sufficient information for community dialog and policy decisions regarding which of the
preliminary alternatives, if any, should be pursued from a funding and logistical standpoint with
outside agencies such as Caltrain, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, and the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
Listed below are the specific grade separation alternatives evaluated by HMM. Alternatives that
were studded by HMM are:
City of Palo Alto Page 3
1. Trenching the corridor from approximately San Antonio to approximately Oregon
Expressway, which would grade separate both Meadow and Charleston by keeping the
existing roadways at-grade and running rail traffic beneath it in an open trench.
Please note that this alternative does not impact whether or not the roadway is
submerged below the railroad tracks at Churchill.
2. Submerging the roadway beneath the railroad tracks at Churchill
3. Submerging the roadway beneath the railroad tracks at Meadow
4. Submerging the roadway beneath the railroad tracks at Charleston
It should be noted, as the report from HMM indicates, that if Council chooses to pursue the
roadway submersion alternatives at both Charleston and Meadow that maintain turning
movements on and off of Alma they must be done as a single project due to their proximity;
however, submerging the roadway at Churchill can occur regardless of what happens at the
Meadow and Charleston intersections.
Attached for your review is HMM’s Palo Alto Grade Separation Study (Attachment A), including
an attachment that outlines the costs associated with each alternative. The primary difference
between the trenching estimate that was generated by HMM in 2011 and the one generated in
this study is that the previous estimate was based on California High Speed Rail Authority
(CHSRA) cost of construction per foot figures and did not take local, existing conditions into
consideration at the level of detail this study does.
The updated study uses current and local construction cost information. HMM generated their
estimates in part by using information they’ve obtained from current transportation
construction projects in the area with similar traits such as the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) to
San Jose extension project. Furthermore, HMM used figures that are more applicable to the
existing conditions at the intersections they studied as it relates to utility relocation costs, right
of way impacts, staging, and traffic signal impacts rather than wholesale allowance numbers.
The use of recent and local construction data provides more realistic order of magnitude cost
estimates for work on the Peninsula compared to the 2011 study.
Results of the Analysis
As displayed in the Alternative Cost Estimates attachment to the HMM report, the most
expensive alternative is the one percent (1%) grade trench alternative at a cost of
approximately $1.05 billion. This alternative would not require a design exemption as it relates
to the slope of the grade but it’s more than double the cost of the two percent (2%) grade
trench alternative mainly due to the impacts it would have on Oregon Expressway (already
grade separated) and the San Antonio Avenue and California Avenue Caltrain stations based on
its expanded footprint. Additionally, this alternative becomes significantly more complex than
the two percent (2%) grade trench alternative when existing creeks are considered because
instead of the trench being able to go above them the creeks would have to be rerouted, likely
City of Palo Alto Page 4
requiring additional infrastructure such as pump stations.
Although both the one percent (1%) grade trench alternative and the two percent (2%) grade
trench alternative are more expensive than the roadway submersion alternatives they require
zero parcel acquisitions, have fewer visual impacts by having a reduced footprint at each
intersection, and result in a grade separated roadway that is level with the existing roadways,
significantly benefiting bicycle and pedestrian movements.
Table 1 below summarizes the trench alternatives:
Table 1: Summary of Trench Alternatives
Trench Grade One Percent (1%) Two Percent (2%)
Cost $1,050,728,700 $488,187,283
Full Property Acquisitions 0 0
Partial Property Acquisitions 0 0
Turn Movements Maintained Yes Yes
Source: Hatch Mott McDonald, 2014
As for the roadway submersion alternatives displayed in the Alternative Cost Estimates
attachment to the HMM report, they are significantly less expensive than the trenching
alternatives (ranging in price from approximately $85 million to $184 million per roadway
submersion) but have far greater impacts in the form of property acquisitions, lost turning
movements, and have far more visual impacts at each intersection due to their larger
footprints.
Below are two tables that summarize the roadway submersion alternatives. Table 2 below
shows the roadway submersion alternatives where Alma Street is left at-grade and therefore
turning movements on and off of Alma Street are lost. Table 3 below shows the roadway
submersion alternatives where Alma Street is lowered in order to maintain turning movements.
Table 2: Summary of Roadway Submersion Alternatives that Abolish Alma Street Turning
Movements
Roadway Submersion Intersection Churchill Meadow Charleston
Cost $90,334,561 $84,578,797 $101,783,449
Full Property Acquisitions 16 11 18
Partial Property Acquisitions 4 5 3
Turn Movements Maintained No No No
Source: Hatch Mott McDonald, 2014
Table 3: Summary of Roadway Submersion Alternatives that Lower Alma Street to Maintain
Turning Movements
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Roadway Submersion Intersection Churchill Meadow Charleston
Cost $183,513,669 $143,385,047 $152,903,454
Full Property Acquisitions 33 14 18
Partial Property Acquisitions 3 4 3
Turn Movements Maintained Yes Yes Yes
Source: Hatch Mott McDonald, 2014
As previously noted, if the roadway submersion alternatives that maintain turning movements
on and off of Alma Street at the Meadow and Charleston intersections are selected they must
be constructed congruently, as a single project, and that will cost an additional $23,177,765 for
a total project cost of $319,466,266 ($143,385,047 + $152,903,454 + $23,177,765).
Next Steps
Based on Council comments, staff will come back to Council in the near future with a staff
recommendation for Council review and approval on a preferred alternative to pursue. By
identifying a preferred alternative staff will be more effective in both discussing the issue with
transportation and funding agencies in addition to facilitating our public outreach efforts.
The property acquisitions associated with some of the alternatives presented in the HMM
report are significant and therefore staff feels strongly that any decision that is made on this
topic should not be rushed. Therefore, staff felt that first discussing the HMM report in a study
session before bringing it before Council for action was most appropriate.
Finally, as noted above, staff is interested in learning whether Council believes further study,
such as Phase II of the HMM scope of work, should be done or if at this time the information
HMM has already provided is sufficient.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Revised Palo Alto Grade Separation Study Memo and Attachment 10-13-
2014 (PDF)
Attachment B: CMR # 5175 Addendum 10-15-2014 (PDF)
Attachment C: Public Comment (PDF)
MEMO
Hatch Mott MacDonald
181 Metro Drive (Suite 510) San Jose CA 95110 T •408-572-8800 • F 408-572-8799www.hatchmott.com
To Richard Hackmann, City of Palo Alto
From Michael Canepa, PE, HMM
Date 10/13/14
Project # 324006
Page 1 of 7
CC Chris Metzger, Brian Hughes, Derek
Penrice
Subject Palo Alto Grade Separation Study
This memo discusses alternatives for grade separating the Caltrain tracks at existing at-grade
crossings in the City of Palo Alto. The two alternatives evaluated in this study were:
construction of an undercrossing at Churchill Ave, Meadow Dr, and Charleston Rd, and the
construction of a rail trench under Meadow Dr and Charleston Rd. The following information
was evaluated in support of the findings of this study:
·Typical cross sections for each alternative
·Plan/profile for each alternative
·ROW impacts
·Traffic impacts
·Utility impacts
·Cost estimate
Undercrossing at Churchill Ave, Meadow Dr, and Charleston Rd
The first alternative is to build an undercrossing at Churchill Ave, Meadow Dr, and Charleston
Rd to separate the existing Caltrain tracks from the roadways. Due to the proximity of Alma St
to the rail corridor, two scenarios were evaluated – keeping Alma St at existing grade and
lowering Alma St to match the elevation of the undercrossing.
Design Criteria and Assumptions
·Design speed is assumed to be 5 mph above the posted speed limit or a minimum of
30 mph
·Maximum roadway grade used is 8%
·Maximum sidewalk grade is 5% (per ADA)
·Roadway vertical clearance is 15.5’ (per JPB Standards for Design and Maintenance of
Structures 2.4.2)
·Sidewalk vertical clearance is 10’ (per HDM 208.6)
·Minimum vertical curve length is 200’ (per HDM 204.4)
·1:10 depth to span ratio for rail bridges
·Roadway bridge depths:
ATTACHMENT A
MEMO
To Richard Hackmann, City of Palo Alto
Date 10/13/14
Page 2 of 7
181 Metro Drive (Suite 510) San Jose CA 95110 T •408-572-8800 • F 408-572-8799 www.hatchmott.com
o Reinforced concrete bridge (continuous span over Caltrain trench) – AASHTO
Bridge Design Table 2.5.2.6.3-1
o Prestressed girder bridge (simple span over roadway undercrossing) – based
on manufacturer’s recommend depth for prestressed girders
Typical Roadway & Bridge Sections
· Churchill Ave undercrossing width is 60’ when Alma St remains at existing grade
o 2x 12’ thru lanes
o 2x 2’ buffer
o 2x 6’ bike lane
o 2x 2’ barrier
o 2x 8’ sidewalk
· Churchill Ave undercrossing width is 70’ when Alma St is lowered
o 2x 12’ thru lanes
o 12’ right turn lane
o 2’ buffer
o 2x 6’ bike lane
o 2x 2’ barrier
o 2x 8’ sidewalk
· Meadow Dr undercrossing width is 80’ when Alma St is at existing grade or lowered
o 4x 11’ thru lanes
o 2x 2’ buffer
o 2x 6’ bike lane
o 2x 2’ barrier
o 2x 8’ sidewalk
· Charleston Rd undercrossing width is 80’ when Alma St is at existing grade or lowered
o 4x 11’ thru lanes
o 2x 2’ buffer
o 2x 6’ bike lane
o 2x 2’ barrier
o 2x 8’ sidewalk
· Rail bridge width at undercrossing is 40’
o 15’ track center (per Caltrain Design Criteria 3.1)
MEMO
To Richard Hackmann, City of Palo Alto
Date 10/13/14
Page 3 of 7
181 Metro Drive (Suite 510) San Jose CA 95110 T •408-572-8800 • F 408-572-8799 www.hatchmott.com
o 2x 9.5’ from centerline of track to OCS pole (per Caltrain Standard Drawing
ETF-0001-0010)
o 2x 1.5’ OCS pole (per Caltrain Standard Drawing ETF-0001-0010)
o 2x 1.5’ from OCS pole to edge of bridge deck
Two scenarios were evaluated at each undercrossing. In the first scenario, Alma St would
remain at existing grade and each undercrossing would pass below both the Caltrain tracks
and Alma St. This would disconnect Alma St from the crossing streets and would require
traffic to be routed to the next crossing to the north or south. In the second scenario, to
maintain connectivity between the streets, Alma St. would be lowered to match the elevation
of the crossing street.
At each crossing, several streets will be closed to avoid property impacts at the intersections
with the undercrossing. Closures at these intersections will force traffic to adjacent
intersections which may require signalization to compensate for the increase in traffic.
In the first scenario, with Alma St at existing grade, the following impacts will occur:
· ROW impacts along Churchill from Castilleja Ave to Emerson St with intersection
closures at Mariposa Ave and the eastern side of Castilleja Ave
· ROW impacts along Meadow Dr from 2nd St to Emerson St with intersection closures
at Park Blvd and 2nd St
· ROW impacts along Charleston Rd from Ruthelma Ave to Wright Pl with intersection
closure at Park Blvd
· Traffic impacts at Madrono Ave/Churchill Ave intersection
· Traffic impacts at Wilkie Way/Meadow Dr intersection
· Traffic impacts at Ruthelma Ave/Charleston Rd intersection and Wilkie
Way/Charleston Rd intersection
For this scenario, there will be 16 full parcel takes and 4 partial takes for Churchill Ave
undercrossing, 11 full parcel takes and 5 partial takes for Meadow Dr undercrossing, and 18
full parcel takes and 3 partial takes for Charleston Rd undercrossing.
In the second scenario, with Alma St lowered to the new elevation of the undercrossing, the
following impacts will occur in addition to those listed above:
MEMO
To Richard Hackmann, City of Palo Alto
Date 10/13/14
Page 4 of 7
181 Metro Drive (Suite 510) San Jose CA 95110 T •408-572-8800 • F 408-572-8799 www.hatchmott.com
· At Churchill Ave, additional ROW impacts along Alma St from Melville Ave to Lowell
Ave with intersection closures at Kellogg Ave and Coleridge Ave
· At Meadow Dr, additional ROW impacts along Alma St from Alma Village Cir to
Meadow Dr
· Intersection closure at Lindero Dr if undercrossings are constructed at both Meadow
Dr and Charleston Rd
· At Churchill Ave, additional traffic impacts at Melville Ave/Alma St intersection and
Lowell Ave/Alma St intersection
The total number of parcel takes required for this scenario is 33 full parcel takes and 3 partial
takes for Churchill Ave undercrossing, 14 full parcel takes and 4 partial takes for Meadow Dr
undercrossing, and no change in parcel takes for Charleston Rd undercrossing (18 full and 3
partial). If undercrossings are constructed at both Meadow Dr and Charleston Rd, a total of 32
full parcel takes and 7 partial takes would be required.
This study also evaluated the potential of combining roadway undercrossings with a slight
elevation of the rail tracks to minimize the extent of the ROW/traffic impacts along the
crossing streets. For every 3’ the tracks are raised, the length of the impacted area along the
cross street decreases by 40’-50’ at each end.
In the first scenario, with Alma St at existing grade, the following benefits will occur when the
tracks are raised 3 feet:
· 3 parcel impacts will no longer be required at Churchill Ave
· Castilleja Ave closure will no longer be required at Churchill Ave
· 2 parcel impacts will no longer be required at Meadow Dr
· 2nd St closure will no longer be required at Meadow Dr
· 3 parcel impacts will no longer be required at Charleston Rd
In the second scenario, with Alma St lowered to the new elevation of the undercrossing, the
following benefits will occur in addition to those listed above when the tracks are raised 3
feet:
· 2 additional parcel impacts will no longer be required at Churchill Ave
· Alma Village Cir closure will no longer be required at Meadow Dr
MEMO
To Richard Hackmann, City of Palo Alto
Date 10/13/14
Page 5 of 7
181 Metro Drive (Suite 510) San Jose CA 95110 T •408-572-8800 • F 408-572-8799 www.hatchmott.com
Rail Trench Under Meadow Dr and Charleston Rd
The second alternative is to build a trench under Meadow Dr and Charleston Rd to separate
the existing Caltrain tracks from the roadways. Due to the constraints of Matadero Creek,
Barron Creek, and Adobe Creek crossing the corridor, two scenarios were studied to avoid
impacts to the creeks – maximum grade of 1% (preferred maximum) and maximum grade of
2% (design exception required).
Design Criteria and Assumptions
· Design speed is assumed to be 90 mph (per Caltrain Design Criteria 1.0)
· Preferred maximum grade is 1%; maximum grade with design exception is 2% (per
Caltrain Design Criteria 7.1)
· Minimum rail vertical clearance is 24.5’ (per Caltrain Standard Drawing SD-2002)
· Minimum distance from TOR to creek invert at creek crossing is 32.5’ (24.5’ rail
vertical clearance + 3’ trench lid + 5’ cover)
Typical Roadway & Trench Sections
· Trench width is 47’
o 15’ track center (per Caltrain Design Criteria 3.1)
o 2x 10’ from track centerline to trench wall (per Caltrain Standards for Design
and Maintenance of Structures 2.4.3)
o 2x 3’ trench wall
o 2x 3’ excavation support wall
· Churchill Ave bridge width is 69’
o 2x 12’ thru lanes
o 12’ right turn lane
o 2’ buffer
o 2x 6’ bike lane
o 2x 8’ sidewalk
o 2x 1.5’ bridge railing
· Meadow Dr bridge width is 79’
o 4x 11’ thru lanes
o 2x 2’ buffer
MEMO
To Richard Hackmann, City of Palo Alto
Date 10/13/14
Page 6 of 7
181 Metro Drive (Suite 510) San Jose CA 95110 T •408-572-8800 • F 408-572-8799 www.hatchmott.com
o 2x 6’ bike lane
o 2x 8’ sidewalk
o 2x 1.5’ bridge railing
· Charleston Rd bridge width is 79’
o 4x 11’ thru lanes
o 2x 2’ buffer
o 2x 6’ bike lane
o 2x 8’ sidewalk
o 2x 1.5’ bridge railing
Two scenarios were studied for the rail trench alternative. In the first scenario, a maximum
grade of 2% is used to minimize the length of the trench while avoiding impacts to the creeks.
Using this alternative, the trench will begin just south of the Matadero Creek. It will pass
under Baron Creek, Meadow Dr, Charleston Rd, and Adobe Creek, and will return to grade just
north of San Antonio Rd. The depth and grade of the trench is controlled by the 32.5’
clearance required under the two creeks (Baron Creek and Adobe Creek) and the constraints
at either end (Matadero Creek and San Antonio Rd). Both the 1.75% grade into the trench
and the 2.00% grade coming out of the trench will require design exceptions.
In the second scenario, a maximum grade of 1% is used, which will also avoid impacts to
creeks but will require approximately 10,500’ additional feet of trench and will require the
reconstruction of Oregon Expressway and San Antonio Rd. The trench will begin just south of
Churchill Ave. It will pass under Oregon Expressway, which will need to be reconstructed to
remove the existing undercrossing and return the roadway to surrounding grade level. The
trench will continue under Matadero Creek, Baron Creek, Meadow Dr, Charleston Rd, and
Adobe Creek, with the depth of the trench being controlled by the 32.5’ clearance require
under Matadero Creek and Adobe Creek. As the trench returns to grade at Rengstorff Ave, it
will pass under San Antonio Rd, which will need to be raised several feet to accommodate
24.5’ of clearance over the rail. This alternative will not require any design exceptions.
This study also evaluated the potential relocation of the three existing creeks to mitigate
design exceptions and minimize trench length. However, relocation of any of the creeks would
require resizing of the culverts to accommodate slower flow through a flatter channel. In
addition, at Adobe Creek and Matadero Creek, the 100 year flood water surface elevation is at
the top of the culvert, and at Baron Creek there is only 1.8’ of freeboard. Any modifications
would require upsizing all the culverts to provide 3’ of freeboard. While maintaining a
minimum slope of 0.25%, the creek crossing could be relocated several hundred feet north or
MEMO
To Richard Hackmann, City of Palo Alto
Date 10/13/14
Page 7 of 7
181 Metro Drive (Suite 510) San Jose CA 95110 T •408-572-8800 • F 408-572-8799 www.hatchmott.com
P:\324006 Palo Alto Grade Separation Study\Memo\Palo Alto Grade Separation Study Memo-Rev 3.doc
south, however, this would not provide enough space to avoid a maximum grade design
exception for the 2% grade scenario and would only provide a few hundred feet of savings in
trench length for the 1% grade scenario.
There will be no permanent ROW impacts with this alternative, as the trench will be built
within the existing JPB ROW. Traffic impacts will be temporary, and will be related to
construction of the roadway bridges and railroad shoofly.
Cost Estimate
A preliminary cost estimate for each alternative for comparative purposes is provided as
Attachment A to this memo. The major civil components used to produce the preliminary cost
estimates include earthwork, trench and bridge structures, pump stations, railroad shooflies,
traffic detours, railroad and roadway signaling, utility relocations, and right-of-way costs. Soft
costs for professional services and contingency costs have been included as percentages of
estimated construction and project costs.
Attachments
Attachment A – Alternative Cost Estimates
line Unit Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
no.Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost
001 Estimate Summary
002 Construction 622,440,744 289,191,768 25,200,625 52,677,350 27,370,319 55,705,363 29,076,479 57,591,565 128,158,000
003 Utility Relocation and Protection 213,300 104,400 1,664,300 4,960,380 2,750,450 5,559,850 2,350,750 4,129,000 8,562,750
004 Subtotal A 622,654,044 289,296,168 26,864,925 57,637,730 30,120,769 61,265,213 31,427,229 61,720,565 136,720,750
005 Professional Services (% of Subtotal A)35%217,928,915 101,253,659 9,402,724 20,173,206 10,542,269 21,442,825 10,999,530 21,602,198 47,852,263
006 Right of Way (incl. ROW Services)- - 36,000,000 69,000,000 27,000,000 32,000,000 39,000,000 39,000,000 71,000,000
007 Subtotal B 840,582,960 390,549,826 72,267,649 146,810,936 67,663,038 114,708,038 81,426,759 122,322,763 255,573,013
008 Contingency (% of Subtotal B)25%210,145,740 97,637,457 18,066,912 36,702,734 16,915,759 28,677,009 20,356,690 30,580,691 63,893,253
009 Total Project Cost (2014 dollars)1,050,728,700 488,187,283 90,334,561 183,513,669 84,578,797 143,385,047 101,783,449 152,903,454 319,466,266
010
011 note 1) Professional Services includes Design Engineering, Project Mgmt, and Construction Mgmt.
012
013
Description Unit
Meadow Charleston
Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty
Charleston Meadow&CharlestonChurchill Churchill Meadow
Palo Alto Caltrain - Grade Separation Projects
Attachment A - Alternative Cost Estimates
Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma Lowered
Rail Trench
1% Max Grade
(Caltrain Preferred)
Rail Trench
2% Max. Grade
(w/Design Exception)
Palo-Alto_Quantities-Rev 4.xlsx - page 1 of 4 PRELIMINARY-- worksheet for discussion only 10/13/2014
line Unit Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
no.Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost
Description Unit
Meadow Charleston
Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty
Charleston Meadow&CharlestonChurchill Churchill Meadow
Palo Alto Caltrain - Grade Separation Projects
Attachment A - Alternative Cost Estimates
Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma Lowered
Rail Trench
1% Max Grade
(Caltrain Preferred)
Rail Trench
2% Max. Grade
(w/Design Exception)
014 Construction
015 Support of Excavation (SOE)- - - - - - - - - -
016 SOE Area SF 80 2,428,595 194,287,616 1,239,904 99,192,320 59,200 4,736,000 155,040 12,403,200 56,320 4,505,600 155,776 12,462,080 60,000 4,800,000 160,320 12,825,600 381,600 30,528,000
017 Excavation - - - - - - - - - -
018 Mass Excavation CY 15 1,232,246 18,483,684 588,380 8,825,706 45,222 678,333 123,748 1,856,222 56,059 840,889 137,788 2,066,822 59,722 895,833 142,161 2,132,417 333,778 5,006,667
019 Offhaul/Disposal - Subcontract Trucking HR 110 236,180 25,979,845 112,773 12,405,019 8,668 953,435 23,718 2,609,023 10,745 1,181,916 26,409 2,905,033 11,447 1,259,144 27,248 2,997,230 63,974 7,037,148
020 Offhaul/Disposal - Dump Fee (Average) Load 50 118,090 5,904,510 56,386 2,819,323 4,334 216,690 11,859 592,960 5,372 268,617 13,205 660,235 5,723 286,169 13,624 681,189 31,987 1,599,352
021 Invert Slab - - - - - - - - - -
022 Invert Slab Concrete CY 600 130,163 78,097,778 54,667 32,800,000 8,800 5,280,000 22,489 13,493,333 10,193 6,115,556 24,919 14,951,111 11,467 6,880,000 26,193 15,715,556 54,267 32,560,000
023 Invert Slab Rebar TON 2,500 6,508 16,270,370 2,733 6,833,333 440 1,100,000 1,124 2,811,111 510 1,274,074 1,246 3,114,815 573 1,433,333 1,310 3,274,074 2,713 6,783,333
024 Trench Walls - - - - - - - - - -
025 Wall Concrete CY 900 149,556 134,600,400 77,104 69,394,000 3,211 2,890,000 8,567 7,710,000 3,111 2,800,000 8,618 7,756,000 3,267 2,940,000 8,833 7,950,000 21,700 19,530,000
026 Wall Rebar TON 2,500 22,433 56,083,500 11,566 28,914,167 482 1,204,167 1,285 3,212,500 467 1,166,667 1,293 3,231,667 490 1,225,000 1,325 3,312,500 3,255 8,137,500
027 Waterproofing - - - - - - - - - -
028 Waterproofing Membrane SF 10 2,224,604 22,246,040 1,062,940 10,629,400 88,300 883,000 228,900 2,289,000 96,800 968,000 245,760 2,457,600 106,800 1,068,000 256,300 2,563,000 561,600 5,616,000
029 Fences - - - - - - - - - -
030 Fence/Railing LF 200 38,800 7,760,000 18,000 3,600,000 1,800 360,000 4,400 880,000 1,600 320,000 4,400 880,000 1,800 360,000 4,600 920,000 9,600 1,920,000
031 Bridges - - - - - - - - - -
032 Bridge Deck Concrete SF 500 13,667 6,833,500 6,478 3,239,000 6,798 3,399,000 2,640 1,320,000 8,858 4,429,000 3,440 1,720,000 8,858 4,429,000 3,440 1,720,000 6,880 3,440,000
033 Creek Crossings - - - - - - - - - -
034 Creek Crossing Concrete SF 500 2,419 1,209,500 1,599 799,500 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
035 Underdrains - - - - - - - - - -
036 Underdrain Rt-Ft 60 19,400 1,164,000 9,000 540,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
037 Pump Stations - - - - - - - - - -
038 Pump Station - Location 1 LS 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 1 1,000,000
039 Pump Station - Location 2 LS 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 1 1,000,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
040 Other Work - - - - - - - - - -
041 UPRR Shoofly with Temp. Signal System (Corridor) Rt-Ft 800 19,400 15,520,000 9,000 7,200,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
042 UPRR Shoofly with Temp. Signal System (Local) EA 2,500,000 - - - - 1 2,500,000 1 2,500,000 1 2,500,000 1 2,500,000 1 2,500,000 1 2,500,000 2 5,000,000
043 Rebuild Oregon Expwy LS 15,000,000 1 15,000,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
044 Rebuild San Antonio Road LS 5,000,000 1 5,000,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
045 Rebuild California Av Caltrain Statn (N.of Oregon Expwy) LS 8,000,000 1 8,000,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
046 Rebuild San Antonio Caltrain Statn (S.of San Antonio Rd) LS 8,000,000 1 8,000,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
047 Total Construction 622,440,744 289,191,768 25,200,625 52,677,350 27,370,319 55,705,363 29,076,479 57,591,565 128,158,000
Palo-Alto_Quantities-Rev 4.xlsx - page 2 of 4 PRELIMINARY-- worksheet for discussion only 10/13/2014
line Unit Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
no.Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost
Description Unit
Meadow Charleston
Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty
Charleston Meadow&CharlestonChurchill Churchill Meadow
Palo Alto Caltrain - Grade Separation Projects
Attachment A - Alternative Cost Estimates
Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma Lowered
Rail Trench
1% Max Grade
(Caltrain Preferred)
Rail Trench
2% Max. Grade
(w/Design Exception)
048 Utility Relocation and Protection
049 Protect-in-Place - Electric (Overhead) LF 200 340 68,000 160 32,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
050 Protect-in-Place - Gas - 04" LF 160 - - - - 150 24,000 - - - - - - 685 109,600 - - - -
051 Protect-in-Place - Gas - 06" LF 200 40 8,000 40 8,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
052 Protect-in-Place - Gas - 08" LF 250 130 32,500 40 10,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
053 Protect-in-Place - Sanitary Sewer - 08" LF 120 40 4,800 40 4,800 - - - - - - - - 540 64,800 - - - -
054 Protect-in-Place - Sanitary Sewer - 10" LF 140 40 5,600 40 5,600 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
055 Protect-in-Place - Sanitary Sewer - 30" LF 300 130 39,000 40 12,000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
056 Protect-in-Place - Storm Drain - 12" LF 140 - - - - 70 9,800 - - 50 7,000 - - 65 9,100 - - - -
057 Protect-in-Place - Water - 06" LF 200 - - - - 75 15,000 - - - - - - - - - - - -
058 Protect-in-Place - Water - 08" LF 220 40 8,800 40 8,800 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
059 Protect-in-Place - Water - 10" LF 240 - - - - 75 18,000 - - - - - - - - - - - -
060 Protect-in-Place - Water - 12" LF 260 130 33,800 40 10,400 75 19,500 - - 300 78,000 - - - - - - - -
061 Protect-in-Place - Water - 16" LF 300 - - - - - - - - 300 90,000 - - 655 196,500 - - - -
062 Protect-in-Place - Water - 18" LF 320 40 12,800 40 12,800 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
063 Relocate - Electric (Overhead) LF 300 - - - - 650 195,000 5,121 1,536,300 4,181 1,254,300 10,661 3,198,300 2,635 790,500 6,450 1,935,000 13,516 4,054,800
064 Relocate - Electric (Underground) LF 300 - - - - 400 120,000 362 108,600 - - - - 190 57,000 190 57,000 - -
065 Relocate - Gas - 02"LF 160 - - - - 650 104,000 425 68,000 100 16,000 100 16,000 - - 65 10,400 165 26,400
066 Relocate - Gas - 03"LF 180 - - - - 500 90,000 510 91,800 - - - - 475 85,500 470 84,600 - -
067 Relocate - Gas - 04"LF 200 - - - - - - 2,185 437,000 - - 900 180,000 - - 1,800 360,000 3,170 634,000
068 Relocate - Gas - 06"LF 250 - - - - - - - - 240 60,000 970 242,500 775 193,750 765 191,250 1,735 433,750
069 Relocate - Gas - 08"LF 300 - - - - - - - - 1,150 345,000 1,150 345,000 - - - - 1,150 345,000
070 Relocate - Joint Trench (PRI,TEL,CATV,W,G,S/L,SEC) LF 300 - - - - 500 150,000 455 136,500 - - - - - - - - - -
071 Relocate - Sanitary Sewer - 06" LF 140 - - - - 500 70,000 466 65,240 - - - - - - - - - -
072 Relocate - Sanitary Sewer - 08" LF 160 - - - - - - 795 127,200 1,400 224,000 1,800 288,000 525 84,000 900 144,000 2,700 432,000
073 Relocate - Sanitary Sewer - 10" LF 180 - - - - - - - - - - - - 700 126,000 - - - -
074 Relocate - Sanitary Sewer - 12" LF 200 - - - - - - - - 70 14,000 70 14,000 - - - - 70 14,000
075 Relocate - Sanitary Sewer - 30" LF 350 - - - - - - - - - - 1,145 400,750 - - - - 1,145 400,750
076 Relocate - Storm Drain - 08" LF 160 - - - - 100 16,000 149 23,840 - - - - - - - - - -
077 Relocate - Storm Drain - 10" LF 180 - - - - - - 25 4,500 - - - - - - - - - -
078 Relocate - Storm Drain - 12" LF 200 - - - - 300 60,000 516 103,200 430 86,000 430 86,000 300 60,000 900 180,000 1,330 266,000
079 Relocate - Storm Drain - 15" LF 220 - - - - - - 645 141,900 - - - - - - - - - -
080 Relocate - Storm Drain - 27" LF 300 - - - - - - - - 15 4,500 15 4,500 - - - - 15 4,500
081 Relocate - Storm Drain - 36" LF 400 - - - - - - - - 50 20,000 50 20,000 - - - - 50 20,000
082 Relocate - Water - 06"LF 240 - - - - 1,200 288,000 2,550 612,000 120 28,800 120 28,800 - - - - 120 28,800
083 Relocate - Water - 08"LF 260 - - - - - - - - 650 169,000 650 169,000 1,225 318,500 1,200 312,000 1,850 481,000
084 Relocate - Water - 10"LF 280 - - - - - - 1,835 513,800 - - - - - - - - - -
085 Relocate - Water - 12"LF 300 - - - - - - 1,835 550,500 800 240,000 900 270,000 - - - - 900 270,000
086 Relocate - Water - 16"LF 330 - - - - - - - - 345 113,850 900 297,000 - - 1,800 594,000 2,700 891,000
087 Relocate - Water - 18"LF 350 - - - - - - - - - - - - 730 255,500 745 260,750 745 260,750
088 Relocate - Water - 24"LF 400 - - - - 650 260,000 605 242,000 - - - - - - - - - -
089 Relocate - Water - 27"LF 450 - - - - 500 225,000 440 198,000 - - - - - - - - - -
090 Total Utility Relocation and Protection 213,300 104,400 1,664,300 4,960,380 2,750,450 5,559,850 2,350,750 4,129,000 8,562,750
Palo-Alto_Quantities-Rev 4.xlsx - page 3 of 4 PRELIMINARY-- worksheet for discussion only 10/13/2014
line Unit Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total Total
no.Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost Cost
Description Unit
Meadow Charleston
Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty Qnty
Charleston Meadow&CharlestonChurchill Churchill Meadow
Palo Alto Caltrain - Grade Separation Projects
Attachment A - Alternative Cost Estimates
Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma At-grade Alma Lowered Alma Lowered
Rail Trench
1% Max Grade
(Caltrain Preferred)
Rail Trench
2% Max. Grade
(w/Design Exception)
091 Right of Way (incl. ROW Services)
092 Property Take - Partial LS 1,000,000 - - - - 4 4,000,000 3 3,000,000 5 5,000,000 4 4,000,000 3 3,000,000 3 3,000,000 7 7,000,000
093 Property Take - Full LS 2,000,000 - - - - 16 32,000,000 33 66,000,000 11 22,000,000 14 28,000,000 18 36,000,000 18 36,000,000 32 64,000,000
094 Total Right of Way (incl. ROW Services)- - 36,000,000 69,000,000 27,000,000 32,000,000 39,000,000 39,000,000 71,000,000
Palo-Alto_Quantities-Rev 4.xlsx - page 4 of 4 PRELIMINARY-- worksheet for discussion only 10/13/2014
October 15, 2014
CMR # 5175 Addendum
On Thursday, October 9, 2014 CMR # 5175, titled Palo Alto Grade Separation and Trenching
Study, was released early for the Monday, October 20, 2014 City Council meeting.
Since the release of that CMR, the City’s engineering consultant, Hatch Mott McDonald (HMM),
discovered there were discrepancies between their original memo, dated October 7, 2014, and
the associated attachment to that memo titled Alternative Cost Estimates.
Therefore, HMM has provided an updated memo, dated October 13, 2014, to account for those
discrepancies, however, the information provided in the original staff report and the original
Alternative Cost Estimates attachment to the original memo, have not changed.
That said, staff has received feedback on the staff report since its release on October 9th and
would like to take the opportunity to address some of that feedback. In addition, HMM will be
making a presentation at the Monday, October 20, 2014 City Council meeting, when this item is
discussed, which will provide additional context for the report.
Staff’s response to some initial feedback is below:
1.Although two different trenching alternatives are presented in the report that does not
imply that they should be considered equally. The 2% grade trench alternative provides
numerous benefits that the 1% grade trench alternative does not including an estimated
price that is more than half the cost of the 1% grade trench alternative, a significantly
reduced footprint, and reduced environmental impacts specifically as they relate to
impacts on the water table. The 1% grade trench alternative was evaluated because it is
the preferred grade of Caltrain and freight users and to help put the 2% grade trench
alternative into context.
2.Despite not formally evaluating a 3% grade trench alternative, HMM will touch on a few
aspects of a 3% grade trench in their presentation including a rough cost estimate for
that alternative and a rough estimated footprint.
3.This report is intended to provide data to policymakers and community members to
begin the process of facilitating an initial community dialogue on the issue. This report is
not intended to make final determinations about which alternatives, if any, should be
pursued at this time or in the future.
4.This report is not intended to make any implications related to where funding for a
selected alternative would come from. As noted above, this report is solely focused on
providing data to policymakers and community members to begin the process of
ATTACHMENT B
facilitating an initial community dialogue on the issue.
5. One of the most significant benefits of grade separations is that they allow for increased
rail capacity. With the growing Bay Area population, and associated transportation
issues, it is staff’s belief that if transportation capacity is not expanded via Caltrain it will
result in more vehicular traffic in the City.
6. One of the most significant benefits of the trenching alternatives when compared to the
roadway submersion alternatives is that pedestrian and bicycle movements stay level
with the surrounding roadways. Therefore, bicyclists and pedestrians are not required
to use underpasses (such as those at University, Embarcadero, and Oregon Expressway)
to cross the rail corridor and can instead do so at the same grade as the surrounding
roadways and sidewalks. This is in addition to the community benefit that trenching
provides of requiring no parcel acquisitions.
ATTACHMENT C
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5173)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 10/20/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Downtown Parking Garages
Title: Council Review of Possible Financing Methods for Construction of One
or More New Parking Garages in Downtown and Direction to Staff Regarding
Next Steps
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommended Motion
Direct staff to continue pursuing construction of one or more new parking garages downtown
via public financing, a public-private partnership, or both. Specifically, direct staff to return to
the Council with:
(a) a draft scope of work and evaluation criteria for a Request for Proposals (RFP) from
qualified design firms for design, environmental review, and preparation of construction
cost estimates of a publicly-financed parking garage on parking Lot D
(Hamilton/Waverly), Lot A (Emerson/Lytton), or Lot E (Gilman Street), and
(b) a draft scope of work and evaluation criteria for an RFP from qualified development
partners for design, environmental review, and construction of a privately-financed
parking garage on Parking Lot D (Hamilton/Waverly) or Parking Lot A (Emerson/Lytton).
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council review possible financing methods for construction of one or
more new parking garages in Downtown and direct staff regarding next steps.
Executive Summary
The City can pursue construction of one or more new parking garages on City-owned parking
lots via public or private financing methods. Public financing could make use of approximately
$4 Million in parking in lieu fees, anticipated lease revenues from any ground floor retail
space(s) included in the garage(s), and possibly paid parking. Private financing would be
available if the City allowed some mixed use development on the site in addition to parking or
if the City agreed to transition to paid parking downtown.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
These methods are illuminated by two responses to a Request for Information (RFI) issued by
the City earlier this year. One response proposed ground floor retail, 18 dwelling units, and 237
underground parking spaces accessed via a mechanical lift system, and one response proposed
ground floor retail and 283 parking spaces based on an assumption that employees and visitors
would pay to park downtown.
To better inform the decision regarding public or private financing, the City could solicit
proposals from design firms and from potential development partners once a scope of work
and evaluation criteria are established for related requests for proposals.
Background
On February 10, 2014 Council authorized staff to proceed with several parking strategies aimed
at helping to improve parking supply for the University Avenue Downtown and California
Avenue Business Districts (Attachment A - Staff Report ID#4374). One of the strategies involved
reprioritizing locations for potential construction of a public parking garage in Downtown, and
one included the release of a Request for Information (RFI) to solicit interest statements for
public-private partnerships aimed at increasing parking supply on at least one existing surface
parking lot in either the University Avenue or California Avenue Business Districts. This report
provides the reprioritization requested and focuses on the findings of the RFI released by the
City and solicits council direction on next steps.
As background, Table 1 below identifies all of the parking supply strategies directed by Council
on February 10, 2014 and includes an update on each item.
Table 1
February 10, 2014 Approved Council Parking Supply Strategies
No. Parking Supply Strategy Status
1
Solicit qualification statements for public-private partnerships to
increase parking supplies on at least one existing surface parking
lot in the University Avenue area and one in the California
Avenue Business District.
Current Update
2 Authorize staff to begin design and environmental review of a
possible satellite parking facility along Embarcadero Road – East
of Geng Road-Faber Place
Council Award
to BKF
Engineers on
August 11,
2014. Design
and Analysis
Underway.
3 Authorize staff to expand parking permit sales to South of Forest Complete. 44
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Avenue (SOFA) Business District Employees at the Lot CC – Civic
Center and Lot CW – Cowper Street/Webster Street parking
garages.
permits sold to
SOFA
employees
since February
2014.
4 Authorize staff to solicit proposals for the installation of parking
garage access and revenue controls aimed at collecting “real
time” data on parking lot and garage occupancy, introducing
flexibility for transferable permits between employees, and
supporting payment options for downtown visitors who park
longer than three hours.
Additional
Council
direction
received on
August 18,
2014.
RFP Release in
October 2014.
5 Revise priority locations for a potential public parking garage in
Downtown and return to Council for direction.
Current Update
The City currently owns 16 surface parking lots and garages in the Downtown area but also
manages permit sales at 2 additional privately-owned sites with development agreements that
allow for the management of daytime parking; see Attachment B – University
Avenue/Downtown Public Parking Facilities. In the California Avenue Business District, the City
owns 10 parking lot areas; see Attachment C – California Avenue Business District Public
Parking Facilities). All of these properties have the potential of being developed to provide
additional off-street parking in the future and in 2013, the City contracted with an engineering
firm, Sandis, to assess the feasibility of constructing parking structures on a number of the
parking lots downtown. The results of Sandis’ study were shared with the City Council in
February 2014, and as noted in Item 5 of Table 1 above, the City Council requested staff work
with Sandis to revise their “constructability constraint matrix” to better prioritize location(s) for
potential construction of a public parking garage in downtown. The revised matrix is provided
as Attachment D and identifies Lot E/G (Gilman St) and Lot D (Hamilton/Waverly) as the best
candidate sites for construction of a new parking garage of the sites analyzed.
The Council’s Infrastructure Committee identified parking garages in California Avenue and
Downtown as being among the City’s priority projects and included $9.6 million for a California
Avenue garage and $13.0 million for a Downtown garage in its funding plan. Pending voter
approval of a Transient Occupancy Tax increase from 12% to 14% scheduled for the November
election, the Infrastructure Funding Plan, including the garage funding, was approved by
Council on June 9, 2014 (CMR ID 4889). The approved Plan includes the use of the $4.0 million
estimated FY 2014 ending balance in the Downtown parking in-lieu fee fund. This fund can be
used toward construction of garages in downtown. There is no such fund in the California
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Avenue area.
To assess the potential for increasing parking supply through a public-private partnership, staff
released a Request for Information (RFI) on April 14, 2014, soliciting interest from private sector
entities interested in constructing parking garages on City-owned parking lots in exchange for
consideration to be defined by each respondent (Attachment E – Public Private Partnership
RFI). The RFI was advertised for almost two months to allow an extended period of time for
thoughtful and informative responses. A total of eight responses were received on June 26,
2014 and are summarized in this report.
During the evaluation of RFI responses, staff solicited the assistance of the City’s financial
advisor, Public Financial Management, Inc. (PFM) to assess the financial implications and
viability of the proposals and to provide a summary of financing options for the City Council’s
consideration (Attachment F).
The City received eight (8) responses to the RFI, which are summarized in Table 2 below. The
responses varied greatly in the level of detail provided, and it was challenging to comparably
assess the ideas presented. In addition, many of the responses proposed additional
development, such that the actual benefit in terms of net new parking supply was unclear.
The responses were reviewed by staff from Transportation, Treasury, Planning, and Real Estate
over the summer and, as mentioned above, the City’s financial advisor, PFM, was engaged to
help assess the responses and articulate the financing options illuminated through this process
for the City Council’s consideration.
The first three responses in Table 2 were selected for oral interviews by the city review team
since they demonstrated creativity in the use of parking lift technology (Kleiman); potentially
effective financing models based on paid parking and retail (Ark Studio West); and use of
adjacent, privately owned lots to maximize parking supply for the University Avenue Downtown
Business District (300 Hamilton LLC). Following the interviews, two responses (Kleiman and Ark
Studio West) were selected for presentation to the City Council, and the remaining responses
were set aside either because the response lacked the necessary detail to properly evaluate the
concepts discussed within the responses, or because they proposed new development with the
potential to increase parking demand and traffic such that the net increase in parking supply
was insufficient to consider the proposal further.
The David Kleiman response assumes no revenue from permit sales to finance the project as
parking would be managed directly and independently of the project while the Ark Studio West
response assumes daily parking rates of $17.50 per space with no discounted annual parking
permit sales for downtown employees. Both the David Kleiman and Ark Studio West responses
are provided in Attachments G and H respectively. A summary of the Kleiman and Ark Studio
West RFI responses is provided below in order to illustrate the financing methods proposed.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
David Kleiman – Lot A
Mixed-Use Residential/Retail/Parking Lift
The David Kleiman Team response includes a Mixed-Use Residential/Retail project on Lot A
located on Lytton Avenue & Emerson Street. The concept includes 14,500 SQ FT of ground
floor retail, 18 apartments (19,782 SQ FT) and 3 levels of underground parking (237 spaces) via
a fully automated parking system.
The basic financing model for the project includes a defined lease period (to be negotiated)
with profit sharing of rental/lease revenue during the lease term. Upon the termination of the
lease period, the building would return to full ownership of the city. A fully automated parking
lift system would allow motorists to park their vehicles in an elevator-like docking station and
the vehicle would then be moved through the use of a mechanical system and stored
underground.
Lot A is relatively small, and thus was not originally included in Sandis Engineering’s study of
parking garage feasibility.
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Table 2
Summary of Public-Private Partnership RFI Responses
No. Response Team Facility Type Location Proposed
Parking
Supply
Existing
No.
Parking
Spaces
Required
No.
Spaces
for
Facility
Type
New
Parking
Supply
Project
Parked
(Yes or
No)?
1 David Kleiman Mixed-Use
Residential
with Retail
(No Office)
Lot A:
Lytton Av &
Emerson St
237 68 94 +75 Yes
2 Ark Studio West
Development
Team
Parking
Garage with
Ground
Floor Retail
Lot D:
Hamilton Av
& Waverly
St
283 86 29 +168 Yes
3 300 Hamilton,
LLC
Parking
Garage Only
Lot EG:
Gilman
Street
N/A 87 N/A N/A N/A
4 Palo Alto
Housing
Corporation
Housing
Project
Lot O:
Emerson
St/High St
148 78 173 -103 No
5 Dostart
Development
Company
Mixed-Use
Retail/Office
Various
Downtown
Lots
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
6 Strada
Development
Mixed-Use
Retail/Office
Various
Downtown
Lots
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
7 Tarlton
Properties
Mixed-Use
Retail/Office
Cal Av
Lot C-7:
Cambridge
Avenue
525 161 N/A N/A N/A
8 Presidio
Development
Group
Mixed-Used
Retail,
Office, and
All Cal Av
Lots
980 N/A N/A N/A N/A
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Housing
Ark Studio West Development Team – Lot D
Mixed-Use Retail /Parking Garage
The Ark Studio West Development Team submitted a response that includes a financing model
that would rely on paid parking and ground floor retail. A critical component of their submission
was that paid parking would have to be implemented throughout the downtown area. Their
response focused on a structure on the corner of Hamilton Avenue & Waverly Street (Lot D)
and included renderings of the building. The proposed structure would provide 283 spaces (at
least 168 net new), as well as ground floor retail space. Ark Studio indicated the necessity of a
minimum 20-year lease. At the end of the lease period, the new structure would revert to City
ownership. The submission discussed the potential for structures on other downtown lots as
well: Lot EG on Gilman Street, Lot O on Emerson Street/High Street, and Lot P on High Street.
For comparison, Sandis Engineering evaluated a parking structure on Lot D as part of the
Parking Garage Feasibility Project in 2013 and estimated that a 300 parking space garage can be
provided on the site, not including underground parking. Underground parking could yield an
additional 96 parking spaces for a total 396 parking space garage.
Public Financial Management Analysis
Any discussion of financing options has to begin with consideration of revenues that could be
used to support the capital costs. Based on input from the City’s financial advisor, there are
several different revenue choices:
1. Public Financing with Reimbursement From Retail
The City could issue debt backed by its own balance sheet but reimbursed from retail
revenues in the new facilities. This approach could utilize Certificates of Participation (COP)
that would be reimbursed by retail revenues. In this case, the City would be using its
balance sheet (general fund revenue pledge) to enhance the credit of the retail revenues.
An alternative approach would be to attempt to issue parking revenue bonds. This would be
a much worse credit and more expensive. However, it has the virtue of having no recourse
to the City’s balance sheet.
2. Private Capital with Reimbursement from Retail and Paid Parking
This would require instituting paid parking in the downtown as a whole in order to allow the
setting of rates at a level that would support capital investment in garages. The City could
utilize the process it has already begun by asking RFI respondents to explain whether or
how they could provide private capital to build garages, and what parking rates would have
to be charged in order for this to happen.
3. Private Capital with Reimbursement From Residential
City of Palo Alto Page 8
This would allow the City to maintain free parking by generating the revenues needed for
the parking garage project from simultaneously constructed development. The City could
utilize the process it has already begun by asking RFI respondents to explain whether or
how they could provide private capital to build residential units, and what residential rates
would have to be charged in order to support their construction along with the construction
of the parking garage.
The three options outlined above employ very different approaches, but their key financial
statistics are compared in Table 3 below assuming a project cost of $15 million:
Table 3
Summary of Financing Options
Option Capital
Contributed
Borrowed
Amount TIC1 Annual
Debt Service2
Annual
Revenues
Daily
Parking Cost
1
(Public)
$7.3MM
(City) $8.8MM 4.14% $500k $1MM
(retail) Free
2
(Private) $0 $16.5MM 7.26% $1.37MM $2.75MM
(retail + parking) $17.5
3
(Private)
$11.7MM
(Developer) $3.9MM 7.26% $325k $650k
(residential) Free
1. City borrowing rates: AAA MMD index +25-65bps; developer borrowing rates: TM3 BBB
taxable housing borrowing index. As of October 2nd, 25bps cushion added to all rates.
2. 30 year amortization, level annual debt service, 2.0x revenue coverage, interest
capitalized for first year.
Source: Public Financial Management, 2014
PFM notes that it is important for the City to move toward increasing parking supply even while
decisions regarding paid parking are pending, and that this can best be accomplished by
pursuing both public and private financing options simultaneously.
Policy Implications
The following policy statements in the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan support the construction
of new parking supply in addition to Council direction to staff on February 10, 2014:
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.
Whatever location and method is used to pursue additional parking supply, the policy
implications of the overall strategy and the specific proposal(s) will require public review and
City of Palo Alto Page 9
careful consideration in terms of policy implications and potential impacts/benefits. This
consideration will involve discussion of the potential for increasing traffic in the immediate
vicinity of a new garage and balancing this against the benefits (e.g. a reduction in over-flow
parking in nearby residential neighborhoods, and convenient parking for area employees and
visitors). The City’s ongoing planning efforts related to transportaton demand management
(“TDM”), sustainability, and greenhouse gas emission reductions may also inform a public
dialog about parking management strategies that increase the cost of parking for employees
and visitors.
Resource Impact
As stated, the Council has adopted an Infrastructure Plan (ID # 4889) that includes the
construction of a downtown and a California Avenue garage. The plan included an estimated
$4.0 million in Parking In-Lieu fees that could be used toward the construction of a $13.0
million garage (estimated cost) in the downtown. There are a variety of other City resources
that were identified in the plan that could be used to publicly finance garages. These include,
for example, using Stanford Development Agreement Infrastructure monies or issuing debt
(COPs) backed by new hotel revenue streams or from the 2 percent TOT increase if approved by
voters. Naturally, the decision to use these funds or public financing must be viewed or vetted
within the larger context of the $126 million Infrastructure Plan (IP). In other words, decisions
on how to fund one part of the IP will affect which funding sources to use for other projects in
the Plan. The IP planned took into consideration $7.5 million of yet to be identified future
revenues and a private/public partnersip could potentially close this funding gap.
Should Council direct staff to pursue public-private partnerships outlined in this report, the use
of Infrastructure Plan resources may be minimized based on negotiations and the terms of
settlement with the private partners.
At this time, and with no substantive, financial discussions with the proposers, it is difficult to
determine the resource impact from the RFI. Instead, the City’s financial advisor has performed
very preliminary calculations on public and private financing options based on the two
proposals discussed above.
Timeline
Staff is requesting Council direction on next steps for the construciton of new parking supply.
Staff has identified two responses from the David Kleiman and Ark Studio West teams that
include innovative parking supply strategies with no out of pocket resources from the City. The
City may build on these ideas and craft a Request for Proposals for a privately-financed and
constructed garage on one or more of the sites, may elect to pursue public financing and
construction of a new garage(s), or may continue along both paths simultaneously as discussed
by PFM.
Environmental Review
City of Palo Alto Page 10
The proposed recommendation before the City Council does not constitute a “project”
requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it does not
commit the City to any specific site or course of action. Nonetheless, CEQA review will be
required prior to any decision to finance or construct a new garage.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Staff Report 4373 - Feb 10 2014 Council Update (without attachments)
(PDF)
Attachment B: Downtown Parking Facility Map (PDF)
Attachment C: Cal Ave Parking Facility Map (PDF)
Attachment D: Sandis Matrix Memo (PDF)
Attachment E: RFI 153960 RFI Public Private Partnership (PDF)
Attachment F: PFM Analysis (PDF)
Attachment G: Kleiman Team RFI Submittal - Lot A (PDF)
Attachment H: Ark Studio West RFI Submittal - Lot D (PDF)
City of Palo Alto (ID # 4374)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/10/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Parking Supply Strategies and Recommendations
Title: Parking Supply Recommendations. Staff recommends that Council
accept the Final Report on the Downtown Parking Garage Study and
authorize staff to take the following actions aimed at increasing the parking
supply in the University Avenue and California Avenue Business Districts: 1.
Authorize staff to begin design and environmental review of a new parking
garage (240 car capacity) on Lot G located on Gilman Avenue 2. Authorize
staff to solicit qualification statements for public-private partnerships to
increase parking supplies on at least one existing surface parking lot in the
University Avenue area and one in the California Avenue Business District 3.
Authorize staff to pursue planning grants and begin planning work for a new
transit mall expansion with a 478-space parking garage on Urban Lane, in
partnership with the property owner and the Joint Powers Authority 4.
Authorize staff to begin design and environmental review of a 200-space
satellite parking facility along Embarcadero Road – East of Geng Road-Faber
Place and in the Bay Lands Athletic Center parking lot or a comparable
alternate location(s), with supporting shuttle service to the University
Avenue Business District 5. Authorize staff to expand parking permit sales to
South of Forest Avenue (SOFA) Business District Employees at the Lot CC –
Civic Center and Lot CW – Cowper Street/Webster Street parking garages 6.
Authorize staff to solicit proposals for the installation of parking garage
access and revenue controls aimed at collecting “real time” data on parking
lot and garage occupancy, introducing flexibility for transferable permits
between employees, and to support payment options for downtown visitors
who park longer than three hours.
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
ATTACHMENT A
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Staff recommends that Council accept the Final Report on the Downtown Parking Garage Study
prepared by Sandis Engineering and authorize staff to take the following actions aimed at
increasing parking supplies in the University Avenue and California Avenue Business Districts:
1. Authorize staff to begin design and environmental review of a new parking garage (240
car capacity) on Lot G located on Gilman Avenue;
2. Authorize staff to solicit qualification statements for public-private partnerships to
increase parking supplies on at least one existing surface parking lot in the University
Avenue area and one in the California Avenue Business District;
3. Authorize staff to pursue planning grants and begin planning work for a transit mall
expansion and 478-space parking garage on Urban Lane, in partnership with the
property owner and the Joint Powers Authority;
4. Authorize staff to begin design and environmental review of a 200-space satellite
parking facility along Embarcadero Road – East of Geng Road-Faber Place and in the
Baylands Athletic Center parking lot or a comparable alternate location(s), with
supporting shuttle service to the University Avenue Business District;
5. Authorize staff to expand parking permit sales to South of Forest Avenue (SOFA)
Business District Employees at the Lot CC – Civic Center and Lot CW – Cowper
Street/Webster Street parking garages; and
6. Authorize staff to solicit proposals for the installation of parking garage access and
revenue controls aimed at collecting “real time” data on parking lot and garage
occupancy, introducing flexibility for transferable permits between employees, and
supporting payment options for downtown visitors who park longer than three hours.
Background
The City began actively monitoring its downtown parking supply in 2010 with semi-annual
parking occupancy counts of both on-street parking and off-street parking facilities within the
Greater Downtown Area. Since that time community interest and concern regarding parking
supply for both the University Avenue and California Avenue business districts has grown,
especially for the Downtown University Districts.
To help address parking supply concerns, the City partnered with Sandis Engineering to
complete a feasibility study for parking garage construction opportunities at several Downtown
surface parking lots. The Council received an update on the study on May 18, 2013 and
provided staff with direction to complete the report. The final report and recommendations on
the Parking Garage Study are presented within this report.
To help build supply at existing garages, in the Fall of 2013 staff released a Request for
Proposals to identify a preferred Parking Operator to implement a Parking Attendant Program
at Lot R – High Street (South). A separate staff report (#4375) recommends award of a one-
year trial project to Standard Parking Corporation for the Lot R Parking Attendant Program and
includes pricing to expand the program for up to a total of three years at the Downtown
garages. The City anticipates at least 42 additional parking permits being released at Lot R as a
City of Palo Alto Page 3
result of the Parking Attendant Program. The first year trial program at Lot R will cost
approximately $120,000 and is being funded through the University Avenue Parking Permit
Fund.
In addition to the parking supply initiatives presented as part of this report, Staff is also
developing a set of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies in response to
Council direction on October 3, 2013 to develop TDM focused around improving alternative
transportation mode options for both local and commuter employees in the city. Those
strategies are outlined in staff report 4373 and will be presented to Council on February 24,
2014.
Discussion
Parking Garage Study
The City partnered with the Sandis Engineering/HNH Pacific Team to study opportunities for
construction of new parking garages in the University Avenue Downtown Business District on
the site of existing surface parking lots. The City selected six locations for inclusion in the study
based on locations where parking permit demand was the highest. One of the sites studied
includes the Urban Lane Caltrain Parking Lot currently used by Caltrain for Park-and-Ride
operations to support Caltrain ridership. The six surface parking lots studied include:
Lot E – Gilman Street
Lot G – Gilman Street
Lot M – High Street/Emerson Street
Lot O – Waverly Street/Hamilton Avenue
Lot P – High Street
Lot U – Urban Lane
Caltrain permitted the City to include Urban Lane in the parking garage study and is supportive
of the City advancing additional planning work to help identify opportunities that better
support both rail operations and adjacent land uses.
Parking garage construction at all sites is feasible but construction has either near-term
construction or long-term land use impacts. The study includes a Parking Garage
Constructability Analysis that considered the following constructability factors:
Access Points
Construction & Staging Impacts
Adjacent Land Use
Adjacent Property Impacts
Site Utility Impacts
Net Stall Gain
Cost per Stall
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Site Potential for Development
The Final Report – Downtown Parking Structure Feasibility Study is provided in Attachment A.
The results of the parking garage study are summarized in Table 1 below and note the existing
parking space counts by both Hourly and Permit allocation. As part of the parking garage
option the following parking options are shown: the minimum “Structure” parking that can be
provided in marked spaces in the garage, additional “Sub-Level” parking space count if
subterranean parking were considered as part of the design, and additional “Stack” parking
space count if a parking attendant operator were used to park vehicles within aisles of the
garage. The results are also summarized by constructability ranking.
Table 1
Downtown Parking Structure Feasibility Study Findings
The study identifies a combined Lot EG as the preferred parking garage site because of the
limited construction impacts both during and following construction to downtown businesses
and its central location. However, the Downtown Farmer’s Market is currently held at this
location and would be displaced as part of the construction. During the May 18, 2013 study
session for this project, several Council members expressed concern regarding the massing of
such a structure with a span over Gilman Avenue. For this reason, staff is not recommending
that Lot EG be further advanced, and is instead recommending that Lot G be selected as the
preferred site of a new parking structure.
Lot G on Gilman Avenue is located directly behind the U.S. Post Office and can provide a
minimum of 166 parking spaces. If subterranean parking and parking attendant operations are
also implemented, a garage in this location could park up to 240 vehicles. Note that these
figures are the total parking for the garage, so that the incremental increase figures over the
existing 53 surface lot spaces are 113 and 187 spaces. Attachment A includes massing concepts
for a proposed parking structure at Lot G in addition to typical floor layouts.
Rank Lot Location
Existing Parking Supply Structured Parking Supply Options
Hourly Permit Total Structure Sub-
Level Stack Total
1 EG Gilman Street - 87 87 268 30 88 386
2 G Gilman Street - 53 53 166 30 44 240
3 U Urban Lane 164 - 164 478 - - 478
4 D Hamilton/Waverley 86 - 86 300 60 85 445
5 O Emerson/High 78 - 78 223 45 52 320
6 E Gilman Street - 34 34 75 - 37 112
7 P High Street 51 - 54 140 55 53 248
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Recommendation No. 1
Staff recommends that Council authorize staff to begin design and environmental review on the
Lot G parking garage concept.
It should be noted that any new garage will increase parking permit supply. Construction of
additional parking supply outside of the current parking assessment district also ensures that
any new supply can serve additional business interests such as SOFA. Currently, parking
permits are only sold to employees working within the Parking Assessment District Boundary in
Attachment B.
Public-Private Partnerships to Build Additional Parking Supply
The Downtown Parking Garage Feasibility Study was a fruitful exercise for the city to help in
identifying potential parking supply options on surface parking lot facilities. In April 2013 the
City received an unsolicited proposal from Keenan Development Group to build a parking
garage on Lot P – High Street as part of a private development project at 135 Hamilton Avenue
located on the corner of Hamilton Avenue & High Street. The Council did not support the
proposal but encouraged staff to consider innovative strategies such as public-private
partnerships to help provide additional parking supply for the downtown.
The Lot EG concepts in the Downtown Parking Garage Feasibility Study include concepts for a
mixed-used office/parking garage at this site. Following the May 2013 study session on the
Downtown Parking Garage Feasibility, the City also received interest from developers for
public-private partnerships at other sites including Lot E and Lot G on Gilman Street as well as
Lot D on Hamilton Avenue & Waverley Street. The City has also at various times considered
including one or more City-owned parking lots in its inventory of housing sites to accommodate
multifamily housing.
Public-Private partnership opportunities can help provide an increase in City-permit parking
supply as part of a lease agreement, while providing opportunities for unique development
projects that contribute to the vitality of Downtown and/or California Avenue.
Recommendation No. 2
Staff recommends that Council authorize staff to solicit Statements of Qualifications (SOQs)
from private developers to expand parking supply alternatives at existing surface parking lots.
Following receipts of the SOQs the City could choose to enter into discussions with one or more
developers to identify development concepts that are both financially feasible to the city and
that increase parking supply for Downtown and/or the California Avenue area. Staff would
return to Council for policy direction before proceeding with planning and development of a
public-private proposal.
Urban Lane Transit Mall Expansion and Parking Garage
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Staff introduced the concept of transit mall expansion and new parking garage on Urban Lane in
Spring 2013 as part of a suite of grant proposal opportunities available for the One Bay Area
Grant (OBAG) program. Urban Lane is located west of the Caltrain tracks between Palo Alto
Medical Foundation (PAMF) and University Avenue. Urban Lane currently operates as a surface
parking lot for Caltrain Park and Ride users and supports informal layover activities by the
Stanford Marguerite Shuttle Program. Caltrain holds a long-term lease interest to the site but
the property is owned by Stanford University. Caltrain supported planning activities to help
identify better long-term land use options for the site when the project was proposed as an
OBAG project. Any project at the site would require Stanford University approval and
reintroduce lease negotiations with Caltrain if the activities were anything other than “rail
supporting”.
Based on the findings of the Downtown Parking Garage Study, transit mall expansion and a new
parking garage on Urban Lane could support up to 17 new bus stops and layover facilities and
up to 478 parking spaces. The current surface parking lot has 164 parking spaces.
Recommendation No. 3
Staff recommends that Council direct staff to begin planning for the transit mall expansion and
new parking garage on Urban Lane, in partnership with the property owner and lease holder.
Both the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission
(MTC) have active calls-for-projects to support land use planning activities. The Urban Lane
Transit Mall Expansion and Parking Garage project may qualify for these types of grant
programs and staff recommends seeking funds through these and other routes.
Satellite Parking Facilities
Council expressed interest in identifying opportunities for satellite parking facilities to provide
alternatives for downtown employees who may not be able to afford the cost of a parking
permit, and also as a strategy to reduce traffic in Downtown. Staff is actively investigating sites
where satellite parking can be supported and has identified the Embarcadero Road Satellite
Parking Concept provided in Attachment C as one opportunity. This location does require a
robust shuttle program to take commuters to and from Downtown.
The Embarcadero Shuttle operated by Caltrain currently provides peak hour service only
between the University Avenue Caltrain Station and the Embarcadero Business Park. As part of
TDM strategies recommended separately to Council, staff will be recommending that the City
consider taking over management of the Embarcadero Shuttle in order to provide enhanced
service to the Embarcadero Business Park Area and to provide support for a potential satellite
parking facility in that area. A full-time Embarcadero Shuttle would also support business
activities in the Edgewood Plaza area.
The Embarcadero Road Satellite Parking Concept includes restriping of Embarcadero Road from
a 4-lane facility to 2-lanes with 90-degree diagonal parking on one side of the street (north
City of Palo Alto Page 7
side), widened bicycle lane facilities, and speed humps to support vehicle speed reductions on
Embarcadero Road. The satellite parking concept also takes advantage of underutilized
parking in the Baylands Athletic Parking Lot located on Geng Road allowing for up to 200
satellite parking spaces. Comparable alternative sites could also be considered.
Recommendation No. 4
Staff recommends that Council authorize staff to begin design and environmental review of the
Embarcadero Road Satellite Parking Facility Concept to further develop feasibility of the
concept and to identify cost estimates.
Staff anticipates a traffic study for this project as well as an extensive community outreach
process with adjacent business and property owners and the recreation facility users of the
Baylands. Alternative sites will also be considered. The Embarcadero Road Satellite Parking
concept does not include any parking within the Baylands Nature Preserve but staff anticipates
community concern about the introduction of additional vehicles close to the preserve. Staff
will continue to explore other satellite parking concepts in conjunction with the Palo Alto
Shuttle Program.
Parking Permit Sales to SOFA District Employees at Lot CC and Lot CW
Parking permit sales in the Downtown area are currently prioritized for employees who work
within the Parking Assessment District Boundary (Attachment B). Prioritizing permit sales to
parking assessment district employees is due to an agreement between the City and the
business leaders who helped establish the Parking Assessment District, which pays back the
bonds that funded garage construction at Lots R – Bryant and S – Alma/High.
As the City introduces additional parking supply to the community, making that supply available
to employees working in or near all areas of Downtown and SOFA is critical to help minimize
intrusion into adjacent neighborhoods. By policy, SOFA employees are currently not able to
purchase parking permits within the parking assessment district. SOFA employees must park
off-street on private lots where they work, at limited permit parking permit spaces available at
800 High Street, or on-street.
The existing parking garages at Lot CC – Civic Center and Lot CW – Cowper/Webster were part
of the City’s parking program prior to the formation of the parking assessment district.
Introducing SOFA employee permit parking at these sites is the best option for expanding
access to parking lots for these employees.
Recommendation No. 5
Staff recommends that Council authorize the sale of parking permits to SOFA District employees
at Lot CC – Civic Center and Lot CW – Cowper Street/Webster Street.
Parking Garage Access and Revenue Controls
City of Palo Alto Page 8
To date, all of the existing surface parking lots and garages in the Downtown Parking Program
are open facilities, either dedicated Permit Parking spaces or 3-Hour Visitor Parking spaces
during normal business hours (8AM-5PM). During nights and weekends all parking spaces in the
Downtown Parking Program are available for visitor or downtown employee use without time
or permit restrictions. Active management by the Parking Enforcement Unit is required to cite
persons parking without valid parking permits or that park beyond the 3-Hour Color Zone
parking restriction limits.
The introduction of Parking Garage Access and Revenue Controls could help to manage parking
supply and support Parking Guidance System (PGS) solutions. An example of PGS systems are
dynamic signage at garage entries which highlights the available hourly or permit supply
available at that facility. After business hours, when permit parking supply becomes available
for general visitor parking, the dynamic signage can be updated to encourage visitor parking.
All parking garage access and revenue control options allow the garages to continue to offer a
3-Hour Free Parking period, but also allow for a fee beyond that period.
Parking Access and Revenue Collection systems, when merged with Parking Permit Data, can
allow business users to transfer their permits to a different employee when the regular permit
holder is not using it. Most companies that reimburse employees the cost of their parking
permits pay the City directly for the cost of the permit but the permit remains under the
ownership of the individual and is typically dedicated to one vehicle. However, with the
implementation of these technology strategies, if more employees in the business account
enter the garage, then the normal parking fee for use of the garage can be transferred to the
business account. In this way, the technology can maximize the effectiveness of the permit
usage.
Recommendation No.6
Staff recommends that Council authorize staff to solicit proposals for the installation of parking
garage and access revenue controls aimed at collecting “real time” data on parking lot and
garage occupancy, introduce flexibility for transferable permits between employees, and to
support payment options for downtown visitors who park longer than three hours.
Policy Implications
The expansion of parking supply is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan Goals,
Policies, and Programs:
Goal T-8 Attractive, Convenient Public 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
City of Palo Alto Page 9
Program T-49 Implement a comprehensive program of parking supply and demand
management strategies for Downtown Palo Alto
Program T-52 Evaluate options to ensure maximum use of the City parking
structures in the University Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue
areas.
Resource Impact
Each of the six parking supply strategies include a different resource impact to the City:
Recommendation No. 1: Begin Design/Environmental Review of Lot G Parking Garage
The cost to advance design and complete an environmental
assessment of a Lot G Parking Garage is estimated at up to $1.5M.
Funds would become available later this year through the Parking In-
Lieu Fee Program. The program currently has $664,609 in payments
and an additional $3,802,200 is anticipated from approved and active
construction development projects including the 101 Lytton/Gateway
Project. This should bring the grand total of the in-lieu fund to
$4,466,809, most of which should be received in 2014. A Budget
Amendment Ordinance will be brought forward for City Council
consideration at the time a contract is awarded for the design and
environmental assessment. The cost of constructing a Lot G Parking
Garage is estimated in the study included as Attachment A, and will
be refined as the design work proceeds.
Recommendation No. 2: Solicit SOQs for Public-Private Partnerships to Build Parking Supply
The release of a Statement of Qualifications Statement solicitation
has no financial commitments to the City but does allow the City to
explore funding strategies to build additional parking supply.
Depending on the SOQs received, additional discussions between the
City and the developers would identify any financial requirements to
establish a partnership. At a minimum, staff anticipates the land
value of existing surface parking lots being a partnership element of
the City to advance a partnership opportunity.
Recommendation No. 3: Urban Lane Transit Mall and Parking Garage Planning
Staff anticipates the cost of a planning and preliminary design for an
Urban Lane Transit Mall and Parking Garage project to cost up to
$250,000. If the project were advanced to full environmental
assessment and design the project may cost up to $2.0M. Currently
there is not an identified funding source for this design work. Staff
City of Palo Alto Page 10
will pursue grant opportunities as a potential strategy for funding this
work.
Recommendation No. 4: Satellite Parking Facility at Embarcadero Rd
Staff estimates the cost to prepare designs and complete
environmental assessment of the Embarcadero Rd Satellite Parking
project to cost up to $75,000. Funds are currently available for this
project in the Parking & Transportation Improvements CIP (PL-12000)
to support this cost.
Recommendation No. 5: Release Permit Parking for SOFA District at Lot CC and Lot CW
The release of parking permits to SOFA District employees at Lot CC
and Lot CW would not cost the city any additional funds. Revenues
from permit sales include the cost of permit production and staff
costs for administration of permit distribution. The release of parking
permits to SOFA District employees may exacerbate the demand for
parking permits, however, particularly as additional TDM Strategies
such as Residential Permit Parking are introduced.
Recommendation No. 5: Parking Garage Access and Revenue Controls
Development of a Request for Proposals (RFP) to solicit technology
solutions can be completed using existing staff resources. While the
true costs will not be known until responses to the RFP are received,
staff estimates the cost to introduce parking garage and access
revenue controls will cost up to $300,000 per garage. Such an
improvement may also introduce new revenues to the Parking Permit
Program and help to expand parking garage supply opportunities, but
additional study is required. A funding strategy for the access and
revenue controls will be brought back to the City Council for
consideration when the contract is awarded.
Timeline
Following approval on the recommendations identified in this report, staff will return to Council
with a timeline schedule for Parking Supply and Transportation Demand Management
strategies.
Environmental Review
None of the proposed actions constitute final decisions to commit resources to a particular
course of action, and all will require environmental review pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) before a final decision is made.
Attachments:
Attachment A: 2013-01-20 - City of Palo Alto Parking Garage Feasibility Study (PDF)
City of Palo Alto Page 11
Attachment B: Palo Alto Parking Map Color (PDF)
Attachment C: Plan Line Concept - Embarcadero at Hwy 101 - Satellite Parking DRAFT
(PDF)
Attachment D: Summary of Available Downtown Parking Data (will be submitted in a
late packet on Feb. 6, 2014) (DOCX)
Attachment E: Public Correspondence (PDF)
CalTrain Parking - Urban Lane
Forest Avenue
Hamilton Avenue
University Avenue
Lytton Avenue
Al
m
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
El
C
a
m
i
n
o
R
e
a
l
Hi
g
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Em
e
r
s
o
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
Ra
m
o
n
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
Br
y
a
n
t
S
t
r
e
e
t
Wa
v
e
r
l
y
S
t
r
e
e
t
Co
w
p
e
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
We
b
s
t
e
r
S
t
r
e
e
t
Ta
s
s
o
S
t
r
e
e
t
Ki
p
l
i
n
g
S
t
r
e
e
t
Fl
o
r
e
n
c
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
Gi
l
m
a
n
S
t
r
e
e
t
High/Alma North Garage
Emerson/High Lot
Emerson/Lytton Lot
PERMIT PARKING
High/Alma
South Garage
3-HOUR &
PERMIT PARKING
2-HOUR PARKING
2-HOUR
PARKING 2-HOUR
PARKING
2-HOUR
PARKING
2-HOUR
PARKING
Ramona/
Lytton
Lot
Florence/
Lytton
Lot
Hamilton/Waverly Lot
Cowper/Hamilton Lot
Webster/Cowper GarageRamona/
University
Garage
Emerson/RamonaLot
Civic Center Garage
Library Lot
Bryant/Lytton
Garage
Lytton/
Waverly
Lot
Lytton/Waverly Lot
Lytton/ Kipling Lot
Gilman/
Bryant
Lot
Private
Parking
Garage2-HOUR
& SENIOR
PERMIT
PARKING
PERMIT
PARKING
2-HOUR &
PERMIT PARKING
3-HOUR
&
PERMIT
PARKING
3-HOUR &
PERMIT PARKING
3-HOUR
PARKING
2-HOUR
PARKING
High/
Hamilton
Lot
2-HOUR
PARKING
3-HOUR &
PERMIT PARKING
2-HOUR
&
PERMIT
PARKING
Gilman/WaverlyLot
PERMIT
PARKING
PUBLIC PARKING
PERMIT
PARKING
TransitCenter
El
Palo
Alto
Post
Office
Permit
Parking
Permit
Parking
N
Emerson/Lytton Lot
Ramona/University Garage
Ramona/Lytton Lot
Civic Center Garage
Emerson/Ramona Lot
Hamilton/Waverley Lot
Gilman/Bryant Lot
Florence/Lytton Lot
Gilman/Waverley Lot
Lytton/Waverley Lot
Bryant/Lytton Garage
Sheraton Hotel Lot
Pay Toilet
Public Restroom
Parking Lot/Garage Entry
High/Hamilton Lot
High/Alma North Garage
High/Alma South Garage
Emerson/High Lot
Cowper/Hamilton Lot
Lytton/Kipling Lot
Private Pay Garage
Webster/Cowper Garage
30-Minute Parking Spaces
Train Station
Transit Stop
City Shuttle Stop
Marguerite Shuttle Stop
Bicycle Boulevard/Bikestation®
A
Q
S/LO
R
P
X
C
F
T
H
W/C
$
KK
D
E
G
N
M
B
CC
Ca
l
T
r
a
i
n
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
-
U
r
b
a
n
L
a
n
e
UNDERPASS TO STANFORD UNIVERSITYTo Hwy 280 To Hwy 101
A
B
C
CC
N
D
E
F
G
K
S/L
X
P
Q
R
O
H
T
$
WC
PT
RR
Purple Zone Coral Zone Lime Zone Blue Zone
800HighGarage
PERMIT
PARKING
Hi
g
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Al
m
a
S
t
r
e
e
t
Homer Avenue
Channing Avenue
Parking lot and garage restrictions and color zone
requirements are in effect:
8 a.m. – 5 p.m. • Monday through Friday
Holidays excepted
Exempt from the color-zone regulations:
Yellow commercial loading zones
30-minute parking spaces
White passenger loading zones
Disability designated spaces
ATTACHMENT B
California Avenue Business District
Parking Lot Facilities
Attachment C
MEMO
From: Ron Sanzo, PE, TE
To: Jaime Rodriguez, Chief Transportation Official – City of Palo Alto
Subject: Downtown Parking Structure Feasibility Study – Executive Summary
Date: March 4, 2014
Introduction
Please accept this memo as a summary of the constructability constraints used in
analyzing the six existing surface lots study as part of the Palo Alto Downtown Parking
Structure Feasibility Study. In order to address additional parking demand within the
City of Palo Alto Downtown Area, the City has requested a study to analyze the
feasibility of constructing a parking garage on an existing surface parking lot. The six
existing surface lots included in this analysis are as follows: Lot D, located on the
northeast corner of Hamilton Ave and Waverly St; Lot E, located along the western side
of Gilman St between Hamilton Ave and Forest Ave; Lot G, located along the western
side of Gilman St between Hamilton Ave and Forest Ave; Lot O, abutting High St and
Emerson St between Lytton Ave and University Ave; Lot P, located along the eastern
side of High St between University Ave and Hamilton Ave; and Lot U, located along
Urban Ln immediately east of University Circle. All existing lots are City-owned with the
exception of Lot U, which is owned by Stanford with a lease to Caltrain.
Overview of Site Constructability Constraints/Constraint Scoring Methodology
In order to evaluate the six existing lots for construction of a parking garage, eight
specific constraints were identified as important elements to consider. Each constraint
has a potential value ranging from 1 to 10, with 10 indicating the most desirable
condition. In addition, an importance factor was also assigned to each constraint
ranging from 1.0 to 1.5. This factor is multiplied to the score for the accompanying
constraint, followed by totaling the weighted scores of all constraints for each lot. This
scoring methodology allows for a maximum weighted score of 100. Refer to Table 1 for
the specific scoring results for each lot as well as a breakdown of the scoring
methodology used for each constraint.
1) Adjacent Property Impacts
The adjacent property impacts constraint evaluated the post-construction impacts each
structure would have on the neighboring parcels. Potential impacts included: loss of
natural light/view, loss/reduction of access to facility, loss/reduction of loading facilities.
The scoring methodology ranged from a score of 10 for no impacts (No lot received this
score) to a score of 2 for significant impacts to multiple neighboring parcels.
ATTACHMENT D
2) Construction and Staging Impacts
The Construction and Staging Impacts constraint evaluated several criteria related to
potential impacts during the course of construction of a parking structure. These
included: proximity of construction staging to lot, loss of permit parking and high
demand parking, as well as overall parking lost during construction. A score of 10 was
assigned to lots with no impacts (no lots received this score) and a score of 2 was
assigned to lots with limited staging options available in the nearby vicinity and a loss of
“high-demand” parking during the course of construction.
3) Access Points
The access point constraint was used to identify whether the existing lot allowed for a
single or multiple access points as well as whether any road constraints were present
that may impact access (ie: proximity to intersection, ease of turning movements, etc).
A score 10 was assigned to lots with multiple access points and no road constraints,
while a score of 2 was assigned to lots with a single access point and significant road
constraints.
4) Adjacent Land Use
The adjacent land use constraint looked to evaluate the neighboring parcels in terms of
quantity of parcels and variability in type of uses. Lots with a high variability in
neighboring uses scored higher than lots with limited variability in this category.
5) Site Utility Impacts
Site utility impacts identified in this analysis range from limited impacts to site exclusive
utilities (ie: power for onsite lighting) to significant impacts to multiple transmission
utilities (ie: high voltage power and communication lines serving numerous neighboring
facilities). None of the sites analyzed received a score of 10, which would indicate no
utility impacts whatsoever.
6) Net Stall Gain
Net stall gain compared the percentage increase of stalls between the existing surface
lot and proposed parking structure. A score of 10 was assigned to a gain of 235% to
250%, while a score of 1 was assigned to a score of 114% or less. Scores within the
234% to 115% range are divided into 15% increments.
7) Total Parking Supply
Total stall gain analyzes the overall stall count provided with the proposed parking
structure. A score of 10 was assigned to facilities with 350 or more total stalls. The
score were reduced incrementally by 2 for every 75 stalls.
8) Site Potential for Development
Site potential for development looked to evaluate any site specific features that would
make each lot desirable for development. After review of each lot, it was determined
that the general location within Palo Alto provides a baseline of desirability for each lot.
A score of 5 was applied for this constraint for all lots evaluated.
Table 1
City of Palo Alto ‐ Downtown Parking Structure Feasibility Study
Lot D Lot E Lot G Lot O Lot P Lot U Lot E/G
Hamilton/Waverly Gilman/Bryant Gilman/Waverly Emerson/High High/Hamilton Urban Lane
A.Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel Concrete or Steel
B.29,200 SF 11,500 SF 16,875 SF 22,500 SF 15,982 SF 63,598 SF 28,375 SF
C.86 34 53 78 51 164 87
D.300 75 166 223 140 478 268
E.214 41 113 145 89 314 181
F.249%121%213%186%175%191%208%
G.$60,750 $60,750 $60,750 $60,750 $60,750 $60,750 $60,750
H.$13,000,500 $2,490,750 $6,864,750 $8,808,750 $5,406,750 $19,075,500 $10,995,750
Constraint Maximum Potential Constraint
Value
Constraint
Importance Factor
1)Adjacent Property Impacts 10 1.3 4 6 8 2 4 8 7
2)Construction and Staging Impacts 10 1.1 4 6 8 2 2 3 6
3)Access Points 10 1.2 10 7 7 10 5 4 7
4)Adjacent Land Use 10 1.3 5 5 7 7 8 5 6
5)Site Utility Impacts 10 1.2 2 6 8 5 3 2 7
6)Net Stall Gain 10 1.5 10 2 8 6 6 7 8
Site Constructability Constraint Matrix
Type of Construction
Lot Size
Existing Spaces
Total Proposed Stalls
Net Stall Gain
Stall Gain %
Estimated Const Cost/Added Stall*
ROM Construction Cost*
7)Total Parking Supply 10 1.4 8 2 5 6 4 10 7
8)Site Potential for Development 10 1.0 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
62 47 70 54 47 57 67
Maximum Weighted Value *Construction Cost/Stall based on City of Palo Alto "Parking in Lieu" fee.
Constraint Scoring Methodology
1) Adjacent Property Impacts 3) Access Points 5) Site Utility Impacts 7) Total Parking Supply
10 = No Impacts 10 = Multiple access points; No road constraints 10 = No utility impacts 10 = 350 or more stalls
8 = Minor impacts to a few neighboring parcels 8 = Multiple access points; Minor road constraints 8 = Lot utility impacts only 8 = 275 to 349 stalls
6 = Minor impacts to multiple neighboring parcels 6 = Multiple access points; Road constraints 6 = Impacts to non‐transmission utilities only 6 = 200 to 274 stalls
4 = Significant impacts to a few neighboring parcels 4 = Single access point; Minor road constraints 4 = Impacts to multiple multiple non‐transmission utilities 4 = 125 to 199 stalls
2 = Significant impacts to multiple neighboring parcels 2 = Single access point; Road constraints 2 = Impacts to multiple transmission utilties 2 = 50 to 124 stalls
2) Construction and Staging Impacts 4) Adjacent Land Use 6) Net Stall Gain 8) Site Potential for Development
10 = No Impacts 10 = Significant variability in use/high parcel density 10 = 235% to 250% 5 = 160% to 174%5 = general desirability for
8 = Adjacent Staging locations available/No Loss of Permit Parking 8 = Significant variability in use/medium parcel density 9 = 220% to 234% 4 = 145 to 159% development due to location in
6 = Limited adjacent staging available/No loss of permit parking 6 = Variability in use/medium parcel density 8 = 205% to 219% 3 = 130% to 144% Palo Alto
4 = Limited adjacent staging available/Loss of Permit Parking 4 = Limited variability in use/low parcel density 7 = 190% to 204% 2 = 115% to 129%
2 = Limited staging available/Loss of high demand parking 2 = No variability in use/low parcel density 6 = 175% to 189% 1 = 114% or less
100
Total Weighted Site Constraint Points
Planning & Community Environment Department
Transportation Division
Request for Information (RFI) Number 153960
for Professional Services
Public Private Partnership
Pre-proposal Teleconference: 2:00 p.m. PST, Monday, May 5, 2014
RFI submittal deadline: 3:00 p.m. PST, Thursday, June 26, 2014
Contract Administrator: Chris Anastole
(Email address) chris.anastole@cityofpaloalto.org
CITY OF PALO ALTO PURCHASING/CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION 250 HAMILTON AVENUE PALO ALTO, CA 94301 (650) 329-2271
ATTACHMENT E
1
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFP) NO. 153960 FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
TITLE: PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
1. INTRODUCTION
Project Background:
The City of Palo Alto is investigating ways to increase the supply of off-street parking
available for employees and visitors to its commercial districts, and would like to explore
ways that the public and private sectors can work together to expand the amount of parking available on existing City-owned parking lots. The City is also interested in
addressing other goals, including maximizing under-utilized sites, providing a variety of
work places and neighborhoods, and encouraging developments which promote
walking, bicycling and public transit.
As part of this investigation, the City is accepting statements of qualifications from
qualified partners interested in developing parking or mixed-use projects on City-owned
property, with particular emphasis on surface parking lots in the University Avenue -
Downtown and California Ave Business Districts. Responses meeting the requirements
listed here will be presented to City Council for review and consideration. At that time, the City Council may instruct staff to solicit more detailed proposals from qualified
respondents, to negotiate a public private partnership for consideration by the City
Council, or elect to refine the parameters and send out a more detailed request for
proposals. The City reserves the right to reject any and all ideas and any acceptance
shall be subject to further negotiation, environmental review and local land use entitlements.
Description of Project (include need and objectives of the project):
The City of Palo Alto is investigating ways to increase the supply of off-street parking
available for employees and visitors to its commercial districts, and would like to explore ways that the public and private sectors can work together to expand the amount of
parking available on existing City-owned parking lots. The City is also interested in
addressing other goals, including maximizing under-utilized sites, providing a variety of
work places and neighborhoods, and encouraging developments which promote
walking, bicycling and public transit.
As part of this investigation, the City is accepting statements of qualifications from
qualified partners interested in developing parking or mixed-use projects on City-owned
property, with particular emphasis on surface parking lots in the University Avenue -
Downtown and California Ave Business Districts. Responses meeting the requirements listed here will be presented to City Council for review and consideration. At that time,
the City Council may instruct staff to solicit more detailed proposals from qualified
respondents, to negotiate a public private partnership for consideration by the City
Council, or elect to refine the parameters and send out a more detailed request for
proposals.
2
Objectives of Public Private Partnerships The City’s primary objective is to increase the supply of off-street parking in the
downtown and California Avenue areas. In doing so, public-private partnerships may
also achieve other objectives, such as increasing the supply of housing, but proposals
must remain consistent with the overall vision inherent in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Attachment A illustrates existing parking lots and the number of parking stalls which currently exist on each site.
All responses must acknowledge and be consistent with existing land use requirements
of the City, including but not limited to building height limits, building and fire code
requirements and parking requirements. Given that the City’s primary objective is to increase the supply of parking, no parking exemptions for mixed-use elements of the
project will be considered. Responses should identify any development and building
code issues requiring resolution via more detailed proposals, as well as anticipated
planning entitlements and financing strategies.
The City anticipates entering into a ground lease agreement with any
developer/developer(s) who are selected following submittal of detailed proposals, site-
specific environmental review, planning entitlements, and negotiations. The terms of
the ground lease, the type of development agreement, the management and operation
of the public parking component of the project and financial considerations would all be negotiated as part of the agreement. The City may also entertain other transaction
structures. Any proposal will be subject to environmental review and receipt of land use
entitlements, which shall be conducted at the developer’s expense.
Structured parking may extend to adjacent parcels, but parking under public streets will not be permitted to minimize utility relocation impacts of the project.
Development Team
Responses must identify the following team members as part of the project team:
Development Team / Investment Team
Project Management team (if separate from Development team)
Prime Contractor and Subcontractors, if applicable
Architect Team
MEP Engineering Team
Civil Engineer, if applicable
Landscape Architect, if applicable
Qualified development teams must have significant urban mixed-use experience and a
demonstrated ability to develop successful, high quality civic and/or mixed-use projects,
including parking structures. Experience working in public/ private partnerships is
desired.
Developers selected for development of detailed proposals will be required to lead the project design team through the City’s approval process, including but not limited to
3
community outreach meetings as required, Architectural Review Board, Planning & Transportation Commission, and City Council approvals. Standard City inspections and
permit requirements will apply through the project approval and construction stages. If
any re-zoning efforts are required to support the project development, these should be
identified as part of the conceptual proposal. The parking structure component should contain one scenario using prevailing wage and one scenario without.
Submittal Requirements
Statement of Interest: Proposers should describe their interest in the project and
explain how their proposal aligns with the City of Palo Alto’s goals for additional public
parking and any other considerations relevant to the site and its surroundings.
Statement of Experience: Proposers should describe their experience in projects of this
type and show a track record of similar successful projects.
Approach: Proposers should explain in detail the anticipated approach to the project, including its conceptual design and necessary agreements and entitlements.
Development Team: Please indicate the following information for all of the proposed
development team:
1. Firm Name and address 2. Primary contact with telephone number and email
3. Website
4. Size of firm
5. Proposed role of each team member
6. Resumes for all proposed team members
Case Study Projects: Provide the following for at least three relevant projects completed
or in progress by members of the proposed team:
1. Name of the project 2. Description of the project
3. Size in square feet and description of parking element
4. Construction Cost
5. Year of Completion
6. Project design team information 7. Any special attributes of the project
8. Description of relevance to the City of Palo Alto
Financing Strategy and Economic Feasibility Proposal: Proposers should provide a
detailed description of their proposed financing strategy and evidence of their financial capacity and capability for developing the project.
2. ATTACHMENTS
4
The attachments below are included with this Request for Proposals (RFP) for your review and submittal (see asterisk):
Attachment A – EXISTING DOWNTOWN AND CALIFORNIA AVENUE LOTS
3. INSTRUCTION TO PROPOSERS
Pre-proposal Teleconference
A pre-proposal teleconference will be held Monday, May 5, 2014 at 2:00
p.m. The call-in number is (605) 475-4800, Access Code: 707751. All prospective Proposers are strongly encouraged to attend.
Addenda/Clarifications
Should discrepancies or omissions be found in this RFI or should there be
a need to clarify this RFI, questions or comments regarding this RFI must
be put in writing and received by the City no later than 1:00 p.m.,
Thursday, June 5, 2014. Correspondence shall be e-mailed to
chris.anastole@cityofpaloalto.org. Responses from the City will be communicated in writing to all recipients of this RFI. Inquiries received
after the date and time stated will not be accepted and will be returned to
senders without response. All addenda shall become a part of this RFI.
The City shall not be responsible for nor be bound by any oral instructions,
interpretations or explanations issued by the City or its representatives.
Submission of Proposals
All responses/information shall be submitted to:
City of Palo Alto
Purchasing and Contract Administration
250 Hamilton Avenue, Mail Stop MB
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Information/responses must be delivered no later than 3:00 p.m. on
Tuesday, June 26, 2014. All proposals received after that time will be
returned to the Responder unopened.
The Responder shall submit one (6) hard copies of its proposal in a sealed envelope, labeled “Original”, addressed as noted above, bearing the
Responder’s name and address clearly marked, “RFI NO. 153960 FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.” Also
submit proposal in soft copy via CD or Flash Drive. [The use of double-
5
sided paper with a minimum 50% post-consumer recycled content is strongly encouraged. Please do not submit proposals in binders].
4. PROPOSED TENTATIVE TIMELINE The tentative RFI timeline is as follows:
RFI Issued April 23, 2014
Pre-RFI Teleconference 2:00 p.m. PST Monday, May 5, 2014
Deadline for questions, clarifications 1:00 p.m. PST June 5, 2014
Answers provided to questions 5:00 p.m. PST June 16, 2014
RFI submittal deadline 3:00 p.m. PST June 26, 2014
Oral Interviews To Be Determined
5. ORAL INTERVIEWS
Proposers may be required to participate in an oral interview. The oral interview will
be a panel comprised of members of the selection committee.
Proposers may only ask questions that are intended to clarify the questions that they
are being asked to respond.
Each Proposer’s time slot for oral interviews will be determined randomly.
Proposers who are selected shall make every effort to attend. If representatives of
the City experience difficulty on the part of any Proposer in scheduling a time for the
oral interview, it may result in disqualification from further consideration.
6. PUBLIC NATURE OF MATERIALS
Responses to this RFP become the exclusive property of the City of Palo Alto. At
such time as the Administrative Services Department recommends to form to the City Manager or to the City Council, as applicable, all proposals received in response to this RFP becomes a matter of public record and shall be regarded as
public records, with the exception of those elements in each proposal which are
defined by the Proposer as business or trade secrets and plainly marked as
“Confidential,” “Trade Secret,” or “Proprietary”. The City shall not in any way be liable or responsible for the disclosure of any such proposal or portions thereof, if they are not plainly marked as “Confidential,” “Trade Secret,” or “Proprietary” or if
disclosure is required under the Public Records Act. Any proposal which contains
language purporting to render all or significant portions of the proposal
“Confidential,” “Trade Secret,” or “Proprietary” shall be regarded as non-responsive. Although the California Public Records Act recognizes that certain confidential trade
secret information may be protected from disclosure, the City of Palo Alto may not
6
accept or approve that the information that a Proposer submits is a trade secret. If a request is made for information marked “Confidential,” “Trade Secret,” or
“Proprietary,” the City shall provide the Proposer who submitted the information with
reasonable notice to allow the Proposer to seek protection from disclosure by a court
of competent jurisdiction.
~ End of Section ~
7
Attachment A: Existing Downtown and California Avenue Lots
Facility Location Parking Spaces Total Square Footage of Lot
Downtown / University Avenue Lots
Emerson/Lytton (A) lot -
corner 68 19,782 sf
Ramona/Lytton (C) lot
On Ramona St, between
Lytton and University
52 84,506 sf
Emerson/Ramona (N) lot
On Emerson St, between
University and Hamilton
48 15,246 sf
Hamilton/Waverley (D) lot -
corner 86 29,185 sf
Gilman/Bryant (E) lot
On Gilman St, between
Hamilton and Forest Ave.
Gilman/Waverley (G) lot
On Gilman St, between Hamilton and Forest Ave
34
53
Lot E: 11,250 sf
Lot G: 16,988 sf
Lytton/Waverley (K) lot Lytton/Kipling (T) lot
57 52
Lot K: 20,908 sf Lot T: 16,552 sf
High/Hamilton (P) lot On High St, between
University and Hamilton
51
16,117 sf
Emerson/High (O) lot
Entrances on both High and
Emerson St, between Lytton
and University
78 22,651 sf
Cowper/Hamilton (H) lot
Entrances on both Hamilton
and Cowper
90 3,049 sf
California Avenue Business District
C-1 lot
370 Cambridge, between
Park Blvd, and Birch St.
27 10,019 sf
C-2 lot
276 Cambridge, between
Birch and El Camino Real
27 10,019 sf
8
C-9 lot
2350 Birch St, between
Cambridge and California Ave.
28 9,900 sf
C-4 lot 391 and 473 Cambridge. Between El Camino Real and
Birch St.
89 5,662 sf
C-6 lot
On Sherman, between Birch
and Park Blvd.
154 53,578 sf
C-7 lot
On Sherman, between Ash
and Birch St
161 44,867 sf
C-8 lot
On Sherman and Peral Lane,
between ECR and Ash St.
89 41,382 sf
Attachment A: Existing Downtown and California Avenue Lots
Downtown / University Lot Locations
1
Attachment A: Existing Downtown and California Avenue Lots
California Avenue Lot Locations
Public Financial Management, Inc.
PFM Asset Management LLC PFM Advisors
50 California Street Suite 2300 San Francisco, CA 94111
415 982-5544 415 982-4513 fax www.pfm.com
October 9, 2014
Memorandum
To: Hillary Gitelman, Jaime Rodriguez, Joe Saccio
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
From: Bob Gamble, Nick Jones
Public Financial Management
50 California Street, Suite 2300
San Francisco, CA 94111
Re: Financing Options for Parking
Background
The City of Palo Alto has requested that PFM review and advise on financing options for creating
additional parking supply in downtown Palo Alto. The City initiated a process seeking proposals from
developers to suggest methods for creating additional supply. The RFI did not provide guidance regarding
financing or delivery methods. Eight proposals were received, and City staff interviewed three of the
respondents. Of those received, all but one relied on some amount of ancillary development rights to
provide revenues to build the garage. This is to be expected given the difficulty of creating a revenue
stream directly from parking in a market largely consisting of free parking. If the ancillary development
proposed in the responses were already a planning goal, this approach could make sense. However, it is
our understanding that the magnitude of development proposed does not comport with the City’s
planning goals. The exception to this concern is with respect to ground floor retail in garage structures.
This type of retail would fit with the City’s planning objectives, although it would not generate sufficient
revenues to support the cost of the garage. The City just interviewed three of the respondents to the RFI,
and received additional information regarding their proposals. The question before the City at this point is
how to move forward with a process that will result in the creation of additional parking supply, and how
to do so in a way that does not violate other planning or financial constraints.
The Current Context
First, there is a strong public perception of a shortage of parking in downtown Palo Alto. There are a
number of city-owned lots and garages, along with on-street parking, and this parking is almost entirely
free. Increases in employment densities (workers per 1,000 square feet) since the end of the recession and
growth of businesses downtown have created additional demand pressure on the existing supply, at times
driving vehicles that had previously parked downtown into the adjacent neighborhoods. In this situation,
there is no pricing mechanism to help balance demand and supply, so additional demand simply expands
the geography of the market. The City is currently working toward implementation of a neighborhood
parking program that will restrict employees from parking in neighborhoods adjacent to business areas.
When implemented, this program will further constrain the parking supply.
In considering options to add parking supply, the City will have to consider the larger context, and
whether it is willing to move toward pricing to manage parking demand. While many larger cities are very
ATTACHMENT F
October 9, 2014
Page 2
accustomed to paid parking, mature suburbs often struggle with the transition from free to paid parking. It
should be noted that the City has previously used an assessment district to finance parking. Downtown
landowners in the assessment district agreed to assess themselves to provide additional parking supply.
The interest in free parking and the willingness of downtown businesses to pay the assessment was in part
driven by the concern that competing businesses at Stanford Shopping Center had a competitive
advantage with relatively abundant free parking.
Another relevant consideration is that the City has charged an in lieu parking fee downtown and has
accumulated funds from these charges for garage construction.
Financing Options
Any discussion of financing options has to begin with consideration of revenues that could be used to
support the capital costs. Broadly speaking, we see the following choices:
1. Public Financing with Reimbursement From Retail
The City could issue debt backed by its own balance sheet but reimbursed from retail revenues in the new
facilities. This approach could utilize a COP that would be reimbursed by retail revenues. In this case, the
City would be using its balance sheet to enhance the credit of the retail revenues. An alternative approach
would be to attempt to issue parking revenue bonds. This would be a much worse credit and more
expensive. However, it has the virtue of having no recourse to the City’s balance sheet.
2. Private Capital with Reimbursement from Retail and Paid Parking
This would require instituting paid parking in the downtown as a whole in order to allow the setting of
rates at a level that would support capital investment in garages. The City could utilize the process it has
already begun by asking RFI respondents to explain whether or how they could provide private capital to
build garages, and what parking rates would have to be charged in order for this to happen.
3. Private Capital with Reimbursement From Residential
This would allow the City to maintain free parking by generating the revenues needed for the parking
garage project from simultaneously constructed residential units. The City could utilize the process it has
already begun by asking RFI respondents to explain whether or how they could provide private capital to
build residential units, and what residential rates would have to be charged in order to support their
construction along with the construction of the parking garage.
The three options outlined above employ very different approaches, but we have compared their key
financial statistics in the table below assuming a project cost of $15 million:
Option Capital
Contributed
Borrowed
Amount TIC1 Annual
Debt Service2
Annual
Revenues
Daily
Parking Cost
1 $7.3MM
(City) $8.8MM 4.14% $500k $1MM
(retail) Free
2 $0 $16.5MM 7.26% $1.37MM $2.75MM
(retail+parking) $17.5
3 $11.7MM
(Developer) $3.9MM 7.26% $325k $650k
(residential) Free
1. City borrowing rates: AAA MMD index +25-65bps; developer borrowing rates: TM3 BBB taxable housing borrowing index. As of
October 2nd, 25bps cushion added to all rates.
2. 30 year amortization, level annual debt service, 2.0x revenue coverage, interest capitalized for first year.
October 9, 2014
Page 3
As shown in Option 1 in the table above, a public financing in which retail revenues provided 2.0x debt
service coverage would require the City to contribute an additional $3.3 million on top of the $4 million it
has earmarked for the project. However, the borrowed amount would be repaid exclusively by retail
revenues and parking would remain free. Under Option 2 the garage would be financed privately, resulting
in a much higher borrowing cost. Despite this, charging $17.5 for daily parking—the amount assumed in
Ark’s proposal—would generate sufficient revenues to provide 2.0x debt service coverage without
requiring a capital contribution. Option 3 illustrates that keeping parking free and using revenues generated
by residential units—at rents proposed by David Kleiman—would require a developer capital contribution
of $11.7 million.
How to Move Forward
The City has several threshold decisions to make and must consider the timing of these choices. If the City
is willing to utilize price as a way to ration a scarce commodity (parking), then it can consider when and
how to do this. If it chooses to move in this direction, then it can use the charges for parking to support
capital investment from either private or public financing. This is the typical approach in larger cities with
substantial demands for parking. This direction would provide the widest range of financing options going
forward. If the City does not want to move toward paid parking, then financing options are more limited:
Access to private equity would require trading development rights to pay for additional parking. Publicly
financed parking would have to be supported by the City’s general fund, or by additional assessments on
property owners.
Managing Options
It is important for the City to move toward increasing parking supply even while decisions regarding paid
parking are pending. This can be best accomplished by pursuing both public and private financing options
simultaneously. The City has already narrowed the range of potential providers of privately financed
parking to two proposers. The City can continue to pursue this process by moving forward with an RFP
that measures the willingness of the proposers to deliver parking supply that is not paid for with
substantial development rights. The inclusion of ground floor retail could be included since it supports
both parking and planning objectives. By narrowing the proposers’ options, the City will be able to
understand the assumptions under which privately financed parking could be workable. If these
assumptions are attractive to the City, then there may be a real option available. At the same time, the City
can pursue a publicly financed option using existing resources for predevelopment work that could
support a publicly financed garage using one of several methods. These methods could include an
assessment approach, a COP, or even stand-alone parking revenue bonds. Further analysis can be
undertaken to determine which financing method is preferable. By pursuing both paths simultaneously, the
City will be hedging its bets with respect to the public versus private choice, and with respect to the actual
outcome of the consideration of paid parking and the timing of that choice. This approach will help ensure
that one or more of these paths is viable, and may provide the ability to compare the attractiveness of the
choices.
We hope this analysis has proved helpful; if you have any additional questions concerning this matter,
please feel free to contact Bob or Nick at gambler@pfm.com or jonesni@pfm.com.
Sincerely,
Robert T. Gamble, Managing Director
Proposer’s Information Form
PROPOSER:
Name: '$9,'./(,0$1
Address: +LJK6WUHHW3DOR$OWR&$
Telephone: Email:GNOHLPDQ#GUHDOW\FRP
Contact person, title, email, and telephone: 6(($%29(
Proposer, if selected, intends to carry on the business as (check one):
Individual Joint Venture
Partnership
Corporation
When incorporated? ______________
In what state? _______________
When authorized to do business in California?
Other (explain):5HVSRQGHUZLOOIRUPDQHZ&DOLIRUQLDOLPLWHGOLDELOLW\FRPSDQ\WRRZQ LI
DSSURSULDWH RURSHUDWHWKLVSURSHUW\LIVHOHFWHGE\WKH&LW\RI3DOR$OWRSXUVXDQWWRWKLV5),
ADDENDA
To assure that all Proposers have received each addendum, check the appropriate box(es)
below. Failure to acknowledge receipt of an addendum/addenda may be considered an
irregularity in the Proposal:
Addendum number(s) received: 5HVSRQGHUKDVUHFHLYHG$GGHQGXP1XPEHUVDQG
PROPOSER’S SIGNATURE
No proposal shall be accepted which has not been signed in ink in the appropriate space below:
9
If Proposer is INDIVIDUAL, sign here
Date:-XQH_____________________________________Proposer’s Signature
'$9,'./(,0$15(6321'(5__________B
Proposer’s typed name and title
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________roposer’sSignature
ATTACHMENT G
Ͳ1Ͳ
Planning & Community Environment Department
Transportation Division
Request for Information (RFI) Number 153960
for Professional Services
Public Private Partnership
RESPONSE TO RFI BY KLEIMAN TEAM FOR
EMERSON/LYTTON LOT A
June 26, 2014
Ͳ2Ͳ
STATEMENTOFINTEREST:
TheKleimanTeamispleasedtopresentthisproposalforamixedͲuseretailandresidentialprojectfor
theCityofPaloAltoEmerson/LyttonLotA.Ourproposedprojectwillincludealargeparking
componentthatwillnotonlyincreasetheCityofPaloAlto'ssupplyofoffͲstreetparking,itwillmaximize
theuseofthispresentlyunderͲutlizedsite.Theprojectwillberealizedinamannerthatcomplements
thesurroundingneighborhoodwhilesimultaneouslypromotiingtheCity'sgoalofpromotingwalking,
bicyclingandtheuseofpublictransit,duetotheproject'sdesignanditsproximitytotheDowntown
CaltrainStation.
Ourprojectwillnotseekanyparkingnorheightlimitexemptions,anditwillcomplywithallbuilding
andfirecoderequirements.
Thegroundfloorretailwillservetoliventhestreetscapeatthislocation,andthehousingwillintroduce
newresidentstothedowntownzonewhilealsominimizingthenumberofparkingspacesrequiredfor
thedevelopmentwhencomparedwithasimilarlysizedofficebuildingalternative.
Fromalegalperspective,itistheintentionthatteammemberDavidKleiman(oranewlyformed
CalifornialimitedliabilitycompanyformedandcontrolledbyMr.Kleiman)willactasthefinancialand
ownershippartnerofthegroup,withtheothermembersactingintheirrespectivecapacitiesonafee
basis.
STATEMENTOFEXPERIENCE:
TeammembershavealongandsuccessfultrackrecordwithmixedͲuseprojectsofthistype.Moreover,
theteammembershaveworkedtogetheronmultipleprojectsinthedowntownarea.Theexperience
withsuchprojectswillbedocumentedbelowinthesectiondevotedtoeachindividualteammember's
qualificationsandexperience.
PROJECTAPPROACH:
TheprojectforEmerson/LyttonLotAproposedbyTeamKleimanisafollows:
ExistingConditions:
Sitelocation:CityofPaloAltoEmerson/LyttonLotA(approximateaddress401Emerson)
Sitesize:19,782squarefeet
Sitezoningclassification:CDͲC(P)
CurrentUse:ParkingFacilityͲͲ68parkingspaces
ProposedProject:
Athreestory,mixedͲuse,retailandresidentialprojectwithabelowͲgradeparkingfacilitytoserveboth
theprojectandthepublic.
ProjectAreaspecificationsbyusecomponent:
GroundFloorRetail:14,500squarefeet
Residential:18apartmentscontainingapproximately19,782(gross)squarefeet
Parking:Threelevelsofbelowgradeparkingcontainingapproximately237spaces,viaafully
automatedparkingsystem.
Ͳ3Ͳ
ProjectParkingRequirementsperCode:
GroundFloorRetail:58
ResidentialUses:36spacestoservetheresidentsand1requiredguestparkingspaceplus
additionalguestparkingbasedon10%ofthetotalnumberofunitsoratotalof39[36+1+1.8
(10%of18)]spacestoservetheresidentialuse.
Totalrequiredparkingforalluses:97spaces
ParkingSummary:
CurrentParkingInventory:68spaces
RequiredProjectParking:97spaces
CurrentPlusRequired: 165spaces
ProposedParking: 237spaces
NETADDITIONTOCITYOFPALOALTOPARKINGINVENTORY:72SPACES
Tosummarize,fromaparkingperspective,ourproposalnotonlymorethandoublestheexistingparking
spaceinventoryatthislocation,itfullyparksallnewusesaswell.
ConceptualDesign
VerypreliminaryconceptualplansfortheproposedprojectarecontainedinAddendum1tothisRFI.
TheseplansareintendedtobemerelythespringboardforadialoguewithCityofPaloAltoPlanning&
CommunityEnvironmentStaff,anditisourhopethatthefinaldesignwillberesponsivetoinputfrom
bothStaffandthecommunity.Inthissamevein,theparkingfacilitydesignislikewisequitepreliminary,
althoughwehaveahighlevelofconfidenceintheestimatedcapacitylevels.
NecessaryAgreements
Inordertoproceed,wearelookingtodiscussandeventuallyfinalizealongtermlandleaseforthe
subjectproperty.Aleasetermofatleast40Ͳ50years,andpreferablylonger,willbenecessaryinorder
tofacilitatethefinancingoftheproject.Additionally,alongtermmanagementagreementofsometype
willhavetobeinplacethatwillallowthecooperativeoperationoftheparkingfacilityforthebenefitof
theproject'sretailandresidentialtenantaswellasthepublic.
RequiredEntitlements
Sincenoexceptionstotheexistingzoningcodeareanticipated,theprojectmerelyneedsthesupportof
StaffandlikelyCityCouncilinordertobeeffectuated.ItwillbenecessaryforStaffand/ortheCity
Attorneytoconfirmthattheadditionalparkingspacesthatarebeingprovidedinexcessofthosewhich
arerequiredfortheprojectwillnotnegativelyimpacttheallowablefloorareafortheproject.
FINANCINGSTATEGYANDECONOMICFEASIBILITY
Thefinancingoftheproposedprojectwillbebasedonstandardbankunderwritingprinciplesfor
commercialrealestatelending.Ourcommercialrealestatelendersunderwriteprojectsbasedona
project'spotentialtogeneratecashflowfromrentaloperationswhichisavailabletoservicethe
Ͳ4Ͳ
project'sdebt.We'vecreatedadetailedprojectproformadepictingtheexpectedcashflowswhichwill
begeneratedbytheproject.WecanofcoursesharethiswithStaffattheappropriatetime.The
unknownvariableisthegroundleasepaymentwhichwillbepaidtotheCityofPaloAltoduringtheterm
ofthegroundlease.Basedondiscussionswithourcommerciallenders,thereisageneralwillingnessto
financeatransactionofthistypeifthelengthofthegroundleaseislongenoughtoaffordthelender
sufficienttimetorecovertheloanbalanceintheeventofadefault.Thereisconsensuswithinthe
industrythatthegroundleasemusthaveatermlengthatleast10yearsbeyondtheloanmaturitydate.
Financeablegroundleasesgenerallycontainatermof50to99years.
Ourunderwritingoftherentsthatcanbegeneratedbytheretailandresidentialtenantsattheproject
(asshowninthesimplifiedpreliminaryprojectionbelow)confirmthatthisprojectisaviableone.
EMERSON/LYTTON MIXED-USE PROJECT
INCOME/EXPENSE PROJECTION
INCOME/EXPENSE PROJECTION
UNIT
COUNT FLOOR SUITE
NUMBER
SQUARE
FOOTAGE
RENTAL
RATE/
FOOT/YEAR
REVENUE
GENERATED
TOTAL
REVENUE
RETAIL COMPONENT*
1 1 100 3,000 $72 $216,000
1 1 200 11,500 $72 $828,000
Subtotal: 14,500 $1,044,000 $1,044,000
RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT
11 2 12,089 $60 $725,340
7 3 7,693 $60 $461,580
Subtotal: 19,782 $1,186,920 $1,186,920
Gross Annual Revenue $2,230,920
Less Residential Expenses (@45%) -$534,114
Potential Annual Profit (Loss) $1,696,806
Less Ground Lease Rent to CPA TBD
Equals Free Cash Flow Available
for Debt Service TBD
*Retail Rents Triple Net (Tenant Pays All Expenses)
Thefinancialcapacityoftheprojectsponsor,aswellastheitscapabilitiesinregardtotherealizationof
thisprojectwillbecoveredinthefollowingsection.
DEVELOPMENTTEAMANDCASESTUDYPROJECTS
Thefollowingpagesidentifyeachmemberoftheprojectteam,withallrelevantcontactinformation,
firmsizeandexperience,andindividualteammemberresumeswhereappropriate.Thissectionwill
alsoprovidenumerousexamplesofbothcurrentandcompletedprojectswhichevidencetheabilityof
teammemberstosuccessfullycompleteaprojectofthecomplexityanticipatedhere.
Ͳ5Ͳ
DEVELOPMENTTEAMMEMBERS:
TEAMROLEMEMBERIDENTITYCONTACTINFORMATIONWEBSITE
Leader/Project
FinancialSponsor
DavidKleiman
D2RealtyServices
333HighSt,PaloAlto,CA94301
(650)327Ͳ2750
dkleiman@d2realty.com
www.d2realty.com
ProjectArchitectKenHayes
HayesGroup
2657SpringSt,RedwoodCity,CA94063
(650)365Ͳ0600
khayes@thehayesgroup.com
www.thehayesgroup.com
PrimeContractorCameronPeach
SouthBayConstruction
1711DellAve,Campbell,CA95008
(408)379Ͳ5500
cpeach@sbci.com
www.sbci.com
StructuralEng.JesusSierra
SierraEngineering
39812MissionBlvd,Fremont,CA94539
(510)445Ͳ0550
jsierra@sierraeng.com
www.sierraeng.com
MEPEngineerSrdjanRebraca
AciesEngineering
111W.EvelynAve,Sunnyvale,CA94086
(408)522Ͳ5255
srdjan@acies.net
www.acies.net
LandscapeArch.ShariVanDorn
VanDornAbed
8114thSt,SanFrancisco,CA94103
(415)864Ͳ1921
shari@valainc.com
www.valainc.com
CivilEngineeringIsaacKontorovsky
BKFEngineers
1650TechnologyDr,SanJose,CA95110
(408)467Ͳ9100
ikontorovsky@bkf.com
www.bkf.com
Parking
Consultant
MichelleWendler
WatryDesignInc
100CenturyCntrCt,SanJose,CA95112
(408)392Ͳ7900
mwendler@watrydesign.com
www.watrydesign.com
Addendum2containsmoredetailedinformationeachteammember,aswellastherepresentative
projectsthattheteammemberhassuccessfullycompleted.Whereappropriate,thisinformationnotes
thoseprojectsonwhichmultipleteammembershavecollaborated.
CLOSINGSTATEMENT
ItisourhopethattheCityofPaloAltofindsourproposedprojecttobeofinterest,andthatweare
giventheopportunitytoengagewithCityStaffinamutuallybeneficialdevelopmentprocesswhichhas
theendresultofimprovingthequalityoflifeforresidentsandvisitorstotheCity.
Thankyouforyourconsideration.
DavidKleiman,President
D2RealtyServices,Inc.
CaliforniaOffice
333HighStreet
PaloAlto,CA94301
(650)327Ͳ2750
http://www.d2realty.com
Ͳ6Ͳ
ADDENDUM1
PRELIMINARYCONCEPTUALDESIGNPLAN
AND
PRELIMINARYPARKINGPLAN
FI
R
S
T
F
L
O
O
R
-
1
4
,
5
0
0
S
F
R
E
T
A
I
L
EM
E
R
S
O
N
L
Y
T
T
O
N
L
O
T
A
06
.
2
5
.
2
0
1
4
LI
F
T
B
A
Y
L
I
F
T
B
A
Y
RE
T
A
I
L
RE
T
A
I
L
LO
B
B
Y
0
5
10
15
20
2
5
F
T
SE
C
O
N
D
F
L
O
O
R
-
1
1
U
N
I
T
S
EM
E
R
S
O
N
L
Y
T
T
O
N
L
O
T
A
06
.
2
5
.
2
0
1
4
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
1
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
0
5
10
15
20
2
5
F
T
TH
I
R
D
F
L
O
O
R
-
7
U
N
I
T
S
EM
E
R
S
O
N
L
Y
T
T
O
N
L
O
T
A
06
.
2
5
.
2
0
1
4
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
2
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
3
B
E
D
R
O
O
M
UN
I
T
RO
O
F
GA
R
D
E
N
0
5
10
15
20
2
5
F
T
Fil
e
N
a
m
e
:
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
Dra
w
n
:
Da
t
e
:
#5
9
3
4
0
0
-
v
1
B
-
0
1
-
F
O
R
T
E
N
D
E
R
O
N
L
Y
-
F
O
R
E
X
P
L
A
N
A
T
O
R
Y
-
F
O
R
E
X
E
C
U
T
I
O
N
Sc
a
l
e
:
GR
A
D
E
L
E
V
E
L
40
0
E
M
E
R
S
O
N
GR
A
D
E
L
E
V
E
L
Te
l
:
2
0
1
-
5
9
2
-
1
4
4
4
Un
i
t
r
o
n
i
c
s
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
,
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
,
Su
i
t
e
4
3
5
F
o
r
t
L
e
e
N
J
0
7
0
2
4
Fa
x
:
2
0
1
-
5
9
2
-
1
5
4
4
06
.
2
6
.
1
4
NT
S
TO
T
A
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
:
2
3
7
C
A
R
S
PA
L
O
A
L
T
O
,
C
A
IL
I
J
A
J
.
Ch
e
c
k
e
d
:
SA
G
I
S
.
UN
I
T
R
O
N
I
C
S
®
EN
T
R
Y
/E
X
I
T
1
EN
T
R
Y
/E
X
I
T
2
RE
T
A
I
L
RE
T
A
I
L
AL
L
E
Y
ST
A
I
R
S
ST
A
I
R
S
3A
CO
N
T
R
O
L
RO
O
M
EM
E
R
S
O
N
S
T
.
WA
I
T
I
N
G
AR
E
A
48
'
-
1
0
"
21'-8"12'-5"
EM
E
R
S
O
N
/
L
Y
T
T
O
N
PA
R
K
I
N
G
F
A
C
I
L
I
T
Y
PA
L
O
A
L
T
O
,
C
A
Fil
e
N
a
m
e
:
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
Dra
w
n
:
Da
t
e
:
#5
9
3
4
0
0
-
v
1
B
-
0
2
-
F
O
R
T
E
N
D
E
R
O
N
L
Y
-
F
O
R
E
X
P
L
A
N
A
T
O
R
Y
-
F
O
R
E
X
E
C
U
T
I
O
N
Sc
a
l
e
:
TY
P
I
C
A
L
L
E
V
E
L
-
1
-
2
40
0
E
M
E
R
S
O
N
TY
P
I
C
A
L
L
E
V
E
L
-
1
-
2
Te
l
:
2
0
1
-
5
9
2
-
1
4
4
4
Un
i
t
r
o
n
i
c
s
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
,
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
,
Su
i
t
e
4
3
5
F
o
r
t
L
e
e
N
J
0
7
0
2
4
Fa
x
:
2
0
1
-
5
9
2
-
1
5
4
4
06
.
2
6
.
1
4
PA
R
K
I
N
G
L
E
V
E
L
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
:
7
9
C
A
R
S
NT
S
TO
T
A
L
P
A
R
K
I
N
G
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
:
2
3
7
C
A
R
S
PA
L
O
A
L
T
O
,
C
A
IL
I
J
A
J
.
Ch
e
c
k
e
d
:
SA
G
I
S
.
UN
I
T
R
O
N
I
C
S
®
102'-0"
19
3
'
-
0
"
3A
ST
A
I
R
S
ST
A
I
R
S
EM
E
R
S
O
N
/
L
Y
T
T
O
N
PA
R
K
I
N
G
F
A
C
I
L
I
T
Y
PA
L
O
A
L
T
O
,
C
A
Fil
e
N
a
m
e
:
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
:
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
:
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
s
:
Dra
w
n
:
Da
t
e
:
#5
9
3
4
0
0
-
v
1
B
-
0
3
-
F
O
R
T
E
N
D
E
R
O
N
L
Y
-
F
O
R
E
X
P
L
A
N
A
T
O
R
Y
-
F
O
R
E
X
E
C
U
T
I
O
N
Sc
a
l
e
:
SE
C
T
I
O
N
A
40
0
E
M
E
R
S
O
N
SE
C
T
I
O
N
A
Te
l
:
2
0
1
-
5
9
2
-
1
4
4
4
Un
i
t
r
o
n
i
c
s
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
,
2
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
D
r
i
v
e
,
Su
i
t
e
4
3
5
F
o
r
t
L
e
e
N
J
0
7
0
2
4
Fa
x
:
2
0
1
-
5
9
2
-
1
5
4
4
06
.
2
6
.
1
4
NT
S
PA
L
O
A
L
T
O
,
C
A
IL
I
J
A
J
.
Ch
e
c
k
e
d
:
SA
G
I
S
.
UN
I
T
R
O
N
I
C
S
®
RE
T
A
I
L
12'-0"
7'-5"6'-8"
23'-11"
9'-10"
EM
E
R
S
O
N
/
L
Y
T
T
O
N
PA
R
K
I
N
G
F
A
C
I
L
I
T
Y
PA
L
O
A
L
T
O
,
C
A
Ͳ7Ͳ
ADDENDUM2
TEAMMEMBERDETAILS
AND
REPRESENTATIVEPROJECTS
D2 REALTY SERVICES, INC.
COMPANY PROFILE
DAVID KLEIMAN, PRESIDENT
Table Of Contents
I EtiC lif iI.Executives-California
II. Company History
III. Completed Projects
IV On the Boards NowIV.On the Boards Now
1
I. EXECUTIVE BIO
DAVID KLEIMAN, Co-Founder/Principal
Degree in Psychology, University of Illinois
J.D., Northwestern University School of Law,y
Licensed to Practice Law-Illinois
Responsible for overall development activities, legal, project
design, construction scheduling
Strong in residential development. Primary responsibility for
apartment and condominium development and construction.
Experienced in Mixed-Use design and construction, with both
t il/ ffi d t il/ id ti l iretail/office and retail/residential mixes.
NON-CORPORATE ACTIVITIES
Faculty Member, Stanford Universityyy
Faculty Member, Illinois Institute of Technology
MEMBERSHIPS
Urban Land InstituteUrban Land Institute
American Institute of Architects (Non-Architect Member)
2
II. COMPANY HISTORY
Company formed in 1995
Initial focus was multi-family development and shopping
center management and leasingcentermanagementandleasing.
Pooled executive resources and experience. Worked with
lenders that were opportunistic and allowed higher
leverage, thereby fueling growth.
Company mantra: “luxury is standard”. Objective has
always been to innovate and offer buyers and tenants
additional value with something unique and generally
unavailable elsewhere in the subject market.unavailable elsewhere in the subject market.
Company has always maintained a small staff (typically 8-
13 employees), while maintaining the ability to manage and
complete large projects by leveraging the strength and size
of top consultants and service providersoftopconsultantsandservice-providers.
As of 2014, the company maintained a significant presence
in both Chicago and Northern California. One of the largest
private owner/operators of parking facilities in Chicago
(approx. 1,000 spaces at the time of this writing) with
approximately 50 property level supervisory and
management personnel.
3
III. COMPLETED PROJECTS (Mixed-Use)
4
Completed Projects
Harrison Street Lofts
Purchased in 1999 as a fully leased 100,000
square foot office building. Slowly moved
tenants out of the building during design and
permit process.
Ten floors with a footprint of 100’ by 100’.
Concrete frame structure with brick exterior
supported by steel shelf angles. Floor loads of
225 lbs/foot! Built in 1922 as the first printer’s
building in the City of Chicago.
Sixty condominiums on floors 3-15.1-3Sixtycondominiumsonfloors315.1 3
bedrooms. 876 square feet to 2,382 square
feet. Parking in the basement and on the
second floor is accessed from the alley next to
the building
Retail at the base of the building. Challenge
was to keep one retailer in the building during
tti!construction!
Added six stories of steel to the top to create
new construction. These floors were
differentiated by having drywalled ceilings
versus the existing floors with exposed
concrete ceilings.
The first new condominium building in Chicago
to offer high-speed internet connections to its
residents.
5
Completed Projects – Harrison Street Lofts
66
Completed Projects – Harrison Street Lofts
7
Completed Projects
Wells Street Tower
Purchased the land site in 2000 as a parking lot.
Operated the lot during the design and permit process.
Site is approximately 100 feet deep by 162 feet wide, or
16 200 square feet16,200 square feet.
Building architect is Solomon Cordwell Buenz, a large,
Chicago-based national firm. Structural engineering by
Thornton Tomasetti, which has designed six of the
world’s ten tallest buildings, including the Kingdom
Tower in Saudi Arabia, which upon completion will be
1,000 meters tall. MEP design by ESD, the largest
MEP design firm in the Midwest. Building contains
206,000 square feet of residential condominiums on
floors 8-34 and 187 parking spaces on floors 2-7. The
eighth floor contains an exercise facility, a multi-
purpose room, a library, and a business center.
Construction began in the spring of 2001 and was
completed approximately 14 months later Thecompletedapproximately14monthslater.The
structure is poured-in-place concrete. At its peak, the
concrete contractor (who was also the general
contractor) was pouring one full floor every three days!
There is 5,000 feet of retail space at the base of the
building, including a cleaners and a children’s day care
facility.
Apartments were offered in two styles, a loft-style finish
with exposed concrete ceilings, and more fully finished,
with skim-coated ceilings. Standard appliances were
stainless steel, and all kitchens had granite counters
and breakfast-bar islands. All but 8 apartments had
private outdoor space.
Some unique features are a combined tub and shower
bathing area, fireplaces and washer/dryers in every
apartment, and a recessed television niche in living
rooms which were customized to a buyer’s
specifications (back in the days of tube TV’s!). We also
set up a webcam on an adjoining building so that our
buyers could track construction progress.
88
Completed Projects – Wells Street Tower
999
Completed Projects – Wells Street Tower
101010
Completed Projects – Wells Street Tower
111111
Completed Projects – Wells Street Tower
12121212
Completed Projects – Wells Street Tower
13131313
Completed Projects – Wells Street Tower
14141414
Completed Projects – Wells Street Tower
15151515
Completed Projects
250 South Wacker Drive
Purchased the existing fully occupied office building
in early 2005. Systematically moved tenants out of
the building during design and permit process.
The building consisted of a sixteen story, 300,000
gross square foot poured-in-place structure, built in
1957. When the building was fully vacant in 2006,
all building systems and the exterior glazing were
removed and replaced. Additionally, the building
required a complete asbestos abatement programrequiredacompleteasbestosabatementprogram.
Unsightly brown brick was covered with aluminum
panels, which matched the new glazing system.
Two-story lobby created with tubular steel, married
to a 4-sided structurally glazed façade.
Originally planned as a commercial condominium,
which was relatively unknown in Chicago at the
time. Market conditions resulted in a change to a
more typical rental scenario.
First floor space rental to Walgreen and Panera
Bread drove the project economics. Chosen by
MillerCoors as their international headquarters.
Breakthrough: First installation of an Active Chilled
Beam (ACB) system in the United States. Quieter
and more efficient than conventional HVAC
systems. (More on this later)
Challenges:
No power for 90 days!
Keep multiple building antennae operational during
construction operations. Much of glazing incorrectly
manufactured because of a shop drawing error.
Convincing Walgreens to use a new, backlit
stainless steel logo sign.
161616
Completed Projects – 250 South Wacker Drive
BEFORE
AFTER
1717171717
Completed Projects – 250 South Wacker Drive
1818181818181818
Typical Floor Plan – 16,626
Square Feet
Completed Projects – 250 South Wacker Drive
191919191919
Courtesy VOA Associates Architects
Completed Projects – 250 South Wacker Drive
20202020202020
Courtesy VOA Associates Architects
Completed Projects – 250 South Wacker Drive
212121212121
In Progress Now – Palo Alto Projects
22
636 Waverley Street, Palo Alto
FIRM PROFILE
Since its founding in 1996 by Ken Hayes, AIA, Hayes Group Architects has
distinguished itself as a diverse design practice dedicated to solving client problems
with innovative but practical architectural solutions.
At Hayes Group Architects, we believe design is an iterative process, ensuring that the
solutions we create will accurately reflect our client’s core values, goals, and mission.
Our architectural style is circumstantial, not predetermined, and responds to the nature
of the site, the social and physical context, and to our client’s lifestyle, work style, and
aesthetic disposition.
While this philosophy has earned us awards from the design community, its true value
is in how it enables us to create solutions that are as diverse in physical response as
they are in purpose, and that reflect each client’s personality.
And because we believe the best solutions are custom-tailored to our client’s needs,
we rigorously manage the size of our firm to provide a personal but scalable experience
to all of our clients, no matter how large—or small—their projects may be. Not only
does this make it possible for principals Ken Hayes and Jason Holleb to be involved in
every project we undertake, but it also leverages the depth and breadth of our staff’s
experience and vision, yielding designs of uncompromising quality,
Our experience encompasses a variety of project types throughout California, but
we’re equally at home operating locally.
PROJECT TYPES
New And Renovated Commercial Buildings
Retail Buildings
Shopping Centers
Offices
Restaurants
Lounges
Fitness / Wellness Facilities
Corporate Interiors
Conference Centers
Training Facilities
Medical Offices
Mixed-Use Projects
Multi-Family Projects
Custom Residential Commissions
SERVICES
Pre-Design
Site Analysis
Feasibility Studies
Programming (Analysis)
Schematic Design
Design Development
Construction Documents
Bidding and Negotiating
Construction Phase Services
QUALIFICATIONS
Hayes Group Architects is a California corporation providing the full spectrum of
programming, architecture, space planning and interior design services. Kenneth
Hayes, AIA, president, formed the firm in 1996 as a sole proprietorship and established
the corporation in 2011.
Mr. Hayes has over 30 years of experience in a variety of project types including
technology companies, private equity firms, professional corporations, retail
establishments, restaurants, multi-family / mixed use projects, adaptive reuse of historic
and non-historic structures, as well as custom residential commissions. The firm
provides pre-design/programming, schematic design, design development, construction
documentation and construction phase services through the completion of each project.
Hayes Group Architects has a strong reputation for providing quality design while
meeting project schedules and working within the project budget.
Sixteen professional staff consisting of architects, intern architects and interior
designers provide architecture and interior design services. The senior staff has over
twenty years of experience in the planning and designing of buildings and interiors. Our
completed projects and projects under development demonstrate extensive experience
in all aspects of architectural design, interior design and community leadership. Mr.
Hayes has worked with a wide range of clients including Apple Inc., Samsung, Palantir,
Sevin Rosen Funds, TA Associates, First Virtual Group, The Social Capital +
Partnership, Starbucks Coffee, Premier Properties, Federal Realty Investment Trust,
IDEO Product Development, Ellis Partners, and the City of Palo Alto. With this diverse
EDFNJURXQG+D\HV*URXS$UFKLWHFWVXQGHUVWDQGVDQGUHVSRQGVWRWKHXQLTXHQDWXUH
DQGGHPDQGVRIPDQ\SURMHFWW\SHV+D\HV*URXS$UFKLWHFWVSURYLGHVIXOOVWDWHRIWKH
DUW FRPSXWHU FDSDELOLWLHV IRU GHVLJQ DQG SURGXFWLRQ GUDZLQJV LQFOXGLQJ WKUHH
GLPHQVLRQDO FRPSXWHU PRGHOV $OO VWDII LV HTXLSSHG ZLWK &RPSXWHU $LGHG 'HVLJQ
VRIWZDUHDQGDUHIXOO\NQRZOHGJHDEOHLQLWVXVHDQGFDSDELOLWLHV
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Excellent communication is fundamental to the success of any project. As the
organizational hub of the project, the Project Manager is responsible for maintaining
communication between consultants and the design team ensuring the smooth flow of
information and the adherence to project schedule milestones. The duties of the Project
Manager will also include keeping the client apprised of the current project status on a
regular basis in addition to meetings at the specific project milestones. Our principals
are also involved on each and every project as design visionary and principal in charge
and are kept apprised of project status on a daily basis. This system of strong Project
Managers and daily communication with the principals directing the design effort
ensures the overall success of the project.
QUALITY CONTROL
Quality Control is maintained by a two-phase process on each project. The first phase
consists of a systematic review process during design documentation whereby the
Project Manager sets up a detailed schedule of the work to be performed and
continuously monitors progress on the project. The project manager reports to the
principals for periodic reviews of the design and design documentation including
drawings and specifications.
The second phase of Quality Control is to have the principal in charge provide a final
design quality control check of the plans and specifications for aesthetics, accuracy,
constructability and longevity as well as coordination of plans and details of consultants
on the project. This second review further ensures company quality control standards
are being maintained and client satisfaction is achieved.
KEN HAYES- President
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Architecture, 1982, Magna cum laude
California Polytechnic, San Luis Obispo, CA
California State College International Program, Florence, Italy, 1981-1982
REGISTRATION
Architect, State of California, initial date 1985, registration number C15562
QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Hayes has over thirty years experience with a broad range of project types. He has
provided the full range of programming, master planning, architecture and space planning
services for high tech, corporate, commercial, developer and residential clients in the Bay
Area. His experience includes new construction, seismic rehabilitation/reuse, building
remodeling and interior architecture.
Mr. Hayes has particularly creative skills in developing strong architectural concepts and
solving complex projects, as demonstrated by the award winning work.
Mr. Hayes’ firm, Hayes Group Architects, is a community-minded architecture, interiors
and urban design firm, with offices in Redwood City, that has had a strong presence on
the peninsula for the past 16 years. The firm has successfully created and implemented
many diverse project types in the Bay Area and is recognized for its expertise in projects
in Palo Alto and surrounding communities.
COMMUNITY SERVICE AND AWARDS
San Francisco AIA, Merit Award, 1986*
DuPont Antron Design Awards, 1987*
Santa Clara Valley AIA, Citation Award, 1988*
San Mateo AIA, Citation Award, 2003
Santa Clara Valley AIA, Visions of the Valley Design Awards, Merit Award
2004 Santa Clara Valley AIA, Design Awards, Merit Award 2006
&LW\RI3DOR$OWR$UFKLWHFWXUDO5HYLHZ%RDUG$ZDUGVRI5HFRJQLWLRQIRU
2XWVWDQGLQJ'HVLJQDQG
6DQWD&ODUD9DOOH\$,$&LWDWLRQ$ZDUG
DZDUGVZRQZKLOHDVVRFLDWHGZLWKRWKHUILUPV
American Institute of Architects, Member
International Code Council, Member
Rotary Club Woodside/Portola Valley, Community Service Director, 1998-2004
Rotary Club Woodside/Portola Valley, Taste of Woodside chair, 2004-2007, 2010 - 2014
Rotary Club Woodside Portola Valley Foundation, President
Rebuilding Together, Treasurer
Stanford University, Lecturer/Teacher - Spring 2012, 2013, 2014
JASON HOLLEB- Principal | AIA
EDUCATION
Bachelor of Architecture, 1995
University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
REGISTRATION
Architect, State of California, initial date 2002, registration number C29006
QUALIFICATIONS
Mr. Holleb joined Hayes Group in 2000 as a project designer. He was promoted to
Principal in 2014.
Mr. Holleb has over 18 years of experience in the design and construction industry. His
responsibilities have included project design, and project management of
multidisciplinary teams for a variety of project types and sizes including building shells
and interior design.
He demonstrates creative skills in developing strong architectural concepts, solving
complex problems and supporting a team approach to his projects.
RECENT EXPERIENCE
Apple Inc, Shell upgrades and tenant improvements, Cupertino, CA:
Interior office space and building shell work for various Apple Inc. groups over the past 14
years. Projects have included Hardware Engineering Groups and Retail design groups.
+250,000 SF.
278 University Ave, Palo Alto, CA:
Downtown Palo Alto four story class A office and retail building with a full basement.
Includes contemporary stone and steel window frame systems.
24,000 SF.
Town & Country Village, Shopping Center renovation, Palo Alto, CA:
Site and building renovations consisting of office improvements, retail renovations, and
the design of Trader Joe’s grocery store. 180,000sf.
Downtown Palo Alto
Projects
Address Description Client
291 Alma
705 Alma Street
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Melchor Corporation
Melchor Corporation
IDEO
715 Alma Street
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
IDEO
IDEO
IDEO
801 Alma Street
901 Alma Street
917 Alma Street
999 Alma Street
1027 Alma Street
Alma Plaza Center
335 Bryant Street
New Building (unbuilt)
New Building (unbuilt)
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
New Buildings
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
IDEO
Storm Land Company
IDEO
McNellis Partners
Anthropologie
Cintz Properties
Cintz Properties
McNellis Partners
335 Braynt LLC
Essex Woodland Healthcare
Ventures
636 Waverley Street New Mixed-Use Building
With Parking Lift System
David Kleiman/D2
203 Forest Avenue Mixed-Use Building
(Addition to Existing)
David Kleiman/D2
540 Bryant Street
260 California
361 California Avenue
361 California Avenue
366 Cambridge Avenue
577 College Avenue
611 Cowper Street
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvement
New Building
New Building (unbuilt)
New Building
Building Shell Renovation
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
New Building (Design)
Thoits Bros., Inc.
Corporate Design Strategies
Presidio Development
Premier Properties
Ehikian & Company
Premier Properties
INNO Design
INNO Design
R&M Properties
Edgewood Plaza
Edgewood Plaza
1795 El Camino Real
1805 El Camino Real
2000 El Camino Real
2310 El Camino Real
2390 El Camino Real
2755 El Camino Real
2805 El Camino Real
2875 El Camino Real
Building Shell Renovation
Building Shell Renovation
New Building
Building Shell Renovation
New Building
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
New Building (Design)
New Building
New Building
Sandhill Properties
City of Palo Alto Redevel.
Dr. James Newman
Dr. Tom Tayeri
Starbucks
Panda Express
Intrinsic Ventures
Pollack Financial Group
Ehikian & Company
Ehikian & COmpany
4073 El Camino Real
4131 El Camino Real
400 Emerson Street
544 Emerson Street
698 Emerson Street
735 Emerson Street
745 Emerson Street
100 Forest
101 Forest
420 Florence
150 Hamilton Avenue
167 Hamilton Avenue
248 Hamilton Avenue
285 Hamilton Avenue
459 Hamilton Avenue
505 Hamilton Avenue
New Building
New Building
Interior improvements
Building Shell Renovation
New Restaurant
Interior Improvements
Interior Improvements
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
New Building
Interior Improvements
Interior Improvements
Interior Improvement
New Building (unbuilt)
Building Shell Renovation
New Building (Design)
Building Shell Renovation
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Interior Improvements
Eton Capital, LLC
Fred Barez
Avidbank
David Krivich
Melt
Premier Properties
Strategic Development Group
Strategic development Group
IDEO
IDEO
US Trust
Palantir Technologies
Philz Coffee
Premier Properties
Jim Bibbler
Roxy Rapp & Company
Sal Giovannotto
Thoits Bros. Inc.
Sal Giovannotto
King Asset Management
Private Bank of Peninsula
524 Hamilton Avenue
537 Hamilton Avenue
120 Hawthorne
222 High Street
258 High Street
411 High Street
700 High Street
800 High Street
831 High Street
151 Lytton Avenue
181 Lytton Avenue
255 Lytton Avenue
305 Lytton Avenue
590 Lytton Avenue
636 Ramona Street
New Building
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvement
Interior Improvements
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Interior Improvements
New Building (unbuilt)
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Interior Improvements
R&M Properties
Lund Morgan Johnson
Lunar Design
R&M Properties
Social Capital Partnership
POST
Insignia Environmental
Storm Land Company
1185 Design
IDEO
Roxy Rapp & Company
IDEO
21st Century VC
21st Century VC
Ventana Property Services
Ventana Property Services
Premier Properties
HS&S
Rich Kelly
Lowenstein Sandler LLP
Chuck Edelstein, Inc.
Town & Country Center Building Shell Renovations
Interior Improvements
Ellis Partners
Ellis Partners
124 University Avenue
135 University Avenue
151 University Avenue
168 University Avenue
Building Shell Renovations
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovations
Interior Improvements
New Building
Premier Properties
Stanford Properties
Sal Giovannotto
Palantir Technologies
Tuha Huynh
169 University Avenue
171 University Avenue
Interior Improvements
New Building
Sevin Rosen Funds
Hoffacker Family
180 University Avenue
251 University Avenue
Building Shell Renovation
Interior Improvements
Interior Improvements
McNellis Partners
Sevin Rosen Funds
Fidelty
255 University Avenue
270 University Avenue
Building Shell Renovation
New Building
Interior Improvements
Premier Properties
Jim Patrick
First Virtual Group
278 University Avenue
317 University Avenue
323 University Avenue
335 University Avenue
New Building
New Building
Interior Improvements
Historic Renovation
Interior Improvements
Building Shell Renovation
New Restaurant
278 University Investors, LLC
Barry Real Estate
Scout Capital
Barry Real Estate
Scout Capital
Sal Giovannotto
La Strada
339 University Avenue
340 University Avenue
451 University Avenue
456 University Avenue
Building Shell Renovation
New Restaurant
Building Shell Renovation
Building Shell Renovation
Historic Renovation
Sal Giovannotto
Joya
Premier Properties
Premier Properties
Keenan Land Company
499 University Avenue
575 University Avenue
New Building
Interior Improvements
Roxy Rapp Company
Kaspick & Company
CLIENT LIST
Accor Business & Leisure, NA
Apple, Inc.
Anthropologie
Avid Bank
Barry Real Estate
David Kleiman/D2
Ellis Partners
Essex Woodland Healthcare Ventures
Ehikian & Company
Federal Realty
First Virtual
General Catalyst
Hotel Sofitel
Heffernan Insurance
Iconiq Capital
IDEO Product Development
Inno Design
Insignia Environmental
JMS Development Partners
Joya Restaurant
Kaspick & Company
Keenan Land Company
King Asset Management
La Strada Ristorante
Legacy Ventures
Lowenstein Sandler
Melchor Corporation
McNellis Partners
MongoDB
OPES
PacTech
Palantir Technologies
Piacere Restaurant
Pollock Financial Group
Premier Properties
Roxy Rapp Company
R & M Properties
Samsung
Sand Hill Properties
Scout Capital
Seven Rosen Funds
Sierra Ventures
Starbucks Coffee Company
Storm Land Company
Town & Country Investors
TA Associates
Thoits Brothers
Trace Middlefield LLC
The Social Capital + Partnership
Urban Outfitters
US Trust
Ventana Property Services
Vittoria Management
Zuckerberg Media
1185 Design
100 Forest Avenue | Palo Alto
101 Forest | Palo Alto
171 University Avenue | Palo Alto, CA
270 University Avenue | Palo Alto
278 University Avenue | Palo Alto
317 University | Palo Alto
335 Bryant | Palo Alto
611 Cowper | Palo Alto
1795 El Camino Real | Palo Alto
1805 El Camino Real | Palo Alto
2995 Middlefield Road | Palo Alto
64 Willow Road | Menlo Park
COMPANY INTRODUCTION
SBC is a commercial General Contractor founded in 1978 and has been under current management
since 1993. We have experience in every type of commercial building structure. We are currently
structured and sized to manage a steady volume between $150-300 million annually. Our guiding
philosophy is:
Integrity is the foundation of our business. Our clients’ interests are our own and our word is our
bond.
We strive to be leaders in our field through the use of innovative products, programs and services
in an effort to deliver the highest level of performance in every aspect of a project.
We are in business to grow, to earn a reasonable profit, to ensure the continuity of the
organization and to provide opportunities for our employees. Therefore, it is essential to attract
and retain the most talented people.
Bottom Line: a “Reputation Built on Trust”
SBC has been providing construction services for new shell buildings, tenant improvements, structural
renovations and rehabilitation projects since our inception. Our structures experience ranges from small
retail pad buildings and office buildings; to neighborhood/community/big box retail centers; to industrial/
R&D facilities; to mid-rise office towers. Projects range from 5,000 SF to 500,000 SF at values ranging
from $100,000 to $75 million.
Our experience includes office buildings, R&D/technology facilities, medical office buildings, shopping
centers, restaurant/hospitality/fitness, multifamily residential/mixed use, parking structures, auto
dealerships, churches / worship facilities, schools, and non-profits. Our interior improvement portfolio
since 1978 ranges from very simple multi-tenant industrial interiors to very complex and high end office,
technology, medical and biomechanical projects including collaborative work environments, media
centers, customer/employee briefing centers, amenity space and dining facilities, up to Class 1 clean
rooms, data centers and engineering labs, OSHPD, SCIF.
We are an excellent design-assist team resource, offering feasibility, budgeting/cost analysis, value
engineering, means and methods and scheduling utilizing an extensive unit cost data base, extensive
sub-contractor relationships, and years of experience in design/build/assist projects of all types and sizes.
South Bay Construction is an independent/open shop contractor ranked as one of the top Bay Area
commercial contractors over the last 35 years. We believe a significant competitive edge in SBC’s favor
is that we have the ability to work in an “open shop” environment with both non-union and union
subcontractors, achieving the most aggressive pricing in the marketplace while matching the
qualifications and performance standards required for each scope category. There are very few General
Contractors in the area that match our unique qualifications of experience, project size capability and
competitive pricing advantage.
A primary strength of SBC is that one or more of our three principals (with a combined total of 75+ years
of experience) lead every project through the proposal/bidding/budgeting and pre-construction process.
We then blend in the Project Team for construction during the pre-con phase which will consist of one of
a Project Manager, a Project Engineer and a Field Superintendent. We are competitive regardless of
project size as well due to our efficient office staff and overhead management approach. We understand
the importance of accurate budgeting, pre-construction value engineering and the meaning of “on time
and on budget”. With over thirty five years of experience and 95% of our volume generated in the Bay
Area, we enjoy excellent working relationships with all of the local city municipalities.
We look forward to working together to achieve your vision, and to building a solid, enduring relationship.
PRE-CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
STARTING THINGS OFF ON THE RIGHT FOOT
South Bay Construction provides a full range of pre-construction services. We believe that being involved in a
project–right from the start–is the best way to get a job done on time and on budget.
Communication
South Bay Construction is here for the Client, Architect and the entire design team. We want to hear everything
about your project so we can help make informed decision for the betterment of the project. We want to be part
of a team that communicates the needs of the project along with your concerns. We want to be at the side bar
meetings with the end users and that large meeting with the full design team, consultants and subcontractors.
The more South Bay Construction knows about your project the better we can serve our clients.
Estimating
South Bay Construction will provide estimates on your conceptual plans, schematics, and design development
documents. We’ve developed a time-proven estimating system that conforms to the Construction Specifications
Institute (CSI). It accurately identifies every line item–so we can compare our budget with the final estimate. We
always keep the design team and clients fully aware of all costs at each phase of development.
Value Analysis
South Bay Construction, along with the design team, will explore every opportunity to reduce costs. But it’s just
as important not to sacrifice the quality of the work. That’s why we analyze all the variables and make
suggestions based on quality, performance and maintenance. South Bay Construction maintains a library of
historical cost data, current pricing, performance data, maintenance data and state-of-the-art products. We also
work with several subcontractors that will provide us with budget pricing for those budgets that require greater
understanding. All of which helps the client/architect to make informed decisions and enables the team to
control costs and timing.
Scheduling
South Bay Construction will develop and maintain a detailed schedule using Microsoft Project. This schedule
identifies and links all of the stages, milestones and critical path of the project. Our schedule will start with the
date of award to the first design meeting, through the design, permitting and construction, down to the building
final and occupancy.
Procurement
South Bay Construction will advise the client/architect of lead times for all materials and equipment. This
enables the architect to develop documents and to take advantage of alternative pricing. It also lets everyone
see if scheduling goals are attainable. South Bay Construction prepares schedules to reflect all early order
items, as well as delivery dates, before and throughout the construction process.
Constructability
South Bay Construction will also provide input on the constructability on all aspects of the construction. We
would to be part of that detail that no one can figure out. We want to be able to pull together our resources from
the construction community to provide that detail that everyone can construct and will do what it is supposed to
do.
LEED SERVICES
Leading the way to LEED certification and future proofing your project.
South Bay Construction will help guide and manage the LEED Certification process to a successful
project completion. We will integrate the LEED requirements into the preconstruction phase of the project
to assure that the project meets the required points to obtain the agreed upon certification level.
As USGBC members, we will achieve success through the following:
LEED specific construction/A&E team meetings (Eco-Charrette)
LEED task management based on the required points needed
Facilitate LEED participation of the A&E team and subcontractor team
Research of product and material suggest to ensure it will meet LEED requirements
LEED cost break down associated by each point
Management of documentation submittals
Organization of final documentation before USGBC submittal
LEED PROJECTS
Apple DA12 | Cupertino, CA
$10 million; 60,000 s.f. office TI
LEED Silver
South Bay Corporate Office | Campbell, CA
$1.5 million; 11,000 s.f. office TI
LEED Gold
YouTube | San Bruno, CA
$2 million; 175,000 office TI
LEED Silver
Bordeaux Research Center | Sunnyvale, CA
$15.4 million, 115,000 s.f. new shell buildings
Constructed as LEED Certified
278 University Avenue | Palo Alto, CA
$ 6 million; 24,000 s.f. new 4-story commercial
building with basement.
LEED Silver (anticipating certification)
2995 Middlefield | Palo Alto, CA
$2.2 million; 7,000 s.f. new shell building
LEED Silver
Essex | Palo Alto, CA
$2.3 million; 14,500 s.f. exterior retrofit of
existing building including TI
LEED Certified
Valley Christian Arts Conservatory | San
Jose, CA
$16.1 million; 46,000 s.f. new construction
Constructed as LEED Certified
Cassidy Turley Santana Row | San Jose, CA
$1.2 million; 16,234 s.f. tenant improvements
LEED Silver (anticipating certification)
Middlefield Station | Mountain View, CA
$11.7 million; 99,800 s.f. new steel frame office
building with tenant improvements.
LEED Platinum (anticipating certification)
GSA – 1450 Coleman | San Jose, CA
$7 million; 35,000 s.f. shell modifications and
tenant improvements.
LEED Certified (anticipating certification)
ZWED | San Jose, CA
$24.6 million; 85,000 s.f. ground up anaerobic
digestion facility with on and off site
improvements. Located near Zanker landfill.
LEED Silver, CalGreen (anticipating certification)
QUALITY CONTROL
GETTING IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME
Sub-Trade Process
At South Bay Construction, our goal is to maximize your investment. To do this, it is essential to hire
responsible subcontractors and to seek competitive pricing.
We solicit and pre-qualify bidders based on experience, reputation and financial security. The
pre-qualifying and selection process includes the design team and the client.
We review the documents and instruct the bidders as to their scope of work. We have found that
this review often identifies potential construction problem areas.
We review all subcontract proposals for scope and accuracy. We also encourage the architect
and client to participate in this process.
We review insurance requirements to protect the client’s best interests.
Construction Services/Quality Control
For over 30 years, South Bay Construction has maintained a rigorous quality assurance program. We
regularly educate and train all of our employees in new techniques and improved construction methods.
We make daily inspections of the material furnished and work performed to assure they are in
accordance with specifications and contract documents. At South Bay Construction, we believe in doing it
right the first time.
Schedule Control
At South Bay Construction we are committed to meeting scheduled completion dates.
We use a variety of methods, on site, to achieve our goals:
We manage the construction effort.
We manage subcontractors and their schedules.
We prepare updated weekly schedules.
We conduct pre-construction conferences.
We hold subcontractor performance and planning briefings.
We coordinate and confirm long lead deliveries.
We coordinate and minimize interface problems.
PROJECT ADMINISTRATION
GETTING DOWN TO THE DETAILS
South Bay Construction’s onsite personnel are responsible for the following:
Coordinating of project documentation.
Reviewing subcontractor schedules for compliance, including updates
and recovery.
Action Items
Bid, permit and addendum plan distribution
Process LOI’s/subcontracts
Process owner contract
Process RFI’s
Process submittals
Maintain project meeting notes
Coordinate all project docs with superintendent
Process project closeout documentation
Process all sub cont. exhibits & scope letters
Process owner change order
Process sub change order
Sub-Action Items
Sub proposal qualification
Obtain sub insurances
Track project costs/owner change costs
Track project impacts incurred
Progress Billings
South Bay Construction evaluates subcontractor requests for payment, in terms of validity of work
completed, and then makes recommendations to the client for the proper amount. We typically use the
standard AIA forms, but can adapt to most formats,
as requested.
South Bay Construction pays our subcontractors in a timely manner and has implemented a
subcontractor lien release procedure which protects the client’s interest
SAFETY
DEDICATION ON EVERY PROJECT
It is the policy of South Bay Construction to maintain a safe and healthy working environment for its
employees, subcontract employees, the employees of its customers, members of the general public and
the environment. We also take every reasonable precaution to prevent property damage. We believe that
safety in all operations and in all activities is of primary importance.
At South Bay Construction, we create a positive safety culture.
Safety is everyone’s responsibility.
Maintaining a safe place to work is a continuous effort.
We work to ensure that all applicable local, state, and federal regulations are reviewed and
complied with.
Employees are trained in the safe performance of their jobs and encouraged
to be aware of health and safety issues.
The primary channels for delivery of safety training and equipment are the superintendents,
managers and members of the Safety Department.
The objective of South Bay Construction’s Injury and Illness Prevention Program is to minimize work-
related injuries and illnesses.
Our IIPP has been developed and maintained in compliance with the requirements of the California Injury
and Illness Prevention Program regulation as stated in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations,
General Industry Safety Orders (GISO), Section 3203.
The objectives of the South Bay Construction IIPP are achieved through:
Management involvement
Employee involvement
Training
Inspections
- Injury and illness investigation
- Program evaluation
OSHA LOG FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS
2010: zero accidents
2011: zero accidents
2012: zero accidents
ISNETWORLD
Member Contractor Since 2010
South Bay Construction is an active member of ISNetworld. We have centralized our compliance data
within ISNetworld and streamlined our reporting processes. Through ISNetworld, we are able to
complete the following functions:
Comply with regulatory and Owner Client requirements
Centralize all compliance information, contact information and marketing information
Create searchable company profile (types of work/industry classifications, office locations, etc)
Manage our company’s safety and procurement information available to Owner Clients
o Management System Questionnaire (MSQ) o Insurance o Contracts/Agreements o OSHA Forms
o EMR Letters o Safety Programs
o Supplier Diversity Certificates
Receive email reminders prior to expiration of insurance and other compliance information
Manage employee training, job history and performance evaluations
In addition, ISNetworld’s Review and Verification Services (RAVS) verifies and evaluates our health and
safety information to ensure record keeping and minimum OSHA/regulatory requirements are met.
You may contact ISN at (800) 976-1303 or visit their website at www.isnetworld.com.
PROJECT STAFFING
PUTTING THE RIGHT PEOPLE ON YOUR PROJECT
A strong project team is critical to the success of any construction job. So we don’t just recruit the best
people, we make sure they stay the best, with updated education and training. Your team will arrive ready
to overcome obstacles, prevent problems and find solutions. And, since we’re on your team, we make
sure important information is shared and everything is out in the open.
Project Executive
Executives oversee pre-construction, through construction and completion. They work closely with the
design team, the client and the architect to ensure everything is done just right. They also manage, along
with our staff, all the way through to project completion.
Project Manager
The project manager heads the entire construction effort. During pre-construction and construction, our
project managers are dedicated to satisfying the requirements of your job, by providing solid direction and
using proven control programs. They bring with them years of experience—and an understanding of what
it takes to get things done on time and on budget.
Project Engineer
The project engineer assists the project manager during pre-construction and construction phases. Our
project engineers coordinate between the sub-contractors, architect, superintendent and project manager.
Their daily responsibilities include submittal review, RFI’s, schedule control and project coordination.
Project Superintendent
Our project superintendents supervise the construction effort in the field, in conjunction with the project
manager and project engineer. They are involved from the pre-construction phase through the project
move-in. Our project superintendents have many years of hands-on experience, which helps them find
the most cost-effective solutions while maintaining an unsurpassed level of excellence.
Administrative Assistant
Administrative Assistants are responsible for office and clerical activities. Their involvement begins during
the bid process and continues through final close out / warranty binders.
LEADERSHIP THAT MAKES
A DIFFERENCE
RICHARD FURTADO
CEO & PARTNER
PERSONAL PROFILE
Richard has more than 30 years of commercial construction experience.
Richard attended California State University of Chico.
KEY RESPONSIBILITIES
As Chief Executive Officer, Richard is in charge of conducting and overseeing all project management,
scheduling/critical path management, conceptual estimating, value engineering, design build guidance, and
preconstruction services.
JB CAHOON
PARTNER
PERSONAL PROFILE
JB has more than 15 years of commercial construction experience.
JB obtained a Bachelors of Arts degree in 1995 from California State University Sacramento and Leadership Institute
in 2001.
KEY RESPONSIBILITIES
As Partner, JB is in charge of conducting and overseeing project management, scheduling/critical path management,
conceptual estimating, value engineering, design build guidance, preconstruction services, and new business
development.
CAMERON PEACH
PARTNER
PERSONAL PROFILE
Cameron has more than 15 years of commercial construction experience and 10 years of residential construction
experience.
Cameron obtained a Bachelor of Accountancy degree in 1996 from the University of San Diego and graduated from
the Leadership Institute in 2001.
KEY RESPONSIBILITIES
As Partner, Cameron is in charge of project management, scheduling/critical path management, conceptual
estimating, value engineering, design build guidance, LEED consulting, and preconstruction services. He is also in
charge of operations, office management, safety systems, project management systems, corporate structure, policy
and procedures.
WAYNE SMITH
GENERAL SUPERINTENDENT
PERSONAL PROFILE
Wayne has more than 40 years of commercial construction experience.
Wayne studied Construction Management at San Jose City College.
KEY RESPONSIBILITIES
As General Superintendent, Wayne oversees all superintendents and field operations in strict accordance with
contract documents, verification of safety compliance, quality control, and effectively deals with municipal authorities
in inspections and with compliance issues. Wayne implements and maintains cost effective construction standards,
review construction drawings and is a skillful communicator in vendor/client relations. He is EFIS certified.
PROJECT HIGHLIGHT
PROJECT NAME:278 University
LOCATION: 278 University Avenue
Palo Alto, CA
PROJECT TEAM: Cameron Peach, Project Executive
Charlie Griffin, Project Engineer
Kenny Palmer, Project Superintendent
CLIENT:Ventana Property Group | Joseph Martignetti (650) 847-2000
Rapp Development | Roxy Rapp (650) 324-1529
ARCHITECT:Hayes Group | Ken Hayes (650) 365-0600
DURATION:October 2011 – May 2013
New four-story commercial (retail/office) LEED Silver and Cal Green Tier 2 steel frame building in downtown with
subterranean basement constructed on a zero lot line.
PROJECT HIGHLIGHT
PROJECT NAME:2995 Middlefield
LOCATION: 2995 Middlefield Road
Palo Alto, CA
PROJECT TEAM: Larry Paterson, Project Manager
Michelle Crow, Project Engineer
Larry Smedley, Project Superintendent
CLIENT:Old Trace Middlefield | Erik Corrigan (650) 769-3551
ARCHITECT:Hayes Group | Ken Hayes (650) 365-0600
DURATION:October 2010 – June 2011
7,000sf two-story retail/office steel, glass, and architectural metal paneled Class D building with new
parking, transformer, trash enclosure, and landscaping. LEED Silver
PROJECT HIGHLIGHT
PROJECT NAME:Menlo Park Development
LOCATION: 4085 Campbell Avenue
Menlo Park, CA
PROJECT TEAM: Larry Paterson, Project Manager
Kristina Kleven, Project Engineer
Jere Potter, Project Superintendent
CLIENT:Campbell Menlo, LLC | Rob Dean (650) 4933
Cassidy Turley | Jason Schlutt (408) 719-9614
ARCHITECT:Kenneth Rodrigues & Partners | Ken Rodrigues (650) 965-0700
DURATION:April 2012 - July 2013
55,000sf two-story steel frame warm shell office building with core improvements and associated site
work including parking lot, trash enclosure, and landscaping.
PROJECT HIGHLIGHT
PROJECT NAME:Omnicell Shell / Garage
LOCATION: 590 E. Middlefield Road
Mountain View, CA
PROJECT TEAM: Derick Hofstetter, Project Manager
Monica Valdez, Project Engineer
Bob Munro, Project Superintendent
CLIENT:Four Corners Properties | Dave Wilbur (650) 793-5000
ARCHITECT:ARC TEC | Dan Kirby (408)496-0676
DURATION:December 2011 – October 2012
New construction of a three-story 99,880sf warm shell building and on- story parking structure and associated site
work, including surface parking, drives, pedestrian ways, and landscaping. LEED Platinum
PROJECT HIGHLIGHT
PROJECT NAME:Stadium TechCenter
LOCATION: 5450 Great America Parkway
Santa Clara, CA
PROJECT TEAM: Larry Paterson, Project Manager
Kristina Kleven, Project Engineer
Bob Munro, Project Superintendent
CLIENT:Spear Street Capital | Craig Hine (415) 222-7432
NA Construction Management | Alex Ingram (650) 917-8618
ARCHITECT:Arc Tec | Dan Kirby (408) 496-0676
DURATION:March 3, 2014 – September 4, 2015 (anticipated completion)
Six-story speculative class A office building and associated parking structure and site improvements. Parking
structure includes 3 levels below grade parking with one level podium parking. Office building includes 6 story shell
with rest room cores, elevators and stair towers.
GROUND UP PROJECTS
OFFICE
Stadium Tech Center, Santa Clara: Six-story speculative class A office building and
associated parking structure and site improvements. Parking structure includes three
levels below grade parking with one level podium parking. Office building is a six-story
shell with restroom cores, elevators and stair towers.
N. Mathilda Buildings A & B, Sunnyvale: 121,872sf four-story building and 91,254sf three-
story building over an interconnected underground parking structure. Includes site work,
parking lot, and basketball court.
278 University, Palo Alto, CA: New four-story commercial building in downtown with
subterranean basement.
Los Gatos Medical Building, Los Gatos, CA: Demo +/- 5,500 SF wood framed office
building and associated site improvements to construct new 13,853sf type II medical
office building and associated site improvements.
2875 El Camino, Palo Alto, CA: 3,500sf single-story wood framed new office building.
Menlo Park Development, Menlo Park, CA: 55,000sf two-story steel frame building with
core improvements.
Middlefield Station (Omnicell), Mountain View, CA: 99,880sf three-story warm shell office
building with one-level parking deck and site work.
2995 Middlefield, Palo Alto, CA: 7,000sf two-story steel, glass, and architectural metal
panels Class “D” building. LEED Silver.
Bordeaux Center, Sunnyvale, CA: 120,000sf two three-story steel frame buildings. LEED
Shell Construction.
Neo Center, Union City, CA: 27,000sf ground up, three-story steel structure with parking
garage below.
Quadrus #8, Menlo Park, CA: 10,000sf venture capital office building with parking below.
Seven month duration.
Lincoln Office Center, Oakland, CA: 360,000sf four three-story steel frame/GFRC office
buildings.
Kifer Commerce Park, Sunnyvale, CA: 175,000sf two story office condos over seven
buildings on eleven acres.
GROUND UP PROJECTS
Hasbro, Napa, CA: 400,000sf concrete tilt-up structure with 40,000sf of office on a 20-
acre site.
Century Plaza, San Jose, CA: 99,000sf six-story steel frame/GFRC office building with a
five-story parking garage.
Lincoln Airport Business Park, Oakland, CA: Four concrete tilt-up structures on a 15 acre
site over 200,000sf office/industrial buildings.
Mt. Eden Business Park, Hayward, CA: Seven one and two-story concrete tilt-up
structures on an eighteen acre site over 273,000sf office/industrial.
Zip Zoom Fly, Fremont, CA: 260,000sf two-story concrete tilt.
Oyster Point, SSF, CA: 200,000sf two two-story concrete tilt office buildings. Built for
Alexandria Real Estate Equities.
Oyster Point, S. San Francisco, CA: 105,000sf two two-story tilt up structures on point
bearing piles.
Inhale, San Carlos, CA: 185,000sf two-story steel frame office building over two story
parking garage.
Technology Station, Santa Clara, CA: 110,200sf four two-story office buildings, retail
center and parking garage.
Mission College, Santa Clara, CA: 306,000sf two six-story steel frame/GFRC office
building with a five-story parking garage.
County Of Alameda Family Support, Oakland, CA: 40,000sf four story office building
retrofit and TI conversion for law offices. Seven month duration.
901 Gateway, S. San Francisco, CA: 110,000sf three story steel frame/EFIS office
building. Built for Hines.
Clyde Business Park, Mountain View, CA: 45,195sf six single-story office condos.
Redwood City Tech, Redwood City, CA: 105,000sf five-story steel frame office building
over underground parking garage.
Veterans Plaza, Redwood City, CA: 60,000sf four story steel frame building with four
story parking structure.
GROUND UP PROJECTS
801 Gateway Parking Structure, SSF, CA: 220,200sf four story parking structure. Built for
Hines.
NIKU, Redwood City, CA: 60,000sf three story steel frame office building with a three
story parking garage.
Ringwood Court, San Jose, CA: Three single-story concrete tilt-up structures over
72,000sf divided into forty-seven condo units for office/industrial use.
Clyde Business Park, Mountain View, CA: 45,195sf six single-story office condos.
901 Gateway, SSF, CA: 110,000sf three story steel frame/EFIS office building. Built for
Hines.
Willow Glen Gateway, San Jose, CA: 50,000sf two-story steel frame office building.
Tully Office Park, San Jose, CA: 20,000sf one-story office/medical condos.
Kiefer Rd Park, Sunnyvale, CA: Seven two-story concrete tilt-up structures over 176,000sf
divided into sixty-three condo units for office/industrial use.
RETAIL
Main Street Cupertino, Cupertino, CA: Complete construction of ten retail building shells
totaling 58,000sf including grade beam/spread footing foundations, slabs-on-grade,
structural steel beams/columns with moment frames, metal decking, ,
membrane/slate/shingle roofing, exterior metal stud walls, MEP’s, exterior decorative
stone walls, exterior decorative wood finishes, fabric/glass/metal panel exterior canopies,
glass/aluminum storefronts, bi-fold and sliding exterior glass doors, and exterior
decorative wall tile.
Hamilton Mixed Use, San Jose, CA: Two new 4-story mixed use buildings over
underground parking. Mixed-use includes retail space and town homes.
Village Oaks Retail, San Jose, CA: New construction development retail center including
site work totaling 105,000sf.
Homestead Square, Cupertino, CA: Four new retail shops, three new pad buildings, and
renovation of a Safeway building with interior TI.
Mowry Retail, Fremont, CA: 52,100sf new retail buildings include a Whole Foods market.
1st & Campbell Retail, Campbell, CA: 14,992sf new retail building construction and
retrofitting of existing retail space next door.
GROUND UP PROJECTS
700/800 @ First, San Jose, CA: 5,000sf buildings for retail and banking consisting of
ground up wood frame, steel columns and awnings, wall tile, plaster, IPE wood, and site
work.
CIC @ First, San Jose, CA: Ten acres site work with upgrades to utilities, site concrete,
lighting, and paving with accelerated schedule.
Target @ First, San Jose, CA: Fourteen acres site work with upgrades to utilities, site
concrete, lighting, and paving with accelerated schedule.
500/600 @ First, San Jose, CA: 8,000sf retail and banking shells consisting of ground up
structural steel, metal roof, wall plaster, and IPE wood.
Hamilton Plaza Retail, Campbell, CA: 8,000sf wood frame retail center with site work.
Mowry Retail, Fremont, CA: 8,000sf retail center including a Whole Foods market and
associated site work.
Stevenson Retail, Fremont, CA: two concrete tilt-up retail buildings over 80,000sf.
LIFE SCIENCE
Kaiser Sarramonte Corporate Center, Daily City, CA: 381,000sf six story steel frame
office building over four stories of parking.
Micro Dental, Dublin, CA: 120,000sf four-story steel frame building.
Cell Genesys, S. San Francisco, CA: 168,000sf two-story steel frame/GFRC.
George Mark Children’s House (GMCH), San Leandro, CA: 15,400sf free standing
residential pediatric hospice and respite care facility for children and their families. First
facility like this built on the west coast.
Civic Park Medical Condos, Cupertino, CA: 21,000sf two-story office condos, retail, over
below grade parking.
GROUND UP PROJECTS
PARKING GARAGE
Stadium Tech Center, Santa Clara: Parking structure includes three levels below grade
parking with one level podium parking.
N. Mathilda Buildings A & B, Sunnyvale: 121,872sf four-story building and 91,254sf three-
story building over an interconnected underground parking structure. Includes site work,
parking lot, and basketball court.
Main Street Cupertino, Cupertino, CA: Complete construction of a 1416 space, 450,000
sf (approx.) post-tensioned concrete structure, 6 full levels above grade, 2 full basement
levels and 1 partial basement level. Including all MEP’s, structural steel elevator (2 each)
tower, exterior plaster systems, glass/aluminum storefronts systems, metal security
screens and overhead coiling doors.
Middlefield Station (Omnicell), Mountain View, CA: 99,880sf three-story warm shell office
building with one-level parking deck and site work.
Arques Parking Structure, San Jose, CA: 20,000sf new parking structure and site work.
Kaiser Saramonte Corporate Center, Daily City, CA: 381,000sf six story steel frame office
building over four stories of parking.
Redwood City Tech, Redwood City, CA: 105,000sf five story steel frame office building
over underground parking garage.
Technology Station, Santa Clara, CA: 110,200sf four two story office buildings, retail
center and parking garage.
Inhale, San Carlos, CA: 185,000sf two-story steel frame office building over two story
parking garage.
Veterans Plaza, Redwood City, CA: 60,000sf four story steel frame building with four
story parking structure.
Century Plaza, San Jose, CA: 99,000sf six story steel frame/GFRC office building with a
five-story parking garage.
801 Gateway Parking Structure, South San Francisco, CA: 220,200sf four story parking
structure. Built for Hines.
NIKU, Redwood City, CA: 60,000sf three story steel frame office building with a three
story parking garage.
GROUND UP PROJECTS
NIKU Parking Structure, Redwood City, CA: 80,000sf four story parking garage.
Century Plaza Parking Structure, San Jose, CA: 159,182sf five story parking garage.
Civic Park Medical Condos, Cupertino, CA: 21,000sf two story office condos, retail, over
below grade parking.
Quadrus #8, Menlo Park, CA: 10,000sf venture capital office building with parking below.
Seven month duration.
801 Gateway, S. San Francisco, CA: 200,200sf four story parking; 650 parking spaces.
Century Plaza, Pittsburg, CA: 160,000sf five story parking; 536 parking spaces.
660 Alabama, San Francisco, CA: 49,600sf ground floor conversation to parking structure topped
with flour floors of office space including a fourth floor mezzanine; 83 parking spaces.
Soma Storage, San Francisco, CA: 138,550sf basement self-storage, ground floor parking and
loading, topped by five stories of self-storage with a second story manager residents and a
seventh floor office space and seventh floor mezzanine mechanical room.
Mission College, Santa Clara, CA: 306,000sf two six story steel frame/GFRC office building with a
five-story parking garage.
MISCELLANEOUS
ZWED, San Jose, CA: 85,000sf anaerobic digestion facility with on and off-site
improvements. Located near Zanker landfill.
Casino M8trix, San Jose, CA: 88,100sf building with single-story card room (tilt-up) and
eight-story tower.
PROFESSIONAL REFERENCES
Clients
Hunter Properties Haverstock & Owens, LLP
Curtis Leigh Tom Haverstock and Jonathan Owens
10121 Miller Avenue, Suite 200 162 North Wolfe Road
Cupertino, CA 95014 Sunnyvale, CA
(408) 255-4100 (408) 530-9700
4 Corners Property Nimble Storage
Bruce Burkard and Dave Wilbur Awanish Mishra
Embarcadero Center, 37th Floor 211 River Oaks Parkway
San Francisco, CA 94111 San Jose, CA 95134
(415) 354-3283 (408) 432-9600
California Bavarian Corporation Boston Properties
Mark Mordell Pete Back
540 University Ave., #350 Four Embarcadero Center
Palo Alto, CA 94301 San Francisco, CA 94111
(650) 326-4133 (415) 772-0781
Netflix Hines
Amy Dee Charles Peters
1000 Winchester Circle 101 California Street, Ste. 1000
Los Gatos, CA 95032 San Francisco, CA 94111
(408) 450-3700 (415) 398-1442
Legacy Capital Group Radar Management, LLC
Brent Bunger Kevin Compton
459 Monterey Ave 737 Bryant Street
Los Gatos, CA 95030 Palo Alto, CA 94301
(408) 399-6330 (650) 566-3304
Veterinary Medical Specialists/Silver Creek Sportsplex / Rollin’ Ice
Veterinary Surgical Associates Terry Peckham
Dwight Gaudet 800 Embedded Way
1410 Monument Boulevard, Suite 100 San Jose, CA. 95138
Concord, CA 94520 (408) 781-6508
(925) 288-4836
South Bay Development Orchard Partners, LLC
Mark Regoli Mike Bigger
1690 Dell Avenue 2665 N. First Street
Campbell, CA 95008 San Jose, CA 95134
(408) 379-0400 (408) 992-0400
PROFESSIONAL REFERENCES
Architects/Designers/Engineers
Arc Tec, Inc.The Hayes Group
Jim Fulton Ken Hayes
99 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 840 2657 Spring Street
San Jose, CA 95113 Redwood City, CA 94063
(408) 496-0676 (650) 365-0600
Reel Grobman Ken Rodrigues Architect
Win Roney Ken Rodrigues
96 N. Second Street 445 North Whisman Road, Suite 200
San Jose, CA 95113 Mountain View, CA 94043
(408) 288-7833 (650) 965-0700
AP+I Design, Inc.Structural Engineers, Inc.
Jenny Morris Sam Koerper
200 Blossom Lane 4970 El Camino Real, Suite 100
Mountain View, CA 94041 Los Altos, CA 94022
(650) 254-1444 (650) 938-2200
James Crawford Architect Eaton Hall Architecture
Jim Crawford Jeffrey Eaton
4 North Second Street, Suite 580 1155 Meridian Avenue, Suite 208
San Jose, CA 95113 San Jose, CA 95125
(408) 993-2252 (408) 265-5255
Studio G
Kelly Simcox
90 Railway Ave
Campbell CA 95008
(408) 283-0100
DESCRIPTION OF QUALIFICATIONS
WATRY DESIGN, INC. is dedicated to making our clients look good. We take their problems and issues
ŽŶĂƐŽƵƌŽǁŶĂŶĚƚĞĂŵǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŵƚŽĮŶĚƚŚĞďĞƐƚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞƐŽůƵƟŽŶĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐŶĞĞĚƐ͘dŚŝƐĐůŝĞŶƚĐĞŶƚĞƌĞĚƉŚŝůŽƐŽƉŚLJ
ĂůŽŶŐǁŝƚŚĂŶƵŶŵĂƚĐŚĞĚƉĂƐƐŝŽŶĨŽƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĨŽƌŵtĂƚƌLJĞƐŝŐŶ͕/ŶĐ͛ƐŐƵŝĚŝŶŐǀŝƐŝŽŶ͘
hƐŝŶŐĂƵŶŝƋƵĞƉƌŽĐĞƐƐĚĞǀĞůŽƉĞĚŽǀĞƌƚŚĞĮƌŵ͛ƐƚŚŝƌƚLJͲŶŝŶĞLJĞĂƌĚĞƐŝŐŶůĞŐĂĐLJ͕ŽƵƌĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƐ͕ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĂůĞŶŐŝŶĞĞƌƐĂŶĚ
ƉůĂŶŶĞƌƐĂƌĞĞŵƉŽǁĞƌĞĚƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞƚŚĞŝƌƉƌŽĨĞƐƐŝŽŶĂůĞdžƉĞƌƟƐĞŝŶĞǀĞƌLJĂƐƉĞĐƚŽĨƚŚĞĚĞƐŝŐŶ͘dŚŝƐŐŝǀĞƐŽƵƌĐůŝĞŶƚƐƚŚĞ
ĐŽůůĞĐƟǀĞŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞĂŶĚĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞŽĨŽƵƌĞŶƟƌĞƐƚĂī͘dŚŝƐĐŽůůĂďŽƌĂƟǀĞŵĞƚŚŽĚŽůŽŐLJĞŶĂďůĞƐƵƐƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞŽƵƌĐůŝĞŶƚƐ
ǁŝƚŚǁĞůůŝŶƚĞŐƌĂƚĞĚƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐĨŽƌƐĂƟƐĮĞĚĐůŝĞŶƚƐ͘
/ŶĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƚĞĚŝŶϮϬϬϬ͕tĂƚƌLJĞƐŝŐŶ͕/ŶĐ͘ŝƐƚŚĞƐƵĐĐĞƐƐŽƌŽƌŐĂŶŝnjĂƟŽŶŽĨtĂƚƌLJĞƐŝŐŶ'ƌŽƵƉǁŚŝĐŚǁĂƐĨŽƵŶĚĞĚŝŶϭϵϳϱ͘
dŚĞŶĞǁĐŽƌƉŽƌĂƟŽŶǁĂƐĐƌĞĂƚĞĚǁŚĞŶĂŐƌŽƵƉŽĨůŽŶŐƟŵĞĞŵƉůŽLJĞĞƐƉƵƌĐŚĂƐĞĚƚŚĞŶĞƚĂƐƐĞƚƐŽĨƚŚĞŽƌŝŐŝŶĂůĮƌŵĂŶĚ
ŵŽƐƚŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚůLJƌĞƚĂŝŶĞĚĂůůƚŚĞƐƚĂī͘>ĞĚďLJĂƚĞĂŵŽĨWƌŝŶĐŝƉĂůƐ͕tĂƚƌLJĞƐŝŐŶŚĂƐĚĞůŝǀĞƌĞĚŽǀĞƌϴϬϬƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƉƌŽũĞĐƚƐŽŶ
ƟŵĞĂŶĚŽŶďƵĚŐĞƚƚŚƌŽƵŐŚŽƵƚƚŚĞtĞƐƚĞƌŶhŶŝƚĞĚ^ƚĂƚĞƐ͘
tĞŽīĞƌĚĞƐŝŐŶƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐĂƚ
ALL STAGES OF THE PARKING
LIFECYCLE
tŚĞƚŚĞƌLJŽƵŶĞĞĚƚŽĂƐƐĞƐƐLJŽƵƌĐƵƌƌĞŶƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĐŽŶĚŝƟŽŶƐŽƌĞǀĂůƵĂƚĞ
ƚŚĞƉŽƚĞŶƟĂůŽĨŽŶĞƐŝƚĞŽƌĂǁŚŽůĞĐĂŵƉƵƐ͕ǁĞŽīĞƌƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐƚŽŵĞĞƚ
LJŽƵƌŶĞĞĚƐ͘KƵƌƚĞĂŵĚĞƐŝŐŶƐƐƵƌĨĂĐĞ͕ƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĚ͕ƵŶĚĞƌŐƌŽƵŶĚĂŶĚ
ŵŝdžĞĚͲƵƐĞƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐƉĂƌŬŝŶŐŐĂƌĂŐĞĐŽŵƉŽŶĞŶƚƐŽĨůĂƌŐĞƌ
ďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƐĂŶĚĚĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚƐ͘&ƌŽŵƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂůĞƐŝŐŶͲŝĚͲƵŝůĚƚŽƚŚĞ
ĞƐŝŐŶͲƵŝůĚƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͕ǁĞĚĞůŝǀĞƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐƵƐŝŶŐƚŚĞĂƉƉƌŽƉƌŝĂƚĞ
ĚĞůŝǀĞƌLJŵĞƚŚŽĚĨŽƌLJŽƵƌƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘
tĂƚƌLJĞƐŝŐŶůĞǀĞƌĂŐĞƐƚŚĞďĞƐƚŝŶŶŽǀĂƟŽŶĂŶĚƚĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJƚŚĞŝŶĚƵƐƚƌLJ
ŚĂƐƚŽŽīĞƌ͘&ƌŽŵŝŶƚĞŐƌĂƟŶŐWŚŽƚŽǀŽůƚĂŝĐƐƚŽƵƟůŝnjŝŶŐĂƵƚŽŵĂƚĞĚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ͕
ŽƵƌƚĞĂŵĚĞǀĞůŽƉƐŚŝŐŚůLJĞĸĐŝĞŶƚŶĞǁ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐƌĞƉůĂĐĞŵĞŶƚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ
ƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ͘
ĞůŽǁŝƐĂƉĂƌƟĂůůŝƐƚŽĨŽƵƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ͘/ĨLJŽƵĚŽŶ͛ƚƐĞĞǁŚĂƚLJŽƵĂƌĞůŽŽŬŝŶŐĨŽƌ͕ƉůĞĂƐĞĐĂůůƵƐďĞĐĂƵƐĞŝĨŝƚŝƐƌĞůĂƚĞĚ
ƚŽƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ͕ǁĞĐĂŶŚĞůƉ͘
WĂƌŬŝŶŐDĂƐƚĞƌWůĂŶŶŝŶŐΘWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ŝƚĞWůĂŶŶŝŶŐ
WĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƵƉƉůLJΘĞŵĂŶĚ^ƚƵĚŝĞƐ
^ŚĂƌĞĚWĂƌŬŝŶŐΘWĂƌŬŝŶŐWŚĂƐŝŶŐŶĂůLJƐŝƐ
WĂƌŬŝŶŐdĞĐŚŶŽůŽŐLJƐƐĞƐƐŵĞŶƚƐΘ^ƉĞĐŝĮĐĂƟŽŶ
ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ
WĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚŝĞƐ
^ƵƐƚĂŝŶĂďůĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞƐƚWƌĂĐƟĐĞƐ
800+
completed
parking
projects
WĂƌŬŝŶŐ&ĂĐŝůŝƚLJWůĂŶŶŝŶŐΘĞƐŝŐŶ
WŚŽƚŽǀŽůƚĂŝĐΘ> ĞƌƟĮĐĂƟŽŶŶĂůLJƐŝƐ
ƵƚŽŵĂƚĞĚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ŽůƵƟŽŶƐ
WĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞKƉŝŶŝŽŶƐŽĨŽƐƚΘWƌŽ&ŽƌŵĂ
ĞǀĞůŽƉŵĞŶƚ
WĂƌŬŝŶŐ&ĂĐŝůŝƚLJDĂŝŶƚĞŶĂŶĐĞΘhƉŐƌĂĚĞƐ
ZĞƐƚŽƌĂƟŽŶΘ^ĞŝƐŵŝĐhƉŐƌĂĚĞƐ
Michelle Wendler, AIA
Principal
ĚƵĐĂƟŽŶ
Bachelor of Architecture
California Polytechnic State University,
San Luis Obispo, CA
ZĞŐŝƐƚƌĂƟŽŶƐ
Architect (#25066), CA (5/24/94)
ĸůŝĂƟŽŶƐ
ŵĞƌŝĐĂŶ/ŶƐƟƚƵƚĞŽĨƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƐ
/ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůWĂƌŬŝŶŐ/ŶƐƟƚƵƚĞĚǀŝƐŽƌLJŽƵŶĐŝů͗
^ƵƐƚĂŝŶĂďŝůŝƚLJΘ ĚƵĐĂƟŽŶŽŵŵŝƩĞĞƐ
ĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂWƵďůŝĐWĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƐŽĐŝĂƟŽŶ
ĞƐŝŐŶƵŝůĚ/ŶƐƟƚƵƚĞŽĨŵĞƌŝĐĂ
tŽŵĂŶŝŶWĂƌŬŝŶŐŽĂƌĚŽĨŝƌĞĐƚŽƌƐ
WƵďůŝĐĂƟŽŶƐΘ^ƉĞĞĐŚĞƐ
Sustainable Parking Design and Management: A
WƌĂĐƟƟŽŶĞƌΖƐ,ĂŶĚŬ
^ƵƐƚĂŝŶĂďŝůŝƚLJŝŶĞƐŝŐŶΘŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶŽĨ
WĂƌŬŝŶŐ&ĂĐŝůŝƟĞƐ
Mixed Use Stacking the Deck, /ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůWĂƌŬ-
ŝŶŐŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ
dŚĞ/ŶƐĂŶĚKƵƚƐŽĨWĂƌŬŝŶŐĞƐŝŐŶ͕WĂĐŝĮĐƵŝůĚ-
ŝŶŐĂŶĚdƌĂĚĞ džƉŽ
ŚĂŶŐŝŶŐWĞƌĐĞƉƟŽŶŽĨWĂƌŬŝŶŐ
IPI Conference & SWPA
WŚŽƚŽǀŽůƚĂŝĐƐDĞĞƚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐ͕
/ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůWĂƌŬŝŶŐŽŶĨĞƌĞŶĐĞ
WĂƌŬŝŶŐ&ƵŶĐƟŽŶĂůŝƚLJCPPA Conference
ZĞůĞǀĂŶƚWƌŽũĞĐƚƐ
ŝƚLJŽĨWĂůŽůƚŽ>ŽƚƐZΘ^ͬ>WĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƐ͕
ŽǁŶƚŽǁŶWĂůŽůƚŽ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶsŝĞǁWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
WĂůŵΘDŽƌƌŽWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕^ĂŶ>ƵŝƐKďŝƐƉŽ͕
WĂůŵEŝƉŽŵŽWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕^ĂŶ>ƵŝƐKďŝƐƉŽ͕
ĂƉŝƚŽůĂsŝůůĂŐĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƵĚLJ͕
ŽǀŝŶĂŽǁŶƚŽǁŶWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕ŽǀŝŶĂ͕
EĂƉĂϱƚŚ^ƚƌĞĞƚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕EĂƉĂ͕
dĞŵĞĐƵůĂŝǀŝĐĞŶƚĞƌWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕dĞŵĞĐƵůĂ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨ&ƌĞƐŶŽŽŶǀĞŶƟŽŶĞŶƚĞƌWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨZŝǀĞƌƐŝĚĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞηϲ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨ^ĂŶZĂĨĂĞůWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨ^ŽƵƚŚ^ĂŶ&ƌĂŶĐŝƐĐŽWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ŽƵŐůĂƐŽƵŶƚLJWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕^ƚĂƚĞůŝŶĞ͕Es
^ŽůdƌĂŶƐWĂƌŬŝŶŐΘdƌĂŶƐŝƚ,Ƶď͕sĂůůĞũŽ͕
'ŽůĚ>ŝŶĞ&ŽŽƚŚŝůů džƚĞŶƐŝŽŶŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶƵƚŚŽƌŝƚLJ^ƚĂƟŽŶWĂƌŬŝŶŐ
Structures, CA
ŝƚLJŽĨZĞĚůĂŶĚƐWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ƵƌŝĞŶWĂƌŬΘZŝĚĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕t
ĂůĚǁŝŶWĂƌŬdƌĂŶƐŝƚĞŶƚĞƌWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
KddƵƐƟŶDĞƚƌŽůŝŶŬ^ƚĂƟŽŶWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
>ŽŶŐĞĂĐŚŝƌƉŽƌƚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕>ŽŶŐĞĂĐŚ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨ>ŝǀĞƌŵŽƌĞsĂůůĞLJĞŶƚĞƌWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨKĐĞĂŶƐŝĚĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
hŶŝŽŶŝƚLJ^ƚĂƟŽŶŝƐƚƌŝĐƚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƵĚLJ͕
^ĂŶƚĂƌƵnjDĞƚƌŽWĂĐŝĮĐ^ƚĂƟŽŶdƌĂŶƐŝƚĞŶƚĞƌWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ZdZŝĐŚŵŽŶĚdƌĂŶƐŝƚsŝůůĂŐĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ZdWůĞĂƐĂŶƚ,ŝůůWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
Zd&ƌƵŝƚǀĂůĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕KĂŬůĂŶĚ͕
ZdDŝůůďƌĂĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ZdtĂůŶƵƚƌĞĞŬWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ZdŽŶĐŽƌĚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨŽǀŝŶĂDĞƚƌŽůŝŶŬdƌĂŶƐŝƚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
&ŽŽƚŚŝůůdƌĂŶƐŝƚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ^ƚƵĚLJ͕tĞƐƚŽǀŝŶĂ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨ^ĂŶ:ŽƐĞ͕'ƌĞLJŚŽƵŶĚWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͕
ŝǀĞƌŵŽƌĞŽǁŶƚŽǁŶWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƵĚLJ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨ^ĂŶƚĂƌƵnjWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ͕
ŽǀŝŶĂŽǁŶƚŽǁŶ//WĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƵĚLJ͕
ZŝǀĞƌƐŝĚĞ&ŽdždŚĞĂƚĞƌ'ĂƌĂŐĞ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨ^ĂŶDĂƚĞŽWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ͕
ŝƚLJŽĨƌĞŶƚǁŽŽĚ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ͕
tĂŝůƵŬƵWĂƌŬŝŶŐ^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ͕DĂƵŝ͕,/
dŽǁŶŽĨ>ŽƐ'ĂƚŽƐ&ĞĂƐŝďŝůŝƚLJ^ƚƵĚLJ͕
DŝĐŚĞůůĞ͕ĂWƌŝŶĐŝƉĂůǁŝƚŚtĂƚƌLJĞƐŝŐŶ͕/ŶĐ͕͘ŚĂƐǁŽƌŬĞĚĞdžƚĞŶƐŝǀĞůLJ
ǁŝƚŚƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĚĞƐŝŐŶ͕ĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐ͕ĂŶĚĐŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶ
ĂĚŵŝŶŝƐƚƌĂƟŽŶƐŝŶĐĞϭϵϴϵ͘͞KƵƌŐŽĂůŝƐƚŽŵĂŬĞŽƵƌĐůŝĞŶƚƐůŽŽŬŐŽŽĚ͘
tĞƚĂŬĞŽƵƌĐůŝĞŶƚƐ͛ƉƌŽďůĞŵƐĂŶĚŝƐƐƵĞƐĂƐŽƵƌŽǁŶĂŶĚǁĞƚĞĂŵǁŝƚŚ
ƚŚĞŵƚŽĮŶĚƚŚĞďĞƐƚƉŽƐƐŝďůĞƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ͕͟ƐĂLJƐDŝĐŚĞůůĞ͘/ŶĂĚĚŝƟŽŶ͕
ƐŚĞƟƌĞůĞƐƐůLJƐƚƌŝǀĞƐƚŽĞŶƐƵƌĞƚŚĂƚƚŚĞĮƌŵ͛ƐĚĞƐŝŐŶƐǁŽƌŬǁŝƚŚŝŶƚŚĞ
ĐŽŶƚĞdžƚŽĨƚŚĞŝƌĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĂƌĞƐŽŵĞƚŚŝŶŐƚŚĂƚĞǀĞƌLJŽŶĞĐĂŶďĞ
ƉƌŽƵĚŽĨ͘DŝĐŚĞůůĞŚĂƐĞdžƚĞŶƐŝǀĞĞdžƉĞƌŝĞŶĐĞǁŽƌŬŝŶŐǁŝƚŚŵƵŶŝĐŝƉĂů
ŐŽǀĞƌŶŵĞŶƚƐƚŽƐŽůǀĞƚŚĞŝƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐĐŚĂůůĞŶŐĞƐ͕ĂƐǁĞůůĂƐŵƵůƟƉůĞƐƚĂŬĞ
ŚŽůĚĞƌƐ͕ĂŐĞŶĐŝĞƐĂŶĚůĂƌŐĞŐƌŽƵƉƐƚŽŐĂŝŶĐŽŶƐĞŶƐƵƐ͘^ŚĞƐĞƌǀĞƐŽŶƚŚĞ
ĚǀŝƐŽƌLJŽƵŶĐŝůĨŽƌƚŚĞ/ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůWĂƌŬŝŶŐ/ŶƐƟƚƵƚĞĂŶĚŝƐĂŶĂĐƟǀĞ
ƉĂƌƟĐŝƉĂŶƚŝŶŝŶĚƵƐƚƌLJĂƐƐŽĐŝĂƟŽŶƐ͕ĂƉŽǁĞƌĨƵůƐƉĞĂŬĞƌĂŶĚĐŽŵƉĞůůŝŶŐ
ĂĚǀŽĐĂƚĞĨŽƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ͘
tdZz ^/'E yW Zd/^
20+
years in
ƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ
design
City of Palo Alto Lot
S/L Parking Structure
Palo Alto, California
Owner: City of Palo Alto
Services: Architects, Parking
Planners and Structural
Engineers
Design Architect: Carrasco &
Architects
Contractor: McCarthy Builders
Status: Completed October
2003
ͻ690 parking stalls
ͻ229,380 total square feet
including leasable
ͻspace
ͻ$17,146,100 total cost
ͻ$24,849 cost per stall
including leasable
ͻspace
ͻ332 square feet per stall
ͻ5 levels above grade/ 2
below
ͻ8,000 square feet of
leasable area
ͻStone clad façade
ͻPublic Art
ͻ ZĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂ
ŽŶƐƚƌƵĐƟŽŶ>ŝŶŬΖƐĞƐƚŽĨ
ĂůŝĨŽƌŶŝĂϮϬϬϰǁĂƌĚ
The parking structure designed for Lot S/L occupies nearly a third of its block. While the
City Wanted to create as many new parking spaces as possible, it did not want to create a
building out of scale with its neighbors. Maintaining the pedestrian appeal of the downtown
ĂƌĞĂǁĂƐĂůƐŽĂŶŝŵƉŽƌƚĂŶƚĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƟŽŶ͘
dŽĂĐĐŽŵƉůŝƐŚďŽƚŚŽĨƚŚĞƐĞŐŽĂůƐ͕ƚŚĞtĂƚƌLJƚĞĂŵƐĞƚďĂĐŬĂƉŽƌƟŽŶŽĨƚŚĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞΖƐ
ĚĞƐŝŐŶĨƌŽŵƚŚĞƐŝĚĞǁĂůŬ͘dŽĂĚĚĨƵƌƚŚĞƌŝŶƚĞƌĞƐƚƚŽƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͕ĂƌĞƚĂŝůͬŽĸĐĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐŚĂƐďĞĞŶ
placed at the corner, as well as a courtyard for the outdoor dining adjacent to the sidewalk.
To maximize parking on the site,
the structure contains 2 levels
below grade and five above.
The basement levels receive
natural light from the central
lightwell that penetrates the
entire structure. The facade
incorporates public art with
bird structures mounted to an
external wall.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
City of Palo Alto Lot R
Parking Structure
Palo Alto, California
Owner: City of Palo Alto
Services: Architects, Parking
Planners and Structural
Engineers
Design Architect: Joseph
Bellomo Architects
Contractor: McCarthy Builders
Status: Completed October
2003
ͻ212 parking stalls
ͻ93,930 total square feet
ͻ$7,743,500 total cost
ͻ$36,526 cost per stall
ͻ443 square feet per stall
ͻ5 levels
ͻMetal rails
ͻPublic Art Wall
dŚĞƉƌŝŵĂƌLJŐŽĂůĨŽƌƚŚĞŝƚLJŽĨWĂůŽůƚŽǁĂƐƚŽƉƌŽǀŝĚĞĂƐŵĂŶLJĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂůƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƉĂĐĞƐ
ĂƐƉŽƐƐŝďůĞǁŚŝůĞƌĞƐƉĞĐƟŶŐƚŚĞƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶͲĨƌŝĞŶĚůLJĚŽǁŶƚŽǁŶĞŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚ͘dŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐ
ĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚĨŽƌ>ŽƚZĮƚƐŽŶƚŽĂǀĞƌLJƐŵĂůůƐŝƚĞ͕ǁŚŝůĞƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐĞĂƐLJƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶĂĐĐĞƐƐ
ĂĐƌŽƐƐƚŚĞƐŝƚĞ͘ƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶĂůůĞLJĐŽŶŶĞĐƚƐƚŚĞĚŽǁŶƚŽǁŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞŶĞĂƌďLJƚƌĂŝŶƐƚĂƟŽŶ͕
ŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶŝŶŐĐŽŶǀĞŶŝĞŶĐĞĞŶƚƌŝĞƐĨŽƌĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚƌĞƚĂŝůƉƌŽƉĞƌƟĞƐ͘
The building façade is broken into smaller elements and the top level is pulled back at
ďŽƚŚĞŶĚƐƚŽŵŝƟŐĂƚĞƚŚĞĂƉƉĞĂƌĂŶĐĞŽĨĂůĂƌŐĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞ͘&ŽƌĂĚĚĞĚƐĞĐƵƌŝƚLJ͕ƚŚĞŐůĂƐƐͲ
ďĂĐŬĞĚĞůĞǀĂƚŽƌƚŽǁĞƌĨĂĐĞƐƚŚĞƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶĂůůĞLJ͘
The Lot R Parking Structure
includes a unique public art
installation, which highlights
ŚĂŝŬƵƉŽĞƚƌLJ͘
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
City of Mountain View
Parking Structure
Mountain View,
California
Owner: City of Mountain View
Services: Architects, Structural
Engineers and Parking Planners
Contractor: Nibbi Brothers
Status: Completed May 2007
ͻ405 parking stalls
ͻ159,000 total project square
feet
ͻ147,000 total square feet of
parking
ͻ12,000 square feet of retail
ͻ$14,220,000 total cost
including $1,020,000 for the
photovoltaic system
ͻ$35,111 cost per stall
ͻ362 square feet per stall
ͻ5 levels above grade
ͻLevel facade along main
streets
ͻRetail at ground level
ͻTruck loading dock
ͻPowered by Photovoltaic
System
dŚĞŝƚLJŽĨDŽƵŶƚĂŝŶsŝĞǁǁĂŶƚĞĚƚŽĞŶŚĂŶĐĞƚŚĞĚŽǁŶƚŽǁŶďLJƉƌŽǀŝĚŝŶŐĂĚĚŝƟŽŶĂů
structured parking at its main entrance. Watry Design, Inc. was hired to achieve the
ĐŝƚLJ͛ƐǀŝƐŝŽŶŽĨĚĞƐŝŐŶŝŶŐĂůĂŶĚŵĂƌŬƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞƚŚĂƚƌĞŇĞĐƚƐƚŚĞƚƌĂĚŝƟŽŶĂůĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĞ
of the area. Located at the corner of California Street and Bryant Street, the building
houses 12,000 square feet of retail at the pedestrian level with four levels of parking
ĂďŽǀĞ͘ĂƌĞĨƵůĐŽŶƐŝĚĞƌĂƟŽŶǁĂƐƚĂŬĞŶƚŽĚĞǀĞůŽƉĂƐŽůƵƟŽŶƚŽŵŝŶŝŵŝnjĞƚŚĞǀŝďƌĂƟŽŶ
and noise created by cars and to create the high light levels required for parking while
ŵŝŶŝŵŝnjŝŶŐƚŚĞƐƉŝůůĂŐĞŝŶƚŽƚŚĞĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƟĂůŶĞŝŐŚďŽƌƐ͘dŚĞƚŽƉůĞǀĞůŽĨƚŚĞ
structure is stepped back to reduce the mass of the building along Bryant Street and the
ŽƉĞŶŝŶŐƐǁĞƌĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚƚŽůŽŽŬůŝŬĞǁŝŶĚŽǁƐƚŽďůĞŶĚŝŶǁŝƚŚƚŚĞƐƚƌĞĞƚƐĐĂƉĞ͘ƌŽŽŌŽƉ͕
90k photovoltaic system powers the parking lights and elevators.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Oĸ ce & Parking
Structure at Palm and
Morro
San Luis Obispo,
California
Developer: Copeland Enterprises
Owner: City of San Luis Obispo
Services: Architect-of-Record,
Parking Planners, and Structural
Engineers
Local Architect: APS Architects
Contractor: J.W. Design, Inc.
Status: Completed 2006
• 242 parking stalls
• 103,000 total square feet
• $10,100,000 est. total cost
• $41,735 est. per stall incl. oĸ ce
• 426 square feet per stall
• 5 levels above grade & 1 below
grade
• 20,000 square feet of oĸ ce
space at Į rst level
The Oĸ ce & Parking Structure at Palm and Morro Streets in San Luis Obispo, California,
is a mulƟ -use facility that transforms an exisƟ ng parking lot into much needed downtown
parking and oĸ ce space and creates a convenient pedestrian route to the commercial and
retail district of the city. The City’s Planning and Community Development Department is
the primary tenant of the oĸ ce space.
The building contains restricted access parking in a basement level, oĸ ces on the main
Ň oor, plus four levels of paid public parking above. Special care was taken to reduce the
vibraƟ on from the cars on the oĸ ce space. The upper Ň oors are bathed in natural light from
windows, as well as lightwells. The detailing of the exterior façade respects the historic
character of the San Luis Obispo downtown. A variety of brick Į nishes and height changes
suggest several smaller structures bundled together, reminiscent of the 19th century "row
houses" that once populated the district. A decoraƟ ve, angled entry way at the corner
of Palm and Morro Streets creates a sense of prominence and guides people to the main
entrance. Two elevator towers further facilitate pedestrians entry and exit from the building.
The structural framing system is long-span, post-tensioned concrete, which creates an open
Ň oor plan. Speed ramps address the Ɵ ght space requirements of the site.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Granada Garage and
KĸĐĞƵŝůĚŝŶŐ
Santa Barbara, California
Owner: City of Santa Barbara
^ĞƌǀŝĐĞƐ͗ Architects, Structural
Engineers, and Parking
Planners
ĞƐŝŐŶƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚ͗ Henry Lenny
Design Studio
ŽŶƚƌĂĐƚŽƌ͗ McCarthy Builders
^ƚĂƚƵƐ͗ Completed June 2006
ͻϱϳϮƉĂƌŬŝŶŐƐƚĂůůƐ
ͻϮϭϰ͕ϱϬϬƚŽƚĂůƐĨĨŽƌƉĂƌŬŝŶŐ
structure
ͻϯϳϱƐƋƵĂƌĞĨĞĞƚƉĞƌƐƚĂůů
ͻϵ͕ϴϵϮƐĨŽĨŽĸĐĞƐƉĂĐĞ
ͻΨϮϬ͕ϰϬϬ͕ϬϬϬƚŽƚĂůĞƐƟŵĂƚĞĚĐŽƐƚ
ͻΨϯϱ͕ϲϲϰĐŽƐƚƉĞƌƐƚĂůů
ͻϲůĞǀĞůƐ͗ϰĂďŽǀĞ͕ϮůĞǀĞůƐďĞůŽǁ
ͻDĞĐŚĂŶŝĐĂůsĞŶƟůĂƟŽŶŝƐƵƐĞĚ
ͻŝŬĞ^ƚŽƌĂŐĞ
ͻZĞĐŝƉŝĞŶƚŽĨƚŚĞϮϬϬϳ
/ŶƚĞƌŶĂƟŽŶĂůWĂƌŬŝŶŐ/ŶƐƟƚƵƚĞΖƐ
ǁĂƌĚŽĨ džĐĞůůĞŶĐĞ͕ƚŚĞ
ŵĞƌŝĐĂŶ^ŽĐŝĞƚLJŽĨŝǀŝů
ŶŐŝŶĞĞƌƐΖϮϬϬϲWƌŽũĞĐƚŽĨƚŚĞ
Year and the American Public
tŽƌŬƐƐƐŽĐŝĂƟŽŶΖƐϮϬϬϲĞƐƚ
WƌŽũĞĐƚŽǀĞƌΨϭϬDΘWƌŽũĞĐƚŽĨ
the Year.
ŌĞƌƚŚĞŽƌŝŐŝŶĂů'ƌĂŶĂĚĂ'ĂƌĂŐĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĐĂŵĞŝŶƐƵďƐƚĂŶƟĂůůLJŽǀĞƌďƵĚŐĞƚ͕ƚŚĞŝƚLJ
ŽĨ^ĂŶƚĂĂƌďĂƌĂŚŝƌĞĚtĂƚƌLJĞƐŝŐŶ͕/ŶĐ͘ƚŽĐŽŵƉůĞƚĞůLJƌĞĚĞƐŝŐŶƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚǁŝƚŚŝŶ
ƚŚĞŝƌďƵĚŐĞƚĐŽŶƐƚƌĂŝŶƚƐ͘dŚĞƐŝƚĞŝƐůŽĐĂƚĞĚŽŶĂĨŽƌŵĞƌŝƚLJƉĂƌŬŝŶŐůŽƚ͕ǁŚŝĐŚŝƐ
ďŽƌĚĞƌĞĚďLJƚǁŽŵĂũŽƌƐƚƌĞĞƚƐĂŶĚƚǁŽƉĞĚĞƐƚƌŝĂŶƉĂƐĞŽƐ͘ƐĂĐĞŶƚƌĂůĚŽǁŶƚŽǁŶ
ůŽĐĂƟŽŶ͕ƚŚĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞǁŝůůƐĞƌǀĞůŽĐĂůďƵƐŝŶĞƐƐĞƐŝŶĐůƵĚŝŶŐƚŚĞ'ƌĂŶĂĚĂdŚĞĂƚĞƌ͕
ƐŚŽƉƉŝŶŐ͕ƌĞƐƚĂƵƌĂŶƚƐ͕ŽĸĐĞƐ͕ƚŚĞƉƵďůŝĐůŝďƌĂƌLJĂŶĚƚŚĞĐŽƵŶƚLJĐŽƵƌƚƐ͘KĸĐĞƐƉĂĐĞ
ŽŶƚŚĞŐƌŽƵŶĚůĞǀĞůŝƐĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚĂƐƉĂƌƚŽĨƚŚĞƉƌŽũĞĐƚĂŶĚƐĞƌǀĞƐƚŚĞWĂƌŬŝŶŐĂŶĚ
dƌĂŶƐƉŽƌƚĂƟŽŶĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐ͘
dŚĞĂƌĐŚŝƚĞĐƚƵƌĂůĚĞƐŝŐŶŽĨƚŚĞďƵŝůĚŝŶŐƌĞŇĞĐƚƐƚŚĞŚŝƐƚŽƌŝĐ^ƉĂŶŝƐŚͲƐƚLJůĞŽĨĚŽǁŶƚŽǁŶ
^ĂŶƚĂĂƌďĂƌĂĂŶĚĐŽŵƉůĞŵĞŶƚƐĂŶĂĚũĂĐĞŶƚŚŽƵƐŝŶŐƉƌŽũĞĐƚ͘dŚĞƐƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĞĨĞĂƚƵƌĞƐ
ĞŶĐŚĂŶƟŶŐƉĞƌŝŽĚƐƉĞĐŝĮĐĚĞƚĂŝů͕ƐƵĐŚĂƐŵƵƌĂůƐ͕ĂůĐŽǀĞƐ͕ĐƵƐƚŽŵǁƌŽƵŐŚƚŝƌŽŶ
ďĂůĐŽŶŝĞƐ͕^ƉĂŶŝƐŚͲƐƚLJůĞŽƌŶĂŵĞŶƚĂƟŽŶ͕ƐĐĂůůŽƉĞĚƉĂƌĂƉĞƚƐ͕ǁŽŽĚĨƌĂŵĞĚĚŽŽƌƐĂŶĚ
ǁŝŶĚŽǁƐ͕ŵĞƚĂůƐƉŝƌĞƐ͕ƉůĂŶƚĞƌƐĐŽŶĞƐĂŶĚĂ^ƉĂŶŝƐŚƟůĞƌŽŽĨ͘
Oceanside Transit
Parking Structure
Oceanside, California
Owner: City of Oceanside
Services: Architecture and
Parking Planning
Contractor: RQ ConstrucƟ on
Status: Completed April 2006
• 453 parking stalls
• 149,100 total square feet
• Approx. $11,100,000 total
project cost
• Approx. $24,503 per stall
• 330 square feet per stall
• 3 levels above grade
• Lightwell provides natural
light on the interior
• Cascading stairs provide a
fun pedestrian experience
• Supports Downtown and
Transit use
The City of Oceanside wanted to add parking to serve both the downtown and the transit
staƟ on. In concert with the North County Transit District, a 450 stall parking structure now
occupies this strategic site. The structure is approximately 149,100 s.f. on 3 levels with a
park-on ramp system. Since the structure serves two areas one elevator was located at each
end of the structure. Cascading stairs were provided for convenient and rapid pedestrian
access to and from the structure.
The City wanted the structure to look more like a retail building, so a facade that incorporated
smaller openings was developed. The structural frame is long span with shearwalls and
designed with precast structural members.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Statement of
Qualifications
▲ 39812 Mission Blvd. Suite 100, Fremont, CA 94539 ph: 510-445-0550 fx: 510-445-0440 ▲
Sierra Engineering Group (SEG) is a minority-owned small-
business enterprise structural engineering firm located in
Fremont, California founded in 1992. SEG is well versed with
all the latest seismic and other relevant design
requirements in the State of California, this includes but is
not limited to the California Building Code as well as the
Caltrans Bridge Design Specifications. Our services
include:
≠ Structural engineering for new structures.
≠ Seismic assessment of existing structures.
≠ Structural retrofit of existing structures.
≠ Quantity estimation.
≠ Value engineering services.
≠ Conditional reports.
≠ Peer reviews.
≠ Constructability reviews.
≠ As-built surveys
≠ Construction administration services.
≠ Construction observation services.
We have provided structural engineering services to the public
and private sectors. Our work includes a variety of project
types including building (concrete, masonry – including
URM -, steel and timber structures) as well as
infrastructure projects. SEG has experience with a multitude
of structure types including but not limited to:
≠ Bridges (vehicular, pedestrian)
≠ Inlet and outlet structures.
≠ Energy dissipating structures.
≠ Box Culverts.
≠ Transit centers.
≠ Cut and cover structures.
≠ Temporary shoring design.
≠ Retaining walls.
≠ Pump Stations.
≠ Signage.
≠ Lighting structures.
≠ Public Buildings
≠ URM Buildings
Union City BART Intermodal Station
Currently SEG holds certifications as an MBE and SBE for
several agencies. The list includes:
≠ California Department of Transportation/Caltrans –
DBE & SMBE
≠ State of California – Department of General
Services – SBE
≠ State of California – Department of General
Services – Micro SBE
≠ Women & Minority Business Enterprise
Clearinghouse – MBE (CPUC)
299 Valencia Post-Tensioned Concrete
Sierra Engineering Group’s current staff of 9 full time and 1
part-time employee. This includes one licensed structural
▲ 39812 Mission Blvd. Suite 100, Fremont, CA 94539 ph: 510-445-0550 fx: 510-445-0440 ▲
engineer and four registered civil engineers. Each member
of our team contributes a unique skill set, all of which combine
to create a wealth of knowledge and experience. With these
qualities, our staff is capable of accomplishing any goal
established with attention to detail, schedule, and most
important- quality.
BART Elevated Guideway
Sierra Engineering Group has over its long history worked with
a variety of clients both private and public including Civil
Engineers, Mechanical Engineers, Hydraulic Engineers as well
as numerous public agencies. The list includes but is not
limited to:
Public Clients: (Partial List)
≠ Caltrans
≠ Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
≠ Valley Transit Authority
≠ Santa Clara Water District
≠ Alameda County Water District
≠ California Air National Guard
≠ County of Santa Clara
≠ City of Union City
≠ City of San Francisco
≠ City of Oakland
≠ City of Fremont
≠ County of San Mateo
≠ County of Alameda
≠ Port of Oakland
Private Clients: (Partial List)
≠ HNTB
≠ ROMA Design Group
≠ Freedman Tung & Bottomley
≠ AECOM
≠ CH2MHill
≠ Kimley-Horn & Associates
≠ Hatch-Mott-McDonald
≠ Brian Kangas Foulk
≠ Rajappan & Meyer
≠ Mark Thomas & Company
≠ Biggs Cardosa Associates
≠ Cornerstone Structural Engineering Group
Top-of-the-line software and programs allow us to maintain
the highest level of quality and efficiency. AutoCAD, SAP
2000, SAFE, RISA 3D, ETABS, L-Pile, PY Wall, Vbrige, Vbent
and Enercalc are just a few examples of applications used on
each project, in addition to proprietary, project-specific
programs developed in-house.
SEG’s quality control / quality assurance program includes
an in-house checking procedure which requires an
independent peer review of the documents and calculations
prior to issuing the final construction documents. Once the
peer review is complete, the documents undergo an additional
Great Mall Pedestrian Overcrossing
▲ 39812 Mission Blvd. Suite 100, Fremont, CA 94539 ph: 510-445-0550 fx: 510-445-0440 ▲
cursory review by the principal engineer; insuring that
documents are delivered with the highest possible level of
quality.
Our dedication to excellence does not end with the
delivery of documents. In an effort to verify that our work is
properly implemented in the field, SEG provides construction
administration services on all of our projects including
regular site visits to observe construction.
Agua Fria Box Culvert
The success of Sierra Engineering Group is only measured
by the success of the project. We believe in working in an
environment where input from one member of the design team
is just as important as the next. Inclusion of all ideas fosters
the type of creative energy that propels the team to
achieve a consensus and ensure elegant and efficient
solutions, the type of solutions that will ultimately benefit the
client and maintain public safety.
References:
≠ Charles Beauvoir – Vice President
AECOM Transportation
(408)490-2010
≠ Chris Adams – Project Manager
Hatch Mott McDonald
(925)469-8010
≠ Boris Dramov, AIA - Principal
ROMA Design Group
(415)616-9900 x228
Sierra Engineering Group
Structural Engineers
Certified MBE / SBE
39812 Mission Blvd.#100
Fremont, CA 94539
www.sierraeng.com
Contact:
Jesus Sierra, S.E.
jsierra@sierraeng.com
510-445-0550 x15
Jesus Sierra, P.E., S.E.
President – Sierra Engineering Group
Education
B.S., Civil Engineering
Technology (1981)
Cogswell Polytechnical
College, San Francisco, CA
Professional
Registrations
≠ Structural Engineer (S.E.)
California SE3298
≠ Civil Engineer (C.E.) –
California CE38763
≠ Professional Engineer –
Alabama, Arizona,
Arkansas, Colorado,
Connecticut, Florida,
Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas,
Kentucky, Louisiana,
Maine, Missouri, Nevada,
New Mexico, New York,
North Carolina, Ohio,
Oklahoma, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, Texas,
Virginia, Washington,
Wisconsin, Wyoming.
Professional
Affiliations
≠ Structural Engineers
Association of Northern
California (SEAONC)
≠ International Conference
of Building Officials
(ICBO)
≠ American Concrete
Institute(ACI)
≠ Florida Engineering
Society (FES)
≠ Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute
Summary
Mr. Sierra has more than 30 years experience as structural project engineer,
engineer of record and principal-in-charge on many projects for public and
private sector clients. Background includes structural analysis and design of
new facilities, seismic retrofit, and rehabilitation of existing structures, peer
review, and value engineering.
Representative Experience
Residential/Mixed Use:
≠ 1795 El Camino Real – Palo Alto, CA
≠ 1805 El Camino Real – Palo Alto, CA
≠ 101 Forest – Palo Alto, CA
≠ 299 Valencia St. – San Francisco, CA
≠ Pacific Hacienda Condominiums- San Carlos, California
≠ Bentley Bay Condominiums- Miami, Florida
≠ Cherry Chestnut Development- San Carlos, California
Hospitality
≠ Hamton Inn & Suites – Palo Alto, CA
≠ Aloft Hotel - Cupertino, California
≠ Staybridge Suites – Palo Alto, CA
≠ Holiday Inn Express- El Dorado Hills, California
≠ 805 El Camino Real- Palo Alto, California
Commercial
≠ Race Street Offices- San Jose, California
≠ San Jose Real State Board New Offices- San Jose, California
≠ Brandon Business Park – Pleasanton, CA
≠ Power One Credit Union Offices- Pembroke Pines, Florida
Retrofit:
≠ 181 Lytton- Palo Alto, California
≠ 180 University Avenue- Palo Alto, California
≠ Old School Retrofit- Fremont, California
Retail:
≠ The Gap Inc.- Various Locations Nationally
≠ Banana Republic- Various Locations Nationally
≠ The Children’s Place- Various Locations Nationally
Restaurants:
≠ PF Chang’s China Bistro- Various Locations Nationally
≠ Yardhouse Brewery – Various Locations Nationally
≠ The Cheesecake Factory- Various Locations Nationally
≠ Rose Pistola- San Francisco, California
Civil/Public/Transportation:
≠ Great Mall Access Structure C- Milpitas California
≠ SVRT BART Extension- Downtown San Jose, Alum Rock, and Milpitas Stations
≠ Rockridge BART Station Seismic Retrofit- Oakland, California
INTEGRITY . QUALITY . LEADERSHIP . RESULTS
BKF PORTFOLIO: MIXED USE PROJECTS
PRESENTED TO
THE D2 REALTY COMPANIES
| FOUNDED 1915
6/25/2014
BKF Engineers
255 Shoreline Drive, Suite 200
Redwood City, CA 94065
1650 Tecnnology Dr., Suite 650
San Jose, CA 95120
Santana Row
Bay Meadows Treasure Island VMWare Facebook
|
Santana Row, San Jose, CA
Oracle, Redwood Shores, CATreasure Island, San Francisco, CA
CIVIL ENGINEERING
Site Development
Streetscape Design
Parking Lot Planning & Design
Grade Separations
Joint Trench Coordination
WATER RESOURCES
Storm, Sewer and Water Systems
Storm Water Quality Compliance
Erosion Control & SWPPP
Pump Station
Detention Systems
Hydraulic & Hydrology Studies
Masterplanning, Design & Construction
TRANSPORTATION
Geometric Roadway Design
7UDIÀF6LJQDO'HVLJQ
7UDIÀF,PSDFW6WXGLHV
+LJKZD\DQG,QWHUFKDQJH'HVLJQ
7UDIÀF&LUFXODWLRQ
Light and Heavy Rail
LAND PLANNING
Master Planning
=RQLQJ0RGLÀFDWLRQ
Permit Application
Contract Planning to Public Agencies
ENTITLEMENT SUPPORT
Review Permit Requirements
Hard/Soft Cost Estimates
Environmental Review
Tentative Map Preparation
Scheduling
Feasibility Studies
Due Diligence Reports
SURVEY
GPS Surveys
Right-of-Way Mapping
ALTA Surveys
Topographic Mapping
High Resolution Scanning
*,60DSSLQJ
Subdivision Mapping
Boundary Surveys
Construction Surveying
Expert Witnessing
SPECIALTY SERVICES
/DQGÀOO5HFODPDWLRQ
Wetlands Permits
Project Management
Differential Settlement Site Design
LEED Documentation Support
CIVIL ENGINEERING . SURVEYING . PLANNING | Since 1915
Designing Infrastructure for a sustainable future.
OFFICES
Redwood City
San Jose
,UYLQH
Pleasanton
Walnut Creek
Sacramento
Richmond
Santa Rosa
Oakland
San Francisco
650.482.6300
408.467.9100
949.526.8400
925.396.7700
925.940.2200
916.556.5800
510.529.0336
707.583.8500
510.227.3011
415.930.7900
Since our founding in 1915 by Willis “Jack” Frost, BKF has been dedi-
cated to being the leading engineering resource for California de-
velopment. To maintain that status, we have continued to grow with
QLQHRIÀFHVDQGRYHUVWDIIFRPELQLQJRXU\HDUVRIH[SHULHQFHLQ
diverse markets with new, innovative approaches to problem solving.
BKF specializes in many areas of development, including sustainable\
design, hydrology/hydraulics, water resources, bay mud settlement,
WUDQVSRUWDWLRQWUDIÀFVLJQDOVFRQGRPLQLXPPDSSLQJDQG'ODVHU
scanning. We are also actively engaged in non-typical markets such as
mixed-use development, designbuild, land reclamation, habitat resto-
UDWLRQRQFDOOFRQVXOWLQJDQGÀEHUWHOHFRPPXQLFDWLRQV
We have developed extensive local knowledge in geography, geology,
DQGDJHQF\UHODWHGLVVXHV,WSURYLGHVXVZLWKDGHHSXQGHUVWDQGLQJ
of the impacts on feasibility, permitting, and entitlement approvals.
INTEGRITY . QUALITY . LEADERSHIP . RESULTS
We value integrity, quality, leadership, and results. Our perspective
comes from experience. We know that providing the best service
requires unsurpassed attention to detail and unrivaled dedication to
quality.
FIRM PROFILE
|
EDUCATION
B.S. Civil Engineering California State
Polytechnic University Pomona, California
REGISTRATION
Civil Engineer, CA License No. 47813
YEARS WITH BKF
Since 1990
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
27 years
As a principal and project manager at BKF, Mr. Schork has been exten-
sively involved in planning, design and management of many facets
of civil engineering over the past 27 years. He has overseen complex
land development and infrastructure projects contributing to their
successful completion. These developments involve environmentally
sensitive (hillside, bay mud, contaminated soils), processing inten-
sive (federal, regional and local government agencies and districts),
DQGVLWHFRQVWUDLQHGSURMHFWV LQÀOOUHGHYHORSPHQWSUHVHUYDWLRQ
and multi-phased). His experience includes residential, commercial,
healthcare, educational, municipal, and transportation related proj-
ects.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
Santan Row Mixed-UseSan Jose, CA
360 South Market Street Mixed-Use San Jose, CA
Mary ManorSunnyvale, CA
Golden Gate Fields Mixed-Use Albany, CA
Oak Knoll Mixed Use Oakland, CA
Calabazas Place Mixed-Use Cupertino, CA
Main Street Mixed-Use Cupertino, CA
Montecito Vista Urban Village Mixed-Use San Jose, CA
Gilroy Cannery Gilroy, CA
South Hayward Mixed-UseHayward, CA
San Antonio Mixed-UseMountain View, CA
SCOTT SCHORK, PE
PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE
RESUME
|
EDUCATION
B.S. Civil Engineering with Emphasis in
Structural Design, St. Mary’s University,
Venezuela
REGISTRATION
Civil Engineer, CA License No. 78090
RELEVANT STUDIES/ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Project Planning and Management, and
Management of Public Works Projects,
University of California, Davis
High Performance Concrete Design,
St. Mary’s University, Venezuela
Developer of CMEL, a Design Software for
Steel Connections
YEARS WITH BKF
Since 2011
TOTAL YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
13 years
Mr. Kontorovsky is an accomplished professional with experience on
numerous public and private projects throughout California. Dur-
LQJWKHFRXUVHRIKLVSURIHVVLRQDOFDUHHU,VDDFKDVEHHQSHUVRQDOO\
LQYROYHGLQWKH&LYLO(QJLQHHULQJ &RQVWUXFWLRQ,QGXVWU\VFDOLQJIURP
small renovations to the design of a vast spectrum of challenging
developments with focus on large academic, civic and commercial
projects.
As a strong advocate of sustainable and environmentally responsible
design, his holistic approach is characterized for the implementa-
tion of green technologies and sustainable practices consistent with
today’s ecological needs. While introducing green initiatives in several
/(('FHUWLÀHGSURMHFWV0U.RQWRURYVN\KDVEHHQDEOHWRFUHDWLYHO\
provide solutions combining integrity and aesthetics with respect for
WKHSURMHFW·VVFKHGXOHEXGJHWDQGHIÀFLHQWFRQVWUXFWLRQSURFHGXUHV
,VDDF·VODUJHOLVWRIGHVLJQHGDQGVXSHUYLVHGPXOWLSKDVHODQGGH-
velopment and infrastructure projects, expertise in ADA standards
for accessible design, DSA requirements, and his thorough knowl-
HGJHRQSURMHFWHQWLWOHPHQWVDQGLQWHUDFWLRQZLWKSXEOLFRIÀFLDOVLVD
tremendous asset to any design and construction team. His rational
approach to project management and direct involvement exemplify
his commitment to diversity in design, which translates onto quality
assurance and fast problem solving during the construction adminis-
tration phase.
RELEVANT EXPERIENCE1825 EL Camino RealPalo Alto, CA
2755 El Camino Real Mixed Use Palo Alto, CA
Parker Place Mixed-UseBerkeley, CA
Greystar – Elan Mixed UseMountain View, CA
813 West El Camino Real Mixed Use Sunnyvale, CA
Greystar - Kifer Road Mixed Use Sunnyvale, CA
Park Kiely Mixed Use Santa Clara, CA
San Antonio Center Mixed-Use Bldg. Mountain View, CA
The Reserve Mixed Use San Jose, CA
ISAAC KONTOROVSKY, PE, QSD/QSP
PROJECT MANAGER
RESUME
|
• 173-acre village-style community
• Infrastructure improvements
• New roadways on site implemented
multi-modal design considerations
• Transportation Master Plan
• Integrated vehicular, bicycle, and
SHGHVWULDQWUDIÀF
• 42-acre European Style Village
• BKF continues to provide engineer
support since project inception in 1998
• 1,200 podium style apartments/con-
dominiums
• 700,000 s.f. of commercial space
including approximately 100,000 s.f. of
RIÀFHVSDFH
• 214-room hotel, 5 parking structures,
6-screen cinema, Linear Parks and
Plaza
Santana Row San Jose, CA
San Mateo, CA
2004 CELSOC Engineering
Excellence Award: Honor
Award
2010 Silicon Valley/San Jose
Business Journal: Project of
the Decade
Bay Meadows
2005 CELSOC Engineering
Excellence Award - Merit
Award
2004 Golden Nugget
Awards - Grand Award
Gateway Village Santa Clara, CA
• Mixed-use development of an under-
utilized 13-acre parcel
• Planned development includes 475
apartments, structured parking and
90,000 SF of pedestrian-oriented retail
and commercial space
• Central park area including water
features and other amenities
• Extension of city operated utilities to
support project located at city limits
This project will be the east-
ern “Gateway” to Santa
Clara on El Camino Real
The orientation of the
multi-family residential and
pedestrian-oriented retail
space will model itself as a
small village
Image: NC2 Studio
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
|
The goal is to be one of
$PHULFD·VÀUVWnet-zero
carbon communities
Treasure Island San Francisco, CA
• 450-acre military base reuse, mixed-
use redevelopment
• 120 acres of residential and commer-
cial development
• 30-acres of open space and parks
• BKF is responsible for developing
pedestrian friendly and safe angled
intersections
• Developed “Adaptive Management
Strategy” for protection against future
sea level rise
2008 Governors Top Environ-
mental and Economic Lead-
ership Award (GEELA) for
Sustainable Communities
One of 16 founding projects
of the Clinton Positive Devel-
opment Program
• $1.2 Billion mixed-use redevelopment
• 8,900 units
• Net increase of 5,679 units
• 152 acres
• Resident oriented community that
will implement the most advanced
techniques in
• Combating climate change and
providing innovative transportation
strategies
Parkmerced San Francisco, CA
Image: Google Maps
Candlestick Point/Hunters Point Phase I & II San Francisco, CA
Image: Google Maps
BKF knows how to design
HIÀFLHQWO\PHHWLQJWKH
community’s needs
• 57-acre mixed-use redevelopment
• 98 residential units in Phase I
• 10,500 residential units in Phase II
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
|
• 172-acre project containing 960 resi-
dential units and 67,000 SF retail space
• Residential units consist of 410 de-
tached single-family, 250 townhouses,
and 300 podium-style condominiums
and senior housing units
• Public and private pocket parks
• Realignment of creek and establish-
ment of creek trails
• Assistance with CEQA process
• Processing master tentative map
(equivalent to 30% construction docu-
ments)
• Site master planning and civil design
• )LQDOFORVXUHRIDFUHODQGÀOO
• PLOOLRQVIRIÀFHKRWHOFDPSXV
• )LUVWODQGÀOOGHYHORSPHQWVLWHLQ6DQ
Jose under Title 27
/(('*ROG&HUWLÀHG
America Center San Jose, CA
Redevelopment of this for-
mer Naval Hospital site will
revitalize an amazing prop-
erty with panoramic views
of the Bay; Vast open space
areas will be made open to
the public as well as restora-
tion of the Historic 1942 Oak
.QROO2IÀFHUV&OXE
• 80-acre new campus
• Rezoning, General Plan Amend-
ments, CEQA processing, master
planning, and engineering
• ALTA surveys, parcelization, entitle-
ment processing and full construc-
tion plans for the campus site layout,
grading, and utility plans
Sunnyvale, CAJuniper Network Systems
All buildings are
/(('*ROG&HUWLÀHG
Oak Knoll Mixed-Use Development Oakland, CA
Image: Courtesy of Calthorpe Associates
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
|
• Two properties in Menlo Park totaling
82 acres - 60-acre formerly occupied
by Sun Microsystems and 22 acres
owned by General Motors (GM)
• Processing entitlements to increase
the Sun Campus employee popula-
tion from its current entitled limit of
3,500 to 6,600, and to entitle approxi-
PDWHO\VIRIRIÀFHVSDFHRQ
the GM Site
• New, sustainable, forward thinking
campus of approximately 1,100,000
6)RIRIÀFHUHVHDUFKGHYHORSPHQW
space and 100,000 SF of residential,
on 42-acres at Moffett Field
• 0XOWLSOHWKUHHWRÀYHVWRU\RIÀFHEXLOG-
ings, organized in a series of “quads”
• Multi-level parking garage (with a
podium level transit hub as well as
landscape and hardscape plazas).
Google Bayview Campus Mountain View, CA
Menlo Park, CA
2.1 million gallons of emer-
gency water storage for
GRPHVWLFDQGÀUHSURWHF-
tion use in case of interrup-
tion of service from Hetch-
Hetchy
Facebook
Facebook had acquired
two properties in Menlo
Park totaling 1 million s.f.
Image: Google Earth
• 66-acre new campus expansion
• Engineering assistance with Entitle-
ments, SD/DD/CDs and CA
• 6XUYH\RIXWLOLW\DQGWUHHV
• Coordination with City Planning and
Engineering staff
• Assistance with new off-site sidewalk
• Site sustainability/C.3 stormwater
design
2010 Site Design Award
from Santa Clara Valley Ur-
ban Runoff Pollution Preven-
tion Program (SCVURPPP)
VMware Campus Expansion Palo Alto, CA
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
|
• 1.2 Million s.f. of retail
• High-density residential transit-orient-
ed village near the New BART light rail
station
• BKF has provided surveying and
research of existing site conditions to
identify development possibilities and
constraints
• BKF is providing a Project Description
for use in the preparation of an Envi-
ronmental Impact Report (EIR)
County Crossings Antioch, CA
Largest retail/mixed-use
development (250 acres)
in the Bay Area in the fore-
seeable future
• Mixed-use redevelopment of three
city blocks in downtown Sunnyvale
• 600 condominiums and town houses,
WKUHHRIÀFHEXLOGLQJVIRXUSDUNLQJ
structures, a hotel, theaters and ap-
proximately a million square feet of
retail stores and restaurants
• BKF prepared master plans and de-
sign documents for site grading and
drainage
Sunnyvale Town Center Sunnyvale, CA
The master plan was pre-
pared to accommodate
the City of Sunnyvale ca-
pacity constraints with their
storm water and sanitary
sewer mains
• 65-acre parcel to be developed into a
residential/ retail/commercial water-
oriented mixed-use development
• Due Diligence and Site Planning
• Historic boundary & title information
• Department of Toxic Substance Con-
trol (DTSC) processing for environmen-
tal clean-up areas
• Review of existing lease arrangements
and historical buildings
Oakland, CAOak To Ninth Mixed-Use Development
Civil design for 30-acre
open space area with 1.2
mile waterfront that in-
cludes public trails, bike/
pedestrian paths and land-
scape based storm water
treatment facilities
Image: Google Earth
PROJECT EXPERIENCE
|
So
n
o
m
a
M
o
u
n
t
a
i
n
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
-
R
o
h
n
e
r
t
P
a
r
k
SA
N
J
O
S
E
SA
N
F
R
A
N
C
I
S
C
O
Oc
e
a
n
V
i
e
w
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
S
a
n
F
r
a
n
c
i
s
c
o
Tr
e
a
s
u
r
e
I
s
l
a
n
d
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
S
a
n
F
r
a
n
c
i
s
c
o
Fr
a
n
k
l
i
n
R
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
C
i
t
y
Ma
r
i
n
a
S
h
o
r
e
s
W
a
t
e
r
f
r
o
n
t
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
C
i
t
y
Un
i
v
e
r
s
t
i
y
P
a
r
k
I
n
f
i
l
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
Na
p
a
J
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
-
A
m
e
r
i
c
a
n
C
a
n
y
o
n
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
-
A
l
b
a
n
y
Sa
n
t
a
n
a
R
o
w
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
S
a
n
J
o
s
e
Gl
e
n
C
o
v
e
C
o
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
-
V
a
l
l
e
j
o
SA
C
R
A
M
E
N
T
O
Sa
n
t
a
R
i
t
a
M
i
x
e
d
-
U
s
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
D
u
b
l
i
n
Wa
t
e
r
f
o
r
d
R
e
t
a
i
l
/
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
D
u
b
l
i
n
Co
u
n
t
y
C
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
s
-
A
n
t
i
o
c
h
Te
r
r
a
B
a
y
M
i
x
e
d
-
U
s
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
S
o
.
S
a
n
F
r
a
n
c
i
s
c
o
Ba
y
M
e
a
d
o
w
s
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
S
a
n
M
a
t
e
o
Ma
r
l
i
n
C
o
v
e
R
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
F
o
s
t
e
r
C
i
t
y
Ci
r
c
l
e
S
t
a
r
H
o
t
e
l
/
O
f
f
i
c
e
P
a
r
k
-
S
a
n
C
a
r
l
o
s
Re
d
w
o
o
d
S
h
o
r
e
s
-
R
e
d
w
o
o
d
C
i
t
y
Un
i
v
e
r
s
t
i
y
C
i
r
c
l
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
E
.
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
Mo
f
f
e
t
t
F
i
e
l
d
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
S
u
n
n
y
v
a
l
e
Lo
c
k
h
e
e
d
M
a
r
t
i
n
M
i
s
s
i
l
e
S
y
s
t
e
m
s
-
S
u
n
n
y
v
a
l
e
Gr
e
a
t
M
a
l
l
R
e
d
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
M
i
l
p
i
t
a
s
Fo
u
n
d
r
y
S
q
u
a
r
e
-
4
0
0
/
5
0
5
H
o
w
a
r
d
-
S
a
n
F
r
a
n
c
i
s
c
o
Ga
t
e
w
a
y
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
S
a
n
R
a
m
o
n
Al
a
m
e
d
a
B
a
y
p
o
r
t
&
L
a
n
d
i
n
g
-
A
l
a
m
e
d
a
N
A
S
Oa
k
t
o
N
i
n
t
h
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
O
a
k
l
a
n
d
Ja
c
k
L
o
n
d
o
n
S
q
u
a
r
e
-
O
a
k
l
a
n
d
Br
o
a
d
w
a
y
G
r
a
n
d
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
O
a
k
l
a
n
d
He
r
c
u
l
e
s
W
a
t
e
r
f
r
o
n
t
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
12
t
h
/
M
a
c
d
o
n
a
l
d
M
i
x
e
d
-
U
s
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
R
i
c
h
m
o
n
d
Tr
a
c
y
G
a
t
e
w
a
y
-
T
r
a
c
y
El
l
i
s
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
y
-
T
r
a
c
y
La
g
o
o
n
V
a
l
l
e
y
-
V
a
c
a
v
i
l
l
e
Af
f
y
m
e
t
r
i
x
F
a
c
i
l
i
t
y
-
W
e
s
t
S
a
c
r
a
m
e
n
t
o
En
c
h
a
n
t
e
d
R
e
s
o
r
t
s
-
C
a
l
i
s
t
o
g
a
Du
b
l
i
n
/
P
l
e
a
s
a
n
t
o
n
B
A
R
T
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
O
r
i
e
n
t
e
d
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
D
u
b
l
i
n
Hi
d
d
e
n
b
r
o
o
k
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
V
a
l
l
e
j
o
Wa
l
n
u
t
C
r
e
e
k
B
A
R
T
T
r
a
n
s
i
t
V
i
l
l
a
g
e
-
W
a
l
n
u
t
C
r
e
e
k
Am
e
r
i
c
a
C
e
n
t
e
r
M
i
x
e
d
-
U
s
e
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
S
a
n
J
o
s
e
Sa
n
J
o
s
e
M
a
r
k
e
t
C
e
n
t
e
r
-
S
a
n
J
o
s
e
Ce
n
t
r
a
l
P
l
a
c
e
-
S
a
n
J
o
s
e
Fo
s
t
e
r
A
i
r
p
o
r
t
T
o
w
e
r
s
-
S
a
n
J
o
s
e
Ca
l
a
b
a
z
a
s
P
l
a
c
e
-
C
u
p
e
r
t
i
n
o
Po
r
t
o
f
O
a
k
l
a
n
d
D
e
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
-
O
a
k
l
a
n
d
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
o
f
C
a
l
i
f
o
r
n
i
a
-
B
e
r
k
e
l
e
y
Pa
r
k
m
e
r
c
e
d
-
S
a
n
F
r
a
n
c
i
s
c
o
Sp
e
a
r
T
o
w
e
r
-
S
a
n
F
r
a
n
c
i
s
c
o
19
0
1
V
a
n
N
e
s
s
-
S
a
n
F
r
a
n
c
i
s
c
o
MI
X
E
D
-
U
S
E
E
X
P
E
R
I
E
N
C
E
|RELEVANT EXPERIENCE
|
BKF Engineers is a recognized leader in innova-
WLYHGHVLJQDVH[HPSOLÀHGLQRXUHIIRUWVLQPDQ\
San Francisco Bay Area development projects.
We promote on-going review of new technologies
and creative strategies. We embrace the challenge of
incorporating sustainable infrastructure into all of our
projects. Our focus is the practical application of theoretical
sustainable solutions in a manner that meets local
regulations while maintaining economical construction
practices. Our track record of getting major projects built
with sustainable elements speaks for itself.
There are several areas where BKF’s innovative
approach focuses special attention to create a
sustainable project. These include:
Sustainable Design
In addition to our work on water quality, BKF is committed
to making our projects more sustainable. We do this
by carefully grading to limit off haul and import of soil
materials. This is critical to control project impacts and
costs in areas that may contain soil contamination. We
carefully specify the reuse of pulverized pavement and
JUDGLQJPDWHULDOIRUHLWKHUWUHQFKLQJEDFN¿OOGUDLQURFNRU
where applicable, sub base material. This onsite recycling
LVDVLJQL¿FDQWVWHSLQLPSURYLQJWKHVXVWDLQDELOLW\RID
project. We practice:
• Implementation of reclaimed/recycled water systems
• Storm water management and treatment systems
• Cistern design and rainwater harvesting
• Recycling of onsite materials for use in roadways and
drainage facilities
• 6SHFL¿FDWLRQVIRUJUHHQVXVWDLQDEOHPDWHULDOV
• Strategic site and building orientation
• Bio-Filtration and Bio-Retention design
• Creek restoration
• Pervious pavements
• Use of renewable resources
Stormwater Management
BKF is a leader in stormwater quality. One of our staff
PHPEHUV(G%RVFDFFL3(/(('$3ZDVRQHRIWKH¿UVW
TXDOL¿HG&DOLIRUQLD&RQVWUXFWLRQ*HQHUDO3HUPLW7UDLQHUV
of Record. Ed has been training individuals on preparing
TXDOL¿HG6WRUP:DWHU3ROOXWLRQ3UHYHQWLRQ3ODQV 6:333
for both QSD and QSP requirements. We incorporate
water quality standards into every project. For streetscape
projects we have implemented median bioswales, we have
also been at the forefront of testing permeable pavement
for various types of parking at Stanford University. We
practice:
• Harvest + Reuse 5DLQZDWHU&LVWHUQV*UH\ZDWHU6\VWHPV
• ,Q¿OWUDWLRQ/DQGVFDSH3HUYLRXV3DYLQJLQ¿OWUDWLRQ
Basins, Bio-retention Ponds, and Basins
• Water Treatment Retention Ponds, Swales, Flow-
through Planters
• Evapotranspiration *UHHQ5RRIV/DQGVFDSLQJ
Bio-retention Ponds, Basins
• +\GURPRGL¿FDWLRQ9ROXPH&RQWURO Pervious
Paving, Bio-retention Ponds, and Basins
Careful Coordination with Utility Companies
BKF’s innovative designs at Santana Row, Bay Meadows,
Laurel Street in San Carlos, and Santa Cruz Avenue in
/RV*DWRVKDYHGHPRQVWUDWHGRXUDWWHQWLRQWRGHWDLO
6SHFL¿FDOO\ZHZRUNFORVHO\ZLWKWKHXWLOLW\FRPSDQLHV
Each of these BKF projects supports a thriving retail
district, as well as providing a neighborhood gathering spot
for the communities they serve. BKF took meticulous detail
LQORFDWLQJXWLOLW\ER[HV¿UHK\GUDQWVPHWHULQJORFDWLRQV
EDFNÀRZSUHYHQWHUV¿UHGHSDUWPHQWFRQQHFWLRQVHWF7KLV
attention to detail is necessary to make sure that none of
these necessary utility appurtenances detract from the user
experience. The ongoing success and popularity of each of
these spots demonstrates that we have achieved that goal.
Expediting Approvals
One last aspect of BKF’s design, a processing innovation,
has served us well on many projects. The critical path
to getting this process approved goes through three
important elements: the schedule, the coordination of
utility relocations, and approvals by the various agencies
with jurisdiction over the project. We carefully establish
a working relationship with the reviewers of each of
WKHVHDJHQFLHVLQFOXGLQJ3* (&DOWUDQVDQG%&'&DQG
NHHSWKHPQRWL¿HGRQDQRQJRLQJEDVLVRIRXUSURJUHVV
Also, we highlight in advance when we will need them to
respond to submittals and provide us guidance so that we
are all working as a team, with the goal to be successfully
completing the project, and helping the client initiate area-
wide development.
SUSTAINABILITY
|
%.)KDVEHHQWKHFLYLOGHVLJQHURIRYHU3ODWLQXP*ROGDQG6LOYHU/(('FHUWLÀHGSURMHFWV%.)
takes a proactive approach to promote sustainable design, hosting in-house LEED seminars and
promoting LEED standards internally. BKF currently employs over 50 LEED Accredited Profession-
DOVDQGRYHU46'463FHUWLÀHGSURIHVVLRQDOVWDII
6KLQVHL*DUGHQV
7KH)HGHUDO*6$%XLOGLQJ
0LOOV&ROOHJH*6%%XLOGLQJ
Oakland, CA
Alameda, CA
San Francisco, CA
LEED PLATINUM&HUWL¿HG
• 260 Homer, Palo Alto
• 5th Avenue Alternative School, Redwood City
• Mills College - Irene Moore Natural Science Building, Oakland
)LUVW/(('%XLOGLQJRQ&DPSXV
• Portola Valley Town Center, Portola Valley
• 6HTXRLD+LJK6FKRRO*\PQDVLXP5HGZRRG&LW\
• 6KLQVHL*DUGHQV$ODPHGD
• 6RQRPD0RXQWDLQ9LOODJH5RKQHUW3DUN /(('1'
• The Nueva School, Hillsborough
/(('*2/'&HUWL¿HG
• AAA Headquarters, Walnut Creek
• America Center, San Jose
• CCSF Joint-Use Academic Building, San Francisco
• &ROOHJH2I6DQ0DWHR+HDOWK :HOOQHVV%XLOGLQJ6DQ0DWHR
)LUVW/(('*ROGRILWVNLQG
• Education Park Branch Library, San Jose
• 0LOOV*UDGXDWH6FKRRORI%XVLQHVV2DNODQG
• Oak Park Community Center, Sacramento
)LUVW/(('*ROG%XLOGLQJLQWKH&LW\RI6DFUDPHQWR
• Roosevelt Community Center, San Jose
• Santana Row - Lot 2, San Jose
• State Compensation Insurance Fund Campus, Vacaville
• USF Center for Science Innovation, San Francisco
• YMCA, East Palo Alto
LEED SILVER - &HUWL¿HG
• $OPDQRU2I¿FH%XLOGLQJ6XQQ\YDOH
• Applied Biosystems Campus, Pleasanton
• East Contra Costa Courthouse, Pittsburg
• 6DQ0DWHR&RXQW\)RUHQVLF/DE &RURQHUV2I¿FH6DQ0DWHR
• San Mateo County Youth Services Center, San Mateo
• San Jose Educational Park Branch Library, San Jose
• 7KH)HGHUDO*6$%XLOGLQJ6DQ)UDQFLVFR
LEED - CHUWL¿HG
• Lockheed Building 179, Sunnyvale
• San Jose Central Service Yard, San Jose
• San Jose Environmental Innovation Center, San Jose
SUSTAINABILITY
VAN DORN ABED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC.
81 14th Street, San Francisco, CA 94103 ph 415.864.1921 fx 415.864.4796 valainc.com
VanDornAbedLandscapeArchitectsInc.specializesin
comprehensive,creativeandresponsibledesigndevelopment
acrossabroadbaseofprojecttypesincludingbusinessparks,
hospitalcampuses,commercialprojects,singleandmultiͲ
familyhousing,recreationalfacilities,parkingfacilities,resort
hotels,themeparks,educationalcenters,streetscapes,mixed
usedevelopments,andgovernmentalfacilities.Thefirmhas
beenaleaderinthedevelopmentofinnovativeand
aestheticallyrichlandscapesthatarebothfunctionaland
contextuallyappropriate.
Ourservicescoverthespectrumfromthecommunity
participationprocessandinitialprojectprogrammingthrough
conceptualplans,detailedpreliminarydrawings,andtechnical
constructiondocumentpackages.Additionally,weareskilled
inassistingwithcontractbidding,scheduleandadministration
requirements,constructionsitevisitsanddocumentation.
Throughallthesephases,VanDornAbedLandscapeArchitects
hasarecordofhighqualitycontractdocuments,creative
designsolutions,timelyresponsetoschedulerequirements,
andareputationforcompletionofprojectswithinbudget
constraints.Thefirmhastheabilitytohandlediversetypesof
projectsandemploysastaffwithanabilitytoquickly
comprehendanddevelopexceptionalandfunctionaldesign
solutionsforprojectsofanycomplexity.Wehaveareputation
forprovidingaquickresponsetoclientneedsanda
commitmenttogivingourclientsimmediateaccesstoour
projectmanagersandstaff.Ourreputationforprovidingclose
communication,maintainingtimelyschedulesandadheringto
projectbudgetshasbroughtusnumerousrepeatclientsover
theyears.Principalandseniorstaffparticipationinallprojects
isakeyelementtothesuccessofourwork.
Asgreenbuildingpractices,sustainabledesignandwater
qualitycontrolhasbecomenotonlythekeytoasuccessful
futurefortheplanet,butalsointheforefrontofdiscussion
withmostcitiesandagencies,VanDornAbedLandscape
Architectshasbeenprovidingcreativeandsuccessfulsolutions
addressingtheseneeds.Ourprojectshaveincludeddesigns
forbioswales,infiltrationareas,greenstreetsolutions,
permeablepavingsystems,detentionareas,pretreatment
concepts,waterconservation,sustainableandrecycled
materialsuseandgreenroofsolutions.Inadditionour
landscapeshaveincorporatedtheuseofintegratedpest
managementconcepts,biodiversity,andwildlifehabitat
creation.
VAN DORN ABED LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS INC.
SHARI VAN DORN PRINCIPAL
Education University of California, Berkeley Bachelor of Arts Degree in Landscape Architecture, 1984
Professional Registered Landscape ArchitectCertification State of California - License #2852
Professional 1990 - Present: Principal at Van Dorn Abed Landscape Architects Inc. Experience 1988 - 1990: Walt Disney Imagineering, California and France
Area Development Designer
1984 - 1989: Peridian, Irvine, CA Senior Project Manager and Designer for Landscape Architectural and Planning Office
Other Qualifications 2009 Building of America Green Publication: Turning Landscapes Green – Sustainable Site Design Solutions, 2009 Community Service Award, 2008 Excellence in Green Building of America Award, 2007 SFO San Francisco Beautiful Award, 2006 American Living Platinum Award – Best Neighborhood and Best Redevelopment
Shari Van Dorn is a licensed Landscape Architect with over 28 years of experience providing creative and comprehensive design solutions, succinct public presentations, high quality construction documentation, project management and construction administration. She has extensive experience working on large multi-disciplinary projects for a wide range of clients including governmental agencies and private developers. Her projects have ranged from new multi-story housing developments, new communities, renovation projects, streetscapes, public
parks, recreation centers and schools to hotels and theme parks. She brings in-depth experience in balancing the concerns of the client with those of the community, reviewing agencies, and the environment. She has specialized knowledge and experience with over structure use areas and roof gardens, green building techniques and sustainable landscape design.
PROJECTS (Partial List)
WESTSHORE MARINA, POINT RICHMOND, CA: Design for a 3 building, 269 unit condominium project at 57 units per acre with expansive podium level landscaping including pools, spa’s, fountains, outdoor use areas, landscaping and a bay front
park with connections to the bay trail system.
POINT RICHMOND SHORES, RICHMOND, CA: Design for a 325 unit condominium complex and large public park including 3 large podium level courtyards with swimming pool, spa’s, fountains, putting greens, outdoor fire places and gathering areas. The park features a large pier on the bay with plaza’s and lawns including historical references, signage and bay trail.
UNIVERSITY PARK, SUMMERHILL HOMES, PALO ALTO, CA: 2005 BALA AWARDS: BEST NEIGHBORHOOD; BEST ATTACHED URBAN INFILL DEVELOPMENT AND BEST ATTACHED HOME Project management and design for two multi-family condominium complexes, five blocks of infill housing, historic home renovations, and city park connections. This project involved over structure
courtyards and gardens, city park interface, landscape preservation and incorporation of green building materials. The project required extensive production and presentation of design materials to reviewing agencies.
SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, SAN FRANCISCO, CA: Landscape design, construction documents and construction administration of the main entrance into the expanded new international airport terminal complex to highway 101 and over 2 miles of
freeway frontage along Highway 101 north with a budget of $6,500,000.00.
1844 MARKET, THE VENN APARTMENTS, SAN FRANCISCO, CA Design for a new 8 story apartment building in the vibrant upper market neighborhood including a podium level courtyard and garden and a roof deck social lounge with bbq area, cocktail garden and social spaces.
2300 HARRISON, SAN FRANCISCO, CA Renovation of a commercial building including at grade entry and parking lot landscape
improvements and a roof deck with muraled paving, art screens, wind screens, furnishing for social interaction and artistic planters.
BRODERICK PLACE, SAN FRANCISCO, CA: Design for a multi-story condominium and mixed use retail project including podium level courtyards, patios, retail frontage and streetscapes.
MARINA HARBOR APARTMENTS, MARINA DEL REY, CA: Design for the renovation of a 966 unit apartment complex on 25 acres surrounding the marina including both new construction and renovation work for the entire complex. Project includes the
complete re-design and renovation of 3 large podium level pool areas with tennis courts, new public park, 120 units of new multi-story apartments with podium level pool area and the renovation of 846 units of existing apartments and at grade plazas and pool areas.
CENTERED: SAN JOSE, CA Design for a condominium project including an outdoor community space for gathering, playing
and showcasing local artists work. Received award for “ Best Outdoor Living Space “ 2014.
700 DELONG, NOVATO, CA: Design for a multi story condominium project with retail below including 3 podium level courtyards, a ground level public plaza with historical context, artwork and fountains, a children’s water play zone, and 4 blocks of offsite landscape improvements including entry monuments to direct people into the downtown district.
288 THIRD STREET, OAKLAND, CA: Design for a multi-story condominium project including streetscape, podium level courtyards and a roof deck.
VARIAN CORPORATE CAMPUS: PALO ALTO, CA Renovations and additions to the corporate campus including a new cafeteria with outdoor dining,
outdoor games and central courtyard to create a new campus identity.
GOSSAMER ISLE AND VILLAGE, REDWOOD SHORES, CA:
Project management and design for landscaping for two new housing developments fronting the bay including levee overlooks, mini parks, and levee trail, front and rear yards and coordination with public agencies.
SERRAMONTE CONDOS, DALY CITY, CADesign for a 200 unit condominium 5 building complex including entry fountain, play areas and an extensive 65’ high retaining wall faced in rockwork, planting and waterfalls.
MERIDIAN BAY CONDOS, FOSTER CITY, CA: Design for landscaping of a prominent condominium complex including pool area, tot lot, podium
level gardens, and an urban plaza with fountain.
EVELYN GLEN, SUNNYVALE, CA: Design for a new development of town homes including common paseos, park, lighting, community
center, streets and model homes.
ELKS LODGE, PALO ALTO, CA: Design for a new Elks Lodge facility with pools, outdoor dining and cooking area, open play area, day care center and play area and public entry court. Project includes taking roof water under a paved plaza to infiltration planters.
Corporate Profile
acies –ei f. [keenness, edge]; of the mind, [penetration, insight]; of the eye, [a piercing look or keen vision]
111 W. Evelyn Avenue, Suite 301, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 phone: (408) 522-5255 fax: (408) 522-5260 info@acies.net
ABOUT US
ACIES Engineering is committed to providing quality design for the 21st century. Our experience assures clients of
efficient solutions for mechanical, plumbing and electrical systems. By focusing on teamwork, we make our services
responsive to the needs of the client and the design team.
Our design and engineering philosophy has been founded on a practice that will bring new:
VISION for design practice
CLARITY of engineering perception
FOCUS on our lives, our world and our environment
CREATIVITY based on multicultural interaction
Our professional expertise spans through:
x Engineering studies and feasibility reports
x Building system surveys
x Schematic design development and presentation
x Construction documentation
x Value engineering
x Construction administration and management
x Energy management enhancement
As a company, the ACIES team has over 10 years of experience with both existing construction and new construction
on a variety of project types, including public and private educational facilities, and public facilities such as civic buildings
and libraries. Additionally, many of our team members have years of experience prior to joining ACIES that strengthens
the knowledge of the team through the experience of adapting to ever-evolving design techniques, new and innovative
controls, equipment, and fixtures, and constantly updated design codes, regulations and energy efficiency standards.
When working in the civic sector, each project has a unique set of requirements to meet jurisdictional codes and remain
within a specified budget. With extensive private projects within the City of Sunnyvale and local city-regulated projects
around the Bay Area, ACIES has the experience and knowledge to move forward with innovative and efficient
mechanical, electrical and plumbing designs to meet or exceed the requirements put forth for the City of Sunnyvale.
Today more than ever, new standards for energy efficiency management are sought to be achieved, and sometimes
exceeded, in current construction design. ACIES has extensive experience with California’s Title-24 Energy Efficiency
Standards, oftentimes exceeding those standards through efficient design. Additionally, we have experience with the
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System and other standards around the
Bay Area such as San Francisco's Green Building Ordinances.
Our company profile reflects our approach to clients based on a foundation of:
x Professional engineering expertise
x Design completion within accelerated project schedules
x Construction cost control implementations
x “Team based” communication protocols
x Competitive value added service
ACIES Engineering takes pride in collaboration with all parties of the project to find the best design solution for the client.
By effectively coordinating with the design team, the client, and other involved parties, ACIES strives to make the needs
of the client a reality through the most economical and efficient designs available today.
Team
acies –ei f. [keenness, edge]; of the mind, [penetration, insight]; of the eye, [a piercing look or keen vision]
111 W. Evelyn Avenue, Suite 301, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 phone: (408) 522-5255 fax: (408) 522-5260 info@ACIES.net
Srdjan Rebraca, PE
PROJECT RESPONSIBILITY
Project Lead
Mechanical Engineer of Record
CONTACT
111 W Evelyn Ave Suite 301
Sunnyvale CA 94086
(408) 522-5255 x103
(408) 522-5260 fax
srdjan@acies.net
EDUCATION
MS, Mechanical Engineering
University of Belgrade
Belgrade, Serbia
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION
Professional Mechanical
Engineer
CA License # M28498, 1993
Tomislav Gajic, PE
PROJECT RESPONSIBILITY
Electrical Principal
Electrical Engineer of Record
CONTACT
111 W Evelyn Ave Suite 301
Sunnyvale CA 94086
(408) 522-5255 x104
(408) 522-5260 fax
tomislav@acies.net
EDUCATION
MS, Electrical Engineering
University of Belgrade
Belgrade, Serbia
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION
Professional Electrical Engineer
CA License # E15130, 1996
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Srdjan Rebraca, PE is a founding Principal Owner of ACIES Engineering, in Sunnyvale,
CA, incorporated in 1999. He specializes in large-scale commercial design, retail
development, office tenant improvement, upscale and multi-family residential, health care
facilities and offices, public facilities, educational facilities, hotel chains, and campus
development. He is fluent with both design/build and full-design projects. Mr. Rebraca has
over twenty years of experience as a consulting engineer in field of Mechanical Engineering
and has been with ACIES Engineering for over 10 years.
As a Principal of ACIES Engineering, Mr. Rebraca is frequently leading a team of
MEP engineers and designers through diverse types of corporate, health care, and
mixed-use commercial projects. Each requires a unique design and coordination
approach based on broad experience and business perspectives for evolving
markets.
Mr. Rebraca extensively participates in private, custom, upscale residential and multi-
family residential development projects. He has initiated specific engineering and
design concepts for addressing ever-changing lifestyle and cultural influences. Project
sizes range from 15,000SF to 40,000SF of living environments.
Mr. Rebraca’s design team often participates in commercial facility projects.
Design/build concepts are applied to respond to the programming needs of large
scale office/tenant improvement projects.
Mr. Rebraca’s implementation of the latest developments in design procedures, and design
techniques match the rollout process used by Architects.
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Tomislav Gajic, PE is a founding Principal Owner of ACIES Engineering, in Sunnyvale,
CA, incorporated in 1999. He specializes in large-scale commercial design, retail
development, office tenant improvement, health care facilities and offices, public facilities,
educational facilities, and campus development. He is fluent with both design/build and full-
design projects. Mr. Gajic has over eighteen years of experience as a consulting engineer
in field of Electrical Engineering and has been with ACIES Engineering for over 10 years.
As Principal of ACIES Engineering, Mr. Gajic develops conceptual engineering
design, monitors electrical teams and coordinates with other parties during the design
process. He actively participates in electrical engineering and design of commercial,
residential, health care facilities, educational facilities, food service and retail projects.
He specializes in area of power distribution and controls, lighting design and fire
alarm system design.
Mr. Gajic served as a Senior Electrical Engineer for Energoprojekt Hydroengineering,
Belgrade, Yugoslavia and was involved in electrical design and management of an
electrical team for water treatment facilities. His implementation of the latest
developments in computer control systems, with PLC monitoring and SCADA
utilization, reduced the operating costs of the typical facility by 40%.
Throughout his involvement in numerous design-build projects, Mr. Gajic has
developed design/performance criteria that meet customer needs and are cost
effective and energy-conservation oriented. His involvement in projects does not end
at the reward of contracts, but continues through to punchlist, demonstrating his
commitment to a successful project for his clients.
Respected in the engineering field, many former clients frequently refer to Mr. Gajic for
advice on electrical engineering standards, lighting controls, and the latest in power
distribution systems.
Team
acies –ei f. [keenness, edge]; of the mind, [penetration, insight]; of the eye, [a piercing look or keen vision]
111 W. Evelyn Avenue, Suite 301, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 phone: (408) 522-5255 fax: (408) 522-5260 info@ACIES.net
Alex Petrovic
PROJECT RESPONSIBILITY
Mechanical Project Manager
CONTACT
111 W Evelyn Ave Suite 301
Sunnyvale CA 94086
(408) 522-5255 x105
(408) 522-5260 fax
alex@acies.net
EDUCATION
MS, Mechanical Engineering
University of Belgrade
Belgrade, Serbia
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION
None
Rene Tañag
PROJECT RESPONSIBILITY
Plumbing Project Manager
CONTACT
111 W Evelyn Ave Suite 301
Sunnyvale CA 94086
(408) 522-5255 x142
(408) 522-5260 fax
rene@acies.net
EDUCATION
BS, Mechanical Engineering
University of the East
Manila, Philippines
PROFESSIONAL REGISTRATION
None
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Alex Petrovic is an Associate Partner and Project Manager for ACIES Engineering, in
Sunnyvale, CA, incorporated in 1999. He specializes in food service, upscale residential,
airport development, and large commercial design projects. He is fluent with both
design/build and full-design projects. Mr. Petrovich has over fifteen years of experience as
a consulting engineer in field of Mechanical Engineering and has been with ACIES
Engineering for over 8 years.
As a Mechanical Project Manager of ACIES Engineering, he is a major contributor for
the early development and establishment of design concepts, which greatly improve
production and coordination between MEP disciplines.
Mr. Petrovic also oversees the operations of ACIES Engineering’s MIS, CAD and
network operating systems. Using the latest technology allows ACIES Engineering to
be at its most competitive.
Working with the Architect, Mr. Petrovic helped develop and maintained prototype
drawings and design standards for Apple Computer’s rollout of Apple Computer retail
stores across the United States. When developing standards for the planned rollout
of Apple Computer’s new retail stores, Mr. Petrovic used his previous experience
working with the GAP Stores Engineering Department.
ACIES Engineering was proud to be part of the IKEA team working on the second
Bay Area location. These massive stores have everything from high-palleted storage
to a complete commercial restaurant inside of them.
Mr. Petrovic contributed to the design of multiple Il Fornaio restaurants in California
and Colorado.
Before joining ACIES Engineering, Mr. Petrovic worked as a Project Manager for Siemens,
supervising HVAC control systems.
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
Rene Tañag is a Mechanical/Plumbing Project Manager for ACIES Engineering, in
Sunnyvale, CA, incorporated in 1999. He specializes in health care facilities, educational,
retail, food service, residential and commercial project design. He is fluent with both
design/build and full-design projects. Mr. Tañag has over twenty years of experience as a
consulting engineer in field of Mechanical/Plumbing Engineering and has been with
ACIES Engineering for over 5 years.
As a Project Manager of ACIES Engineering, he is a major contributor for the early
development and establishment of design concepts, which greatly improve
production and coordination between MEP disciplines.
Mr. Tañag develops conceptual engineering design, monitors mechanical engineers
and coordinates with other parties during the design process. He actively
participates in Mechanical Engineering and design of health care, educational,
commercial, residential, food service and retail projects. His implementation of the
latest developments in design procedures, and design techniques match the rollout
process used by Architects.
Mr. Tañag is extensively involved in design of custom, multi-family and upscale
residential projects. He has initiated specific engineering and design concepts for
addressing ever-changing lifestyle and cultural influences. Project sizes ranged from
5,000SF to 20,000SF of living environment.
During his involvement in many design-build projects, Mr. Tañag has developed
design/performance criteria that meet customer needs and are cost effective and
energy conservation oriented. His involvement in projects did not end at the reward
of contracts, but continued through to punchlist demonstrating his commitment to a
successful project for his clients.
Respected in the consulting engineering field, many former clients routinely call Mr. Tañag
for advice on code interpretation as well as HVAC system evaluations.
Examples of Work
acies –ei f. [keenness, edge]; of the mind, [penetration, insight]; of the eye, [a piercing look or keen vision]
111 W. Evelyn Avenue, Suite 301, Sunnyvale, CA 94086 phone: (408) 522-5255 fax: (408) 522-5260 info@acies.net
REFERENCES
Lisa Victor
BAR Architects
543 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415) 293-5700
www.bararch.com/
Russ Naylor
NC2 Studio
1515 Vallejo Street
San Francisco, CA 94109
(415) 749-6500
www.nc2studio.com/
Jeffrey Eaton, AIA
Eaton Hall Architecture
1155 Meridian Avenue
Suite 208
San Jose, CA, 95125
(408) 265-5255
www.jearchitects.com
Toby Levy, AIA
Levy Design Partners
90 South Park
San Francisco, CA 94107
(415) 777-0561
www.levydesignpartners.com
Neil Kaye
Stanly Saitowitz/Natoma
Architects Inc
1022 Natoma Street
No. 3
San Francisco, CA 94103
(415) 626-8977
www.saitowitz.com
William Hershey
De Anza Properties
920 West Fremont Avenue
Sunnyvale, CA 94087
(408) 738-444
Bill Bain
Essex Property Trust
925 East Meadow Drive
Palo Alto, CA 94303
(650) 849-1632
www.essexpropertytrust.com/
RELEVANT PROJECTS
Projects representative of ACIES Engineering’s relevant experience include:
1500 Newell Avenue in Walnut Creek, CA ( 124,000SF) Full MEP for 4-story
mixed use building with 49 condos above 40,000SF of retail space.
870 Harrison Street in San Francisco, CA (29,843SF) MEP design for 26
residential units within six stories.
450 Hayes Street in San Francisco, CA (52,125SF) MEP design for 40
residential units and 2 commercial units.
400 Grove Street in San Francisco, CA (44,360SF) MEP design for 30
residential units and 1 commercial unit.
Fruitdale Station, Block C1 & Block E in San Jose, CA. Full MEP for the 117
one and two level Townhome Development.
2024 Durant Avenue in Berkeley, CA (113,279SF) MEP required for one 4-
story building and one 8-story high-rise residential building with 97 units.
Lake Pines Apartments in San Mateo, CA (179,590SF). MEP design to
support the interior remodeling of a 288-unit, six-building complex with
conventional wood-frame units.
Charities Housing Apartments on Parcel B1 at the intersection of North
King Road and Dobbin Drive in San Jose, CA (105,592SF). Full MEP
engineering design services for new four story building with 94 new
residential units on a podium over an underground parking garage.
Family Supportive Housing on Parcel B2 at the intersection of North King
Road and Dobbin Drive in San Jose, CA. (48,582SF). Full MEP engineering
design services for a new five-story building of 36 new residential units.
23rd Street and Valley Street in Oakland, CA (121,700SF). 2-level parking
garage, 2 ground level retail tenant spaces, and 6 levels above for 60 residential
units.
2559 Van Ness in San Francisco, CA (50,000 SF) Full MEP engineering
required for a six story with basement building comprised of 27 units and
basement level parking garage with 27 spaces.
Cummings Park Lofts and Townhomes, East Palo Alto, CA (55,000SF).
Ground level parking garage with ground level retail and 30 residential units
above.
San Francisco Housing Authority - Mechanical and Plumbing engineering
services for as-needed engineering services for the San Francisco Housing
developments throughout San Francisco, CA. Facilities include existing and new
construction.
1080 Sutter Street, San Francisco, CA.(60,814SF) Full MEP engineering
design services and eleven story building comprised of 35 new residential
units, 1 commercial tenant spaces and a basement level parking garage
with 29 spaces.
1501 15th Street, San Francisco, CA (55,500SF) Full MEP engineering
design services for a five story building comprised of 36 new residential
units, 3 commercial tenant spaces, and a basement level parking garage
with 27 spaces.
1331 Harrison, Oakland, CA. Full MEP engineering design services for a 5-
level parking structure and 19-story apartment building.
1
RFI NO. 153960 FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES:
PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP
ARK STUDIO WEST DEVELOPMENT TEAM
ATTACHMENT H
2
1
STATEMENT OF INTEREST
3
4
STATEMENT OF INTEREST
This team has been structured to specifically address the challenges
presented in meeting the requirements of this RFI. Members of this
team have experience working in the area, and our respective
strengths and experience furnish unique and appropriate solutions
for Palo Alto’s parking needs. Selected for their experience and
expertise, each individual will help achieve the specific goals and
requirements of Palo Alto while navigating the processes required to
achieve successful parking facilities.
This proposal addresses the RFI in ways unique to this team, with
prototypes designed to maximize parking. Some of the important
considerations regarding these parking structures are as follows:
Appropriate Solutions
Highly sophisticated solutions are appropriate to Palo Alto as a center
of technology, to address the mind set of users used to high-tech
solutions. Such solutions as applicable will include electronic signage,
Parking Access Revenue Control (PARCS), parking guidance systems,
automatic valet systems and EV charging stations as appropriate. This
team can deliver a parking facility to Palo Alto that is user friendly,
easy to operate, sustainable and maximizes return on investment.
Minimum Impact, Compact Development
Creatively and efficiently planned to maximize parking, the modular-
designed structures will be attractive and functional while respecting
height and envelope limitations.
5
Unique Added Uses
Retail is proposed in a variety of locations to increase pedestrian
liveliness and invite additional users to the location. Having off-street
parking available for retail visitors will make downtown visits easier
and less stressful. Each structure based on location will dictate the
design option approach that will complement its inherent surrounding
neighbors, adjacent uses and feasibility. The ultimate decision will be
made collaboratively by Client and focus group decisions.
Green Building Principles
A green building is one whose construction and operation assure the
healthiest possible environment while representing the most efficient
and least disruptive use of land, water, energy and resources.
This team agrees with the City’s goals, and with state-of-the-art
sustainability solutions will produce parking structures that will make
the city and taxpayers proud. These solutions include but are not
limited to:
• Runoff filtering system
• Renewable energy systems and Photovoltaics
• LED lighting and way finding,
• Occupancy sensors.
• Recycled materials
• Green Roofs and Rainwater harvesting
• EV Charging systems
• Bicycles parking
• Others
User Safety and Way-Finding
The team will work with the Client to establish what types of passive
and active security technology and controls should be factored into
the design to satisfy the level of need. Designs will encourage walking,
bicycling, carpooling or taking transit.
6
2
APPROACH
7
8
Project Approach
The specific project Methodology represents an effort to respond to the goals of the RFP in an
organized fashion. In order to understand the City’s needs well enough to develop substantive
insights and to make suggestions for improvement in both operations and facilities, a thorough,
flexible, and analytical process must be employed. We believe this approach will provide the City
of Palo Alto with efficient, minimum impact new structures to meet the parking requirements for the
foreseeable future.
In this proposal, we have provided a prototypical parking structure design and financial approach
that will be attractive to both City of Palo Alto and Investment group. We have taken Lot D as our
example to showcase how we would implement the four F’s:
Form - Aesthetics
Function – Efficient circulation and maximized space utilization
Finance – Revenue generating design and parking solution
Fit – Appropriate and site specific design solution
We have also provided 3 design options to allow each structure to be unique and site specific that
is responsive to adjacent commercial, retail and residential neighbors.
DESIGN APPROACH
9
Lot D - Option C
Hybrid Ground Floor Retail and Roof Top Terrace and Retail and / or Office space
Lot D - Option B
Top Floor / Roof Top retail / office – Offers higher lease, and VIP customers / users
Lot D - Option A
Ground Floor Retail – offers pedestrian level retail component
10
Information Collection
The Team will obtain the necessary data required to successfully complete each phase of the
project. The data will include information about City and any other requirements, historical parking
data, and specific features or anticipated changes affecting the proposed facilities. This data will
enable development of parking structure standardization guidelines.
Consensus Building Process
An important part of the success of the planning and design process is the extent to which a shared
vision and shared strategies can be developed. After data collection, a dialogue must occur, with
the team working closely with the Client. Representative members of the team would ideally meet
every 2-3 weeks for the duration of the project(s).
Palo Alto 2030 Goals (from Comprehensive Plan)
A critical design approach we are embracing is to seamlessly weave this new development within
the current established guidelines, goals and mission of the city. These are (will be) the base
standard and priority of all concepts and design approach.
o Climate Protection: minimum impact, compact development, best land use to balance natural
resources and community needs.
o Improve City’s urban streetscape to support business prosperity, pedestrian usage and
aesthetic quality of its civic spaces.
o Reinforce existing character and scale of streets, new public plazas or gardens to create
connectivity. Promote design and site planning of on-site open space that incorporates green
building principles and invites surrounding inhabitants to use spaces.
o Encourage efficient parking design and creative parking solutions, including parking with
adjacent uses to minimize the amount of land devoted to parking, provided that City’s traffic
safety, parking and economic goals are met.
o Recognize the significance of innovative, high-quality architecture in supporting community
character and urban design.
o Encourage high-quality signage that is attractive, appropriate for the location, energy efficient,
and balances visibility with aesthetic needs.
PALO ALTO COOPERATION
11
o Allow all City’s infrastructure improvements to serve all areas of the City fairly, address the
most urgent present needs, and accommodate future growth.
o Enhance the appearance, safety and walk ability of sidewalks and streets.
o Employ small-scale urban design elements to stimulate economic growth and provide a
sense of identity in commercial districts, such as centrally located open spaces, spirited
building entries, storefronts with indoor/outdoor connections, (....) and details that provide a
human scale and overview of the street.
o Design and maintain street frontages that contribute to walkability and to retail vitality in all
commercial districts.
o Ensure that University Ave./Downtown is pedestrian friendly and supports bicycle and
pedestrian facilities improvements. Use public art and other amenities to create an environment
inviting to pedestrians.
o Encourage new development around transit stations, locations with bicycle and pedestrian
connectivity, and city services to allow residents and employees to meet daily needs without
the use of cars. Encourage such development to maximize allowed densities and intensities
to take advantage of these locations.
o Avoid abrupt changes in scale and density.
Review and Approval
The Client will serve as final authorities on the resolution of issues, and provide direction regarding
the project(s), as well as reviewing standards to be used for the project. The team may present a
number of alternatives for a specific issue, to be reviewed and decided upon. Our development
team has key consultant contacts with past City Planning and Building experience that can help
us navigate through this collaborative process and critical City of Palo Alto planning and building
guidelines.
Project Schedule
The Team recognizes the importance of schedule adherence and project completion. As no
time frame has been identified, the Team believes that complete documentation, strong individual
contributions and an interactive approach will be successful in maintaining schedule control.
12
Metal Mesh Panels
Provide economic solution
for shading, privacy, and
ventilation
Aluminum Sun Shades Shade Structure
Provide shade for upper
level of parking
BUILDING DIAGRAM
13
TRESPA Panels
Colored TRESPA panels used
to give each building a unique
identity appropriate to its
parking zone
Ground Level Retail / Restaurant
Activates and enlivens the ground pedestrian level
Reinforces the existing character and scale of the street
Enhance the appearance, safety and walkability of sidewalks
Enhance neighborhood identity
Signage
Provides clear wayfinding for
pedestrians
Vertical Circulation
Well lit to allow for safe
pedestrian use
14
SUSTAINABLE STRATEGIES
Rainwater Collection
Rainwater collected and stored
for non potable use and to
prevent storm drain overload
Bike Storage and Changing
Room
Promote use of alternative
transportation as a way to
reduce CO emissions
Concrete
Contains up to 40% recycled
content
Permeable Pavement
Allows rainwater runoff to naturally
filter and replenish the aquifer
2
15
Solar PV Panels
Provide energy to run lighting as well as
shade for upper level parking
High Solar Reflectance Index (SRI)
Prevents heat gain
EV Charging Station
Promote use of electric vehicles to re-
duce CO emissions2
High Performance Lighting
LED lighting allows for efficient use of
energy to light public spaces
Steel
Contains up to 90% recycled content
16
LOT D - OPTION A
Ground Floor Retail – offers pedestrian level retail component
17
UPUP
UP
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
17' - 0"14' - 0"14' - 0"17' - 0"
12'
-
6
"
18'
-
0
"
18'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
18'
-
0
"
18'
-
0
"
18' - 0"
18' - 0"18' - 0"18' - 0"18' - 0"18' - 0"16' - 0"14' - 0"
24
'
-
0
"
20
'
-
8
"
20'
-
8
"
20'
-
8
"
176 SFSTORAGE
567 SFBIKE LOCKER
UP
2' SETBACK
16' - 0"
HAMILTON AVENUE
WA
V
E
R
L
E
Y
S
T
R
E
E
T
4809 SFRETAIL/RESTAURANT
801 SFKITCHEN/ SERVICE
520 SFSTORAGE641 SFMEP RM 429 SFTOILET
911 SFOUTDOOR DINING
329 SFBIKE RACK
13371 SFPARKING (25 SPACES)
2’
0’
10’
5’
30’
20’
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
18
DNDN
UP
DN
UP
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
UP DN
22741 SF
PARKING (64 SPACES)
2’
0’
10’
5’
30’
20’
TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN
19
DN
DN
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
22890 SF
PARKING (66 SPACES)
DN
2’
0’
10’
5’
30’
20’
TOP LEVEL PLAN
20
LOT D - OPTION B
Top Floor / Roof Top retail / office – Offers higher lease, and VIP customers / users
21
2’
0’
10’
5’
30’
20’
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
UPUP
UP
1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
17' - 0"14' - 0"14' - 0"17' - 0"
12'
-
6
"
18'
-
0
"
18'
-
0
"
18
'
-
0
"
18'
-
0
"
18'
-
0
"
18' - 0"
18' - 0"18' - 0"18' - 0"18' - 0"18' - 0"16' - 0"14' - 0"
24
'
-
0
"
20
'
-
8
"
20'
-
8
"
20'
-
8
"
176 SFSTORAGE
567 SFBIKE LOCKER
UP
2' SETBACK
16' - 0"
HAMILTON AVENUE
WA
V
E
R
L
E
Y
S
T
R
E
E
T
248 SFTOILET240 SFTOILET623 SFBIKE LOCKER
329 SFBIKE RACK
344 SFBIKE RACK
22
LOT D - OPTION C
Hybrid Ground Floor Retail and Roof Top Terrace and Retail and / or Office space
23
24
DESIGN FEATURES
Exterior Envelope
Each parking structure building envelope will be customized for specific locations. Concrete and
steel is necessary for its inherent structural needs. Facades will be site specifically designed and
cladded in various colors and materials to offer unique identifying features. These include metal
panels, green walls, rain screen systems, sun shading devices / systems and potential LED lighting
for signage, information or artwork.
Mechanical, Electrical and Plumbing
Benefits of LED lighting:
• LED light fixtures have a long life of up to 100,000 hours. This equates to almost 22 years
of 50% use and 11 years of continuous operation.
• LED lamps are energy efficient utilizing 80-90% of the energy required to operate them.
• LED lamps do not contain chemicals like mercury. They are completely non-toxic and
recyclable.
• LED lights operate in extreme temperatures and are resistant to shock and vibrations making
them ideal for outdoor lighting.
• LED lamps are dimmable and do not require warm up. They are instantly on or off.
• According to manufacturers LED lighting costs are paid back to the user in 5-8 years.
Plumbing:
• Low-flow fixtures. Toilets: 1.2 gallon per flush with dual flush capability.
• Lavatories with aerators
• Urinals: Ultra-low flow 1 pint per flush
• High efficiency water heaters
Mechanical:
• High efficiency HVAC systems
• IAQ indoor CO2 sensors for optimal fresh air to spaces
• Variable speed fans for parking garage ventilation
• Smart temperature controls for optimal comfort and energy savings
Additional Uses
Retail uses are being proposed to increase pedestrian liveliness and invite additional users to the
location. These uses include food vendors and office space, or other uses to be determined in the
future.
Signage
Signage will be creative and appropriate, integrated as a decorative element. Environmental Graphics
design will reinforce our security, way finding and unique color and identity of each structure to be
used as a landmark for users.
Accent Colors of structure can also be used to convey potential Corporate sponsors for their
affiliate company and key corporate employees and executives.
Amenities
‘Green space” amenities will be integrated to give breathing space between and address the
business entries on the backs of existing buildings. These small-scale urban design elements will
provide a sense of identity in each location. These new public “green space” amenities will create
connectivity, invite surrounding inhabitants to use the spaces, and reinforce existing character and
scale of streets. In addition, Option 2 & 3 offer “Green space” or roof top gardens
25
Necessary agreements and entitlements:
• Environmental Impact Report / CEQA
• Possible appeal of height and density requirements established for existing zoning
• Planning & Transportation Commission
• Architectural Review Board
• Agreements with neighboring businesses as required
• Water and Energy Efficiency Rebates through the City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) Commercial
Advantage Rebate Program.
• 2013 California Green Building Code (CALGreen) with Local Amendments
• Green Halo System, to help contractors to recycle construction debris
Scope of Work & Deliverables
a. Parking Structure Standardization Guidelines
b. Architectural Design
c. Exterior Enclosure Design
d. Structural Design
e. Parking Layout Design
f. Engineered Systems Schematics: Including Plumbing, Electrical, Mechanical, Vertical
Transportation, And Electronic Entry/Exit And Security Systems, Plus Any Other Specialty
Equipment.
g. Sustainability Features Design
h. Site Features Design
Rooftop Garden
26
3
FINANCING STRATEGY AND
ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY
27
28
Financial Feasibility
• Estimated Project Costs
• Cash Flow
• Financing
• Legal Concerns
Our team has developed several revenue generating scenarios that correlates to our design
approach options that will benefit both city and developer / investor both in the short term and long
term period. Detailed feasibility study will need to be developed further to successfully develop
a Public / Private Partnership agreement. Our goal is to preserve current revenue for city during
the construction period that can be detailed out during the RFP stage. Our financial summary is
focused on the delta of added parking stalls and increased revenue generated by a mixed use
retail/ commercial component.
Transfer of Risks
Public/Private partnerships are commonly used to transfer certain risks to the private sector,
because they eliminates those risks for the city and, by extension, for the taxpayer. Examples of risk
include design, construction/implementation, and financing. The transfer of risk for various elements
has a value that will be quantified where possible in the financial proposal.
Parking Lots Project Costs Analysis
Lot
D Lot
E
Lot
G Lot
E/G Lot
O Lot
P
Existing
Surface
Lot 86 34 53 87 78 51
Proposed
Gargage
(P-‐1
thru
P-‐5)283 75 166 268 223 140
Total
Net
Gain 197 41 113 181 145 89
%
Increase
of
Parking 249%121%213%208%186%175%
Subterranean
(B-‐1)*0 -‐30 30 45 55
ΔProposed
w/
Commercial
Space*-‐-‐-‐-‐23 -‐-‐
Valet
Parking*68 37 44 88 52 42
Subterranean
Valet
Parking*-‐-‐-‐-‐11
ΔValet
w/
Commercial
Space*-‐-‐-‐-‐10 -‐-‐
Transit
Substituted
with
Parking*-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
Total
Max
Net
Gain*265 78 187 299 242 197
%
Increase
of
Parking*417%229%353%344%310%386%
Parking
SQFT 117,450 31,275
69,222
111,756
92,991
58,380
Retail
SQFT 7,173.00
3,127.50
6,922.20
11,175.60
9,299.10
5,838.00
Parking
Construction
Cost 115.00$
13,506,750.00$
3,579,527.39$
7,922,687.28$
12,790,844.52$
10,643,128.09$
6,681,784.45$
Retail
Construction
Cost 125.00$
896,625.00$
390,937.50$
865,275.00$
1,396,950.00$
1,162,387.50$
729,750.00$
Retail
Construction
Cost 14,403,375.00$
3,970,464.89$
8,787,962.28$
14,187,794.52$
11,805,515.59$
7,411,534.45$
Lot
D Lot
E
Lot
G Lot
E/G Lot
O Lot
P
Existing
Surface
Lot 86 34 53 87 78 51
Proposed
Gargage
(P-‐1
thru
P-‐5)283 75 166 268 223 140
Total
Net
Gain 197 41 113 181 145 89
%
Increase
of
Parking 249%121%213%208%186%175%
Subterranean
(B-‐1)*0 -‐30 30 45 55
ΔProposed
w/
Commercial
Space*-‐-‐-‐-‐23 -‐-‐
Valet
Parking*68 37 44 88 52 42
Subterranean
Valet
Parking*-‐-‐-‐-‐11
ΔValet
w/
Commercial
Space*-‐-‐-‐-‐10 -‐-‐
Transit
Substituted
with
Parking*-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
Total
Max
Net
Gain*265 78 187 299 242 197
%
Increase
of
Parking*417%229%353%344%310%386%
Parking
SQFT 117,450 31,275
69,222
111,756
92,991
58,380
Retail
SQFT 7,173.00
3,127.50
6,922.20
11,175.60
9,299.10
5,838.00
Parking
Construction
Cost 115.00$
13,506,750.00$
3,579,527.39$
7,922,687.28$
12,790,844.52$
10,643,128.09$
6,681,784.45$
Retail
Construction
Cost 125.00$
896,625.00$
390,937.50$
865,275.00$
1,396,950.00$
1,162,387.50$
729,750.00$
Retail
Construction
Cost 14,403,375.00$
3,970,464.89$
8,787,962.28$
14,187,794.52$
11,805,515.59$
7,411,534.45$
FINANCIAL STRATEGY
29
Parking
SQFT 117,450
Retail
SQFT 7173
Total
Construction
cost 14,403,375.00$
Construction
cost
Per
Stall
417
50895.31802
Retail
leasing
monthly 12.00$
$86,076.00
Annual
rental
income $1,032,912.00
Lease
parking
per
day 17.50$
$4,952.50
Lease
parking
per
Month 30
$148,575.00
Lease
parking
per
Year
12
$1,782,900.00
ROI
in
years
10
$28,158,120.00
Total
Profit
of
ROI
in
years 10
13,754,745.00$
Total
ROI
%
in
years 10
95.50%
Parking Lot D Example Cash Flow Analysis
Lot
DLot
E
Lot
G Lot
E/G Lot
O Lot
P
Existing
Surface
Lot86 34 53 87 78 51
Proposed
Gargage
(P-‐1
thru
P-‐5)283 75 166 268 223 140
Total
Net
Gain197 41 113 181 145 89
%
Increase
of
Parking249%121%213%208%186%175%
Subterranean
(B-‐1)*0 -‐30 30 45 55
ΔProposed
w/
Commercial
Space*-‐-‐-‐-‐23 -‐-‐
Valet
Parking*68 37 44 88 52 42
Subterranean
Valet
Parking*-‐-‐-‐-‐11
ΔValet
w/
Commercial
Space*-‐-‐-‐-‐10 -‐-‐
Transit
Substituted
with
Parking*-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐
Total
Max
Net
Gain*265 78 187 299 242 197
%
Increase
of
Parking*417%229%353%344%310%386%
Parking
SQFT117,450 31,275
69,222
111,756
92,991
58,380
Retail
SQFT7,173.00
3,127.50
6,922.20
11,175.60
9,299.10
5,838.00
Parking
Construction
Cost115.00$
13,506,750.00$
3,579,527.39$
7,922,687.28$
12,790,844.52$
10,643,128.09$
6,681,784.45$
Retail
Construction
Cost125.00$
896,625.00$
390,937.50$
865,275.00$
1,396,950.00$
1,162,387.50$
729,750.00$
Retail
Construction
Cost14,403,375.00$
3,970,464.89$
8,787,962.28$
14,187,794.52$
11,805,515.59$
7,411,534.45$
30
4
DEVELOPMENT TEAM
31
32
The team proposes a series of modular designs to address the variety of locations identified in the RFP. Innovative,
modern architectural design will support the community character and urban design, respecting the features that make
Palo Alto special.
The team’s efficiency and clear methodology will enable fast solutions in response to issues raised in the approval
process. Our approach will allow for multiple areas of this work to be done simultaneously rather than sequentially. A
project of this size and complexity needs the unique skills possessed by this team. The City’s client committee (hereafter
called the Client, including representation from such agencies as the City deems appropriate) will work closely with this
team. Specific team members and their roles include:
Development Team
The development team below represents the key areas of expertise needed to deliver a collaborative, effective and
successful projects for the Client. Below is a brief description of team roles and value added to team. Additional
corporate information, experience and project team roles are further detailed in their respective sections in this submittal.
Architect
ARK Studio West reflects the intelligence and commitment of the extraordinary individuals with a common vision: to
inspire quality living through innovation, sustainable design and holistic design approach. ARK Studio West will provide
architectural design through attention to detail, green design strategies and affinity to the context/site. In addition, they
will execute a successful project delivery through effective communication protocol, project management, scheduling
and cost control. ARK Studio West will provide the necessary leadership to preserve the Client’s interest throughout
this collaborative process.
Developer / Investor
LYNKS DEVELOPERS LLC is a CM/GC design/build company working to create and develop facilities similar to this
project. Swenson Builders is one of the top real estate development and construction firms in Northern California.
Both will provide the development leadership and Investments arm to this team. They are well versed in public private
partnerships and have the capacity and strength to successfully plan and execute for the City of Palo Alto.
DEVELOPMENT TEAM
33
General Contractor
Clark & Sullivan is committed to understand and exceed customers’ needs and maximize their investment. Their team
approach creates a work environment which encourages communication and builds confidence and trust. They will
work with the development team to provide cost estimating, constructability review, cost control, project scheduling and
construction implementation.
Parking Consultant / Structural,
Walter P Moore is a leading U.S.-based engineering and consulting firm. They will provide structural engineering,
diagnostics, civil, traffic, and transportation engineering, as well as parking consulting services to public and private
sector clients. Their role will be to provide parking design and structural recommendations for the various design
scenarios we have proposed. Depending on construction sequencing and phasing, WP Moore will coordinate with
design team consultants including Biggs Cardosa Associates Structural to provide a divide and conquer approach since
there are many sites of various sizes and scope.
Structural
Biggs Cardosa Associates has been involved with numerous projects requiring innovative solutions – both in operating
procedures and technical matters. They offer a well-established practice of always operating proactively to foresee
potential challenges, combined with our cutting-edge technical expertise, have consistently led to innovative procedural
approaches and/or design ideas that have saved both time and money on many projects and demonstrated ability to
exceed client’s expectations. They will provide both peer structural review and structural design services. Depending on
construction sequencing and phasing, Biggs Cardosa Structural will coordinate with design team consultants including
WP Moore to provide a divide and conquer approach since there are many sites of various sizes.
MEP
Optimum Energy Design (OED) is full service Mechanical, Plumbing, Fire Protection, Energy Engineering and Commissioning
firm serving the Western United States. They strive to provide cutting edge service using the latest in simulation technology
and real world experience. Their work will be instrumental for both the parking structure and mixed use components.
34
FIRM PROFILE
Firm Name ARK Studio West
Office to Provide Services 1900 Powell Street Suite 460
Emeryville, CA 94608
[t] 510.646.8150 [f] 510.646.8160
www.arkstudiowest.com
Main Contact Nik Sernande, Managing Director
niks@arkstudiowest.com
[t] 510.646.8153 [c] 925.202.6252
Business Structure CA Corporation
No. of Current Employees 7 (U.S.A.), 100 (India)
Date Firm Established 2013 (U.S.A.), 1988 (India)
Firm Profile
Established in Emeryville, CA (USA), ARK Studio West reflects the intelligence and commitment of the extraordi-
nary individuals with a common vision, that is to inspire quality living through innovation, sustainable design and
holistic design approach. The people in ARK Studio West strives to bring together a portfolio of 25 years proven
experience in project design and delivery ranging from educational, institutional, residential and commercial
buildings. With commitment to highest standard of quality and service for the clients, the firm’s approach will
gravitate around two essential ideas. One is to provide great architectural design through attention to detail,
green design strategies and affinity to the context/site, and the other is to provide great project delivery through
excellent communication, scheduling and cost control.
ARK Studio West is partnering with REZA KABUL ARCHITECTS PVT. LTD. (ARK), Founded in 1988, Reza Kabul began
its practice in a time of exciting change and urban growth in India. Now having strength of almost 100+ full time
staff the firm drastically grew along with the growth of Mumbai. The steady growth of the practice over the years
is one factor in allowing us to address projects on a Big Scale, Nationally and Internationally.
The firm strives to provide world class designs which improve the quality of life where people live, work, seek
education, entertainment or leisure. The same effort has imparted a Reputed Identity for ARK and thus maintains
close contacts between the design team and the client and pride ourselves on offering a highly personalized
service.
ARK STUDIO WEST
35
One of the foremost talents in the realm of Indian architecture, Mr.
Reza Kabul’s foray into the industry was quite by accident. A random experience of viewing books on architecture proved catalyst enough for a switch from engineering to architecture. After proving his abilities at legendary architect Mr.Hafeez Contractor’s establishment, he set up ARK in 1988. Mr. Kabul has envisioned and successfully executed a string of path breaking projects centered on the design philosophy of ‘liberating spaces’. Mr. Kabul has handled projects for virtually all the leading names in Indian real estate and continues to enjoy the trust and appreciation of the industry with projects that continue to set pioneering benchmarks in architectural design.A speaker for Marcus Evans “Tall Buildings” Conference in Seoul, Korea 2008 and a pioneer in tall buildings, has been listed in the Limca Book of Awards 2003 for the tallest building Shreepati Arcade in India. His signature designs are found in Sudan, Bhutan, Korea, Nairobi, Mauritius, and UAE where his design, Hotel Landmark Grand has recently won International Hotel Awards – ‘Highly Commended - Best Hotel’, Dubai 2012-2013
Representative Projects:
RESIDENTIAL
Sierra Vista Development, Talegaon, India
Socorro Gardens, Povorim, Goa, India
Teacher’s Colony, Mumbai, India
Shreepati Gardens, Mumbai, India
HOSPITALITY
Landmark Grand, Vashi, Mumbai, Dubai
Hotel Itc Fortune, Vashi, Mumbai, India
COMMERCIAL
Socorro Gardens, Povorim, Goa, India
Mega Mall, Oshiwara, Mumbai, India
RESIDENTIAL
Sierra Vista Development, Talegaon, India
Socorro Gardens, Povorim, Goa, India
Awards:
2004 Accommodation Times for “The Best Architect of the Year”
2005-2006 Practicing Engineers, Architects, Town Planners Association
for Best Performance
2007 HOST Design Zone Awards
2008 IAD - Best Architect Commercial Category
2009 Real Estate Association Award
2010 Best Architect - News Makers Achievers
2011 The Indian Institute of Architects - Citation of Emerging Master
2011 Archilights Certificate of Appreciation
Indian Achievers Award for Development
Bharat Gaurav Award
Best Corporate Design Excellence
REGISTRATION
Indian Institute of Architects
American Institute of Architects
EDUCATION
B. Arch, University, Location
REZA KABUL, AAIA, IIA
President
ARK STUDIO WEST
36
ARK STUDIO WEST
Peyman A. Nejad is International Design Principal; he has dedicated
himself to structural innovation throughout his prestigious career. His
renowned contribution is the invention of the “Hexagrid” structural system for the tall buildings. While broadly known for his work on super tall buildings; he has had a notable career in the analysis and design of concrete and steel structures and is an acknowledged expert in the design of super-tall buildings. His expertise extends to skillful project management and the development. He is a motivated, dynamic, and individual with the ability to lead his team in developing innovative solutions for a wide variety of issues whether in structural analysis and design. An effective and tactful communicator, much of his career to date has been in the auditing of the structural design of tall buildings including the world’s tallest - the Burj Khalifa in Dubai. Other examples are designing the new Gazprom HQ, the tallest building in Europe - Lakhta Tower in St. Petersburg, Russia, and three buildings over 100 storeys – Princess Tower, Dubai; Marina 101 Tower, Dubai and Roya Tower, Doha. He was involved in the post collapse analysis of World Trade Centre (WTC7) in New York.Peyman is the recipient of multiple awards and honors, including the Award for Excellence for the invention of a new structural system -the Beehive (HexatGrid) system for tall and Super Tall Buildings. He is actively involved with numerous professional organizations and Universities; He has also received an Award for Excellence in Lecturing at the Islamic Azad University (IAU) and St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University (SPBPU). He was selected chairman of the Seismic Committee of High-rise & Complex Building for the International Congress on Seismic Retrofitting in Iran (March 2006).
Representative Projects:
TOWERS
Burj Khalifa, Dubai, UAE
Gazprom Headquarters And Business Centre St Petersburg, Russia
Capital Gate Adnec Development - Phase 3, Abu Dhabi, UAE
Noga Headquarters, Manama, Bahrain
The Lagoons, Dubai, UAE
Infinity Tower, Dubai Marina
U Bora Tower, Dubai, UAE
Shatha Tower, Dubai, UAE
RESORTS
Crescent Luxury Resort and Residence, Palm Jumeirah, Dubai, UAE
Awards:
2001 Article Award concrete deep beam using perforated steel plates
2002 Design of High-Rise Building Award
2006 Outstanding Researcher of the Year in Science and Research
PEYMAN ASKARINEJAD, CENG., CIARB
Vice President
B.A. Civil Engineering, 1997
M.Sc. Project Management, UC
Berkeley, California
Master in Structural Engineering, Sharif
University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
REGISTRATION
Chairman, High-Rise Building,
International Congress on Seismic Retrofit
EDUCATION
PhD in Structural Engineering, UC
Berkeley, California
37
Nik brings to the team 15+ years of experience designing and
managing many projects similar to Palo Alto Private Public Partnership.
Nik Sernande is currently a Managing Director, Partner of ARK Studio West, USA with its solid 100+ member parent company, ARK based in Mumbai India. He continues to add to his portfolio of over several hundred million dollars worth of award winning architecture and construction projects. He provides leadership, global design experience and expertise in education, commercial, master planning, multifamily, hotel, retail and mixed-use residential developments.
Representative Projects:
EDUCATIONAL K-12 MASTER PLANNING EXPERIENCE
5-Site District Wide Master Plan : $74M 2012 bond passed : San Carlos
SD
Anaheim CSD : 24-Site District Wide Master Plan : $169M local bond
passed 2010 : $300M program identified
9-Site District Wide Master Plan : $54M 2012 bond : Brea-Olinda USD
Lincoln Elementary School: $25M Campus Reconstruction
Marshall Elementary School: $29M Campus Reconstruction
San Mateo High School Biotechnology Facility: $9.2M state-of-the-art
laboratory, classroom, and staff conference facility
COMMERCIAL
Shannon Community Center, Dublin : $25M
Dublin Senior Center
Dahlin Group Corporate Office
Oak Park Multi Purpose Building: $5M
Scenic Oak Office Building
Skywest Golf Club House
On The Boards:
DEVELOPMENT
Eden Village Infill Residential Development: $4M Sustainable single
family detached homes
Wiegman Commercial Super Center: $7M Sustainable commercial
retail super center
Transcon
COMMUNITY PLANNING
Shrivardhan Master Plan: 850 acre Luxury Beach Front destination
community, Shrivardhan, India
Tirumala Master Plan: 16 acre Mixed use 5 high rise tower urban
community development
EDUCATION
B.A. Architecture, Washington State
University, 2000
NIK SERNANDE, AIA
Project Manager
38
Chinese Culture University (Taiwan)
B.Sc in Architecture, 1998
Lucas Kartalim has over 10 years of experience as a project designer
with specialized expertise in the planning and design of essential
facility, institutional and commercial buildings. His design process focuses on bringing strategic approaches to the integration of building technology, sustainability, security and aesthetic into workable design solutions.Mr. Kartalim’s completed works includes : Fire Station No 10, a LEED Silver rated facility totaling in 69,000 SF which integrates the function of fire station, Emergency Operation Center (EOC) and 911 dispatch center in the City of Seattle and UC Santa Cruz Emergency Response Center in Santa Cruz, CA. Mr. Kartalim was also involved in the master plan and design of San Ysidro Land Port of Entry, a brand new 125,000 SF border station facility located at San Diego - Tijuana; City of Palo Alto Public Safety Building, a state of the art 112,000 SF building consisted of police station, Emergency Response Center and 911 dispatch; UCLA Landfair Student Housing at Santa Monica, CA. Additional experience also include several award winning architectural competitions, both in the US and overseas. Notable winning projects includes: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) Science and Users Support Building at Menlo Park, CA and Shanghai International Dance Center at Shanghai, China. A registered architect in the state of California, Mr. Kartalim is a member of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) and also a LEED Accredited Professional specializing in Building Design and Construction (BD+C). He received his Master of Architecture degree (M.Arch) from Washington University in St. Louis and his Bachelor of Science degree (B.Sc) from Chinese Culture University in Taipei, Taiwan.
Representative Projects:
ESSENTIAL FACILITY
Fire Station No – 10 & Emergency Response Center, Seattle, WA
UC Santa Cruz Emergency Response Center, Santa Cruz, CA
Palo Alto Public Safety Building, Palo Alto, CA
EDUCATIONAL
UCLA Landfair Student Housing, Santa Monica, CA
SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Science and Users Support
Building, Menlo Park, CA
COMMERCIAL
Wiegman Commercial Super Center, Hayward, CA (On the Board)
INTERNATIONAL PROJECT
Shanghai International Dance School & Theatre, Shanghai, China
URBAN DESIGN & MASTER PLANNING
Shrivardhan Ocean City Master Plan, Shrivardhan, India
San Ysidro Border Station Master Plan & Building Design, San Ysidro, CA
REGISTRATION
Registered Architect California (C34444)
American Institute of Architects
National Council of Architect Board
LEED Accredited Professional
EDUCATION
Washington University in St. Louis
Master of Architecture, 2002
LUCAS KARTALIM, AIA, LEED AP BD+C
Project Architect
ARK STUDIO WEST
39
40
LYNKS DEVELOPERS
Lynks Developers Profile
Our Strength is Your Advantage
Since 1985, the Gabriel Perez has played a pivotal role in shaping Silicon Valley with unique facilities that
provide compelling benefits for forward-thinking companies. Founded by Gabriel Perez. Gabriel Perez in
2000, Started Lynks Developers LLC firm with joint venture partners. Who serves as Chief Executive Of-
ficer, our firm is known for integrity and dedication.
Cultivating Stability, Responding with Agility
For more than two decades, The Gabriel Perez Organization has cultivated enduring relationships with
leading technology companies, real estate brokers, architects, subcontractors and other vendors. Today,
thanks to wise investments and solid partnerships, our financial strength rivals that of many larger real
estate investment trusts. Unlike institutional developers that rely on layers of management for decision-
making, Gabriel Perez is structured to keep up with fast-paced schedules. We operate our own construc-
tion company and we conduct all lease negotiations in-house to streamline the development process. Our
principals take a hands-on role in every major transaction we undertake.
Bring Us Your Vision and We Can Build Your Future
Today, Gabriel Perez has built in Silicon Valley for hundreds of company’s throughout Santa Clara and
Alameda counties. We have developed more than 7 million square feet of office and R&D properties, and
currently mostly Class A, mid-rise office buildings.
41
Lynks Developers LLC: Gabriel Perez with over twenty five years of
experience with commercial and institutional clients. In addition, he
has developed close working relationships with key San Francisco
Bay Area owners, developers, architects, subcontractors and trades people. His skill set and knowledge fits well within your company’s strategic plans and initiatives
Before joining LYNKS DEVELOPERS LLC, Mr. Perez worked with Fluid
Industrial/Ranger Construction and Southland Industries, two regional construction and process/mechanical companies. He developed
and managed all Major Projects building over 7 million square feet
of commercial /retail and clean space within the San Francisco Bay
Area, and his experience with design-build projects, from corporate
campuses to interior tenant improvement projects, complements LYNKS DEVELOPERS LLC’s expertise within these market segments. LYNKS DEVELOPERS LLC will continue to expand on the outstanding corporate relationships developed with the San Francisco Bay Area commercial construction communities, particularly as it relates to design-build and design-assist projects.
Representative Projects:
3250/3260/3270 Jay street, Santa Clara, CA
Bring to market ready
(3) 45,000 SQFT 2 story buildings
Cost of Project : $9.8 million
Demolition of all interior back to shell
Demolition on eves build and install modern façade
Build new Effuse connecting two building to create a new lobby
New landscape.
191-221 East Campbell Ave, Campbell, CA
Cost of project : 15.8 million
Mixed use facilities 4 story structure
(4) story parking garage
First floor retail space
Second floor office space
Third and fourth floor Condominiums
Santana Row Parking Structure, San Jose, CA
(7) story parking structure
Cost of project 25 million
GABRIEL PEREZ
Chief Executive Officer Lynks Developers Llc
42
RICHARD BOURQUE
Construction Manager
LYNKS DEVELOPERS
Richard Bourque, began his building career in 1974, in both residential
and commercial industries. Richard has been a General Contractor and
Plumbing Contractor for over twenty-five years with experience in all aspects
of commercial and residential construction, including healthcare, cleanroom
space, biopharmaceutical, retail, and industrial and many prestigious projects
for the San Francisco 49er’s. Richard also holds an ICC Mechanical Inspector
certificate, a California Real Estate license and is a certified PV solar system
designer.
Mr. Bourque, as a former Project Manager and MEP coordinator for Swinerton
& Walberg, was responsible for the construction of the Palo Alto Medical
Foundation campus. After completion of the new PAMF medical facilities,
Research facility, and parking structures were complete, he had gone on to
become Director of Facilities for PAMF, a Sutter Health affiliate, and managed
all of their facilities across the bay area. Richard was a key part of the PAMF/
Sutter special projects team, managing design and construction teams for new
PAMF medical facilities.
Mr. Bourque was most recently, Operations Director for the Stanford Shopping
Center responsible for all building operations and construction management.
Richard was also recently a part of a consulting team responsible for assembly
line modifications at Tesla in Fremont, CA.
Additional Information
Organizational skills
Problem Solving, one of my strongest assets.
Strong customer service/public relations skills.
Accomplished computer skills in all MS Office components, MS
Project, QuickBooks, various Estimating and Scheduling pro-
grams.
General Contractor, Plumbing Contractor, Flooring Contractor
ICC Mechanical Inspector
CA licensed Realtor
EDUCATION
Maritime University, 2003
West Valley College, 1980 to 1981
Camden High School, 1970 to 1974
43
51
57
BIGGS CARDOSA-
Proposed Development Team
Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc
865 The Alameda
San Jose, CA 95126
-
Contact: Mark Cardosa, 408.296.5515, mcardosa@biggscardosa.com
Website: www.biggscardosa.com
Size of Firm: 86
Proposed Role of Team Members:
Mark Cardosa, Principal-in-Charge/Project Manager
Daniel Devlin, Quality Control
Resumes: Included on following pages
62
5
CASE STUDY PROJECTS
63
64
SELECTED WORKS - COMMERCIAL
MEGA MALL, OSHIWARA, MUMBAI, INDIA
ROLE: CLIENT:PROJECT SIZE:CONSTRUCTION:
The Mega Mall in Mumbai is designed around a central
atrium that opens the five floors of shopping to the sky. At
night the glow from the glass dome serves as a beacon to
attract shoppers. From the entry the escalators spread out
as symmetrical wings that allow shoppers to quickly move
to their desired location. The floors have been designed to
allow for clear sight lines to allow for easy way finding and
to take advantage of the natural daylight from the central
atrium. Every store was designed with the direct input of
the final tenant to allow the space to be tailored to their
individual needs while still forming a comprehensive whole
with the rest of the mall.
Architect
Dudhwala Builders406,000 Sq. Ft.2005
ARK STUDIO WEST
65
SELECTED WORKS - COMMERCIAL
DIAMOND PLAZA, NAIROBI, KENYA
ROLE: CLIENT:AREA:
Diamond Plaza Parking Towers are located at Parklands
Shopping Centre. The Centre is easily accessible by Agakhan schools, University, and Highridge Estate. It’s ideal location coupled with its modern design and wide array of services has allowed it to become a destination shopping spot. It combines retail, coffee shops, show rooms, office space all under one roof.The parking tower is fitted with an automatic parking indicator system. A back-up generator and voltage stabilizer and provides a healthy power supply at all times.
Architect
Shahjanand153,000 Sq. Ft.
66
ARK STUDIO WEST
This slender set of four towers playfully interact with one
another as they rise over 100 stories into the air. The two
main towers act as arms, opening up and embracing the sky. These arms are connected by a large sky platform that can be used to hold public functions 300 meters above the city streets. The towers have an Olympic sized swim-ming pool, expansive sundecks, a rooftop observatory, and many other amenities. The result is a unique building that seems to defy gravity.
SELECTED WORKS - RESIDENTIAL
SHREEPATI GARDENS, MUMBAI, INDIA
ROLE:CLIENT: NUMBER OF FLOORS:
Architect
Shreepati Group of Companies2 Towers :: 125 floors2 Towers :: 45 Floors
67
SELECTED WORKS - RESIDENTIAL
TEACHER’S COLONY, MUMBAI, INDIA
ROLE: CLIENT:NUMBER OF FLOORS:
Teacher’s Colony is nestled in the suburbs of Mumbai and
rises 45 stories to become a key landmark on the city’s sky-line. A serpentine landscape wraps around the building’s entry level plaza and up onto the podium level recreation areas. The three wings of the podium are designed with the latest amenities for comfort and leisure. The club house con-tains a multipurpose hall, an auditorium, swimming pools on both the ground level and the open top of the podium, a yoga and meditation area and a health club with a spa, Jacuzzi, steam and massage rooms. The garage area has built in washing stations as well as car charging stations for the new generation of electric cars. Bike and jogging paths are also integrated into the landscape design to encourage alternative forms of transportation and fitness.Active sustainable strategies used in the tower include rain water harvesting, a sewage treatment plant and the use of recycled water for sanitation and landscape irrigation.
Architect
ShahjanandPodium + 42
68
SELECTED WORKS - RESIDENTIAL
TRANSCON FLORA, UNDRI, PUNE, INDIA
ROLE: CLIENT:NUMBER OF FLOORS:
Transcon flora is ideally located in an upcoming suburb of
Mumbai. It consists of a 6 level podium, 31 typical floors, 4
refuge floors and a terrace level with breathtaking views
of the sea and city skyline. The design revolves around
space efficiency, natural cross ventilation, landscaped
grounds and abundant amenities. The façade consists of
a simplistic approach with symmetrical planning coupled
with clean straight vertical elements that enunciate the
height of the building while decks that protrude from each
level provide exterior space to every apartment.
Amenities provided include a spa, gymnasium, party hall,
indoor games area, kid’s area, as well as a business center.
The outdoor landscaped area has a lap pool, jogging
track, kids play area, multipurpose court, outdoor seating
and meditation area to unwind after a long day at work.
The tower forms a perfect blend of practical needs nestled
in luxury by embracing environmentally responsible design.
The building covers only a small part of the site, allowing
for large landscaped areas. Sustainable strategies used
include recycling water for sanitary and landscape
purposes, treatment of organic waste, solar water heating
tubes on the terrace, ample new plantings, rain water
harvesting, and solar lighting.
Architect
Transcon Developers PVT. LTD
Podium + 36
ARK STUDIO WEST
69
SELECTED WORKS - CORPORATE
ROLE: CLIENT:PROJECT SIZE:FLOORS:CONSTRUCTION:
Dheeraj Corporate Park is located on a narrow lot with a large street frontage. The façade located on the street frontage is sculpted to curve out from the base and wrap over the top, creating a visually distinct landmark. The coated energy saving angular glass panels that make up the façade allow maximum daylight in, but shelter the occupants by reflecting the heat. Stepped back terraces allow for direct access to landscaped areas from every other floor.
Architect
Dheeraj Corporate Park16,000 Sq. Ft. 112015 [Estimated]
DHEERAJ CORPORATE PARK, MUMBAI, INDIA
70
LYNKS DEVELOPERS
191-221 East Campbell Ave, Campbell, CA
Cost of project : 15.8 million
Mixed use facilities 4 story structure
(4) story parking garage
First floor retail space
Second floor office space
Third and fourth floor Condominiums
Santana Row Parking Structure, San Jose, CA
(7) story parking structure
Cost of project 25 million
71
3250/3260/3270 Jay street, Santa Clara, CA
Bring to market ready
(3) 45,000 SQFT 2 story buildings
Cost of Project : $9.8 million
Demolition of all interior back to shell
Demolition on eves build and install modern
façade
Build new Effuse connecting two building to
create a new lobby
New landscape.
75
101
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5200)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 10/20/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: CIty Hall Remodel Review
Title: Review of City Hall Remodel Project
From: City Manager
Lead Department: City Manager
At the August 4, 2014 Council meeting, several Council Members asked to add a
review of the City Hall remodel project as a follow-up to previous Council action.
On June 16, 2014 Council approved the construction contract and Budget
Amendment Ordinance to continue work on the City Hall remodel project.
Attached is the June 16, 2014 staff report (Attachment A). Staff will be prepared
to make a presentation and update Council on the project’s progress and answer
any questions.
Attachments:
Attachment A - Staff Report 4754 (PDF)
City of Palo Alto (ID # 4754)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/16/2014
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: City Hall Remodel Contract
Title: Approval of a Construction Contract with D.L. Falk Construction, Inc. in
the Amount of $2,718,350, Approval of Amendment Number 2 to Contract
No. C12144101 with WMB Architects, Inc. in the Amount of $141,565 for a
Not-to-Exceed Amount of $426,256 for the City Hall Remodel Project PE-
12017, and Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance for Fiscal Year 2014
to Provide an Additional Appropriation in the Amount of $1,607,109
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Public Works
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council:
1.Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the
attached contract with D.L. Falk Construction, Inc.in the amount of
$2,718,350 (Attachment A) for the City Hall Remodel Capital Improvement
Program Project PE-12017;
2.Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or
more change orders to the contract with D.L. Falk Construction, Inc.for
related, additional but unforeseen work which may develop during the
project, the total value of which shall not exceed a ten percent contingency
of $271,835;
3.Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the
attached amendment to Contract C12144101 with WMB Architects, Inc.
(Attachment B) in the amount of $141,565 for construction administration
services for the City Hall Remodel Project (Capital Improvement Program
Project PE-12017), adding $128,695 to basic services and adding $12,870
City of Palo Alto Page 2
for additional services for a total contract amount not-to-exceed $426,256;
and
4.Approve the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) in the amount
of $1,607,109 (Attachment C) for construction to selected areas on the first
floor, mezzanine, and second floor of City Hall.
Background
Palo Alto City Hall opened 44 years ago in 1970. Although the building has
recently undergone a thorough mechanical, electrical, and exterior refurbishment
under the Civic Center Infrastructure Upgrade Project (PF-01002), some of the
interior areas remain functionally inadequate and aesthetically dated.
Specifically, there are several public meeting and gathering areas that hinder
effective interaction between the community and city staff and Council due to
small seating capability and technical limitations. In particular, the Council
Conference Room has a limited seating capacity, has outdated architectural
treatments and furnishings, and lacks modern amenities such as flexible seating,
efficient lighting,and technological resources for audio-visual presentations.
Staff has identified the need for additional building elements similar to the
Council Conference Room for the first floor of City Hall, and included them in the
scope of this comprehensive project. These include a more welcoming and
accommodating lobby area; a new community conference room with a capacity
to seat 55 to better serve larger Council Committee and Commission meetings,
and several areas for efficient use of space for enhanced customer services for
residents.
Additionally, the elevator cabs have worn-out wall and floor finishes, harsh
lighting, and inadequate building information and directional signage. There is
also a significant need to improve the signage and other wayfinding information
at the various building entrances and on the first floor of City Hall in order to
assist members of the public with finding the staff members and services that can
meet their needs.
During the project design, the goal of the first floor renovation was broadened in
scope to achieve a more open atmosphere to encourage public participation and
community access to City Hall. The final plan also includes moving the Utilities
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Department’s customer service counter from the second floor to the lobby area
to be located near the Revenue Collections customer service counter.The People
Strategy & Operations conference room behind the Council Chambers would then
become a new,larger conference room that could also be used for Council and
staff sessions and the current (very inadequate) Council Conference Room would
be transformed into a staff training and multi-use room.
To relocate People Strategy & Operations (PSO)out of the lobby level, a number
of other staff reconfigurations and relocations are necessary. PSO would be
consolidated on the mezzanine level by relocating the Information Technology (IT)
Department staff currently using the space. The IT Department will be
consolidated on the second floor using more densely configured desks in an open
floor plan similar to what many high tech firms use. They will also expand into the
portion of the second floor vacated by the Utilities Department’s customer
service counter staff that will move to the first floor.
The plan accomplishes the goal of consolidating customer service functions on the
first floor and providing improved public spaces to promote public involvement.
In addition, PSO and IT staff are currently split between different floors.
Following construction,they will each be located together on their respective
floors, improving employee interaction and increasing efficiency.
Additional aspects of the project include reconfiguration of the existing restrooms
serving the Council to conform to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
accessibility requirements. The kitchenette serving evening Council meetings will
also be relocated. Since the project will include extensive carpeting on much of
the first floor, mezzanine and second floor, staff combined the new carpeting and
the reupholstery of the seating for the Council Chambers. Council Chamber
carpeting is funded through CIP PF-11001.
Open government and technology are the key principles for this project. The new
community conference room and renovated public spaces have been designed for
better interaction and public engagement. The rooms will be equipped with
broadcast media capabilities, including multiple LCD screens, High Definition
cameras, and wall-mounted speakers. Flexibility is also a key theme of the design.
The rooms will allow multiple table and chair configurations. Most importantly,
for very large events, the proposed glass partition separating the lobby from the
City of Palo Alto Page 4
new community conference room can be opened and folded away to allow even
greater space flexibility.
The project will also coordinate with a new interactive digital media public art
element to be installed on the main lobby wall facing the main building entry
doors. An open call to new media artists was recently conducted by the
Community Services Department (CSD). Their call for artists resulted in 104
responses that were narrowed to 29 by a selection panel that included staff and
Public Art Commissioners. Further selection panels brought the field down to 5,
then to 3, and now a final artist selection is nearly complete. CSD will bring the
artist’s contract and full details of the proposed digital art piece for Council
approval in late summer. A portion of the funding for the artist is included in the
attached Budget Amendment Ordinance.
Wayfinding and building signage aspects of the overall project are also still in final
design stages. Exterior signage is expected to be reviewed by the Architectural
Review Board (ARB) this summer. Following ARB approval, an invitation for bids
(IFB) will be issued to procure the services of a specialty signage fabrication and
installation contractor.
Discussion
Scope Overview
The scope of work for the attached construction contract includes:
1)Main Lobby remodel including coordination with an interactive digital
media public art element;
2)Enhance the lobby area heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC)
system in order to handle the increased loads from the new community
meeting room and the new digital art installation;
3)Restore the terrazzo floor of the main lobby;
4)Convert existing PSO conference room into a new Council Conference
Room;
5)Convert existing Council Conference Room into a new Training and Multi-
purpose Meeting Room for staff and the public;
6)Create a new Community Meeting Room beside the Main Lobby;
7)Install broadcast media capabilities for all the new lobby-level meeting
spaces, including multiple LCD screens, High Definition cameras, and wall-
mounted speakers;
City of Palo Alto Page 5
8)Modify the lobby payment counter to match the new architectural style of
the lobby and provide a lower ledge for writing checks and signing forms;
9)Convert the Revenue Services offices into new Utilities Customer Service
counter and offices;
10)Reconfigure and renovate mezzanine level offices (PSO and Purchasing);
11)Reconfigure and renovate second floor offices (IT and Utilities);
12)New carpeting and new bench upholstery for Council Chambers; and
13)Remodel the three (3)building elevator cabs.
The building will remain occupied during the course of the project. Work will be
scheduled to keep systems operational during working hours and to minimize the
impacts of construction on staff and the public. There may be some temporary
relocation of department staff to accommodate construction. The entire PSO
Department will temporarily relocate to Cubberley Community Center Room H-5
for the duration of the project. This move will provide space in the building for
other temporary office relocations that are necessary for construction.
Bid Process
Notices inviting formal bids for the City Hall Remodel Project were posted at City
Hall and sent to 32 contractors on April 18, 2014. The bidding period was 19 days.
Bids were received from one qualified contractor on May 6, 2014.
Summary of Bid Process
Bid Name/Number City Hall Remodel Project –IFB 153838
Proposed Length of Project 225 calendar days
Number of Bid Packages
Mailed to Contractors
32
Number of Builder’s
Exchanges receiving Bid
Packages
0
Total Days to Respond to Bid 19
Pre-Bid Meeting April 23, 2014
Number of Company
Attendees at Pre-Bid Meeting
10 firms attended of which 5 were General
Contractors and 5 were Subcontractors
Number of Bids Received: 1
Base Bid Price Range $2,664,000
City of Palo Alto Page 6
*The submitted bid form from D.L. Falk is provided as Attachment D.
Staff reviewed the bid submitted and recommends that D.L. Falk Construction be
declared the lowest responsible bidder. Staff recommends that the City award
the Base Bid ($2,664,000) plus Add Alternates 1 through 6 ($54,350)for a total
contract award amount of $2,718,350.
The base bid is approximately 19% above the construction cost estimate for the
scope of work included. Staff believes that the busy local construction industry
has resulted in higher prices and the higher bid is still reasonable for the complex
nature of this project. Staff also inquired as to why other contractors did not
submit bids. Smaller firms indicated that bonds for projects over $1.5 million are
difficult to obtain. One firm that worked on City Hall previously indicated they no
longer bid on public projects. Another unionized firm indicated they did not think
they could prepare a competitive bid for a non-prevailing wage project. Others
said the project did not fit their schedule.
A contingency amount of $271,835 equal to 10 percent of the total contract is
requested for unforeseen conditions which may be discovered during
construction. With renovation of an existing facility, there is a high likelihood of
additional required repairs or system replacement triggered by the base
construction. In addition, due to the time constraints placed upon the contractors
to complete their work during off hours, the majority of change orders will be
billed at a premium rate for night or weekend work.
Staff confirmed with the Contractor’s State License Board that the contractor has
an active license on file. Staff checked references supplied by the contractor for
previous work performed and found that their projects were similar to this
project and were completed to the satisfaction of the owners.
WMB Contract –Construction Administration
The contract amendment with the design architect, WMB Architects
(Attachment B) will provide for the architect’s general construction administration
oversight during project work. As the designer of record, WMB Architects will
respond to design questions and issues raised by the contractor, attend meetings
at the job site,make construction observations, review material submittals, and
assist in the preparation of the record documents at the completion of
City of Palo Alto Page 7
construction. The contract also includes work related to wayfinding signage
design for the exterior and interior areas of the City Hall complex. The signage
fabrication and installation will be let as a separate invitation for bid (IFB) to be
awarded to a specialty contractor in late summer or early fall.
Timeline
The construction of the architectural upgrades to City Hall are to be completed in
four phases. The first phase encompases the majority of the work for the first
floor and the duration is anticipated to be ninety days. The subsequent three
remaining phases at forty-five days each will be used for work on the mezzanine
level and second floors. Note that some construction in the first floor lobby may
be delayed towards the end of the project to keep the current Council Conference
Room available for meetings during Phase 1 and to allow for construction to
include a new public art display on the large lobby wall near the main building
entrance.
Resource Impact
Funding for this project has been allocated in several capital projects, including:
City Hall First Floor Renovations (PE-12017), Facility Interior Finishes Replacement
(PF-02022), and Council Chambers Carpet (PF-11001). Remaining funding from
the Civic Center Infrastructure Upgrade project (PF-01002) will also be used for
the project. All of these projects are budgeted in the Capital Improvement Fund,
which receives the majority of its funding from the annual General Fund transfer.
As referenced earlier in the staff report, the bids for the project came in higher
than previously estimated as a result of the local construction environment, the
public art element, and changes in scope. In order to complete the project, a
Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) is required. The Budget Amendment
Ordinance recommended as part of this report would increase the City Hall First
Floor Renovations project by $1,607,109. This increase would allow for the
construction contract, contingency, design fees, wayfinding systems construction,
furniture, temporary office space, permit fees, architectural construction
administration, and a portion of the public art costs. Offsetting the increased
costs would be transfers from various funding sources, resulting in no reduction
to the Infrastructure Reserve. The transfers from other funding sources, which
will recover each fund’s respective fair share of the costs, will enable a return of
City of Palo Alto Page 8
funds to the Infrastructure Reserve upon completion of the project.
In determining the amounts and funding sources for the BAO, staff carefully
reviewed the bid and the work units benefitting from the work. A concerted
effort has been made to align the cost of the project to the benefitting
department/fund. For example, the cost of renovating the space to meet the
functional requirements of the Utilities Department will be charged to the Utility
Funds. Similarly, the cost of improving the Information Technology Department’s
space will be charged to the Technology Fund, while the cost of improving the
Administrative Services and People Strategies and Operations Departments will
be charged to the Capital Improvement Fund. Much of the work involves
improvements to common areas. The common area costs can be divided into two
categories: the first floor community room and improvements to the rest of the
facility that do not primarily benefit one exclusive department.
As part of the BAO, the cost of the new community room is recommended to be
charged to the Community Center Development Impact Fee Fund. The remaining
common areas are charged to the Capital Improvement Fund, with the City’s
various Enterprise Funds paying a share proportionate to their anticipated
utilization of space in City Hall. It should be noted that after accounting for the
transfers from the various Utility Funds, Technology Fund, and the Community
Center Development Impact Fee Fund, some portion of the funding in the Capital
Improvement Fund is expected to be returned to the Infrastructure Reserve. A
summary of the funding sources, as well as anticipated uses, is included in the
table on the following page.
Summary of Project Funding
Existing Funding Source (from Capital
Improvement Fund)
Amount allocated
City Hall First Floor Renovations (PE-12017)$2,183,733
Facility Interior Finishes Replacement (PF-02022)$380,000
Council Chambers Carpet (PF-11001)$80,000
Civic Center Infrastructure Upgrade (PF-01002)$61,643
Total Current Funding $2,705,376
City of Palo Alto Page 9
Funding Source (BAO)Amount allocated
Transfer from Community Center Development
Impact Fee Fund
$686,298
Transfer from Electric Fund $133,687
Transfer from Gas Fund $133,687
Transfer from Wastewater Collection Fund $133,687
Transfer from Water Fund $133,687
Transfer from Fiber Optics Fund $133,687
Transfer from Technology Fund $499,335
Total New Funding $1,854,068
Total Project Funding $4,559,444
Summary of Project Expenditures
Construction Contract $2,718,350
Contract Contingency (10%)$271,835
Design Fees $278,285
Architectural Construction Administration $141,565
Public Art $150,000
Furniture $300,000
Wayfinding Systems Construction $307,450
Other $145,000
Total Project Expenditures $4,312,485
Anticipated Return to Infrastructure Reserve $246,959
Policy Implications
This recommendation does not represent any change to existing City policies.
Environmental Review
This project is categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) under Sections 15301 and 15302 of the CEQA guidelines as an alteration
to an existing facility and no further environmental review is necessary.
Attachments:
·A -D.L. Falk Construction Contract (PDF)
City of Palo Alto Page 10
·B -WMB Architects Contract Amendment No. 2 (PDF)
·C -BAO -City Hall Remodel (DOC)
·D -D.L. Falk Bid Form (PDF)
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 1 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Contract No. C14153838
City of Palo Alto
And
D.L. Falk Construction, Inc.
PROJECT
City Hall Remodel Project
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 2 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY. ...................................................................................................... 7
SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. ................................................................................................................. 7
6.1 Time Is of Essence. .............................................................................................................................. 7
6.2 Commencement of Work. ................................................................................................................ 7
6.3 Contract Time. ...................................................................................................................................... 7
6.4 Liquidated Damages. .......................................................................................................................... 8
6.4.1 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. ............................................................................................... 9
SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS............................................................................... 10
SECTION 13 NOTICES ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
13.1 Method of Notice ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10
13.2 Notice Recipents ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….10
13.3 Change of Address. ........................................................................................................................... 11
SECTION 14 DEFAULT. ......................................................................................................................... 11
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 3 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
14.1 Notice of Default. .............................................................................................................................. 11
14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. ........................................................................................................ 11
SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. ...................................................................................... 12
15.1 Remedies Upon Default. ................................................................................................................. 12
15.1.1 Delete Certain Services. .......................................................................................... 12
15.1.2 Perform and Withhold. ........................................................................................... 12
15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. .................................................................... 12
15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. .............................................................................. 12
15.1.6 Additional Provisions. ............................................................................................. 12
15.2 Delays by Sureties. ............................................................................................................................ 12
15.3 Damages to City. ................................................................................................................................ 13
15.3.1 For Contractor's Default. ........................................................................................ 13
15.3.2 Compensation for Losses. ...................................................................................... 13
15.4 Suspension by City ............................................................................................................................ 13
15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience. .......................................................................................... 13
15.5 Termination Without Cause. ......................................................................................................... 14
15.5.1 Compensation. ......................................................................................................... 14
15.5.2 Subcontractors. ........................................................................................................ 14
15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. ..................................................................................... 14
SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. ...................................................................... 15
16.1 Contractor’s Remedies. ................................................................................................................... 15
16.1.1 For Work Stoppage. ................................................................................................. 15
16.1.2 For City's Non‐Payment. ......................................................................................... 15
16.2 Damages to Contractor. .................................................................................................................. 15
SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. ................................................................................................ 15
17.1 Financial Management and City Access. ................................................................................... 15
17.2 Compliance with City Requests. ................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. ................................................................................................. 16
SECTION 19 NUISANCE. ...................................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES. ................................................................................................ 16
SECTION 21 WAIVER. .......................................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE. ...................................................................................... 16
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 4 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. ................................................................................................ 17
SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. ............................................................................................... 17
SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES. ...................................................................................................... 17
SECTION 26 NON APPROPRIATION. ................................................................................................... 17
SECTION 27 AUTHORITY. .................................................................................................................... 17
SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS .............................................................................................................. 18
SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY. ................................................................................................................. 18
SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES . ............................................................. 18
SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION. ................................................................ 18
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 5 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on June 5, 2014 (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY
OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and D.L. Falk Construction, 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 California Corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of
California, Contractor’s License Number 683837. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State
of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set
forth in this Construction Contract.
C. On April 18, 2014, City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the City Hall Remodel
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 Contract 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 Hall Remodel Project, located at 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA. 94301
("Project").
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 6 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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) Instructions to Bidders
10) Invitation for Bids
11) Contractor's Bid/Non‐Collusion Affidavit
12) Reports listed in the Contract Documents
13) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications (most current version at
time of Bid)
14) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards (most current
version at time of Bid)
15) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements
16) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations
17) Notice Inviting Pre‐Qualification Statements, Pre‐Qualification Statement, and Pre‐
Qualification Checklist (if applicable)
18) Performance and Payment Bonds
3.2 Order of Precedence.
For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the
provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the
preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 7 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY.
Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work required for the Project, as specified in the Contract
Documents, all of which are fully incorporated herein. Contractor shall provide, furnish, and supply all
things necessary and incidental for the timely performance and completion of the Work, including, but not
limited to, provision of all necessary labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and utilities, unless
otherwise specified in the Contract Documents. Contractor also agrees to use its best efforts to complete
the Work in a professional and expeditious manner and to meet or exceed the performance standards
required by the Contract Documents.
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 Contract
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 225 calendar days () after the commencement date specified in City’s Notice to
Proceed.
By executing this Construction Contract, Contractor expressly waives any claim for delayed early
completion.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 8 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
6.4 Liquidated Damages.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.85, 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 Five Hundred dollars ($500.00) 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.
6.4.1 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 two million seven hundred eighteen three hundred fifty
Dollars ($2,718,350).
[This amount includes the Base Bid of $2,664,000 and Additive Alternates 1 for
$7,800, Additive Alternate 2 for $13,400, Additive Alternate 3 for $5,050,
Additive Alternate 4 for $3,000, Additive Alternate 5 for $17,200, and Additive
Alternate 6 for $7,900.]
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, except as expressly provided herein. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted
for Change Orders approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 9 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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.
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 individually referred to as an “Indemnitee” and collectively referred to as
"Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and liability, loss,
damage, claims, expenses (including, without limitation, attorney fees, expert witness fees,
paralegal fees, and fees and costs of litigation or arbitration) (collectively, “Liability”) of every
nature arising out of or in connection with the acts or omissions of Contractor, its employees,
Subcontractors, representatives, or agents, in performing the Work or its failure to comply with
any of its obligations under the Contract, except such Liability caused by the active negligence,
sole negligence, or willful misconduct of an Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs
City incurs to enforce this provision. Except as provided in Section 9.2 below, 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.
Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of
any third‐party claim relating to the Contract.
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.
Within ten (10) business days following issuance of the Notice of Award, Contractor shall provide City with
evidence that it has obtained insurance and shall submit Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all
requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 10 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS.
City is entering into this Construction Contract in reliance 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, Change Order Requests and
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
[Include Construction Manager, If Applicable.]
City of Palo Alto
Utilities Engineering
250 Hamilton Avenue
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 11 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Attn:
In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided
to the following:
Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office
250 Hamilton Avenue
P.O. Box 10250
Palo Alto, California 94303
All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail.
All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to:
D.L. Falk Construction, Inc.
3526 Investment Blvd.
Hayward, CA 94545
Attn: David L. Falk
13.3 Change of Address.
In advance of any change of address, Contractor shall notify City 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 DEFAULT.
14.1 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, with a copy to
Contractor’s performance bond surety.
14.2 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.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 12 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.
15.1 Remedies Upon Default.
If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth
above in Section 14, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including,
without limitation, the following:
15.1.1 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.
15.1.2 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.
15.1.3 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.
15.1.4 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 14. 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.
15.1.5 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.
15.1.6 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.
15.2 Delays by Sureties.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 13 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Time being of the essence in the performance of the Work, if Contractor’s surety fails to arrange
for completion of the Work in accordance with the Performance Bond, within seven (7) calendar
days from the date of the notice of termination, Contractor’s surety shall be deemed to have
waived its right to complete the Work under the Contract, and City may immediately make
arrangements for the completion of the Work through use of its own forces, by hiring a
replacement contractor, or by any other means that City determines advisable under the
circumstances. Contractor and its surety shall be jointly and severally liable for any additional cost
incurred by City to complete the Work following termination. In addition, City shall have the right
to use any materials, supplies, and equipment belonging to Contractor and located at the
Worksite for the purposes of completing the remaining Work.
15.3 Damages to City.
15.3.1 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.
15.3.2 Compensation for Losses.
In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City
shall be entitled to deduct the cost of such Losses from monies otherwise payable to Contractor.
If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount payable, Contractor shall be liable to City for the
difference and shall promptly remit same to City.
15.4 Suspension by City
15.4.1 Suspension 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.
15.4.2 Suspension for Cause.
In addition to all other remedies available to City, if Contractor fails to perform or correct work in
accordance with the Contract Documents, City may immediately order the Work, or any portion
thereof, suspended until the cause for the suspension has been eliminated to City’s satisfaction.
Contractor shall not be entitled to an increase in Contract Time or Contract Price for a suspension
occasioned by Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents. City’s right to
suspend the Work shall not give rise to a duty to suspend the Work, and City’s failure to suspend
the Work shall not constitute a defense to Contractor’s failure to comply with the requirements of
the Contract Documents.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 14 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
15.5 Termination Without Cause.
City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or
in whole upon written notice to Contractor. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall, at City’s
expense, comply with the notice and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs to close out and
demobilize. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 15.5 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.
15.5.1 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 15.5.1, 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
(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.
15.5.2 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.
15.6 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
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 15 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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.
Upon termination, whether for cause or for convenience, the provisions of the Contract
Documents remain in effect as to any Claim, indemnity obligation, warranties, guarantees,
submittals of as‐built drawings, instructions, or manuals, or other such rights and obligations
arising prior to the termination date.
SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.
16.1 Contractor’s Remedies.
Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the
following:
16.1.1 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.
16.1.2 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.
16.2 Damages to Contractor.
In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided
for in Paragraph 15.5.1 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 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS.
17.1 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
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 16 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
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.
17.2 Compliance with City Requests.
Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 17 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 17.1 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 18 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.
SECTION 19 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 20 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 21 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 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE.
This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of
California, and venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Santa Clara, and no
other place.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 17 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 23 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 24 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 25 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. This Project remains subject to all
other applicable provisions of the California Labor Code and regulations promulgated thereunder.
Or
The Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the
California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has
obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work
in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this
Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. Copies of these rates may be obtained
at 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 26 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 27 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.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 18 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS
This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties,
constitute a single binding agreement.
SECTION 29 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.
SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES.
With respect to any amendments to any statutes or regulations referenced in these Contract Documents,
the reference is deemed to be the version in effect on the date that the Contract was awarded by City,
unless otherwise required by law.
SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION.
Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, by signing this Contract, Contractor certifies as follows: “I am aware
of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against
liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self‐insurance in accordance with the provisions of that
code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work on this
Contract.”
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
D. L. Falk Construction, Inc.
By:___________________________
Name:__David L. Falk____________
Title:____President _____________
Date: _________________________
AMENDMENT NO.2 TO CONTRACT NO. C12144101
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND
WMB ARCHITECTS, INC.
This Amendment No.2 ("Amendment") to Contract No. C12144101 ("Contract") is
entered into and made effective on June _,2014, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a
California chartered municipal corporation ("CITY"), and WMB Architects, Inc., a California
Corporation, located at 5757 Pacific Avenue, Suite 226, Stockton, CA 95207, ("CONSULTANT").
RECIT ALS
WHEREAS, the Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of
professional design services relating to the City Hall Remodel Project ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2013, the parties amended the Contract to add
$105,974 of compensation for a total Contract amount not to exceed $284,691; and
WHEREAS, the parties seek by this Amendment No.2 to increase the scope of
services, schedule of performance, and compensation;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and
provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree:
SECTION 1. Section A of RECITALS is hereby amended to read as follows:
"A. CITY intends to implement the City Hall Renovation Project ("Project") and
desires to engage a consultant to provide professional architectural design services
and construction administration services for architectural upgrades in connection
with the Project ("Services")."
SECTION 2. Section 4 of the Contract, NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION,
Paragraph 1, is hereby amended to read as follows:
"The compensation to be paid to CONSULT ANT for performance of the Services
described in Exhibit "A", including both payment for professional services and
reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Three Hundred Eighty-Seven Thousand
Five Hundred Five Dollars [$387,505.00]. In the event Additional Services are
authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not
exceed Four Hundred Twenty-Six Thousand Two Hundred Fifty·Six Dollars
[$426,256.00]. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit
"C-2", entitled "CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION FEE SCHEDULE", which
is attached to and make a part of this Agreement."
1 Revision April 28, 2014
SECTION 4. The following exhibit(s) to the Contract is/are hereby amended to read
as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference:
a. Exhibit "A" entitled "Scope of Work".
b. Exhibit "B" entitled "Schedule".
c. Exhibit "C" entitled "Compensation".
SECTION 5. 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 WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives
executed this Amendment on the date first above written.
CITY OF PALO ALTO WMB Architects, Inc.
City Manager ::!!:~
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Title: nZW/ectOr
Senior Asst. City Attorney
Attachments:
EXHIBIT "A":
EXHIBIT "B":
EXHIBIT "C":
SCOPE OF PROJECT
TIME SCHEDULE
COMPENSATION SCHEDULE
2 Revision Apli12S, 2014
EXHIBIT “A” - SCOPE OF WORK
CONTRACT C12144101 - AMENDMENT No. 2
CIP PROJECT PE-12017
Task 1: City Hall Lobby Design Modifications The Lobby is intended to serve as a space that welcomes members of the public to the building and
helps direct them to their destination within City Hall. The Lobby should also be modified to better accommodate the display of public art and to create opportunities for small, informal gatherings of staff and the public. A) Transform the Lobby into an attractive and welcoming space to display public art and facilitate gatherings and events.
B) Remove the current furniture and cabinets.
C) Refinish walls and design an improved display mounting system to create a more attractive,
functional, and safe environment for the display of artwork.
D) Establish lighting conducive to displaying art, both on walls and freestanding that allows for safe, easy, and efficient bulb replacement. E) Establish signage and an electronic information kiosk to provide wayfinding information to the public.
F) Create paths for foot traffic through the lobby which create protected spaces conducive to
small gatherings.
G) Design and select furniture and carpets which create space for gatherings & meetings.
H) Consider changes to ceiling fixtures to modernize the lobby’s appearance.
Task 2: City Hall Council Conference Room Design Modifications The Council Conference Room is intended to serve as a less formal, more intimate meeting space for
the Finance Committee and Policy & Services Committee of the City Council, various advisory
Boards and Commissions, public gatherings, and to host larger staff meetings.
A) Transform the Council Conference Room into a more modern and usable space which will
more readily accommodate the multitude of departments and Committees, Boards, and
Commissions that utilize the area.
B) Explore opportunities to enlarge the existing area via the removal of the existing east wall and
incorporation of the adjoining corridor into a larger and more usable meeting space.
A structural analysis for this portion of the design will be required.
C) Provide room layout and seating arrangements that will improve the interface between
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 3
Committee/Board/Commission members and audience members during public meetings.
D) Provide flexible room layout and seating arrangements to accommodate a larger number of
occupants during public meetings, public multi-media presentations, and staff meetings.
E) Design a more modern method for effective presentation delivery to accommodate conferences and
public presentations via electronic media. Seating arrangements will be critical to allow for easy
viewing of the material presented by both board/commission members as well as audience members.
F) Modernize the area utilizing newly-designed lighting, wall coverings, flooring, and furniture.
Task 3: City Hall Human Resources Conference Room Design Modifications The Human Resources Conference Room serves as one of the larger staff meeting rooms in City Hall
and is used by the City Council for private discussion during closed sessions.
A) Transform the Human Resources Conference Room into a more modern and usable space which
will more readily accommodate the multitude of departments that utilize the area.
B) Design a more modern method for effective presentation delivery to accommodate conferences and small department presentations via electronic media. C) Modernize the area utilizing newly-designed lighting, wall coverings, flooring, and furniture.
Task 4: City Hall Wayfinding Design Modifications
Existing directional signage in City Hall is sparse and inadequate. The proposed wayfinding
modifications should provide a simple, attractive, uniform, intuitive system of signage and other
directional elements to assist members of the public to locate the service provider within City Hall that
can address their needs and to find their vehicle upon returning to the garage.
A) Integrate the signage and an electronic information kiosk from Task 1 into a programmatic and
unified City Hall signage program that will readily direct members of the public to service locations throughout the various departments on all levels of City Hall (including the Police Wing); including paths of travel from the exterior of the building.
B) Improve signage on the building exterior to direct members of the public to the Police Department
offices on Forest Avenue. Coordinate the new signage with the signage on the Downtown Library
across the street.
C) Provide an easy means of identifying parking locations in the underground City Hall Garage which
will readily assist customers in relocating their vehicle.
D) Incorporate signage to direct customers from the parking garage to the location of an information
kiosk on the First Floor.
E) Provide signage and terminology that assists the customer to readily locate the service provider
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 4
within City Hall that can address their needs. Integrate service descriptions with department names
into unified naming conventions.
F) Coordinate the design of informational signage in the elevator lobbies with ongoing efforts by the
City Manager’s Office to integrate photographs evocative of the services provided on each floor of the
building with the accompanying signage.
Task 5: City Hall Way Elevator Cabs Refurbishment
A) Upgrade and modernize interior cab panels, including all sides, doors, flooring, and ceiling.
B) Provide a more energy-efficient lighting system that will provide softer, more diffused illumination. C) Modernize the signage direction/display systems. Integrate same with Task 4, Wayfinding.
D) Enhance the appearance of exterior door panels. Possibilities include integration with Task 4,
Wayfinding, as well as including artistic concepts that correlate with department themes associated
with that individual floor level.
B. SCOPE OF SERVICES
1. Study Phase City Hall is an occupied building and will remain so during the entire design process and through the
completion of construction. The Consultant will be responsible for surveying all the various
departments and end-users that will be utilizing the areas of refurbishment to effectively address their desired needs and concerns. The study shall identify strategies and alternatives that will provide
maximum benefit to endusers and optimize the functionality and usefulness of the work spaces. The analysis and resulting recommendation shall take into account both feasibility and economics. The Consultant shall work with the City’s Project Manager to develop the survey strategy, identify the
existing conditions and needs, and develop recommended modifications to meet the critical needs.
Consultant shall identify implementation methodologies for the renovation to assist in accommodating
existing occupants. Relocation alternatives, rebuilding on a “fast-track” basis, and other alternatives
proposed by Consultant shall be considered during this phase to accomplish the work with the least
cost and/or minimum disruption to the occupants. Consultant shall present the study with alternates
and recommendations to the Project Manager and appropriate departmental managers in the affected
work areas for review and comment. Once a decision on approach, alternates, and recommendations
is made by the City, the next phase of the project shall commence.
2. Conceptual Design
Consultant’s second phase shall be to prepare a preliminary design with estimated construction costs
for the City’s review. Consultant shall evaluate all parameters and observations in preparing a
conceptual design to accomplish the City’s objectives as outlined in the four tasks described above. A
proposed methodology for completing the renovations during time periods of least impact to the
functions of the departments will be proposed; along with refining the full scope of the project.
Consultant shall provide conceptual (30%) drawings for review and approval and shall attend
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 5
meetings with City staff to describe and discuss the elements of the conceptual design. Consultant
shall provide a preliminary engineer’s estimate of the construction contract cost for City review at the
30% design stage to aid the City in determining the final scope of work.
3. Construction Documents
In the third phase, Consultant shall prepare the construction documents, including plans, technical
specifications, an engineer’s estimate, and a preliminary construction schedule which minimizes
disruptions to building occupants. Consultant shall prepare the final construction documents for all
components defined in the Conceptual Design. Plans and specifications shall be presented to the City
at 60% and 90% completion for review and comment. An engineer’s estimate shall be prepared at the
90% design stage. Consultant shall assist the City in obtaining all building permits, and other permits
as applicable, required for implementation of the work.
4. Bid and Construction Phase
The Consultant shall provide assistance to City staff (e.g. pre-bid meeting with prospective bidders,
issuance of addenda, etc.) during the bidding phase of the project. Upon award of a construction
contract to a general contractor, the City will negotiate with the Consultant an appropriate scope of
work for construction phase services to be provided (e.g. assistance with Requests for Information,
review of contractor submittals, review of change order requests, periodic site inspections, preparation
of record drawings, etc.). Construction phase services will be added to the Consultant’s contract at the
City’s discretion via a contract amendment.
C. PROJECT ELEMENTS
Preparation Work
• City will provide any available existing plans for the City Hall work spaces to be modified during
this project.
• Consultant will meet with City representatives to develop a schedule for the work. Some tasks will
hold a higher priority and may need to be fast tracked in comparison to some of the other tasks.
Site Assessment
• Consultant will conduct site visits.
• Consultant will review and evaluate all available information and determine procedure for acquiring
any necessary additional information. Equipment Evaluation
• Consultant will evaluate existing lighting for anticipated needs.
• Consultant will suggest possible audio/visual equipment to satisfy requirements. Economic Analysis
and Feasibility
• Consultant will recommend equipment based on functionality and cost.
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 6
WORK PLAN
ARCHITECTURAL AND ENGINEERING TASK LIST
TASK 1: INVESTIGATION PHASE
Subtask 1.1 On-site review of existing building documents.
Subtask 1.2 On-site verification and measurement of lobby, elevator lobbies and conference rooms,
mezzanine and second floor.
Subtask 1.3 On-site photographing of existing building areas.
Subtask 1.4 CADD input of base floor plans, reflected ceiling plans and interior elevations.
Subtask 1.5 CADD input of parking levels and site plan for wayfinding.
TASK 2: NEEDS ASSESSMENT PHASE
Subtask 2.1 Prepare program survey forms
Subtask 2.2 On-site meetings with departmental end-user groups to establish needs for conference
spaces and lobby areas
Subtask 2.3 On-site meetings with departmental end-user groups to establish needs for wayfinding.
Subtask 2.4 Summarize in written and graphic format the needs assessment information.
Subtask 2.5 Meet with Project Manager, Project Engineer to review needs assessment data.
Subtask 2.6 Working with Project Manager and Project Engineer, refine needs assessment and set
priorities.
Subtask 2.7 Prepare final Needs Assessment document that will serve as the basis for the design
Subtask 2.8 Meet with design team to review completed needs assessment document.
TASK 3: CONCEPT DESIGN DEVELOMENT PHASE
Subtask 3.1 Utilizing the approved Final Needs Assessment, design team will develop concept design
solutions that meet the criteria set forth in the Final Needs Assessment. Design concepts
to be illustrated by floor plan(s), reflected ceiling plans, 3 dimensional sketches, interior
finish materials samples, AV concepts and modifications to building electrical and
mechanical systems
Subtask 3.2 Develop concept budget estimates for design options.
Subtask 3.3 Meet with City’s Project Manager to review concept design/cost estimates.
Subtask 3.4 Prepare base floor plans, reflected ceiling plans and interior elevations of existing
conditions.
Subtask 3.5 Per Project Managers Direction, Present concept design to City Staff for review and
input.
Subtask 3.6 Refine concept design documentation and budget estimate incorporating City input.
Subtask 3.7 Prepare Concept Design package (30%) for City review and approval.
TASK 4: CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS PHASE
Subtask 4.1 Based on approved concept design and budget, develop construction documents
(including plans, specifications, calculations and budget estimate) for plan review,
permitting and bidding. Prepare City review packages at 60% and 90%.
Subtask 4.2 60% document review meeting with Project Manager and Project Engineer.
Subtask 4.3 90% document review meeting with Project Manager and Project Engineer.
Subtask 4.4 In-house peer review of documents.
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 7
Subtask 4.5 Prepare 100% construction document submittal package.
Subtask 4.6 Review meeting with Project Manager and Project Engineer of final construction
document package.
TASK 5: PLAN REVIEW | PERMITTING PHASE
Subtask 5.1 Assist City in submittal of construction documents package for plan review for building
permit.
Subtask 5.2 Make revisions to construction documents to address plan review comments.
Subtask 5.3 Assist City in re-submittal of construction documents package incorporating plan review
comments.
TASK 6: BIDDING PHASE
Subtask 6.1 Provide assistance to City staff during bid process including: attendance at pre-bid
meeting, assist City in responding to bid questions, and issue addenda as required.
Subtask 6.2 Assist City in review of submitted bids.
TASK 7: CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION PHASE (Amendment No. 2)
Subtask 7.1 Twenty-four (24) Weekly Construction site meetings with architect (assume 6 months
construction timeframe).
Subtask 7.2 Six (6) monthly Site visits for mechanical, electrical and audio visual engineers.
Subtask 7.3 Process and document as required General Contractor’s Requests for Information (RFI’s).
Subtask 7.4 Process product submittals and shop drawings.
Subtask 7.5 Review and evaluate substitutions to products and equipment submitted by the General
Contractor.
Subtask 7.6 General Contractor payment request and progressive lien waiver review. Sub-contractor
lien waiver documentation and verification responsibility of the General Contractor.
Subtask 7.7 Punch-list site at substantial completion. Develop punch list of items for correction.
Follow-up evaluation of punch list items at final completion.
Subtask 7.8 Review of General Contractor’s Operations and Maintenance Manual and warranties.
Subtask 7.9 Perform project closeout activities and prepare final record plan set from contractor
markups.
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 8
WORK PLAN
WAYFINDING TASKS
PARAGRAPH 5.4 SCOPE OF WORK | WORK PLAN
PROPOSAL SCOPE OF WORK
The Square Peg Proven Project Approach and Design Process
Square Peg employs a proven project process and design approach based on a well defined schedule of
evaluation, progress and milestone review meetings with the Client and the Design team. The checks and
balances built in the this highly collaborative process ensures that the
• Vision and goals are clearly understood at the onset of the project
• Pertinent information is collected and analyzed
• Design work is concepted and refined based on multiple reviews by the Client and Design Team
• Documentation is subjected to multiple reviews
• One or more of the key sign types are prototyped prior to final production for Client and
Design Team approval.
• Construction administration and installation oversight services ensure continuity and control
throughout the entire process.
Square Peg will thoroughly review the existing signing, study circulation etc in preparation to
develop a new wayfinding and signing program. The new program will address the following:
1. Integrate the signage and an electronic information kiosk from Task 1 into a programmatic and
unified City Hall signage program that will readily direct members of the public to service locations
throughout the various departments on all levels of City Hall (including the Police Wing); including
paths of travel from the exterior of the building.
2. Improve signage on the building exterior to direct members of the public to the Police Department
offices on Forest Avenue. Coordinate the new signage with the signage on the Downtown Library
across the street.
3. Provide an easy means of identifying parking locations in the underground City Hall Garage which
will readily assist customers in relocating their vehicle.
4. Incorporate signage to direct customers from the parking garage to the location of an information
kiosk on the First Floor.
5. Provide signage and terminology that assists the customer to readily locate the service provider
within City Hall that can address their needs. Integrate service descriptions with department names
into unified naming conventions.
6. Coordinate the design of informational signage in the elevator lobbies with ongoing efforts by the City
Manager’s Office to integrate photographs evocative of the services provided on each floor of the
building with the accompanying signage.
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 9
Based on the scope outline from the RFP and past experience with similar projects we anticipate the scope of
signs to include, but is not limited to:
Based on the scope outline from the RFP and information gained at the interview with the City, we
anticipate the scope of signs may include, but is not limited to:
SITE SIGNING
Project/Building Identity Signing
Parking Garage Entrance ID Sign
Directional Signing
Accessibility Signing
Signing at Entry Doors
Entrance ID Signing
Pedestrian Directional & Information Signing
Building Entry Identification Graphics at Entry Doors (Address, HC Accessibility, No Smoking, etc.)
Emergency Assembly Area Signing
Building Address
PARKING
Parking Entry ID
Clearance Bar
Vehicular Directional Signing
Pedestrian Directional Signing
Column and Core Graphics
Misc Room ID Signing
INTERIOR SIGNING
Orientation Directory/Information Display or Kiosk (Static
/ Dynamic) - Main Lobby
- Secondary Entry Lobbies
- Elevator Lobbies at Upper Levels
Floor Level ID in Elevator Lobbies
Floor Level Directories and/or Orientation Maps
Directional Signing
Changeable Displays for Daily Events,
Information, etc ( Digital System
and/or Static)
Service Window Signing ( Digital System and/or Static)
Informational Signing in Elevator Cabs ( Digital System and/or Static)
NOTE: The design process for signing will be closely coordinated with WMB Architects and GB
Engineers to insure a well integrated design solution.
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 10
Square Peg will explore and incorporate technology as potential solutions at multiple locations
throughout the project. A combination of design, cost and evaluation of benefits will be provided to the
client with regard to proposed technology solutions as a means to inform the design decisions and
approvals.
SCOPE EXCLUSIONS
Items that are specifically excluded from the scope of work include:
Signing for Non Public Areas such as office areas and back of house:
Room Identification Signing
Department/Area Identification
Office ID
Workstation ID
Conference Room ID Misc Room ID
Back of House Room ID
Evacuation Maps at Elevators, Stairs and Exits
Preparation of building floor plans for use in sign location plans. It is assumed that the client will
provide SPD with building plans for use in preparation of sign location plans and documents.
Logo design
Print & Amenity design
Sculptures / Feature pieces
Content Design of Digital Media for Digital Displays. Note: SPD can provide content solutions as
additional service if requested, or recommend other means of creating and/or obtaining content.
Should any of these items be required Square Peg Design can provide them as an additional service.
PHASE 1 WAYFINDING STRATEGY AND SCHEMATIC DESIGN
During this phase of work, SPD will meet with the Client and consultants to review the project goals,
existing design concepts, program criteria, and design influences. This phase shall include, but not limited
to, the following tasks and design work:
1. Meet with Client and consultants to review the project goals, existing design concepts, program
criteria, design influences etc.
2. Conduct wayfinding survey to determine overall signage strategy. Systematically study pedestrian and
vehicular traffic flow as it relates to ingress, egress and circulation within the development.
3. Conduct appropriate research on potential design influences, available technologies, materials and
finishes. 4. Collect all relevant data available for the Project to include: -Architectural plans and drawings
-Existing design themes and details
-Details of architectural elements
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 11
5. Prepare preliminary programming for sign locations and message schedules.
6. Confirm required sign types and environmental graphic elements.
7. Review of municipality and authorities regulations.
8. Produce three (3) design concepts for physical form and scale of signage including proposed
materials, finishes, colors.
9. Coordinate design concepts with the architecture and lighting.
10. Based on design concepts and proposed sign quantities, prepare implementation budgets for review and
discussion with client.
11. Present Schematic Design Concepts, budgets and phasing options for comment
and approval.
MEETINGS
1. Kickoff Meeting
2. Interim Meetings with City Staff and Design Team as needed for coordination
3. Schematic Design presentation
PHASE DELIVERABLES
1. Schematic drawing package showing three (3) signage concepts
2. Preliminary power, data and structural requirements.
3. Preliminary sign location plans and phasing options 4. Preliminary implementation budgets.
PHASE ACTION REQUIRED BY CLIENT
Client review, comment, selection of one Schematic design direction and final approval of all phase
deliverables to proceed into Phase 2.
PHASE 2 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Based on the approved Schematic Design direction from Phase 1, Square Peg will develop and apply the
approved design direction to all remaining sign types.
The following is expected during this phase of work:
1. Develop the approved Schematic Design per comments from Phase 1 and apply to all remaining sign
types.
2. Coordinate all sign sizes, locations, power and structural requirements with the Design Team
and project Consultants.
3. Refine and finalize signing typography, icons, materials and finishes
4. Prepare sign message schedules listing all proposed sign types and message copy.
5. Prepare Design Development presentation
6. Present developed materials for approval
MEETINGS
1. Interim design coordination with the city and design consultants as needed
2. Present Final Design
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 12
PHASE DELIVERABLES
1. Design Development drawings for all sign types.
2. Sign location plans and message schedule(s) for all required sign types.
3. Power, data and structural requirements per sign type
4. Sign implementation budget.
5. Material samples as necessary for review.
PHASE ACTION REQUIRED BY CLIENT
Client review, comment and final approval of all phase deliverables to proceed into Phase 3.
PHASE 3 DOCUMENTATION
The purpose of Phase 3 is to provide design intent documentation and technical detailing sufficient in detail to
facilitate tendering and fabrication by a qualified sign fabricator.
The Documentation Phase shall include, but not limited to, the following:
1. Prepare design intent documentation drawings sufficient in detail to facilitate bidding and
fabrication by a qualified sign fabricator.
2. Coordinate all sign sizes, locations, power and structural requirements with the design team.
3. Document design details for all sign types.
4. Specify and document signing colors, illumination and materials.
5. Write performance specifications for all signing colors, illumination, materials and installation as
required.
6. Finalize typography.
7. Finalize sign location plans and message schedules.
8. Produce final set of documentation drawings for signing and graphic elements.
MEETINGS
1. Coordination with the city and design consultants as required
PHASE DELIVERABLE
At the completion of the Documentation Phase, we will deliver Final Documents to the Client.
Documents shall include, but not limited to, the following deliverables and presentation materials:
1. Design Intent documentation sufficient in detail to facilitate tendering and fabrication by a
qualified sign fabricator. 2. Specifications 3. Final sign location plans and message schedule(s) for all required sign types.
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 13
Documents will be issued as follows:
1. Design documentation drawings for signing elements in Illustrator CS4 on Mac OS X platform: CD and
three (3) hard copies, Tabloid format
2. Location Plans - CAD 2010, CD and three (3) hard copies
3. Message Schedule - Filemaker: CD and three (3) hard copies
PHASE 4 CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION
The purpose of Phase 4 is to provide Construction Administration services for the Exterior, Parking and
Interior Signing.
To insure the design intent and desired quality of fabrication is achieved, SPD will coordinate with the selected
fabricator through the submittal, fabrication and installation phases of work to answer questions, provide
details and information. SPD will also review submittals, installation and a final inspection of the completed
installation.
Tasks to included:
1. Review, comment and approval of shop drawings, materials, mock-ups and samples. 2. Review Prototypes and Samples. 3. Provide details and sketches to clarify design intent. 4. Coordinate with the fabricator on Site regarding sign locations. 5. Up to four (4) site visits.
6. Respond to requests made by fabricator for clarification of Contract Documents.
7. Inspect final Installations and prepare punchlist of items for correction.
8. Follow-up evaluation of punch list items at final completion.
9. Perform project closeout activities and prepare final record plan set from contractor markups.
Contract C12144101 Amendment No. 2 Page 14
WMB ARCHITECTS Contract C12144101 - Amendment No. 2
Exhibit "B" - Project Schedule
City Hall Remodel
A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J
Program Confirmation
Design Development
Construction Documents
Plan Review
Bidding
Construction
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
2013 2014 2015
Co
n
t
r
a
c
t
R
e
v
i
s
i
o
n
EXHIBIT “C”
COMPENSATION
CONTRACT C12144101 - AMENDMENT No. 2
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 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. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in
EXHIBIT “A” (“Scope of Work”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Three Hundred Eighty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Five Dollars [$387,505.00]. 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 Four Hundred Twenty-Six Thousand Two Hundred Fifty-Six Dollars [$426,256.00]. 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 Three Hundred Eighty-Seven Thousand Five Hundred Five Dollars [$387,505.00] and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed Thirty-Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty-One Dollars [$38,751.00].
Attachment C
ORDINANCE NO.XXXX
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014 TO PROVIDE
ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION OF $1,607,109 IN THE FIRST
FLOOR RENOVATIONS PROJECT (PE-12017), BUDGETED IN
THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND, FOR ENHANCEMENTS TO
CITY HALL, RESULTING IN NO IMPACT TO THE
INFRASTRUCTURE RESERVE. A SERIES OF TRANSFERS INTO
THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND WILL OFFSET THE
INCREASED BUDGET AMOUNT, INCLUDING: $686,298 FROM
THE COMMUNITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE FUND,
$499,335 FROM THE TECHNOLOGY FUND, AND $668,437
FROM THE UTILITIES ADMINISTRATION FUND. THE
TRANSFERS FROM THE COMMUNITY CENTER DEVELOPMENT
IMPACT FEE FUND ($696,298), TECHNOLOGY FUND
($517,962), AND UTILITIES ADMINISTRATION FUND
($685,121) WILL BE OFFSET BY DECREASES TO THE FUND
BALANCES TO EACH RESPECTIVE FUND. THESE TRANSFERS
FROM OTHER FUNDS WILL ALLOW FOR AN INCREASE TO THE
INFRASTRUCTURE RESERVE IN THE AMOUNT OF $246,961.
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 10, 2013 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2014; and
B.At the time the 2014 Adopted Budget was being
considered by the City Council, the costs associated with the
First Floor Renovation project were not known; and
C. The project will provide for enhancements to City Hall
in order to allow for better civic engagement. Improvements
include: a remodel to the main lobby, including coordination
with a new digital public art element; an enhancement to the
heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system in
the lobby area in order to handle the increased loads from the
new community meeting room and digital art installation; a
restoration to the terrazzo floor of the main lobby;
conversion of the existing People Strategy and Operations
conference room to a new City Council conference room;
conversion of the existing City Council conference room to a
new training and multipurpose meeting room; creation of a new
community meeting room beside the main lobby; installation of
broadcast media capabilities for all the new lobby-level
meeting spaces; modification of the lobby payment counter to
match the new architectural style of the lobby and provide a
lower ledge for writing checks and signing forms; conversion
of the Revenue Services offices into new Utilities Customer
Service counter and offices; reconfiguration and renovation of
mezzanine level offices; reconfiguration and renovation of
second floor offices; new carpeting and bench upholstery for
City Council chambers; and remodeling the three building
elevator cabs.
D.In April 2014, the City posted a notice inviting
formal bids (IFB) for the project, with a bidding period of
nineteen calendar days; and
E. Bids were received from one qualified contractor on
May 6, 2014 with a base bid of $2,664,000, plus add alternates
of $54,350, bringing the total bid to $2,718,350. This bid
amount is 19% higher than the construction cost estimate,
indicative of the busy local construction climate.
F. Staff recommends that the bid of $2,718,350 submitted
by D.L. Falk Construction, Inc. be declared the lowest
responsible and responsive bid; and
G. A contingency amount of $271,835, equal to ten percent
of the total base bid contract amount, is requested for
related, additional, but unforeseen work which may develop
during the project.
SECTION 2.The sum of One Million Six Hundred Seven
Thousand One Hundred and Nine Dollars is hereby appropriated
for the City Hall First Floor Remodel Project. To offset the
increased a portion of the increased costs in the Capital
Improvement Fund, a series of transfers are recommended,
including Six Hundred Eighty Six Thousand Two Hundred Ninety
Eight Dollars from the Community Center Development Impact Fee
Fund, One hundred thirty three thousand six hundred eighty
seven dollars from the Electric Fund, One hundred thirty three
thousand six hundred eighty seven dollars from the Gas Fund,
One hundred thirty three thousand six hundred eighty seven
dollars from the Wastewater Collection Fund, One hundred
thirty three thousand six hundred eighty seven dollars from
the Water Fund, One hundred thirty three thousand six hundred
eighty seven dollars from the Fiber Optics Fund, and four
hundred ninety nine thousand three hundred and thirty five
dollars from the Technology Fund. The transfers in from the
various funds would be offset by reductions to each respective
funds ending fund balance. Finally, as a result of the
transfers in to the Capital Improvement Fund from the various
funds, the Infrastructure Reserve can be increased by two
hundred forty six thousand nine hundred sixty one dollars.
SECTION 4. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo
Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective
upon adoption.
SECTION 5.The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby
finds that this is not a project under the California
Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental
impact assessment is necessary.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:APPROVED:
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Manager
Director of Public Works
Director of Administrative
Services
" ----------
City Council/City Manager
City of Palo Alto
Palo Alto, California
BID FORM (Revised per Addendum No.1)
Name of Company D.L. Falk Construction Inc.
In response to this Invitation For Bids (IFB), the undersigned, as Bidder, declares that the only persons or parties
interested in this Bid as principals are those named herein; that this Bid is made without collusion with any other
person, firm or corporation; that the Bidder has carefully examined the location of the proposed work and the
plans and specifications herein referred to; and that the Bidder proposes and agrees, if this Bid is accepted, ~o
contract with the City of Palo Alto (City), to provide all' necessary materials, equipment, tools, apparatus, and
other means of transport services, and to do all the Work and comply with all the specified requirements in this
IFB, in the manner herein prescribed and for the prices stated in the following Bid:
Project Title: CITY HALL REMODEL
A: Base Bid: Provide all labor, equipment material, transportation and applicable taxes, profit, insurance,
bonds and other overhead to perform the Work in accordance with the Project Plans and
Technical Specifications, herein:
BID APPROX UNIT DESCRIPTION, WITH UNIT PRICE IN WORDS UNIT TOTAL ITEM
ITEM (EACH BID ITEM SHALL INCLUDE ALL APPLICABLE TAXES, PRICE PRICE
QUANTI PROFIT, INSURANCE, BONDS, AND OTHER OVERHEAD)
TV
1. 1 LS Upgrade the aesthetic and functionality of the Council $ fPC I~ Conference Room, Human Resources Conference Room,
Lobby Area, Mezzanine, Level 2, and Elevator Cabs at Palo 1\"" I
Alto City Hall. rv~ . ~'V~
2. 1 lS Moving Allowance $70,000 $70,000
0
Base Bid Total (item 1 and 2) $ cfJ
1.\1
(Total in words: -It-Jo ~1'~·f2V1. t A~[~ ~;Jr-&IAL ~~ \b\J ~/K (\..-\
II
II
II
II
ADDENDUM NO. ONE TO CITY OF PALO ALTO IFB 153838 PAGE 3 OF 6
B: Additive Alternate Bid: Provide all labor, equipment material, transportation and applicable taxes, profit,
insurance, bonds and other overhead to perform the Work in accordance with the Project Plans and Technical
Specifications, herein:
-BID APPRO UNIT
ITEM X.QTY.
1. 1 LS
2. 1 .LS
1 LS
4. 1 LS
s. 1 LS
DESCRIPTION, WITH UNIT PRICE IN WORDS .' ..... _.-'" -UNlt·--'TOTAL ITEM
(EACH BID ITEM SHALL INCLUDE ALL APPLICABLE TAXES, PRICE PRICE
PROFIT, INSURANCE, BONDS, AND OTHER OVERHEAD)
Community Meeting Room: Upgrade AV01-Allow $ $
multiple video camera feeds to be displayed on LCD
screens, i.e. Camera #1 may be displayed on LCD #1 while
Camera #2 is displayed on LCD #2. Routing will be achieved 1/ 'boo 7, Sera
via intuitive controls on Community Meeting Room touch
panel display. . ~e,J P/of\ .\{...ov.'.J,ilrl.J e.;\~"'( h .... ,,~( e!
(Unit Price in Words)
Lobby: Upgrade AV02 -Allow each LCD screen to show
separate sources (in addition to ability to send one source
scaled across the entire LCD screen array). Routing to
individual displays will be achieved via intuitive controls on
associated touch panel display.
Lobby: Upgrade AV03 -One LCD screen (at ADA-compliant
height) shall be touch-capable, and allow users to access
way-finding information on.theLCD screen array. For
example, if a user would like directions to the Flexible
Meeting Space, they may use the touch-enabled LCD
screen to get directions to the room from their current
location.
LiVv +t-.~\I\.V\!. C\ C\-'I'
(Unif Price in Words)
Conference Room: Upgrade AV04 -Allow multiple video
camera feeds to be displayed on LCD screens, i.e. Camera
#1 may be displayed on LCD #1 while Camera #2 is
displayed on LCD #2. Routing will be achieved via intuitive
controls on Conference Room touch panel display.
(Unit Price in Words) ~l «.. ~~cl
Flexible Meeting Space: Upgrade AVOS -Include (2)
Panasonic AW-HE60S cameras on ceiling for routing to
recording hardware in Council Chambers Control Room.
Allow either camera feed to be displayed on LCD screen in
room
(Unit Price in "r,ords) , l I~'\IJ.AI .n -W\.O\,\,~\/\U-\-wo llA.vt.4.,« t!
$ $
$ $
(O~O ~DC-O , .. ,..J)
$ $
., I CJOO
$ $
ADDENDUM NO. ONE TO CITY OF PALO ALTO IFB 153838 PAGE 4 OF6
BID APPRO UNIT DESCRIPTION, WITH UNIT PRICE IN WORDS UNIT TOTAL ITEM
ITEM X.QTY. (EACH BID ITEM SHALL INCLUDE ALL APPLICABLE TAXES, PRICE PRICE
PROFIT, INSURANCE, BONDS, AND OTHER OVERHEAD)
6. 1 LS Expand existing AMAG Security Access Control System to $ $
include Doors No: 107.1, 109.1, 126.1, 122.1, 122.2, 123.1,
MOS.l, Mo6.1 and.20S.1.
1,~OO +~OO
&)tJufN\. ~ lztNifl. A tIlilft-l kJ.'lt-J..
Additive Alternate Bid Total (item 1 through 6) $
(Total in words: 6~~¥ ~\W' ~tA~~ lctL ~JctJ cJhf ) :;4 Ii:> 'fiV
C: Deductive Alternate Bid Total: Provide all labor, equipment material, transportation and applicable taxes,
profit, insurance, bonds and other overhead to perform the Work in
accordance with the Project Plans and Technical Specifications, herein:
BID APPRO UNIT DESCRIPTION, WITH UNIT PRICE IN WORDS UNIT TOTAL ITEM
ITEM X.QTY. (EACH BID ITEM SHALL INCLUDE ALL APPLICABLE TAXES, PRICE PRICE
PROFIT, INSURANCE, BONDS, AND OTHER OVERHEAD)
1. 1 LS Delete Elevator Interiors Package $ $ ~-1S' i\~~l--1r k Ib",~ C'"'-I ~~!h! ~~~ ~Ve.., ~~~1S' (Unit rice in words) 'b't-,
2. 1 LS Delete AV @ Entry Wall including power, data and $ $
monitors refer to Sheet AV2.1, Note 1 ':00 e.ttv tiN ~~s,."J. eir;tt-~~V\cLftJ e::\~~'f 'J(o~~O ~ q,\ol
( nit Price in Words)
3. 1 LS Delete metal panels at entry surrounding restroom core. $ $
As shown on sheet A 2.4. On lieu of install 5/8" gyp board
over th e specified new furring. Tape, texture and paint (n) t;DO
gyp board. ~1~oO ~Chl ~l> ~""c"tAMJ t;\It hl.lMclH~ e;1.1
(Unit Price in Words)
4. 1 LS Delete decorative glazing at doors to Community Meeting $ $
Room (refer to door schedule Sheet A 8.1) and replace
with X" clear tempered glazing. 0° \6D ~ ... t ~ ~~ I)ttt.. "'~~u" \ " \" (Unit Price in Words)
S. 1 LS Delete Folding walls at Community Meeting Room, replace $ $
with fixed anodized aluminum frame storefront system
00 00 ~~i:~nst:;~:rrf<::ed Cl-ea 'II\J ~ 1\;\ I (Unit Price in Words)
ADDENDUM NO. ONE TO CITY OF PALO ALTO IFB 153838 PAGE 5 OF 6
BID APPRO UNIT DESCRIPTION, WITH UNIT PRICE IN WORDS UNIT TOTAL ITEM
ITEM X.QTY. (EACH BID ITEM SHALL INCLUDE ALL APPlicABLE TAXES, PRICE PRICE
PROFIT, INSURANCE, BONDS, AND OTHER OVERHEAD)
6. 1 LS Delete Drinking Fountain Replacement with Water Filling $ $
stations on Floor level A, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. See Sheet
P.01Note P of General Plumbing Notes. .. qOb ,\00 ~i '\:)I sttc ~,a-V'l-J "".V\t U(-eJ (~nit Price iti or s)· ~lP' ~l
7. 1 LS Delete all work associated with Finance Department $ $
counter including casework, decorative glazing and
terrazzo floor infill as shown on sheets D2.1,A2.1, A2.4 and L{"I .. P .;..",0 Ani r.",(vy -S~\C ~S~ ~w '-t~tJ. ~v..hl yIJ 1 I.\,tp\
(Unit Price in Words)
8. 1 LS Delete all work in City Council Chambers as shown of Sheet $ $
A1D.l-CC, including installation of new carpeting and ~tP reupholster of existing bench style seating. 0° ~~~"'" f1.,vw~~ M~ ~ ~ i,() \
'h01 ( nit Price in Words)
9. 1 LS In lieu of replacing suspended ceiling systems as specified $ $
on the Mezzanine and Second Floor levels, maintain
existing suspended grid system as currently installed.
Modify existing grid system as required to accommodate
'lr
0
1/0 new specified fixtures and mechanical diffusers. Replace 7~ ceiling' tiles with specified tiles. Refer to sheet A 9.2 ~~ ~t.t-~\II.<"~ e.Aj"-\-",IAI"-ar~! +-wev--~I
(Unit Price in Words)
Deductive Alternate Bid Total (items 1 through 9) $
(Total in words: ) 4~11n~
~\.W ~ ~f~" .h.J& ./-L.IL~ J ,u,u.t. l. ..J "...,~ .u.. ;,-1.,'1/ t:.a "tlf!...
D. Addenda
During the Bid process there may be changes to the Contract Documents, which would require an
issuance of an addendum or addenda. City disclaims any and all liability for loss, or damage to any
Bidder who does not receive any addendum issued by City in connection with this IFB. Any Bidder in
submitting a Bid is deemed to waive any and all claims and demands Bidder may have against City on
account of the failure of delivery of any such addendum to Bidder. Any and all addenda issued by City
shall be deemed included in this IFB, and the provisions and instructions therein contained shall be
incorporated to any Bid su bmitted by Bidder.
To assure that all Bidders have received each addendum, the following acknowledgment and sign-off is
required. Failure to acknowledge receipt of an addendum/addenda may be considered an irregularity in
the Bid:
ADDENDUM NO. ONE TO CITY OF PALO ALTO IFB 153838 PAGE 6 OF6