Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-11-18 City Council Agenda PacketCITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL Special Meeting Council Chambers November 18, 2013 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 November 18, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. 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 Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions Closed Session 1. A Previous Closed Session has been removed. Study Session 6:00-6:45 PM 2. Presentation to Council About Library Programs and Activities 2 November 18, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. City Manager Comments 6:45-6:55 PM Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements 6:55-7:05 PM Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) Oral Communications 7:05-7:20 PM Members of the public may speak to any item not on the agenda; three minutes per speaker. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. Minutes Approval 7:20-7:25 PM October 7, 2013 Consent Calendar 7:25-7:30 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by two Council Members. 3. Approval of the Fourth Amendment to Extend the Lease with Thoits Bros., Inc. at 285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 100 for a Period of 32 Months and Approval of the First Amendment to Extend the Sublease with Survey Monkey at 285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 280 for a Period Of 22 Months for Use by the City Development Center 4. Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract # C09127499 with AssetWorks, lnc. in the Amount of $32,100 for a Total Contract Not to Exceed Amount of $268,210 for Cloud Hosting Solution and Maintenance for a One Year Term with the Option to Renew Four Additional Years for the City’s FleetFocus and FuelFocus Fleet Transaction Management Systems 5. Approval of a Contract in the Amount of $693,073 with Naturescapes for Improvements to Eleanor Pardee Park Project PE-12012 6. Approval of a Contract Amendment with Envisionware, Inc., for an Amount Not to Exceed $463,000 for the Automatic Materials Handling System at the Main Library, For a Total Contract Not Exceeding $1,000,000 for the Main and Mitchell Park Libraries 7. Second Reading: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Approve an Amendment to Planned Community (PC-5150) Mixed use Project to Allow Reconstruction of One of Two Historic Eichler Retail Buildings (Building 1), for a 3.58 Acre Site Located at 2080 Channing Avenue (Edgewood 3 November 18, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Plaza Mixed Use Project) (First Reading: October 7, 2013; Passed 7-1 Holman no, Scharff absent) 8. Second Reading: Public Hearing: Adoption of Eight Ordinances: (1) Repealing Chapter 16.04 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.04, California Building Code, California Historical Building Code, and California Existing Building Code, 2013 Editions, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (2) Repealing Chapter 16.05 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.05, California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (3) Repealing Chapter 16.06 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.06, California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (4) Repealing Chapter 16.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.08, California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (5) Repealing Chapter 16.14 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.14, California Green Building Standard Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (6) Repealing Chapter 16.16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.16, California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (7) Repealing Chapter 16.17 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.17, California Energy Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; and (8) Repealing Chapter 15.04 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 15 to Adopt a new Chapter 15.04, California Fire Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings (First Reading: October 21, 2013 PASSED: 8-0 Klein absent) 9. Approval of Amendment No. 1 to the City's Power Purchase Agreement with Ameresco San Joaquin, LLC to Extend the Landfill Gas Electric Generating Facility's Commercial Operation Date to January 31, 2014 10. Adoption Of A Budget Amendment Ordinance In The Amount Of $125,000 For The First Year Funding Of A $250,000 Two-Year Agreement For Intensive Case Management In Collaboration With The Housing Subsidies From The County Of Santa Clara 11. Approval of a Contract With WatchGuard Video in the Amount of $296,470 and Additional Services of $8,530 for a Total Not to Exceed 4 November 18, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. $305,000 for the Upgrade of Police Mobile In-Car Video System, Capital Improvement Program Project TE-11002 12. Approval of a Contract in the Amount of $327,535 with MIG, Inc. for the Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan Project PE- 13003 13. Approval of a Contract with Ghirardelli Associates in the Amount of $638,599.82 for Construction Management Services for the California Avenue Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape Project 14. Adoption of a Resolution Declaring Weeds to be a Public Nuisance and Setting December 9th, 2013 for a Public Hearing for Objections to Proposed Weed Abatement 15. Recommendation from the Council Appointed Officers Committee to Approve Amendment No. 2 to a Consulting Contract with Sherry L. Lund Associates to Increase the Scope of Services and Cost by $10,000 for a Total Year-Two Cost Not To Exceed $61,850, to be Funded from the Council Contingency Fund Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 7:30-8:30 PM 16. Public Hearing: City Council Review of a Proposed Mixed-use Development on a 1.6 Acre Site Located at 3159 El Camino Real (between Acacia and Portage Avenues), Adoption of the Environmental Review Document (Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration) and Approval of the Site and Design Review, CUP for Over 5,000 Square Feet of Office and Design Enhancement Exceptions Application (via Record of Land Use Action). The Proposed Four-story, 55-Foot Tall, 74,122 s.f. Development Would Include Retail Space, Office Space, 48 Small Rental Residential Units, Two Zoning Concessions (Increased Floor Area and Reduced Parking Spaces) Under the State Density Bonus Law, and Would Replace the Existing 900 s.f. “We Fix Macs” Commercial Building 8:30-9:15 PM 17. Public Hearing: Request For Council’s Direction On Whether to Apply The Edgewood Plaza PC $94,200 Public Benefit Payment to the 5 November 18, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Construction of a Sidewalk, Historic Preservation of a Public Building, or Another Council Directed Purpose 9:15-10:15 PM 18. Colleague's Memo from Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Shepherd, Council Member Holman and Council Member Price, Regarding Expanding Smoking Ban in Downtown and California Avenue Business Districts 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. 6 November 18, 2013 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Additional Information Standing Committee Meetings Policy and Services Committee Meeting 11/19/13 Finance Committee Meeting 11/19/13 City/School Meeting 11/21/13 Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Informational Report City of Palo Alto Sales Tax Digest Summary Second Quarter Sales (April - June 2013) Public Letters to Council SET 1 SET 2 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4281) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Presentation on Library Program and Activities Title: Presentation to Council about Library Programs and Activities From: City Manager Lead Department: Library Monique le Conge Ziesenhenne, Library Director, and other library staff will present information about specific library programs and activities over the past year to Council. These programs include grant-funded services, online databases and e-materials, school outreach, as well as the annual Summer Reading Program. City of Palo Alto (ID # 4166) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Extension of Lease Agreements for the City Development Center At 285 Hamilton Avenue Title: Approval of the Fourth Amendment to Extend the Lease with Thoits Bros., Inc. at 285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 100 for a Period of 32 Months and Approval of the First Amendment to Extend the Sublease with Survey Monkey at 285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 280 for a Period Of 22 Months for Use by the City Development Center From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services Recommendation Staff recommends that Council 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached fourth amendment to the lease with Thoits Bros., Inc. (TBI) for the 6,361 square foot Development Center ground floor space at 285 Hamilton Avenue to extend the lease from February 1, 2014 to September 30, 2016; and 2. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached first amendment of sublease agreement to extend the term the agreement with Survey Monkey for the 3,133 square foot Development Center second floor space at 285 Hamilton Avenue from November 30, 2014 to September 30, 2016. Executive Summary The two proposed extension of the tenancy agreements at the City Development Center at 280 Hamilton Avenue will provide the City with the continuous operation of the Development City of Palo Alto Page 2 Center to provide services to the Public and will amend the existing agreements termination dates to coincide at the same date of September 30, 2016 to prevent service interruption due to ending of the lease and sublease agreements at different time periods. Background The Development Center currently occupies 6,361 square feet on the ground floor (Suite 100) and 3,133 square feet on the second floor (suite 280) of the property, which is owned by Thoits Bros., INC. (Landlord). Suite 280 The internet company, Survey Monkey, vacated its leased space on the second floor of 285 Hamilton Avenue because of its growth needs and offered to sublet this space to the City. On December 13, 2011, the City entered into a sublease agreement with Survey Monkey to occupy and use approximately 3,133 square feet on the second floor above Development Center in order to avoid over-crowding. The term of the sublease will expire on November 30, 2014. The Survey Monkey lease agreement with the Landlord will expire on September 30, 2016. Suite 100 In early 1998, after receiving Council authorization to search for additional space to relieve overcrowding in the Civic Center, staff considered many possible locations and identified the space at 285 Hamilton Avenue as ideal for the City’s Development Center. On September 22, 1998, the City Council approved an 8-year lease with Hamilton Palo Alto LLC for 6,361 square feet of space at 285 Hamilton Avenue for location of the City’s Development Center (CMR 368:98). On May 18, 1999, the City Manager approved the first amendment to the lease, which expanded the original 6,361 square foot premises by approximately 702 square feet for a limited time, from March 1, 1999 until December 31, 1999, to provide temporary office space for City staff. On June 13, 2006, City and Thoits Bros., INC entered into amendment No. 2 to continue the Lease directly with the Landlord and to adjust rate and to extend the Lease term to January 31, 2012. Amendment No. 3 of the Lease was executed on November 1, 2011 to extend the office lease until January 31, 2014 under the First Option to Extend clause. The City exercised its second Option per terms and condition of the Lease to extend the Lease for twenty four (24) months to February 1, 2016. Since then Landlord and Tenant have agreed to extend the lease for an additional 8 months to bring the total extension to total of thirty two (32) months to expire on September 30, 2016. Discussion The existing lease agreements for the different floors that are occupied by Development Center and Palo Alto Fire Department are currently set to expire at different times. Based on the City of Palo Alto Page 3 existing agreements, the lease agreement, including the Option period with Thoits Bros., Inc will expire on February 1, 2016 and the Sublease Agreement with Survey Monkey will end on November 30, 2014. The purpose of the amendments recommended in this report is to extend the term of both agreements for occupancy of the Development Center to ensure the continuation of operation of the Development Center without interruption and to amend the expiration date of the Lease with Thoits Bros and the Sublease with Survey Monkey to coincide together to expire at the same time. In order to accomplish that goal, Real Estate Staff met with both parties to discuss the amendment of the existing agreements. Survey Monkey agreed to extend the lease term if City would sublease the space for the entire duration of their lease with the landlord, TBI which is to expire on September 30, 2016. TBI also agreed to extend the lease agreement with the City to September 30, 2016. As result, all parties came to agreement to extend the agreements to expire at the same time and to insure extended leaseholds right for the City to remain at the Development Center until other options become available. Amendment of the Sublease with Survey Monkey will add twenty two (22) months to the sublease agreement, and the amendment with TBI will add eight (8) months to twenty four (24) months option period resulting in a total of thirty two additional months (32). The base rent will for both suites will start at $7.00 per square foot and will increase by 3% annually. The lease terms, rental rates and annual rate increases are summarized in the table below: Landlord/Suite Future Commencement Date Lease Expiration date New Rate CPI Adjustment TBI/ground Floor 6,316 sq.ft February 1, 2014 September 30, 2016 $7.00 *NNN per square foot starting on February 1, 2014 3% annual increase Survey Monkey/ second floor 3,133 sq.ft December 1, 2014 September 30, 2016 $7.00 NNN per square foot starting on December 1, 2014 3% annual increase *NNN refers to a triple net lease where tenants are responsible for proportional cost of property taxes, insurance, and maintenance of the building. Should the space at 285 Hamilton be needed beyond 2016, City would embark to negotiate with Landlord, TBI, more than a year before expiration of the terms to establish acceptable rates and duration time to extend the lease. Resource Impact City of Palo Alto Page 4 Annual rental costs for extending the lease for 6,361 square feet for Suite 100 will bring the total rent charges to $534,324 for the first year, beginning February 1, 2014, and will increase by 3 percent each year until September 30, 2016. Common area maintenance (CAM) charges, (including property tax, insurance, assessments, building maintenance, gas, water, sewer and garage) to support occupancy expenses are approximately at $1.00 per square foot or at 14.3% of the total cost of tenancy at this location. Anticipated CAM cost will run approximately $76,000 to $78,000 annually ($6,300 to $6,500 per month). Annual rental cost for extending the lease for 3,133 square feet for suite 280 will be at $263,172, beginning on December 1, 2014 and will increase by 3% to end of the lease term. Common area maintenance (CAM) charges, (including property tax, insurance, assessments, building maintenance, gas, water, sewer and garage) to support occupancy expenses are approximately at $1.00 per square foot or at 14.3% of the total cost of tenancy at this location. Rent expense for both floors is budgeted in the Planning and Community Environment Department. The 2014 Adopted Operating Budget included $790,000 for the first and second floor rental costs. The recommendations included in this report will result in total expenses for renting the Development Center of approximately $851,000, or $61,000 more than the budgeted amount. The Planning and Community Environment Department is working with the Office of Management and Budget to determine whether or not an augmentation request will need to be brought forward to the City Council as part of the mid-year budget report. The amendments recommended in this report will result in Fiscal Year 2015 costs of approximately $935,000, or $144,000 more than the Fiscal Year 2014 Adopted Operating Budget. This increased cost will be included in the proposed Fiscal Year 2015 Base Budget to ensure Planning and Community Environment has sufficient resources to support the increased costs. Policy Implications The lease and the sublease extensions are consistent with existing City policy. The continuation of the Development Center is consistent with Goals of the Comprehensive Plan, which states the City’s commitment to streamline the permit process in order to improve customer service and staff efficiency. Environmental Review Leasing of existing office space involving no expansion of use is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act review pursuant to CBQA Guideline Section 15301. Attachments:  Attachment A: City of Palo Alto - First Amendment to Sublease Agreement (DOCX)  Attachment B: City of P A Amendment 4 to Lease- 285 Hamilton (DOC) FIRST AMENDMENT TO SUBLEASE AGREEMENT This FIRST AMENDMENT TO SUBLEASE AGREEMENT (the “First Amendment”) is dated as of September 5, 2013 (“Effective Date”), for reference, and made by and between CITY OF PALO ALTO, (“Subtenant”), and SURVEYMONKEY INC. (formerly known as SurveyMonkey.com, LLC “Sublandlord”), with reference to the following facts: A. Sublandlord and Subtenant entered into that certain Sublease Agreement dated December 13, 2011, whereby Subtenant sublet a portion of the second floor of the building known as Suite 280 (“Second Floor Space”) located at 285 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California, consisting of approximately 3,133 rentable square feet (the “Sublease”). The Commencement Date of the Sublease prior to this First Amendment is December 15, 2011. B. Sublandlord and Subtenant now desire to amend the Sublease to among other things (i) extend the term of the Sublease through September 30, 2016 (the “Extension”), (ii) set forth the Monthly Base Rent payable by Subtenant during the Extension, and (iii) modify various other terms and provisions of the Sublease as more particularly provided herein. AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants set forth herein and other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Capitalized Terms. All capitalized terms when used herein shall have the same meaning as is given to such terms in the Sublease unless expressly superseded by the terms of this First Amendment. 2. Term. Section 2 of the Sublease is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following text: “2. Term. The term of this Sublease shall commence on December 15, 2011 (the “Commencement Date”) and shall expire on September 30, 2016 (the “Sublease Term”), unless sooner terminated under the provisions of this Sublease or unless the Master lease is sooner terminated.” 3. Monthly Base Rent. The table setting forth the Monthly Base Rent in Section 3 of the Sublease is amended by adding the following rows to the table: Dates (Inclusive) Rent/sq.ft./monthly Totally Monthly Base Rent December 1, 2014 to November 30, 2015 $7.00 $21,931.00 December 1, 2015 to September 30, 2016 $7.21 $22,588.93 Attachment A 4. No Other Amendment; Conflict. Sublandlord and Subtenant acknowledge that as of the effective date of this First Amendment neither party is in default of its obligations under the Sublease. Except as set forth in this First Amendment, the Sublease shall remain in full force and effect. If the provisions of this First Amendment conflict with the provisions of the Sublease, then the provisions of this First Amendment shall prevail. 5. Entire Agreement. The First Amendment amends and is incorporated into the Sublease. The Sublease and this First Amendment constitutes the entire agreement (“Agreement”) between Sublandlord and Subtenant with respect to the subject matter therein and herein and may not be modified orally or in any manner other than by an agreement in writing signed by all the parties to the Agreement or their respective successors and permitted assigns. 6. Counterparts. This First Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and when taken together they shall constitute one and the same amendment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned gave duly executed this First Amendment as of the Effective Date. SUBLANDLORD: SUBTENANT: SURVEYMONKEY INC. CITY OF PALO ALTO By: By: Name: Name: Title: Title: LANDLORD’S CONSENT Subject to the terms and conditions of the Sublease, Landlord hereby consents to the foregoing First Amendment pursuant to Section 12 of the AIR Commercial Real Estate Association Standard Multi-Tenant Office Lease – Net dated November 1, 2010 (as amended, the “Lease”). This consent shall not constitute a waiver of Landlord’s right to withhold consent to any future assignment or sublease, nor a release of Sublandlord from any of its obligations under the Lease. LANDLORD: THOITS BROS., INC. a California corporation By: Print name: __________________________ Title: Attachment B AMENDMENT No. 4 TO OFFICE LEASE 285 HAMILTON AVE THIS Amendment No. 4 to Office Lease, (the “Fourth Amendment”) is dated as of September 3, 2013, and made by and between THOITS BROS., INC. (“TBI”), a California corporation (“Landlord”), and THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (“CITY”), a California municipal corporation (“Tenant”), with reference to the following facts: A. TBI and HAZEL A. THOITS TRUST as “Lessor”, entered into a Master Lease (the “Master Lease”), dated as of April 9, 1970, with EQUITABLE SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA, as “Lessee”, for the entire five story building located at 285 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California (the “Building”). The term of Master Lease expired on January 31, 2007. B. During the term of the Master Lease, TBI acquired the interest of HAZEL A. THOITS TRUST in the leased property and became the sole Lessor, and GREAT WESTERN BANK, a Federal Savings Bank became the successor Lessee. C. TBI, as of October 10, 1997, consented to the Assignment and Assumption of Master Lease by and between GREAT WESTERN BANK and HAMILTON PALO ALTO, LLC, a California Limited Liability Company, and HAMILTON PALO ALTO, LLC became “Lessee”. D. HAMILTON PALO ALTO, LLC, entered into an Office Lease (the “Office Lease”), dated as of October 18, 1998, with CITY for 6,361 rentable square feet of space located on the first floor of the Building, known as Suite 100. Attached to and as a part of the Office Lease is the Summary of Basic Lease Information (the “Summary”). The Office Lease expired with the Master Lease on January 31, 2007. E. HAMILTON PALO ALTO, LLC, entered into the Amendment No. 1 to the Office Lease, dated as of May 18, 1999, with CITY for an additional 702 square feet of space located on the third floor of the Building. This amendment and the use of the additional space terminated on December 31, 1999. F. TBI, as Landlord, and CITY, as Tenant, entered into the Amendment No. 2 to the Office Lease, dated June 13, 2006, to evidence their agreement to continue the Office Lease as a direct lease by Landlord to Tenant and to modify and amend the Office Lease, to establish a direct relationship between Landlord and Tenant, to adjust the Lease base rent and extend the Lease term until January 31, 2012, and create two option terms. G. TBI, as Landlord, and CITY, as Tenant, entered into the Amendment No. 3 to the Office Lease, dated November 1, 2011, to extend the Office Lease until January 31, 2014, under the First Option to Extend. 2 H. Tenant has exercised its Second Option to Extend, and Landlord and Tenant have agreed on terms for the thirty two (32) month extension of the lease term, and now desire to evidence this agreement by this Fourth Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants set forth herein and other good and valuable consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF AMENDMENT AND DEFINED TERMS. Except as expressly provided in this Fourth Amendment, the terms and provisions of the Office Lease, including the Amendments To The Office Lease No. 1 through No. 4, which are hereby referred to and incorporated herein by this reference, shall remain in full force and effect. 2. TERM The term of the Office Lease, is hereby amended to extend for thirty two (32) additional Lease Months commencing on February 1, 2014 and ending on September 30, 2016. 3. BASE RENT The Base Rent is hereby amended to add the following schedule: Lease Year Monthly Rent Rate Monthly (Per Rentable Sq. Ft). Base Rent Feb. 1, 2014 through Jan. 31, 2015 $7.00 $44,527.00 Feb. 1, 2015 through Jan. 31, 2016 $7.21 $45,863.00 Feb. 1, 2016 through Sept. 30, 2016 $7.43 $47,262.00 4. BROKERAGE In connection with this Fourth Amendment, each party represents and warrants that it has not used the services of a broker or other real estate licensee. In the event of a claim for broker’s fee, finder’s fee, commission or other similar compensation in connection herewith based on a relationship with or through such party, that party agrees to protect, 3 defend and indemnify the other party against and hold the other party harmless from any and all damages, liabilities, costs, expenses and losses (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs) which such party may sustain or incur by reason of such claim. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have duly executed this Fourth Amendment as of the date first above written. Landlord: Tenant: TBI, a California corporation By: Name: Its: CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California municipal corporation By: Name: Its: City of Palo Alto (ID # 4132) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Amendment No. 2 to AssetWorks for Cloud Hosting Solution for Fleet Management Software Title: Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract C09127499 with AssetWorks, lnc. in the Amount of $32,100 for a Total Contract Not to Exceed Amount of $268,210 for Cloud Hosting Solution and Maintenance for a One Year Term with the Option to Renew Four Additional Years for the City’s FleetFocus and FuelFocus Fleet Transaction Management Systems From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Amendment No. 2 to Contract C09127499 with AssetWorks, lnc., in the amount of $32,100 (Attachment A) , for a total contract not to exceed $268,210, to provide a cloud hosting solution for fleet data including one-time server and reporting setup fees for the City’s FleetFocus and FuelFocus transaction management systems for a term of three years with the option to renew hosting services for up to two additional one year terms. Background Since 1988, the Public Works Department’s Equipment Management (Fleet) section has utilized FleetFocus software to track all functions related to the maintenance of vehicles and equipment, including processing repair and preventive maintenance, capturing costs (e.g., fuel, oil, and licensing), and tracking vehicle equipment usage. In 2009, Council approved a contract with AssetWorks in the amount of $172,305 to add an integrated module to the City of Palo Alto Page 2 system called FuelFocus. FleetFocus integrates with the automated fuel management system, FuelFocus, in real-time in a single database. The FuelFocus system is used to: record and archive vehicle and equipment fuel transactions; facilitate the reconciliation of fuel inventories; collect vehicle and equipment utilization data (the system will upload mileage and hour meter readings during the transaction); and secure the City's fuel inventories by restricting fuel access to authorized staff only. All hardware is proprietary to the FuelFocus system and can only be obtained through the developer, AssetWorks. During the Windows 7 readiness assessment conducted by the Information Technology Department (IT), in which testing of all City applications was conducted, it was determined that FleetFocus and FuelFocus had not been routinely upgraded over a number of years and therefore the system would not run on Windows 7. At the same time, the Fleet Manager left the City and remaining Fleet staff did not have proper training on the systems and were focused on a number of hardware issues that had occurred relative to the fueling system. In February 2013, Council approved Amendment No. 1 (SR #3407), in the amount of $63,805, to upgrade both the FleetFocus and FuelFocus modules to a Windows 7 system, migration from Oracle to MS-SQL (City supported Database Management System), address fueling hardware problems, and provide thorough training of management, operational and support staff in order to provide a multiplicity of knowledge within Public Works for these fleet systems. Additionally, the amendment No. 1 included annual maintenance and support services. Discussion In preparation for the upgrades and through discussions between IT staff and AssetWorks, it was determined that the City’s servers had insufficient space to support the module upgrades. In keeping with the City’s goal of migrating on- premise file servers to a scalable cloud solution to address existing storage City of Palo Alto Page 3 capacity issues, it was determined that having AssetWorks serve as an off-site host would be a viable alternative to on-premise servers. The scope of amendment No. 2 provides for AssetWorks to host the FleetFocus and FuelFocus software; provide a dedicated and secured server; maintain a non- production test database; provide disaster recovery, archiving, reporting, and system support services. IT Project Managers have reviewed the scope and the IT Security Manager has analyzed and approved AssetWorks’ host security environment. Resource Impact Funds for this amendment are available in the FY 2013 Vehicle Replacement Fund operating budget. Policy Implications Authorization of this contract amendment does not represent any change to the existing policy. Environmental Review This project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under sections 15302 and 15303 of the CEQA guidelines. Attachments:  Attachment A_Amendment #2 AssetWorks Hosting Agreement (PDF) AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 1 Application Service Provider Agreement Application Service Provider Agreement This Application Service Provider Agreement (“Agreement”) is effective as of this 23rd day of October , 2013.(“Effective Date”), by and between AssetWorks, Inc. (“Provider”), with offices located at 998 Old Eagle School Road, Wayne, Pennsylvania, 19087 and City of Palo Alto (“Customer” with offices located at 3201 East Bayshore Blvd, on the following terms and conditions: 1. AGREEMENT OVERVIEW Provider operates an Application Service Provider (“ASP”) Data Center (the “Data Center”), located at 998 Old Eagle School Road, Wayne, PA 19087, and provides associated services to support customers that wish to outsource the operation and maintenance of computer applications. SERVICES Provider will perform the services (“Services”) as described in the Scope of Services, set forth in Attachment 1. The general scope of services addressed by this Agreement includes the operation, maintenance and support of the Customer’s: • Application software, • Database for the Applications hosted under this agreement, • Database security, and • Data Center servers operation. The Services specifically exclude operation and maintenance of the following: AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 2 • Customer hardware, including Customer’s servers, printers, network hardware (including routers and switches) and other Customer site computing equipment; • Customer application software other than noted in the Scope of Services; and • Customer Local Area Networks (“LAN”). The Services shall be provided subject to the Terms and Conditions, which follow. 3. TERM The Term of the Agreement shall commence as of the Effective Date and shall continue for (3) year (“Initial Term”) with the option to extend the agreement for two additional one year terms not to exceed a total of five years per the fee schedule attached unless terminated earlier as set forth below. At the end of the Initial Term, the Customer may decline the renewal option with notice to AssetWorks prior to the renewal date; if no such notice is received, the Agreement will automatically renew for twelve months upon the anniversary date of the Agreement. 4. FEES AND PAYMENT 3.1. Customer shall pay Provider the applicable fees as set forth in the Fee Schedule, Attachment 3. 3.2. Provider shall invoice Customer yearly in advance, and all invoiced fees shall be due and payable within 30 days of the date of an invoice. All payments shall be made in United States Dollars without deduction for any taxes or withholding or other offset, and shall be sent to Provider’s address set forth on the signature page of the Agreement. 3.3. Upon termination of services for whatever reason and regardless of the nature of the default (if any), Customer agrees to pay Provider in full for Services provided to Customer under this Agreement within 30 days of the invoice date. 5. CUSTOMER RESPONSIBILITIES Provider responsibilities are detailed in the Service Level Agreement, Attachment 2. The Customer is responsible for: A. Assigning a primary and alternate representative to coordinate all communications and activities related to Provider services. B. Providing user identification data and determining the appropriate security profile for each user. Customer will control security at the Application level. C. All on-site printing. No print job will print at the Data Center. All physical printing requirements will be the responsibility of the Customer. D. The purchase and installation of printers at Customer’s sites for the Application being utilized as defined in the Scope of Services. E. Installation, operation and maintenance of Customer’s LAN, existing data communications configuration, hardware, or software at the Customer’s site except as otherwise stipulated in the Scope of Services. This is defined as all lines, switches and routers from the Customer site up to the Provider’s site. F. Testing updates and fixes applied by Provider to Applications used by Customer. With the exception of emergency fixes, Customer will test updates and fixes in the test environment and confirm testing results with provider prior to their introduction to the Production environment within a mutually agreed upon time frame. G. Testing upgrades. Upgrades will be moved to production by the Provider at the end of the Customer testing period unless specific problems are communicated to Provider. Upgrades will be moved to production according to the established Hosted upgrade schedule unless Customer communicates specific issues to Provider. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 3 H. Analysis of suspected problems to determine their specific nature and possible causes before calling the Provider for assistance. Customer is responsible to report the problems and the analysis to the provider in a complete and timely manner. 6. OWNERSHIP OF DATA Customer shall not obtain any ownership rights, title or interest in the software, hardware or systems developed or employed by Provider in providing Services under the Agreement. Provider shall not obtain any ownership rights, title or interest to Customer’s data files. Upon expiration or termination of the Agreement for any reason, Provider agrees to provide Customer with a copy of Customer’s data files, as they exist at the date of expiration or termination pursuant to the requirements outlined in the Obligations Upon Termination of Contract section of the Attachment 1. 7. WARRANTY DISCLAIMER/LIMITATION OF LIABILITY EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH HEREIN, PROVIDER SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS ANY OTHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED STANDARDS, GUARANTEES, OR WARRANTIES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR NON-INFRINGEMENT AND ANY WARRANTIES THAT MAY BE ALLEGED TO ARISE AS A RESULT OF CUSTOM OR USAGE, ANY WARRANTY OF ERROR-FREE PERFORMANCE, OR ANY WARRANTY OF THIRD PARTY PRODUCTS, OR FUNCTIONALITY OF THE CUSTOMER’S HARDWARE, SOFTWARE, FIRMWARE, OR COMPUTER SYSTEMS. PROVIDER SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY PUNITIVE, EXEMPLARY, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOST DATA OR LOST REVENUES OR PROFITS, LOSS OF USE OR EQUIPMENT DOWN TIME, AND LOSS OF OR CORRUPTION TO DATA) ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT, REGARDLESS OF THE LEGAL THEORY UNDER WHICH SUCH DAMAGES ARE SOUGHT, AND EVEN IF PROVIDER HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. CUSTOMER HEREBY AGREES THAT PROVIDER'S TOTAL LIABILITY FOR ANY AND ALL LIABILITIES CLAIMS, OR DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT, HOWSOEVER CAUSED AND REGARDLESS OF THE LEGAL THEORY ASSERTED, INCLUDING BREACH OF CONTRACT OR WARRANTY, TORT, STRICT LIABILITY, STATUORY LIABILITY OR OTHERWISE, SHALL NOT, IN THE AGGREGATE, EXCEED FEES PAID TO PROVIDER DURING THE PREVIOUS 12-MONTH PERIOD. THE PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE TO THE FOREGOING LIABILITY RISK ALLOCATION. ANY CLAIM BY CUSTOMER AGAINST PROVIDER RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT MUST BE MADE IN WRITING AND PRESENTED TO PROVIDER WITHIN SIX (6) MONTHS AFTER THE DATE ON WHICH THIS AGREEMENT EXPIRES OR IS OTHERWISE TERMINATED. 8 TERMINATION FOR DEFAULT 8.1 Either party may terminate this Agreement if (i) the other party fails to perform a material obligation of the Agreement and such failure remains uncured for a period of 30 days after receipt of notice from the non-breaching party specifying such failure; or (ii) a party ceases to conduct business, becomes or is declared insolvent or bankrupt, is the subject of any proceeding relating to its liquidation or insolvency which is not dismissed within 90 days or makes an assignment for the benefit of creditors. 8.2 Upon termination for whatever reason and regardless of the nature of the default (if any), Customer agrees to pay Provider in full for all goods and/or services provided to, and accepted by, Customer under this Agreement and/or any task order hereto as of the effective date of the Agreement within 30 days of the invoice date. 9. NOTICES All notices under this Agreement will be in writing and can be delivered electronically via email or by personal service, facsimile or certified mail, postage prepaid, or overnight courier to such person and AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 4 address as may be designated from time to time by the relevant party, which initially shall be the address set forth below: AssetWorks 998 Old Eagle School Rd. - Suite 1215 Wayne, PA 19087 Attn.: John Hines 10. NON-WAIVER OF RIGHTS The failure of either party to insist upon performance of any provision of this Agreement, or to exercise any right, remedy or option provided herein, shall not be construed as a waiver of the right to assert any of the same at any time thereafter. 11. RIGHTS AND REMEDIES NOT EXCLUSIVE Unless otherwise expressly provided herein, no right or remedy of a party expressed herein shall be deemed exclusive, but shall be cumulative with, and not in substitution for, any other right or remedy of that party. 12. SEVERABILITY If any provision of the Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any manner. 13. ASSIGNMENT Neither the Agreement nor any duties or obligations hereunder shall be assigned or transferred by Customer without the prior written approval of Provider, which approval may be withheld in the reasonable judgment of the Provider. Customer agrees that Provider may assign its obligations to a third party subject to Customer’s written approval of such change, but Provider shall remain responsible for performance under the Agreement. All fees will remain intact as outlined in Attachment 3. 14. GOVERNING LAW; VENUE The Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California without regard to choice of law principles. Subject to Section 21 below, the parties agree that the sole jurisdiction and venue for actions related to the subject matter hereof shall be the state and U.S. Federal courts as directed. Both parties consent to the jurisdiction of such courts and waive any objections regarding venue in such courts. 15. INTERPRETATION The captions and headings used in this Agreement are solely for the convenience of the parties, and shall not be used in the interpretation of the text of this Agreement. Each party has read and agreed to the specific language of this Agreement; therefore no conflict, ambiguity, or doubtful interpretation shall be construed against the drafter. 16. DISPUTES The parties will seek a fair and prompt negotiated resolution within ten (10) business days of the initial notice of the dispute (“Dispute”). If the dispute has not been resolved after such time, the parties will escalate the issue to more senior levels. If the parties are unable to resolve any dispute at the senior management level, then any controversy, claim or Dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement shall be resolved by binding arbitration in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association then in effect. Before commencing any such arbitration, the parties agree to enter into negotiations to resolve the Dispute. If the parties are unable to resolve the Dispute by good faith negotiation, either party may refer the matter to arbitration. The arbitrator(s) shall be bound to follow the provisions of this Agreement in resolving the dispute, and may not award any damages, which are excluded by this Agreement. The decision of the arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding on the parties, and any award of the arbitrator(s) may be entered or enforced in any court of AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 5 competent jurisdiction. Any request for arbitration of a claim by either party against the other relating to this Agreement must be filed no later than six (6) months after the date on which Provider concludes performance under this Agreement. 17. MULTIPLE COPIES OF COUNTERPARTS OF AGREEMENT This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement shall not be effective until the execution and delivery between each of the parties of at least one set of the counterparts. 18. FORCE MAJEURE Neither party shall be liable for any failure of or delay in performance of its obligations (except for payment obligations) under this Agreement to the extent such failure or delay is due to acts of God, acts of a public enemy, fires, floods, power outages, wars, civil disturbances, sabotage, terrorism, accidents, insurrections, blockades, embargoes, storms, explosions, labor disputes (whether or not the employees' demands are reasonable and/or within the party's power to satisfy), failure of common carriers, Internet Service Providers, or other communication devices, acts of cyber criminals, terrorists or other criminals, acts of any governmental body (whether civil or military, foreign or domestic), failure or delay of third parties or governmental bodies from whom a party is obtaining or must obtain approvals, authorizations, licenses, franchises or permits, inability to obtain labor, materials, power, equipment, or transportation, or other circumstances beyond its reasonable control (collectively referred to herein as "Force Majeure Occurrences"). Any such delays shall not be a breach of or failure to perform this Agreement or any part thereof and the date on which the obligations hereunder are due to be fulfilled shall be extended for a period equal to the time lost as a result of such delays. Neither party shall be liable to the other for any liability claims, damages or other loss caused by or resulting from a Force Majeure Occurrence. 19. RELATIONSHIP OF PARTIES Provider is an independent contractor in all respects with regard to this Agreement. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed or construed to create a partnership, joint venture, agency, or other relationship other than that of Provider and Customer. 20. THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARIES This Agreement does not create, and shall not be construed as creating, any rights or interests enforceable by any person not a party to this Agreement. 21. WAIVER OR MODIFICATION No provision of the Agreement may be waived or modified unless in writing specifically referencing this Agreement and signed by representatives of both parties against whom enforcement of the purported modification or waiver is sought. Waiver of default of any provision of the Agreement shall not operate or be construed as a waiver of any subsequent default of such provision, nor shall a waiver of any one provision of the Agreement be deemed to be a waiver of any other provision. 22. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; CONFLICTING PROVISIONS The Agreement and any schedules and exhibits thereto contain the entire agreement and understanding of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes and replaces any and all prior or contemporaneous proposals, discussions, agreements, Customer issued purchase order or document of like intent or purchase, understandings, commitments, representations of any kind, whether oral or written, relating to the subject matter hereof or the Services to be provided hereunder. In the event that any provision in any attachment conflicts with any provision of this Agreement, then this Agreement shall be deemed to control, and such conflicting provision to the extent it conflicts shall be deemed removed and replaced with the governing provision herein. 23. AUTHORIZATION Each of the parties represents and warrants that the Agreement is a valid and binding obligation enforceable against it and that the representative executing the Agreement is duly authorized and empowered to sign the Agreement AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 6 24. SURVIVAL The provisions of sections 4, 6, 7, 14, 16 and 22 shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. 25. COUNSEL By execution of this Agreement, each of the Parties acknowledges and agrees that it has had an opportunity to consult with legal counsel and that it knowingly and voluntarily waives any right to a trial by jury of any dispute pertaining to or relating in any way to the transactions contemplated by the Agreement, the provisions of any federal, state or local law, regulation or ordinance notwithstanding. Signatures IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement through their duly authorized representative(s). “Provider” “Customer” AssetWorks, INC. Name: Name: Title: Title: Sign: ________________________________ Sign:_______________________________ Date: ________________________________ Date:_______________________________ Address: Address: 998 Old Eagle School Road 3201 East Bayshore Blvd Suite 1215 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Wayne, PA 19087 Telephone 650.326.2566 Telephone (610) 687-9202 AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 7 Attachment 1 - Scope of Services All the services, functions, processes and activities described below will be collectively described as the “Services” for purposes of this Agreement. All Services will be provided by the Provider to and for the Customer’s benefit in a manner, which will adequately meet or exceed the SLA, Attachment 2. Provider’s failure to deliver the services and meet SLO’s defined in the SLA will constitute Default by the Provider. Neither the SLA nor these Services can be changed in any way without written Amendment. 1. Application Application or Applications refer to the software and modules known as FleetFocusFA 2. Hardware The Application will be hosted on AssetWorks supplied servers. The Server will always provide adequate facility to meet the SLOs. If required by Customer, Customer shall provide the telecommunications equipment (including the routers to be installed at the Data Center and Disaster Recovery Center site), communication line and services for connection from Customer’s site to the Data Center and Disaster Recovery Center. 3. Database Instances A single Production Database instance will be maintained for Customer. This Production Database will provide the daily, real-time transaction data to the Application Users. In addition to the Production Database, Provider shall create an additional, non-production Test Database. Upon request by Customer, Provider will populate the Test Database with Customer’s Production data up to 4 times in any 12 month period with no additional cost. More frequent data updates will be performed with charges to the Customer using the Service Fee rates cited in Section 3 of Attachment 3. For an additional charge, Provider will furnish an Ad-hoc Reporting Database for use with the Customer developed ad-hoc reports. This Database will be updated from the production database every night and will allow the Customer direct access to its data for purposes of ad-hoc reporting. Further, Provider will certify a Customer built Ad-hoc Report for scheduling execution from within the Application directly against the production database, certifying that the Report performs within appropriate guidelines and does not cause unacceptable response time issues. Once certified, Provider will install the Report into Customer’s ASP production environment to make it available for execution submission from within the Application. 4. Hours of System Operations The Application will be accessible and available to the Customer and capable of any and all normal operating functions 24 hours a day, seven days a week except for previously approved and Scheduled Maintenance. The Provider will not be held responsible for inaccessibility arising from communications problems occurring anywhere beyond the Provider’s side of the router resident at the Provider’s Data Center and Disaster Recovery Center, nor will these hours of unavailability be counted as unavailable for purposes of Contractual Non-Compliance. However, Provider will assist with any troubleshooting efforts to resolve communication problems. 5. Help Desk Operations Provider will maintain a Help Desk to receive Customer calls to report, log and resolve any problems with the Services identified by the Customer. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 8 Customer will be allowed unlimited calls to the Help Desk as long as Customer remains in compliance with all contractual commitments between Customer and Provider. While the Application will be available to the Customer on Holidays, the Help Desk will operate on an “after Business Hours” schedule on Holidays. Provider currently recognizes the following Holidays: New Years Day Memorial Day Columbus Day Martin Luther King Day Fourth of July Thanksgiving Day Presidents Day Labor Day Christmas Day Additional Holidays may be added upon prior written notice to Customer. 6. Online Data Retention All data in the Customer’s Production database as provided at time of conversion will be available online. Older data will be archived in a process to be defined in the future, but mutually agreed upon by the Provider and the Customer. This data can be reloaded upon request by Customer for Service Fees identified in section 3 of Attachment 3. 7. Maintenance The Provider will complete Scheduled Maintenance of the Application on a weekly basis. This Scheduled Maintenance will consist of downtime of the Application mutually agreed upon by the Customer and the Provider. Scheduled Maintenance will include database reorganization and any other weekly requirements that allow the Application to successfully and adequately operate in a manner to meet the SLA, Attachment 2. If the Provider is required to perform additional maintenance outside of the Scheduled Maintenance window, it will notify the Customer in writing of its request. The Customer and the Provider will mutually agree on the downtime, which will then be considered Approved Maintenance. 8. Disaster Recovery The Provider will maintain a Disaster Recovery Center. If Customer elects to subscribe to the Disaster Recovery Service, all SLO’s will be met with the exception of Response Time. The Disaster Recovery Center will be expected to meet 75% of the SLO for Response Time. If Customer does not elect to subscribe to Disaster Recovery service, Provider will furnish backups and tapes. Back-up frequency and data retention services will be provided as outlined in the SLA, Attachment 2. The Provider will identify an authorized agent to provide off-site storage services. 9. Reporting The Provider will produce quarterly communications and reports as requested by the Customer. Examples of the possible requests: • Service Level Performance Metrics • Problem Trend Analysis • Status of Current and Future Activities • Application Availability Percentages • Monthly Unit Counts • Database Usage and Statistics • Server Statistics AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 9 10. Obligations Upon Termination of Contract 10.1 Customer’s Obligations Upon Termination or Expiration Upon termination due to a Default by the Customer or expiration of this Agreement, all rights granted hereunder to the Customer shall forthwith terminate, and: (a) Customer shall immediately and permanently cease to use the ASP Services in any manner whatsoever, and (b) Customer shall make all payments due. 10.2 Provider’s Obligations Upon Termination or Expiration Upon termination due to a Default by the Provider or expiration of this Agreement, all rights granted hereunder to the Provider shall forthwith terminate, and: (a) Provider shall immediately and permanently cease to use, in any manner whatsoever, all of the Customer’s Proprietary Marks and distinctive forms, slogans, signs, symbols, and devices associated with the Customer including, without limitation, all signs, advertising materials, displays, stationary, forms and any other articles which display such proprietary marks, (b) Provider will copy the Customer’s Production Database, and any and all other databases, scripts, utilities or files maintained by Provider on behalf of Customer, and forward the copies to the Customer on machine-readable magnetic tape in a file format acceptable to the Customer, (c) Provider will use all reasonable efforts to assist Customer in affecting a smooth transition of the ASP Services to Customer or any other vendor chosen by Customer, and (d) Provider, when directed by Customer in writing to do so, will delete all of Customer’s data in Provider’s possession from any data storage media under control of the Provider. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 10 Attachment 2 - Service Level Agreement This Service Level Agreement (“SLA”) is intended to provide an understanding of the level of service to be delivered by the Provider for the Services specified in Attachment 1. The Service Level Objectives (“SLO”) will be reviewed annually by the Provider and Customer to determine if new business conditions or new technology support a modification of the Agreement. The Provider and Customer will mutually agree upon any recommended modifications. Failure to reach mutual agreement will prompt Dispute Resolution as outlined in Section 16 of the Agreement. Service Level Non-Compliance Non-Compliance is the inability to achieve any SLO. There are two kinds of Non-Compliance: Operational Non-Compliance and Contractual Non-Compliance. Operational Non-Compliance is the instance or onset of the inability of the Provider to meet an SLO (e.g., unavailability of the Application). Contractual Non-Compliance is the failure of the Provider to adhere to the services described in this Agreement. The response outlined below is required for both Operational Non-Compliance and Contractual Non-Compliance. Instances of Operational Non-Compliance can, with multiple occurrences, extended time, or severity, become issues of Contractual Non-Compliance. Should the Customer identify an instance of Operational Non-Compliance, the Customer will notify the Help Desk. Should the Customer identify an instance of Contractual Non-Compliance, the Customer will deliver written notification to the Provider. Upon notification by the Customer of Contractual Non-Compliance, the Provider will research the problem and respond to the Customer by the next business day. This response will outline: • What actions will be taken to resolve this specific instance of the problem; • How long it will take to implement these actions; and • What process will be undertaken to ensure that the SLO will be successfully met in the future. Possible actions to ensure that Provider will meet the SLO in the future include: • The establishment of additional policies or business process enhancements to increase the likelihood of meeting the existing SLOs; • The employment of additional hardware, software, personnel or additional resources to increase the likelihood of meeting the existing SLOs; and • A review of the existing SLOs to determine if they are no longer appropriate given changes in Customer usage, other conflicting demands, or new technology. Based on mutual agreement between the Customer and Provider, more realistic goals may be established based on information gathered since the goals were last set. This will only be done if it is in the best overall interests of the Customer. Non-Compliance Provider will achieve the SLOs on a quarterly calendar basis. The following chart and text describe several categories of SLOs. Contractual Non-Compliance is defined differently for Category 1 (Application Availability and Performance) than it is for all other SLO's. The Provider will be given seven (7) days to cure a Category 1 Non-Compliance instance and thirty (30) days to cure all other Non-Compliance instances. • If the Application is available less than 95% of all “Available Hours” in the calendar quarter, Customer may at its option terminate this Agreement and Provider will waive any Service Termination Fees. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 11 Scheduled Maintenance hours will not count as unavailable hours. “Available Hours” means the product of the number of days in the quarter times 1440 minutes, less Scheduled Maintenance. • Failure to meet one or more of the SLOs other than Category 1 (Application Availability and Performance) for any given month does not constitute a Default of the Agreement. If Provider fails to meet one or more of the other SLOs for two consecutive calendar quarters, Customer may at its option terminate this Agreement and the Service Termination Fee identified in Section 5 of Attachment 3 will be waived by Provider. Service Level Categories and Objectives No. Category Subcategory Objective 1 Application Availability and Performance Normal Operating Conditions • Regular hours • Provider network Data Recovery • Backup Frequency • Data Retention • Data Recovery Response Time • On-line Screens • Queries • Batch Cycles 2 Security Front Door Access to Data • Access Authorization Backdoor Access • Customer Network • Physical Access to Data Center 3 Application Maintenance Major Upgrades Minor Upgrades/Bundled Fixes Immediate Fixes 4 Customer Service Help Desk • Initial Contact • Inquiry Settlement • Technical Administration Communication • Scheduled • On Request • Data Center Announcements • Feedback AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 12 Service Level Category 1: Application Availability and Performance Subcategory: Normal Operating Conditions Regular Hours Objective The Application will be available as defined in section 4 of Attachment 1. The Test Application which accesses the Test database instance will be available during Business Hours as defined in Service Level Category 4: Customer Service. Verification MethodThe Application availability will be monitored by Data Center staff and verified by the Customer using alternate sources available. Provider Network Objective The Data Center will be responsible for the dependability, accessability, and security of the Provider’s internal communication network that begins at either the Customer-provided routers at the Provider’s sites or mutually agreed upon routers. Verification Method The Provider network availability will be monitored by Data Center staff and verified by the Customer. Subcategory: Disaster Recovery Back-up Frequency Objective All Customer data and all other configuration files, scripts, and any other files necessary for complete and successful operation of the Application will be copied to and backed-up to tape at a schedule predefined by Provider. Data back-ups should be scheduled at least daily.For an additional fee, Provider will schedule other 'Critical Points' for back-up, as defined and required by the Customer (e.g., month-end, year-end and before upgrades.) Back-ups of the Customer’s Production and Test data will be performed in accordance with Provider’s standard back up schedule and tapes sent to off-site storage via an authorized escrow agent within 24 hours of the back-up being taken. The Customer retains the right to have copies of back-up tapes mailed to the Customer’s site on schedule determined by Provider. Verification Method The Data Center will verify daily that each back-up's status is listed as complete by the system. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 13 Data Retention Objective Data will be retained for a reasonable timeframe, for recoverability. Daily back-ups will be available for recovery for 2 weeks. Without additional charge, Provider will furnish the most recent back-ups and copies of the Application to enable Customer to run in production on its Disaster Recovery Site. Verification Method The data recovery tests listed under Data Recovery will be used to verify Data Retention. The results of Customer requested restorations will also be recorded. Data Recovery Objective In cases where copies of back-up data exist at the Data Center and the systems supporting the Customer's data are intact, the data will be successfully restored within one (1) calendar day. In cases where the requisite back-up data is stored off-site and the systems supporting the Customer's data are intact, the data will be successfully restored within three (3) calendar days. In the event that the Data Center is severely damaged and Customer processing is moved to the Disaster Recovery Center, due to fire or other disasters, the Data Center will provide Application availability to the Customer within three (3) calendar days at the Disaster Recovery Center. The Provider will return Customer processing to the Data Center from the Disaster Recovery Center as soon as possible. Customer data will be restored from off-site back-ups, which will contain data one (1) day prior to the disaster. Customer will be responsible for providing the telecommunications and telecommunications hardware to the Disaster Recovery Center. Verification Method The Data Center and the Disaster Recovery Center will conduct periodic data recovery tests at least annually to confirm that the recovery objectives can be met. The results of Customer requested restorations will also be recorded. Subcategory: Response Time Queries Objective The Data Center will ensure that the Production database is able to facilitate the completion of queries through the Application that have been supplied by the Customer in a manner which is comparable to what the Customer experiences through their current production configuration as outlined in the Baselines. This excludes Customer network issues. In the case of additional Customer created queries through the Application, due to their unpredictable levels of complexity, the Provider cannot make a response time commitment. The Provider will be able to provide additional support to assist Customer query optimization. Verification Method AssetWorks expects screen and query response times to more than exceed Customer expectations. However, AssetWorks is unable to produce exact performance benchmarks. Anything outside of the routers at the Data Center is not in AssetWorks’ control. AssetWorks expects screen response times to be a maximum of two seconds. AssetWorks anticipates the same for data queries with the assumption that the proper user filters are in place. Upon going into production with the Application, Customer and AssetWorks will agree upon a benchmarking method to derive more accurate results to be included into the SLA as a benchmarking addendum. Annual benchmarking evaluations will be conducted in conjunction with both parties. Online Screens Objective Response time for Customer’s use of the Applications should be no longer than two (2) seconds. The expectation is for on-line window response times for normal transactions (e.g., screen changes, repair order retrievals, file updates, report generation, etc.) to be equal to or better than that currently experience by Customer using other applications via the internet. This excludes Customer network issues. Verification Method AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 14 System load and response time will be monitored to determine if queries are negatively impacting system response time for Customer. Monitoring tools and reports will be defined once the Application is set up and loaded for production use and will be mutually agreed upon by Provider and Customer. Batch Cycles Objective The Data Center will ensure that the daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly batch cycles run in a manner, which is comparable to what the Customer experiences through their current Production configuration as outlined in the Baselines. Verification Method This will be measured by the total execution times from start to finish of each batch cycle. Monitoring tools and reports will be defined once the Application is set up and loaded for production use and will be mutually agreed upon by Provider and Customer. Service Level Category 2: Security This Service Level Category covers two subcategories of data security. The first involves preventing users not authorized to use the Application from using the Application to access Customer data (“Front Door”). The second subcategory involves accessing Customer data from outside the Application in any other manner (“Back Door”). Subcategory: “Frontdoor” Access to Customer Data (via the Application) Access Authorization Objective Customer Application and data will only be accessible by authorized users as defined and managed by the Customer. Customer data is secured in separate database instances. Verification Method To be determined by the Customer. Subcategory: “Backdoor”Access to Customer Data (Outside of the Application) Customer Network Objective If Customer elects to make use of a dedicated telecommunication line, Provider will provide guidelines and technical recommendations to assist Customer in connecting to the Application at the Data Center via its internal communication network beginning at the Customer-provided router at the Provider’s site. The Data Center is not ultimately responsible for the dependability or security of the Customer's internal network beyond the router. Verification Method The Data Center will verify the delivery of the guidelines and technical recommendations. Physical Access to the Data Center Objective The Data Center has implemented security measures to protect against physical intrusion. Access to the Data Center building and the computer room is limited to Data Center staff only. The Customer retains the right to inspect the physical access to the facility. Verification Method Customer may verify by inspection. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 15 Service Level Category 3: Application Maintenance An important element of providing Hosting Services for the Application is ensuring that all appropriate upgrades, updates and fixes are applied in a timely manner. Subcategory: Major Upgrades Objective Application upgrades (as defined by version number changes) will be installed and tested by the Data Center within six months of their release by the Provider. Customer will be provided with each module upgrade and documentation upon a mutually agreed upon time frame within which to test the upgrade prior to its being available to the Customer’s users and interfacing with the Production database. Verification Method The Data Center will record the time between the Application release date and the end of the Customer test period. Subcategory: Minor Upgrades/Bundled Fixes Objective Updates, fixes, patches or similar minor changes to the Application will be installed and tested by the Data Center within six weeks of their release. Customer will be provided each module upgrade upon a mutually agreed upon time frame within which to test the said change prior to its being available to the Customer’s users and interfacing with the Production database. Customer’s custom modifications will be tested by the Data Center and the Customer prior to their being available to the Customer’s users and interfacing with the Production database. Verification Method The Data Center will record the time between the Application release date and the end of the Customer test period. Subcategory: Immediate Fixes Objective Once the Data Center is aware of an Application problem, fixes available from the Application vendor will be installed within a timely period, based on the criticality of the problem as defined by the Customer or identified in Category 1 SLOs. Verification Method Percent of fixes that are completed within their target times. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 16 Service Level Category 4: Customer Service Three subcategories of customer service are included in this Service Level Category. The first examines the responsiveness of the Help Desk. The second examines the Data Center's reponsiveness to requests for Technical Administration. The final Customer Service subcategory examines a number of aspects of general communication between the Data Center and the Customer. Subcategory: Help Desk The Provider will maintain a Help Desk whose function will be to support and assist the Customer in diagnosing and resolving problems associated with the Application. Initial Contact Objective The Help Desk phone line will be staffed during Business Hours. Business Hours are defined as 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. EST, Monday through Friday except Holidays. If a message is left during these Business Hours, a return call will be issued within 15 minutes. Outside of Business Hours, in the event of a critical application issue, a Data Center representative will be available by pager to return Help Desk messages within 15 minutes. Additional pager phone numbers will be provided to Customer for escalation if the first contact is not returned within 15 minutes. A Data Center representative will always be available by pager outside of Business Hours, including Holidays. Verification Method Customer may place calls at any time to determine if the phone is staffed appropriately. Inquiry Settlement Objective Customer inquiries to the Help Desk will be settled in a manner to achieve the SLOs. Help Desk personnel will attempt to resolve the inquiries themselves at initial contact with the Customer. In more complicated cases, the inquiry may be settled by assigning a task to a Data Center specialist. In such cases, the SLO performance will be monitored under the appropriate Service Level category depending on the nature of the task. Verification Method The average time that is needed to resolve a Help Desk incident will be tracked. Technical Administration Objective At times the Customer may request additional administrative services such as creating a new database instance, modifying software or requesting an extra back-up of data. Such services will be performed in a timely and cost effective manner to the Customer’s benefit. For each typical service, the cost (if any) and time to complete are listed in the Scope of Services. Services not listed there may be handled on a time and materials basis. Verification Method The average time that is needed to complete an administrative request will be tracked. Subcategory: Communication Scheduled Objective Regularly scheduled Data Center communications with the Customer will be performed in a timely manner and monthly at a minimum. Examples of potential communications that are considered as regularly scheduled is contained in the Scope of Services section of the Agreement. Late or missing communications should be reported by the Customer to the Help Desk which will escalate and resolve the issue. Verification Method The Data Center Help Desk system will track the number of reported communications problems. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 17 On Request Objective Ad-hoc requests for information by the Customer will be handled in a timely manner based on the timing commitment made by the Data Center or Help Desk in each case. The delivery times for these ad-hoc communications will be estimated by the Data Center or Help Desk as they are requested, based on their criticality and the length of preparation time required. Additional charges may apply for these communications at rates established in Section 4 of Attachment 3. Verification Method The Data Center Help Desk system will track the number of reported communications problems. Data Center Announcements Objective The Data Center will inform the Customer of anticipated changes in Application availability or performance with as much advance notice as possible but always reasonably before any change occurs. The Data Center will contact the designated Customer representative via e-mail and by telephone depending on the anticipated criticality and time remaining before the event. These events will not be considered as approved and will represent a failure of the Provider to meet the related SLO. Verification Method The Data Center Help Desk system will track the number of reported communications problems. Feedback Objective The Data Center will conduct periodic surveys of key Customer contacts to assess general Customer perceptions of the level of service being provided. Surveys will be formatted to support Data Center SLOs. Printed surveys at the subcategory level will be utilized annually. Telephone surveys at the category level will be utilized at least bi-annually. Verification Method The Data Center Help Desk system will track the number of reported communications problems. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 18 Attachment 3 – Fee Schedule 1. Hosting and Maintenance Fees, which commences upon execution of this Agreement. Fees invoiced yearly in advance. Item Qty Unit Price Extension TOTAL SOFTWARE- FleetFocus Server set-up Fees (one time)1 5,000.00$ 5,000.00$ One Time Units Per unit Monthly Year One Hosting Fee (by vehicle equipment units)900 1.50$ 1,350$ 16,200$ Invoiced annual in advance Subtotal 21,200$ Web/Reports Server(s) Set-up 1 2,500.00$ 2,500.00$ One Time Year One Reports Publishing Server monthly 500.00$ 6,000$ FuelFocus 4 50.00$ 200.00$ 2,400$ Subtotal 10,900$ Total Year One (5-Year Contract)32,100$ Monthly Total 2,050$ 32,100$ 2,153$ 25,830$ 2,255$ 27,060$ 2,368$ 28,413$ 2,481$ 29,766$ AssetWorks will supply use of Oracle Database licenses in our datacenter. Fees are invoiced annually in advance Contract Assumes customer renews annual maintenance during the term of the contract. Fees above to not include software maintenance and support One Time Fees 7,500$ None None Hosting Year Two Hosting Year Three Hosting and Set-up Year One Hosting Year Four None Hosting Year Five None 2. Fee Adjustments The fees set forth herein shall remain in effect during the initial one-year term with two option years of the Agreement. Thereafter, Provider shall have the right to adjust its fees upon 60 days prior written notice to Customer. Provider shall not adjust its fees more often than once per year. 3. Fees Work requested by Customer beyond that described in Attachment 1, will be charged at the following rates. Before any work is done which would incur charges billed as Service Fees, the Provider will supply a proposal describing the work and providing an estimate of hours, cost and completion date. Customer approval will be required before work can begin. AssetWorks Hosting Services Agreement Page 19 $205.00/per hour Project Management $205.00/per hour Programming and Training 4. Travel, Meals and Lodging In addition to the fees set forth above, Customer shall reimburse Provider for airfares, meals, ground transportation and other reasonable living expenses incurred by Provider in support of the Agreement during provision of support services at the Customer site. Provider will adhere to the Customer’s Corporate Travel Policies to the extent possible. Invoice amount shall not exceed estimated quote for programming and training provided to Customer. 5. Data Processing Audits Eight hours per year shall be allocated to support Customer’s personnel or Customer’s designee in an audit of Provider’s services and records during Business Hours at Provider’s location. Additional hours, if needed, will be billed at the hourly rates noted above. All out of pocket expenses incurred by Customer in connection with such audits will be borne by the Customer. City of Palo Alto (ID # 4202) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of a Contract for Eleanor Pardee Park Title: Approval of a Contract in the Amount of $693,073 with Naturescapes for Improvements to Eleanor Pardee Park Project PE-12012 From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendations Staff Recommends that Council: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract with Naturescapes Corporation (Attachment A) in an amount not to exceed $630,066 for the Eleanor Pardee Park Improvements Capital Project PE-12012, and Benches, Signage, Fencing, Walkways, and Perimeter Landscaping Capital Improvement Project PG-06003; and 2. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract with Naturescapes Corporation for related, additional but unforeseen work which may develop during the project, the total value of which shall not exceed $63,007, for a total contract amount not to exceed $693,073. Background The renovations at Eleanor Pardee Park address infrastructure and maintenance issues while providing aesthetic enhancements to the park. The planned improvements have been reviewed at three community meetings and two meetings of the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC). Some of the changes to City of Palo Alto Page 2 the original plans that resulted from the community outreach process include elimination of lighting around the asphalt walkway, elimination of a new fence along the boundary of the community garden and substitution of some of the tot- lot playground equipment. Addition of a dog park to Eleanor Pardee Park was considered during the process, but was not included due to opposition from neighborhood residents. The final concept plan was presented to the PRC on March 26, 2013. The PRC recommended Council adoption of a Park Improvement Ordinance (PIO). On June 10, 2013, Council adopted the PIO, which became effective following the Council’s second reading in July. Discussion Planned renovations to Eleanor Pardee Park include:  New asphalt walkways with concrete curb edging  New irrigation system  Replacement of the aged tot-lot play equipment and swing, and the addition of rubberized play surfacing and perimeter fencing  Repair of the drainage at the existing concrete bowl.  Replacing site amenities (benches, picnic tables, BBQ’s, drinking fountains, trash/recycling receptacles).  Removing existing turf in non-active areas and installing sustainable native planting to reduce water consumption  Adding new trees: (10) Native Oak trees, and (10) Flowering Cherry  Installing boulders along Center Drive to replace the existing telephone pole bollards  Installing a maintenance vehicle access point with post and chain These improvements will ensure that the park amenities and playground equipment are safe and in good condition, and will both visually enhance the park and incorporate sustainability practices into the park’s landscaping. The City of Palo Alto Page 3 replacement of existing turf with native plantings is estimated to save 360,000 gallons of water per year. Bid Process On September 9, 2013, a notice inviting formal bids (IFB) for the Eleanor Pardee Park Improvement Project was posted at City Hall, and was sent to eight contractors. The bidding period was 29 calendar days. On October 08, 2013, bids were received from 4 qualified contractors as listed on the attached Bid Summary (Attachment B) Summary of Bid Process Bid Name/Number Eleanor Pardee Park Improvements/ PE- 12012 Proposed Length of Project 90 Calendar days Number of Bid Packages Sent to Contractors 7 Number of Bid Packages Sent to Builder’s Exchanges 12 Total Days to Respond to Bid 29 Pre-Bid Meeting? Yes, September 26, 2013 Number of Bids Received: 4 Bid Price Range (base bid) $794,200.00 - $586,451.00 Bid Alternative Price Range $115,370.00 - $94,729.50 Base Bids ranged from a high of $794,200 to a low bid of $586,451, representing 32.7% above to 2% below the engineer’s estimate of $598,500. The bid alternate prices range from a high of $115,370 to a low of $94,729.50. The low base bid of $586,451 and the low add alternate bid of $94,729.50 were both submitted by Naturescapes. Staff has reviewed all bids submitted and recommends that the base bid and Add Alternates 2, 3, 5 and 6 totaling $43,615 submitted by Naturescapes Corporation City of Palo Alto Page 4 be accepted and that Naturescapes Corporation be declared the lowest responsible bidder. The change order contingency amount of $63,007, which equals ten percent of the total contact, is requested for related, additional, but unforeseen work which may develop during the project. The contract plus the change order contingency amount total a not to exceed of $693,073. Staff reviewed other similar projects performed by Naturescapes. There were no significant complaints with their previous work. Staff also checked with the Contractor’s State License Board and found the contractor has an active license on file. Resource Impact Funds for this project are included in Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project PE-12012 Eleanor Pardee Park Improvements, in the amount of $668,073 and from Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project PG-06003 Benches, Signage, Fencing, Walkways and Perimeter Landscaping for the site furnishings in the amount of $25,000. Timeline Following Council approval of the construction contract, a 90-day construction phase starting in early December 2013 is anticipated. Coordination with the contractor is required for afternoon soccer activities starting in mid-January 2014. Policy Implications The proposed CIP recommendations are consistent with Policy C-26 of the Community Services Department’s element of the Comprehensive Plan that encourages maintaining park facilities as safe and healthy community assets. Environmental Review The proposed improvements are considered minor alterations and repairs to existing facilities and are categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) section 15301 guidelines. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Attachments:  A - Contract - C14151908_Naturescapes_Eleanor Pardee Park Project (PDF)  B - Bid Summary Eleanor Pardee Park Improvement (PDF)     Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 1                            Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT  C14151908                CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT    Contract No. C14151908        City of Palo Alto    and    Naturescapes       PROJECT  Eleanor Pardee Park Improvement Project  CIP: PE‐12012     Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 2                            Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT  C14151908       CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT             TABLE OF CONTENTS      SECTION 1. INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS……………………………….. .................... 1  1.1 Recitals ................................................................................................................  1  1.2 Definitions ...........................................................................................................  1  SECTION 2. THE PROJECT……………………………………………………………………………… .............................. 1  SECTION 3. THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS…………………………………………………………. ......................... 1            3.1           List of Documents …………………………………………………………………………………………. ..... 1            3.2           Order of Precedence …………………………………………………………………………… ................ 2  SECTION 4. THE WORK ………………………………………………………………………………… .............................. 3  SECTION 5. PROJECT TEAM ………………………………………………………………………….. ............................. 3  SECTION 6. TIME OF COMPLETION ………………………………………………………………….. .......................... 3  6.1 Time Is of Essence ........................................................................................ ……… 3  6.2 Commencement of Work .....................................................................................  3  6.3 Contract Time .......................................................................................................  3  6.4 Liquidated Damages .............................................................................................  3  6.4.1 Entitlement…………………………………………………………………………………………….   3  6.4.2 Daily Amount………………………………………………………………………………………….   4  6.4.3 Exclusive Remedy…………………………………………………………………………………..   4  6.4.4 Other Remedies…………………………………………………………………………………...     4  6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time ........................................................................... … 4  SECTION 7. COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR………………………………………………………………………...  4  7.1 Contract Sum ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4  7.2 Full Compensation …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 9  7.3 Compensation for Extra or Deleted Work …………………………………………………………….9  7.3.1 Self Performed Work………………………………………………………………………………… 9  7.3.2 Subcontractors…………………………………………………………………………………………. 9  SECTION 8. STANDARD OF CARE ...................................................................................................  9  SECTION 9. INDEMNIFICATION ...................................................................................................... 10  9.1 Hold Harmless…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 10  9.2 Survival………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10  SECTION 10. NONDISCRIMINATION .............................................................................................. 10  SECTION 11. INSURANCE AND BONDS .......................................................................................... 10      Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 3                            Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT  C14151908  SECTION 12. PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS .......................................................................... 11  SECTION 13. NOTICES .................................................................................................................... 11  13.1 Method of Notice ………………………………………………………………………………………………..11  13.2 Notice Recipients .................................................................................................   11  13.3 Change of Address ...............................................................................................  12  14.1 Resolution of Contract Disputes ...........................................................................  12  14.2 Resolution of Other Disputes ...............................................................................  12  14.2.1 Non‐Contract Disputes ………………………………………………………………………………12  14.2.2 Litigation, City Election ……………………………………………………..........................12    14.3 Submission of Contract Dispute …………………………………………………………………………..13  14.3.1 By Contractor …………………………………………………………………………………………. 13  14.3.2 By City ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 13    14.4 Contract Dispute Resolution Process ............................................................... …… 13  14.4.1 Direct Negotiation………………………………………………………………………….………….13  14.4.2 Deferral of Contract Disputes …………………………………………………………………   14  14.4.3 Mediation …………………………………………………………………………………………….….14  14.4.4 Binding Arbitration ……………………………………………………………………………………14    14.5 Non‐Waiver …………………………………………………………………………………………………………15  SECTION 15. DEFAULT ................................................................................................................... 16  15.1 Notice of Default ..................................................................................................  16  15.2 Opportunity to Cure Default ................................................................................  16  SECTION 16. CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES .................................................................................. 16  16.1 Remedies Upon Default .......................................................................................  16  16.1.1 Delete Certain Servic………………………………………………………..........................16  16.1.2 Perform and Withhold ……………………………………………………………………………. 16  16.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract ………………………………………………………….16  16.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default ……………………………………..16  16.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond ………………………………………………………………….16  16.1.6 Additional Provisions ……………………………………………………………………………….17    16.2 Delays by Sureties ................................................................................................  17  16.3 Damages to City ...................................................................................................  17  16.3.1 For Contractor's Default …………………………………………………………………………..17  16.3.2 Compensation for Losses ………………………………………………………………………….17    16.5 Suspension by City for Convenience .....................................................................  18  16.6 Termination Without Cause .................................................................................  18      Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 4                            Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT  C14151908  16.6.1 Compensation ………………………………………………………………………………………….18  16.6.2 Subcontractors …………………………………………………………………………………………18    16.7 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination .................................................................  19  SECTION 17. CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES ................................................................... 19  17.1 Contractor’s Remedies .........................................................................................  19  17.1.1 For Work Stoppage …………………………………………………………………………………. 19  17.1.2 For City's Non‐Payment …………………………………………………………………………… 19    17.2 Damages to Contractor ........................................................................................  19  SECTION 18. ACCOUNTING RECORDS ............................................................................................ 19  18.1 Financial Management and City Access .......................................................... ……. 19  18.2 Compliance with City Requests ........................................................................ …. 20  SECTION 19. INDEPENDENT PARTIES ............................................................................................. 20  SECTION 20. NUISANCE ................................................................................................................. 20  SECTION 21. PERMITS AND LICENSES ............................................................................................ 20  SECTION 22. WAIVER .................................................................................................................... 20  SECTION 23. GOVERNING LAW ..................................................................................................... 20  SECTION 24. COMPLETE AGREEMENT ........................................................................................... 21  SECTION 25. SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT .......................................................................................... 21  SECTION 26. PREVAILING WAGES .................................................................................................. 21  SECTION 27. NON APPROPRIATION .............................................................................................. 21  SECTION 28. GOVERNMENTAL POWERS ........................................................................................ 21  SECTION 29. ATTORNEY FEES ........................................................................................................ 21  SECTION 30. COUNTERPARTS ........................................................................................................ 22  SECTION 31. SEVERABILITY ........................................................................................................... 22            Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    1                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT    THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on November 20 , 2013 (“Execution Date”) by and between  the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and Naturescapes  ("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 865407. 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 September 9, 2013, City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the Eleanor  Pardee Park  (“Project”).  In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a bid.    D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other  services as identified in the Bid Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions.    NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth  and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby  acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows:    SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS.    1.1 Recitals.    All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference.    1.2 Definitions.    Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the  General Conditions.  If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and  in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail.  SECTION 2 THE PROJECT.    The Project is the construction of the Eleanor Pardee Park  ("Project").    SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.    3.1  List of Documents.  The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist  of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by  reference.       1) Change Orders    2) Field Change Orders          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    2                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    3) Contract    4) Project Plans and Drawings    5) Technical Specifications    6) Special Provisions  7)    Notice Inviting Bids  8)    Instructions to Bidders  9)    General Conditions  10) Bidding Addenda  11) Invitation for Bids    12) Contractor's Bid/Non‐Collusion Affidavit    13)   Reports listed in the Bidding Documents    14)   Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications dated 2007 and                updated from time to time    15) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards dated 2005  and updated from time to time    16)  City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements    17)  City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations    18)  Notice Inviting Pre‐Qualification Statements, Pre‐Qualification Statement, and Pre‐  Qualification Checklist (if applicable)    19)  Performance and Payment Bonds    20)  Insurance Forms      3.2  Order of Precedence.    For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the  provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the  preceding section.  If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City  shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best  interests of the City.        Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    3                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    SECTION 4 THE WORK.    The Work includes all labor, materials, equipment, services, permits, fees, licenses and taxes, and all other  things necessary for Contractor to perform its obligations and complete the Project, including, without  limitation, any Changes approved by City, in accordance with the Contract Documents and all Applicable  Code Requirements.    SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM.    In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide  professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project.  The Project requires  that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other members of  the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the Project.    SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION.     6.1 Time Is of Essence.       Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents.     6.2 Commencement of Work.      Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed.     6.3 Contract Time.      Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City’s Notice to Proceed and shall be  completed within Ninety  calendar days (90) after the commencement date specified in City’s  Notice to Proceed.     6.4 Liquidated Damages.     6.4.1 Entitlement.      City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that if Contractor fails to fully and  satisfactorily complete the Work within the Contract Time, City will suffer, as a result of  Contractor’s failure, substantial damages which are both extremely difficult and  impracticable to ascertain.  Such damages may include, but are not limited to:     (i) Loss of public confidence in City and its contractors and consultants.  (ii) Loss of public use of public facilities.  (iii) Extended disruption to public.            //      //        Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    4                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908      6.4.2 Daily Amount.      City and Contractor have reasonably endeavored, but failed, to ascertain the actual  damage that City will incur if Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the  entire Work within the Contract Time.  Therefore, the parties agree that in addition to all  other damages to which City may be entitled other than delay damages, in the event  Contractor shall fail to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the  Contract Time, Contractor shall pay City as liquidated damages the amount of $500 per  day for each Day occurring after the expiration of the Contract Time until Contractor  achieves Substantial Completion of the entire Work.  The liquidated damages amount is  not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages City  will suffer by delay in completion of the Work.    6.4.3 Exclusive Remedy.    City and Contractor acknowledge and agree that this liquidated damages provision shall  be City’s only remedy for delay damages caused by Contractor’s failure to achieve  Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time.    6.4.4 Other Remedies.    City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where  City’s Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve  Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time.    6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time.    The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and agreed to by  Change Order executed by City and Contractor in accordance with the requirements of the  Contract Documents.  SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR.    7.1 Contract Sum.    Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the  Contract Documents the Contract Sum of Six Hundred and Thirty Thousand and Sixty Six Dollars  ($630,066).         [ This amount includes the Base Bid and Add Alternates:   #2 for $16,580.00, #3 for $7,400.00, #5 for$15,470.00,   #6 for $4,165.00. ]                    / /      / /          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    9                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    7.2 Full Compensation.    The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor  and, except as otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover  all Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen  difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until  its Acceptance by City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to  suspension or discontinuance of the Work.  The Contract Sum may only be adjusted for Change  Orders issued, executed and satisfactorily performed in accordance with the requirements of the  Contract Documents.    7.3 Compensation for Extra or Deleted Work.    The Contract Sum shall be adjusted (either by addition or credit) for Changes in the Work involving  Extra Work or Deleted Work based on one or more of the following methods to be selected by  City:  1. Unit prices stated in the Contract Documents or agreed upon by City and Contractor,   which unit prices shall be deemed to include Contractor Markup and   Subcontractor/Sub‐subcontractor Markups permitted by this Section.    2. A lump sum agreed upon by City and Contractor, based on the estimated Allowable   Costs and Contractor Markup and Subcontractor Markup computed in accordance   with this Section.    3. Contractor’s Allowable Costs, plus Contractor Markup and Subcontractor Markups   applicable to such Extra Work computed in accordance with this Section.    Contractor Markup and Subcontractor/Sub‐subcontractor Markups set forth herein are the full  amount of compensation to be added for Extra Work or to be subtracted for Deleted Work that is  attributable to overhead (direct and indirect) and profit of Contractor and of its Subcontractors  and Sub‐subcontractors, of every Tier.  When using this payment methodology, Contractor  Markup and Subcontractor/Sub‐subcontractor Markups, which shall not be compounded, shall be  computed as follows:    7.3.1 Markup Self‐Performed Work.    10% of the Allowable Costs for that portion of the Extra Work or Deleted Work to be  performed by Contractor with its own forces.    7.3.2 Markup for Work Performed by Subcontractors.    15% of the Allowable Costs for that portion of the Extra Work or Deleted Work to be  performed by a first Tier Subcontractor.        SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE.    Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, 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.           Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    10                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION.    9.1 Hold Harmless.    To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its  City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers  (hereinafter collectively referred to as "Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City,  from and against any and all Losses arising directly or indirectly from, or in any manner relating to  any of, the following:  (i) Performance or nonperformance of the Work by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub‐ subcontractors, of any tier;  (ii) Performance or nonperformance by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub‐ subcontractors of any tier, of any of the obligations under the Contract Documents;  (iii) The construction activities of Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub‐subcontractors, of  any tier, either on the Site or on other properties;  (iv) The payment or nonpayment by Contractor to any of its employees, Subcontractors or  Sub‐subcontractors of any tier, for Work performed on or off the Site for the Project; and  (v) Any personal injury, property damage or economic loss to third persons associated with  the performance or nonperformance by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub‐ subcontractors of any tier, of the Work.    However, nothing herein shall obligate Contractor to indemnify any Indemnitee for Losses  resulting from the sole or active negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitee.  Contractor  shall pay City for any costs City incurs to enforce this provision.  Nothing in the Contract  Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of Contractor  against City or any other Indemnitee.    9.2 Survival.    The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract.    SECTION 10 NONDISCRIMINATION.    As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of  this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color,  gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status,  familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands  the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination  Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section  2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment.  SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS.    On or before the Execution Date, Contractor shall provide City with evidence that it has obtained insurance  and Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions.   Failure to do so shall be deemed a material breach of this Construction Contract.          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    11                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS.    City is entering into this Construction Contract based upon the stated experience and qualifications of the  Contractor and its subcontractors set forth in Contractor’s Bid.  Accordingly, Contractor shall not assign,  hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by  operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or  transfer without said consent shall be null and void.    The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of  Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor  is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co‐tenancy shall result in changing the control of  Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than  fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity.     SECTION 13 NOTICES.    13.1 Method of Notice.    All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in  writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following:  (i) On the date delivered if delivered personally;  (ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and   addressed as hereinafter provided;   (iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission;   (iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or   (v) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail.     13.2 Notice Recipients.     All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Claims) from Contractor to City   shall include the Project name and the number of this Construction Contract and shall be   addressed to City at:      To City:  City of Palo Alto     City Clerk     250 Hamilton Avenue     P.O. Box 10250     Palo Alto, CA 94303     Copy to:  City of Palo Alto     Public Works Administration     250 Hamilton Avenue     Palo Alto, CA 94301     Attn: Peter Jensen      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.          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    12                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to:    Naturescapes  560 Newhall St.  San Jose, Ca 95110  Attn: Denny Stengel      13.3 Change of Address.    In the event of any change of address, the moving party shall notify the other party of the change  of address in writing.  Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any  individuals to whom and addresses to which notice shall be provided.    SECTION 14 DISPUTE RESOLUTION.     14.1 Resolution of Contract Disputes.    Contract Disputes shall be resolved by the parties in accordance with the provisions of this Section  14, in lieu of any and all rights under the law that either party have its rights adjudged by a trial  court or jury.  All Contract Disputes shall be subject to the Contract Dispute Resolution Process set  forth in this Section 14, which shall be the exclusive  recourse of Contractor and City for such  Contract Disputes.    14.2 Resolution of Other Disputes.     14.2.1 Non‐Contract Disputes.    Contract Disputes shall not include any of the following:  (i) Penalties or forfeitures prescribed by statute or regulation imposed by a  governmental agency;  (ii) Third party tort claims for personal injury, property damage or death relating to  any Work performed by Contractor or its Subcontractors or Sub‐subcontractors  of any tier;  (iii) False claims liability under California Government Code Section 12650, et. seq.;  (iv) Defects in the Work first discovered by City after Final Payment by City to  Contractor;  (v) Stop notices; or  (vi) The right of City to specific performance or injunctive relief to compel  performance of any provision of the Contract Documents.    14.2.2 Litigation, City Election.    Matters that do not constitute Contract Disputes shall be resolved by way of an action  filed in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara, and shall not  be subject to the Contract Dispute Resolution Process. However, the City reserves the  right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to treat such disputes as Contract Disputes.  Upon written notice by City of its election as provided in the preceding sentence, such  dispute shall be submitted by the parties and finally decided pursuant to the Contract  Dispute Resolution Process in the manner as required for Contract Disputes, including,  without limitation, City’s right under Paragraph 14.4.2 to defer resolution and final  determination until after Final Completion of the Work.          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    13                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    14.3 Submission of Contract Dispute.    14.3.1 By Contractor.    Contractors may commence the Contract Dispute Resolution Process upon City's written  response denying all or part of a Claim pursuant to Paragraph 4.2.9 or 4.2.10 of the  General Conditions.  Contractor shall submit a written Statement of Contract Dispute (as  set forth below) to City within seven (7) Days after City rejects all or a portion of  Contractor's Claim.  Failure by Contractor to submit its Statement of Contract Dispute in a  timely manner shall result in City’s decision by City on the Claim becoming final and  binding.  Contractor’s Statement of Contract Dispute shall be signed under penalty of  perjury and shall state with specificity the events or circumstances giving rise to the  Contract Dispute, the dates of their occurrence and the asserted effect on the Contract  Sum and the Contract Time.  The Statement of Contract Dispute shall include adequate  supporting data to substantiate the disputed Claim.  Adequate supporting data for a  Contract Dispute relating to an adjustment of the Contract Time shall include both of the  following:  (i) All of the scheduling data required to be submitted by Contractor under the  Contract Documents to obtain extensions of time and adjustments to the  Contract Time and  (ii) A detailed, event‐by‐event description of the impact of each event on  completion of Work.  Adequate data to support a Statement of Contract Dispute  involving an adjustment of the Contract Sum must include both of the following:   (a) A detailed cost breakdown and   (b) Supporting cost data in such form and including such information and   other supporting data as required under the Contract Documents for   submission of Change Order Requests and Claims.  14.3.2 By City.    City's right to commence the Contract Dispute Resolution Process shall arise at any time  following City's actual discovery of the circumstances giving rise to the Contract Dispute.   City asserts Contract Disputes in response to a Contract Dispute asserted by Contractor.   A Statement of Contract Dispute submitted by City shall state the events or  circumstances giving rise to the Contract Dispute, the dates of their occurrence and the  damages or other relief claimed by City as a result of such events.    14.4 Contract Dispute Resolution Process.    The parties shall utilize each of the following steps in the Contract Dispute Resolution  Process in the sequence they appear below.  Each party shall participate fully and in good  faith in each step in the Contract Dispute Resolution Process, and good faith effort shall  be a condition precedent to the right of each party to proceed to the next step in the  process.    14.4.1 Direct Negotiations.    Designated representatives of City and Contractor shall meet as soon as possible (but not  later than ten (10) Days after receipt of the Statement of Contract Dispute) in a good  faith effort to negotiate a resolution to the Contract Dispute.  Each party shall be  represented in such negotiations by an authorized representative with full knowledge of  the details of the Claims or defenses being asserted by such party in the negotiations,  and with full authority to resolve such Contract Dispute then and there, subject only to  City’s obligation to obtain administrative and/or City Council approval of any agreed  settlement or resolution.  If the Contract Dispute involves the assertion of a right or claim  by a Subcontractor or Sub‐subcontractor, of any tier, against Contractor that is in turn  being asserted by Contractor against City (“Pass‐Through Claim”), then the Subcontractor  or Sub‐Subcontractor shall also have a representative attend the negotiations, with the  same authority and knowledge as described above.  Upon completion of the meeting, if  the Contract Dispute is not resolved, the parties may either continue the negotiations or        Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    14                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    any party may declare negotiations ended.  All discussions that occur during such  negotiations and all documents prepared solely for the purpose of such negotiations shall  be confidential and privileged pursuant to California Evidence Code Sections 1119 and  1152.    14.4.2 Deferral of Contract Disputes.    Following the completion of the negotiations required by Paragraph 14.4.1, all  unresolved Contract Disputes shall be deferred pending Final Completion of the Project,  subject to City’s right, in its sole and absolute discretion, to require that the Contract  Dispute Resolution Process proceed prior to Final Completion.  All Contract Disputes that  have been deferred until Final Completion shall be consolidated within a reasonable time  after Final Completion and thereafter pursued to resolution pursuant to this Contract  Dispute Resolution Process. The parties can continue informal negotiations of Contract  Disputes; provided, however, that such informal negotiations shall not be alter the  provisions of the Agreement deferring final determination and resolution of unresolved  Contract Disputes until after Final Completion.    14.4.3 Mediation.    If the Contract Dispute remains unresolved after negotiations pursuant to Paragraph  14.4.1, the parties shall submit the Contract Dispute to non‐binding mediation before a  mutually acceptable third party mediator.    .1 Qualifications of Mediator.  The parties shall endeavor to select a mediator who  is a retired judge or an attorney with at least five (5) years of experience in  public works construction contract law and in mediating public works  construction disputes.  In addition, the mediator shall have at least twenty (20)  hours of formal training in mediation skills.    .2 Submission to Mediation and Selection of Mediator.  The party initiating  mediation of a Contract Dispute shall provide written notice to the other party  of its decision to mediate.  In the event the parties are unable to agree upon a  mediator within fifteen (15) Days after the receipt of such written notice, then  the parties shall submit the matter to the American Arbitration Association  (AAA) at its San Francisco Regional Office for selection of a mediator in  accordance with the AAA Construction Industry Mediation Rules.    .3 Mediation Process.  The location of the mediation shall be at the offices of City.   The costs of mediation shall be shared equally by both parties.  The mediator  shall provide an independent assessment on the merits of the Contract Dispute  and recommendations for resolution.  All discussions that occur during the  mediation and all documents prepared solely for the purpose of the mediation  shall be confidential and privileged pursuant to California Evidence Code  Sections 1119 and 1152.    14.4.4 Binding Arbitration.    If the Contract Dispute is not resolved by mediation, then any party may submit the  Contract Dispute for final and binding arbitration pursuant to the provisions of California  Public Contract Code Sections 10240, et seq.  The award of the arbitrator therein shall be  final and may be entered as a judgment by any court of competent jurisdiction.  Such  arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the following:    .1 Arbitration Initiation.  The arbitration shall be initiated by filing a complaint in  arbitration in accordance with the regulations promulgated pursuant to  California Public Contract Code Section 10240.5.          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    15                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    .2 Qualifications of the Arbitrator.  The arbitrator shall be approved by all parties.  The arbitrator shall be a retired judge or an attorney with at least five (5) years  of experience in public works construction contract law and in arbitrating public  works construction disputes.  In addition, the arbitrator shall have at least  twenty (20) hours of formal training in arbitration skills.  In the event the parties  cannot agree upon an arbitrator, the provisions of California Public Contract  Code Section 10240.3 shall be followed in selecting an arbitrator possessing the  qualifications required herein.    .3 Hearing Days and Location.  Arbitration hearings shall be held at the offices of  City and shall, except for good cause shown to and determined by the arbitrator,  be conducted on consecutive business days, without interruption or  continuance.    .4 Hearing Delays.  Arbitration hearings shall not be delayed except upon good  cause shown.    .5 Recording Hearings.  All hearings to receive evidence shall be recorded by a  certified stenographic reporter, with the costs thereof borne equally by City and  Contractor and allocated by the arbitrator in the final award.    .6 Limitation of Depositions.  The parties may conduct discovery in accordance  with the provisions of section 10240.11 of the Public Contract Code; provided,  however, that depositions shall be limited to both of the following:    (i) Ten (10) percipient witnesses for each party and 5 expert witnesses per  party.      Upon a showing of good cause, the arbitrator may increase the number of  permitted depositions.  An individual who is both percipient and expert shall, for  purposes of applying the foregoing numerical limitation only, be deemed an  expert.  Expert reports shall be exchanged prior to receipt of evidence, in  accordance with the direction of the arbitrator, and expert reports (including  initial and rebuttal reports) not so submitted shall not be admissible as  evidence.    .7 Authority of the Arbitrator.  The arbitrator shall have the authority to hear  dispositive motions and issue interim orders and interim or executory awards.    .8 Waiver of Jury Trial.  Contractor and City each voluntarily waives its right to a  jury trial with respect to any Contract Dispute that is subject to binding  arbitration in accordance with the provisions of this Paragraph 14.4.4.   Contractor shall include this provision in its contracts with its Subcontractors  who provide any portion of the Work.    14.5 Non‐Waiver.    Participation in the Contract Dispute Resolution Process shall not waive, release or compromise  any defense of City, including, without limitation, any defense based on the assertion that the  rights or Claims of Contractor that are the basis of a Contract Dispute were previously waived by  Contractor due to Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents, including, without  limitation, Contractor’s failure to comply with any time periods for providing notice of requests  for adjustments of the Contract Sum or Contract Time or for submission of Claims or supporting  documentation of Claims.          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    16                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    SECTION 15 DEFAULT.    15.1 Notice of Default.    In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to  perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any  provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the  manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract.    15.2 Opportunity to Cure Default.  Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under  the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require)  after receipt of written notice.  However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such  time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as  City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to  completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after  receipt of such written notice.  SECTION 16 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.    16.1 Remedies Upon Default.    If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth  above in Section 15, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including,  without limitation, the following:    16.1.1 Delete Certain Services.    City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work,  reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto.    16.1.2 Perform and Withhold.    City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or  portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost  thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related  thereto.    16.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract.    City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses  related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of  time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no  obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor  for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work.    16.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default.    City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the  failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 15.  City’s election to  terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a  written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction  Contract.  Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately,  unless otherwise provided therein.    16.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond.    City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to  Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond.          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    17                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    16.1.6 Additional Provisions.    All of City’s rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in  addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity.  Designation in the Contract  Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City’s authority to designate other  breaches as material nor limit City’s right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the  City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material.  City’s determination of  whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise  by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on  all parties.  No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other  rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such  termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and  Losses suffered by City.    16.2 Delays by Sureties.    Without limiting to any of City’s other rights or remedies, City has the right to suspend the  performance of the Work by Contractor’s sureties in the event of any of the following:  (i) The sureties’ failure to begin Work within a reasonable time in such manner as to insure  full compliance with the Construction Contract within the Contract Time;  (ii) The sureties’ abandonment of the Work;  (iii) If at any time City is of the opinion the sureties’ Work is unnecessarily or unreasonably  delaying the Work;  (iv) The sureties’ violation of any terms of the Construction Contract;  (v) The sureties’ failure to perform according to the Contract Documents; or  (vi) The sureties’ failure to follow City’s instructions for completion of the Work within the  Contract Time.    16.3 Damages to City.    16.3.1 For Contractor's Default.    City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of  Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents.     16.3.2 Compensation for Losses.   In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City  shall be entitled to withhold monies otherwise payable to Contractor until Final Completion of the  Project.  If City incurs Losses due to Contractor’s default, then the amount of Losses shall be  deducted from the amounts withheld.  Should the amount withheld exceed the amount deducted,  the balance will be paid to Contractor or its designee upon Final Completion of the Project.  If the  Losses incurred by City exceed the amount withheld, Contractor shall be liable to City for the  difference and shall promptly remit same to City.        Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    18                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    16.4 Suspension by City for Convenience.    City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to  suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an  aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time.  The order shall be specifically identified as  a Suspension Order by City.  Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s  expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the  Work covered by the Suspension Order.  During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if  any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered  by the Suspension Order.  If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume  and continue with the Work.  A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the  Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension.    A Suspension Order  shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work.    16.5 Termination Without Cause.    City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or  in whole by giving thirty (30) Days written notice to Contractor. The compensation allowed under  this Paragraph 16.5 shall be the Contractor’s sole and exclusive compensation for such  termination and Contractor waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not  limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential,  direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind resulting from termination without cause.      16.5.1 Compensation.    Following such termination and within forty‐five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from  Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 16.5, City shall pay the  following to Contractor as Contractor’s sole compensation for performance of the Work :    .1 For Work Performed.  The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion  of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination,  less sums previously paid to Contractor.    .2 For Close‐out Costs.  Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors and  Sub‐subcontractors for:  (i) Demobilizing and  (ii) Administering the close‐out of its participation in the Project (including,  without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including  attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (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.    16.5.2 Subcontractors.      Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts  permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this  Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are  afforded to Contractor against City under this Section.          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    19                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    16.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination.    Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the  notice directs otherwise, do the following:  (i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice;  (ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities,  except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not  discontinued;  (iii) Provide to City a description, in writing no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the  notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are  outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes,  payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of  the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or  modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine  necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to  terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract;  (iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions  thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms  reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof,  that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and  (v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already   in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in   transit thereto.  SECTION 17 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.    17.1 Contractor’s Remedies.    Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the  following:    17.1.1 For Work Stoppage.    The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any  Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of  an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of  government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable.  This  provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City’s issuance of a suspension  notice issued either for cause or for convenience.    17.1.2 For City's Non‐Payment.    If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of  notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a  second notice to City of Contractor’s intention to terminate the Construction Contract.    17.2 Damages to Contractor.   In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided  for in Paragraph 16.5.1 above.  Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive  compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not  limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential,  direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind.  SECTION 18 ACCOUNTING RECORDS.    18.1 Financial Management and City Access.    Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary  for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally        Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    20                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants  during normal business  hours, may  inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take‐offs, cost reports,  ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase  orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project. Contractor shall retain these  documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) final payment or (ii) final resolution  of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by  law.    18.2 Compliance with City Requests.    Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 18 shall be a condition  precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City  and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents.  City many  enforce Contractor’s obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred  to in Section 18.1 for inspection or copying by  issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent  mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such  court, without the necessity of oral testimony.    SECTION 19 INDEPENDENT PARTIES.    Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint ventures’  of the other party.  City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or  its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth.  SECTION 20 NUISANCE.    Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in  connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract.  SECTION 21 PERMITS AND LICENSES.    Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall  provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government  jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work.  Payment of all costs and expenses  for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation  shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non‐City inspectors or conditions set  forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies.  SECTION 22 WAIVER.    A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be  deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition  contained herein, whether of the same or a different character.  SECTION 23 GOVERNING LAW.    This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of  California.          Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    21                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    SECTION 24 COMPLETE AGREEMENT.    This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all  prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended  only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties.  SECTION 25 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT.    The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction  Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment  obligations, and City’s right to audit Contractor’s books and records, shall remain in full force and effect  after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract.  SECTION 26 PREVAILING WAGES.         This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. The Contractor is not required to pay prevailing wages in the  performance and implementation of the Project, because the City, pursuant to its authority as a chartered  city, has adopted Resolution No. 5981 exempting the City from prevailing wages.  The City invokes the  exemption from the state prevailing wage requirement for this Project and declares that the Project is  funded one hundred percent (100%) by the City of Palo Alto.  SECTION 27 NON APPROPRIATION.    This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto  Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the  event that the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time  within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds  for this Construction Contract are no longer available.  This section shall take precedence in the event of a  conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement.   SECTION 28 AUTHORITY.    The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and  authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.  SECTION 29 ATTORNEY FEES.    Each Party shall bear its own costs, including attorney’s fees through the completion of mediation. If the  claim or dispute is not resolved through mediation and in any dispute described in Paragraph 14.2, the prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provision of this Agreement may recover its  reasonable costs and attorney’s fees expended in connection with that action.  The prevailing party shall be  entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys  employed by it as well as any attorney’s’ fees paid to third parties.        //      //        Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package    22                 Rev. July 2012  CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C14151908    SECTION 30 COUNTERPARTS  This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties,  constitute a single binding agreement.  SECTION 31 SEVERABILITY.    In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity,  legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected.        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      NATURESCAPE      By:___________________________        Name:_________________________        Title:________________________        Bid Analysis Project: Eleanor Pardee Park Improvement Bid Item Qnty. Units Unit Price Bid Unit Price Bid Unit Price Bid Unit Price Bid  1 Traffic Control and Notifications lump $14,000.00 $2,500.00 $5,000.00 $1,500.00 2 Demolition and Removal lump $90,000.00 $35,600.00 $35,000.00 $33,000.00 3 Grading and Drainage lump $18,000.00 $14,990.00 $35,000.00 $18,500.00 4 Asphalt Paving of pathways and driveway with redwood  header board SF $4.70 $66,505.00 $10.45 $147,867.50 $8.00 $113,200.00 $7.00 $99,050.00 5 Concrete Sidewalks/Paving SF $44.00 $85,800.00 $9.33 $18,193.50 $20.00 $39,200.00 $28.00 $54,600.00 6 Site Furnishing lump $8,500.00 $59,900.00 $50,000.00 $89,000.00 7 Playground equipment, fencing & rubber surfacing lump $141,000.00 $146,100.00 $302,000.00 $136,000.00 8 Irrigation system (complete in place)lump $129,000.00 $89,500.00 $115,000.00 $119,000.00 9 Planting & Overseeding lump $40,150.00 $71,800.00 $100,000.00 $127,000.00 TOTAL: $669,445.00 TOTAL: $586,451.00 TOTAL: $794,200.00 TOTAL: $677,650.00 Bid Alternate Qnty. Units 1 Decomposed Granite Paving  (complete in place: grading  & header board)3900 SF $4.00 $15,600.00 $11.56 $45,064.50 $8.00 $31,200.00 $12.00 $46,800.00 2 Remove existing bollards & Install stone bollards 1 LS $23,500.00 $16,580.00 $7,000.00 $10,870.00 3 Maintenance vehicle access ‐ Posted & chain 1 LS $6,700.00 $7,400.00 $12,000.00 $2,200.00 4 Reconfigure Decomposed Granite Pathway at 9/11  Memorial Garden (complete in place: grading & header  board) 500 SF $11.00 $5,500.00 $12.10 $6,050.00 $23.00 $11,500.00 $12.00 $6,000.00 5 6" wide concrete mow band at edge of asphalt walk  instead of wood header board 2600 LF $17.00 $44,200.00 $5.95 $15,470.00 $12.00 $31,200.00 $20.00 $39,000.00 6 Concrete mow band at turf areas 700 LF $19.00 $13,300.00 $5.95 $4,165.00 $12.00 $8,400.00 $15.00 $10,500.00 TOTAL: $108,800.00 TOTAL: $94,729.50 TOTAL: $101,300.00 TOTAL: $115,370.00 Total Bid Items & Bid Alternates: TOTAL: $778,245.00 TOTAL: $681,180.50 TOTAL: $895,500.00 TOTAL: $793,020.00 Suarez and Munoz  Construction, Inc.Green Growth  Industrial, Inc. QLM, Inc.Naturescapes  City of Palo Alto (ID # 4167) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: PACL Automated Materials Handling Project - Main Library Title: Approval of a Contract Amendment with Envisionware, Inc., for an Amount Not to Exceed $463,000 for the Automatic Materials Handling System at the Main Library, For a Total Contract Not Exceeding $1,000,000 for the Main and Mitchell Park Libraries From: City Manager Lead Department: Library RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute an amended contract with EnvisionWare, Inc. for the purchase of an Automatic Material Handling System (AMHS) for the Main Library in an amount not to exceed $463,000. An AMHS for the Mitchell Park Library was included in the original contract and this amendment would provide for additional equipment planned for the Main Library renovation. This amendment will result in a total not exceeding $1,000,000 in the contract with EnvisionWare. BACKGROUND A feasibility study and implementation plan for Radio Frequency Identification Systems (RFID) and Automated Materials Handling System (AMHS) was completed in 2006. The Palo Alto City Library Technology Plan, 2009-2013, included a detailed analysis, evaluation, and recommendation for RFID and AMHS for the Palo Alto City Library. The most recent report from 2009 recommends implementation of such systems in conjunction with the ongoing building projects. Specifically, the report recommends that AMHS be implemented at the Mitchell Park Library to coincide with the new construction, at the Main Library to coincide with that building renovation, and lastly, at the Children’s Library if deemed appropriate after all the Measure N building projects are completed. The Library issued a request for proposal (RFP) in August 2010 to solicit bids from vendors for RFID and AMHS systems and, after a lengthy City of Palo Alto Page 2 evaluation process of the respondents, selected P.V. Supa, an AMHS manufacturing company, for the AMHS portion of the project. The P.V. Supa AMHS was bid by the EnvisionWare company, which is a distributor for this brand of AMHS. The Library plans to implement RFID & AMHS primarily to achieve the following goals:  Achieve capacity for high levels of customer service;  Free up staff from current repetitive and routine tasks;  Reduce the risk of potential repetitive motion injuries;  Reduce material losses;  Improve circulation efficiency and shelf accuracy; and,  Manage an increasing circulation workload without additional staffing. In the Technology Plan analysis, it was determined that the return on investment for the Main Library AMHS would be averaged at $100,000/year. Thus, the staff savings (in time spent on circulation activities the AMHS will do, possible staff repetitive stress injuries, etc.) realized through acquisition of these products will pay for themselves within approximately four (4) years. Because the total library circulation is over 1.5 million items per year, and projected to increase with the opening of the renovated facility, it is possible that this savings will be realized in a shorter period of time. DISCUSSION A request for proposal (RFP) for the provision of the AMHS and RFID systems was issued in August 2010. An evaluation team of staff from the Library Department evaluated the proposals. The criteria used were cost considerations; company viability and references; support and maintenance agreements; and expertise in providing the required service. Evaluation and award of the RFID vendor was approved in March 2011. Staff checked references from other libraries that currently use the respondents’ services and found that when taking into consideration all criteria, P.V. Supa was found to have the best AMHS products to meet the needs of the Library. Mitchell Park Library is in the process of being outfitted with the vendor’s AMH system, and will begin operation by the end of 2013. Please refer to CMR 2024 for the Mitchell Park Library AMH approval. This contract amendment extend the use of AMHS to the renovated Main Library. City of Palo Alto Page 3 RESOURCE IMPACT Funds for this contract have been identified in the CIP budget for the Measure N projects as follows: Mitchell Park Library & Community Center (PE-09006) and Main Library (PE-11000). The AMHS will be integrated into the building construction and is expected to be fully installed and operational prior to the opening of the Main Library in the fall of 2014 (FY 2015). Ongoing equipment and software maintenance costs are estimated at $42,000 per year and will be budgeted annually in the Information Technology Fund. POLICY IMPLICATIONS An implementation of the AMHS specifically responds to City Council direction to employ technology solutions in the Library, and the City Auditor’s recommendation in the July 2007 Audit of Library Operations to expedite an RFID and AMHS implementation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Implementation of AMHS is not considered a project subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Environmental review for the Measure N bond projects was completed prior to the 2008 election. Attachments:  Attachment A: Amendment 2, C12144307 (PDF)  Attachment B: Envisionware Quote #US-16313 (Main Library AMH) (PDF)  Attachment C: Appendix N Contract Revision Form Envisionware C12144307 (PDF) 1 131106 sm 010 ATTACHMENT A AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. C12144307 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND ENVISIONWARE, INC. This Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. C12144307 (“Contract”) is entered into November __, 2013, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a charter city and a municipal corporation of the State of California (“CITY”), and ENVISIONWARE, INC., a California corporation, located at 2855 Premiere Parkway, Suite A, Duluth GA 30097-5201, Phone: 800.216.8370 (“CONTRACTOR”). R E C I T A L S: WHEREAS, the Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of providing and implementing AMHS (automatic materials handling) systems at various City Libraries; and WHEREAS, 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 3 Term. is hereby amended to read as follows: “The Term of this Agreement is from 11/07/2011 to 11/06/14 inclusive, subject to the provisions of Section Q and V of the General Terms and Conditions.” SECTION 2. Section 5 Compensation. is hereby amended to read as follows: “ CITY shall pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept as not to exceed compensation for the full performance of the Services and reimbursable expenses, if any, a sum calculated in accordance with the fee schedule set forth in Exhibit C, not to exceed a total maximum compensation amount of Eight Hundred Seventy-five Thousand Five Hundred Seventy-six Dollars ($454,576.00 original Contract + $420,614.15 Amendment2 = $875,190.00 Total). CONTRACTOR agrees that it can perform the Services for an amount not to exceed the total maximum compensation set forth above. Any hours worked or services performed by CONTRACTOR for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth above for performance of the Services shall be at no cost to CITY. The City has set aside the sum of fifty-two thousand four hundred eighty-five dollars ($20,424.00 original Contract + $42061.00 Amendment2 = $52485.00 Total) for Additional Services. CONTRACTOR shall provide Additional Services only by advanced, written authorization from the City Manager or designee. CONTRACTOR, at the CITY’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONTRACTOR’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services. Compensation shall be based on the hourly rates set forth 2 131106 sm 010 above or in Exhibit C (whichever is applicable), or if such rates are not applicable, a negotiated lump sum. CITY shall not authorize and CONTRACTOR shall not perform any Additional Services for which payment would exceed the amount set forth above for Additional Services. Payment for Additional Services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. “ SECTION 3. 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 Services”. b. Exhibit “B” entitled “Schedule of Performance”. c. Exhibit “C” entitled “Schedule of Fees”. SECTION ?. 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 __________________________ City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney ENVISIONWARE, INC. By:___________________________ Name:_________________________ Title:________________________ Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT "B": PROJECT SCHEDULE EXHIBIT "C": COMPENSATION 10 Rev. July 11, 2011 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES A. BACKGROUND The Palo Alto city Library plans to outfit various library locations with AMH (automatic materials handling) systems. The initial installation will occur at Mitchell Park Library and will be valid through November 06, 2014. Overview The Palo Alto City Library is a mid-sized city library system comprised of five (5) library locations serving a community of approximately 63,500 people in Palo Alto, California. The Library has about 54,000 cardholders, a circulation of about 1.6 million on a collection of about 275,000 items. The Library Director reports to the City Manager. The seven-member Library Advisory Commission is appointed by and advisory to the City Council. The Library is in the process of renovating and/or rebuilding all of its five branches. City voters passed a bond measure in November 2008 to fund the renovation of the Downtown Library, renovation and expansion of the Main Library, and the building of a new Mitchell Park Library. The Children’s Library renovation was completed in September 2007, the College Terrace Library renovation completed in October 2010 and the Downtown Library renovation completed in July 2011. A feasibility study and implementation plan for RFID and AMH systems was completed in 2006. A technology report from 2009 included a detailed analysis, evaluation and recommendation for materials handling and RFID systems for the Palo Alto City Library. The most recent report from 2009 recommends implementation of such systems in conjunction with upcoming building projects. Specifically, the reports recommend RFID be implemented at all five locations and AMH be implemented at the three busiest branches in a phased approach to coincide with construction and renovations. Because all five locations have undergone or will have undergone extensive renovation by the fall of 2013, the Library is moving forward with an RFID and AMH system implementation. Goals, Values and Objectives The Library plans to implement RFID/AMH systems primarily to achieve the following goals:  Achieve capacity for high levels of customer self-service; 11 Rev. July 11, 2011  Free up staff from current repetitive and routine tasks;  Reduce the risk of potential repetitive motion injuries;  Reduce material losses;  Improve circulation efficiency and shelf accuracy; and,  Manage an increasing circulation workload without additional staffing Technology Infrastructure (City & Library) City’s Technology & Infrastructure The City and Library are served by a gigabit fiber network, with a 10 GB internet connection through Palo Alto Internet Exchange (PAIX). The City and Library networks are connected by a 100 Mb gateway. City IT assigns a primary network administrator to the Library, with backup available from other administrators. The City’s IT department manages approximately 150 servers, located in the City Hall server room. The City primarily uses HP/Compaq servers. City IT staff provide hardware and operating-system management, upgrades, and patches. Application- level support is provided by vendors, the Library system administrator, and City IT staff. Library’s Technology & Infrastructure The Library’s Internet, network printing, email and file-sharing are provided through the City’s wide area network. All libraries are connected to this WAN through the City’s private fiber optic loop. The Library’s servers are all housed and managed at the OS level by I.T. staff at City Hall. The Library administers library-specific software on these servers using Remote Desktop Connection, PC Anywhere and/or VNC. SirsiDynix’s Horizon software serves as the Library’s integrated library system with many other 3rd party software platforms supporting library technology, including but not limited to: Comprise’s SAM PC and print management systems, Edify Telephony system, SIP2/ESIP servers, Envisionware’s Ecommerce server. The Library employs a system administrator who is responsible for configuring and managing the SirsiDynix Horizon integrated library system (ILS) and numerous other library business applications. The system administrator also provides project management and general technology support to library staff. Project Management CONTRACTOR will assign a project manager to oversee the project to ensure that it meets the requirements of the Library and to be the key contact for the entire installation. The project manager should be in attendance at the demo and provide the overall introduction and explanation of the Provider’s proposed solution. 12 Rev. July 11, 2011 Health and Safety To ensure the safety of the system, for both operators and the public, CONTRACTOR’s system shall meet the following requirements:  The complete system components, including monitors, computers scanners must meet worldwide safety requirements including UL (USA), cUL (Canada), CE (Europe), and CB Scheme certification (Europe and Asia).  All equipment must be UL approved for adequate fire and safety compliance. That compliance must be for complete units (i.e. security gates, conversion stations, etc) in a system, and not for individual electrical components or pieces. Bidders shall provide documentation and certification listing numbers of UL approval.  All equipment must be FCC Compliant.  The UL, cUL, CE and C-tick marks shall be displayed on the serial plate of the system.  System must be in compliance with ADA guideline 4.15.4 for wheel chair clearance and ADA guideline 4.34.3 reach range standards.  Detection and security corridors must be in compliance with relevant ADA requirements.  All products must comply with internationally recognized standards for RFID- based Library self-service systems.  All equipment must meet the EU RoHS (Reduction of Hazardous Substance) Directive. RoHS prohibits lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated biphenyls (PBB) and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDE) above certain maximum concentration levels for those substances.  All equipment must meet the EU WEEE (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment) Directive which addresses the return at end-of-life, and recyclability/ recoverability /reusability of waste electrical and electronic equipment. Place of Manufacture To ensure ready availability of components, parts, and supplies, all major elements of the system must be warehoused in U.S.A. or CONTRACTOR can have these items available within 24 hours of request. B. OVERALL REQUIREMENTS AND SUBSITUTIONS CONTRACTOR (or “provider” referred to below) shall provide the products and services described in Exhibit C and meet the Project requirements described below, with the solution/equipment and/or services to comply with all of the following requirements and/or preferences to meet the implementation of an AMH system at the Mitchell Park Library.: 13 Rev. July 11, 2011 AMH system functional requirements 1. The AMH system software and hardware components, including induction stations, check-in and sorting equipment, must be fully compatible with the Library’s existing Horizon ILS system. Returned items shall be identified in the Horizon system as having been checked in and the borrower record must be updated in real time. 2. System supports “tote check-in” for all items sorted to totes. EnvisionWare understand and complies with this requirement. We would like the opportunity to explore this request in detail with the library in person. 3. The AMH system shall have intakes that feed into a single conveyor for sortation. 4. The materials intakes shall accept, check in and sort all print and non-print formats effectively (books, magazines, CDs, DVDs, CD-ROMs, board books, paperback books, etc.) using RFID technology. 5. The system shall be designed to fit into existing circulation/sorting workroom spaces of those branches that have already been renovated and the Provider will work with the Library to design the AMH system to fit into any new or newly renovated facilities. 6. The AMH system will be configured with the designated number of sorts but be expandable to additional sorts. 7. Automated sorting equipment must be capable of distributing returned items into separate bins according to criteria established by the library using information provided from the library’s database or from the RFID tag. 8. In the process of sorting, tags’ security bits must be reactivated. 9. Sorting software must interface with library’s database through SIP, SIP2, NCIP or some other API supported by the library ILS in order to separate holds from other items. 10. Sorting software must distribute items that have no RFID tag or damaged RFID tags into a separate bin. 11. The system must have an option for patron receipts. Patrons returning items must not have to sort them by patron (for example, one family member must be able to return all the family’s items without having to separate them and provide patron authentication for each family member). A single printed receipt for all items read must be available. 12. Provider must be prepared to specify the appropriate combination of bins, totes, and/or trolleys for each library based on current and anticipated circulation patterns and provide a sample report of a library for which they’ve done this, that is similar in size to Palo Alto City Library. 13. System must be capable of handling up to 2,000 items per hour. EnvisionWare understands and complies with this requirement. Our Sorter’s induction speed without load or ILS created delays is 1,440 items per hour. To accomplish the requested 2,000 item per hour handling capability, the sorter will be configured with two or more induction stations. Every induction station increases the sorter’s induction capabilities. 14. System must not require use of special bins. 14 Rev. July 11, 2011 15. System must provide bin-full lights or some other indicator so staff knows when to swap out bins. 16. System must allow for a virtually unlimited number of sorting bins. 17. When problems occur, system notifies staff through the software interface. 18. System includes ability for patron check-in capability. 19. System can check-in items even when the Library’s ILS is offline or unavailable; storing transactions for later synchronization with the ILS. 20. System provides remote monitoring and diagnostics to troubleshoot problems. 21. System provides usage statistics for each location. 22. System includes an audible and/or visual indicator when sorting bins reach capacity. 23. System includes an emergency stop button. 24. System is interoperable with circulation and security technologies from other vendors 25. System is compatible with both RFID and barcode circulation to be used in a phased implementation. 26. System supports automatic holds label printing. References must be provided of other Horizon libraries that have implemented this feature. EnvisionWare understands and complies with this requirement. EnvisionWare Santa Clara County Library System in Los Altos, California is a SirisDynix Horizon that uses the EnvisionWare AMH solution with the Holds capabilities that causes the sorter to print a hold slips when an item is received. 27. Introductory train-the-trainer training shall be provided. 28. Provider provides live phone support Monday through Friday, 9-5 PST. EnvisionWare understands and exceeds this requirement. For all EnvisionWare Automated Materials Handling customers support is available 24 hours / 7 days a week by live EnvisionWare technicians. 29. Provider provides on-call support services 24/7 with a guaranteed response time of two hours. 30. Provider provides 24 hour or better turnaround for onsite support calls during business hours and 48 hour turnaround on the weekends. EnvisionWare responds to service requests within two hours and immediately acts upon the request. Onsite service is provided at no additional charge when the system is covered under EnvisionWare maintenance. EnvisionWare support department requests onsite assistance when problems cannot be resolved remotely. Our reputation for timely response speaks for itself and is a better measure the than any written message. As stated n the cover letter, we have primary and back up service. 31. Provider does not partner or subcontract with another company for support. EnvisionWare does not subcontract our support. All support is handled by EnvisionWare employees who can ensure rapid and optimal services and support. 32. Provider has support offices within 50 miles of Library. EnvisionWare has a support office located in Concord, CA, which is approximately 60 miles from Palo Alto, CA and back up support within approximately 10 miles. 33. Provider will provide a yearly maintenance or service contract for all equipment provided with an option to purchase multi-year maintenance at the time of purchase. 15 Rev. July 11, 2011 34. Maintenance/service agreement must be renewable on an annual basis. 35. Provider offers a 12-month 100% money-back performance guarantee on all equipment purchased and covered by 12-month warranty or service agreement. EnvisionWare ensures total customer satisfaction. EnvisionWare offers a money‐back purchase satisfaction guarantee for EnvisionWare hardware and software and non‐custom items as stated in our EULA. Custom printed RFID tags, tags inserted in materials, installation costs and transport costs to the library for the initial installation of the equipment are not covered by the money‐back guarantee. 36. All units will be delivered, installed and fully functional based upon the Library’s implementation schedule as agreed upon with Provider. EnvisionWare understands and complies with this requirement. EnvisionWare Professional Services staff will design the implementation schedule with the library staff during the Planning Phase of the Installation process. 37. Provider will detail site requirements for all equipment no later than 90 days before delivery is scheduled. 38. Provider will arrange unpacking and placement of all equipment which it furnishes and removal of all debris generated by the installation of the equipment. 39. Provider will certify in writing when each installation is complete and ready for use. 40. Provider provides a detailed project timetable for the AMH implementations. 16 Rev. July 11, 2011 EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE Installation Schedule A mutually agreeable, detailed Project and Installation Schedule will be delivered to the library within ten working days of contract signing. A draft schedule for the Mitchell Park Library AMH is as follows: Period Tasks to be Performed Responsibility (Provider or Library) November 2013 Provide shop drawings of 13-bin AMH for Main Library Provider December 2013 Work with architects on space planning and design Main Library Library and Provider January 2014 Library orders AMH equipment for Main Library Library: P.O. sent to EnvisionWare June 2014 AMH equipment manufactured for Main Library Provider August 2014 AMH equipment delivered and installed at Main Library Provider September 2014 Configuration and training on AMH system Main Library Provider and Library December 2014 AMH system fully functional Main Library Provider and Library 17 Rev. July 11, 2011 EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF FEES (ATTACHED) EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 http://www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Quotation Date 9/14/2011 Estimate #US-10480 Bill To Marth Walters Palo Alto City Library 1213 Newell Rd Palo Alto CA 94303 United States Ship To Martha Walters Palo Alto City Library Mitchell Park Library 4050 Middlefield Road Palo Alto CA 94303 United States Expires 12/13/2011 Exp. Order 3/31/2011 Project Sales Rep Himes, John Product Specialist Partner Memo 12 Bin 3 Inlet AMH Terms Net 30 Days End User Partner User Expira... Maint. Expiration 7/31/2012 Item AMH Induction - Station GEN3 AMH Induction - Panel [External] 24-H Interface AMH Induction - Panel [External] Fire Protection AMH Induction - Detection (RFID Reader) AMH Induction - Detection (Barcode) AMH Induction - SW/HW (Hold Processing - Std) AMH Induction - SW (Bin Full Software) AMH Module - Sorting GEN3 Quant... 3 2 2 3 3 1 1 5 Description SORTER INDUCTION / FRONT BELT MODULE - System control module accepts items into the sorter, reads identification (RFID and/or Barcode); Sensitizes (RFID and/or EM optional); checks in items; retrieves sorting criteria and dispatches accepted items to the proper route and receptacle on the system. The Module includes a Windows XP Workstation PC, LibRetto sorter control software, Master Controller, Ethernet Switch; Touch screen display; and master shutdown switch. ** REQUIRES a SIP2 connection from an ILS that supports the standard sorting extensions. SORTER EXTERNAL INDUCTION PANEL - Touch screen interface and kiosk-style printer incorporated into a weatherproof stainless steel enclosure for external, 24-hour return of materials. Requires Induction/Front Belt behind the panel to process returning items. Suggested option: AMH Induction - Panel [External] Fire Protection SORTER INDUCTION FIRE PROTECTION MODULE - Fire suppression unit installs between the External Induction Panel (24 hour hatch) and the Induction/Front Belt unit. SORTER RFID READER/ANTENNA - Installed in Induction/Front Belt Stations to read RFID tags. Default system supports the open standard Danish Data Model. ISO 15693 / 18000-3 complaint; 13.56MHz; CE SORTER BARCODE SCANNER - Industrial Barcode Scanner Installed in Induction/Front Belt Stations SORTER HOLD PROCESSING - Standard Hold/Reserves Processing Module with Desktop Receipt Printer (a high capacity receipt printer upgrade is optional). As items are processed, the holds module retrieves the hold information and prepares customized receipts for insertion/attachment to items. SORTER BIN FULL SOFTWARE WITH (1) BIN FULL SWITCH - Counts items as they are sorted into a receptacle and then ignites a light at a pre-set limits, disabling the full sort receptacle from further acceptance of items. SORTER SORTING MODULE distributes items into receptacles. In-line, a module provides two sorts. At the end of a line, the module provides three sorts. The end of a sorting line is typically dedicated to exceptions and uses a large bin, space permitting Unit Price 31,995.00 19,995.00 5,495.00 3,995.00 2,495.00 2,195.00 1,450.00 16,495.00 Amount 95,985.00 39,990.00 10,990.00 11,985.00 7,485.00 2,195.00 1,450.00 82,475.00 Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT C Original Contract Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 http://www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 2 of 4 Quotation Date 9/14/2011 Estimate #US-10480 Item AMH Module - Conveyor [0750] AMH Module - Conveyor [0600] AMH Module - Turntable GEN3 AMH Module - Sorting Bin Full Switch AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Docking Station AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Trolley AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Battery/Charger AMH Receptacle - Bin [Standard] SUBTOTAL AMH PS-EXPFF-U 1st Day PS-TP Day Rate PS-PM-TK-U Project Management Quant... 2 1 2 10 3 6 1 12 2 1 1 Description SORTER CONVEYOR - 750 mm / ~2.5ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER CONVEYOR - 600 mm / ~2ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER TURNTABLE rotates items to align a spine or to turn right angles. SORTER BIN FULL DEACTIVATION SWITCH is used to stop the distribution of items into a receptacle. The Switch ignites when the Bin Full Software activates the light. (requires Bin Full Software) Add one switch per sort receptacle location. SORTER ERGOSTACK DOCKING STATION automatically raises and lowers items on an ErgoStack Trolley (sold separately) and senses a full Trolley. SORTER ERGOSTACK TROLLEY receives items from the sorter and then converts to a shelving cart using the attached rechargeable battery (requires ErgoStack Docking Station) (1) Battery/Charger included. SORTER ERGOSTACK SPARE BATTERY AND CHARGER for ErgoStack Trolley SORTER STANDARD BIN holds approximately 100 or more print items. The bin has an auto-leveling internal base that raises and lowers with the addition or removal of items in the bin SUBTOTAL for Automated Materials Handling / Sorter System ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - First of Every Five Days Onsite. No partial days. ENVISIONWARE FACTORY PERSONNEL ONSITE INSTALLATION DAY for Sorters ENVISIONWARE TURNKEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ** Consultation and Project Planning ** Implementation/Installation Services ** Training ** Post Installation Review ** An EnvisionWare Implementation Consultant will be assigned to manage and implement your project from start to finish and includes pre-installation consultation, project planning, product installation and training, and post installation review as mutually agreed. You will receive documentation and progress reports throughout the process. ** A turnkey project is an indication that you have Unit Price 9,995.00 9,995.00 19,495.00 495.00 5,030.00 4,385.00 1,595.00 1,645.00 975.00 1,500.00 2,400.00 Amount 19,990.00 9,995.00 38,990.00 4,950.00 15,090.00 26,310.00 1,595.00 19,740.00 389,215.00 1,950.00 1,500.00 2,400.00 EXHIBIT C Original Contract Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 http://www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 3 of 4 Quotation Date 9/14/2011 Estimate #US-10480 Item SUBTOTAL Services PS-EXPFF-U 1st Day PS-EXPFF-U Additional Day PS-TP Day Rate PS-PM-TK-U Project Management SUBTOTAL Services Quant... 4 10 7 1 Description accepted our calculations for a complete installation. EnvisionWare will assume the responsibility for delivering according to customer expecations defined in a Scope of Work that will be developed collaboratively with your staff. You remain responsible for providing timely access, environmental issues, and for ensuring that your resources including systems are virus free and in complete working order. ++ This price does not include any of the fixed travel cost items when onsite services are requested. SUBTOTAL for EnvisionWare Professional Services These Services are for a Site Survey to check on Electricity and Hole build outs. ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - First of Every Five Days Onsite. No partial days. ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - Additional Days After First. Maximum (4) additional days before an additional First day is required. ENVISIONWARE FACTORY PERSONNEL ONSITE INSTALLATION DAY for Sorters ENVISIONWARE TURNKEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ** Consultation and Project Planning ** Implementation/Installation Services ** Training ** Post Installation Review ** An EnvisionWare Implementation Consultant will be assigned to manage and implement your project from start to finish and includes pre-installation consultation, project planning, product installation and training, and post installation review as mutually agreed. You will receive documentation and progress reports throughout the process. ** A turnkey project is an indication that you have accepted our calculations for a complete installation. EnvisionWare will assume the responsibility for delivering according to customer expecations defined in a Scope of Work that will be developed collaboratively with your staff. You remain responsible for providing timely access, environmental issues, and for ensuring that your resources including systems are virus free and in complete working order. ++ This price does not include any of the fixed travel cost items when onsite services are requested. SUBTOTAL for EnvisionWare Professional Services These Services are for the Main installation, testing, and training for the new AMH Sorter. Unit Price 975.00 250.00 1,500.00 10,500.00 Amount 5,850.00 3,900.00 2,500.00 10,500.00 10,500.00 27,400.00 EXHIBIT C Original Contract Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 http://www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 4 of 4 Quotation Date 9/14/2011 Estimate #US-10480 Item Quant...Description Unit Price Amount Subtotal Total Tax Total 422,465.00 32,110.24 $454,575.24 All sales subject to the standard EULA and Product Warranty provided with your products. This offer is not valid after the expiration date. Thank you for your interest in EnvisionWare products and services. EXHIBIT C Original Contract Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 http://www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Quotation Date 9/15/2011 Estimate #US-10485 Bill To Marth Walters Palo Alto City Library 1213 Newell Rd Palo Alto CA 94303 United States Ship To Martha Walters Palo Alto City Library Mitchell Park Library 4050 Middlefield Road Palo Alto CA 94303 United States Expires 12/14/2011 Exp. Order 9/15/2011 Project Sales Rep Himes, John Product Specialist Partner Memo 12 Bin 3 Inlet AMH Terms Net 30 Days End User Partner User Expira... Maint. Expiration 7/31/2012 Item AMH Induction - Station GEN3 AMH Induction - Panel [External] 24-H Interface AMH Induction - Panel [External] Fire Protection AMH Induction - Detection (RFID Reader) AMH Induction - Detection (Barcode) AMH Induction - SW/HW (Hold Processing - Std) AMH Induction - SW (Bin Full Software) AMH Module - Sorting GEN3 Quant... 3 2 2 3 3 1 1 5 Description SORTER INDUCTION / FRONT BELT MODULE - System control module accepts items into the sorter, reads identification (RFID and/or Barcode); Sensitizes (RFID and/or EM optional); checks in items; retrieves sorting criteria and dispatches accepted items to the proper route and receptacle on the system. The Module includes a Windows XP Workstation PC, LibRetto sorter control software, Master Controller, Ethernet Switch; Touch screen display; and master shutdown switch. ** REQUIRES a SIP2 connection from an ILS that supports the standard sorting extensions. SORTER EXTERNAL INDUCTION PANEL - Touch screen interface and kiosk-style printer incorporated into a weatherproof stainless steel enclosure for external, 24-hour return of materials. Requires Induction/Front Belt behind the panel to process returning items. Suggested option: AMH Induction - Panel [External] Fire Protection SORTER INDUCTION FIRE PROTECTION MODULE - Fire suppression unit installs between the External Induction Panel (24 hour hatch) and the Induction/Front Belt unit. SORTER RFID READER/ANTENNA - Installed in Induction/Front Belt Stations to read RFID tags. Default system supports the open standard Danish Data Model. ISO 15693 / 18000-3 complaint; 13.56MHz; CE SORTER BARCODE SCANNER - Industrial Barcode Scanner Installed in Induction/Front Belt Stations SORTER HOLD PROCESSING - Standard Hold/Reserves Processing Module with Desktop Receipt Printer (a high capacity receipt printer upgrade is optional). As items are processed, the holds module retrieves the hold information and prepares customized receipts for insertion/attachment to items. SORTER BIN FULL SOFTWARE WITH (1) BIN FULL SWITCH - Counts items as they are sorted into a receptacle and then ignites a light at a pre-set limits, disabling the full sort receptacle from further acceptance of items. SORTER SORTING MODULE distributes items into receptacles. In-line, a module provides two sorts. At the end of a line, the module provides three sorts. The end of a sorting line is typically dedicated to exceptions and uses a large bin, space permitting Unit Price 31,995.00 19,995.00 5,495.00 3,995.00 2,495.00 2,195.00 1,450.00 16,495.00 Amount 95,985.00 39,990.00 10,990.00 11,985.00 7,485.00 2,195.00 1,450.00 82,475.00 Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT C Original Contract Option Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 http://www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 2 of 4 Quotation Date 9/15/2011 Estimate #US-10485 Item AMH Module - Conveyor [0750] AMH Module - Conveyor [0600] AMH Module - Turntable GEN3 AMH Module - Sorting Bin Full Switch AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Docking Station AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Trolley AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Battery/Charger AMH Receptacle - Bin [Standard] SUBTOTAL AMH PS-EXPFF-U 1st Day PS-TP Day Rate PS-PM-TK-U Project Management Quant... 2 1 2 10 3 6 1 12 2 1 1 Description SORTER CONVEYOR - 750 mm / ~2.5ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER CONVEYOR - 600 mm / ~2ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER TURNTABLE rotates items to align a spine or to turn right angles. SORTER BIN FULL DEACTIVATION SWITCH is used to stop the distribution of items into a receptacle. The Switch ignites when the Bin Full Software activates the light. (requires Bin Full Software) Add one switch per sort receptacle location. SORTER ERGOSTACK DOCKING STATION automatically raises and lowers items on an ErgoStack Trolley (sold separately) and senses a full Trolley. SORTER ERGOSTACK TROLLEY receives items from the sorter and then converts to a shelving cart using the attached rechargeable battery (requires ErgoStack Docking Station) (1) Battery/Charger included. SORTER ERGOSTACK SPARE BATTERY AND CHARGER for ErgoStack Trolley SORTER STANDARD BIN holds approximately 100 or more print items. The bin has an auto-leveling internal base that raises and lowers with the addition or removal of items in the bin SUBTOTAL for Automated Materials Handling / Sorter System ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - First of Every Five Days Onsite. No partial days. ENVISIONWARE FACTORY PERSONNEL ONSITE INSTALLATION DAY for Sorters ENVISIONWARE TURNKEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ** Consultation and Project Planning ** Implementation/Installation Services ** Training ** Post Installation Review ** An EnvisionWare Implementation Consultant will be assigned to manage and implement your project from start to finish and includes pre-installation consultation, project planning, product installation and training, and post installation review as mutually agreed. You will receive documentation and progress reports throughout the process. ** A turnkey project is an indication that you have Unit Price 9,995.00 9,995.00 19,495.00 495.00 5,030.00 4,385.00 1,595.00 1,645.00 975.00 1,500.00 2,400.00 Amount 19,990.00 9,995.00 38,990.00 4,950.00 15,090.00 26,310.00 1,595.00 19,740.00 389,215.00 1,950.00 1,500.00 2,400.00 EXHIBIT C Original Contract Option Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 http://www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 3 of 4 Quotation Date 9/15/2011 Estimate #US-10485 Item SUBTOTAL Services PS-EXPFF-U 1st Day PS-EXPFF-U Additional Day PS-TP Day Rate PS-PM-TK-U Project Management SUBTOTAL Services XA-Maintenance XA-Maintenance Quant... 4 10 7 1 1 1 Description accepted our calculations for a complete installation. EnvisionWare will assume the responsibility for delivering according to customer expecations defined in a Scope of Work that will be developed collaboratively with your staff. You remain responsible for providing timely access, environmental issues, and for ensuring that your resources including systems are virus free and in complete working order. ++ This price does not include any of the fixed travel cost items when onsite services are requested. SUBTOTAL for EnvisionWare Professional Services These Services are for a Site Survey to check on Electricity and Hole build outs. ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - First of Every Five Days Onsite. No partial days. ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - Additional Days After First. Maximum (4) additional days before an additional First day is required. ENVISIONWARE FACTORY PERSONNEL ONSITE INSTALLATION DAY for Sorters ENVISIONWARE TURNKEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ** Consultation and Project Planning ** Implementation/Installation Services ** Training ** Post Installation Review ** An EnvisionWare Implementation Consultant will be assigned to manage and implement your project from start to finish and includes pre-installation consultation, project planning, product installation and training, and post installation review as mutually agreed. You will receive documentation and progress reports throughout the process. ** A turnkey project is an indication that you have accepted our calculations for a complete installation. EnvisionWare will assume the responsibility for delivering according to customer expecations defined in a Scope of Work that will be developed collaboratively with your staff. You remain responsible for providing timely access, environmental issues, and for ensuring that your resources including systems are virus free and in complete working order. ++ This price does not include any of the fixed travel cost items when onsite services are requested. SUBTOTAL for EnvisionWare Professional Services These Services are for the Main installation, testing, and training for the new AMH Sorter. Year 2 Maintenance for AMH Hardware (389215.00 * .11 = $ 42,813.65) Year 3 Maintenance for AMH Hardware (389215.00 * .11 = $ 42,813.65) Unit Price 975.00 250.00 1,500.00 10,500.00 42,813.65 42,813.65 Amount 5,850.00 3,900.00 2,500.00 10,500.00 10,500.00 27,400.00 42,813.65 42,813.65 EXHIBIT C Original Contract Option Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 http://www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 4 of 4 Quotation Date 9/15/2011 Estimate #US-10485 Item SUBTOTAL Items Discount: Maintenance - Advance SUBTOTAL Items Quant...Description SUBTOTAL Years 2 and 3 of Maintenance DISCOUNT for Advance Purchase of EnvisionWare Annual Maintenance Services for Year 2-4 (Payment must be made at time of original purchase.) SUBTOTAL Years 2 and 3 after pre-payment discount. Unit Price -10.00% Amount 85,627.30 -8,562.73 77,064.57 Total $499,529.57 All sales subject to the standard EULA and Product Warranty provided with your products. This offer is not valid after the expiration date. Thank you for your interest in EnvisionWare products and services. EXHIBIT C Original Contract Option Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 / +1 678-382-6500 www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Quotation Date 7/11/2013 Quote Number US-16313 Bill To Martha Walters Palo Alto City Library Mitchell Park Library 4050 Middlefield Road Palo Alto CA 94306 United States Ship To Martha Walters Palo Alto City Library 1213 Newell Road Palo Alto CA 94303 United States Quote Expires 1/31/2014 Project Sales Rep Evans, Ken Partner Currency US Dollar Memo (Prints) Terms Net 30 Days Currency US Dollar End User End User Expiration Maintenance Expira...7/31/2014 Item AMH Induction - Station GEN3 AMH Induction - Panel [External] 24-H Interface AMH Induction - Panel [External] Fire Protection AMH Induction - Detection (RFID Reader) AMH Induction - Panel [Internal] INCover AMH Induction - Station In-line Staff AMH Induction - SW/HW (Hold Processing - Std) AMH Module - Sorting GEN3 Qty 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 6 Description SORTER INDUCTION / FRONT BELT MODULE - System control module accepts items into the sorter, reads identification (RFID and/or Barcode); Sensitizes (RFID and/or EM optional); checks in items; retrieves sorting criteria and dispatches accepted items to the proper route and receptacle on the system. The Module includes a Windows XP Workstation PC, LibRetto sorter control software, Master Controller, Ethernet Switch; Touch screen display; and master shutdown switch. ** REQUIRES a SIP2 connection from an ILS that supports the standard sorting extensions. SORTER EXTERNAL INDUCTION PANEL - Touch screen interface and kiosk-style printer incorporated into a weatherproof stainless steel enclosure for external, 24-hour return of materials. Requires Induction/Front Belt behind the panel to process returning items. Suggested option: AMH Induction - Panel [External] Fire Protection SORTER INDUCTION FIRE PROTECTION MODULE - Fire suppression unit installs between the External Induction Panel (24 hour hatch) and the Induction/Front Belt unit. SORTER RFID READER/ANTENNA - Installed in Induction/Front Belt Stations to read RFID tags. Default system supports the open standard Danish Data Model. ISO 15693 / 18000-3 complaint; 13.56MHz; CE SORTER INTERNAL INDUCTION PANEL - Internal Induction Stainless Panel with flush mount 12 inch industrial touch screen; integrated high performance kiosk printer capability, stainless cover and shelf. SORTER STAFF INDUCTION / FEEDER BELT MODULE - System feeder belt module accepts items into the sorter, reads identification (RFID only), checks in items, retrieves sorting criteria and dispatches accepted items to the proper route and receptacle on the system. The Module does not include a receipt printer or touch screen display. ** REQUIRES a SIP2 connection from an ILS that supports the standard sorting extensions. SORTER HOLD PROCESSING - Standard Hold/Reserves Processing Module with Desktop Receipt Printer (a high capacity receipt printer upgrade is optional). As items are processed, the holds module retrieves the hold information and prepares customized receipts for insertion/attachment to items. SORTER SORTING MODULE distributes items into receptacles. In-line, a module provides two sorts. At the Rate 29,895.00 18,595.00 5,195.00 995.00 10,495.00 19,500.00 1,995.00 15,495.00 Amount 59,790.00 18,595.00 5,195.00 1,990.00 10,495.00 19,500.00 1,995.00 92,970.00 Page 1 of 4 EXHIBIT C Amendment 2 Contract Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 / +1 678-382-6500 www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 2 of 4 Quotation Date 7/11/2013 Quote Number US-16313 Item AMH Module - Conveyor [0700] AMH Module - Conveyor [0600] AMH Module - Conveyor [1000] AMH Module - Turntable GEN3 AMH Induction - SW (Bin Full Software) AMH Module - Sorting Bin Full Switch AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Docking Station AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Trolley AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Battery/Charger AMH Receptacle - Bin [Standard] SUBTOTAL AMH PS-EXPFF-U 1st Day Qty 1 2 2 2 1 13 6 6 1 8 2 Description end of a line, the module provides three sorts. The end of a sorting line is typically dedicated to exceptions and uses a large bin, space permitting SORTER CONVEYOR - 700 mm / ~2.2ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER CONVEYOR - 600 mm / ~2ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER CONVEYOR - 1000 mm / ~3ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER TURNTABLE rotates items to align a spine or to turn right angles. SORTER BIN FULL SOFTWARE WITH (1) BIN FULL SWITCH - Counts items as they are sorted into a receptacle and then ignites a light at a pre-set limits, disabling the full sort receptacle from further acceptance of items. SORTER BIN FULL DEACTIVATION SWITCH is used to stop the distribution of items into a receptacle. The Switch ignites when the Bin Full Software activates the light. (requires Bin Full Software) Add one switch per sort receptacle location. SORTER ERGOSTACK DOCKING STATION automatically raises and lowers items on an ErgoStack Trolley (sold separately) and senses a full Trolley. SORTER ERGOSTACK TROLLEY receives items from the sorter and then converts to a shelving cart using the attached rechargeable battery (requires ErgoStack Docking Station) (1) Battery/Charger included. SORTER ERGOSTACK SPARE BATTERY AND CHARGER for ErgoStack Trolley SORTER STANDARD BIN holds approximately 100 or more print items. The bin has an auto-leveling internal base that raises and lowers with the addition or removal of items in the bin. 22.8"w x 22.8"d x 30.3"h [579.12mm x 579.12mm x 769.62mm]. SUBTOTAL for Automated Materials Handling / Sorter System ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - First of Every Five Days Onsite. No partial days. Rate 8,795.00 8,795.00 10,095.00 18,495.00 1,350.00 495.00 3,995.00 3,725.00 1,275.00 1,495.00 975.00 Amount 8,795.00 17,590.00 20,190.00 36,990.00 1,350.00 6,435.00 23,970.00 22,350.00 1,275.00 11,960.00 361,435.00 1,950.00 EXHIBIT C Amendment 2 Contract Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 / +1 678-382-6500 www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 3 of 4 Quotation Date 7/11/2013 Quote Number US-16313 Item PS-EXPFF-U Additional Day PS-PM-BLDG PS-TP Day Rate SUBTOTAL Services PS-EXPFF-U 1st Day PS-EXPFF-U Additional Day PS-TP Day Rate PS-PM-TK-U Project Management Qty 1 1 1 2 8 5 1 Description ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - Additional Days After First. Maximum (4) additional days before an additional First day is required. ENVISIONWARE COLLABORATIVE PROJECT SERVICES -- PER BUILDING An EnvisionWare Implementation Consultant will collaborate with you and your team on the development of a strategy that ensures optimal use of your EnvisionWare technology investment. ** The Project begins with a Launch Webinar to introduce representatives from your team and ours. In the Launch discussion we will collaborate on project goals, schedule, and milestones. ** A Statement of Work (SOW) will be developed collaboratively which defines the responsibilities of EnvisionWare and your staff and which establishes the criteria that define your acceptance of the solution. ++ This price does not include any of the fixed travel costs (Continental US) or billed expenses (Outside USA) items when onsite services are requested. ENVISIONWARE FACTORY PERSONNEL ONSITE INSTALLATION DAY for Sorters SUBTOTAL for EnvisionWare Professional Services These services are for a Site Survey to check on Electricity and data build outs and other facilities related tasks ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - First of Every Five Days Onsite. No partial days. ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - Additional Days After First. Maximum (4) additional days before an additional First day is required. ENVISIONWARE FACTORY PERSONNEL ONSITE INSTALLATION DAY for Sorters ENVISIONWARE TURNKEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ** Consultation and Project Planning ** Implementation/Installation Services ** Training ** Post Installation Review ** An EnvisionWare Implementation Consultant will be assigned to manage and implement your project from start to finish and includes pre-installation consultation, project planning, product installation and training, and post installation review as mutually agreed. You will receive documentation and progress reports throughout the process. ** A turnkey project is an indication that you have accepted our calculations for a complete installation. EnvisionWare will assume the responsibility for delivering according to customer expecations defined in a Scope of Work that will be developed collaboratively with your staff. You remain responsible for providing timely access, Rate 250.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 975.00 250.00 1,500.00 10,500.00 Amount 250.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 4,700.00 1,950.00 2,000.00 7,500.00 10,500.00 EXHIBIT C Amendment 2 Contract Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 / +1 678-382-6500 www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 4 of 4 Quotation Date 7/11/2013 Quote Number US-16313 Item SUBTOTAL Services Qty Description environmental issues, and for ensuring that your resources including systems are virus free and in complete working order. ++ This price does not include any of the fixed travel cost items when onsite services are requested. SUBTOTAL for EnvisionWare Professional Services These services are for the Main installation, training, testing of the new sorter Rate Amount 21,950.00 Subtotal Total Tax Total 388,085.00 32,529.15 $420,614.15 All sales subject to the standard EULA and Product Warranty provided with your products. This offer is not valid after the expiration date. EXHIBIT CA Amendment 2 Contract Cost EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 / +1 678-382-6500 www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Quotation Date 7/11/2013 Quote Number US-16313 Bill To Martha Walters Palo Alto City Library Mitchell Park Library 4050 Middlefield Road Palo Alto CA 94306 United States Ship To Martha Walters Palo Alto City Library 1213 Newell Road Palo Alto CA 94303 United States Quote Expires 1/31/2014 Project Sales Rep Evans, Ken Partner Currency US Dollar Memo (Prints) Terms Net 30 Days Currency US Dollar End User End User Expiration Maintenance Expira...7/31/2014 Item AMH Induction - Station GEN3 AMH Induction - Panel [External] 24-H Interface AMH Induction - Panel [External] Fire Protection AMH Induction - Detection (RFID Reader) AMH Induction - Panel [Internal] INCover AMH Induction - Station In-line Staff AMH Induction - SW/HW (Hold Processing - Std) AMH Module - Sorting GEN3 Qty 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 6 Description SORTER INDUCTION / FRONT BELT MODULE - System control module accepts items into the sorter, reads identification (RFID and/or Barcode); Sensitizes (RFID and/or EM optional); checks in items; retrieves sorting criteria and dispatches accepted items to the proper route and receptacle on the system. The Module includes a Windows XP Workstation PC, LibRetto sorter control software, Master Controller, Ethernet Switch; Touch screen display; and master shutdown switch. ** REQUIRES a SIP2 connection from an ILS that supports the standard sorting extensions. SORTER EXTERNAL INDUCTION PANEL - Touch screen interface and kiosk-style printer incorporated into a weatherproof stainless steel enclosure for external, 24-hour return of materials. Requires Induction/Front Belt behind the panel to process returning items. Suggested option: AMH Induction - Panel [External] Fire Protection SORTER INDUCTION FIRE PROTECTION MODULE - Fire suppression unit installs between the External Induction Panel (24 hour hatch) and the Induction/Front Belt unit. SORTER RFID READER/ANTENNA - Installed in Induction/Front Belt Stations to read RFID tags. Default system supports the open standard Danish Data Model. ISO 15693 / 18000-3 complaint; 13.56MHz; CE SORTER INTERNAL INDUCTION PANEL - Internal Induction Stainless Panel with flush mount 12 inch industrial touch screen; integrated high performance kiosk printer capability, stainless cover and shelf. SORTER STAFF INDUCTION / FEEDER BELT MODULE - System feeder belt module accepts items into the sorter, reads identification (RFID only), checks in items, retrieves sorting criteria and dispatches accepted items to the proper route and receptacle on the system. The Module does not include a receipt printer or touch screen display. ** REQUIRES a SIP2 connection from an ILS that supports the standard sorting extensions. SORTER HOLD PROCESSING - Standard Hold/Reserves Processing Module with Desktop Receipt Printer (a high capacity receipt printer upgrade is optional). As items are processed, the holds module retrieves the hold information and prepares customized receipts for insertion/attachment to items. SORTER SORTING MODULE distributes items into receptacles. In-line, a module provides two sorts. At the Rate 29,895.00 18,595.00 5,195.00 995.00 10,495.00 19,500.00 1,995.00 15,495.00 Amount 59,790.00 18,595.00 5,195.00 1,990.00 10,495.00 19,500.00 1,995.00 92,970.00 Page 1 of 4 EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 / +1 678-382-6500 www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 2 of 4 Quotation Date 7/11/2013 Quote Number US-16313 Item AMH Module - Conveyor [0700] AMH Module - Conveyor [0600] AMH Module - Conveyor [1000] AMH Module - Turntable GEN3 AMH Induction - SW (Bin Full Software) AMH Module - Sorting Bin Full Switch AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Docking Station AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Trolley AMH Receptacle - ErgoStack Battery/Charger AMH Receptacle - Bin [Standard] SUBTOTAL AMH PS-EXPFF-U 1st Day Qty 1 2 2 2 1 13 6 6 1 8 2 Description end of a line, the module provides three sorts. The end of a sorting line is typically dedicated to exceptions and uses a large bin, space permitting SORTER CONVEYOR - 700 mm / ~2.2ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER CONVEYOR - 600 mm / ~2ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER CONVEYOR - 1000 mm / ~3ft. The sorter/buffer module moves items across a space or distance and/or it buffers items that may need to be accepted to avoid system latency. The distributed architecture capitalizes on the addition of each module to increase performance. SORTER TURNTABLE rotates items to align a spine or to turn right angles. SORTER BIN FULL SOFTWARE WITH (1) BIN FULL SWITCH - Counts items as they are sorted into a receptacle and then ignites a light at a pre-set limits, disabling the full sort receptacle from further acceptance of items. SORTER BIN FULL DEACTIVATION SWITCH is used to stop the distribution of items into a receptacle. The Switch ignites when the Bin Full Software activates the light. (requires Bin Full Software) Add one switch per sort receptacle location. SORTER ERGOSTACK DOCKING STATION automatically raises and lowers items on an ErgoStack Trolley (sold separately) and senses a full Trolley. SORTER ERGOSTACK TROLLEY receives items from the sorter and then converts to a shelving cart using the attached rechargeable battery (requires ErgoStack Docking Station) (1) Battery/Charger included. SORTER ERGOSTACK SPARE BATTERY AND CHARGER for ErgoStack Trolley SORTER STANDARD BIN holds approximately 100 or more print items. The bin has an auto-leveling internal base that raises and lowers with the addition or removal of items in the bin. 22.8"w x 22.8"d x 30.3"h [579.12mm x 579.12mm x 769.62mm]. SUBTOTAL for Automated Materials Handling / Sorter System ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - First of Every Five Days Onsite. No partial days. Rate 8,795.00 8,795.00 10,095.00 18,495.00 1,350.00 495.00 3,995.00 3,725.00 1,275.00 1,495.00 975.00 Amount 8,795.00 17,590.00 20,190.00 36,990.00 1,350.00 6,435.00 23,970.00 22,350.00 1,275.00 11,960.00 361,435.00 1,950.00 EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 / +1 678-382-6500 www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 3 of 4 Quotation Date 7/11/2013 Quote Number US-16313 Item PS-EXPFF-U Additional Day PS-PM-BLDG PS-TP Day Rate SUBTOTAL Services PS-EXPFF-U 1st Day PS-EXPFF-U Additional Day PS-TP Day Rate PS-PM-TK-U Project Management Qty 1 1 1 2 8 5 1 Description ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - Additional Days After First. Maximum (4) additional days before an additional First day is required. ENVISIONWARE COLLABORATIVE PROJECT SERVICES -- PER BUILDING An EnvisionWare Implementation Consultant will collaborate with you and your team on the development of a strategy that ensures optimal use of your EnvisionWare technology investment. ** The Project begins with a Launch Webinar to introduce representatives from your team and ours. In the Launch discussion we will collaborate on project goals, schedule, and milestones. ** A Statement of Work (SOW) will be developed collaboratively which defines the responsibilities of EnvisionWare and your staff and which establishes the criteria that define your acceptance of the solution. ++ This price does not include any of the fixed travel costs (Continental US) or billed expenses (Outside USA) items when onsite services are requested. ENVISIONWARE FACTORY PERSONNEL ONSITE INSTALLATION DAY for Sorters SUBTOTAL for EnvisionWare Professional Services These services are for a Site Survey to check on Electricity and data build outs and other facilities related tasks ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - First of Every Five Days Onsite. No partial days. ENVISIONWARE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - FLAT FEE FOR EXPENSES - Additional Days After First. Maximum (4) additional days before an additional First day is required. ENVISIONWARE FACTORY PERSONNEL ONSITE INSTALLATION DAY for Sorters ENVISIONWARE TURNKEY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ** Consultation and Project Planning ** Implementation/Installation Services ** Training ** Post Installation Review ** An EnvisionWare Implementation Consultant will be assigned to manage and implement your project from start to finish and includes pre-installation consultation, project planning, product installation and training, and post installation review as mutually agreed. You will receive documentation and progress reports throughout the process. ** A turnkey project is an indication that you have accepted our calculations for a complete installation. EnvisionWare will assume the responsibility for delivering according to customer expecations defined in a Scope of Work that will be developed collaboratively with your staff. You remain responsible for providing timely access, Rate 250.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 975.00 250.00 1,500.00 10,500.00 Amount 250.00 1,000.00 1,500.00 4,700.00 1,950.00 2,000.00 7,500.00 10,500.00 EnvisionWare, Inc. 2855 Premiere Parkway | Suite A Duluth GA 30097-5201 United States 800-216-8370 / +1 678-382-6500 www.envisionware.com Tax ID # 58-2424595 Page 4 of 4 Quotation Date 7/11/2013 Quote Number US-16313 Item SUBTOTAL Services Qty Description environmental issues, and for ensuring that your resources including systems are virus free and in complete working order. ++ This price does not include any of the fixed travel cost items when onsite services are requested. SUBTOTAL for EnvisionWare Professional Services These services are for the Main installation, training, testing of the new sorter Rate Amount 21,950.00 Subtotal Total Tax Total 388,085.00 32,529.15 $420,614.15 All sales subject to the standard EULA and Product Warranty provided with your products. This offer is not valid after the expiration date. APPENDIX N: Contract Revision Form Page 1 of 2 Appendix N: Contract Revision Form CONTRACT REVISION FORM Department: Library Contract #: C12144307 To: Administrative Services Department Purchasing/Contract Administration From: Name: Martha Walters Phone extension: X2308 Date: October 9, 2013 APPENDIX N: Contract Revision Form Page 2 of 2 Type of Contract Revision: Check the appropriate box Funding Reduction Account Number Change X Contract Term Extension Use of Additional Services (already part of original contract) * X Request for Additional Services * * Requires PR in SAP Describe why contract revision is necessary: Additional $462,675.15 for purchases related to the Measure N bond project, specifically Main Library’s Automated Materials Handling System (AMH) as approved in CMR 2024. See attached quotes for expected costs. This quote dollar amount ($420,614.15) plus a 10% contingency amounts to $462,675.15. An additional CMR (#4167) will be submitted to City Council for approval to expand the contract amount with Envisionware and extend the contract end date. Extending contract end date from 11/30/2013 to 12/31/2014, when the Main Library is expected to be open. Approvals: Requested by: Martha Walters Date: 10/09/2013 Department Approval: Date: City of Palo Alto (ID # 4191) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 2nd Reading - Edgewood Plaza PC Amendment Title: Second Reading: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Approve an Amendment to Planned Community (PC-5150) Mixed use Project to Allow Reconstruction of One of Two Historic Eichler Retail Buildings (Building 1), for a 3.58 Acre Site Located at 2080 Channing Avenue (Edgewood Plaza Mixed Use Project) (First Reading: October 7, 2013; Passed 7-1 Holman no, Scharff absent) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that City Council at the second reading adopt the revised draft Ordinance (Attachment A), approving the amendment to the Planned Community (PC) project to allow the reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials, where installation of replicas of the original detailed wood window frames and contribution of $94,200 would serve as the two PC public benefits. Background At its October 7, 2013 hearing, the City Council certified a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Final SEIR) and approved a request by Sand Hill Property Company, for a Planned Community Zoning Amendment to allow reconstruction of one of two historically significant retail buildings with all new materials. City Council approved the original Edgewood Plaza PC and associated EIR on March 19, 2012, allowing redevelopment of the historic, three- building shopping center, including the relocation and rehabilitation of a historic building, ten new single family homes and a new 0.20 acre park. The amendment would allow the reconstruction of the historic building that was illegally demolished. All other components of the project would remain the same as originally approved. Discussion City of Palo Alto Page 2 The attached ordinance for the Edgewood Plaza Planned Community Zoning Amendment is provided for second reading by the City Council. The revised ordinance reflects a change to the public benefit requirement that City Council adopted at the October 7, 2013 public hearing. The revised ordinance requires the public benefit payment of $94,200 as a penalty for the demolition of the historic structure without identifying the use of the penalty. The original proposal was to allocate the penalty to either a historic restoration fund or a towards the construction of a sidewalk on W. Bayshore Road from Channing Avenue to the City of Palo Alto and East Palo Alto border. City Council directed that, as a separate action from this Planned Community Zoning Amendment, staff to return to the City Council within 90 days with a recommendation as to the use of the fund. Environmental Review The Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Final SEIR) prepared for the project was certified by the City Council on October 7, 2013. Statement of Overriding Considerations were adopted regarding the significant unavoidable historic resource impacts. The Draft and Final SEIR, as well as the original Final EIR, Draft EIR, and First Amendment are also available online on the City’s website: http://goo.gl/PjnreG. Attachments:  Attachment A: Revised Ordinance (PDF)  Attachment B: CMR dated October 7, 2013 with attachments (PDF) NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 1 Ordinance No.________ Ordinance of the Council of the City Of Palo Alto Amending Ordinance 5150 (amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code [The Zoning Map] to Change the Classification of Property Located at 2080 Channing Avenue [Edgewood Plaza] to PC Planned Community Zone (PC 5150)) to Allow the Reconstruction of Building #1 with All New Materials. The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1. (a) On April 9, 2012, the City Council granted Planned Community (PC) Zoning Ordinance 5150 (“Project”) to permit the redevelopment of the property commonly known as the Edgewood Shopping Center located at 2080 Channing Avenue (the “Subject Property”). A copy of Ordinance 5150 is attached as Exhibit C and incorporated by reference. As part of that PC, the applicant Sand Hill Property Company (Applicant) was required to rehabilitate Building 1, identified as a historic resource, in accordance with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. (b) In September 2012, the Applicant without permission of the City, demolished Building 1 rendering reconstruction infeasible. The City immediately put a Stop Work Order on the remaining portion of the Project. Subsequently, the City permitted certain aspects of the Project to move forward. (c) On February 26, 2013, the Applicant applied to the City for an amendment to Planned Community Zoning (PC) 5150 to substitute the reconstruction of Building 1 for the rehabilitation of Building 1 to accommodate the uses set forth below. (d) The Historic Resources Board, at its meeting of August 21, 2013, reviewed the Project and recommended the City Council approve the amendment with associated draft conditions of approval ‘Exhibit B.’ (e) The Planning and Transportation Commission, after a duly noticed public hearing held September 11, 2013, reviewed, considered, and recommended certification of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, then reviewed the Planned Community, and recommended that Section 18.08.040 (the Zoning Map) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code be amended to rezone the Subject Property to a new Planned Community zone for the proposed project depicted on ‘Exhibit A,’ (the “Project”), consistent with conditions included in the Planned Community zone related to allowable land uses and required development standards, and subject to provision of the public benefits outlined in this ordinance. Draft conditions of project approval “Exhibit B” attached to this document and incorporated by reference were presented to the PTC for review and comments. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 2 (f) The Palo Alto City Council, after due consideration of the proposed Project, the analysis of the City staff, and the conditions recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission, certified the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program, concurred with the recommendations from the PTC and the HRB, approved conditions of approval attached as Exhibit B hereto, and found that the proposed project and this Ordinance is in the public interest and will promote the public health, safety and welfare, as hereinafter set forth. (g) The Council finds that the findings made in Ordinance 5150 justifying the granting of Planned Community 5150 still apply to the Subject Property in that the Project will incorporate the modified community benefits described in Section (3)(f) hereof. SECTION 2. Ordinance 5150 amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the “Zoning Map,” is hereby amended as follows: The project is as depicted on the Development Plans dated February 2, 2012 and amended in Development Plans dated September 11, 2013, incorporated by reference, including the following new component: (a) Reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials in the originally approved location and configuration. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of Ordinance 5150, including any exhibits and conditions, shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. Section 4 of Ordinance 5150 is amended to additionally require compliance with (i) the February 29, 2012 Development Plans as amended on September 11, 2013, (ii) the conditions of project approval attached as Exhibit B, and (iii) any approved supplemental materials for the Subject Property, as submitted by the applicant pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC §18.38.090). In addition, Sections (f) and (g) shall be amended as follows: (f) Public Benefits: Development of the site under the provisions of the PC Planned Community District will result in public benefits not otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts. The Project includes the following public benefits that are inherent to the Project and in excess of those required by City zoning districts. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 3 (1) Rehabilitation of Building #2 and reconstruction of Building #1 in a design significantly closer to its original appearance with the inclusion of custom made windows in the original design, with narrow full height frames and projecting moldings. Rehabilitation of the original historic monument sign for the shopping center. (2) Redevelopment and rehabilitation of a high-quality shopping and commercial area on the Edgewood Plaza site that will serve the community, including the provision of a new grocery store for the local neighborhood, in a manner that reflects the mid-century aesthetic and design of the existing buildings and surrounding Duveneck/Saint Francis (Edgewood and Green Gables) neighborhood. Reconstruction of Building #1 will enable a complete restoration of the shopping center. (3) Provision of a grocery store in the 20,600 sq. ft. building. The commercial property owner shall ensure the continued use of the 20,600 sq. ft. building as a grocery store for the life of the Project; (4) Provision of 0.20 acre public park, via public access easements in perpetuity. The park would be maintained by the commercial property owner and shall not be used for seating/activities associated with the retail uses. The Applicant shall provide an on-site display highlighting Joseph Eichler’s achievements in the Park. (5) Payment to the City of $94,200 to be used for the restoration of a publicly owned or accessible historic resourcewith respect to the improper demolition of Building #1. (6) Subject to support by the immediate neighborhood, Applicant shall construct a sidewalk along west side of West Bayshore from Channing to the Palo Alto city border. (76) Provision of two Level 2 Electric Vehicle chargers and one Level 2 Electric Vehicle charger. (g) Development Schedule: The project is required to include a Development Schedule pursuant to PAMC §18.38.100. The approved Development Schedule is set forth below: NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 4 Construction of the Project shall commence immediately following the adoption of the PC zone, unless a change in the development schedule is approved by the Director of Planning and Community Environment, not to exceed a one year extension in time and only one such extension without a hearing, pursuant to PAMC §18.38.130. The total time for the project construction and occupancy of tenant spaces is expected to be 12 months following adoption of the PC zone, or by October 2014, unless extended by the Director for up to one additional year. SECTION 4. A Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for this project was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council certified the EIR and Mitigation Monitoring Program and adopted a resolution at its meeting of October7, 2013. SECTION 5. The plans referenced consist of plans titled “Edgewood Shopping Center” prepared by Kenneth Rodrigues & Partners, Burton Architecture, Sandis and the Guzzardo Partnership, dated February 29, 2012, including the Tentative Map for Edgewood Plaza, prepared by Sandis, dated September 11, 2013. // // // // // // // // // // // // NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 5 SECTION 6. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of its adoption (second reading). INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: __________________________ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney __________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment _________________________ Mayor _________________________ City Manager NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 6 NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 7 Exhibit B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 2080 Channing Avenue – Edgewood Plaza/ File No. 13PLN-00197 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Planning and Transportation Divisions 1. The plans submitted to obtain all permits through the Building Inspection Division shall be in substantial conformance with the revised plans, project details and materials received on March 22, 2012 and as modified in plans received on September 11, 2013, except as modified to incorporate these conditions of approval. 2. All conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet of the plan set submitted to obtain any permit through the Building Inspection Division. 3. Construction details, colors, materials, and placement of the shopping center signs and roof mounted equipment shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review prior to submittal of the building permit. 4. All conditions required in PC-5150, including mitigation measures, are still applicable unless specifically amended by the document. 5. Prior to the submittal of a building permit application, a historic consultant shall be hired by the City and paid for the applicant to review the building permit submittal and construction of Building #1 to confirm compliance with this approval and mitigation requirements of the project’s Supplement Environmental Impact Report. 6. Building #1 shall be constructed of materials that were approved for use in Building #2 to the satisfaction of the Director of the Planning and Community Environment Department. 7. A plaque identifying Building #1 as a reconstructed building shall be installed on Building #1 to the satisfaction of the Director of the Planning and Community Environment Department. 8. Storefront glass shall not be obstructed by shelves or storage and shall remain primarily open to permit public viewing of interior of store, except as allowed by the Sign Ordinance. The Director may permit display of store’s merchandise or NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 8 other window display in his or her discretion provided it shall not impact the neighborhood serving retail environment. EIR Mitigation Measures 9. MM CR-2.2: The applicant shall create a display illustrating the history of the Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, prior to approval of final occupancy. 10. MM CR-2.3: Distinctive materials and defining architectural features, finishes, and construction techniques of Building 2 including windows, frames, and eaves will be retained to the extent possible to the satisfaction of the Director of the Planning and Community Environment Department, as the building elements will require some alterations due to ADA compliance, public safety, building code compliance, or deteriorated condition. The existing building components, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, may be constructed out of new building materials that match the character and form of the existing, if reuse of existing building components is not feasible. Prior to the rehabilitation of Building 2, a qualified historic preservation architect shall review the plans for the remodeled buildings and verify that the work on these buildings is in keeping with the buildings’ original design and applicable Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, such as Standards #5, 6, 7, and 9. 11. A new Building 1 will be constructed of new building materials that match the character and one-story form of the commercial buildings of Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, consistent with the previously approved building elevations. As a condition of approval, all facades of Building 1 will be wood- framed storefront systems that replicate the detail of the original 1957 window design. 12. The final design and materials to be used in the renovation of Building #2 and reconstruction of Building #1 will be reviewed and approved by the Director and the Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department. 13. Government Code Section 66020 provides that project applicant who desires to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project must initiate the protest at the time the development project is approved or conditionally approved or within ninety (90) days after the date that fees, dedications, reservations or exactions are imposed on the project. Additionally, procedural requirements for protesting these development fees, dedications, reservations and exactions are set forth in Government Code Section 66020. IF YOU FAIL TO INITIATE A PROTEST WITHIN THE 90-DAY PERIOD OR TO FOLLOW THE PROTEST PROCEDURES DESCRIBED IN GOVERNMENT CODE NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 9 SECTION 66020, YOU WILL BE BARRED FROM CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OR REASONABLENESS OF THE FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND EXACTIONS. 14. This matter is subject to the Code of Civil Procedures (CCP) Section 1094.5, and the time by which judicial review must be sought is governed by CCP Section 1094.6. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 10 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4081) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 10/7/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Council Priority: Land Use and Transportation Planning Summary Title: Edgewood Plaza SEIR, Final Map and PC Amendment Title: Public Hearing: Adoption of (1) a Resolution Certifying a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report; (2) an Ordinance Amendin g Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Approve an Amendment to Planned Community (PC-5150) Mixed use Project to Allow Reconstruction of One of Two Historic Eichler Retail Buildings (Building 1); and 3) Approval of a Final Map to Subdivide Two Commercial Parcels Into Eleven Parcels to Include a Commercial Parcel with a Public Park and Ten Single Family Properties, for a 3.58 Acre Site Located at 2080 Channing Avenue (Edgewood Plaza Mixed Use Project). * Quasi-Judicial From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that City Council (1) approve the Resolution (Attachment A), certifying the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (EIR), (2) adopt an Ordinance (Attachment B), approving the amendment to the Planned Community (PC) project to allow the reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials, where installation of replicas of the original detailed wood window frames and contribution of $94,200 towards a fund for the future historic rehabilitation of a public building would serve as the two PC public benefits, and (3) approve the Final Map. Executive Summary The applicant, Sand Hill Property Company, is requesting a Planned Community Zoning Amendment to allow reconstruction of one of two historically significant retail buildings with all new materials. Council approved the Edgewood Plaza PC on March 19, 2012, allowing redevelopment of the historic, three-building shopping center, including the relocation and rehabilitation of a historic building, ten new single family homes and a new 0.20 acre park. Council concurrently approved an EIR and a Tentative Map to subdivide the property into one City of Palo Alto Page 2 commercial parcel, which would include the 0.2-acre park, and ten residential, fee simple lots. The two historically significant retail buildings were to be preserved as a primary PC public benefit: Building #2 was to be rehabilitated in place, while Building #1 was to be disassembled, relocated on site and rehabilitated. However, the applicant demolished Building #1 without notifying or receiving approval from the City, resulting in an order to stop construction. On March 4, 2013, the City Council authorized the applicant to proceed with the construction of the grocery store, the remaining historic building (Building #2), and six of the ten homes. Because the Final EIR certified for the original project assumed both historic buildings would be rehabilitated, a Supplemental EIR was prepared to address the fact that Building #1 must be rebuilt with all new materials. On August 21, 2013, the Historic Resources Board (HRB) has recommended that City Council certify the SEIR and approve the PC Zoning Amendment. At its hearing on September 25, 2013, the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) recommended by a vote of 5-1-2 that the City Council certify the Final SEIR and approve the PC amendment. Background The project scope required submittal and review of a separate Planned Community Rezoning Amendment application, because the project is not considered a minor change to a previously approved Planned Community development plan. If it were considered as a minor change, the Architectural Review Board and Historic Resources Board would have been allowed to review and recommend the changes to the Director of Planning and Community Environment. The applicant proposes to reconstruct Building #1 using new materials rather that rehabilitate the building demolished during the construction process. The applicant is not proposing any other changes to the project. Planned Community Rezoning PC districts follow a unique set of procedures, standards, and findings, which are described in Chapter 18.38 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC). Typically, the first step in the PC process is PTC review of the concept plans, development program statement and draft development schedule, and initiation of the rezoning. This application is different in that (1) it is a revision to a PC project the Council recently approved, (2) the application does not require initiation, and (3) the Architectural Review Board (ARB) review was not included in this PC review process due to the scope of the amendment; rather, the Historic Resources Board (HRB) has considered the project and has provided a recommendation to Council. Because the only proposed change to the PC development plan is the construction materials of Building #1, and all other components of the PC remain the same, the amendment was not brought to the ARB. However, the ARB subcommittee has been consulted on a periodic basis for minor façade changes in the ARB’s purview throughout the construction process. City of Palo Alto Page 3 The approval of the amended PC is still subject to the three PC findings, that: (a) the site is so situated, and the use or uses proposed for the site are of such characteristics that the application of general districts or combining districts will not provide sufficient flexibility to allow the proposed development; and (b) development of the site under the provisions of the PC planned community district will result in public benefits not otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts. In making the findings required by this section, the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council, as appropriate, shall specifically cite the public benefits expected to result from use of the planned community district; and (c) the use or uses permitted, and the site development regulations applicable within the district shall be consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and shall be compatible with existing and potential uses on adjoining sites or within the general vicinity. Project History Edgewood Plaza is a commercial shopping center built between 1956 and 1958 by Joseph Eichler/Eichler Homes and A. Quincy Jones of Jones and Emmons. The center was originally built with the existing grocery building (1957), two retail buildings (1958), an office building that formerly housed the office of Eichler Homes (1959), and a gas station (1957). The office building and gas station sites are not part of the shopping center or this project. Edgewood Plaza is not listed on The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or on the Palo Alto Historic Inventory. This site is not on the City’s historic resources inventory but, because it has been deemed eligible for both registers, it is considered a historic resource. The site was the subject of a Planned Community (PC) rezoning approved by the City Council on March 19, 2012 to allow the redevelopment of an existing vacant and historic shopping center, including the relocation of one of three retail buildings, the addition of ten homes and a new 9,000 square foot park. Two of the existing commercial buildings, Buildings #1 and #2 were deemed historic resources and approved for rehabilitation. Building #3, the former Lucky market building, currently occupied by Fresh Market, is not considered a historic resource. Building #1 was to be disassembled, relocated on the site and rehabilitated. Building #2 was to be rehabilitated in place. A tentative map was also approved to subdivide the property into one commercial lot, including a public park, and ten single family lots. The primary public benefits for the Edgewood Plaza project consisted of 1) the preservation of historic resources, 2) the construction and operation of the grocery store, 3) the creation of a 0.20 acre park containing a display highlighting Joseph Eichler’s achievements, and 4) the installation of three electric vehicle chargers. City of Palo Alto Page 4 A Final EIR was prepared and certified by the City Council on March 19, 2012, to provide environmental clearance for the rezoning, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The document analyzed the historic resources and the project’s potential impact on those resources. Buildings #1 and #2 were deemed to have retained integrity of design and would have been eligible for inclusion on the CRHR. Because the site had been determined to be eligible for both the NRHP and CRHR, per the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the site would have qualified for the Palo Alto Historic Inventory under Criterion 3 and 4. The certification of the EIR was based on the assumption that historic impacts for the relocation of Building #1 would be mitigated to a less than significant impact because the building would be rehabilitated in accordance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Historic Rehabilitation (Standards). The rehabilitation was to include retention of the character defining features of the building, such as the wood window frames, glulam beams, concrete block wall, cornice and wood paneling. City Council Hearing on March 4, 2013 In September 2012, a stop work order was issued because the historic building (Building #1) that was to be disassembled and reconstructed onsite was illegally demolished. The project was taken to a City Council hearing on March 4, 2013 (continued from February 11, 2013) to request direction on how to move forward on the project given the demolition. The City Council authorized the continued construction of the grocery store, the remaining historic (Building #2), six of the homes and other onsite and offsite improvements. The City Council also authorized the City’s hiring of Carey & Company, the historic consulting firm that the performed the peer review on the original EIR for the City, to review plans and monitor construction to ensure that Building #2 complies with the PC zoning and all mitigation measures, including the Standards. The monitoring has included multiple walk-throughs and special focus has been placed on the preservation of the building’s signature glulam beams. To date, the applicant has completed the grocery store building, and installation of various parking lot improvements including the electric charging stations. The rehabilitation of Building #2 is in process and has been done to the satisfaction of the City’s historic consultant. Following the March Council hearing, staff received multiple emails supporting the continued construction of the project. The City Council motion specifically included the following:  Allow preparation of Supplemental EIR;  Return to Council with SEIR and amendment to the PC Zoning following HRB and PTC hearings;  Prohibit construction of Building #1 until SEIR certified and PC Amendment approved;  Allow continued construction of Building #3 (grocery store);  Allow rehabilitation of Building #2 with monitoring by City’s historic consultant;  Allow offsite improvements; City of Palo Alto Page 5  Allow installation of historic sign and other related work;  Allow construction of six homes, with the two units behind Building #2 stayed pending PC Amendment; and  Request for staff to return with a recommendation on a fine based on the amount of savings likely to be achieved from moving forward with housing construction. Board and Commission Review HRB Review Following the release of the Supplemental EIR, a Historic Resources Board hearing was held on August 21, 2013 to receive HRB feedback on the Supplemental EIR and the proposal to rebuild Building #1 with all new materials. The shopping center, now more than 50 years old, has been deemed a historic resource even though it is not on the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR), the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), or the Palo Alto Historic Inventor. The HRB had reviewed the original project and EIR. A copy of the staff report and minutes of the August 21st hearing are attached for the Council’s review. The staff report can also be found at the following link: http://goo.gl/tN7OKG. During the hearing, one member of the public spoke regarding the project, suggesting that Building #1 not be rebuilt and that the housing site be replaced with dedicated parkland. The HRB voted unanimously to recommend that City Council certify the Supplemental EIR with a Statement of Overriding Considerations. The HRB also voted unanimously to approve the amendment to the PC Zoning to allow the reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials, specifying that the replacement materials must follow the materials approved for use in Building #2 and a plaque must be installed on the building recognizing that it is a replica in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Reconstruction. The HRB believed that this was the most appropriate response to the loss of the historic structure. The HRB’s recommendation included staff’s recommendation that a historic consultant be hired to monitor the construction of Building #1, to ensure that it will be similar to the originally approved Building #1. The HRB determined that the project could be supported because the proposed replacement meets the original intent to retain the retail building environment. PTC Review On September 25, 2013, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommended that the City Council certify of Final SEIR and approve the PC Zoning Amendment, on a 4-1-2. The PTC recommended that the installation of custom made wood windows that replicate the original windows in Building #1 and #2 be identified as a public benefit, because the windows bring the design closer to the original buildings. The PTC also recommended that the applicant be City of Palo Alto Page 6 required to contribute $94,200 to a fund for the future rehabilitation of a City owned historic building as the second public benefit. The PTC’s motion also included that, if a survey of residents along West Bayshore Road shows support for the construction of the West Bayshore Road sidewalk, then a contribution to the sidewalk project should be considered. As directed, a survey has been sent out to area residents. The results of the survey will be presented to the City Council at the October 7th hearing. The Commissioners were generally supportive of allowing the project to continue and expressed appreciation for the applicant taking responsibility for the demolition. One member of the public spoke at the PTC hearing. The speaker, a 46-year resident on Wildwood Lane, stated that she was thrilled that the project was originally approved, happy about Fresh Market opening, and that she and her neighbors are enthusiastically in favor of the project continuing. Roger Kohler, vice chair of the HRB, noted that the HRB unanimously supported the project as proposed and felt it was the best solution. The PTC’s primary focus during the discussion was the topic of penalties and public benefits. The PTC acknowledged that this project is different from other PC requests, in that the project is no longer controversial but that the City’s response to the violation of the PC is very important and is needed to discourage future violations. In addition to debating the appropriate penalty dollar amount, the PTC also debated whether the penalty should be applied to a future historic rehabilitation of a public building or to the construction of a sidewalk on West Bayshore Road to benefit the neighborhood to the north. The initial recommendation was to apply the penalty towards a historic rehabilitation fund. However, the PTC’s motion also included that the sidewalk project be considered if the neighborhood supported it. The September 25, 2013 PTC staff reports, without attachments and meeting minutes are attached. The entire PTC staff report can also be found on the City’s website at the following link: http://goo.gl/u0ddiQ. Discussion The resolution for the Final Supplemental EIR (Attachment A) and the Ordinance for the Planned Community Rezoning (Attachment B) are attached. Key issues discussed below are: (1) the Final SEIR and historic impacts and (2) Penalty and Planned Community Public Benefits. Final SEIR and Historic Impacts A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was originally published and posted on February 1, 2013 and sent to the State Clearinghouse for a 30-day period, from February 1 to March 4, 2013. A Notice of Completion and Availability of the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was published, posted and mailed announcing that the document was available for a 45- day comment period from May 17 through July 20, 2013. Copies of the Draft SEIR and Final City of Palo Alto Page 7 SEIR were provided to the HRB, PTC and City Council at the beginning of the circulation period. The document concluded that the revised project would result in two new significant impacts: 1) Significant Impact to the historic resources specific to Building #1 after implementation of mitigation measures and 2) Significant Cumulative Historic Resources Impact. The SEIR, prepared by David J. Powers and Associates, was found acceptable by both the HRB and PTC. The Final SEIR would have included formal responses to all comments received during the public comment period. Since no comments were received regarding the SEIR, a Final SEIR was prepared confirming that no comments were received. The Final SEIR was circulated for public review on September 5, 2013 and was available to the public a minimum of ten days prior to the EIR certification hearing. The Draft SEIR and Final SEIR, including source documents, additional background information, and the PTC, HRB, and ARB reports for review dates mentioned above are available on the City’s website at http://goo.gl/PjnreG. Images of project plans are also available with the staff report online, as a link on the PTC September 11, 2013 PTC meeting agenda at http://goo.gl/u0ddiQ. SEIR Contents Because the complete loss of Building #1 has been deemed a substantial change to the project, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the SEIR was prepared to address the changes needed to comply with State law. This SEIR is focused only on the new significant historic impact created by the change to the proposal, the loss of Building #1 and the replacement construction in the same location with new materials. The original Final EIR included a mitigation measure (MMCR-2.3) that required compliance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation to reduce the impact to historic resources to a less than significant level for both Buildings #1 and #2. Loss of Building #1’s materials prevents the application of the mitigation measure and the Standards of Rehabilitation. The other two mitigation measures to reduce the impact to historic resources to a less than significant level included the preparation of a Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) (MM CR-2.1) and creation of a display illustrating the history of Edgewood Plaza (MM CR-2.2) are still applicable. The HABS survey was completed and has been used to facilitate the preparation of the SEIR and the project implementation. The SEIR concluded that there would be a new significant impact to historic resources due to the loss of Building #1. Because there was a complete loss of materials, only the Secretary of Interior’s Reconstruction approach for potential mitigation is applicable to address impacts to the site’s historic resources. The Reconstruction guidelines have typically been used in very selective situations, such as reconstruction of a historic museum, where there is a clear public benefit (usually educational). The guidelines include requirements such as preservation of any remaining historic materials and construction of only the original design. The complete list of Guidelines and Standards for Reconstruction are provided on pages 19-22 of the Draft SEIR. City of Palo Alto Page 8 However, application of the guidelines cannot reduce the demolition to a less than significant level, because none of the historic fabric would be retained. Because the proposed Building #1 is substantially consistent with the originally approved design and in the same location, the SEIR concludes that there would not be an impact to the character of Building #2. To address the new impact caused by the loss of Building #1, mitigation measure CR-2.3 has been amended. The mitigation measure as originally written still applies to Building #2. CR-2.3 now states: A new Building 1 will be constructed of new building materials that match the character and one-story form of the commercial buildings of Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, consistent with the previous approved building elevations. As a condition of approval, all facades of Building #1 will be wood- framed storefront systems that replicate the detail of the original 1957 window design. The final design and materials to be used in the renovation of Building #2 and reconstruction of Building #1 will be reviewed and approved by the Director and the Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment. In addition, staff proposes that the City’s historic consultant, Carey & Company, review and monitor the construction of Building #1, similar to what was required for Building #2. As noted above, application of the revised mitigation measure will not reduce the level of significance because none of the original building has been retained. The SEIR also concluded that there is a significant impact to Cumulative Cultural Resources, in that the loss of Building #1 combined with the recently approved demolition of the Edward Durrell Stone Building Complex (1959), a significant example of a mid-century building, at the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) campus (as part of the SUMC Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project approved in July 2011) has created a cumulatively considerable impact to mid-century modern buildings by prominent architects. The loss of Building #1 combined with the loss of the Stone Building Complex will therefore be a significant impact. As noted, the Final SEIR, together with the Draft SEIR, is considered the CEQA clearance document for the amended project. No new environmental impacts were identified following the release of the Draft SEIR. The Final SEIR confirmed that no comments were received for the Draft SEIR and no changes have been made. Because there are significant impacts that cannot be mitigated, the City Council must adopt overriding considerations in order to certify the SEIR. City of Palo Alto Page 9 Overriding considerations have been provided in the CEQA Resolution in Attachment A for the Council’s review and action. Reconstruction versus Retention/Rehabilitation of Building #1 Building #1 was originally approved to be dismantled and rebuilt to accommodate the redevelopment, and would have retained the character defining features, such as the turn- down roof, glue laminated or glulam beams, concrete masonry unit (cmu) block walls, and redwood siding. The walls were defined as a “kit of parts” to be reorganized to maintain the historic character of the buildings, while allowing the modernization of the building to accommodate a successful retail environment. The applicant proposes a complete reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials, but in the same location and configuration as previously approved by Council. All other components of the previously approved PC project, including the ten residences and park, would remain the same as approved by Council. Building #1 is proposed to be substantially similar to the originally approved design, which was based on the “kit of parts” concept that would ensure the building would retain the character defining features of the Eichler aesthetic: the block walls, the storefront glass, redwood siding and the glulam beams. The building would still include a new roof screen to hide roof-mounted equipment. The modifications include minor changes to the proportions of each element to accommodate modern tenants and requirements of the Building Code. These minor modifications have been carefully reviewed and found acceptable by the City’s Historic Preservation Planner. Similar modifications to Building #2 have been reviewed and approved by the City, also with consultation by the City’s historic consultant, Carey & Company. The applicant will also be required to install a plaque, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, identifying the building as a reconstruction in accordance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Reconstruction. Staff is also recommending that Carey & Company be retained to monitor the building permit process and construction for Building #1. This will also be critical for the installation of the window frames, discussed below. Storefront Windows Given that the proposal is for reconstruction, replication of the original storefront window system is now possible. The original approval allowed installation of simpler wood window frames. Building #1 can now be rebuilt in a design significantly closer to its original appearance than the altered building that was demolished. The original wood window frames of both Eichler buildings were a more complex design that included narrow full-height projecting moldings on either side of the glass, which gave the windows a streamlined, modern look. Because one storefront at the rear of Building #2 was preserved intact since 1957, the City and the applicant’s historic consultant is able to use that storefront as a model to guide the City of Palo Alto Page 10 reconstruction of Buildings #2 and #1 to better approximate its original 1957 design. The reconstruction of Building #1 with the custom made windows would provide a much more historically correct design than was found in the building that was demolished, and more correct than the version originally approved. Working closely with the City’s historic consultant, the applicant now has custom-made replicas for the rehabilitation of Building #2, and will do the same for Building #1, should the amendment be approved. Although the loss of a historic building cannot be mitigated, the historic accuracy of the replacement structure would be increased with the installation of these more complex window frames. Staff has determined that, because the storefront glass system was a large part of the original design, this requirement provides a significant historic benefit to the project. This addition, in some ways, will result in a building that is more similar to the original design, although constructed of all new materials. This historic enhancement will also improve the historic integrity of the remaining historic building, Building #2. Public Benefits and Penalties As part of the original PC rezoning, the applicant proposed to provide the following public benefits to satisfy the second PC finding: 1) preservation of a historically significant Eichler designed shopping center, 2) an approximately 20,600 sq. ft. grocery store, 3) an approximately 0.20 acre park with an on-site display highlighting Joseph Eichler’s achievements, and 4) three electric vehicle car chargers. The applicant will still be able to provide the second, third and fourth public benefits. However, due to the demolition of Building 1, the character of the preservation benefit will need to be modified. The applicant is also requesting that the City weigh his unexpected costs during the consideration of penalties and public benefits. The applicant has had to increase his cost by over $200,000 for complications regarding the traffic signal modification and the electric vehicle chargers. Additional costs have also included the cost of the preparation of the SEIR ($43,000) and the construction monitoring and plan review by the historic consultant ($15,000). Because the applicant is proposing a PC amendment, the City can consider whether additional public benefits should be required to compensate for the benefits lost by the demolition of Building #1. The installation of a storefront window system on Buildings #1 and #2 that replicates the original wood window frames of the original Eichler design can be considered a public benefit. The window frames feature a more complex, three-dimensional design that included narrow full-height projecting moldings on either side of the glass. The cost for installing the new frames will be over $250,000. The installation of the new frames on Building City of Palo Alto Page 11 #2 has begun and it was anticipated that construction would be completed in late September. The City’s consultant has been carefully reviewing the entire process. Although Building #1 has been lost, the project continues to provide the public benefit of the preservation (or re-creation) of a historic design, preservation of the historic Building #2, a public park, a grocery store and the rehabilitation of a public sign. Construction of Building #1 will result in a project that more closely resembles the original center than it would without the building. Possible Public Benefits West Bayshore Road Sidewalk During the original public hearings for this project, there were requests to require the construction of sidewalks along the site’s West Bayshore Road frontage. Sidewalks were not required because West Bayshore Road to the north of the site does not have sidewalks and this portion of West Bayshore Road frontage is not designed for pedestrian activity. However, in response to the request by area residents, the City has incorporated the construction of sidewalks on West Bayshore Road as a future project in the Bike and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (adopted July 2012). Staff has consulted both with Transportation and Public Works staff regarding the feasibility of the construction of sidewalks. The cost estimate for construction of sidewalk on one side of West Bayshore from the project site to the City limits for a length of approximately 1,600 feet, excluding drainage cost, is approximately $144,000. The City Council could require the applicant to contribute towards the work to be completed by the City as part of its Capital Improvement Program, as a public benefit. This option would directly benefit this neighborhood. However, the construction of sidewalks in this area would result in the loss of approximately 10 potential parking spaces. The parking spaces are not official spaces but areas in the unfinished dirt edge that are large enough to accommodate vehicles. Historic Rehabilitation Contribution As an alternative, the applicant could make a contribution to the restoration of a publicly owned, historic resource in Palo Alto. For example, the applicant could contribute funding towards improvements of the University Avenue Multi-modal Transit Depot, which is the second busiest station for the Caltrain system. The Streamline Modern style station is designated as a Category 1 resource on the City’s historic inventory and is also on the National Registry of Historic Places. This is just one example; there are other publicly owned buildings in Palo Alto that could also benefit from rehabilitation funds. If appropriate, these funds could be stored in a reserve account, and be made available for use toward a specific project when directed by the Council. This public benefit is appropriate because the proceeds would be for historic rehabilitation in exchange for the loss of a historic resource. City of Palo Alto Page 12 Penalties Because this is a PC and one of the primary community benefits has been removed, the Council has some discretion in determining the best approach for assessing penalties. While at a minimum the penalty should serve as a deterrent to future violations, the penalties could also provide a vehicle for additional public benefits. The approaches include consideration of possible savings by the applicant by being allowed to continue the project, use of the City’s existing penalty system, and typical practices by other cities. City Council had directed staff to provide them with recommendations regarding penalties for the demolition of Building #1. Council specifically requested that staff make a recommendation of the fine based on the amount of the savings likely to be achieved by the developer from moving forward with the construction of the housing. The applicant has not yet received building permit because a Final Map has not been issued and has not been able to begin construction. The Final Map cannot be approved until the SEIR is certified for the revised project. However, the applicant has stated that the ability to move forward with the review of the building permit for the homes has allowed the loan financing to proceed. The cost of capital or interest “savings” is approximately $52,800 because work was allowed for the 6 months following Council’s March 4th authorization to continue. Accordingly, using this methodology a penalty of $52,800 would be appropriate. The Municipal Code allows the City to fine applicants for a variety of code violations, based on the type of infraction. Palo Alto’s standard administrative penalty for violating a building permit condition is $500. A daily fine can be levied in situations where the applicant has the ability to correct the violation. In this situation, a daily fine is not applicable as there is no feasible method for correcting the violation. In addition, a one-time penalty of $500 is grossly inadequate for the subject violation. An alternate method, which has been used by other cities, is to charge double or triple the building permit fee for code violations. The building permit fee is based on the valuation of the construction cost and the scope of work for all trades (i.e. lighting, plumbing, etc.). The building permit fee for the shell that was charged for Building 1 was $9,443.17, or about 1.5 percent for a valuation of $600,000. The City could use this rationale to fine the applicant $9,443.17 (or double) for the illegal demolition. Additionally, given the special circumstance of the demolition of an historic structure, an additional fine may be warranted. There is a specific fine of $1,000 authorized in the City Code for demolition of a downtown historic structure. If a similar fine were added to the building permit fee, a total of $10,443.17 could be assessed. According to the applicant, the cost of the construction is approximately 25-30% higher, or between $150,000 and $180,000 (based on the original valuation), than expected. This excludes site construction and the additional cost due to the custom made windows. The cost of the custom made windows will add approximately $162,000 to the total construction cost of City of Palo Alto Page 13 Building #1. This also excludes the cost of the electrical vehicle charging stations and the traffic signal modifications discussed above. If the building permit fee were to be evaluated again, the valuation would be $912,000 or $942,000. If the cost of the revised building permit fee was to be used as a penalty, then a possible fine would be between $13,680 (double the fee) and $28,260 and (triple the fee). As an alternative, the City could charge a percentage of the construction cost of the project because of the significant loss. If ten percent is used, the fine can be between $91,200 and $94,200. Although typical practice would be to charge double or triple the building permit fee and the cost of the project has increased significantly, given that a significant structure has been lost and a required public benefit can no longer be provided, the higher amount would be appropriate. The PTC recommended the $94,200 penalty amount as an appropriate penalty. In addition, the PTC recommended that the penalty be applied towards a city historic fund to help compensate for the loss of the resource. As an alternative, if there is neighborhood support, the PTC is requesting that the Council also consider applying the penalty to the Bayshore Road sidewalk improvements. Staff has consulted with various cities regarding their approaches for implementing penalties for the illegal demolition of historic resources. Cities consulted included Berkeley, San Jose, Burlingame, Menlo Park, and Los Gatos. Those cities do not have ordinances that identify specific penalty fees for illegal demolition. (As a side note, staff will continue its research and will likely recommend a separate fine for demolition of historic buildings in connection with the Administrative Penalty update.) The City of Pasadena requires an automatic construction delay of 6 months for illegal demolitions. As discussed above, those cities have required payment of double to triple the building permit fees as a penalty. The applicant has and will continue to incur costs associated with the delay due to the demolition. The costs include the preparation of the SEIR, hiring of the historic consultant and the fees for the PC Amendment. Final Map The purpose of the final map is to subdivide the subject into one commercial parcel, which would include the 0.20 acre park, and ten residential fee simple lots. The Final Map and the Ordinance for the original PC Zoning and Tentative Map have been provided for the Council’s information. Staff of the Planning and Public Works Departments have reviewed the Final Map (Attachment D) and have determined that it is consistent with the approved Tentative Map. The map is consistent with the approved Tentative Map site layout, which was designed to meet the requirements of both the original Planned Community Zoning and the proposed Amendment. The map also satisfies all approval conditions for the Tentative Map, including the preparation of a Subdivision Improvement Agreement, Park Maintenance Agreement, and Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Agreement. The City Attorney, Public Works Department and Community Services Department have reviewed the agreements and concur. According to City of Palo Alto Page 14 the State Subdivision Map Act, the City Council must therefore approve the Final Map if it complies with the approved Tentative Map. Resource Impact The project’s addition of 10 residential units, along with its creation of 38,400 square feet of retail space to the existing shopping center, would yield the City additional annual revenues in the form of property taxes, sales taxes, and utility user taxes, estimated in the range of $100,000 to $150,000. One-time revenues would include impact fees of approximately $1.6 million and documentary Transfer Fees of approximately $0.07 million. On the expenditure side, the project’s residential portion will create additional demand for City services, but these should be offset by the required development impact fees. Environmental Review A Final Supplemental Environmental Impact report (Final SEIR) was prepared for the project, with a focus on impacts to historic resources, as discussed above. The Draft SEIR was circulated for public review between May 17 and July 20, 2013. The Final EIR was circulated on September 5, 2013, confirming that no comments were received by the comment end date. CEQA requires that Final SEIR be circulated a minimum of ten days prior to actions by the decision making body, which is the City Council. Copies of the Draft and Final SEIR have previously been distributed to the City Council. The Draft and Final SEIR, as well as the original Final EIR, Draft EIR, and First Amendment are also available online on the City’s website: http://goo.gl/PjnreG. Attachments:  Attachment A: Resolution (PDF)  Attachment B: Ordinance (Exhibits include location map and original Ordinance) (PDF)  Attachment C: Location Map (PDF)  Attachment D: Historic Resources Board Staff Report (without attachments) and Minutes dated August 21, 2013 (PDF)  Attachment E: Planning and Transportation Commission Staff Report (without attachments) and Draft Minutes (PDF)  Attachment F: Applicant's Development Schedule Letter (PDF)  Attachment G: Applicant's Cost Savings Letter (PDF)  Attachment H: Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (PDF)  Attachment I: Public Correspondence (PDF)  Attachment J: Project Plans (Council Members Only) (TXT) NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 1 Resolution No _________ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Certifying the Adequacy of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Edgewood Plaza Project Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act and Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the Statement of Overriding Considerations The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. Introduction and Certification. (a) The City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”), in the exercise of its independent judgment, makes and adopts the following findings to comply with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”; Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21000 et seq.), and Sections 15091, 15092, and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines (14 Cal. Code Regs., § 15000 et seq.). All statements set forth in this Resolution constitute formal findings of the City Council, including the statements set forth in this paragraph. These findings are made relative to the conclusions of the City of Palo Alto Edgewood Plaza Project Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2011022030) (the “Final SEIR”), which includes the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (“Draft SEIR”). The Final SEIR addresses the environmental impacts of the implementation of the Edgewood Plaza Project (the “Project”, as further defined in Section 2(b) below) and is incorporated herein by reference. These findings are based upon the entire record of proceedings for the Project. (b) Mitigation measures associated with the potentially significant impacts of the Project will be implemented through the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program described below, which is the responsibility of the City. (c) The City of Palo Alto is the Lead Agency pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21067 as it has the principal responsibility to approve and regulate the Project. Sand Hill Property Company is the Project applicant. (d) The City exercised its independent judgment in accordance with Public Resources Code section 20182.1(c), in retaining the independent consulting firm David J. Powers & Associates, Inc. (“Powers & Associates”) to prepare the Final SEIR, and Powers & Associates prepared the Final SEIR under the supervision and at the direction of the City’s Director of Planning and Community Environment. (e) The City, through Powers & Associates, initially prepared the Draft SEIR and circulated it for review by responsible and trustee agencies and the public and submitted it to the State Clearinghouse for review and comment by state agencies, for a comment period which ran from May 1, through July 20, 2013. As noted above, the Final SEIR includes the Draft SEIR. No comments were received and no changes were made in the Final SEIR. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 2 (f) The City’s Planning and Transportation Committee has reviewed the Final SEIR and a draft of these findings and has provided its recommendations to the City Council regarding certification of the Final SEIR. The City Council has independently reviewed the Final SEIR and has considered the Planning and Transportation Committee’s recommendations in making these findings. (g) Based upon review and consideration of the information contained therein, the City Council hereby certifies that the Final EIR was completed in compliance with CEQA, and reflects the City of Palo Alto’s independent judgment and analysis. The City Council has considered evidence and arguments presented during consideration of the Project and the Final EIR. In determining whether the Project may have a significant impact on the environment, and in adopting the findings set forth below, the City Council certifies that it has complied with Public Resources Code sections 21081, 21081.5, and 21082.2. (h) Section 6 of the Final SEIR shows all revisions which the Final SEIR made to the Draft SEIR. All references to the Draft SEIR in these findings include references to all revisions to the Draft SEIR made in the Final SEIR. Having reviewed this section and the Final SEIR as a whole, the City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that no significant new information has been added to the Final SEIR so as to warrant recirculation of all or a portion of the Draft SEIR. Likewise, the City Council has considered all public comments and other information submitted into the record since publication of the Final SEIR, and further finds that none of that additional information constitutes significant new information requiring recirculation of the Final SEIR. SECTION 2. Project Information. The following Project information is supplied to provide context for the discussion and findings that follow, but is intended as a summary and not a replacement for the information contained in the Draft SEIR, Final SEIR, or Project approvals. (a) Project Objectives The Project Objectives of the Project applicant are set forth in Section 2.4 of the Draft EIR, which is incorporated herein by reference. (b) Project Description The proposed Project is an amendment to the approved project that consisted of the renovation of three existing commercial buildings at the Edgewood Shopping Center containing approximately 38,400 square feet of retail uses, and the redevelopment of the northern portion of the site with ten single-family residences and an approximately 10,000 square-foot park. The amendment would be to allow the reconstruction of one of the two historic Eichler retail buildings (Building #1) in the already approved location and configuration. Building #1 was approved to be dismantled and rehabilitated onsite as one of the primary public benefits, but NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 3 was demolished instead. A conceptual site plan of the proposed Project is shown on Figure 4. A breakdown of the proposed development areas and building square footage are shown in Table 2.3-1. Conceptual elevations of the commercial buildings are shown on Figures 5-10, and conceptual residential elevations are shown on Figure 11. (All references to figures and tables are to those appearing in the Draft SEIR, as modified where applicable in the Final SEIR.) A complete description of the Project as proposed by the Project applicant is set forth in Section 2.3 of the Draft SEIR, as modified in the Final SEIR. (c) Required Approvals The approvals required by the City as lead agency for implementation of the Project include: A. Planned Community Zoning B. Final Subdivision Map C. Tree Removal Permits SECTION 3. Record of Proceedings. (a) For purposes of CEQA, CEQA Guidelines section 15091(e), and these findings, the Record of Proceedings for the Project includes, but is not limited to, the following documents: (1) The Final SEIR, which consists of the Edgewood Plaza Project Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, published and circulated for public review and comment by the City from May 17 through July 20, 2013 (the “Draft SEIR”), and the Edgewood Plaza Project Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Report, published and made available on September 5, 2013, and all appendices, reports, documents, studies, memoranda, maps, testimony, and other materials related thereto; (2) All public notices issued by the City in connection with the Project and the preparation of the Draft SEIR and the Final SEIR, including but not limited to public notices for all public workshops held to seek public comments and input on the Project and the Notice of Preparation, Notice of Completion, Notice of Availability; (3) All written and oral communications submitted by agencies or interested members of the general public during the public review period for the Draft EIR, NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 4 including oral communications made at public hearings or meetings held on the Project approvals; (4) The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; (5) All findings and resolutions adopted by the City Council in connection with the Project, and all documents cited or referred to therein; (6) All final reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating to the Project prepared by the City of Palo Alto and consultants with respect to the City of Palo Alto’s compliance with the requirements of CEQA, and with respect to the City of Palo Alto’s actions on the Project, including all staff reports and attachments to all staff reports for all public meetings held by the City; (7) Minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all public meetings and/or public hearings held by the City of Palo Alto in connection with the Project; (8) Matters of common knowledge to the City of Palo Alto, including, but not limited to, federal, state, and local laws and regulations; (9) Any documents expressly cited in these findings, in addition to those cited above; and (10) Any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code section 21167.6(e). (b) The custodian of the documents comprising the record of proceedings is the Director of Planning and Community Environment, City of Palo Alto, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California, 94301. (c) Copies of all of the above-referenced documents, which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City of Palo Alto’s decision on the Project is based, are and have been available upon request at the offices of the Planning and Community Environment Department, City of Palo Alto, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California, 94301, and other locations in the City of Palo Alto. (d) The City of Palo Alto has relied upon all of the documents, materials, and evidence listed above in reaching its decision on the Project. (e) The City Council hereby finds, determines and declares that the above- referenced documents, materials, and evidence constitute substantial evidence (as that term is defined by section 15384 of the CEQA Guidelines) to support each of the findings contained herein. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 5 SECTION 4. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. (a) CEQA requires the lead agency approving a project to adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the changes made to the project that it has adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. An MMRP has been prepared and is recommended for adoption by the City Council concurrently with the adoption of these findings to ensure compliance with mitigation measures during Project implementation. As required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the MMRP designates responsibility and anticipated timing for the implementation of the mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR. The MMRP will remain available for public review during the compliance period. (b) The City Council hereby adopts the MMRP for the Project attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference, and finds, determines, and declares that adoption of the MMRP will ensure enforcement and continued imposition of the mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR, and set forth in the MMRP, in order to mitigate or avoid significant impacts on the environment. SECTION 5. Significant and Unavoidable Impacts. The Draft SEIR and the Final SEIR documented that the Project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts which cannot be adequately mitigated through the adoption and implementation of feasible mitigation measures. Those impacts, along with mitigation measures to mitigate them to the extent feasible, are listed below as referenced in the Draft SEIR. 3.1 Cultural Resources Impact CR: Demolition of Building 1 represents a substantial adverse alteration of the physical characteristics of a historical resource and a change in the significant of the resource. Reconstruction of the proposed replacement building would not reduce the adverse impacts to the physical characteristics of the former building that conveyed its historical significance and eligibility for the California Register of Historical Resources and the National Register of Historic Places. a) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section 3.1.3 of the Draft SEIR. b) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and as further described in the remainder of these findings: Mitigation Measures CR-2.2 and CR-2.3. MM CR-2.2: The applicant shall create a display illustrating the history of the Edgewood NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 6 Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, prior to approval of final occupancy. MM CR-2.3: Distinctive materials and defining architectural features, finishes, and construction techniques of Building 2 including windows, frames, and eaves will be retained to the extent possible, as the building elements will require some alterations due to ADA compliance, public safety, building code compliance, or deteriorated condition. The existing building components may be constructed out of new building materials that match the character and form of the existing, if reuse of existing building components is not feasible. Prior to the rehabilitation of Building 2, a qualified historic preservation architect shall review the plans for the remodeled buildings and verify that the work on these buildings is in keeping with the buildings’ original design and applicable Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, such as Standards #5, 6, 7, and 9. A new Building 1 will be constructed of new building materials that match the character and one-story form of the commercial buildings of Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, consistent with the previously approved building elevations. As a condition of approval, all facades of Building 1 will be wood-framed storefront systems that replicate the detail of the original 1957 window design. The final design and materials to be used in the renovation of Building 2 and reconstruction of Building 1 will be reviewed and approved by the Director and the Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department. c) Findings. The above-noted mitigation measures will reduce the severity of this potentially significant impact by: (i) creating a display illustrating the history of the Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes prior to approval of final occupancy; (ii) requiring that the distinctive and defining architectural features, finishes and construction techniques of Buildings #1, including windows, frames, and eaves, be retained to the extent feasible during the reconstruction of Building #1, subject to verification by qualified professionals that work on these resources is completed in conformance with applicable federal standards; and (iii) requiring review and approval of the final design and materials to be used in the renovation of these buildings by the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department; thereby ensuring that this Impact is mitigated to the extent feasible. However, these measures would not fully mitigate this Impact to a less-than-significant level. d) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR- 2.2 and 2.3 would lessen the Project’s impacts on the described historical resources by reconstructing Building #1 as originally approved and documenting the significant historical characteristics of Buildings #1. However, the reconstruction of Building #1 would not result in reversing the demolition, and therefore this reconstruction would still result in a significant impact to historic resources. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 7 e) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating to historical resources as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations below. Section 4.0 Cumulative Impacts f) Impact Cumulative Impact: The Edgewood Plaza site is considered historically significant under federal, state and City of Palo Alto criteria. The demolition of Building #1 and reconstruction with all new materials would result in a significant impact to cumulative cultural resources. As with all historic structures of a particular design or time period, there are a finite number of representative structures that exist. Of the two Eichler commercial buildings within the City of Palo Alto deemed historically significant, one has now been demolished. As a result, Building #2 is the only remaining representative Eichler commercial building within Palo Alto. As discussed in the Edgewood Plaza Final EIR, the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) project would result in the loss of the Stone Building Complex, which was designed by E.D. Stone and constructed in 1959. The SUMC project has been identified as resulting in a significant cumulative historic resources impact due to the small body of E.D. Stone’s work in Palo Alto that retains sufficient integrity to be eligible as historic resources. The Stone Building Complex and Building #1 are of a similar time period, both represent a modern design aesthetic, and both are significant examples of their respective architects. Therefore, the loss of Building 1 combined with the loss of the Stone Building Complex is a cumulatively considerable impact relative to mid-century modern buildings by prominent architects in Palo Alto. g) Potential Impact. The impact identified above is described and discussed in Section 3.1.3 of the Draft SEIR. h) Mitigation Measures. The following mitigation measures will be adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and as further described in the remainder of these findings: Mitigation Measures CR-2.2 and CR-2.3. MM CR-2.2: The applicant shall create a display illustrating the history of the Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, prior to approval of final occupancy. MM CR-2.3: Distinctive materials and defining architectural features, finishes, and construction techniques of Building 2 including windows, frames, and eaves will be retained to the extent possible, as the building elements will require some alterations due to ADA compliance, public safety, building code compliance, or deteriorated condition. The existing building components may be constructed out of new building materials that match the character and form of the existing, if reuse of existing building NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 8 components is not feasible. Prior to the rehabilitation of Building 2, a qualified historic preservation architect shall review the plans for the remodeled buildings and verify that the work on these buildings is in keeping with the buildings’ original design and applicable Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, such as Standards #5, 6, 7, and 9. A new Building 1 will be constructed of new building materials that match the character and one-story form of the commercial buildings of Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, consistent with the previously approved building elevations. As a condition of approval, all facades of Building 1 will be wood-framed storefront systems that replicate the detail of the original 1957 window design. The final design and materials to be used in the renovation of Building 2 and reconstruction of Building 1 will be reviewed and approved by the Director and the Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department. i) Findings. The above-noted mitigation measures will reduce the severity of this potentially significant impact by: (i) creating a display illustrating the history of the Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes prior to approval of final occupancy; (ii) requiring that the distinctive and defining architectural features, finishes and construction techniques of Buildings #1, including windows, frames, and eaves, be retained to the extent feasible during the reconstruction of Building #1, subject to verification by qualified professionals that work on these resources is completed in conformance with applicable federal standards; and (iii) requiring review and approval of the final design and materials to be used in the renovation of these buildings by the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department; thereby ensuring that this Impact is mitigated to the extent feasible. However, these measures would not fully mitigate this Impact to a less-than-significant level. j) Remaining Impacts. There are no other feasible mitigation measures available to mitigate this impact to a less-than-significant level. Implementation of Mitigation Measures CR- 2.2 and 2.3 would lessen the Project’s impacts on the described historical resources by reconstructing Building #1 as originally approved and documenting the significant historical characteristics of Buildings #1. However, the reconstruction of Building #1 would not result in reversing the demolition, and therefore this reconstruction would still result in a significant impact to cumulative historic resources. k) Overriding Considerations. The environmental, social, economic and other benefits of the Project override any remaining significant adverse impacts of the Project relating to historical resources as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations below. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 9 SECTION 6. Findings Regarding Project Alternatives. Public Resources Code section 21002 prohibits a public agency from approving a project if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of the project. When a lead agency finds, even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, that a project will still cause one or more significant environmental effects that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided, it must, prior to approving the project as mitigated, first determine whether there are any project alternatives that are feasible and that would substantially lessen or avoid the project's significant impacts. Under CEQA, "feasibility" includes "desirability" to the extent that it is based on a reasonable balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors, and an alternative may be deemed by the lead agency to be "infeasible" if it fails to adequately promote the project applicant's and/or the lead agency's primary underlying goals and objectives for the project. Thus, a lead agency may reject an alternative, even if it would avoid or substantially lessen one or more significant environmental effects of the project, if it finds that the alternative's failure to adequately achieve the objectives for the project, or other specific and identifiable considerations, make the alternative infeasible. The City Council certifies that the Final SEIR describes a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project, which could feasibly obtain the basic objectives of the Project, and that the City Council has evaluated the comparative merits of the alternatives. As described below, the City Council has decided to approve the Project as proposed, and to reject the remainder of the alternatives, as summarized below. Sections 2.3 of the Draft SEIR set forth the Project applicant’s objectives for the Project. That list is incorporated herein by reference. In light of the applicant’s objectives for the Project, and given that the Project is expected to result in certain significant environmental effects even after the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, as identified above, the City hereby makes the following findings with respect to whether one or more of the alternatives evaluated in the Draft EIR could feasibly accomplish most of the goals and objectives for the Project and substantially lessen or avoid one or more of its potentially significant effects. No Project Alternative The No Project Alternative – Current Conditions Scenario is discussed at Section 7.2 of the Draft SEIR. The No Project – Current Conditions Scenario is hereby rejected as infeasible because it would not achieve the Project objectives, as explained in Sections 7.3.2, 7.3.3 and 7.3.4 of the Draft SEIR. Building Design Alternative The Building Design Alternative is discussed in Section 7.4.1 of the Draft SEIR. The Building Design Alternative is hereby rejected as infeasible because it would not achieve most NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 10 of the Project objectives, as explained in Sections 7.4.3, 7.4.4 and 7.5 of the Draft SEIR. SECTION 7. Statement of Overriding Considerations Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines, this City Council adopts and makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations regarding the remaining significant unavoidable impacts of the Project, as discussed above, and the anticipated economic, social and other benefits of the Project. The City finds that: (i) the majority of the significant impacts of the Project will be reduced to less- than-significant and acceptable levels by the mitigation measures described in the Final EIR and approved and adopted by these Findings; (ii) the City’s approval of the Project will result in certain significant adverse environmental effects that cannot be avoided even with the incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures into the Project; and (iii) there are no other feasible mitigation measures or feasible Project alternatives that would further mitigate or avoid the remaining significant environmental effects. The significant effects that have not been mitigated to a less-than-significant level and are therefore considered significant and unavoidable are identified in Section 6 above. Despite these potentially significant impacts, it is the City’s considered judgment that the benefits offered by the Project outweigh the potentially adverse effects of these significant impacts. The substantial evidence supporting the following described benefits of the Project can be found in the preceding findings and in the record of proceedings. The benefits of the Project which the City Council finds serve as “overriding considerations” justifying its approval include the following: (1) Rehabilitation of Building #2 and reconstruction of Building #1 in a design significantly closer to its original appearance with the inclusion of custom made windows in the original design, with narrow full height frames and projecting moldings. Rehabilitation of the original historic monument sign for the shopping center. (2) Redevelopment and rehabilitation of a high-quality shopping and commercial area on the Edgewood Plaza site that will serve the community, including the provision of a new grocery store for the local neighborhood, in a manner that reflects the mid- century aesthetic and design of the existing buildings and surrounding Duveneck/ Saint Francis (Edgewood and Green Gables) neighborhood. Reconstruction of Building #1 will enable a complete restoration of the shopping center. (3) Provision of a grocery store in the 20,600 sq. ft. building. The commercial property owner shall ensure the continued use of the 20,600 sq. ft. building as a grocery store for the life of the Project; NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 11 (4) Provision of 0.20 acre public park, via public access easements in perpetuity. The park would be maintained by the commercial property owner and shall not be used for seating/activities associated with the retail uses. The Applicant shall provide an on-site display highlighting Joseph Eichler’s achievements in the Park. (5) Payment to the City of $94,200 to be used for the restoration of a publicly owned or accessible historic resource. (6) Subject to support by the immediate neighborhood, Applicant shall construct a sidewalk along west side of West Bayshore from Channing to the Palo Alto city border. (7) Provision of two Level 2 Electric Vehicle chargers and one Level 2 Electric Vehicle charger. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 12 EXHIBIT A MITIGATION MONITORING OR REPORTING PROGRAM EDGEWOOD PLAZA PROJECT SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Palo Alto File No. 08PLN-00157/10PLN-00198/13PLN-00197 State Clearinghouse No. 2011022030 CITY OF PALO ALTO JULY 2013 NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 13 P R E F A C E Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a Lead Agency to adopt a Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program whenever it approves a project for which measures have been required to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The purpose of the monitoring or reporting program is to ensure compliance with the mitigation measures during project implementation. The Supplemental Environmental Impact Report concluded that the implementation of the project could result in significant effects on the environment and mitigation measures were incorporated into the proposed project. This Mitigation Monitoring or Reporting Program addresses those measures in terms of how and when they will be implemented. The previously approved project included three mitigation measures to reduce impacts to historic resources on the site. Mitigation Measure (MM) MM CR-2.1, completion of a Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) documentation of Building 1 and Building 2 has been completed and is not referenced further. MM CR-2.2, creation of a display illustrating the history of the Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, will be completed prior to approval of final occupancy and is included below. The third mitigation measure, MM CR-2.3 is included in its entirety, and has been revised to reflect the demolition of Building 1 and proposed changes in the project. The changes affect the reconstruction of Building 1 only. No changes have been made to the approved mitigation for rehabilitation of Building 2. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131134 14 MITIGATION MONITORING OR REPORTING PROGRAM Edgewood Plaza Project, 2080 Channing Avenue, Palo Alto Palo Alto File No. 08PLN-00157/10PLN-00198/13PLN-00197, State Clearinghouse No. 2011022030 Environmental Impacts Mitigation Measures Responsibility for Compliance Method of Compliance and Oversight of Implementation Timing of Compliance Cultural Resources Impact: Demolition of Building 1 represents a substantial adverse alteration of the physical characteristics of a historical resource and a change in the significant of the resource. Reconstruction of the proposed replacement building would not reduce the adverse impacts to the physical characteristics of the former building that conveyed its historical significance and eligibility for the California Register of Historical Resources and the National Register of Historic Places [Significant Impact] MM CR-2.2: The applicant shall create a display illustrating the history of the Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, prior to approval of final occupancy. MM CR-2.3: Distinctive materials and defining architectural features, finishes, and construction techniques of Building 2 including windows, frames, and eaves will be retained to the extent possible, as the building elements will require some alterations due to ADA compliance, public safety, building code compliance, or deteriorated condition. The existing building components may be constructed out of new building materials that match the character and form of the existing, if reuse of existing building components is not feasible. Prior to the rehabilitation of Building 2, a qualified historic preservation architect shall review the plans for the remodeled buildings and verify that the work on these buildings is in keeping with the buildings’ original design and applicable Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, such as Standards #5, 6, 7, and 9. A new Building 1 will be constructed of new building materials that match the character and one-story form of the commercial buildings of Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, consistent with the previously approved building elevations. As a condition of approval, all facades of Building 1 will be wood-framed storefront systems that replicate the detail of the original 1957 window design. The final design and materials to be used in the renovation of Building 2 and reconstruction of Building 1 will be reviewed and approved by the Director and the Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department. (Significant Impact After the Implementation of Mitigation Measures) Project applicant and consulting historic preservation architect. All measures will be required as part of development permits, and will be printed on all construction documents, contracts, and project plans prior to issuance of development permits. Oversight of implementation by the City of Palo Alto Director of Planning and Community Environment and the City’s Historic Resources Plan Prior to the start of demolition and construction, as specified. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 1 Ordinance No.________ Ordinance of the Council of the City Of Palo Alto Amending Ordinance 5150 (amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code [The Zoning Map] to Change the Classification of Property Located at 2080 Channing Avenue [Edgewood Plaza] to PC Planned Community Zone (PC 5150)) to Allow the Reconstruction of Building #1 with All New Materials. The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows: SECTION 1. (a) On April 9, 2012, the City Council granted Planned Community (PC) Zoning Ordinance 5150 (“Project”) to permit the redevelopment of the property commonly known as the Edgewood Shopping Center located at 2080 Channing Avenue (the “Subject Property”). A copy of Ordinance 5150 is attached as Exhibit C and incorporated by reference. As part of that PC, the applicant Sand Hill Property Company (Applicant) was required to rehabilitate Building 1, identified as a historic resource, in accordance with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. (b) In September 2012, the Applicant without permission of the City, demolished Building 1 rendering reconstruction infeasible. The City immediately put a Stop Work Order on the remaining portion of the Project. Subsequently, the City permitted certain aspects of the Project to move forward. (c) On February 26, 2013, the Applicant applied to the City for an amendment to Planned Community Zoning (PC) 5150 to substitute the reconstruction of Building 1 for the rehabilitation of Building 1 to accommodate the uses set forth below. (d) The Historic Resources Board, at its meeting of August 21, 2013, reviewed the Project and recommended the City Council approve the amendment with associated draft conditions of approval ‘Exhibit B.’ (e) The Planning and Transportation Commission, after a duly noticed public hearing held September 11, 2013, reviewed, considered, and recommended certification of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, then reviewed the Planned Community, and recommended that Section 18.08.040 (the Zoning Map) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code be amended to rezone the Subject Property to a new Planned Community zone for the proposed project depicted on ‘Exhibit A,’ (the “Project”), consistent with conditions included in the Planned Community zone related to allowable land uses and required development standards, and subject to provision of the public benefits outlined in this ordinance. Draft conditions of project approval “Exhibit B” attached to this document and incorporated by reference were presented to the PTC for review and comments. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 2 (f) The Palo Alto City Council, after due consideration of the proposed Project, the analysis of the City staff, and the conditions recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission, certified the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program, concurred with the recommendations from the PTC and the HRB, approved conditions of approval attached as Exhibit B hereto, and found that the proposed project and this Ordinance is in the public interest and will promote the public health, safety and welfare, as hereinafter set forth. (g) The Council finds that the findings made in Ordinance 5150 justifying the granting of Planned Community 5150 still apply to the Subject Property in that the Project will incorporate the modified community benefits described in Section (3)(f) hereof. SECTION 2. Ordinance 5150 amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the “Zoning Map,” is hereby amended as follows: The project is as depicted on the Development Plans dated February 2, 2012 and amended in Development Plans dated September 11, 2013, incorporated by reference, including the following new component: (a) Reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials in the originally approved location and configuration. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of Ordinance 5150, including any exhibits and conditions, shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 3. Section 4 of Ordinance 5150 is amended to additionally require compliance with (i) the February 29, 2012 Development Plans as amended on September 11, 2013, (ii) the conditions of project approval attached as Exhibit B, and (iii) any approved supplemental materials for the Subject Property, as submitted by the applicant pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC §18.38.090). In addition, Sections (f) and (g) shall be amended as follows: (f) Public Benefits: Development of the site under the provisions of the PC Planned Community District will result in public benefits not otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts. The Project includes the following public benefits that are inherent to the Project and in excess of those required by City zoning districts. NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 3 (1) Rehabilitation of Building #2 and reconstruction of Building #1 in a design significantly closer to its original appearance with the inclusion of custom made windows in the original design, with narrow full height frames and projecting moldings. Rehabilitation of the original historic monument sign for the shopping center. (2) Redevelopment and rehabilitation of a high-quality shopping and commercial area on the Edgewood Plaza site that will serve the community, including the provision of a new grocery store for the local neighborhood, in a manner that reflects the mid-century aesthetic and design of the existing buildings and surrounding Duveneck/Saint Francis (Edgewood and Green Gables) neighborhood. Reconstruction of Building #1 will enable a complete restoration of the shopping center. (3) Provision of a grocery store in the 20,600 sq. ft. building. The commercial property owner shall ensure the continued use of the 20,600 sq. ft. building as a grocery store for the life of the Project; (4) Provision of 0.20 acre public park, via public access easements in perpetuity. The park would be maintained by the commercial property owner and shall not be used for seating/activities associated with the retail uses. The Applicant shall provide an on-site display highlighting Joseph Eichler’s achievements in the Park. (5) Payment to the City of $94,200 to be used for the restoration of a publicly owned or accessible historic resource. (6) Subject to support by the immediate neighborhood, Applicant shall construct a sidewalk along west side of West Bayshore from Channing to the Palo Alto city border. (7) Provision of two Level 2 Electric Vehicle chargers and one Level 2 Electric Vehicle charger. (g) Development Schedule: The project is required to include a Development Schedule pursuant to PAMC §18.38.100. The approved Development Schedule is set forth below: NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 4 Construction of the Project shall commence immediately following the adoption of the PC zone, unless a change in the development schedule is approved by the Director of Planning and Community Environment, not to exceed a one year extension in time and only one such extension without a hearing, pursuant to PAMC §18.38.130. The total time for the project construction and occupancy of tenant spaces is expected to be 12 months following adoption of the PC zone, or by October 2014, unless extended by the Director for up to one additional year. SECTION 4. A Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for this project was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council certified the EIR and Mitigation Monitoring Program and adopted a resolution at its meeting of October7, 2013. SECTION 5. The plans referenced consist of plans titled “Edgewood Shopping Center” prepared by Kenneth Rodrigues & Partners, Burton Architecture, Sandis and the Guzzardo Partnership, dated February 29, 2012, including the Tentative Map for Edgewood Plaza, prepared by Sandis, dated September 11, 2013. // // // // // // // // // // // // NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 5 SECTION 6. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of its adoption (second reading). INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: __________________________ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney __________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment _________________________ Mayor _________________________ City Manager '"h. e ll! or r a l o Alto Edgewood Pl aza Location Map This mao is a product of the City 01 PiIIQ A.IIo GIS • •• NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 7 Exhibit B CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 2080 Channing Avenue – Edgewood Plaza/ File No. 13PLN-00197 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Planning and Transportation Divisions 1. The plans submitted to obtain all permits through the Building Inspection Division shall be in substantial conformance with the revised plans, project details and materials received on March 22, 2012 and as modified in plans received on September 11, 2013, except as modified to incorporate these conditions of approval. 2. All conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet of the plan set submitted to obtain any permit through the Building Inspection Division. 3. Construction details, colors, materials, and placement of the shopping center signs and roof mounted equipment shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review prior to submittal of the building permit. 4. All conditions required in PC-5150, including mitigation measures, are still applicable unless specifically amended by the document. 5. Prior to the submittal of a building permit application, a historic consultant shall be hired by the City and paid for the applicant to review the building permit submittal and construction of Building #1 to confirm compliance with this approval and mitigation requirements of the project’s Supplement Environmental Impact Report. 6. Building #1 shall be constructed of materials that were approved for use in Building #2 to the satisfaction of the Director of the Planning and Community Environment Department. 7. A plaque identifying Building #1 as a reconstructed building shall be installed on Building #1 to the satisfaction of the Director of the Planning and Community Environment Department. 8. Storefront glass shall not be obstructed by shelves or storage and shall remain primarily open to permit public viewing of interior of store, except as allowed by the Sign Ordinance. The Director may permit display of store’s merchandise or NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 8 other window display in his or her discretion provided it shall not impact the neighborhood serving retail environment. EIR Mitigation Measures 9. MM CR-2.2: The applicant shall create a display illustrating the history of the Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, prior to approval of final occupancy. 10. MM CR-2.3: Distinctive materials and defining architectural features, finishes, and construction techniques of Building 2 including windows, frames, and eaves will be retained to the extent possible to the satisfaction of the Director of the Planning and Community Environment Department, as the building elements will require some alterations due to ADA compliance, public safety, building code compliance, or deteriorated condition. The existing building components, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, may be constructed out of new building materials that match the character and form of the existing, if reuse of existing building components is not feasible. Prior to the rehabilitation of Building 2, a qualified historic preservation architect shall review the plans for the remodeled buildings and verify that the work on these buildings is in keeping with the buildings’ original design and applicable Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, such as Standards #5, 6, 7, and 9. 11. A new Building 1 will be constructed of new building materials that match the character and one-story form of the commercial buildings of Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, consistent with the previously approved building elevations. As a condition of approval, all facades of Building 1 will be wood- framed storefront systems that replicate the detail of the original 1957 window design. 12. The final design and materials to be used in the renovation of Building #2 and reconstruction of Building #1 will be reviewed and approved by the Director and the Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department. 13. Government Code Section 66020 provides that project applicant who desires to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project must initiate the protest at the time the development project is approved or conditionally approved or within ninety (90) days after the date that fees, dedications, reservations or exactions are imposed on the project. Additionally, procedural requirements for protesting these development fees, dedications, reservations and exactions are set forth in Government Code Section 66020. IF YOU FAIL TO INITIATE A PROTEST WITHIN THE 90-DAY PERIOD OR TO FOLLOW THE PROTEST PROCEDURES DESCRIBED IN GOVERNMENT CODE NOT YET APPROVED 131001 jb 0131135 9 SECTION 66020, YOU WILL BE BARRED FROM CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OR REASONABLENESS OF THE FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND EXACTIONS. 14. This matter is subject to the Code of Civil Procedures (CCP) Section 1094.5, and the time by which judicial review must be sought is governed by CCP Section 1094.6. Ordinance No. 5150 Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Classification of Property Located at 2080 Channing Avenue (Edgewood Plaza) from Planned Community (PC-1643) to PC Planned Community Zone (PC-5150) for the Renovation of the Three Existing Eichler Retail Structures, On-Site Relocation of One of the Retail Structures, Construction of Ten New Single-Family Homes, and Creation of a 0.20 Acre Park The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. (a) Sand Hill Property Company, ("the Applicant") applied on June 1,2010 to the City for approval of (1) a rezoning application (the "Project") for a new Planned Community (PC) district for a property located at 2080 Channing Avenue (the "Subject Property") to accommodate the uses set forth below and (2) a Tentative Map to subdivide the 3.58 site into one commercial lot, including a 0.20 acre park, dedicated to the City with public access easements and maintained by the commercial property owner, and ten single family residential lots. (b) The Tentative Map plan set, dated February 15,2012, and last revised on March 19, 2012 includes information on the existing parcels, onsite conditions, and the layout of the proposed new lots. These drawings are in compliance with the applicable provisions of the City's Subdivision Ordinance. These plans contain all information and notations required to be shown on a Tentative Map (per PAMC Sections 21.12 and 21.13), as well as the design requirements concerning the creation of lots, streets, walkways, and similar features (P AMC 21.20). (c) The Planning and Transportation Commission, at its meeting of April 27, 2011, acted favorably on the applicant's request for initiation of the Planned Community Zone process for the establishment of Planned Community Zone District No. PC-5150. (d) The Architectural Review Board, at its meeting of February 2, 2012, reviewed the Project design and recommended the City Council approve the project with associated draft conditions of approval 'Exhibit B.' (e) The Plmming and Transportation Commission, after a duly noticed public hearing held February 29,2012, reviewed, considered, and recommended certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report, then reviewed the Planned Community and Tentative Map and this ordinm1ce, and recommended that Section 18.08.040 (the Zoning Map) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code be amended to rezone the Subject Property to a new Planned Community zone for the proposed project depicted on 'Exhibit A,' (the "Project"), consistent with conditions included in the PlaImed Community zone related to 120313 dm0120529 1 allowable land uses and required development standards, and subject to provision of the public benefits outlined in this ordinance and recommended approval of the Tentative Map. Draft conditions of project approval "Exhibit B" attached to this document and incorporated by reference were presented to the PTC for review and comments. (f) The Palo Alto City Council, after due consideration of the proposed Project, the analysis of the City staff, and the conditions recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission, certified the Final Environmental Impact Report and Mitigation Monitoring Program, concurred with the recommendations from the PTC and the ARB, and found that the proposed project and this Ordinance is in the public interest and will promote the public health, safety and welfare, as hereinafter set forth. (g) The Council finds that (1) the Subject Property is so situated, and the use or uses proposed for the site are of such characteristics that the application of general districts or combining districts will not provide sufficient flexibility to allow for the Project; (2) development of the Subject Property under the provisions of the PC Planned Community District will result in public benefits not otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts, as set forth in Section (4)( c) hereof; and (3) the use or uses permitted, and the site development regulations applicable within the proposed district are consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (Goals, Policies, and proposed designation of Mixed Use for the Subject Property) and are compatible with existing and potential uses on adjoining sites or within the general vicinity. SECTION 2. Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the "Zoning Map," is hereby amended by changing the zoning of Subject Property from Planned Community (PC- 1643) to "PC Planned Community Zone 5150". SECTION 3. The City Council hereby finds with respect to the Subject Property that the project (the "Project") comprises the following uses included in this ordinance and a mixed use development, depicted on the Development Plans dated February 2, 2012, incorporated by reference, including the following components: (a) Renovation of an existing 37,965 sq. ft. shopping center, including relocation and renovation ofthe 10,000 sq. ft. retail building, renovation of the 7,800 sq. ft. retail building in place, and renovation of the 20,600 sq. ft. building in place for use as a grocery store, deletion of the outer parking lots and expansion of the remaining parking lot, and associated site improvements (b) Construction of ten detached residential units on fee simple lots along Channing Avenue, including five surface parking stalls and ten two-car garages. (c) Construction of a 0.20 acre park at the comer of Channing Avenue and St. Francis Drive. The park shall include public access easement so that it would be a public 120313 dm0120529 2 \ ) park to be maintained by the commercial property owner in perpetuity. There shall not be any use of the park for the purposes of the retail tenants. (d) A Tentative Map to subdivide the 3.58 acre site into eleven parcels. The first parcel (2.73 acres) would contain the existing grocery building, the other two retail buildings ("Buildings 1 and 2") and the new 0.20 acre park. The park would include a public access easement allowing use as a public park, and would be maintained by the owner of the commercial parcel. The remaining ten parcels (ranging from 3,376 to 4,026 sq. ft.) would be created for the ten residences. Private easements would be provided for the driveways and walkways. SECTION 4. The Development Plan for the Subject Property dated February 29,2012, and any approved supplemental materials for the Subject Property, as submitted by the applicant pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code (pAMC §18.38.090), shall be subject to the following permitted and conditional land uses and special limitations on land uses, development standards, parking and loading requirements, modifications to the development plans and provisions of public benefits outlined below, and conditions of project approval, attached and incorporated as "Exhibit B". (a) as follows: Permitted, Conditionally Permitted land uses shall be allowed and limited Permitted Uses (subject to the limitations below under Section 4(b)): (1) Ten residential units; (2) Retail Services (excluding liquor stores); (3) Eating and Drinking Services (excluding drive-in services); (4) Personal Services; (5) Neighborhood Business Services; (6) Financial Services (excluding drive-up services); (7) A 0.20 acre public park, via public access easements; (8) Accessory facilities and activities customarily associated with or essential to permitted uses, and operated incidental to the principal use. Conditionally Permitted Uses: (1) Small tutoring center or afterschool program center; 120313 drn 0120529 3 (2) Limited commercial recreation; (3) Farmer's Markets or similar. (b) Special limitations on land uses include the following: (1) The 20,600 sq. ft. building shall be primarily used for grocery uses only; (2) No medical office shall be permitted within the development; (3) No administrative office use shall be permitted within the development; (4) The "Retail" space as identified on the Development Plan shall be occupied by retail uses, personal service uses, eating and drinking services or customer serving financial services only, except where a conditional use permit is required in accordance with 4(a). (c) Development Standards: Development Standards for the site shall comply with the standards prescribed for the Planned Community (PC) Zone District (P AMC Chapter 18.38) and as described in Section Three and Section Four herein and in the Approved Development Plans. (d) Parking and Loading Requirements: 120313 dm0120529 In addition to the parking and loading requirements specified in P AMC §§18.52 and 18.54, a Transportation Demand Management Plan ("TDM") Program shall be developed for the Project in accordance with P AMC §18.52.050(d) for employees of the Project. The TDM plan shall include bicycle, pedestrian and public transportation functions. The TDM plan shall be approved by the Director of Planning and Community Environment prior to issuance of building permits for the site and shall include, at a minimum, offer for parking cash out, bike facilities, transportation information kiosks, and the designation of a transportation demand coordinator for the building. The TDM program will include monitoring reports, which shall be submitted to the Director not later than two years after building occupancy and again not later than five years after building occupancy, noting the effectiveness of the proposed measures as compared to the initial performance targets, and suggestions for modifications if necessary to enhance parking and/or trip reductions. Where the monitoring reports indicate that performance measures are not met, the director may require further program modifications. 4 ( e) Modifications to the Development Plan and Site Development Regulations: Once the project has been constructed consistent with the approved Development Plan, any modifications to the exterior design of the Development Plan or any new construction not specifically permitted by the Development Plan or the site development regulations contained in Section 4 (a) -(c) above shall require an amendment to this Planned Community zone, unless the modification is a minor change as described in PAMC §18.76.050 (b) (3) (e), in which case the modification may be approved through the minor Architectural Review process. Any use not specifically permitted by this ordinance shall require an amendment to the PC ordinance. (f) Public Benefits: Development of the site under the prOVISIOns of the PC Planned Community District will result in public benefits not otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts. The Project includes the following public benefits that are inherent to the Project and in excess of those required by City zoning districts. (1) Preservation and renovation of an existing historically significant shopping center developed by Eichler Homes, eligible for federal, state and local historic registries; (2) Provision of a grocery store in the 20,600 sq. ft. building; (3) Provision of a 0.20 acre public park, via public access easements, in perpetuity. (Land is dedicated for the ten units, plus an additional 5,000 sq. ft., where an in-lieu fee could also be proposed. The park would be maintained by the commercial property owner.) The park shall not be used for seating/activities associated with the retail uses. (4) Provision of three (3) electrical vehicle (EY) charging stations installed on site, subject to final City approval. The applicant shall incur all costs of the installation. (g) Development Schedule: 120313 dm 0120529 The project is required to include a Development Schedule pursuant to PAMC §18.38.100. The approved Development Schedule is set forth below: Construction of the Project shall commence immediately following the adoption of the PC zone, unless a change in the development schedule is approved by the Director of Planning and Community Environment, not 5 \ ) to exceed a one year extension in time and only one such extension without a hearing, pursuant to P AMC § 18.38.130. The total time for the project construction and occupancy of tenant spaces is expected to be 24 months following adoption of the PC zone, or by March 2014, unless extended by the Director for up to one additional year. (h) No building permit shall be approved (other than for model homes with no more than one model home per plan type) for residential development prior to submittal to the Director of a lease agreement or other legally binding commitment from a grocery operator to occupy 20,600 square feet in the Grocery Building. The Lease Agreement shall require that Occupancy of the grocery store shall occur not later than 15 months after the issuance of the first building permit for the Grocery Building or 15 months after issuance of the first building permit for the residential development (other than a model home). Final inspection and occupancy shall be allowed for not more than 5 homes (including model homes) prior to final inspection and occupancy approval for the grocery store. Bonding or other financial security may be considered in lieu of these requirements only upon review and approval by the City Council as an amendment to this PC ordinance. SECTION 5. Tentative Map Findings. A legislative body of a city shall deny approval of a Tentative Map, if it makes any of the following findings (California Government Code Section 66474): 1. That the proposed map is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans as specified in Section 65451: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The site does not lie within a specific plan area and is consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. The land use designation in the area of the subdivision is Neighborhood Commercial and the zoning designation is Planned Community (PC) District. The proposed development of the commercial and residential mixed use development is consistent with the land use and zoning designations of the site. 2. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The map is consistent with applicable Comprehensive Plan policies, particularly including: (1) Policy L-l - Limiting future urban development to currently developed lands within the urban service area; (2) Policy L-4 -Maintain Palo Alto's varied residential neighborhoods while sustaining the vitality of its commercial areas and public facilities. Use the Zoning Ordinance as a tool to enhance Palo Alto's desirable qualities; (3) Policy L-9 -Enhance desirable characteristics in mixed use areas. Use the planning and zoning process to 120313 dm0120529 6 \ / create opportunities for new mixed use development; and (4) Policy B-27 -Support the upgrading and revitalization of Palo Alto's four Neighborhood Commercial Centers. 3. That the site is not physically suitable for the type of development: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The site can accommodate the proposed subdivision, as it is currently vacant, flat, and absent any significant vegetation. The lots conform to the width, depth, and area requirements of this Planned Community Zoning District. The design of the mixed use, commercial and residential buildings require Architectural Review approval. The proposed development was recommended for approval by the City Council from the Architectural Review Board on February 2,2012. 4. That the site is not physically suitable for the proposed density of development: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The subdivision would be consistent with the site development regulations of this Planned Community Zoning District and would not affect the location of the existing property lines at the perimeter of the site. 5. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The subdivision would not cause environmental damage or injure fish, wildlife, or their habitat, as the site is currently fully developed with a vacant commercial development. An Environmental Impact Report was adopted certifying that there will be no significant unmitigated environmental impacts. 6. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvements is likely to cause serious public health problems: This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The subdivision of the existing parcel for a commercial and residential mixed use development will not cause serious public health problems. 7. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements, acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, property within the proposed subdivision. In this connection, the governing body may approve a map if it finds that alternate easements, for access or for use, will be provided, and that these will be substantially equivalent to ones previously acquired by the public. This subsection shall apply only to easements of record or to easements established by judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction and no authority is hereby granted to a legislative body to determine that the public at large has 120313 dm 0120529 7 acquired easements for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision. This finding can not be made in the affirmative. The subdivision of the existing parcel will not conflict with easements of any type, in that the subdivision is compatible with adequate emergency vehicle access and any utility easements that would be required to serve the proposed developments. SECTION 6. Indenmification. To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the "indenmified parties") from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indenmified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void this ordinance or any permit or approval authorized hereby for the project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorneys fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice SECTION 7. Monitoring of Conditions and Public Benefits. Not later than three (3) years following the approval of building occupancy by the City and every three (3) years thereafter, the applicant shall request that the City review the project to assure that conditions of approval and public benefits remain in effect as provided in the original approval. The applicant shall provide adequate funding to reimburse the City for these costs. If conditions or benefits are found deficient by staff, the applicant shall correct such conditions in not more than 90 days from notice by the City. If correction is not made within the prescribed timeframe, the Director of Planning and Community Environment will schedule review of the project before the Planning and Transportation Commission and Council to determine appropriate remedies, fines or other actions. SECTION 8. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for this project was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. The City Council certified the EIR and Mitigation Monitoring Program and adopted a resolution at its meeting of March 19,2012. SECTION 9. The plans referenced consist of plans titled "Edgewood Shopping Center" prepared by Kenneth Rodrigues & Partners, Burton Architecture, Sandis and the Guzzardo Partnership, dated February 29, 2012, including the Tentative Map for Edgewood Plaza, prepared by Sandis, dated February 15,2012. SECTION 10. 120313 drn 0120529 8 This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of its adoption (second reading). INTRODUCED: March 19,2012 PASSED: April 9, 2012 AYES: Burt, Espinosa, Klein, Price, Schmid, Shepherd, Yeh NOES: Holman ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: Scharff ATTEST: APPROVED: C:~-CL.-~y ~Clerk D :zt; <:~RM: Assistant City Attome;=:::::::-: ~~~ Director of Planning and Community Environment 120313 dm 0120529 9 T I. C i L~ .r Palo Alto Edgewood Plaza Location Map Exhibit A --• \ ; ExhihitB RECOMMENDED DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 2080 Channing Avenue -Edgewood Plaza! File No. 10PLN-00198 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Planning and Transportation Divisions 1. The plans submitted to obtain all pem1its through the Building Inspection Division shall be in substantial conformance with the revised plans, project details and materials received on March 22,2012, except as modified to incorporate these conditions of approval. 2. All conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet of the plan set submitted to obtain any permit through the Building Inspection Division. 3. Construction details, colors, materials, and placement ofthe shopping center signs and roof mounted equipment shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review prior to submittal of the building permit. 4. A subsequent Architectural Review Permit shall be required for the relocated sign and other new signs related to this project. 5. The project shall be subject to applicable Development In1pact Fees, which would be due prior to issuance of the building permit. The applicable impact fees would be calculated based upon the fee structure in place at the time of building permit submittal. 6. The developer shall submit and implement a Transportation Demand Management program to the satisfaction ofthe Planning and Community Environment Director. 7. Sheet T-I_Tree Protection-it's Part ofthe Plan (http://www.city.palo- alto.ca.us/arb/planning forms.htrnl). Complete the Tree Disclosure Statement and Inspection(s) #1-6 shall be checked. 8. Applicant shall file a tree removal permit for the trees planned for removal. 9. The entire Tree Preservation Report approved by staff, shall be printed on Sheet T-1 and/or T -2 (all sheets). A note shall be applied to the site plan stating, "All measures identified in the Tree Protection Report on Sheet T -1 and the approved plans shall be implemented, including inspections and required watering of trees. 10. Maintenance: All landscape and trees shall be maintained, watered, fertilized, and pruned according to Best Management Practices-Pruning (ANSI A300-2001 or current version). Any vegetation that dies shall be replaced or failed automatic irrigation repaired by the current property owner within 30 days of discovery. 11. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a final detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review and approval, specifying exact species, numbers and location of all plant materials. 12. The planting palette shall be modified as follows: • Specify Elegant Tristania, replacing the Tristaniopis laurina. • Do not use Liquidambars in small areas or planters. The species forms multiple leaders and hardscape damaging root system. Replace with other fall color species such as, Sour Gum, Shumard Oak or similar. • All trees should be 24" box size as a minimum. • Justify the use of century plant, in both large spatial area needed and safety from the potentially lethal spear-like foliage. Or, select another species better suited for these populated areas. 13. All parking lot median islands that are ~ccupied with trees, shrubs and ground covers and surrounded by raised curb shall specify: • Materials, concrete or asphalt on grade • Specify discontinuous curb (planned breaks in the curb every 3 vehicle spaces) in all formed curb lengths. Intent to drain or capture water runoff, allow capacity spillover and plant/soil filtration of water runoff. 14. Screening of all above ground utilities is required, especially around water check valves and backflow preventers near the sidewalks and property lines. Creative use of shrubbery and species encouraged. 15. Other conditions of approval that are site and landscape related will be provided for submittal of the building permits. 16. The parking lot median islands shall incorporate discontinuous curbs (planned eight inch breaks in the curb every three vehicle spaces) to allow for filtration of water runoff. 17. Prior to the submittal of abuilding permit, the applicant shall submit documentation demonstrating that all noise producing equipment proposed for the project shall meet the City's Noise Ordinance requirement. 18. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the ten single-family residences shall include a provision that requires all future owners to maintain the private garages so that two cars may be parked inside at all times. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed by the Planning Director and City Attorney for approval prior to approval of the Final Map. 19. To the extent permitted by law, the applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the "indemnified parties) from against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorneys fees and \ ) costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. 20. Lighting shall not exceed 0.5 foot-candle as measured at the abutting residential property line. Lighting fixtures shall not exceed a height of 15 feet in the parking lot. 21. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit application, the applicant shall return to the ARB subcommittee and obtain feedback and/or approval on the following items: • Final landscaping plan • Street furniture • Trellis details 22. All property line fences shall meet the requirements of the Mlmicipal Code 23. Integral color shall be used for the stucco. 24. The lighting shall be corrected so that the photometric plans show that light will not spill beyond the residential property line 25. The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) for the ten single-family residences shall include a provision that requires all future owners to maintain the private garages so that two cars may be parked inside at all times. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed by the Planning Director and City Attorney for approval prior to approval of the Final Map. 26. No restrictions shall be placed on the commercial or residential surface parking spaces that will prevent park users from using those spaces. 27. The rehabilitation of the proposed sign shall be reviewed by the Historic Resources Board for their recommendation. 28. A Final Map, in conformance with the approved Tentative Map, all requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance (PAMC Section 21.16), and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, shall be filed with the Planning Division and the Public Works Engineering Division within two years of the Tentative Map approval date (PAM C 21.13.020 [ c ]). 29. A Below Market Rate agreement shall be executed prior to City Council Action on the Final Map and recorded concurrently with the subdivision agreement and map. 30. Prior to the recordation of a Final Map, the applicant shall execute and record a Park Maintenance Agreement for the proposed public park to the satisfaction of the Director of the Community Services Department. Sustainability Requirements 31. The project is required to comply with P AMC 16.14 for green building. Building permit plans shall include compliance with the Greenpoint Rated Checklist -as locally amended - \ ) for the residential portion ofthe project and the California Green Building Code Checklist- as locally amended -for the nonresidential portion of the project. These requirements incorporate minimum standards for landscape water efficiency (note that the installation of a dedicated irrigation meter for all landscape with an approved backflow prevention device will be required) and energy performance among other things. For more information visit www.cityofpaloalto.orglgreenbuilding. 32. The project is required to comply with P AMC 16.12.030 for recycled water infrastructure. Building permit plans shall include the on-site infrastructure necessary to connect the site's irrigation system to the city's recycled water supply when it becomes available. Plans shall demonstrate that recycled water will be used when available, and include consideration for plants that are recycled water tolerant Transportation Division 33. A Transportation Demand Management plan shall be submitted for the approval of the Planning Director prior to the issuance of a building permit. In addition to the annual report, the project applicant and/or Edgewood Plaza owner will conduct a parking monitoring program for a minimum of six months after full occupancy of the retail portion ofthe Edgewood Plaza site, or as directed by the City of Palo Alto Director of Planning and Community Environment. The monitoring program will record the number of parked vehicles during the anticipated peak times of 11 :00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. If parking demand is found to exceed parking supply, one or more of the following strategies will be employed as a part of the project's Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program tplimit parking spillover: • Offer parking cash-out (financial payment) to employees who forego their parking space on-site and get to work by carpooling, bicycling, walking, or taking transit; and/or • Increase use ofTDM measures (such as facilitating a carpool matching service for employees on site). The hours of loading shall be consistent with the Municipal Code. The need for traffic calming, including the installation of speed humps on Channing Avenue, shall be evaluated by the City approximately a year after occupancy. 34. One level 3 electric vehicle charging station and two level 2 electric charging stations shall be provided on site. 35. Bicycle racks must be installed to the satisfaction ofthe Transportation Division. The project shall include four double loaded bike racks (8 bike capacity) within 50 feet ofthe main entrance of the Grocery Store. The rack closest to the pedestrian ramp must be located with at least 5 feet of clear landing area from the ADA accessible ramp connecting to the parking lot pedestrian path. 36. Parking stalls closest to St. Francis Drive that are 15'6" in depth must have a low curb and at least two feet of clear overhang. 37. The project shall include raised islands and median striping enhancements at intersection of West Bayshore/Embarcadero intersection (West Bayshore right-tum only). 38. The project shall include off-site crosswalk and curb ramp improvements at intersection of st. Francis I Channing. 39. Signing and striping modifications per mitigation measure identified on Embarcadero between st. Francis and Wildwood shall be included. 40. Bicycle improvements are recommended along West Bayshore including share the road signage and pavement markings. 41. A left turn sign shall be installed on West Bayshore Road, north of Channing subject to the review ofthe Transportation Division. 42. Modify the traffic signal on Embarcadero Road at Saint Francis Drive to provide left tum signal phasing from Embarcadero Road to Saint Francis Drive. 43. Preserve the vehicular access between the project site and the adjacent gas station site at the existing site connection, with no net loss of vehicle parking spaces on the shopping center site. Building Division 44. Architectural Comments: On sheet AI.O, Project Data: list the following information on the plans for all the (N) and (E) structures: • Building Occupancy Group: • Type of Construction: • Number of Stories: • Building Area: • Sprinklered: (YIN) 45. On sheet AI.O, Conceptual Site Plan: provide a revised site plan showing the proposed lot line adjustments to be made for this project. Currently, this project is located on two legal parcels and the proposed residential units #3 & 4 both straddle the current lot line and is not allowed. Show on the revised Site Plan the lots lines that divides the ten (10) residential units into separate parcels. 46. On sheet AI.O, Project Data: provide an allowable area analysis for the (E) Grocery Building as it appears that it can no longer take advantage of the three (3) sides open for area increase. In addition, provide the allowable area calculations for Retail Buildings 1 & 2. Show if the buildings are to be considered as parts of one building on the lot or multiple buildings on one lot with assumed property lines between the buildings. If the latter is the case, then clearly show on the Site Plan the location of the assumed property line. \ / 47. Structural Comments: A geotechnical report is required for the construction of the new location ofthe relocated Commercial building. 48. General Comment: The completed plan submittal package should be sent to an approved Outside Plan Check Consultant for plan review. 49. Additional accessible parking spaces are required due to the total number of required parking spaces. At least 6 are required when there are 151 to 200 parking stalls. Show location of dispersed accessible parking spaces and provide the accessible path of travel to the building located such that those persons with disabilities are not compelled to walk or wheel behind parked cars other than their own. CBC 1129B.4.3,'CBC 1129B.1 50. Based on the scope of work for this project the City of Palo Alto has the option to require the applicant to utilize a third party plan check firm to conduct the building code plan review. A list of plan check agencies approved by the City of Palo Alto is available at the Development Center. The City of Palo Alto Building plan check fees are reduced by 35% when a 3rd party plan check agency is utilized. 51. The Building Permit Plans shall be prepared by a licensed architect. When the plans are submitted for a building permit, be sure to include the full scope of work including all site development, disabled access and exiting for the entire site, utility installations, architectural, structural, electrical, plumbing, mechanical work associated with the proposed project. The plans shall include the allowable floor area and entire building area calculations on the project data sheet and where there are multiple occupancies, provide unity calculations for either separated or non-separated uses. EIR Mitigation Measures 52. MM CR-2.1: Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) Level III documentation of the exterior of Buildings 1 and 2 and their setting shall be prepared by the applicant and project consultants prior to the relocation of Building 1 and remodeling of Building 2. Following the HABS guidelines, this documentation shall include: • Sketch plan of the existing site and reproduction of original drawings. • Up to 12 large-format photographs (4 by 5 inches) of exterior view. • A written summary of project site's history. • Transmittal of one set of documents to the City's Historic Resources Planner and to a relevant local historical society, library or repository. • The documentation shall be filed by the applicant prior to the start of construction 53. MM CR-2.2: The applicant shall create a display illustrating the history of the Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, prior to approval of final occupancy. 54. MM CR-2.3: Distinctive materials and defining architectural features, finishes, and construction techniques of Buildings 1 and 2 including windows, frames and eaves will be retained to the extent possible, as the building elements will require some alterations due to ADA compliance, public safety, building code compliance, or deteriorated condition. The existing building components may be constructed out of new building materials that match the character and form of the existing, if reuse of existing building components is not feasible. Prior to the relocation and reconstruction of Building 1 and the rehabilitation of Building 2, a qualified historic preservation architect shall review the plans for the remodeled buildings and verify that the work on these buildings is in keeping with the building'S original design and applicable Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, such as Standards #5,6, 7, and 9. The final design and materials to be used in the renovation of these buildings will be reviewed and approved by the Director and Historic Resources Planner of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department. 55. Air Quality MM AQ-l.l: The following mitigation measures shall be implemented during all phases of construction on the project site to prevent visible dust emissions from leaving the site: • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. • All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used. • Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to five minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points. • All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified visible emissions evaluator. • Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District's phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. 56. Biological Resources MM BIO-l.l: In compliance with the MBTA and the California Fish and Game Code, the proposed project shall implement the following measures: • Pre-construction surveys shall be completed by a qualified ornithologist to identify active nests that may be disturbed during project implementation. All potential nesting areas (trees, tall shrubs) shall be surveyed no more than 30 days prior to tree removal or pruning, ifthe activity will occur within the breeding season (February 1 -August 31). If more than 30 days pass between the completion of the preconstruction survey and the initiation of construction activities, the preconstruction survey shall be completed again and repeated at 30 day intervals until construction activities are initiated. • If an active nest is observed, tree removal and pruning shall be postponed until all the young have fledged. An exclusion zone shall be established around the nest site, in consultation with the California Department ofFish and Game (CDFG). Exclusion zones for active passerine (songbirds) nests shall have a 50-foot radius centered on the nest tree or shrub. • Active nests shall be monitored weekly until the young fledge. No construction activities, • parking, staging, material storage, or other disturbance shall be allowed within the exclusion zones until the young have fledged from the nest. 57. Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM HAZ-1.1: Considering the property will be redeveloped and that potentially regulated soils may be encountered during site preparation activities, a Soil Management Plan (SMP) shall be prepared to reduce or eliminate exposure risk to human health and the environment. The SMP shall be developed to establish management practices for handling contaminated soil or other materials if encountered during construction activities. The SMP shall be reviewed and approved by the City of Palo Alto prior to commencing construction activities. 58. Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM HAZ-1.2: Each contractor working at the site shall prepare a health and safety plan (HSP) that addresses the safety and health hazards of each phase of site operations that includes the requirements and procedures for employee protection. 59. Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM HAZ-1.3: At the time Building 1 is moved, soil and groundwater samples, and/or soil vapor samples, if appropriate, shall be obtained from under 2125 Saint Francis Drive (the former Moon Cleaners) to ensure that soil exceeding the applicable levels for tetrachloroethene (PCE) and its breakdown products is not present within five feet ofthe ground surface. PCE-affected soil shall be removed by properly trained and licensed personnel and contractors, in conformance with procedures in the soil management plan (MM HAZ-l) prior to paving the area. Contaminated soil will be handled by trained personnel using appropriate protective equipment and engineering controls, in accordance with local, state, and federal laws. An excavation base confirmation sample will be collected and analyzed to document sufficient soils removal. Documentation of removal ofPCE-affected soil shall be provided to the City of Palo Alto and appropriate oversight agencies prior to installation of pavement in the parking lot area. 60. Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM HAZ-l.4: Excavated soils will be characterized prior to off-site disposal or reuse on-site. Appropriate soil characterization, storage, transportation, and disposal procedures shall be followed. Contaminated soils shall be disposed of at a licensed facility in accordance with all appropriate local, state, and federal regulations, in accordance with its characteristics. 61. Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM HAZ-1.5: The applicant shall prepare a contingency plan prior to the beginning of the project construction that will address any previously unknown sumps, hydraulic hoists, or tanks that may be present in the area of work. 62. Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM HAZ-2.1: In conformance with local, state, and federal laws, an asbestos building survey and a lead-based paint survey shall be completed by a qualified professional to determine the presence of ACMs and/or lead-based paint on the structures proposed for renovation. The surveys shall be completed prior to work beginning on these structures. 63. Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM HAZ-2.2: A registered asbestos abatement contractor shall be retained to remove and dispose of all potentially friable asbestos- containing materials, in accordance with the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) guidelines, prior to building relocation or renovation that may disturb the materials. All construction activities shall be undertaken in accordance with Cal/OSHA standards, contained in Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Section 1529, to protect workers from exposure to asbestos. Materials containing more than one percent asbestos are also subject to Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) regulations. 64. Hazards and Hazardous Materials MM HAZ-2.3: During renovation activities, all building materials containing lead-based paint shall be removed in accordance with Cal/OSHA Lead in Construction Standard, Title 8, CCR 1532.1, including employee training, employee air monitoring and dust control. Any debris or soil containing lead-based paint or coatings shall be disposed of at landfills that meet acceptance criteria for the waste being disposed. 65. Hydrology and Water Quality MM HYDRO-1.1: Construction ofthe proposed project on site will comply with the City of Palo Alto Flood Hazard Ordinance, including elevation of habitable spaces above anticipated flood levels, as listed in the Municipal Code, Section 16.52, Flood Hazard Regulations. All project plans must show the base flood elevations on all applicable elevations, sections, and details, and must comply with all other requirements as listed in the ordinance. 66. Hydrology and Water Quality MM HYDRO-l.2: Construction of the proposed project on site will comply with the requirements of the Federal Emergency Management Agency for flood hazard areas. 67. Hydrology and Water Quality MM HYDRO-2.1 : Erosion and Sedimentation Control: The following erosion and sediment control measures, based upon Best Management Practices recommended by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, shall be included in the project to reduce potential construction-related water quality impacts. Many of these measures are the same as or similar to measures required to reduce air quality impacts. Erosion and sedimentation control plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of grading or building permits. • Stormwater inlet protection will be installed around storm drain inlets to keep sediment • and other debris out of the stormwater drainage system. • All exposed or disturbed soil surfaces will be watered at least twice daily to control dust as necessary. • Earthmoving or other dust-producing activities will be suspended during periods of high winds (instantaneous gusts exceed 25 miles per hour). • Stockpiles of soil or other materials that can be blown by the wind will be watered or covered. • All trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose materials will be covered and all trucks will be required to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. • All paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas adjacent to the construction sites will be swept daily with water sweepers. • Vegetation in disturbed areas will be replanted as quickly as possible. 68. Hydrology and Water Quality MM HYDRO-2.2: Post-Construction Mitigation: The following mitigation measures, and City of Palo Alto requirements, are included in the proposed project to ensure compliance with NPDES permit requirements to reduce postconstruction water quality impacts: • All onsite trash enclosures shall have roofs. • Storm runoff from the site shall be treated prior to discharge to the City of Palo Alto stormwater system. (Treatment mayor may not include the use of mechanical devices.) • An annual post-construction maintenance agreement shall be prepared and submitted to the Public Works Department prior to issuance of grading or building permits. • The commercial development shall implement regular maintenance activities (i.e., litter control and maintaining on-site drainage facilities) to prevent soil and litter from accumulating on the project site and contaminating surface runoff. • Landscape maintenance shall employ minimal pesticide use, including landscape maintenance techniques listed in the Fact Sheet on Landscape Maintenance Techniques for Pest Reduction prepared by the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program. 69. MM NOISE-I. I : Sound-rated windows, doors, and exterior wall assemblies will be used in residential building construction to reduce interior noise from outdoor sources to the 45 dB DNL and Lmax 50/55 dB criteria. Specific details and sound insulation ratings shall be determined during the design phase, when the final site, grading and floor plans, and exterior elevations have been detennined. An acoustical consultant shall review drawings during the design phase and finalize appropriate noise control treatments, which will be submitted to the City of Palo Alto Building Division along with the building plans, and approved prior to issuance of building pennits. 70. Noise MM NOI-1.2: Dual pane windows and doors with equal glass thicknesses can have resonances that result in audible tones indoors. Acoustical test reports of all sOtmd rated windows and doors shall be reviewed by an acoustical consultant, and compared with traffic noise spectrums, prior to approval. 71. Noise MM NOI-1.3: Since windows will have to be closed to maintain the interior noise goals, "ventilation or air conditioning system to provide a habitable interior environment," even with windows closed, shall be included in the project (i.e., windows shall not be relied upon for ventilation). 72. Noise MM NOI-l.4: Overall outdoor noise in yards is expected to be between DNL 60 and 65 dBA, based on a combination of local and distant transportation sources. Since the proposed residences would include private fenced yards, six foot tall noise barriers shall be incorporated where plans currently show walls or fences separating private yards from the adjacent roadways. Barriers should be solid from bottom to top with no cracks or gaps, and a minimum surface density of three pounds per square foot. 73. Noise MM NOI-1.5: Residential mechanical equipment shall be selected and located to meet the property line limits in the City's Noise Ordinance. If detennined to be necessary during the design phase and the acoustical review described in MM NOISE-I. 1 , additional measures may consist of equipment barriers and/or enclosures. 74. Noise MM NOI-2.l: Measures shall be included in the renovation of the commercial buildings to reduce noise impacts at nearby residences, in confonnance with the Palo Alto Noise Ordinance. These measures would be finalized during the design phase and acoustical analysis (as described in Mitigation Measure MM NOISE-I. 1), submitted to the City of Palo Alto Building Division along with the building plans, and approved prior to issuance of building pennits. These measures could include: • Solid noise barriers along the north and east sides (the eastern wall extending south alongside delivery trucks) ofthe loading dock, combined with a shed roof. These barriers would reduce the estimated noise levels from unloading activities to the allowable limits in the Palo Alto Noise Ordinance. • The roof and walls shall be lined with a sound absorbing material (for example, perforated metal panels, such as Kinetics KNP, or a spray on material, such as Pyrok Acoustement 40, applied to a thickness of 1-112"). 75. MM NOISE-2.2: Trucks entering and leaving the site must pass close to a residential property line. As they do, they are likely to exceed the noise ordinance limits. Although it may not be feasible to completely eliminate this noise, the following measures would reduce this impact: • Limit deliveries to daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) • Communicate to vendors that their drivers will be operating close to residences, so they limit noise (e.g., avoid excess idling, high engine speeds, un-necessary backing, etc.) • Provide a full disclosure statement to the owners of residential Lots #9 and #10 to make them aware that trucks entering and leaving the site may generate noise levels in excess ofthe Noise Ordinance limits. This disclosure would be incorporated by the project applicant into the deeds for these residential properties. 76. MM NOISE-3.1: Mechanical equipment shall be selected, designed, and located so as to minimize impacts on adjacent and nearby residential uses. This can be accomplished by locating noise generating equipment away from residential uses or by providing acoustical shielding. Preliminary estimates suggest that solid rooftop screens or noise barriers will be needed. An acoustical specialist will review the mechanical equipment plans prior to construction to confirm that the City's Noise Ordinance would be met at the residential property line. These plans will be submitted to the City of Palo Alto Building Division, and approved prior to issuance of building permits. 77. Transportation MM TRANS-I. 1 : Because of signal spacing considerations, a traffic signal is not recommended at this intersection. To mitigate this impact, the proposed project will restripe Embarcadero Road to create a left turn receiving lane. As part ofthe project left turn lane improvements at the Embarcadero Road/Saint Francis Drive intersection, a left turn receiving area will be built at Wildwood Lane. This will facilitate outbound left turns and reduce left turn delay, which would reduce the project impact to a less than significant level. 78. Avoidance Measures a. Biological Resources CONDITION BIO-2.1: A Tree Preservation Report (TPR) will be prepared for trees to be preserved and protected, consistent with Policy N -7 of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. An updated tree survey and tree preservation report (TPR) prepared by a certified arborist shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the City Urban Forester. The TPR incorporate the following measures, safeguards and information: • The TPR shall be based on latest plans and amended as needed to address activity or improvements within the dripline area, including but not limited to incidental work (utilities trenching, street work, lighting, irrigation, patio material, leveling, etc.) that may affect the health of the trees. The project shall be modified to address TPR concerns and recommendations identified to minimize below ground or above ground impacts. • The TPR shall be consistent with the criteria set forth in the tree preservation ordinance, P AMC 8.10.030 and the City'S Tree Technical Manual, Section 3.00, 4.00 and 6.30 http://www.cityofpaloalto.orglenvironment/urban _ canopy. asp. • To avoid improvements that may be detrimental to the health of the trees the TPR shall review the applicant's landscape plan to ensure that patio flat work, irrigation, planting or potted plants is consistent with the Tree Technical Manual. The approved TPR shall be implemented in full, including mandatory inspections and monthly reporting to City Urban Forester. b. Biological Resources CONDITION BIO-2.2: Provide optimum public tree replacement for loss of one or more public street trees. Publicly owned trees are growing in the right- of-way along Saint Francis Drive, Channing Avenue, and West Bayshore Road. Provide mitigation in the event of a public tree removal. The new frontage should be provided maximum streetscape design and materials to include the following elements: • Consistency with the Public Works Department Tree Management Program. Provide adequate room for tree canopy growth and root growing volume resources. • Create conflict-free planting sites by locating tree sites and underground utility services at least 1 a-feet apart (electric, gas, sewer, water, fiber optic, telecom, etc.). • Utilize city-approved best management practices for sustainability products, such as permeable ADA sidewalk, Silva Cell planters, engineered soil mix base, generous planter soil volume (800 to 1,200 cubic feet) to sustain a medium to large tree. c. Noise CONDITION NOI-4.1: The following mitigation measures are included in the project to further reduce construction noise impacts on neighboring properties: • Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment; • Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines; • Route construction related traffic to and from the site via designated truck routes and avoid residential streets where possible; • Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists; • Locate all stationary noise-generating equipment, such as air compressors and portable power generators, as far away as possible from adjacent land uses; • Shield adjacent sensitive uses from stationary equipment with individual noise barriers or partial acoustical enclosures; • Temporary noise barriers (e.g., solid plywood fences (minimum 8 feet in height) and/or acoustical blankets could be erected, if necessary, along affected property boundaries facing the construction site. This mitigation would only be necessary if conflicts occurred which were irresolvable by proper scheduling. Noise control blanket barriers can be rented and quickly erected; • Locate staging areas and construction material storage areas as far away as possible from adjacent sensitive land uses; • Designate a "disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause ofthe noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule; • Hold a preconstruction meeting with the job inspectors and the general contractor/on-site project manager to confirm that noise mitigation and practices (including construction hours, construction schedule, and noise coordinator) are completed. Utilities Water Gas Wastewater 79. Prior to demolition, the applicant shall submit the existing water/wastewater fixture unit loads (and building as-built plans to verify the existing loads) to determine the capacity fee credit for the existing load. If the applicant does not submit loads and plans they may not receive credit for the existing water/wastewater fixtures. 80. The applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all utility services and/or meters including a signed affidavit of vacancy. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within 10 working days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued by the building inspection division after all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected and removed. 81. The applicant shall submit a completed separate water-gas-wastewater service connection application -load sheets for each commercial tenant space or residential unit for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must provide all the information requested for utility service demands (water in fixture units/g.p.m., gas in b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture units/g.p.d.). 82. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction. The plans must show the size and location of all underground utilities within the development and the public right of way including meters, backflow preventers, fire service requirements, sewer mains, sewer cleanouts, sewer lift stations and any other required utilities. All water meters shall be in the public right-of-way (sidewalk or planting strip). All WGW utility services shall be from Saint Francis Drive or Channing Avenue. 83. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures can not be placed over existing or new water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain l' horizontal clear separation from the vault/cabinet/concrete base to existing utilities as found in the field. If there is a conflict with existing utilities, Cabinets/vaultslbases shall be relocated from the plan location as needed to meet field conditions. 84. The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any auxiliary water supply, (i.e. water well, gray water, recYGled water, rain catchment, water storage tank, etc). 85. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading the existing utility mains and/or services as necessary to handle anticipated peak loads. This responsibility includes all costs associated with the design and construction for the installation/upgrade of the utility mains and/or services. 86. Sewer drainage piping serving fixtures located less than one foot above the next upstream sewer main manhole cover shall be protected by an approved backwater valve per California Plumbing Code 710.0. The upstream sewer main manhole rim elevation shall be shown on the plans. 87. Flushing of the fire system to sanitary sewer shall not exceed 30 GPM. Higher flushing rates shall be diverted to a detention tank to achieve the 30 GPM flow to sewer. 88. Sewage ejector pumps shall meet the following conditions: • The pump( s) be limited to a total 100 GPM capacity or less. • The sewage line changes to a 4" gravity flow line at least 20' from the City clean out. • The tank and float is set up such that the pump run time not exceed 20 seconds each cycle. Prior to Issuance of Building Permit 89. The applicant's engineer shall submit flow calculations and system capacity study showing that the on-site and off-site water and sanitary sewer mains and services will provide the domestic, irrigation, fire flows, and wastewater capacity needed to service the development and adjacent properties during anticipated peak flow demands. Field testing may be required to determined current flows and water pressures on existing water main. Calculations must be signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. 90. For contractor installed water and wastewater mains or services, the applicant shall submit to the WGW engineering section of the Utilities Department four copies of the installation of water and wastewater utilities off-site improvement plans in accordance with the utilities department design criteria. All utility work within the public right-of- way shall be clearly shown on the plans that are prepared, signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. The contractor shall also submit a complete schedule of work, method of construction and the manufacture's literature on the materials to be used for approval by the utilities engineering section. The applicant's contractor will not be allowed to begin work until the improvement plan and other submittals have been approved by the water, gas and wastewater engineering section. After the work is complete but prior to sign off, the applicant shall provide record drawings (as-builts) of the contractor installed water and wastewater mains and services per City of Palo Alto Utilities record drawing procedures. 91. Existing wastewater laterals that are not plastic (ABS, PVC, or PE) shall be replaced at the applicant's expense. 92. The applicant shall pay the capacity fees and connection fees associated with the installation of the new utility service/s to be installed by the City of Palo Alto Utilities. The approved relocation of services, meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the cost of the person/entity requesting the relocation. 93. Each unit or place of business shall have its own water and gas meter shown on the plans. 94. Each parcel shall have its own water service, gas service and sewer lateral connection shown on the plans. 95. A separate water meter and backflow preventer shall be installed to irrigate the approved landscape plan. Show the location of the irrigation meter on the plans. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account an no other water service will be billed on the account. The irrigation and landscape plans submitted with the application for a grading or building permit shall conform to the City of Palo Alto water efficiency standards. 96. An approved reduce pressure principle assembly (RPPA backflow preventer device) is required for all existing and new water connections from Palo Alto Utilities to comply with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive. The RPP A shall be installed on the owner's property and directly behind the water meter, within 5' of the property line. Show the location of the RPPA on the plans. Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe between the meter and the assembly. The applicant shall provide the City with current test certificates for all backflows. 97. An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the existing or new water connection for the fire system to comply with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive. reduced pressure detector assemblies shall be installed on the owner's property adjacent to the property line, within 5' of the property line. Show the location of the reduced pressure detector assembly on the plans. Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe between the City connection and the assembly. 98. A new gas service line installation is required. Show the new gas meter location(s) on the plans. The gas meter location must conform with utilities standard details. The gas meters shall be located above ground on private property against the building as close to Saint Francis or Channing as possible. 99. The applicant shall secure a public utilities easement for facilities installed in private property. The applicant's engineer shall obtain, prepare, record with the county of Santa Clara, and provide the utilities engineering section with copies ofthe public utilities easement across the adjacent parcels as is necessary to serve the development. 100. All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be abandoned at the main per WOW utilties procedures before any new utility services are installed. 101. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto utility standards for water, gas & wastewater. 102. For contractor installed water and wastewater mains or services, the applicant shall prepare and submit to the WOW engineering section of the Utilities Department as-built drawings of the installation of water and wastewater utilities to be owned and maintained by the City in accordance with: • Two sets of as-built drawings (hard copies). • As-built drawings in 2008 or 2010 AutoCAD format. • As-built drawings in .tiffformat. • Survey points in .csv format for all new utility features. Note: All survey data shall be collected by a California Licensed Land Surveyor. The surveyor is responsible to setup all control points needed to perform the survey work. The accuracy for all survey data shall be +/-1cm. 103. Survey data to be collected (what's applicable): • Collect horizontal and vertical data for: • Sanitary sewer manholes (rim and invert elevations and depth) • Storm drain manholes and catch basins (rim and invert elevations and depth) • Water valves (cover and stem elevations) 104. Collect horizontal data only for: • Service or lateral connection points at the main • Fire hydrants • Water meters • Sanitary sewer cleanout boxes 105. Use CPAU WOW Engineering's "feature codes" for naming convention available from CPAU WGW Engineering 1007 Elwell Ct, Palo Alto, CA 94303 (650) 566-4501. All drawings and survey data shall be on the California State Plane Coordinate System -Zone 3 in units of feet. The horizontal datum shall be the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83) and the vertical datum shall be based on Bestor 93. Fire Department 106. Applicant shall follow all mitigation measures outlined in the EIR. 107. Fire Department recommends a contingency plan be put in place to deal with any previously undiscovered soil contamination, sumps, hydraulic hoists or tanks that may be present in the area of work. The plan shall be submitted to the Fire Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Public Works Engineering 108. Flood Zone: The proposed improvements are located within Special Flood Hazard Areas AH 11.9 & AH 12.2. Please make sure the submitted plans accurately reflect the flood zone designation. Accordingly, the proposed construction must meet all ofthe City's and Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) requirements for construction within a flood zone, such as: the finished bottom floor must be at or above the base flood elevation (BFE); the crawl space (if used) must have flood vents; and all construction materials and equipment below the BFE must be water-resistant. Garage slabs can be below the BFE, but the garage will then need flood vents. See Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.52, Flood Hazard Regulations, and our website for more information. The plans must show the BFE on all applicable elevations, sections and details; must include a calculation of the required amount of flood vents; must include the flood vents on the elevations and foundation plan; must note all materials below the BFE as water-resistant; and must include the Elevation Certification Submittal Requirements for Construction in the Special Flood Hazard Area form, which is available from Public Works at the Development Center or on our website. Please note that FEMA recently (May 2009) changed the vertical datum of the flood zones. You must use the new vertical datum (NA VD88) on plans submitted for a building permit. 109. Substantial Improvement: The existing structures are located within a Special Flood Hazard Area. If the construction cost of the improvements (remodeling and/or addition) is greater than 50% of the depreciated existing value of the structure, then the improvements will be classified as a "substantial improvement" and the existing structure and all new construction will be required to meet the City's Flood Hazard Regulations. In particular, the finished first floor must be at or above the base flood elevation (BFE). If the project is a "substantial improvement", then upon submittal for a building permit, the applicant must provide a copy of the FEMA Elevation Certificate showing that the existing finished first floor is at or above the BFE or, if the floor is below the BFE, the plans must show the floor being raised. The plans must include: • The Elevation Certification Submittal Requirements for Construction in the Special Flood Hazard Area form • The BFE on sections, elevations and details • Flood vents, if there is a crawl space • A table calculating the flood vents required and provided • If the crawl space is sub grade , meaning that the bottom of the crawl space is below the adjacent exterior grade on all four sides ofthe house, then it must be filled in until it is either no longer subgrade or until it is 18" from the floor framing (to meet the minimum CBC requirement) • If the crawl space is still subgrade after filling, then include a sump, pump and outlet pipe to pump flood waters out • The garage slab can be below the BFE, but the garage will then need to be flood vented separately from the house • Notes that all materials and equipment below the BFE are water-resistant 110. Public Works will prepare a flood zone screening form, including a "substantial improvement" screening form, at the Development Center when plans are submitted for a building permit. In order to determine if your project is a "substantial improvement" prior to submitting for a building permit, you can have a preliminary screening performed by Public Works' staff at the Development Center. 111. Conceptual Grading, Drainage, C.3 and SWPPP Plan: To verify the project adequately addresses grading, drainage and surface water infiltration, the applicant is required to submit a conceptual site grading and drainage plan to Public Works Engineering (PWE) prior to the final ARB submittal. The plan must demonstrate that site runoff is conveyed to the nearest adequate municipal storm drain system and that drainage is not increased onto, nor blocked from, neighboring properties. The plan must also include a conceptual storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), including the permanent best management practices (BMP's) to protect storm water quality and control runoff per the C.3 provisions of the Grading Ordinance (see C.3 below). Resources and handouts are available from PWE, including "Planning Your Land Development Project". The elements of the PWE-approved conceptual grading and drainage plan shall be incorporated into the building permit plans. 112. Subdivision Maps: A Tentative Map and a Final Map are required for the proposed development. The applicant shall submit an application for a major subdivision with the Planning Division. Public Works' Major Subdivision -Tentative Map checklist must accompany the Tentative Map and the Major Subdivision -Final Map checklist must accompany the Final Map. All existing and proposed dedications and easements must be shown on the maps. A digital copy of the Final Map, in AutoCAD format, shall be submitted to Public Works Engineering and shall conform to North American Datum 1983 State Plane Zone 3 for horizontal survey controls and NA VD 1988 for vertical survey controls. 113. Improvement Plans: The applicant shall arrange a meeting with the Public Works Engineering, Water/GaslW astewater and Electric Utilities Engineering, Planning, and Transportation Divisions and the Fire Department to determine what on-site and off-site public improvements will be required. The off-site improvements required by Public Works Engineering will include at minimum: replacement of the sidewalk, curb & gutter along the frontages of the site; the installation of curb ramps and street trees; and the resurfacing of the street (2" grind & overlay) along the project frontages. Improvement plans must be completed, approved and signed prior to the Final Map going to City Cotmcil for approval. 114. Subdivision Improvement Agreement: A subdivision improvement agreement is required to secure compliance with the conditions of approval and security of the onsite and offsite public improvements. The agreement must be finalized and signed prior to the Final Map going to City Council for approval. 115. Bonds: The developer shall post bonds to guarantee the completion of the onsite and offsite public improvements. The applicant must submit a construction cost estimate for the onsite and offsite public improvements. The amount of the bond shall be determined by the Planning, Utilities and Public Works Departments after reviewing the plans and the estimate. The bonds must be submitted prior to the Final Map going to City Council for approval. 116. Developer's Project Manager: The subdivision includes significant complexity involving coordination of infrastructure design and construction. Developer shall appoint a Project Manager to coordinate with Planning, Public Works and Utility Department staff. Public Works will have regular communication with the Project Manager in order to facilitate timely review and approval of design and construction. Prior to Final ARB Submittal 117. Flood Zone: The applicant shall arrange a meeting with the Public Works Engineering Division to verify compliance with the FEMA flood zone construction requirements regarding all new construction as well as remodeling of existing retail buildings. Grading & Building Submittal 118. Grading & Excavation Permit: A Grading and Excavation Permit is required for the project. A grading permit only authorizes grading and storm drain improvements, therefore, the following note shall be included on each grading permit plan sheet: "This grading permit will only authorize general grading and installation of the storm drain system. Other building and utility improvements are shown for reference information only and are subject to a separate building permit approval." No utility infrastructure should be shown inside the building footprints. 119. Storm Drains: The existing municipal storm drainage system in the area may be unable to convey the peak runoff from the project site. The applicant may be required to provide ) stonn water detention on-site to lessen the project's impact on city stonn drains. The applicant's engineer shall provide stonn drain flow and detention calculations, including pre-project and post-project conditions. The calculations must be signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. 120. C3: This project shall comply with the stonn water regulations contained in provision C.3 of the NPDES municipal stonn water discharge pennit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (and incorporated into Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.11). These regulations apply to land development projects that create or replace 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface. In order to address the potential pennanent impacts of the project on stonn water quality, the applicant shall incorporate into the project a set of permanent site design measures, source controls, and treatment controls that serve to protect stonn water quality, subject to the approval of the Public Works Department. The applicant shall identify, size, design and incorporate pennanent stonn water pollution prevention measures (preferably landscape-based treatment controls such as bioswales, filter strips, and penneable pavement rather than mechanical devices that require long-tenn maintenance) to treat the runoff from a "water quality stonn" specified in PAMC Chapter 16.11 prior to discharge to the municipal stonn drain system. In addition, the applicant shall designate a party to maintain the control measures for the life of the improvements and must enter into a maintenance agreement with the City. The City will inspect the treatment measures yearly and charge an inspection fee. 121. UPDATE: New regulations regarding third-party certifications of stonn water treatment designs and installations went into effect 211 0111. Prior to the issuance of the building pennit, the project applicant shall submit a certification by a qualified third-party reviewer that the design of the project complies with the requirements of P AMC Chapter 16.11. Prior to issuance of an occupancy pennit, the project applicant shall submit a certification by a qualified third-party reviewer that the project's pennanent stonn water pollution prevention measures were constructed or installed in accordance with the approved plans. A list of qualified third-party reviewers is available at: http://www.scvurppp- w2k. com! consultants.htm 122. Revision: Additional, new stonn water treatment requirements will go into effect on December 1, 2011. These new requirements will not apply if a development application (ARB) receives final discretionary approval before December 1,2011. 123. Survey Datum: Plans shall be prepared using North American Datum 1983 State Plane Zone 3 for horizontal survey controls and NA VD 1988 for vertical survey controls throughout the design process. J 124. Final Drainage Plan: The plans shall include a final drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional. This plan shall show proposed spot elevations or contours of the site and demonstrate the proper conveyance of storm water to the nearest adequate municipal storm drainage system. Existing drainage patterns, including accommodation of runoff from adjacent properties, shall be maintained. 125. SWPPP: This proposed development will disturb more than one acre of land. Accordingly, the applicant must apply for coverage under the State ·Water Resources Control Board's (SWRCB) NPDES general permit for storm water discharge associated with construction activity. A Notice of Intent (NOl) must be filed for this project with the SWRCB in order to obtain coverage under the permit. The General Permit requires the applicant to prepare and implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The applicant is required to submit two copies of the NOl and the draft SWPPP to the Public Works Department for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. The SWPPP should include both permanent, post-development project design features and temporary measures employed during construction to control storm water pollution. 126. Impervious Surface Area: The proposed development will result in a change in the impervious area of the property. The applicant shall provide calculations of the existing and proposed impervious surface areas with the building permit application. For non- residential properties, a Storm Drainage Fee adjustment on the applicant's monthly City utility bill will take place in the month following the final approval ofthe construction by the Building Inspection Division. The impervious area calculation sheets and instructions are available from Public Works Engineering and on the division's website: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/public-works/eng-documents.htmI 127. Work in the Right-of-Way: The off-site public improvement plans must note that any work that is to be conducted in the public right-of-way must be done per City standards and that the contractor performing this work must first obtain a Street Work Permit from Public Works at the Development Center. 128. Street Trees: Show all street trees in the public right-of-way or state that there are none. Include street tree protection details in the plans. Any removal, relocation or planting of street trees; or excavation, trenching or pavement installation within 10 feet of a street tree, must be approved by Public Works' arborist. This approval shall appear on the plans. \ ,I Prior to Demolition & Constrnction 129. Temporary Encroachment Permit: The contractor may be required to obtain a temporary encroachment permit from Public Works at the Development Center in order to occupy the right-of-way and/or to provide traffic control to perform the demolition. 130. Street Work Permit: A Permit for Constrnction in the Public Street ("street work permit") must be obtained by the general contractor or all subcontractors performing work in the public right-of-way. All construction within the right-of-way, easements or other property under City jurisdiction shall conform to the standard specifications and details of the Public Works and Utility Departments. 131. Logistics Plan: A construction logistics plan shall be provided addressing all impacts to the public and including, at a minimum: work hours, noticing of affected businesses, construction signage, dust control, noise control, storm water pollution prevention, job trailer, contractors' parking, truck routes, staging, concrete pours, crane lifts, scaffolding, materials storage, pedestrian safety, and traffic control. All truck routes shall conform to the City of Palo Alto's Trucks and Truck Route Ordinance, Chapter 10.48, and the route map, which outlines truck routes available throughout the City of Palo Alto. A handout describing these and other requirements for a construction logistics plan is available from Public Works Engineering. Typically, the construction logistics plan is required for and attached to an encroachment permit or a street work permit. 132. Storm Drain Logo: The applicant is required to paint "No Dumping/Flows to Matadero Creek" in blue on a white background adjacent to all onsite storm drain inlets. Stencils of the logo are available from the Public Works Environmental Compliance Division, which may be contacted at (650) 329-2598. Include the instruction to paint the logos on the construction grading and drainage plan. The applicant is required to install thermoplastic logos adjacent to all off-site storm drain inlets that are located in the public right-of-way and affected by the project. The thermoplastic logos may be obtained from the Public Works Inspector. 133. Record Drawings: At the conclusion of the project applicant shall provide digital as- built/record drawings of all improvements constructed in the public right-of-way or easements in which the City owns an interest. The digital files shall conform to North American Datum 1983 State Plane Zone 3 for horizontal survey controls and NA VD 1988 for vertical survey controls. In addition, a digital copy of any project parcel map, subdivision map, or certificate-of-compliance shall also be provided. All files should be delivered in AutoCad format. 134. Building Permit Sign-Off: The Public Works Inspector shall sign-offthe building permit. Activities that must be completed prior to this sign-off include: 1) all off-site improvements, 2) all on-site grading and stonn drain improvements, 3) all post- construction stonn water pollution control measures, 4) entering into and recording a maintenance agreement for the C.3 measures, and 5) submittal of as-built record drawings for improvements in the public right-of-way. Utilities Electrical Engineering General 135. This project requires the installation of padmount transfonners for both the new residential development and the rehabilitation of the existing retail buildings. The present transfonner serving the site shall be removed by CPAU. Proposed locations for the transfonners shall be incorporated on the site plan and submitted to the Utilities Department for approval. 136. The existing main breaker serving the facility, located in CPAU manhole 1637, shall be removed. The new switchgear location shall be incorporated on the site plan and submitted to the Utilities Department for approval. 137. Easements for the pad mounted transfonners and clearances in the front and around the transfonner shall be as per City's requirements. 138. All the existing equipments/vaults and utility lines (on-site) shall be removed or relocated at applicant's expense prior to construction. 139. The applicant shall comply with all the Electric Utility Engineering Department service requirements noted during plan review. 140. The Permittee shall be responsible for identification and location of all utilities, both public and private, within the work area. Prior to any excavation work at the site, the Pennittee shall contact Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600, at least 48 hours prior to beginning work. The Following Shall Be Submitted/or Electrical Permit Submittals 141. , A completed Electric Load Sheet and a full set of plans must be included with all applications involving electrical work. The load sheet must be included with the preliminary submittal. 142. Industrial and large commercial customers must allow sufficient lead-time for Electric Utility Engineering and Operations (typically 8-12 weeks after advance engineering fees have been paid) to design and construct the electric service requested. 143. Only one electric service lateral is pennitted per parcel. Utilities Rule & Regulation #18. 144. The developer/owner shall provide space for installing padmount equipment (i.e. transformers, switches, and interrupters) and associated substructure as required by the City. 145. The customer shall install all electrical substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required from the service point to the customer's switchgear. The design and installation shall be according to the City standards and shown on plans. Utilities Rule & Regulations #16 & #18. 146. A public utility easement shall be required for the padmount transformers. 147. Location of the electric panel/switchboard shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Architectural Review Board and Utilities Department. 148. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, and any other required equipment shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials. In addition, all aboveground equipment shall be screened in a manner that is consistent with the building design and setback requirements. 149. For services larger than 1600 amps, the customer will be required to provide a transition cabinet as the interconnection point between the utility's padmount transformer and the customer's main switchgear. The cabinet design drawings must be submitted to the Electric Utility Engineering Department for review and approval. 150. For underground services, no more than four (4) 750 MCM conductors per phase can be connected to the transformer secondary terminals; otherwise, bus duct must be used for connections to padmount transformers. If customer installs a bus duct directly between the transformer secondary terminals and the main switchgear, the installation of a transition cabinet will not be required. 151. The customer is responsible for sizing the service conductors and other required equipment according to the National Electric Code requirements and the City standards. Utilities Rule & Regulation #18. 152. Any additional facilities and services requested by the Applicant that are beyond what the utility deems standard facilities will be subject to Special Facilities charges. The Special Facilities charges include the cost of installing the additional facilities as well as the cost of ownership. Utilities Rule & Regulation #20. 153. Applicant shall submit well-pump specifications. Specifications to include pump type, HP, voltage, starting current, efficiency, single-phase or three-phase. Also include reduced starting method. 154. Projects that require the extension of high voltage primary distribution lines or reinforcement of offsite electric facilities will be at the customer's expense and must be coordinated with the Electric Utility. During Construction 155. At least 48 hours prior to starting any excavation, the customer must call Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600 to have existing underground utilities located and marked. The areas to be check by USA shall be delineated with white paint. All USA markings shall be removed by the customer or contractor when construction is complete. 156. The customer is responsible for installing all on-site substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required for the electric service. No more than 270 degrees of bends are allowed in a secondary conduit run. All conduits must be sized according to National Electric Code requirements and no 112 -inch size conduits are permitted. All off-site substructure work will be constructed by the City at the customer's expense. Where mutually agreed upon by the City and the Applicant, all or part of the off-site substructure work may be constructed by the Applicant. 157. All primary electric conduits shall be concrete encased with the top of the encasement at the depth of30 inches. No more than 180 degrees of bends are allowed in a primary . conduit nm. Conduit runs over 500 feet in length require additional pull boxes. 158. All new underground conduits and substructures shall be installed per City standards and shall be inspected by the Electrical Underground Inspector before backfilling. 159. The customer is responsible for installing all underground electric service conductors, bus duct, transition cabinets, and other required equipment. The installation shall meet the National Electric Code and the City Standards. 160. Meter and switchboard requirements shall be in accordance with Electric Utility Service Equipment Requirements Committee (EUSERC) drawings accepted by Utility and CPA standards for meter installations. 161. Shop/factory drawings for switchboards (400A and greater) and associated hardware must be submitted for review and approval prior to installing the switchgear to: Gopal Jagannath, P.E. Supervising Electric Project Engineer Utilities Engineering (Electrical) 1007 Elwell Court Palo Alto, CA 94303 162. Catalog cut sheets may not be substituted for factory drawing submittal. 163. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing. Public Works Department Water Quality Control Plant/Environmental Compliance Division 164. P AMC 16.09.032(B)(17) Covered Parking: Drain plumbing for parking garage floor drains must be connected to an oil/water separator with a minimum capacity of 100 gallons, and to the sanitary sewer system. 165. PAMC 16.09.106(e) Dumpsters for New and Remodeled Facilities: New dumpster areas shall be covered. The area shall be designed to prevent water run-on to the area and run- off from the area. 166. PAMC 16.09.032 Loading Docks with Chemicals: Connections to the storm drain shall not be permitted for loading docks where chemicals, hazardous materials, grease, oil, or waste products are handled. 167. Loading dock drains may be connected to the sewer only if the area in which the drain is located is covered or protected from rainwater run-on by berms and/or grading, and appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the superintendent is provided. Any loading dock area with a sanitary sewer drain shall be equipped with a fail-safe valve, which shall be kept closed during periods of operation. 168. PAMC 16.09.l06(d)(4) Loading Docks without Chemicals: Loading dock drains to the storm drain system may be allowed if a valve or equivalent device is provided, which remains closed except when it is raining. 169. Undesignated Retail Space~ P AMC 16.09 -Newly constructed or improved buildings with all or a portion of the space with undesignated tenants or future use will need to meet all requirements that would have been applicable during design and construction. 170. If such undesignated retail space becomes a food service facility the following requirements must be met: P AMC Section 16.09.103(a) Grease Interceptors for Food Service Facilities 171. A grease interceptor shall be installed with a minimum capacity of 750 gallons. The grease interceptor must be sized in accordance with Appendix H of the Uniform Plumbing Code. The sizing calculation must be submitted with the plans. 172. PAMC 16.09.032b(16) Covered Dumpsters for Food Service Facilities: After January 1, 1996, new buildings constructed to house food service facilities shall include a covered area for a dumpster. The area shall be designed to prevent water run-on to the area and runoff from the area. Drains that are installed beneath dumpsters serving food service facilities shall be connected to a grease removal device. 173. P AMC 16.09.1 03( e) Prohibition Against Garbage Disposals: The installation of a garbage grinder at any food service facility is prohibited after January 1, 2003. The kitchen cannot utilize a garbage grinder for food waste disposal to the sanitary sewer. 174. P AMC 16.09.032b(16) Large Item Cleaning Sink for Food Service Facilities: Food service facilities shall have a sink or other area for cleaning floor mats, containers, and equipment, which is connected to a grease interceptor and the sanitary sewer. 175. At the former Moon Cleaners location, the current appropriate level that will be used to define the extent of soil removal and as the comparison criteria for the confirmation sample for PCE is the Environmental Screening Level (ESL) of 0.70 mg/kg for commerciallindustrialland use listed by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) in Screeningfor Environmental Concerns at Sites with Contaminated Soil and Groundwater, Table A, Interim Final November 2007, revised May 2008). This ESL for sites where Groundwater is Current or Potential Source of Drinking Water would be conservatively applied. Characterization and removal of any contaminated soil will be undertaken in coordination with appropriate oversight agencies and that coordination will be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Department of Planning and Community Environment and the Palo Alto Fire Department. 176. The final underground utility plan will be reviewed by a qualified California professional geologist or professional civil engineer, the Palo Alto Fire Department, Utilities Department, and Department of Public Works to determine whether the extension of underground utilities (in a joint trench or separate water lines, sewer lines, storm drains, electrical conduit, etc.) could provide a conduit for PCE soil gas intrusion from the former Moon Cleaners location. In the event utility lines extend through areas near the former Moon Cleaners site and a possibility of soil vapor intrusion remains, appropriate engineering controls will be implemented to reduce possible soil vapor migration through trench backfill and utility conduits. These engineering controls may include placement of low-permeability backfill "plugs" at intervals in the on-site utility trenches or other measures. Measures to be employed will be approved by the Palo Alto Fire Department, the Utilities Department and the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of building permits. '"h. e ll! or r a l o Alto Edgewood Pl aza Location Map This mao is a product of the City 01 PiIIQ A.IIo GIS • •• C iTY OF PALO A LT O Agenda Date: To: From: S ubject: August 21,2013 (HRB) Historic Resources Board Elena Lee Senior Planner Historic Resources Board Staff Report Dep.ar1ment: Planning and Community Environment 2080 Channing Avenue [13PLN-001 97): Review of a request by Sand Hill Property Company for an amendment to the Planned Community Zoning (pC- 5150) for the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Ccnter mixed use project to allow fo r the reconstruction afone of the two historic Eichler retail buildings (Building I). Building I was approved to be dismantled and rehabilitated onsile as one of the primary public benefits, but was demolished instead. The Supplemental Environmenta11mpact Repon prepared fOT the project has been published and the public comment period began May 17 and ended July 20,2013. A Planning and Transportation Commission public hearing for tbe projecl has been tentatively scheduled for September 11, 2013. RECOMMENDA nON Staff recommends thal tbe Historic Resources Board (HRB) review the proposed revised project and the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and provide feedback to staff, th~ Planning a nd TranspOrtation Commission (P&TC) and City Council. BACKGROUND Project Hi,tory Edgewood Plaza is a commercial shopping center built between 1956 and 1958 by Joseph EichlerfEichler Homes and A. Quincy Jones of lanes and Emmons. The center was originally built with the eKisling grocery building (1957), two retail buildings (t 958), an office building that formerly housed lhe office of Eichler Homes (1959), and a gas station (1957). The office building and gas station sites are not part of the subject shopping center. Edgewood Plaza is nol listed on The Nat;onal Register of Historic Places (NR.J-n», tbe California Register of Historical Resowces (CRHR» nor on the Palo A Ito Historic lnventory. Although this site is not 00 the City'S inventory, because it has been deemed eligiblt: for bolh registers, it is considered a hiStoric resource. Accordingly. slaff is requesting the HRB's input 011 this change to the project and the SEIR because it is about tbe historic resource. As the center is not on the City's Historic Inventory, the HRB is not required by the City's Municipal Code to make a formal reCommendation to the ARB. However, given the historic importance of the site, the HRB's comments wi ll be important and helpful during the entitlement process. Page I The site was the subject of a Planned Community (PC) rezoning approved by the City Council on March 9, 2012 to allow the redevelopment of an existing vacant and historic shopping center, including the relocation of one of three retail buildings, the addition of ten homes and a new 9,000 square foot park. Two of the existing commercial buildings, Buildings # 1 and #2 have been deemed historic resources. Building 3, the fornler market building, currently occupied by Fresh Market, is not considered a historic resource. Building # 1 was approved to be disassembled, relocated on site and rehabilitated. Building #2 was approved to be rehabilitated in place. The primary public benefits for the Edgewood Plaza project consist of 1) the preservation of historic resources and 2) the construction and operation of the grocery store. An Environnlental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified by the City Council to provide environmental clearance in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the rezoning. The EIR was certified by the City Council based on the assumption that historic impacts for the relocation of Building #1 wouldbe mitigated to a less than significant impact because the building would be rehabilitated in accordance with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. This was consistent with the HRB' s recommendation at the October 19, 2011 hearing for the original project. Specifically, the character defining features of the building, such as the wood window frames, glu-lam beams, concrete block wall, cornice and wood paneling, would be retained. In September 2012, a stop work order was issued because the historic building (Building #1) that was to be disassembled and reconstructed onsite was illegally demolished.. On March 4, 2013, the City Council authorized the continued construction of the grocery store, the remaining historic (Building #2), six of the homes and other onsite and offsite improvements. The City Council also authorized staff to hire Carey & Company, the historic consulting finn that the perfonned the peer review on the original EIR for the City, to review plans and monitor construction to ensure that Building #2 comply with the PC zoning and all mitigation measures, 'including the Secretary of Interior's Standards of Rehabilitation. The monitoring has included multiple walk throughs and special focus has been placed in the preservation of the building's signature glu-lam beams. To date, the applicant has completed the grocery store building, various parking lot improvements and installation of the electric charging stations. The rehabilitation of Building #2 is in process. DISCUSSION Building #1 Building # 1 was originally approved to be dismantled and rebuilt to accommodate the redevelopment. As discussed above, the building would be reconstructed and rehabilitated according to the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. The building would have retained the character defining features, such as the tum-down roof, glue laminated or glu-lam beams, cmu block walls, and redwood siding. The walls have been defined as a "kit of parts" that are proposed to be reorganized to maintain the historic character of the buildings, while allowing the modernization of the building to accommodate a successful retail environment. As of September of2012, the building was demolished and the materials were disposed of, making it not possible to comply with the original approval. The applicant is now requesting the City to allow complete reconstruction of Building # 1 with all Page 2 new materials. All other components of the project, including the ten residences and park, would remain the same. Under the revised project, the building would be constructed with all new materials in the approved location. The building would be substantially consistent with the originally approved design with a few minor modifications. The most important modification is the City's requirement to replicate the original storefront window system. The original approval approved installation of new much simpler wood framed windows. Like Building #2, the original window frames in Building # 1 had been replaced over the years with similar but simpler wood frames. The replacement wood window frames were flat and did not include the projecting moldings. This modification allows Building #1 to be rebuilt in a design significantly closer to its original appearance than the altered building that was illegally demolished. The original wood window frames of both Eichler buildings were a more complex design that included narrow full-height projecting moldings on either side of the glass which gave the windows a streamline modeme look. Because one storefront at the rear of Building #2 was preserved' intact since' 1957, the City and the applicant's historic consultant will be able to use that storefront as a model in the reconstruction of Buildings #2 and # 1, if approved, to its original 1957 design. The rebuilding of Building #1 will provide a much more historic design of the building than was provided in the building that was demolished and even compared to the version if the building was preserved and rehabilitated as originally approved. The applicant has agreed to install these more complex window frames for both Buildings #1 and #2. Working closely with the City's historic consultant, the applicant has custom made replicas for the rehabilitation of Buiiding #2 and will do the same for Building #1 should the amendment be approved. Building # 1 is proposed to be substantially similar to the originally approved design, which was based on the "kit of parts" concept that would ensure that the building would retain the character defining features of the Eichler aesthetic. The "kit of parts" consist of the block walls, the storefront glass, redwood siding and the glu-Iam beams. The building would still include a new roof screen to hide roof mounted equipment. The modifications include moving around of the "parts" and modifications of the proportions of each element to accommodate modem tenants and requirements of the Building Code. As illustrated in the elevations shown on plan set pages A3.2 and A3.3 (Attachment D), the new building would consist of the same types of materials in a different configuration. These minor modifications have been carefully reviewed and found acceptable by the City's Historic Preservation Plaluler. Similar modifications to Building #2 have been reviewed and approved by the City, also with consultation by the City's historic consultant, Carey & Company. Although the loss of a historic building cannot be mitigated, the historic accuracy of the replacement structure would be increased with the installation of the more complex window frames. Staff has determined that because the storefront glass system was a large part of the original design, this requirement provides a significant historic benefit to the project. HISTORIC RESOURCES AND SEIR A Final ErR was certified by the City Council, following positive recommendations by the HRB, the PlalIDing and Transportation Commission (P&TC) , and the Architectural Review Board. The original Final ErR analyzed the historic resources and the proj ect' s potential impact on those Page 3 resources. Four reports regarding the project's historic resources were prepared for the project's Eut An initial report was prepared by Page & Turnbull, Inc., the applicant's consultant, with a peer review prepared by Carey & Company. <Buildings 1 and 2 were deemed to have retained integrity of design, despite some nlinor exterior alterations over the past fifty years. Both buildings would be eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) under Criterion 3, Architecture, as a rare example of commercial development by the noted partnership of Eichler Homes and Jones & Emmons. Because the site has been determined to be eligible for both the NRHP and CRHR, per the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the site would qualify for the Palo Alto Historic Inventory under Criterion 3 and 4. Because the complete loss of Building # 1 has been deemed a substantial change to the proj ect, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), a Supplemental to the EIR (SEIR) has been prepared to address the changes needed to comply with State law. The supplement contains the information needed to address the change. This SEIR is focused only on the new significant historic impact created by the change to the proposal, the loss of Building # 1 and the replacement construction in the same location of new materials. The original Final EIR included a mitigation measure (MMCR-2.3) that required compliance with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation to reduce the impact to historic resources to a less than significant level for both Buildings #1 and #2. Loss of Building #1 's materials has made application of the mitigation measure and the Standards of Rehabilitation not possible. The other two mitigation measures to reduce the impact to historic resources to a less than significant level included the preparation of a Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) (MM CR-2.1) and creation of ad is play illustrating the history of Edgewood Plaza (MM CR-2.2) are still applicable. The HABS survey was completed and has been used to facilitate the preparation of the SEIR and the project implementation. The applicant is working on the design of the historic display. The City's Historic Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 16.49 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC), states that the Historic Resources Board is responsible for making recommendations to the Director ofPlmming and Community Environment and City Council on projects that could impact sites listed in the City's Historic Inventory. Although this site is not on the City's inventory, because it has been deemed a historic resource, staff is requesting the HRB' s input on the historic component of this project. The HRB's comments will be important and helpful to the P&TC and City Council during the upcoming project reviews. The SEIR was prepared to address the historic impact of Building # 1 and circulated on May 17, 2013 for the required 45-day period. The Notice of Availability and SEIR were sent to the State Clearinghouse and made available for public review at City Hall and the City's website (http://goo.gl/PinreG). Additionally, the notices were emailed to interested parties. The end of the circulation period was originally July 1,2013 but had been extended to July 20th. Copies of the SEIR were provided to the HRB, P&TC and City Council at the beginning of the circulation period. No public comments have been received. The document concluded that the revised project would result in two new significant impacts: 1) Significant Impact to the historic resources specific to Building #1 after implementation of mitigation measures and 2) Significant Cumulative Historic Resources Impact. Page 4 The SEIR concluded that there would be a new significant impact to historic resources due to the loss of Building # 1. The Secretary of Interi9r has established four treatments or guidelines to address the preservation of historic resources: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration and Reconstruction. Because there was a complete loss of materials, only the Reconstruction approach is applicable to address impacts to historic resources. The Reconstruction guidelines have typically been used in very selective sitl1ations, such as reconstruction of historic museum, where there is a clear public benefit (usually educational). The guidelines include requirements such as preservation of any remaining historic materials and construction of only the original design. The complete list of Guidelines and Standards for Reconstruction are provided on pages 19-22 of the SEIR. However, application of the guidelines cannot reduce the demolition to a less than significant level because none of the historic fabric would be retained. The SEIR also analyzed the potential impact to the remaining historic building, Building #2. Because the proposed Building # 1 is substantially consistent with the originally approved design and in the same location, it was determined that there would not be an impact to the character of Building #2. To address the new impact caused by the loss of Building #1, mitigation measure CR-2.3 has been amended. The mitigation measure as originally written still applies to Building #2. CR-2.3 now states: A new Building 1 will be constructed of new building materials that match the character and one-story form of the commercial buildings of Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, consistent with the previous approved building elevations. As a condition of approval, all facades of Building #1 will be wood-framed storefront systems that replicate the detail of the original 1957 window design. The final design and materials to be used in the renovation of Building #2 and reconstruction of Building #1 will be reviewed and approved by the Director and the Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment. In addition, staff is also proposing to have the City's historic consultant, Carey & Company, to review and monitor the construction of Building # 1 sinlilar to what was required for Building #2. As noted above, application of the revised mitigation measure will not reduce the level of significance because none of the original building has been retained. The SEIR also concluded that there is a significant impact to Cumulative Cultural Resources, in that the loss of Building #1 combined with the recently approved demolition of the Edward Durrell Stone Building Complex (1959) at the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) campus (as part of the SUMC Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project approved in July 2011) has created a cumulatively considerable impact to mid- century modem buildings by prominent architects. The Stone Building Complex represents a significant example of the modem design Aesthetic and of a significant architect. The loss of Building # 1 combined with the loss of the Stone Building Complex will therefore be a significant inlpact. Alternatives have been set forth and evaluated in the SEIR to allow the City Council and recommending bodies to consider ways to nlinimize the significance of the impacts to historic Page 5 resources. Two alternatives were analyzed in the SEIR: (1) No Project and (2) Building Design. The No Project alternative would be a project without a new Building #1. Because the original building no longer exists, this would not avoid or reduce the historic impact due to the loss. However, the project objectives of creating a new mixed use project with three retail buildings would not be met. The second alternative, Building Design Alternative, would allow for a new building to be constructed in its new location with new materials. However, the building would be constructed in a manner that duplicates the original 1957 design. This nlay result in a more historically accurate representation, but would still be a new building. Therefore it would not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. The alternative would also not meet the project objectives because it would not allow the changes originally proposed by the applicant to make the building more suitable for a viable retail building. RECOMMENDED REVIEW ITEMS FOR THE HRB 1. Review and comment on the adequacy of the analysis for the loss of Building # 1 and the proposal to reconstruct the building as originally approved with all new materials, and 2. Review and provide a recommendation on the change to the project which would allow the construction of Building # 1 with all new materials. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW As described above, a SEIR has been prepared for the project. The SEIR was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act to address changes to the project that occurred after the certification of the or~ginal Final EIR for the original project. The Draft EIR was circulated for public review on May 17,2013 through July 20,2013. A Final EIR will be prepared to respond to comments received from the public, the HRB, P&TC and City Council. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that the Final EIR be circulated for a minimum often days. Upon completion of the circulation period, the EIR must be certified and accepted by the decision making body before a decision can be made on the application the EIR was prepared for. In this case, the City Council must certify this EIR before taking a final action on the proj ect. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Location Map Attachrrlent B: Approved CEQA Resolution Attachment C: Edgewood Plaza Project Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Previously provided and available online, including the original FEIR at http://goo.gl!Pj m'cG) Attachment D: Project Plans* (Commissioners & Libraries only) Page 6 COURTESY COPIES John Tze, Ho Holdings No.1 LLC Prepared by: Elena Lee, Senior Planner @- Reviewed by: Steven Turner, Advance Planning Manager Page 7 Historic Resources Board 1 Draft Minutes 2 August 21, 2013 3 Excerpt 4 5 6 7 8 1. 2080 Channing Avenue [13PLN-00197]: Review of a request by Sand Hill Property 9 Company for an amendment to the Planned Community Zoning (PC-5150) for the 10 Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center mixed use project to allow for the reconstruction of 11 one of the two historic Eichler retail buildings (Building 1). Building 1 was approved 12 to be dismantled and rehabilitated onsite as one of the primary public benefits, but 13 was demolished instead. The Supplemental Environmental Impact Report prepared 14 for the project has been published and the public comment period began May 17 and 15 ended July 20, 2013. A Planning and Transportation Commission public hearing for 16 the project has been tentatively scheduled for September 11, 2013. 17 18 Chair Bernstein: Next on our agenda is 2080 Channing Avenue. Request, review of a 19 request by Sand Hill Property Company for an amendment to the Planned Community 20 Zoning (PC-5150) for the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center mixed-use project to allow 21 for the reconstruction of one of the two historic Eichler retail buildings (Building 1). 22 Building 1 was approved to be dismantled and rehabilitated onsite as one of the primary 23 public benefits, but was demolished instead. The Supplemental Environmental Impact 24 Report (EIR) prepared for the project has been published and the public comment period 25 began May 17th and ended July 20, 2013. A Planning and Transportation Commission 26 (PTC) public hearing for the project has been tentatively scheduled for September 11, 27 2013. Planning staff have a staff report for us. 28 29 Steven Turner, Advance Planning Manager: Yes, good morning Board Members. Steven 30 Turner, Advance Planning Manager. I’d like to introduce Elena Lee a Senior Planner in 31 the Planning Division who will be giving the staff report this morning. 32 33 Elena Lee, Senior Planner: Thank you. The purpose of today’s hearing is to request 34 Historic Resources Board (HRB) feedback on the adequacy of a Supplemental EIR that 35 was prepared for the project and the proposal to approve the rebuilding of Building 1 in 36 its originally approved location with all new materials. Although the shopping center has 37 not been identified on any historic inventories because it was deemed eligible for both the 38 State and Federal register staff is requesting the Board’s recommendation regarding the 39 proposed project. This site was the subject of a Planned Community (PC) Zoning that 40 was approved last year that allowed the rehabilitation of the existing shopping center, 41 three building shopping center, and the construction of 10 new single family residential 42 units as well as a small park. The project included the relocation and renovation of one 43 of the two retail buildings that were deemed historic and rehabilitation of the other 44 historic building and renovation of the grocery building, which is now occupied by Fresh 45 Market and was deemed not historic. A final Environmental Impact Report was certified 46 to provide environmental clearance on the assumption that both historic buildings would 1 be rehabilitated per the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and 2 therefore would not create any significant unavoidable impacts. 3 4 In September 2012 a stop work order was issued because one of the two historic 5 buildings, Building 1 that was supposed to be dismantled and rehabilitated onsite was 6 demolished. Council authorized the continued construction of the project in March of 7 2013 that included construction of, continued construction of Building 2, which was still, 8 which was not demolished and so application of the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for 9 Rehabilitation would still be possible. The Council also authorized construction on the 10 four homes. Since the authorization of Council the applicant has requested an 11 amendment to the Planned Community Zoning that would allow the rebuilding of 12 Building 1 with all new materials. As part of the oversight staff has also retained Carey 13 and Company, the City’s historic consultant for the Environmental Impact Report for the 14 original project to review all the building permit plans related to Building 2 as well as to 15 provide onsite monitoring to make sure that there’s full compliance with the project. 16 17 The, as I stated, the applicant is now requesting ability to move forward with the project 18 and the proposal would be to build it where it was approved and substantially consistent 19 with its originally approved elevation, but with all new materials. The applicant has 20 made minor modifications to the elevations to better address modern tenant’s needs. 21 These changes have been reviewed both by staff including Historic Preservation Planner 22 as well as the City’s historic consultant and accordingly the Supplemental EIR was also 23 prepared for the project that would address that change to the project, which would be 24 that Building 1 would be constructed with all new materials; however, the Rehabilitation 25 Standards are no longer applicable so analysis was done using the Reconstruction 26 Standards. However, because all the building materials have been removed and it’s no 27 longer available and because there is no remnant of the historic materials, the EIR 28 assumes that there are significant unavoidable impacts because the building, the historic 29 resources is no longer available and accordingly the EIR assumes significant unavoidable 30 impacts for historic resources as well as cumulative impacts because this is the loss of yet 31 another historic building in the City. 32 33 So staff is requesting feedback from the HRB, comments regarding the adequacy of the 34 Supplemental EIR and its analysis of the historic resources and again because the only 35 change to the project was the historic building this EIR focused on the historic resources. 36 Staff would also like to bring attention to one significant addition to the project. The City 37 required application of the original constructed windows, which included narrow full 38 height projecting moldings. During the analysis, during the construction process staff, it 39 was discovered that one of the storefront windows in Building 2 were the original 40 windows. So we were able to require that that be preserved again under the auspices of 41 the City’s historic consultant and use that to basically replicate those original windows. 42 The applicant has agreed to do that with Building 2 and if Building 1 is approved then the 43 same thing would occur on Building 1. Staff is also proposing to retain Carey and 44 Company to also monitor the construction and review of Building 1 should this be 45 approved. 46 1 So the custom made windows I think, we believe will help create a building that is 2 significantly closer to its original appearance than what would have been required under 3 the original project which required installation of wood windows but not the original 4 moldings. So staff’s assessment is that this will significantly enhance the historic quality 5 of the building and this is already going to be occurring with Building 2. So basically 6 because of the amount of storefront glass that exists on Building 1 we believe that this 7 really does add to the project. And as stated earlier the whole project including the 8 Supplemental EIR will be going back to the Planning and Transportation Commission on 9 September 11th for their analysis and a recommendation. Then the whole project will 10 return to the City Council for their final decision. As part of that decision there will be a 11 discussion on the requirement for public benefits and any other changes that the City 12 Council or any of the boards or commission would like to see on this project. 13 14 The applicant is available here today as well as Nora Monette and Shannon George of the 15 City’s Environmental Impact Report Consultant. This concludes staff report. Oh, also 16 want to bring your attention to an e-mail that was sent to the Board yesterday and is 17 available at places today, which is from one of the neighbors of the project. And she’s 18 just in that e-mail, yes, stating that she fully supports the project and would like to see the 19 project progress. Other than that particular comment staff has received some questions 20 and feedback from neighbors regarding concern about the project, most of it just asking 21 what’s going on and also stating their support for the project because they just want to see 22 the project continue. Other than that staff has not received any other comments regarding 23 the EIR in particular. This concludes staff’s report. 24 25 Chair Bernstein: Ok, thank you. For members of the public I just want to announce our 26 normal process for this hearing, after the staff recommendation that Planner Lee just 27 mentioned then there’d be applicant presentation 10 minutes presentation, then Historic 28 Resources Board questions of the applicant or staff, then public comment. I do have one 29 comment card from members of the public. Applicant closing comments, three minutes, 30 close the public hearing, and then any Motions or recommendations by the Board and 31 then a final vote. So moving ahead, applicant presentation; I’d like to invite the applicant 32 to, and please state your name for our recorded message. Thank you. 33 34 John Tze, Sand Hill Property Company: Good morning, my name is John Tze with Sand 35 Hill Property Company at 203 Redwood Shores Parkway in Redwood City. Thank you 36 for seeing me this morning. I know it’s early. 37 38 And Board Member Bunnenberg just to clarify, we did change the historic sign so there is 39 no metal element on that wing carrying the… yes, that’s correct. It is wood painted. So 40 going right back to the way the original sign was. Correct. So just confirming that. 41 42 We’re continuously working with the neighbors, meeting with them regularly, keeping 43 them updated with what’s happening with the project. Everybody seems to be very 44 pleased with the way Fresh Market has opened and the condition of Fresh Market 45 bringing it back to the way it was originally designed or at least as close as we could. 46 The second building, the historic building that’s undergoing the renovation is progressing 1 as well. The detailing on the wood storefront frames is actually being hand installed right 2 now as we speak and the windows should be going in next week. And I’m sorry, I was 3 saying the second building, Building 2, that is being renovated in places is progressing 4 quite well. The detailing on the wood framing is being installed right now and the 5 windows themselves will be installed next week and so that building should be pretty 6 much closed up and starting the plaster and painting within the next few weeks and you’ll 7 see significantly how our proposed Building 1 will look since it has very similar Eichler 8 characteristics, paint colors, and so forth. So there doesn’t have to be too much 9 imagination in what Building 1 will be. 10 11 We continue to work very closely with Carey and Company keeping them apprised of 12 every detail, every little change that tenants are requiring, such as an ATM for Chase 13 Bank, additional lighting for the ATM required by the banking authorities, things like 14 that. We continue to work with staff and Carey and Company and by the way the, I 15 wanted to express my appreciation for the staff report. The planning report seemed very 16 thorough and I’m very appreciative of everybody’s time on this. One little detail is 17 although it was quite a surprise to us, but we take full responsibility, I do, not all the 18 demolished materials was removed from the site. And so a lot of the old glulam beams 19 from Building 1 are actually still on site, but I don’t think that really makes any 20 difference. I will be available for any questions and be very happy to answer anything or 21 make clarification as needed. Thank you very much. 22 23 Chair Bernstein: And thank you John. First of all I’d like to make a disclosure that I have 24 actually visited the site. I bought some eggs there, so. 25 26 Board Member Bower: Yeah, I had the opportunity to visit the site yesterday as well, 27 looked at Building 2 in preparation for this meeting. 28 29 Board Member Bunnenberg: I also visited the site. I shopped at the Fresh Market. I 30 looked at Building 2 as much as possible and of course saw that there are supports up for 31 Building 1 it appeared. So that I made a site visit. 32 33 Chair Bernstein: Alright, then moving ahead on our schedule of events Historic 34 Resources Board questions of the applicant or staff. Yeah, David? 35 36 Board Member Bower: Quick question; the glass in Building 1 I assume now will be 37 insulated glass? 38 39 Mr. Tze: That’s correct. It’ll be the same glass that’s in the grocery building and going 40 into Building 2. 41 42 Board Member Bower: Yeah, ok. It’s not significant, just a question of interest. 43 44 Chair Bernstein: Beth. 45 46 Board Member Bunnenberg: Actually I kind of have a line of questioning and then 1 actually to ask for Mr. Tze’s help as well. Because this historic, loss of historic fabric is 2 really a very serious matter I had some questions about it. In the drawings that we were 3 provided on A33Y, there is a small statement that the existing wood panel and this is on 4 Building 1 should be carefully removed and stored. Can you tell me if that statement also 5 got onto the construction drawings, which of course are much more detailed? 6 7 Mr. Tze: Yes, that is actually excerpted from the permit, construction permit drawing set. 8 9 Board Member Bunnenberg: So that that and it included the glulam beams and also that 10 one referred to redwood that was vertically grooved. Was any of that material still left or 11 did Building 2 have any of that vertically grooved redwood? 12 13 Mr. Tze: Yes, a lot of that material is left. Working with Dennis Backlund we thoroughly 14 investigated Building 2’s condition before we started work on it a few months ago and 15 discovered what panels were original. We were very surprised with a lot of our 16 discovery, but those panels that were deemed to be original have been protected, 17 carefully removed, and placed into a safekeeping trailer or storage container on site for 18 reference. So (interrupted) 19 20 Board Member Bunnenberg: For reference and you also will be using them for Building 1 21 for the, where the vertically grooved was indicated. 22 23 Mr. Tze: That’s correct. It’s the (interrupted) 24 25 Board Member Bunnenberg: So it’s your model, it’s your sample, the pieces you have 26 (interrupted) 27 28 Mr. Tze: That’s correct. 29 30 Board Member Bunnenberg: Are the models to make sure that you’re doing that. Thank 31 you very much. I also noted that there was some mention of raptor nests and whether 32 there were any archeological finds. And sometimes some of that is just word that’s put in 33 in this kind of thing. Did you find any raptor nests? No. 34 35 Mr. Tze: No, not that we’re aware of; no archeological (interrupted) 36 37 Board Member Bunnenberg: And no archeological (interrupted) 38 39 Mr. Tze: Artifacts of significance (interrupted) 40 41 Board Member Bunnenberg: Things. 42 43 Mr. Tze: No. 44 45 Board Member Bunnenberg: Ok, because I had been asked that question by a member of 1 the public. So my question to you is: this is a very serious matter and have you 2 suggestions as a person who’s been through it as to how we as a Board and a City could 3 avoid this kind of thing? Is it a matter of training? Is it a matter of highlighting on the 4 construction plans? Is it a matter of very stiff regulations and penalties? What do you 5 see and how do you see the monitoring as having gone? 6 7 Mr. Tze: That actually goes to the heart of how this occurred and Former Planning 8 Director Curtis Williams and I had numerous conversations of this, about that exact topic: 9 how to, how this, why this occurred and how to prevent it from happening again. The 10 solution I feel personally is the monitoring of Carey and Company or somebody who 11 understands construction, the practical implications of what you are hoping to find when 12 you start construction, what you do find, and somebody who has the judgment and 13 expertise to be able to guide you through that as you find inevitable surprises through the 14 construction process. So the monitoring of Carey and Company in this case or any 15 historic consultant who has construction background has been instrumental in guiding us 16 through the rehabilitation of Building 2. Dennis Backlund’s assistance or oversight 17 during the discovery of what Building 2 is was very key. 18 19 I would say stepping back our biggest mistake was investigating the grocery building 20 condition and realizing that yeah, it doesn’t meet historic standards, but not thoroughly 21 investigating the construction condition of the two historic buildings before this whole 22 process and EIR and everything was started a year or two ago. And so that wasn’t a 23 historic issue that was just simply a construction miss. When you’re renovating 24 something you should try to understand it thoroughly before you start. But I think just 25 that oversight and having somebody act as the bridge on the construction site and 26 understanding the entitlement process is key. 27 28 Board Member Bunnenberg: And was the historic documentation done? Photographs 29 and so forth were supposed to have been taken. Was that done? 30 31 Mr. Tze: Yes, the conditions require us to have survey and all of that was done. I 32 personally was checking off every line item as we progressed. 33 34 Board Member Bunnenberg: Thank you very much. 35 36 Chair Bernstein: Other Board Members? David? 37 38 Board Member Bower: Just a little follow up on that. So I was out there yesterday. I 39 looked at the building Number 2 and there’s effectively no building there. I mean 40 Eichler’s didn’t have a lot. They were very streamlined designs. So they’re a beam, 41 prominent architectural features would be the beams, the Concrete Masonry Unit (CMU) 42 block walls, the siding, and the glass walls. Now when this project came to our Board the 43 first time I wondered how Building 1 was going to be moved because I’m pretty sure the 44 cinder block walls had no grout. Is that what you found? 45 46 Mr. Tze: Yeah, we found in our investigation of the grocery building, which we thought 1 would be in the best condition of the three buildings simply because of its height and its 2 structural requirements at the time it was built would be in the best condition, but during 3 construction even the walls we thought we would save turned out not to be reusable and 4 no walls in the grocery building are original. And similarly from a practical standpoint 5 we never thought we would be able to actually pick up and move one of the historic 6 masonry walls and that was just kind of a practical issue that we had vetted with the 7 historians early on. But yes, we found that they weren’t to any kind of structural code of 8 today. 9 10 Board Member Bower: Sure I watched the grocery building be reconstructed and so when 11 this project came to us initially I thought well what you’ll be doing on that Building 1 is 12 moving the roof, because that’s really the only part of the structure that you could 13 actually pick up and move. You could’ve picked up the beams with it, but the posts that 14 support the beams probably don’t have, I’m guessing didn’t have adequate connections, 15 maybe they weren’t even, they might have been redwood, which is a typical material that 16 Eichler used, so what we’ve lost in, where I’m going with this is what we’ve lost in this 17 particular situation is the glass storefronts frames, some of the siding which you have 18 saved, if I understood your comment to Beth. So in effect we have not lost a lot of a 19 building because there wasn’t a lot of the building to lose initially. So I understand 20 we’ve lost the roof, I understand the protection of historic fabric, but there wasn’t a lot of 21 it here so I think what I saw yesterday onsite is that you can reproduce this building and 22 make it look just like the old one even though it’s not the old one. And that’s I guess 23 why we’re here today. Is that an adequate statement? 24 25 Mr. Tze: We are reproducing the original 50’s building to meet current code and so the 26 plans that you have are actually the construction documents, the permit drawings, but you 27 cannot have a 12 inch thick roof anymore because there was no insulation in those roofs. 28 And so now you see that roof is about 22 inches. You have the overhanging roof lines at 29 the same distance, six feet. You have the turn down roofs where they were original. The 30 posts actually, this is just simply a post and beam construction, the posts were actually 31 four inch steel columns, tubular columns, just type, but structurally they weren’t 32 embedded into the ground properly. Their buckets up, holding up the glulam beams 33 weren’t quite adequate today. 34 35 What we found in the roof of Building 1 and Building 2, if you notice in Building 2 very 36 little of the roof is actually store original and many of the glulam beams had to be 37 replaced as well because they failed. 38 39 Board Member Bower: Sure. 40 41 Mr. Tze: Even before we purchased the property in 2005 the roof had pretty much failed 42 in both these buildings. They weren’t properly sloped anymore. We, every time it rained 43 we had to go up there and wash off the rainwater and so that settling rainwater over the 44 years had basically dry rotted large portions of the roof all the way through the glulam 45 beams. And so one of the conditions that we found was, coming to your point, we 46 actually weren’t able to salvage any of the roof because and that’s something that our 1 historic consultant and we and the structural engineer reviewed, you could actually put a 2 pencil into the glulam beam in points. And so our structural engineer pretty much 3 insisted you can’t use any of these glulam beams. Maybe we can go out and test them 4 and try to salvage a few, but he wasn’t very comfortable using any of the glulam beams 5 because we had to meet a new building construction structural requirements of today. 6 7 On top the glulam beams if you understand construction, that’s why Carey and Company 8 has been very good. On top of the glulam beams you had purlins going back and forth 9 and then on top of the purlins, these are the roughly 2 by 8 inch or 2 by 10 inch purlins 10 that built on top of the glulam beams in perpendicular direction to the beams and then on 11 top of that you had basically just plywood. And on top of the plywood was basically just 12 a little tar and gravel type of roof to keep water out. Well when the plywood rotted there 13 was not really not much of any roof to save because the purlins were also damaged. It 14 just kind of made its way all the way through. 15 16 In our discovery phase of Building 1 before Carey and Company go involved the wood 17 slatted walls that you’re mentioning, most of those weren’t original. They looked exactly 18 the same and we couldn’t even tell, but somebody at some point had to replace them and 19 used plywood and just adhered little one by quarter inch strips to the plywood. And so if 20 you were very careful you could see little nails and so it wasn’t actually the lathed 21 grooved slats that were original. And we found that in almost all the way around the 22 building. So as far as what really we could move we could’ve moved the whole building 23 theoretically, but then we would have had to replace everything. 24 25 Board Member Bower: Yeah, so where I was going with this is I thought this was going 26 to be a very difficult process. When I first heard it doesn’t surprise me that you’re back 27 here with this situation and that’s maybe a little more destructive testing earlier in the 28 process would’ve given you a better understanding of existing conditions and so maybe 29 we wouldn’t have to be here. Anyway I just wanted to make that (interrupted) 30 31 Mr. Tze: Yeah. 32 33 Chair Bernstein: Other Board Members, questions for the applicant or staff? Michael. 34 35 Board Member Makinen: Thank you Chair Bernstein. What do you have in the way of 36 evidence of the original look of Building 1 as far as photographs or drawings that you 37 could use to guide you in the reconstruction of that building? 38 39 Mr. Tze: Oh we photographed both buildings thoroughly with hundreds of photographs 40 and beyond that we did a HABS survey. Our architect took those photos. Beyond that 41 we hired a historic consultant to do the HABS survey, which were additional 42 photographs. The architectural construction drawings that you have copies of that were 43 inserted into this revised package of yours were based on the historic buildings that were 44 there. it was, everything was available when these drawings were produced. 45 46 Board Member Makinen: Thank you. 1 2 Mr. Tze: And beyond that of course we have materials from Building 2 stored. 3 4 Chair Bernstein: Ok. Yeah, Elena on the staff report it says “Recommended review items 5 for the HRB: review and comment on the adequacy of the analysis of the loss.” I assume 6 that’s the adequacy of the Supplemental EIR? 7 8 Ms. Lee: Yes it is. 9 10 Chair Bernstein: And also then “Comment on the proposal to reconstruct the building as 11 originally approved with all new materials,” and “Review and provide a recommendation 12 on the change to the project, which would allow the construction of Building 1 with all 13 new materials.” Any other items that you’d like the HRB to review? 14 15 Ms. Lee: No, that’s pretty much all of what staff is requesting feedback on. You know 16 it’s primarily the project is the Supplemental EIR and the amendment to the Planned 17 Community Zoning. 18 19 Chair Bernstein: Ok, thank you. 20 21 Mr. Turner: Staff might direct the Board specifically to the Supplemental Environmental 22 Impact Report (SEIR), which I believe that you, were, was previously distributed to you. 23 One of the tasks that the HRB often preforms is a discussion about the project’s 24 consistency with the Secretary Standards and a discussion and analysis of this project’s 25 consistency with the Standards are contained within the SEIR and I believe it begins on 26 Page 16. Just for your reference, you have probably looked at this already, but just 27 wanted to direct you and the public to the discussion within the SEIR. So finding, if the 28 Board finds that the SEIR is adequate I think you would also be finding that the 29 reconstruction of Building 1 would be consistent with the Standards as well. 30 31 As Elena mentioned I think previously the overall there is still a significant impact that 32 cannot be mitigated even though the SEIR does recommend mitigations it cannot reduce 33 the impacts to a less than significant level. And so therefore Council would have to adopt 34 essentially a statement of overriding considerations with the Supplemental EIR at one of 35 their future reviews. 36 37 Ms. Lee: Staff also wants to point out that the original SEIR was distributed to the Board 38 in May, but the entire document including the original Environmental Impact Report are 39 all available online on the City’s website. 40 41 Chair Bernstein: Thank you. Ok, if there are no more questions for the applicant or staff 42 we will move to members of the public. I have one card from Herb Borock. Herb 43 welcome, if you could state your name for our recorded documents? Thanks. 44 45 Herb Borock: Good morning Chair Bernstein and Board Members. My name’s Herb 1 Borock. I hesitated even coming here this morning because the behavior of City 2 Manager and the City Council on this project indicate to me that they don’t think we have 3 a Historic Resources Board and since you’re not relevant anymore maybe the best 4 recommendation you can make is that you dissolve the Board, Council dissolves the 5 Board. Now I realize it may be in the City Council’s interest to continue to have a 6 Historic Resources Board, an Architectural Review Board (ARB), and a Planning and 7 Transportation Commission so they can appoint warm bodies to each of the boards and 8 commissions who will then vote in favor of development projects and disregard the 9 zoning code in the same way that the Council and the Manager do. 10 11 On this particular project to go to Board Member Bunnenberg’s question there has to be a 12 price to pay for the action that was taken. The staff report indicates that a stop work 13 order was issued in September of last year, almost a year ago. In fact, the staff permitted 14 the developer to continue working on the grocery store. So that’s not a stop work order. 15 And they didn’t bring the issue to the Council until six months later when the grocery 16 store was about to be opened. So that doesn’t show any interest in doing anything about 17 what had happened. 18 19 I suspect that the building that was demolished was only demolished after the developer 20 and his consultant figured out that if they couldn’t rebuild it it would still be a very 21 profitable project. So the simplest thing to do is to make a recommendation that the 22 building not be rebuilt. Ideally since it’s a Planned Community Zone what the Council 23 should have done, would have withdrawn the approval for the residential units and turned 24 it into dedicated parkland or else to just rezone it to Neighborhood Commercial. 25 26 You’re being asked to make a determination about restoring a building or so on. That’s 27 not what the Secretary of the Interior Standards talk about. You can restore something 28 that still exists otherwise what you’re doing is replicating. And replicating something 29 violates the Interior, Secretary of the Interior Standards. So doing anything that even 30 looks like or is another Building 1 violates the Secretary of the Interior Standards. So 31 therefore you can’t do anything with the building if you’re a Historic Resources Board, 32 but if the Council doesn’t care what you’re doing and the staff doesn’t care what you’re 33 doing, why are you bothering to still exist? Why? Because it’s in the Municipal Code. 34 35 In regard to the report I’ve already mentioned the loose language in terms of the stop 36 work order. Also if I am reading this correctly on page 5 the paragraph at the top of the 37 page last sentence it starts off saying “Because the proposed Building 1 is substantially 38 consistent with the originally approved design.” I think that means Building 2, but if 39 we’ve had a staff write that and all of you have read it maybe you understand better than I 40 do. 41 42 In regard to which staff is here today it seems to be a pattern that whenever there’s some 43 sort of loose recommendation regarding historic resources Dennis Backlund disappears 44 who is the Historic Planner for the City. This is not the first project on which this has 45 happened. What you have essentially is the City Council has made clear what 46 development it wants approved here and its pretending to seek your recommendation. In 1 fact if you look at the staff reports for this entire calendar year they no longer start off by 2 asking boards and commissions for a recommendation. They instead say “Well, provide 3 feedback to the staff.” That’s not what the Municipal Code says about boards and 4 commissions. It says you are an advisory body to the City Council. You are not a 5 sounding board to City staff. 6 7 So this project is sort of a poster child for figuring out whether or not it’s appropriate to 8 have a Historic Resources Board anymore. You eventually you may have a majority of 9 you whose job it is to approve projects that this developer or this consultant bring you, 10 but if you think there’s a role for the HRB it certainly isn’t at this stage in the process, 11 which is almost a year after the building was demolished. Thank you. 12 13 Chair Bernstein: Thank you Herb. Any other members of the public like to speak to us? 14 Ok, seeing none we’ll move back to our process. Next will be applicant closing 15 comments. Three minutes if you’d like to add any more words? Ok, seeing none for 16 that. Next is to close the public hearing and bring it back to the Board for Motions and 17 recommendations or comments. 18 19 I do have one question about looking at the Standards for Rehabilitation and staff correct 20 me if this is correct that even buildings that are considered to be reconstructions or 21 replications does the standards of differentiation and compatibility still apply? 22 23 Ms. Lee: The guidelines for reconstruction that would apply to the project basically talks 24 about preserving any possible historic materials and doing accurate depiction. I think 25 there’s more emphasis on accurate depiction of what was gone, basically to replicate 26 exactly what was gone. The rehabilitation standard talks about differentiation materials, 27 but the reconstruction standards do not. 28 29 Chair Bernstein: Ok, thank you. David. 30 31 Board Member Bower: So I’d like to make a comment and be interested in other Board 32 Members response to this. I just attended a California Environmental Quality Act 33 (CEQA) conference and went through a very thorough analysis of what CEQA requires 34 and what happens when, first of all CEQA requires that all steps be taken to mitigate 35 damage of historic fabric. Well, I think it’s pretty clear from the consultants review and 36 the engineers’ analysis of what the little historic fabric that this building contained that it 37 was not possible to renovate it, it would have to be replaced. And under the CEQA 38 guidelines that cannot, that mitigation measure cannot be met and so replacing the 39 damaged parts of the building is within a CEQA guideline and it is not, does not 40 challenge the CEQA requirements. So this particular hearing while in a difference 41 circumstance is in effect a verification of what the City’s consultants and owner’s 42 consultants would have told us if the building hadn’t been damaged or destroyed prior to 43 this hearing. So I think this is where we were going to come to inevitably and so I’m not 44 sure about the reproduction, exact reproduction of historic fabric, but I think we’re not as 45 a public speaker just suggested, we’re not here for window dressing. We’re following the 46 CEQA guidelines and that they have this specific, this kind of analysis is not only part of 1 the CEQA process but is a really, is condoned, it’s not the right word, but it would be 2 accepted as part of the CEQA process. 3 4 So I think that as a Board what we’re doing here is we are acknowledging what I thought 5 was inevitable when it first came, this project first came to us and that we’re trying to 6 make the best of a situation that for a variety of reasons we didn’t anticipate, but we’re 7 now having to deal with. So… Also the other thing is in any project in the City of Palo 8 Alto every structure has its own permit. Stopping work on Building 1 would not have 9 required that work be stopped on the market or Building 2 because those are separate, in 10 the eyes of City planners those are separate buildings and they have their own process 11 and they have their own reviews and they have their own inspections. While all three 12 buildings are part of this project proposal, losing one building doesn’t disqualify the 13 entire project to move forward. 14 15 Chair Bernstein: Board Member Wimmer. Go ahead. 16 17 Board Member Wimmer: I just wanted to just comment and this is just a general 18 comment. So now that this building no longer exists and there was a question of its 19 historic real value to begin with and I do believe that relocating it would have been next 20 to impossible. Any building that’s that old and probably had initial flaws to the original 21 design anyway and doesn’t comply to the current codes, excuse me, now that building no 22 longer exists. So is the best solution to rebuild it as closely as possible to what it was or 23 is this an opportunity to do something, I don’t know. I mean I know this is probably 24 going back in time and I’m new to the committee and I’m new to this project so when I 25 look at this and I see what’s on this paper I’m not sure that that’s the best solution for 26 Palo Alto. I’m not sure that that’s the best building that we can build in that spot. I mean 27 it is a nod to Eichler. It is a nod also to mid-century modern, which I think is very 28 popular right now especially among younger people and it’s a design that I think does 29 have merit and value in the historic history of American architecture, but I’m not sure 30 that this is a prize winning example of architecture that belongs in Palo Alto. 31 32 I mean I’m hoping I’m not stepping on anyone’s toes, but also what I see another thing 33 that bothers me is just the amount of the height of the shroud that hides the air 34 conditioning unit is a third of the height, of the overall height of the building. Two-thirds 35 is the building and one-third is this box that is necessary I guess because we do have to 36 make sure that the building has the adequate mechanical features that it needs, but it’s 37 such a design impact. It’s such a, it has so much height and it’s just a box that’s there and 38 it is visible, it’s very visible and I know that it’s not original to the original building 39 because the original building didn’t require that feature, but if we can at least look at that 40 I think that’s something worth looking at. 41 42 Chair Bernstein: Thank you. I just want to make a comment. I was actually thinking 43 similar thoughts that Board Member Wimmer just mentioned about what else could be 44 there for a building and that’s why I asked the question about the differentiation. Is there 45 a structure there that would be completely different than replicating the building that was 46 there in style? And one of my thoughts about that is that could be interesting from an 1 architectural design point of view, but would that distract then from the historical quality 2 of the existing buildings that are qualified or deemed possible for historic registration and 3 I think that’s probably the most important thing about any existing historical qualities is 4 that whatever is there does it district from the quality of what’s there historically? So I 5 thought about the same question. There’s an opportunity to do something that is 6 compatible yet differentiation. But we’re looking at something right now, the applicant is 7 asking for reconstruction. Beth, go ahead. 8 9 Board Member Bunnenberg: Thank you for bringing up the question of the cumulative 10 effects of the loss of these mid-century modern buildings. I think one thing that we had 11 not talked about was the fact that here is this building lost and to put in something new 12 would definitely change the whole atmosphere I feel of the shopping center and the fact 13 that we’ve also are losing the Edward Durell Stone Building out at Stanford and the 14 hospital complex so that unless I’m missing one I think that the main library is the only 15 Edward Durell Stone Building that’s left so that there’s a definite loss of this kind of 16 thing. And in that we’re seeing a real resurgence in the Eichlers it feels to me like the 17 important thing would be to maintain the look of the shopping center and if necessary put 18 a little plaque up to the effect that this is a reconstruction of what was there, but I would 19 seriously worry about putting a modern, different, total different building there. 20 21 Chair Bernstein: David. 22 23 Board Member Bower: So I think the staff report on Page 6 the first paragraph really 24 captures why we’re here today. We’re not really here to look at a building and whether 25 or not the trim around the windows matches. It’s the fact that this particular Eichler 26 development was the first retail development that Eichler did and maybe the only one. 27 Isn’t that right? It’s the only one. And so the purpose of this project was to retain the 28 three building retail interaction and moving this Building 1 allowed for a more efficient 29 use of this space. And we’ve lost the building itself, but by recreating the building, 30 rebuilding it we won’t lose the what I think is the most important historic aspect and 31 that’s the retail environment. So putting another type of building there basically ends that 32 as a historic objective and I think that that’s really what we’re analyzing today. 33 34 And I’m sorry we lost the hospital. Durell Stone is a significant architect. This building 35 is no longer considered historic because they had to take down the canopies outside. We 36 still have it until the earthquake takes it away from us, which I think is inevitable. So we 37 have a problem in Palo Alto retaining any building that’s old and doesn’t have some kind 38 of protection downtown. None of the residential buildings that were built say before the 39 Second World War I think will survive in this building because of the land value 40 pressure. That’s something we ought to do as a Board. We ought to figure out a way to 41 get those buildings, but today we’re here to look at the Eichler retail development out at 42 Embarcadero and I think that approving this is the way we keep that development intact. 43 44 Chair Bernstein: Pat. 45 46 Board Member DiCicco: I feel actually very strongly in agreement with David and Beth 1 because we still are retaining something that is the only thing that existed at this time 2 being a retail center constructed in the postmodern and even though there is the 3 development of ten houses it is far, far better than the development of 25 house and 4 basically eliminating what was the core of this property granted it has a lot of mitigation 5 that it is new and I agree a plaque or something to identify that this has been replicated as 6 close as we can to the original to get the feel of what this property really was and the 7 signage and so on and so forth. So it is what it is and I think that’s the best solution. 8 9 Chair Bernstein: Michael. 10 11 Board Member Makinen: So I generally agree with everything I’ve heard here. I will 12 point out the fact that the integrity of the shopping center is what we’re really interested 13 in preserving and there are seven aspects of historic integrity and association and the 14 context are the important ones right here that we try to maintain the fact that we do have a 15 shopping center that is unique, it is mid-century, the only mid-century shopping center 16 that was ever built, and to put something entirely different would I believe result in loss 17 of total integrity that we have for that site. So I’m in favor of the reconstruction. 18 19 Chair Bernstein: Staff, Steven. If the Board does make a Motion and it gets passed to 20 recommend the reconstruction process for this there are findings that are, are findings 21 needed to support any Motion? 22 23 Mr. Turner: Well I believe there are two requests and recommendations by staff as noted 24 on Page 6. Number one is to review and comment on the adequacy of the analysis of the 25 loss of Building 1 and the proposal to reconstruct the building as originally approved with 26 all new materials. That’s essentially the information that’s contained within the SEIR 27 and on Page 16 there is a detailed environmental analysis that talks about the consistency 28 of the reconstruction project with those standards. So by finding that the Board chooses 29 to do so, making a finding that the SEIR seems to adequate analyze the reconstruction 30 that you would be essentially agreeing with the Secretary’s Standards analysis within that 31 document. And then second of all, the second item for review and recommendation to 32 the reconstruction project itself, those were the project plans that were contained within 33 your packet and you can make comments on that as well. 34 35 I think staff might recommend separate Motions and votes on each one. I know Board 36 Member Wimmer as a new Board Member may not have had the opportunity to review 37 the SEIR since that was distributed previously, so if she chooses she may abstain on that 38 particular action, but can certainly make a recommendation on the second item on the 39 reconstruction plans themselves. 40 41 Ms. Lee: Chair if I may I also wanted to point out that the reconstruction standards do 42 require that, do identify a need for a plaque to identify that the building is not a historic 43 building and it’s a recreation. So that will be a requirement for this as well as the 44 applicant is still working on providing a plaque for the park that provides the historic 45 context of this project. 46 1 Chair Bernstein: Thank you. Are we approaching a Motion? Go ahead, yeah. Roger. 2 3 Vice-Chair Kohler: I guess I thought I’d make one last comment. I’ve worked on several 4 Eichlers, homes and they are very susceptible to rot and things like that because they are 5 all wood. And so I think that the fact that the one building is maintaining and being 6 refurbished and the other building sounds like just was barely standing on its own by 7 itself. The other thing if you look at the site plans the aerial photos of the arrangement of 8 the three buildings on the site I think that was one of the downturns of this, the popularity 9 of the shopping center in that it became it was so close and tight knit that you couldn’t, 10 when you drove by you actually couldn’t see all the buildings. And so I think its 11 perception as a shopping center sort of went down as time went on and the fact that the 12 building that’s was being relocated is now is actually being moved will make the 13 visibility of the shopping center much more friendly and will invite more people into it 14 then it had in the past. 15 16 You know because my office isn’t far from there and we used to go get pizza there at 17 lunch, but just finding the pizza place which was around the back on the other side of the 18 building that’s actually being moved was difficult to locate. So I think the arrangement 19 of this shopping center has I think contributed a lot to its demise. Not totally, but I think 20 it’s just visually not very friendly to get into. So I think moving the building is actually 21 going to be a good thing. So, ok. 22 23 Chair Bernstein: Beth. 24 25 Board Member Bunnenberg: Well I think I would respectfully disagree with Board 26 Member Kohler. I was thoroughly disappointed when this building, when the agreement 27 of the Board was to move this building because I thought the arcade was an important 28 part of it. my only hope is that some of the retention of those woodland beams and the 29 fact that there is a visual way through even from the Saint Francis side keeps a little bit of 30 that feeling, but for the Secretary of Interior Standards I didn’t really approve, I didn’t 31 feel that moving the building was a great thing for the site. 32 33 Chair Bernstein: For the benefit of the next review process staff is asking us to make two 34 recommendations or consider making two recommendations. The first is review and 35 comment on the adequacy of the Supplemental EIR; any recommendations or a proposed 36 Motion for that item? 37 38 Board Member Bower: I would move that the SEIR as the staff has requested is adequate 39 and I think it’s, you want to know that it, you want us to say it’s adequate and that it 40 addresses the issues, correct. 41 42 Ms. Lee: Yes and also that you’re recommending that if the City Council should certify 43 the Supplemental EIR that would be the technical (interrupted) 44 45 MOTION 46 1 Board Member Bower: So my Motion is that we approve the SEIR and that we encourage 2 the Council to certify the SEIR. 3 4 Chair Bernstein: Do I have a second? 5 6 Board Member Bunnenberg: Do we want to mention the Secretary of Interior Standards 7 in the Motion? 8 9 Chair Bernstein: I think it’s in the SEIR 10 11 Board Member Bunnenberg: Is that sufficient to have it there? 12 13 Mr. Turner: I think it’s sufficient in that the Secretary Standards are described in detail 14 within the SEIR. 15 16 SECOND, VOTE 17 18 Chair Bernstein: Ok, do we have a second for the Motion? Ok it’s been seconded, Any 19 discussion on this particular Motion before we bring it to a vote? All in favor say aye 20 (Aye). That passes unanimously. 21 22 MOTION PASSED (7-0) 23 24 Chair Bernstein: Next item, review and provide recommendation on the change to the 25 project, which would allow the construction of Building 1 with all new materials; Any 26 discussion or recommendation or Motion toward that direction? Pat your light’s on. We 27 need your light on. 28 29 MOTION 30 31 Board Member DiCicco: I would recommend that we approve reconstruction of Building 32 1 in the planned site and to meet the Secretary Standards ensure that a placard is affixed 33 to the building and construction will follow the approval of the materials already used in 34 Building 2. 35 36 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT 37 38 Board Member Bunnenberg: And do we including monitoring in that? Oh, I’d like to see 39 it called out. Would you accept that addition? 40 41 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT INCORPORATED 42 43 Board Member DiCicco: And to include in this recommendation that the monitoring at 44 every step of the way continue as recommended in the staff report. 45 46 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT 1 2 Board Member Bower: Could I make one other friendly amendment/recommendation? 3 That we say in this Motion that we feel as a Board that replacing this building meets the 4 original intent of the proposal, which is to retain the retail, the retail environment, 5 building environment. 6 7 Chair Bernstein: Was that agreeable to the maker of the Motion? 8 9 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT INCORPORATED 10 11 Board Member DiCicco: Yes, well stated. 12 13 Chair Bernstein: Ok. 14 15 SECOND 16 17 Board Member Bower: I’ll second that Motion then. 18 19 Chair Bernstein: Ok, it’s been Moved and seconded, Any discussion on this? I have a 20 just a quick comment. I think this is the right direction to go. We’ve discussed the 21 option of, we discussed the possibility of no building, no project. We’ve discussed or at 22 least mentioned the idea that there could be an alternative design. So my thought about 23 this is that having a reconstruction and it’ll be publicly noted through a plaque process 24 that I think having the three buildings there that have this certain feel is a higher benefit 25 than if there are only two buildings there that have this feeling and not have a building 26 that competes with the character that Mr. Eichler tried to achieve on this. That’s why I’ll 27 be in support of the Motion. 28 29 Anymore discussion before we bring it to a vote? Staff do you need anything else from 30 us on this Motion? 31 32 Ms. Lee: No, that’s it. Thank you. 33 34 VOTE Motion by Bower and seconded by DiCicco 35 36 Chair Bernstein: Ok. All in favor say aye (Aye). Passes unanimously. Good. Ok, thank 37 you very much, the applicant thank you so much for your presentation, and staff thank 38 you for your regard on this. 39 40 MOTION PASSED (7-0-0-0) 41 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4076) Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report Report Type: Meeting Date: 9/25/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Edgewood Plaza PC Amendment Title: 2080 Channing Avenue [13PLN-00197]: Review of a request by Sand Hill Property Company for (1) the certification of the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Adoption of Overriding Considerations, and (2) an amendment to Planned Community (PC-5150), Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center mixed use project, to allow reconstruction of one of two historic Eichler retail buildings (Building 1). The Supplemental Environmental Impact Report public comment period began May 17 and ended July 20, 2013. From: Elena Lee, Senior Planner Lead Department: Planning & Community Environment PLANNING COMMISSION PURVIEW The Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) is requested to review the Edgewood Shopping Center Mixed Use Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) and the attached draft Resolution (Attachment A) and amended Planned Community (PC) ordinance (Attachment B) and forward its recommendation to Council regarding the SEIR and proposed Amendment to Planned Community PC-5150. The applicant is proposing the amendment to this PC Zoning because one of the historic retail buildings proposed to be rehabilitated was demolished during the construction process. The project scope required submittal and review of a separate Planned Community Rezone application, because the project is not considered a minor change to a previously approved Planned Community development plan. If it were considered as a minor change, the Architectural Review Board and Historic Resources Board would be allowed to review and recommend the changes to the Director of Planning and Community Environment. Attachment A identifies the proposed construction of Building #1 using new materials and a schedule for estimated completion of the project. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Planned Community Rezoning PC districts follow a unique set of procedures, standards, and findings, which are described in Chapter 18.38 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC). Typically, the first step in the PC process is Commission review of the concept plans, development program statement and draft development schedule, and initiation of the rezoning. This application is different in that (1) the Council previously approved a development plan, a development program statement, a schedule, and a PC ordinance for the previous version of the project. The proposed project is a modification of a recent Council approved PC. (2) The application does not require initiation, and (3) the Architectural Review Board (ARB) is not part of this PC review process due to the scope of this amendment; rather, the Historic Resources Board (HRB) has considered the project and has provided a recommendation to Council. Because the only proposed change to the PC development plan is the construction materials of Building #1, and all other components of the PC remain the same, the amendment was not brought to the ARB. However, the ARB subcommittee has been consulted on a periodic basis for minor façade changes in the ARB’s purview throughout the construction process. The approval of the amended PC is still subject to the three PC findings, that: (a) the site is so situated, and the use or uses proposed for the site are of such characteristics that the application of general districts or combining districts will not provide sufficient flexibility to allow the proposed development; and (b) development of the site under the provisions of the PC planned community district will result in public benefits not otherwise attainable by application of the regulations of general districts or combining districts. In making the findings required by this section, the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council, as appropriate, shall specifically cite the public benefits expected to result from use of the planned community district; and (c) the use or uses permitted, and the site development regulations applicable within the district shall be consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and shall be compatible with existing and potential uses on adjoining sites or within the general vicinity. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission recommend that the City Council: 1) approve the Resolution (Attachment A) certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (previously distributed and available on the City’s website); and 2) adopt an Ordinance (Attachment B) approving the amendment to the Planned Community project to allow the reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials. City of Palo Alto Page 3 BACKGROUND Project Description Planned Community (PC) application 13PLN-00198 submitted on February 6, 2013 requested the rebuilding of Building #1 with all new materials. The applicant is not proposing any other changes to the project. The site area of the PC is 156,175 sq. ft. and is currently developed with two retail buildings having a combined 28,400 sq. ft. non-residential floor area. Building #1 (at 10,000 sq. ft.) would be relocated towards the southeast of the property, such that the nearest street facing wall would be set back approximately 15 feet from the Saint Francis Drive property line (approximately 20 feet from the back of the sidewalk). Building #1 would be reconstructed as originally approved by Council in March 2012. The building would feature the character defining features, such as the turn-down roof, glulam beams and redwood siding. The building would also include a new metal mechanical enclosure on the roof to screen roof- mounted equipment. Building #1 is to be rebuilt in substantial conformance to the elevations approved in March 2012. A Final Map is also pending Council review and action. This PC amendment was reviewed and recommended for approval by the Historic Resources Board (HRB) at the August 21, 2013 public hearing. A summary of the HRB hearing is provided below. The master sign program, grocery store signage and re-facing of the historic monument sign were reviewed and approved by both the ARB and HRB accordingly. Project History Edgewood Plaza is a commercial shopping center built between 1956 and 1958 by Joseph Eichler/Eichler Homes and A. Quincy Jones of Jones and Emmons. The center was originally built with the existing grocery building (1957), two retail buildings (1958), an office building that formerly housed the office of Eichler Homes (1959), and a gas station (1957). The office building and gas station sites are not part of the subject shopping center. Edgewood Plaza is not listed on The National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), or on the Palo Alto Historic Inventory. Although this site is not on the City’s inventory, because it has been deemed eligible for both registers, it is considered a historic resource. The site was the subject of a Planned Community (PC) rezoning approved by the City Council on March 19, 2012 to allow the redevelopment of an existing vacant and historic shopping center, including the relocation of one of three retail buildings, the addition of ten homes and a new 9,000 square foot park. Two of the existing commercial buildings, Buildings #1 and #2 have been deemed historic resources and proposed for rehabilitation. Building #3, the former market building, currently occupied by Fresh Market, is not considered a historic resource. Building #1 was approved to be disassembled, relocated on site and rehabilitated. Building #2 was approved to be rehabilitated in place. A tentative map was also approved to subdivide the City of Palo Alto Page 4 property into one commercial lot, including the public park, and ten single family lots. The primary public benefits for the Edgewood Plaza project consisted of 1) the preservation of historic resources, 2) the construction and operation of the grocery store and 3) 0.20 acre park with an on-site display highlighting Joseph Eichler’s achievements. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared and certified by the City Council in March 2012, to provide environmental clearance for the rezoning, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). A Final EIR for the original project was certified by the City Council, following positive recommendations by the HRB, the Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC), and the Architectural Review Board. The original Final EIR analyzed the historic resources and the project’s potential impact on those resources. Four reports regarding the project’s historic resources were prepared for the project’s EIR. An initial report was prepared by Page & Turnbull, Inc., the applicant’s consultant, with a peer review prepared by Carey & Company. Buildings 1 and 2 were deemed to have retained integrity of design, despite some minor exterior alterations over the past fifty years. Both buildings would have been eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) under Criterion 3, Architecture, as a rare example of commercial development by the noted partnership of Eichler Homes and Jones & Emmons. Because the site had been determined to be eligible for both the NRHP and CRHR, per the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the site would have qualified for the Palo Alto Historic Inventory under Criterion 3 and 4. The Council’s March 19, 2012 certification of the EIR based on the assumption that historic impacts for the relocation of Building #1 would be mitigated to a less than significant impact because the building would be rehabilitated in accordance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Historic Rehabilitation (Standards). This was consistent with the HRB’s recommendation at the October 19, 2011 hearing for the original project. The rehabilitation included retention of the character defining features of the building, such as the wood window frames, glulam beams, concrete block wall, cornice and wood paneling. In September 2012, a stop work order was issued because the historic building (Building #1) that was to be disassembled and reconstructed onsite was illegally demolished. On March 4, 2013, the City Council authorized the continued construction of the grocery store, the remaining historic (Building #2), six of the homes and other onsite and offsite improvements. The City Council also authorized the hiring of Carey & Company, the historic consulting firm that the performed the peer review on the original EIR for the City, to review plans and monitor construction to ensure that Building #2 comply with the PC zoning and all mitigation measures, including the Standards. The monitoring has included multiple walk-throughs and special focus has been placed in the preservation of the building’s signature glulam beams. To date, the applicant has completed the grocery store building, various parking lot improvements and installation of the electric charging stations. The rehabilitation of Building #2 is in process. Following the Council hearing, staff has received multiple emails supporting the continued City of Palo Alto Page 5 construction of the project. HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD REVIEW Following the release of the Supplemental EIR, a HRB hearing was held on August 21, 2013 to receive HRB feedback on the Supplemental EIR and rebuilding of Building #1 with all new materials. The shopping center, now more than 50 years old, has been deemed a historic resource even though it is not on the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR), the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), or the Palo Alto Historic Inventor. The HRB had reviewed the original project and EIR. During the hearing, one member of the public spoke regarding the project, recommending that Building #1 not be rebuilt and that the housing approved with the project be replaced with dedicated parkland. The HRB voted unanimously to recommend that City Council certify the Supplemental EIR with a Statement of Overriding Considerations. The HRB also voted unanimously to approve the amendment to the PC Zoning to allow the reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials, specifying that the replacement materials must follow the materials approved for use in Building #2 and a plaque must be installed on the building recognizing that it is a replica in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Reconstruction. The HRB’s recommendation included staff’s recommendation that a historic consultant be hired to monitor the construction of Building #1, to ensure that it will be similar to the originally approved Building #1. The HRB determined that the project can be supported because the proposed replacement meets the original intent to retain the retail building environment. KEY ISSUES Reconstruction versus Retention of Building #1 Building #1 was originally approved to be dismantled and rebuilt to accommodate the redevelopment, and would have retained the character defining features, such as the turn- down roof, glue laminated or glulam beams, concrete masonry unit (cmu) block walls, and redwood siding. The walls were defined as a “kit of parts” to be reorganized to maintain the historic character of the buildings, while allowing the modernization of the building to accommodate a successful retail environment. As of September of 2012, the building was demolished and the materials were disposed of, making it not possible to comply with the original approval. The applicant proposes a complete reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials, but in the same location as previously approved by Council. All other components of the previously approved PC project, including the ten residences and park, would remain the same as City of Palo Alto Page 6 approved by Council. The building would be substantially consistent with the originally approved design, with a few minor modifications. Building #1 is proposed to be substantially similar to the originally approved design, which was based on the “kit of parts” concept that would ensure the building would retain the character defining features of the Eichler aesthetic. The “kit of parts” consist of the block walls, the storefront glass, redwood siding and the glulam beams. The building would still include a new roof screen to hide roof mounted equipment. The modifications include moving around of the “parts” and modifications of the proportions of each element to accommodate modern tenants and requirements of the Building Code. As illustrated in the elevations shown on plan set pages A3.2 and A3.3 (Attachment D), the new building would consist of the same types of materials in a different configuration. These minor modifications have been carefully reviewed and found acceptable by the City’s Historic Preservation Planner. Similar modifications to Building #2 have been reviewed and approved by the City, also with consultation by the City’s historic consultant, Carey & Company. The applicant will also be required to install a plaque, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, identifying the building as a reconstruction in accordance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Reconstruction. Staff is also recommending that Carey & Company be retained to monitor the building permit process and construction for Building #1. This will also be critical for the installation of the window frames. Storefront Windows The original Council approved PC plan included the installation of new, much simpler wood framed windows. Like Building #2, the original window frames in Building #1 had been replaced over the years with similar, but simpler, wood frames. The approved replacement wood window frames were flat and did not include the projecting moldings. Given that the revised project allows for modifications, replication of the original storefront window system is now possible. Building #1 can now be rebuilt in a design significantly closer to its original appearance than the altered building that was illegally demolished. The original wood window frames of both Eichler buildings were a more complex design that included narrow full-height projecting moldings on either side of the glass which gave the windows a streamline modern look. Because one storefront at the rear of Building #2 was preserved intact since 1957, the City and the applicant’s historic consultant will be able to use that storefront as a model in the reconstruction of Buildings #2 and #1 to its original 1957 design. The rebuilding of Building #1 will provide a much more historically correct design than was found in the building that was demolished, and more correct than the version the Council had approved. The applicant has agreed to install these more complex window frames for both Buildings #1 and #2. Working closely with the City’s historic consultant, the applicant now has custom-made City of Palo Alto Page 7 replicas for the rehabilitation of Building #2, and will do the same for Building #1, should the amendment be approved. Although the loss of a historic building cannot be mitigated, the historic accuracy of the replacement structure would be increased with the installation of these more complex window frames. Staff has determined that because the storefront glass system was a large part of the original design, this requirement provides a significant historic benefit to the project. This addition, in some ways, will result in a building that is more similar to the original design, although constructed of all new materials. This historic enhancement will improve the historic integrity of the remaining historic building, Building #2. Public Benefits Original Public Benefits As part of the original PC rezoning, the applicant proposed to provide the following public benefits to satisfy the second PC finding: 1) preservation of a historically significant Eichler designed shopping center, 2) an approximately 20,600 sq. ft. grocery store, 3) an approximately 0.20 acre park with an on-site display highlighting Joseph Eichler’s achievements, and 4) three electric vehicle car chargers Applicant’s Proposed New Public Benefits The applicant will still be able to provide most of the public benefits. However, due to the demolition of Building 1, the character of the preservation benefit will need to be modified. The applicant is also intending on completing the rehabilitation of Building #2 in late September and staff believes that the rehabilitation will conform to the Secretary of Interior Standards and be a good example of mid-century architecture. The City’s historic consultant, Charlie Duncan of Carey & Company, indicated that he has been satisfied with the process and work so far. The applicant has also stated that he would request that the City consider the addition of the three car chargers and the traffic signal upgrade at St. Francis and Embarcadero also be considered public benefits because although those were City requirements, technical modifications have increased the cost significantly. Per the applicant, those items will cost over $200,000. Because the applicant is proposing an amendment to the Planned Community Zoning, the City can consider whether additional public benefits should be required to compensate for the benefits lost by the demolition of Building #1. As noted earlier in this report, the applicant is proposing that the installation of a storefront window system on Buildings #1 and #2 that replicates the original wood window frames of the original Eichler design be considered a public benefit. The window frames feature a more complex three dimensional design that included narrow full-height projecting moldings on either side of the glass. The cost for installing the City of Palo Alto Page 8 new frames will be over $250,000, excluding the cost required for monitoring by the City’s historic consultant. The installation of the new frames on Building #2 has begun and construction is anticipated to be completed in late September. The City’s consultant has been carefully reviewing the entire process. Although Building #1 has been lost, the project continues to provide the public benefit of the preservation (or recreation) of a historic design, a public park, a grocery store and the rehabilitation of a public sign. Construction of Building #1 will result in a project that more closely resembles the original center than it would without the building. Possible Public Benefits West Bayshore Road Sidewalk During the original public hearings for this project, there were requests to require the construction of sidewalks along West Bayshore Road. Sidewalks were not been required because West Bayshore Road to the north of the site does not have sidewalks and this portion of West Bayshore Road frontage is not designed for pedestrian activity. Construction of sidewalks to the north of the site would have been beyond the scope of the project. However, in response to neighbor comments, the City has incorporated the construction of sidewalks on West Bayshore Road as a future project in the Bike and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (adopted July 2012). Staff has consulted both with Transportation and Public Works staff regarding the feasibility of the construction of sidewalks. The cost estimate for construction of sidewalk on one side of West Bayshore from the project site to the City limits, excluding drainage cost, is approximately $144,000. The City could require the applicant contribute towards the work to be completed by the City as part of its Capital Improvement Program as a public benefit. Historic Rehabilitation Contribution As an alternative, the applicant could make a contribution to the restoration of a publicly owned, historic resource in Palo Alto. For example, the applicant could contribute funding towards improvements of the University Avenue Multi-modal Transit Depot, which is the second busiest station for the Caltrain system. The Streamline Modern style station is designated as Category 1 on the City’s historic inventory and is also on the National Registry of Historic Places. This is just one example; however, there are other publicly owned buildings in Palo Alto that could also benefit from rehabilitation funds. If appropriate, these funds could be stored in a reserve account, and be made available when directed by the Council. Penalties City of Palo Alto Page 9 City Council also asked staff to provide them with recommendations regarding penalties for the demolition of Building #1. The consideration of penalties should be weighed when determining the cost and benefit of additional required public benefits. The Municipal Code allows the City to fine applicants for a variety of code violations, based on the type of infraction. A common practice among various municipalities is to charge double to triple the building permit fee for code violations. Although the demolition of historic buildings without permits happens rarely, the application of double or triple the building permit fee has been used. The building permit fee is based on the valuation of the construction cost and the scope of work for all trades (i.e. lighting, plumbing, etc.). The building permit fee for the shell that was charged for Building 1 was $9443.17, or about 1.5 percent for a valuation of $600,000. Accordingly, the City could use this rationale to fine the applicant an additional $9,443.17 for the illegal demolition. Additionally, given the special circumstance of the demolition of an historic structure, an additional fine may be warranted. There is a specific fine of $1,000 authorized in the City Code for demolition of a downtown historic structure. If a similar fine were added to the building permit fee, a total of $10,443.17 could be assessed. According to the applicant, the cost of the construction is approximately 25-30% higher, or between $150,000 and $180,000 (based on the original valuation), than expected due to the poor condition of the building materials. This excludes site construction and the additional cost due to the custom made windows. The cost of the custom made windows will add approximately $162,000 to the total construction cost. This also excludes the cost of the electrical vehicle charging stations and the traffic signal modifications discussed above. If the building permit fee were to be evaluated, the valuation would be $912,000 or $942,000. If the cost of the building permit fee was used as a penalty, then a possible fine would be between $13,680 and $28,260. As an alternative, the City could charge a percentage of the construction cost of the project. If ten percent is used, the fine can be between $91,200 and $94,200. Staff has consulted with various cities regarding their approaches for implementing penalties for the illegal demolition of historic resources. Cities consulted included Berkeley, San Jose, Burlingame, Menlo Park, and Los Gatos. Those cities do not have ordinances that identify specific penalty fees for illegal demolition. However, as discussed above, those cities have required payment of double to triple of the building permit fees as a penalty. The applicant has and will continue to incur substantial costs associated with the delay due to the demolition. The costs include the preparation of the Supplemental EIR, hiring of the historic consultant and the fees for the PC Amendment. While it does not appear that the City’s existing penalty structure adequately compensates the community for loss of a historic resource, nevertheless, the City Council may ultimately determine additional compensation is warranted upon review of the amended PC Zoning. Final SEIR and Environmental Impacts City of Palo Alto Page 10 A Notice of Preparation (NOP) was originally published and posted on February 1, 2013 and sent to the State Clearinghouse for a 30-day period, from February 1 to March 4, 2013. A Notice of Completion and Availability of the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) was published, posted and mailed announcing that the document was available for a 45- day comment period from May 17 through July 20, 2013. Copies of the SEIR were provided to the HRB, P&TC and City Council at the beginning of the circulation period. The document concluded that the revised project would result in two new significant impacts: 1) Significant Impact to the historic resources specific to Building #1 after implementation of mitigation measures and 2) Significant Cumulative Historic Resources Impact. The Supplemental EIR was prepared by David J. Powers and Associates, an environmental consulting firm. The Draft SEIR was the subject of a HRB hearing on August 21, 2013. The HRB found the SEIR adequate and recommended that it be certified by the City Council. The Final SEIR would have included formal responses to all comments received during the public comment period. Since no comments were received regarding the SEIR, a Final SEIR was prepared confirming that no comments were received. The Final SEIR was circulated for public review on September 5, 2013 and will be available to the public a minimum of ten days prior to the EIR certification hearing. The SEIR and project have been tentatively scheduled for an October 2013 City Council hearing, pending the outcome of this PTC hearing. The Draft SEIR and Final SEIR, including source documents, additional background information, and the PTC, HRB, and ARB reports for review dates mentioned above are available on the City’s website at http://goo.gl/PjnreG. Images of project plans are also available with the staff report online, as a link on the PTC September 11, 2013 PTC meeting agenda. SEIR Contents Because the complete loss of Building #1 has been deemed a substantial change to the project, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a), the Supplement to the EIR (SEIR) was prepared to address the changes needed to comply with State law. The supplement contains the information needed to address the change. This SEIR is focused only on the new significant historic impact created by the change to the proposal, the loss of Building #1 and the replacement construction in the same location of new materials. The original Final EIR included a mitigation measure (MMCR-2.3) that required compliance with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation to reduce the impact to historic resources to a less than significant level for both Buildings #1 and #2. Loss of Building #1’s materials has made application of the mitigation measure and the Standards of Rehabilitation not possible. The other two mitigation measures to reduce the impact to historic resources to a less than significant level included the preparation of a Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) (MM CR-2.1) and creation of a display illustrating the history of Edgewood Plaza (MM CR-2.2) are still applicable. The HABS survey was completed and has been used to facilitate the preparation of the SEIR and the project implementation. The applicant is working on the design of the historic display. City of Palo Alto Page 11 The SEIR concluded that there would be a new significant impact to historic resources due to the loss of Building #1. The Secretary of Interior has established four treatments or guidelines to address the preservation of historic resources: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration and Reconstruction. Because there was a complete loss of materials, only the Reconstruction approach is applicable to address impacts to historic resources. The Reconstruction guidelines have typically been used in very selective situations, such as reconstruction of historic museum, where there is a clear public benefit (usually educational). The guidelines include requirements such as preservation of any remaining historic materials and construction of only the original design. The complete list of Guidelines and Standards for Reconstruction are provided on pages 19-22 of the SEIR. However, application of the guidelines cannot reduce the demolition to a less than significant level because none of the historic fabric would be retained. The SEIR also analyzed the potential impact to the remaining historic building, Building #2. Because the proposed Building #1 is substantially consistent with the originally approved design and in the same location, it was determined that there would not be an impact to the character of Building #2. To address the new impact caused by the loss of Building #1, mitigation measure CR-2.3 has been amended. The mitigation measure as originally written still applies to Building #2. CR-2.3 now states: A new Building 1 will be constructed of new building materials that match the character and one-story form of the commercial buildings of Edgewood Plaza as built by Eichler Homes, consistent with the previous approved building elevations. As a condition of approval, all facades of Building #1 will be wood- framed storefront systems that replicate the detail of the original 1957 window design. The final design and materials to be used in the renovation of Building #2 and reconstruction of Building #1 will be reviewed and approved by the Director and the Historic Preservation Planner of the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment. In addition, staff is also proposing to have the City’s historic consultant, Carey & Company, to review and monitor the construction of Building #1 similar to what was required for Building #2. As noted above, application of the revised mitigation measure will not reduce the level of significance because none of the original building has been retained. The SEIR also concluded that there is a significant impact to Cumulative Cultural Resources, in that the loss of Building #1 combined with the recently approved demolition of the Edward Durrell Stone Building Complex (1959) at the Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) campus (as part of the SUMC Facilities Renewal and Replacement Project approved in July 2011) has created a cumulatively City of Palo Alto Page 12 considerable impact to mid-century modern buildings by prominent architects. The Stone Building Complex represents a significant example of the modern design Aesthetic and of a significant architect. The loss of Building #1 combined with the loss of the Stone Building Complex will therefore be a significant impact. Alternatives have been set forth and evaluated in the SEIR to allow the City Council and recommending bodies to consider ways to minimize the significance of the impacts to historic resources. Two alternatives were analyzed in the SEIR: (1) No Project and (2) Building Design. The No Project alternative would be a project without a new Building #1. Because the original building no longer exists, this would not avoid or reduce the historic impact due to the loss. However, the project objectives of creating a new mixed use project with three retail buildings would not be met. The second alternative, Building Design Alternative, would allow for a new building to be constructed in its new location with new materials. However, the building would be constructed in a manner that duplicates the original 1957 design. This may result in a more historically accurate representation, but would still be a new building. Therefore it would not reduce the impact to a less than significant level. The alternative would also not meet the project objectives because it would not allow the changes originally proposed by the applicant to make the building more suitable for a viable retail building. As noted, the Final SEIR, together with the Draft SEIR, is considered the CEQA clearance document for the amended project. No new environmental impacts were identified following the release of the Draft SEIR. The Final SEIR confirmed that no comments were received for the Draft SEIR and no changes have been made. Certification of Final SEIR Based on the analysis provided in the Final SEIR, consultation with various professional consultants and the recommendation by the HRB, staff recommends that the PTC recommend that the Council find that the demolition of Building #1 is significant, but that Statement of Overriding Considerations be made to allow the reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials. The reconstruction of Building #1 will result in a building that is compatible to the original and will be more similar to the original building than the approved rehabilitation due to the installation of the more detailed window frames. RESOURCE IMPACT City of Palo Alto Page 13 The applicant has already paid impact fees for the original PC rezoning, which included park, community center and library fees for the project. The redeveloped project site is expected to result in a significant increase in property taxes. The applicant estimates that the project would result in annual sales tax revenue from retail activity of approximately $1,050,000 and annual property tax revenue of approximately $350,000. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposed amendment to the PC zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan land use designation of Neighborhood Commercial and associated policies. A table of applicable Comprehensive Plan policies is included as Attachment E. NEXT STEPS After the Planning and Transportation Commission makes a recommendation regarding the Final SEIR and the PC amendment, the project has been tentatively scheduled for a City Council hearing on October 2013. Attachments:  Attachment A: Draft Edgewood Plaza CEQA Resolution (PDF)  Attachment B: Ordinance for Edgewood Plaza PC Amendment (DOCX)  Attachment C: Approved Ordinance 5150 for Edgewood Plaza (PDF)  Attachment D: Final SEIR Edgewood Plaza Project (PDF)  Attachment E: Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) (DOCX)  Attachment F: Applicant's Development Schedule (PDF)  Attachment G: Project Plans (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 1 1 ===============MEETINGS ARE CABLECAST LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 26================= This agenda is posted in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2(a) or section 54956. 2 3 Wednesday, September 25, 2013, Meeting 4 6:00 PM, Council Chambers 5 6 7 Public Hearing 8 9 1. 2080 Channing Avenue [13PLN-00197]: Review of a request by Sand Hill Property Company for review 10 and recommendation of: (1) the certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and (2) an amendment 11 to the Planned Community Zoning (PC-5150) for the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center mixed use project to 12 allow for the reconstruction of one of the two historic Eichler retail buildings (Building 1). Building 1 was 13 approved to be dismantled and rehabilitated onsite as one of the primary public benefits, but was demolished 14 instead. The Supplemental Environmental Impact Report prepared for the project has been published and the 15 public comment period began May 17 and ended July 20, 2013. *Quasi-Judicial 16 Item 1 continued from September 11, 2013 17 18 Chair Michael: So moving ahead let’s open the public hearing. The first item is, relates to 2080 19 Channing Avenue, which is a quasi-judicial matter. And it’s a review of a request by Sand Hill 20 Property Company for our review and recommendation of (1) the certification of the final 21 Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and (2) an amendment to the Planned Community (PC) 22 zoning for the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center mixed-use project to allow for the 23 reconstruction of one of the two historic Eichler retail buildings, which was inadvertently 24 demolished. 25 26 Now this is a quasi-judicial item, which leads me to ask my fellow Commissioners if anyone has 27 a disclosure to make regarding ex-parte communications with the applicant. Before I do that 28 let me just note for the Commission and those present what our policy is on ex-parte 29 communications and that is that each Commissioner who has had such contact with the 30 applicant, which communication outside of this public meeting would make a verbal disclosure 31 on the record of any relevant information that was, which transpired in that communication or 32 PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION DRAFT MINUTES – EXCERPT City of Palo Alto Page 2 our policy permits the Commissioner to make a very brief written summary of the discussion 1 and make that available to the public. And we allow either mode of disclosure, but the verbal 2 disclosure is sort of required, the written disclosure would be optional if necessary to clarify. So 3 with that does anybody have any disclosures to make with respect to this matter? 4 5 Ok. There are none. So let’s begin this with the report from staff. 6 7 Elena Lee, Senior Planner: Thank you Chair; Elena Lee, Senior Planner with the Planning 8 Division. So the purpose of today’s hearing is to review the Edgewood Plaza PC amendment. 9 Specifically staff is requesting Commission’s recommendation to the City Council on the 10 adequacy of the final supplemental EIR that was prepared for the subject project and the 11 Planned Community zoning amendment to approve the rebuilding of Building 1 with all new 12 materials. All other components of the project are to remain the same. 13 14 The subject was the site of a PC zoning to allow rehabilitation of an existing shopping center 15 and the development of ten new residential units including a small park. The project included 16 the relocation and renovation of one of the two retail buildings including Building 1 that was 17 deemed historic and renovation of the other historic building, Building 2, and renovation of the 18 grocery building that was not deemed historic. A final Environmental Impact Report was 19 certified to provide environmental clearance, which assumed that all historic resources would be 20 rehabilitated and therefore not create any significant impacts. The public benefit of the project 21 were the preservation of the shopping center, two historic buildings, provision of a grocery 22 store, electrical vehicle chargers, and a small park. The historic monument sign on the site was 23 also to be rehabilitated and protected. 24 25 City of Palo Alto Page 3 In September 2012 a stop work order was issued because a historic building, Building 1, which 1 was originally required to be relocated onsite and rehabilitated was to be rebuilt. It was 2 demolished illegally. City Council authorized the continued construction of the project on March 3 4, 2113, with the exception of the reconstruction of the demolished Building 1 and for the 4 homes. Since the authorization of Council the applicant has completed a renovation of the 5 grocery building and Fresh Market has occupied the site and has opened for business. Although 6 Building 1 will no longer be historic the project is able to provide most of the required public 7 benefits especially the revitalization of a shopping center, the grocery store, the park, and the 8 electrical vehicle chargers. 9 10 So staff has also retained Carey Company the City’s historic consultant for the original EIR to 11 review building permit plans and monitor construction of Building 2, the remaining historic 12 building. Because the original FEIR assumed both buildings would be retained, the demolition 13 of Building 1 would require new environmental clearance. A supplemental EIR in accordance 14 with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was prepared for the revised project. The 15 document was circulated for public review on May 17th for a 45 day circulation period. To date 16 staff has not received any comments about the project, accordingly staff has prepared a final 17 supplemental Environmental Impact Report confirming that no comments were received and no 18 changes were made to SEIR. That document has been released and circulated for at least 10 19 days. 20 21 Staff is requesting Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) comments on the adequacy 22 of the supplemental EIR and proposal to reconstruct Building 1. Staff would like to bring 23 attention to one significant addition to the project; the City has required the applicant to 24 replicate the original storefront window system, which is a distinct style that includes narrow full 25 City of Palo Alto Page 4 height projecting moldings. This required custom made windows that staff believes will help 1 create a building that is significantly closer to its original appearance than would have been 2 required for the original approval. The applicant has agreed to install these windows in Building 3 2 and will be required to do the same if Building 1 is approved to be reconstructed. Given the 4 amount of storefront glass that would exist in Building 1, this represents a significant 5 contribution to the Eichler character of the building. 6 7 The other key component that staff would request Commission’s recommendation on would be 8 the topic of public benefits. The loss of Building 1 removed the project’s ability to preserve one 9 of the two historic buildings, which was one of the primary public benefits. The applicant is 10 requesting that the addition of the custom windows as well as other site improvements, which 11 cost over $250,000 for both Buildings 1 and 2 be considered as public benefits. Staff has 12 included in the staff report two potential public benefits for the Commission’s consideration. 13 One would be funding towards construction of sidewalks along West Bayshore Road as 14 requested by some of the area residents and discussed at previous Commission hearings or 15 funding towards a restoration of a publicly owned historic resource, such as the University 16 Avenue Caltrain Station to be later determined by Council. 17 18 Because a historic resource was lost, staff recommends that a new public benefit be for historic 19 preservation. Although the City does have a system in place for issuing fines for building 20 infractions such as illegal demolition the key issue for this project is a public benefit because of 21 the laws of historic building. Identification of an appropriate public benefit potentially provides 22 a bigger benefit to the City while allowing the City to clearly state that the provision of public 23 benefits is important to the City and cannot be ignored. Staff has also identified a range of 24 City of Palo Alto Page 5 what the amount should be based on the City’s established fine and typical practices by other 1 cities. 2 3 Copies of the August 21st Historic Resources Board (HRB) staff report and draft excerpt minutes 4 have been provided at places and is also available to the public. Vice-Chair Roger Kohler is in 5 attendance tonight to represent the HRB. At the August 21st hearing the HRB unanimously 6 voted to recommend that Council certify the SEIR and also approve the PC amendment. Also 7 available tonight is the City’s Historic Consultant, Charlie Duncan, and Environmental Consultant 8 Nora Monette and Shannon George of David J. Powers & Associates. They’re available to 9 answer questions. This concludes staff’s report. Oh, and also the applicant John Tze is also in 10 attendance to answer questions. Thank you. 11 12 Chair Michael: Would the representative of the applicant have a statement that you would like 13 to add to the staff report? 14 15 John Tze, Sand Hill Property Company: Good evening, my name is John Tze, Sand Hill Property 16 Company at 203 Redwood Shores Parkway in Redwood City. Thank you for taking the time 17 Chairman and Members of the Commission. I apologize to have to bring this project back to 18 you. Many of you have seen this over the years and it’s unfortunate that I have to take your 19 time to do this. I think the staff report was very thorough. I imagine some of you may be 20 wondering what exactly happened and so if I may take a minute I’ll just walk you through in my 21 own words what I think may be in the back of some of your minds as everybody asks. 22 23 Over the course of the project entitlements and once we’ve got approvals we rarely walked the 24 site with our consultants and one of those are the historic consultant that we had hired. This 25 City of Palo Alto Page 6 walk included myself, my construction team, which is my project manager and contractors and 1 so after getting the consultant’s recommendations or opinions I was like the neighbors 2 surprised when I heard from the neighbors that the building came down. I think my 3 construction team and I take responsibility as they are my team, came to their own reasoning 4 and jumped the gun. That’s essentially what happened. I don’t think there’s no mal intent. I 5 think it was just an error on my team’s part and we’re trying to rectify it. 6 7 When we were made aware of a possible way to make the buildings more historically significant 8 by rebuilding the storefronts, the wood storefronts with much more detail we opted to go ahead 9 and do that to try to make amends for our mistake. I’ll be available for questions and basically 10 that’s I think what happened. Thank you. 11 12 Chair Michael: So thank you very much. Do we have any speaker cards? Are there any 13 members of the public who have indicated, ok we have… Oh. So you can bring up the speaker 14 card and in the meantime does anybody from the Commission want to ask a question of the 15 applicant? Vice-Chair Keller. 16 17 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you very much and I appreciate your apology. It’s an unfortunate 18 situation. I’m wondering are there some comments in the staff report about the expenditure 19 that you put in in terms of improving the windows beyond what, for the building that is 20 remaining to make them, is that correct? To make them more conducent with the original 21 style? 22 23 Mr. Tze: Yes. I think there are figures that are provided Elena as to what it cost to rather than 24 taken off the shelf wood storefront have we had actually had a team of carpenters out there 25 City of Palo Alto Page 7 building it onsite. And so that cost for both buildings was about a quarter of a million dollars. 1 So Building 1 is a little bit larger than the building that we’re just finishing up and about to 2 paint. So if you maybe break it up 55/45 percent of that $250,000. 3 4 Vice-Chair Keller: And I’m wondering, you know more about this than I do, so I’m wondering 5 whether the life of the building that you’re building from scratch in terms of being built with 6 modern materials and modern insulation, modern wiring to code and all that kind of stuff 7 without having to rebuild it whether that would have a value of the fact that it’s in some sense 8 new construction as opposed to having to retrofit the existing building? 9 10 Mr. Tze: Well we’ve just gone through a rehabilitation of Building 2, the one that you might see 11 right next to the Fresh Market and very little bit was actually salvageable. In fact under the 12 guidance of Charlie Duncan we and the architects and structural engineers agreed what should 13 and should not be kept as far as even the large glulam beams. A new, the original building I 14 can’t tell you exactly what kind of age buildings are designed, but what I’ve heard from 15 architects and engineers is generally the use of those buildings may not have been designed for 16 more than 30 to 50 or 60 years. 17 18 And so what we discovered in the building that was illegally demolished is to our surprise not 19 much of the material was actually original of the observable façade. When we peeled that 20 away and showed our consultants we were actually surprised by how little original material 21 there was. And what original material there was a lot of it was found objectionable by our 22 structural engineer from simply you could actually put a pencil into the glulam beams that were 23 supposed to be reused. And so he didn’t want to reuse any of those. So anyway a new 24 City of Palo Alto Page 8 building should have a life of at least 50 years. It is still a wood structure building, but 1 obviously to current seismic code, current Title 24 green building requirements, etcetera. 2 3 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you very much. 4 5 Chair Michael: Are there any other questions of the applicant? Commissioner King. 6 7 Commissioner King: I will ask there’s also reference to technical modifications that have 8 increased the cost to the traffic signal upgrade and the three car chargers. Can you address 9 that and I ask you and may ask staff as well do we have verification of the funds expended? 10 11 Mr. Tze: Sure. The staff does not have verification, but I can provide that. Maybe it was 12 mischaracterized as technical upgrades, but the traffic signal was maybe estimated by some 13 staff members to be a certain dollar amount and it turns out it’s not, it’s quite a bit more. So 14 the $200,000 is basically what the replacement traffic signal. That’s not the intersection work 15 or roadwork, just the electric signals section. And three car charger and the affiliated power 16 that Commissioner Keller very well knows about. In our case we saved a lot of money on the 17 chargers themselves because actually a provider called Blink provided the actual level two and 18 level three chargers, but we just had to put the infrastructure in for them. And so that’s where 19 the $200,000 came from, but it’s not a technical difference. It was basically maybe an 20 inaccurate estimate by some people early on. 21 22 Commissioner King: And so is your argument that you relied upon those numbers in your initial 23 (interrupted) 24 25 City of Palo Alto Page 9 Mr. Tze: No. 1 2 Commissioner King: Oh? 3 4 Mr. Tze: No, I’m not arguing that. 5 6 Commissioner King: Ok, so I’m just a little… so if in fact the request is to, I guess it appears 7 here that you’re requesting that we might consider that a public benefit, the expenses incurred 8 on that for the chargers and the traffic signal. 9 10 Mr. Tze: The expense was just to quantify what it cost. That was what was asked of me, but 11 my opinion is the chargers, in my view is a benefit to the public. Putting that revised traffic 12 signal in along with the restriping will be a benefit. It wasn’t a requirement by Transportation, 13 but it was more, it’s inconvenient making a left hand turn going westbound onto St. Francis. 14 I’ve experienced it, I’m sure you all have because the exiting traffic is sometimes moving at 50 15 miles per hour toward you. 16 17 Commissioner King: Yes. 18 19 Mr. Tze: And so it was suggested that we replace that. And all I’m saying is an estimate by a 20 staff member at the time was very low compared to what it really cost, but I’m not saying that 21 that’s a, I’m not trying to make an exorbatant case for that being a public benefit. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 10 Commissioner King: Ok, but those expenses were a discretion on your part is your… the change 1 to the traffic signal and the car chargers were a discretion on your part and not part of the 2 original requirements for the project? 3 4 Mr. Tze: I don’t think they’re discretionary. I think they were part of the project conditions of 5 approval. 6 7 Commissioner King: Ok. Great. Thank you. 8 9 Chair Michael: So I just had one question of staff and that is it appears that there’s no dispute 10 about the fact and I think that that’s all for you. 11 12 Mr. Tze: Thank you. 13 14 Chair Michael: So thanks very much. But there isn’t any dispute about the fact that Building 1 15 was demolished illegally and for which we’ve received an apology from the applicant; however, 16 the question is what, what are the consequences of that? And under the applicable provisions 17 of the City code when there’s a, I suppose this is analogous to a building permit violation or a 18 zoning code violation, but in fact this is a Planned Community zone, which was granted in 19 exchange for in part because of the public benefit that would be provided as a result of 20 proceeding with this project and the public benefit here had multiple elements, one of which 21 was the preservation of the historic structure that was illegally demolished. So do we have any 22 guidance to give the Commission in terms of one, what our purview is as a Commission and 23 what are the applicable standards for a penalty or remedy for the illegal demolition of this 24 building in the Planned Community zone, which abrogates part of the public benefit? 25 City of Palo Alto Page 11 1 Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney: Yes, thank you Chair. Cara Silver, Senior Assistant 2 City Attorney. There are two issues here. One is the penalty procedure and there is a penalty 3 for demolishing a building in violation of the building permit and other entitlements. And 4 unfortunately our penalty structure is very low in connection with that. And so the information 5 in the staff report shows that it’s about $5,000 for a penalty. And so I think that staff thought 6 and at the City Council hearing when this issue came up the first time around the sense was 7 that that penalty was really not sufficient. Now because this is a PC it is possible to try to 8 satisfy the or assess an appropriate penalty through the PC process and it is also appropriate in 9 the PC process too because the one of the primary community benefits in this case was the 10 historic demolition or was the historic retention of this building it is appropriate to come up with 11 a substitute for that community benefit. So there are two issues in front of the Commission at 12 this point; one is whether the penalty is appropriate and second whether the community benefit 13 is appropriate at this point. 14 15 Chair Michael: Ok, thank you very much. And we have one speaker card. Let’s open up to 16 that. 17 18 Vice-Chair Keller: The speaker is Gayle Olson and by the way after this, after we hear from the 19 public the applicant will be allowed to speak later. Thank you. 20 21 Gayle Olson: Good evening and thank you. I’m Gayle Olson. I live at 715 Wildwood Lane, 22 which is right around the corner from the shopping center. I’ve lived there with my husband 23 for 46 years. Needless to say we have been through many difficulties with the Edgewood 24 Shopping Center over these years. We’ve attended numerous meetings to plan what to do 25 City of Palo Alto Page 12 about the shopping center. So when this was finally approved I was thrilled, the neighborhood 1 was thrilled, and when the Fresh Market opened it was a glorious day. So I’m here to speak in 2 favor of moving forward with this project and getting the rest of the shopping center 3 completed. There will be additional services, there’ll be shops, hopefully a restaurant with 4 some pizza parlors and that sort of thing. The neighbors are all enthusiastic. We have elderly 5 people in the neighborhood who are not able to drive anymore so this is a benefit for them. So 6 I would urge you to move forward and approve the project. Thank you. 7 8 Chair Michael: Thank you very much. Are there any other speakers from the public? Seeing 9 none… oh, do we have a representative from the HRB here this evening? And would you like to 10 elaborate on any of the issues that are presented here based on your hearing? 11 12 Roger Kohler, Vice-Chair HRB: Yes, Good evening. I’m Roger Kohler, Vice-Chair of the Historic 13 Resources Board. We reviewed this project a couple weeks ago and we also reviewed it of 14 course when it first came through. We found that the, there was some suggestion during the 15 meeting that instead of rebuilding the structure was to do an entirely different looking structure 16 because there was thought that this was not, you shouldn’t be duplicating because it’s not a 17 historic structure. But we all felt unanimously that the proposed program would be far more 18 appropriate and would continue the feel and the look of the historic shopping center over 19 having a totally different looking building there. 20 21 The truth is that having worked on a lot of homes myself and things that refurbishing historic 22 homes there’s a lot of existing structure that’s there and everything, but in the end it looks 23 brand new because it’s all been new paint and fixed up and it looks very good. So I think in the 24 end this building, I think from the inside as well it’ll be obvious that this is a new structure. 25 City of Palo Alto Page 13 From the exterior I think it’ll fit in and look like the old, the existing building that is there. The 1 building is also being refurbished is also going to look brand new as well because it’s being 2 refurbished from top to bottom. So that was our feeling and that was one of the few 3 discussions we had about the structure. Other than that we approved of the project as it was 4 presented. 5 6 Chair Michael: So thank you very much. Does anybody on the Commission have questions of, 7 excuse me, I didn’t get your name. 8 9 Mr. Kohler: Roger Kohler. 10 11 Chair Michael: Of Roger Kohler? Vice-Chair Keller? Ok. Commissioner King. 12 13 Commissioner King: Yes, thank you Mr. Kohler. So I, and this, you may decline to answer 14 these, but you’ve had history of probably doing hundreds of new construction and remodels in 15 the City of Palo Alto. So do you have any rough guess of what the applicant might have saved 16 in costs by tearing down the property and being able to build without having to remodel? 17 18 Mr. Kohler: Well the building was, this building was being moved because it was the part of the 19 reason the shopping center failed in a lot of the opinion of the Board Members was the random 20 orientation of those two structures. When you drove in you saw the one unit and the other was 21 around the corner. So once you, like today when you walk into even Safeway parking lot in 22 Mountain View you can see all the structures and you get an obvious oh yeah, there’s that store 23 and there’s that store, but on Edgewood Market when you pulled into the Lucky Store the other 24 unit was behind the other one store so you weren’t always aware that it was there. I mean my 25 City of Palo Alto Page 14 office is on Colorado and I used to go there to get pizza for lunch all the time, but I think the 1 arrangement of it is, is going to make the whole shopping center work a great deal better. I’m 2 not sure I’m answering your question. 3 4 Commissioner King: My more question is (interrupted) 5 6 Mr. Kohler: In the end I don’t, I think yeah they might be saving some money, but because 7 they were moving the building anyway I think some of that cost is somewhat negligible. But 8 (interrupted) 9 10 Commissioner King: Ok, and the reason I asked the question is that I think in my mind one of 11 the primary things we want to move forward with is to ensure that we do not provide incentives 12 and that we actually provide a disincentive for people to break terms of the development 13 agreement such that there could be an argument made oh if the applicant would save X, pick a 14 number, half a million dollars in costs by tearing down the building and starting from scratch 15 versus rehabilitating the existing building then it makes sense to have some penalties or public 16 benefits that are commensurate with the savings. 17 18 Mr. Kohler: I suppose you’re, there’s a project on University Avenue where they sort of just 19 dismantled the whole house and are going to do things different than were on the approved 20 plans, but fortunately when they dismantled the home they kept a very good record of all the 21 little pieces of the siding and everything so the reassembled building is looking very close to the 22 original because a good part of the materials are still being used although a lot of the actual 23 structure is new. So I would say that the preferred option and that’s why we don’t since the 24 late mid-eighties or so we do more new homes than remodeling’s in my little business in part 25 City of Palo Alto Page 15 because a lot of the older homes just are really failing. The foundations are no good and with 1 the new zoning ordinance and everything it’s just usually easier to do a new home. 2 3 In this case I think they might have saved some money. I wouldn’t say it’s dramatic myself 4 because they, I mean it’s just construction. Maybe there’s, if they had been able to keep all of 5 the glulam beams the cost of the glulam beams might have been some dimension, but I don’t, I 6 just don’t think it’s that much myself. 7 8 Commissioner King: Thank you. 9 10 Chair Michael: Vice-Chair Keller. 11 12 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. Did the HRB consider at all whether or not there should be any 13 penalties applied to the applicant in this project or was that not within the purview of the HRB? 14 15 Mr. Kohler: I might defer that to Steven. I don’t actually remember that we talked about 16 anything like that. We don’t normally get into that kind of discussion. 17 18 Ms. Lee: If I may, that was not a question that was brought to the HRB. The HRB’s role and 19 what we requested of them specifically was on the EIR and the historic resource impact of the 20 project. 21 22 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. And in terms of the historic resources impact of the project I 23 understand that because the building was demolished and was being rebuilt that that is a 24 City of Palo Alto Page 16 significant but unavoidable impact. Is that right of the project, the destruction of the building 1 and rebuilding of it, is that right? 2 3 Mr. Kohler: I’m not exactly sure. It’s basically an impact. The building is being rebuilt. Now 4 the impact on the shopping center itself is probably going to be negligible because it’s all going 5 to look like the original structure. That was one of the reasons why we weren’t in favor of 6 doing a total and different looking building so you’d have two older looking buildings and 7 suddenly this new structure. So if that’s what you’re asking. I’m seeing other people here 8 [have something to say]. 9 10 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you very much. Yes? 11 12 Aaron Aknin, Interim Director – Planning: I was just going to note that EIR related questions 13 you could probably ask staff because we may be able to answer those. 14 15 Vice-Chair Keller: Great, thank you very much. Thank you Rodger. 16 17 Mr. Kohler: I’m not good at answering EIR questions. 18 19 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck. 20 21 Commissioner Alcheck: Yeah just I’m not sure if you’ll be able to speak to this or staff, but is 22 there any precedent for this situation? I mean in your experience or on maybe any of the 23 current members of the HRB’s experience have you ever been in a situation where (interrupted) 24 25 City of Palo Alto Page 17 Ms. Lee: In consulting with multiple staff members this is the first time something like this has 1 happened in the City, especially for a PC project. We’ve had situations where historic buildings 2 were demolished, but in one case in the downtown the materials were preserved and so they 3 were able to reconstruct, but in this case none of the building remains in order to allow 4 reconstruction. Staff also surveyed cities around the Bay Area to see if this has happened and 5 this is a very rare occurrence. 6 7 Mr. Kohler: I guess I can chime in. I guess next year begins my 20th year as a HRB Member so 8 when I walk down University there’s a whole number of buildings we’ve looked at and over 9 town and I don’t think we’ve ever encountered where we’ve approved the reworking of a 10 historic structure to have it torn down. So. 11 12 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok. 13 14 Chair Michael: So now we’ll come back to the Commission and as we’ve done in the past first if 15 there’s a round of any questions to clarify the matter and then we’ll have sort of comments 16 perhaps based on a Motion. Ok, and then we’ll have the opportunity for the applicant to make 17 a final statement. So to the Commission for any questions that you have about the matter. 18 Commissioner Panelli. 19 20 Commissioner Panelli: Thank you Mr. Chair. I have a question for staff on actually the slide 21 that’s up there right now, Slide 8. There are a couple ideas for additional public benefits, one 22 being a contribution toward the West Bayshore sidewalk improvement the other being toward 23 restoration of a historic building. Does staff have a recommendation of what the size of that 24 contribution should be? 25 City of Palo Alto Page 18 1 Ms. Lee: That’s been a difficult question for staff. We’ve looked at the penalty structure that we 2 have in the City, which is fairly low amounts as shown in the staff report. And when we 3 surveyed other cities for destruction or demolition of historic buildings or some impact on 4 historic structures most of that has been doubling to tripling of the fees, which again is shown 5 in the staff report as what that range could be. As an alternative staff has said you could also 6 just apply a percentage based on the valuation and staff has also raised the valuation because 7 we understand that there’s significant costs incurred in the project as part of this. So that’s 8 something that we’re really looking to the Commission to provide, but we do have a range in 9 there. It would be between $10,000 up to $942,000. 10 11 Commissioner Panelli: Ok. I guess let me phrase it differently then, the question. How much 12 for example is the, what’s the total budget required for the West Bayshore sidewalk 13 improvement? 14 15 Ms. Lee: It’s estimated right now to be about $144,000. 16 17 Commissioner Panelli: Ok. And the contribution towards restoration of a historic building, I’m 18 assuming that’s for a future unknown so you really, you’d have to just pick a number and hope 19 that it satisfies whatever future project. 20 21 Ms. Lee: That’s correct. 22 23 Commissioner Panelli: Ok. Can you remind me what the total square footage of this building is? 24 I know it’s in the staff report, but I, is it? 25 City of Palo Alto Page 19 1 Ms. Lee: It is about 10,000 square feet. 2 3 Commissioner Panelli: Ok. Just for this, for this building? Ok. 4 5 Ms. Lee: Just Building 1. 6 7 Commissioner Panelli: Ok, thank you. 8 9 Chair Michael: Commissioner King do you have any clarifying questions? 10 11 Commissioner King: Yes. So I’d ask of staff of the same, regarding the sidewalk project I mean 12 I’m, I don’t get a sense being able to read between the lines on whether this is a project we 13 feel really fits in with our long term plans or whether it’s just hey, here’s something we could 14 throw money at even if we don’t think it’s a great use for the money. It’s someplace to put 15 money even though it may not be the most optimal solution. Could you address that please? 16 17 Ms. Lee: Sure, thank you. So basically this improvement came up as part of the overall 18 discussion during the original PC and when the neighbors brought that up City did recognize 19 that that was a deficiency in our sidewalk system. And so it’s been identified in our Bike 20 Pedestrian Master Plan as a deficiency that should be corrected. And so it is a project or 21 improvement that the City would support. 22 23 Commissioner King: And I’m, I may be missing it. Is there a graphic of where that exists? 24 Where we’re talking about? 25 City of Palo Alto Page 20 1 Ms. Lee: It would be basically from, there’s no graphic on there although if you look on your, 2 the site plan it’s basically West Bayshore Road from north of the site all the way to the East 3 Palo Alto boarder. So it would be basically the left hand side, the one opposite from the 4 freeway. Right now it’s really a dirt, some dirt paths and then so the proposal would be to add 5 a sidewalk where those dirt paths currently are. 6 7 Commissioner King: And that’s beginning at Channing Avenue? 8 9 Ms. Lee: Yes, well north of Channing. 10 11 Commissioner King: Beginning of Channing headed north? 12 13 Ms. Lee: Yes. 14 15 Commissioner King: And how far would that go? 16 17 Ms. Lee: I don’t actually have the footage, the distance, but it would be all the way to the East 18 Palo Alto boarder. 19 20 Commissioner King: Ok. Ok, thank you. And then let’s see do I have another question… no, I 21 think that’s it. Thank you. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 21 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck did you have any clarifying questions? Ok. Ok so at this 1 point maybe we can open the floor for a Motion. Oh, Vice-Chair Keller is keeping me honest 2 and I’d like to invite the applicant back to make a statement if you like for three minutes. 3 4 Mr. Tze: It’s not a final statement. I just wanted to clarify a few things because after this 5 happened when I finally got a hold of my contractors and asked him what happened there were 6 a few things that contributed to their confusion and mistake. One is there was a demo permit 7 issued for this building because the City doesn’t have a deconstruction permit or relocation 8 permit. That permit did exist and to your question Commissioner King as far as the condition of 9 the building when it was reviewed and opened up was such that you didn’t want to reuse those 10 materials. If you tried to reuse it the inspector would tell you to replace it. There was that 11 much damage and dry rot and so forth in most of the building materials. So I just wanted to 12 point those things out. Thank you. 13 14 Chair Michael: Thank you very much. So now we’ll turn back to the Commission for a Motion 15 and for any other comments. Commissioner King. 16 17 Commissioner King: Yeah, so I guess on the comment section I watched the Council when they 18 addressed this and I think they as I believe we maybe find ourselves are perplexed. There’s no 19 track record. It’s a very rare occurrence. As far as how you would penalize or yeah, really it’s 20 penalizing the applicant for the error made, which at face value was unintended and in my mind 21 I think you, we’re ending up with a superior building that will last longer and probably safer, 22 certainly more habitable for the tenants so… Although that decision should have of course 23 been made during the initial process and I know at the time there were many members of the 24 public who were saying that’s an old beat up building and in fact with that style of architecture 25 City of Palo Alto Page 22 there’s not much there that you know it’s some windows there just isn’t a lot of structure, right? 1 It’s like a, like Eichler homes. And so I think it’s very hard to decide what is the appropriate 2 penalty. 3 4 I think as I mentioned before the key thing is that you want some disincentive for this to ever 5 happen again and yet the odds of something, the stars aligning where this could even happen 6 seems pretty rare. And so I really don’t want to make an unreasonable burden on the applicant 7 and yet again we don’t want that to become a par for the course for developers to say, “Hey it’s 8 just cheaper for me to break the agreement and pay the penalty.” So I have to say I don’t 9 really know where to really start as far as proposing a dollar amount that would then be 10 converted into funds to the City or General Fund or to specific projects. So I’m anxious to see if 11 any of the other Commissioners have a sense of that. 12 13 I believe staff may have made an error in saying $942,000. I think it was $94,000. Is that 14 correct? 15 16 Ms. Lee: Yeah, thank you. It’s actually between, so basically the $942,000 would be the 17 adjusted valuation and so if we used the 10 percent it’d be $91,200 to $94,200. And on the 18 other hand also if we did a doubling or tripling of the building permit fees, which is a pretty 19 standard fine used by other cities in the area that would be between $13,680 and $28,260. So 20 that would be more in line with what other cities have done, but because this is a PC the City 21 does have the leeway to make that a different number because the question that we’re focused 22 on here also is not just what is the violation that was done but also ultimately what is the best 23 public benefit that’s appropriate given the situation and given the needs of the City. 24 25 City of Palo Alto Page 23 Commissioner King: Thank you and so I mean, I guess if I were just trying to put some 1 numbers in there a fine in the ten to hundred thousand dollar range it could be again I don’t 2 know. Mr. Kohler didn’t really have an offhand back of the envelope of what the applicant 3 might have saved. Then again, maybe he didn’t save anything, but I would expect that not 4 having to try and recreate the building moving pieces of that type of construction that there 5 was, were some material savings and maybe we want to ask the applicant. I want to ask him 6 at this point, but those are my thoughts. And I’m sorry, no Motion is popping out from this 7 Commissioner at this point. 8 9 Chair Michael: Ok, thank you. So at this point let me just observe that often before the 10 Planning and Transportation Commission are applications for Planned Community zoning. In 11 connection with approving a PC zone ordinance it’s incumbent upon the Commission to 12 determine the adequacy of the public benefit that would result from the project. And here, well 13 and we also have had in the community some concern about the PC zoning process. It was 14 observed that the criticism is that oftentimes the public benefits are arguably inadequate and 15 then in the end they might not actually be delivered. So there, I think that situation is not what 16 we’re looking at tonight just to be perfectly clear. And I’ve also from up here this evening I’ve 17 been very impressed with the candor and the sincerity of the applicant in acknowledging the 18 facts, what happened, and it wasn’t intended and their efforts to bring about a practical way 19 forward, which was also part of the record in front of the Historic Resources Board. 20 21 So as we’re dealing with sort of a matter that there isn’t a well-established precedent in Palo 22 Alto for the penalty that the Council will impose I think that we should put forward sort of a 23 recommendation for the Council in terms of what would be a reasonable amount of monetary 24 penalty perhaps in line with the standards suggested by staff. But I think that the important 25 City of Palo Alto Page 24 policy issues that we face in considering public benefits in connection with PC zoning generally 1 that’s not the issue we’re facing tonight. There is an aspect of the, the nature of the benefit 2 relative to the historic building demolition, but the fact that it’s been rebuilt or is in the process 3 of being rebuilt with attention to the proper detail and whatnot is duly noted. So perhaps one 4 of our colleagues of the Commission will come forward with a Motion for a recommendation to 5 Council and our action on the two issues that we have. Interim Planning Director Aknin. 6 7 Mr. Aknin: If I could help out with this, I think after taking a look this is obviously a difficult one 8 for staff too because it’s hard to quantify this. When I’m taking a look at this I’m taking a look 9 at what public benefit was lost and obviously it was the historical aspect of this. I think just 10 talking briefly and speaking to other cities I think tripling of the fine, which would come out to 11 about $28,000 and then putting that towards some type of historic, some type of fund to help 12 rehabilitate a historic public structure would be something that would be adequate in this case. 13 14 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck. 15 16 Commissioner Alcheck: So is there precedent where we were consulted on fine amounts in past 17 transgressions, not tear downs of historical so and so, like I’ll give you an example of why I’m 18 asking because this isn’t the first “public benefit” that didn’t turn out the way it should have. 19 And I don’t know if we’ve gone back and investigated other public benefits which we feel have 20 not been provided the way they may or may not have been agreed to be provided. To the 21 extent that that’s the topic we’re talking about I feel like is this something we’ve done in the 22 past? Is it something we want to start doing? To the extent that this is an act that violated 23 let’s say a permit, is there a precedent for Planning Commission to kind of weigh in on the fine 24 City of Palo Alto Page 25 someone would get for violating a permit? Do you see what, there’s sort of two different 1 (interrupted) 2 3 Mr. Aknin: Yeah, the answer is no. I think you’re hitting it right there. We’re kind of mixing 4 and matching two things. There’s the fine and then there’s the public benefit amount. In this 5 case what we’re saying is a fine would typically be brought down by staff to an applicant. But 6 since we’re part of a PC zone right here right now what we’re saying is to pay an equivalent 7 amount as part of the public benefit so that fine could be put towards a specific purpose, which 8 in this case would be rehabilitation of a publicly owned historic building. 9 10 Commissioner Alcheck: I’m not putting forth a Motion at this time, but I would suggest that if 11 we evaluate the loss of a public benefit or if we begin that sort of can of worms there the 12 notion that the public benefit’s value has been lost and so we’re going to get involved in 13 remedying the, that loss because there’s a lot of potential public benefits that you may want to 14 look at that similarly didn’t meet expectation or direction of the Planning Commission. And I’m 15 not sure that’s what we want to do tonight or that’s, I don’t know. 16 17 To the extent that there should be a fine assessed for the failure of the applicant to comply with 18 the permit he was given if there was a Motion to essentially defer to the City Council I would be 19 in favor of that. I sort of think that there are sort of two unspoken or I guess subtle messages 20 here. If the City Council, I’m assuming they’ll review this, if the City Council determines that 21 the failure to provide the public benefit is or failure to essentially deliver the public benefit as 22 promised is so significant that the fine has to be severe that would go a long way to bolstering 23 the notion that City Council is behind this idea of public benefits. If the City Council decides to 24 essentially assess a fine for failure to adhere to the permit that’s sort of different because 25 City of Palo Alto Page 26 people will fail to comply with specific permits in the future and they may or may not have 1 anything to do with the public benefit scenario. 2 3 And so again, I don’t think we’ve ever been in a situation where we’re tasked with enforcing the 4 receipt of public benefits. And so to a certain extent I’m uncomfortable with beginning to do 5 that because in the past on the Commission I’ve heard Commissioners state that the public 6 benefits that were supposed to occur didn’t occur. And I would then query as to well why don’t 7 we open that back up and figure out why that public benefit has not been provided the way you 8 intended and if it didn’t let’s assess some fine for it. If, so since we haven’t gone there in the 9 past and I’m not sure that’s where we want to go I don’t know if we should be essentially 10 weighing in too heavily on specific fine amounts. If this is an issue about assessing a fine for 11 permit noncompliance I think the City’s got a pretty standard formula and since we’re not 12 actively involved in the enforcement of those sorts of issues I don’t really know if we have to be 13 any more involved than to suggest that the City Council review this matter in light of the 14 situation and enact the standard procedure for assessing a fine for permit noncompliance. 15 16 So there’s sort of two big issues here and in both cases I’m sort of inclined to suggest that we 17 defer to the City Council with the suggestion that they pay particularly close attention to the 18 notion that if they don’t deal with this in a way they’re going to set a precedent for the value 19 we’re actually placing in our public benefit analysis if you could essentially avoid the delivery. 20 That’s convoluted, but I’d like to hear what you guys think about it. 21 22 Chair Michael: Commissioner Panelli. 23 24 MOTION 25 City of Palo Alto Page 27 1 Commissioner Panelli: Thank you Mr. Chair. I’m going to suggest that building off of what the 2 Chairman said before that this PC is not controversial like some of the others because this is 3 something that the neighborhood actually really wants. And I’d argue that the folks who have 4 been penalized the most are probably the neighbors. 5 6 I am very sensitive though to the comments that Commissioner King mentioned, which is we’ve 7 got to provide some kind of a disincentive to the old adage that it’s easier to ask for forgiveness 8 afterwards than to ask for permission beforehand. So what I’d suggest is, I’m going to disagree 9 with you Commissioner Alcheck about deferring to Council. I think Council appointed us to this 10 body to ease their load in some way and so the more that we can demonstrate some leadership 11 I think the more valuable we are to Council. So I would say let’s suggest something. They are 12 more than welcome to agree or add to it or subtract from it, but I think we can put forward 13 some rationale as to a specific proposal. 14 15 I think at this point I would like to make a recommendation, a Motion that we recommend that 16 Council approve this… let’s see, what’s the best way to phrase this? This amended Planned 17 Community or supplemental EIR under the condition that they contribute for the West Bayshore 18 sidewalk improvement. To me there’s a direct, because this is a connector to this, ostensibly to 19 this shopping center I think it’s a benefit to the community because I think it allows them to 20 perhaps walk more safely than what it is available today if they were to try to walk down West 21 Bayshore. I’m hesitant towards this contribution towards restoration of a historic building 22 because to me there’s no direct relationship other than the idea is that we’re supposed to be 23 historically preserving something, it didn’t happen, but it’s… I don’t see any connection to a 24 historic preservation opportunity in that part of town. So I’d rather see a project, a public 25 City of Palo Alto Page 28 benefit that actually benefits that part of town directly. And barring a better idea that one 1 seems like the best one on the table. So that would be my Motion. 2 3 Chair Michael: Just as a clarification did you have an amount for the contribution? 4 5 Commissioner Panelli: The $144,000, I mean whatever the estimated cost was. 6 7 Chair Michael: Planning Director Aknin. 8 9 Mr. Aknin: One thing, sorry for late breaking news, but we just received an e-mail from our 10 Transportation Staff. I had asked them to go out there an actually measure to figure out if any 11 parking spaces would be lost as a result of the sidewalk being put in and I’m reading the e-mail 12 now that up to 10 parking spaces could be lost if the sidewalk was put in now. They’re not 13 legally, they may or may not be legal spaces, but they are functioning as spaces and historically 14 have been functioning as spaces along there near the East Palo Alto boarder. So just to throw 15 another monkey wrench into everything there could potentially be a loss. Now you could 16 amend your Motion for us to take a look at that and provide that as part of our information to 17 City Council. That could be one way of going about it because this is just a preliminary e-mail, 18 but since I had the info I wanted to relay it to you. 19 20 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck had a question. 21 22 Commissioner Alcheck: Yes. This is going to come off wrong, but this sidewalk serves residents 23 of Palo Alto or residents of East Palo Alto? 24 25 City of Palo Alto Page 29 Commissioner Panelli: It’s both. 1 2 Commissioner Alcheck: Because I’m a little confused about that because it looks like it would 3 serve residents of East Palo Alto and not that that isn’t a worthy cause, it’s just I think relevant 4 to the discussion. 5 6 Chair Michael: Commissioner King. 7 8 Commissioner King: Yeah, I have my, I can pass this along. Unfortunately I don’t, someday 9 soon we’ll be able to project it up there. I have Google maps here and I’ll describe what I see, 10 which is that from Channing along 101, along West Bayshore to I believe the City of Palo Alto 11 ends at the creek, correct? That’s our boarder. There are no houses that appear to face from, 12 the houses on Edgewood back to West Bayshore there appear to be no residences or structures 13 through to the creek, which would be the border with East Palo Alto and then there’s that 14 apartment complex there that has sidewalks in front of it and then it goes to the intersection at 15 Woodland and from there north it appears there are no sidewalks and that there is street 16 parking where sidewalks might be. And so I’ll pass this along if Commissioners would like to 17 take a look at that. And so I’ll just… 18 19 Commissioner Alcheck: Do you know if the parking spots he was talking about are those near 20 that apartment complex? 21 22 Commissioner King: Maybe Aaron could address that. I’m not seeing any parking spaces near 23 Channing. I’m seeing parking spaces near Woodland. 24 25 City of Palo Alto Page 30 Commissioner Alcheck: I guess my question is: are those East Palo Alto? Are those parking 1 spaces that residents of East Palo Alto are using that we would…? 2 3 Ms. Lee: Well, we’re not sure exactly who uses those parking spots, but the parking spots as 4 Aaron had described are in Palo Alto. It’s just they’re informal parking spaces where vehicles, 5 people are parking their vehicles on basically dirt areas. So they’re not paved, but they’re just 6 wide enough for cars to park. 7 8 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT 9 10 Chair Michael: So I have a question of Commissioner Panelli and maybe this is in the form of a 11 friendly amendment to your Motion and that is I guess for all the factors that you articulated in 12 making the Motion I wonder if we should try to provide some just clarity in our recommendation 13 to Council that the amount of the penalty should be some multiple of the permit amount, say 14 three times the permit amount and that it should be contributed towards the purpose stated, 15 which is towards a portion of the cost of the West Bayshore sidewalk improvement when that 16 project is implemented. So would that be accepted as a friendly amendment to your Motion? 17 18 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ACCEPTED 19 20 Commissioner Panelli: Yes. 21 22 Chair Michael: Is there a second? Commissioner Alcheck? 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 31 Commissioner Alcheck: I just want to throw in that I mean, again I to some extent wish we 1 could defer, but if we’re going to make a recommendation I sort of would prefer that the 2 contribution went towards the restoration of a historic building because this sidewalk to 3 nowhere essentially is what I would call it seems like a complete waste of money. I’m worried 4 that it doesn’t serve our residents and to some extent it seems more fitting that the monies 5 raised or assessed will go to the very cause that was not met here right, the restoration of a 6 historic building. It seems like the second concept would be more apt. 7 8 Chair Michael: Vice-Chair Keller. 9 10 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. So firstly I think that there are two additional presumably public 11 benefits that have apparently already been done, which were not included in the original public 12 benefit. And one of those which is arguable is the restoration of the storefront windows of 13 Building 1 and 2 to their original appearance as designed by the architect. The second thing is 14 the improvement of the traffic signal, which was not originally public benefit and that I’m not 15 sure if that was. Was that a public benefit or not? 16 17 Ms. Lee: It was a condition of approval. 18 19 MOTION 20 21 Vice-Chair Keller: It was a condition of approval. Ok, thank you for that clarification. So it 22 seems to me that I’m aligned with Commissioner Panelli that there should be some sort of 23 penalty. I’m aligned with Commissioner Alcheck that the direct cost if you will, the loss was in 24 historic resources and therefore any penalty should be applied to historic rehabilitation of 25 City of Palo Alto Page 32 resources in Palo Alto. The thing that’s interesting to me about this is that the sidewalk 1 construction on West Bayshore although I have no problem with benefitting the people of the 2 Condo Complex in East Palo Alto who came and spoke to us, I think that’s a worthy thing to 3 consider doing, the issue is that construction might further annoy the neighbors because it’s 4 actually happening behind the houses that are in Palo Alto on Edgewood Drive. And so I’m not 5 sure if that construction would be desired by them or not desired by them. So without getting 6 their input I don’t know, I have trouble recommending that that be done. 7 8 And I’m guessing that my suggestion would be probably considered too high, but I’m going to 9 say it anyway. So, but first let me say that we should probably have an ordinance. We have 10 this informally but it may not be an ordinance to require that there be no demolition without a 11 new building permit and that would have prevented for example the loss of the historic property 12 at the Juana Briones House that happened because of inadequate and there were also 13 destructions of houses that were not replaced by anything in Professorville I believe. People 14 just wanted vacant land and that’s a problem. And also we should actually have a law that 15 basically creates a penalty in case of an illegal demolition and other things like that so that this 16 would be clarified. 17 18 But it seems to me that there’s actually two things going on. There’s actually two infractions. 19 One infraction is demolition in violation of the building code. They’re supposed to have not 20 demolished the building but moved it. And I realize that technically there was a demolition 21 permit issued to move it, but that’s kind of an arcane thing. The second thing is that there’s a 22 loss of public benefit, which is the public benefit of having this historic building there. There is 23 a new historic building in its place, which is according to the Historic Resources Board better 24 City of Palo Alto Page 33 than replacing it with a building that looks out of place, but in some sense that’s a loss of 1 resources. 2 3 So I don’t know if I’ll get a second, but my suggestion is, my Motion is to recommend approval 4 to the City Council of the supplemental Environmental Impact Report to amend the Planned 5 Community ordinance to add to the benefits (1) restoring windows of Buildings 1 and 2, 6 storefront windows of Building 1 and 2 to the original appearance as designed by the original 7 architect and (2) a $500,000 contribution to historic rehabilitation of some buildings in Palo 8 Alto, one or more buildings in Palo Alto with that amount covering both the penalty of the illegal 9 demolition as well as the loss of the historic resource. 10 11 Chair Michael: So there’s a substitute Motion by Vice-Chair… there’s a new Motion by Vice-Chair 12 Keller. Is there a second? 13 14 Commissioner King: I’m sorry, could you repeat the penalty amount? 15 16 Vice-Chair Keller: The penalty amount as recommended was $500,000. And basically the idea 17 there is that that’s significant enough to deter people from violating PC ordinances at this stage 18 and I do, and it is, it goes towards historic rehabilitation and also the issue is I do think that we 19 should be enforcing in some ways public benefits that we don’t get. 20 21 Chair Michael: Can I make a friendly amendment to your Motion? 22 23 Vice-Chair Keller: Sure. 24 25 City of Palo Alto Page 34 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT 1 2 Chair Michael: I am inclined to support everything, all of the elements of your Motion other than 3 the penalty amount, which I think under the circumstances and facts outlined this evening is 4 significantly higher than I would have thought reasonable. And I would recommend that the 5 penalty amount be at the high end of the range in the staff report, which ranged from $10,000 6 to $94,000. So I think if we have a recommendation being for the high end of the range from 7 the Planning Department I would support your Motion. 8 9 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT ACCEPTED 10 11 Vice-Chair Keller: Ok. I’ll accept your friendly amendment of the high end, which was I guess 12 $94,000 approximately. 13 14 Mr. Aknin: Correct. 15 16 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. 17 18 SECOND 19 20 Chair Michael: So I’m going to second the Motion and then Commissioner Alcheck would like to 21 make a friendly amendment. 22 23 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT 24 25 City of Palo Alto Page 35 Commissioner Alcheck: I’m just going to throw this out there again, which is that we operate 1 with the, I would prefer to operate with the fine amount that was typical in the City for I would 2 call it permit infractions, which is three times the permit fees. And the reason why I would 3 prefer to do that is because since there is no current process for us to somehow enforce the PC 4 requirements on developers after the fact, at least I’m not aware of one if there is. It says if 5 we’re, it’s as if we’re trying to get that all out right here. Because it’s so important to us that 6 the PC’s that we, the public benefits that we attempt to negotiate if you will in some cases are 7 not achieved that we would really want to discourage anyone from ever doing something like 8 that again. At the same time we can’t go back and fix the ones that we don’t think are being 9 properly provided now and I’m not sure we’ll be able to, our role is not to enforce the delivery 10 of those public benefits that have been negotiated already and so I sort of would prefer that we 11 use this three times amount of the permit process because then we can say well this situation 12 we dealt with it in the standard permit penalty process as opposed to public benefit analysis 13 process. 14 15 Chair Michael: So does Vice-Chair Keller accept Commissioner Alcheck’s friendly amendment? 16 17 Vice-Chair Keller: With all due respect I don’t accept your friendly amendment. The reason 18 being we’re actually dealing with two things: the violation of the code rule for which the three 19 times rule might make sense, but the additional amount is for the loss of the public benefit that 20 was in the original PC. 21 22 Ms. Silver: Chair Michael if I could just interject for one moment just to clarify we do have a 23 code enforcement process for violations of a PC ordinance that has already been approved by 24 the Council. What makes this situation a little bit awkward is that while the ordinance was 25 City of Palo Alto Page 36 approved the construction was midstream and so we’re, the community benefits had not 1 entirely been provided at this point so we treat this violation really as a building permit violation 2 as opposed to a PC code enforcement violation. 3 4 Chair Michael: Commissioner Alcheck. 5 6 Commissioner Alcheck: I’m just sort of curious if a development was supposed to provide a 7 certain space for public use and it not only failed to provide that space, but that space was sort 8 of commandeered for private benefit use is there any enforcement process that would allow this 9 Commission to assign a value to that public space and ask that applicant after the fact to pay 10 into a General Fund or in the Park Fund or something? 11 12 Ms. Silver: I see what you’re saying. No, we would, that type of issue would be handled at an 13 administrative code enforcement level. And so there would be fines imposed and there would 14 also be an option that staff could bring to you a revocation or a modification of the PC 15 ordinance and that process would ultimately come to you so you would be considering whether 16 the violation is sufficient enough to revoke the PC permit. 17 18 Chair Michael: Vice-Chair Keller do you want to speak to your Motion? 19 20 Vice-Chair Keller: I think I’ve spoken enough on this and I hope that we can, let me just say 21 quickly I think that in general this has been an excellent project and I appreciate all that the 22 applicant has done to build this project and to try to create a, the grocery store for the 23 community. I think we’re all, my guess is that we’re all in agreement as to this project should 24 move forward and that the entire project should be built and that the building should be 25 City of Palo Alto Page 37 rehabilitated. What we’re arguing about is the consequence for the demolition that was not 1 according to what the original PC said. So I just wanted to clarify that. So I’m assuming that 2 even those who might decide to vote against this Motion probably are, I would assume are still 3 in favor of moving forward. Thank you. 4 5 Chair Michael: And I have no further comments. Maybe we could just have a vote on the 6 Motion? Commissioner Panelli? 7 8 FRIENDLY AMENDMENT 9 10 Commissioner Panelli: I would like to make a friendly amendment to what you put forth. I 11 would like for us to say that we will recommend this to Council, but that the decision about 12 where to apply this public benefit we’ll leave up to them whether it goes to the sidewalk or to 13 the historic preservation. We’ll let them make that decision. Because then it gives the 14 neighborhood neighbors a chance to provide their commentary about what they want. Because 15 one of my concerns is that the benefits are not, we’re going to see these benefits in some other 16 part of town and I’d rather see that neighborhood get the benefit. 17 18 MOTION AMENDED BY MAKER 19 20 Vice-Chair Keller: How about if I deal with this way that staff should survey, I’m requesting that 21 staff get some information about the neighbors on, in the vicinity and see whether they support 22 the building of the sidewalk and if so then report that as an option to Council. Is that 23 acceptable? 24 25 City of Palo Alto Page 38 Commissioner Panelli: Yes. 1 2 Mr. Aknin: I’ll just make one comment. This is scheduled for the, an early October Council 3 agenda. So we’ll do our best to get something out. We’ll send our regular notice out related to 4 it, but I can’t say with confidence we’re going to be able to have any type of adequate polling 5 of the neighborhood. And yeah we did send out the notice and we haven’t had much comment 6 on it so. 7 8 Vice-Chair Keller: My suggestion is that for the houses along Edgewood Road, I guess 9 Edgewood Drive that go from this property to where West Bayshore crosses over the bridge to 10 East Palo Alto, but basically maybe a postcard be sent to them whether they have any 11 comments or objections to having a sidewalk installed. 12 13 Mr. Aknin: That’s fine. 14 15 Vice-Chair Keller: Thank you. 16 17 Chair Michael: Ok, I’m going to call for a vote. Commissioner King. 18 19 Commissioner King: Sorry. One question I have is will Council see the graphic that we’re seeing 20 now that offers, that has the two proposed potential benefits? Will Council see that? 21 22 Ms. Lee: Yes, we’ll make sure they’re presented that. 23 24 Commissioner King: So they’ll know that these were options we discussed? 25 City of Palo Alto Page 39 1 Ms. Lee: Yes. 2 3 Commissioner King: Ok, thank you. And then my comment I wanted to bring up and I’d like to 4 actually address this to the applicant is I believe that in the Council’s addressing of this issue 5 that you were, had to stop building four of the houses and then you had to incur the expense of 6 the SEIR. So I believe that can be considered some form of a penalty that there were costs 7 incurred by the applicant for those and I would, if I were the applicant I might want to make 8 some estimate of those costs when you address the Council when this comes up before them. 9 So that’s it. Thanks. 10 11 Chair Michael: Ok. So I think we’re ready for a vote on the Motion. All in favor say aye (Aye). 12 All opposed? So the Motion has passed with Commissioners Panelli, Vice-Chair Keller, Chair 13 Michael, and Commissioner King voting in favor. Commissioner Alcheck opposed and 14 Commissioners Martinez and Tanaka absent. And we’ll take a five minute break. 15 16 MOTION PASSED (4-1-2, Commissioner Alcheck opposed, Commissioners Martinez and Tanaka 17 absent) 18 19 Commission Action: Approved staff recommendation to approve SEIR and amendment to 20 the PC zoning for the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center mixed use project to allow for the 21 reconstruction of one of the two historic Eichler retail buildings (Building 1) with a friendly 22 amendment by Chair Michael to add historic rehab penalty in the amount of $94,200. 23 Motion by Vice-chair Keller second by Chair Michael (4-1-2, Commissioner Alcheck against, 24 Commissioners Martinez and Tanaka absent) 25 26 Page 1 EDGEWOOD PLAZA DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE FOR PC ZONE DISTRICT AND ORDINANCE ______________________________________________________________________ The Grocery Building and site parking areas including landscaping and tree planting were completed in May 2013. Retail Building 2 will be completed and painted in September 2013, and the park is currently under construction. Construction of Retail Building 1 shall commence once its building permit is secured and shall complete construction within 12 months following the adoption of the new PC Zone. The completion date is subject to a one-time extension of up to twelve months by Staff. Aug.  27,  2013         1. Determine:   The  amount  of  the  savings  likely  to  be  achieved  by  the  developer  from  moving   forward  with  the  construction  of  six  homes  starting  March  4,  2013,  the  last  City   Council  hearing.     Response:   Each  home  will  cost  approx.  $550,000  to  construct  so  six  homes  is  $3,300,000.    We   borrow  from  our  bank  at  an  annual  interest  rate  of  3.20%  (one  month  LIBOR  plus   3.00%).    And  March  4,  2013  to  present  is  nearly  6  months.     The  cost  of  capital,  or  interest,  “savings”  is  $3,300,000  x  3.20%/year  x  0.5  years  =   $52,800.       2. Added  cost  of  historic  detailing  on  wood  storefronts:   Our  original  off-­‐the-­‐shelf  storefronts  for  Buildings  1  &  2  cost  $134,000.    To  achieve   the  historic  detailing  multiple  carpenters  are  on  site  custom-­‐building  the  storefronts   at  a  cost  of  $384,000  (see  attachment).     Thus,  the  additional  cost  of  the  historic  detailing  is  $250,000.   To: Lyncon Construction 650.335.1988 From: Jason Goyette Phone: 715.9545 Project: Edgewood Plaza Bldgs 1,2 Fax: 715.9547 GC#: Att: Sean Anderson / Nandy Kumar Ref: Wood system alternatives Alternate #3 Complete wood system bldg’s #1 & #2 $383,954.00 lump sum complete to include -shop drawings and submittals -field verificaition of openings prior to fabrication of framing -Con-heart kiln dried S4S redwood 2” x 6” framing vertical and horizontal members - Con-heart clear, kiln dried S4S 1X stops of various sizes for the exterior and interior surfaces and for the bottom kick plate. The stops will be used to duplicate the original wood system -SAM wrap of all openings prior to framing install -Galvanized sill flahings under all wood storefront by SVG with up-turned end dams welded/soldered corners -Shop fabrication of frames for field install -installation of SAM material in glass pockets prior to glass install. -pre-shimmed Buty sealant tape at interior and exterior of windows -finish cap bead of sealant between glass and wood stops -Glazing to be project standard 1” clear Low “E”, tempered as required by code -interior and exterior perimeter beads of sealant between frames and surrounding SAM wrapped construction -Doors to be aluminum in bronze anodized finish with 1” perimeter aluminum sub-frame installed into the wood framing. Hardware is to be unchanged from what has been submitted. -cladding of wood around steel posts incidental to the window walls -mock-up (finishing not by SVG) NOTE: FINISHING OF WOOD IS NOT IN OUR SCOPE 220 Vineyard Court, Ste. 150 Morgan Hill, CA 95037 T 408-778-7786 F 408-778-8203 www.siliconvalleyglass.com QUOTE SVG Quote# 1206761 Date 3/21/2013 Pages 2 March 21, 2013 l Page 2 Exclusions: Final cleaning of glass; protection of glass after install; labor for composite cleaning crews; afterhours or weekend work; anything not listed above. License #735260 C-17 Signatory to Glazier’s Local 1621 Jason Goyette Estimator ______________________________________ Accepted By ______________________________________3/21/2013 ______________________________________ Signature Date Signature Date BY SIGNING ABOVE YOU ACCEPT THE TERMS OF THIS QUOTE Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report Edgewood Plaza Project Palo Alto File No. 08PLN-00157/10PLN-00198 State Clearinghouse No. 2011022030 City of Palo Alto July 2013 Edgewood Plaza Project (2080 Channing Avenue) 1 Final Supplemental EIR City of Palo Alto July 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE OF THE FINAL EIR ............................................ 2 SECTION 2.0 LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING THE DRAFT EIR OR NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY ................... 4 SECTION 3.0 LETTER FROM STATE CLEARINGHOUSE ..................................................... 5 Edgewood Plaza Project (2080 Channing Avenue) 2 Final Supplemental EIR City of Palo Alto July 2013 SECTION 1.0 OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE OF THE FINAL EIR This document, together with the Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Draft SEIR), constitutes the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) for the proposed Edgewood Plaza Project in Palo Alto, California. Under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Lead Agency is required, after completion of a Draft SEIR, to consult with and obtain comments from public agencies having jurisdiction by law with respect to the proposed project, and to provide the general public with an opportunity to comment on the Draft SEIR. The City of Palo Alto, as the Lead Agency, is then required to respond to significant environmental issues raised in the review and consultation process, as described in CEQA Section 15132. The Draft SEIR was circulated to affected public agencies and interested parties for a 45-day review period. Comments on the Draft SEIR were to be received in writing by no later than June 28, 2013. 1.1 FORMAT OF THE FINAL EIR This document has been prepared in accordance with Section 15088 of the CEQA Guidelines. In addition to Section 1.0, describing an overview of the purpose and format of the Final EIR, the Final EIR includes the following sections: Section 2.0 List of Agencies and Individuals Receiving the Draft EIR The agencies, organizations, and individuals who received copies of the Draft EIR are listed in this section. The locations where the Draft EIR could be reviewed during the public circulation period are also included in this section. Section 3.0 Letter from State Clearinghouse There were no written comments received on the Draft SEIR during the 45-day circulation period and no changes to the Text of Draft SEIR have been made. Therefore, this document does not include responses to comments or text revisions. Edgewood Plaza Project (2080 Channing Avenue) 3 Final Supplemental EIR City of Palo Alto July 2013 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE FINAL EIR In conformance with the CEQA Guidelines (Section 15151), EIRs should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decisions-makers with information which enables them to make a decision on the project that takes into account environmental consequences. The Final EIR also is required to examine mitigation measures and alternatives to the project intended to reduce or eliminate significant environmental impacts. The FSEIR is used by the City and other Responsible Agencies in making decisions regarding the project. The CEQA Guidelines require that, while the information in the FSEIR does not control the agency’s ultimate discretion on the project, the agency must respond to each significant effect identified in the DEIR by making written findings for each of those effects. According to the State Public Resources Code (Section 21081), no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is approved or carried out unless both of the following occur: (a) The public agency makes one or more of the following findings with respect to each significant effect: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will mitigate or avoid the significant effects on the environment. (2) Those changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and have been, or can and should be, adopted by that other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities of highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the environmental impact report. (b) With respect to significant effects which were subject to a finding under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a), the public agency finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment. All documents referenced in this SEIR are available for public review in the City of Palo Alto’s Development Center, 285 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, during business hours, Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.; Wednesdays 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. The Final SEIR will also be available for review on the City’s website, http://www.cityofpaloalto.org, and at the following public libraries: Palo Alto Main Library, 1213 Newell Rd., Palo Alto, CA 94303, and Palo Alto Downtown Library, 270 Forest Ave., Palo Alto, CA 94301. In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines, the FSEIR will be made available to the public a minimum of ten days prior to the EIR certification hearing. Edgewood Plaza Project (2080 Channing Avenue) 4 Final Supplemental EIR City of Palo Alto July 2013 SECTION 2.0 LIST OF AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS, AND INDIVIDUALS RECEIVING THE DRAFT SEIR OR NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY State Agencies California Department of Fish and Game, Region 3 California Department of Parks and Recreation California Department of Toxic Substances Control California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics and District 4 California Department of Water Resources California Highway Patrol California Native American Heritage Commission California Public Utilities Commission California Resources Agency California State Clearinghouse Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 2 State Office of Historic Preservation Regional Agencies San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Local Agencies Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) City of East Palo Alto Additional individuals and groups were notified of the availability of the Draft EIR by email and postal mail, and the Draft EIR has been posted on the City’s website and in the Palo Alto Main and Downtown Libraries. Edgewood Plaza Project (2080 Channing Avenue) 5 Final Supplemental EIR City of Palo Alto July 2013 SECTION 3.0 LETTER FROM STATE CLEARINGHOUSE :-~--~---~-------~-------------.--------------.. -------~----.--------c~~!>.;;_ STATE OF CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE o/PLANNING AND RESR.ARCH STATE CLEARINGHOUSE AND PLANNING UNIT EDMUND G. BROWN JR. KENAJ.Ex DOOCI'OR GoVERNOR July 1, 2013 Elena Lee City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th Floor Palo Alto, CA 94301 Subject: Edgewood Plaza SCH#: 2011022030 Dear Elena Lee: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Supplemental EIR to selected slate agencies for review_ The review period closed on June 28, 2013, and no state agencies snbrnitted comments by that date_ This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft envirorunental documents, pursuant to the California Envirorunental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. If you have a question about the above-named project, please refer to the ten-digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. sm~~ Scott Morgan Director, State Clearinghouse 1400 lOth Street P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, California 95812·3044 (916) 445·0613 FAX (916) 323-3018 WWW.OpLWl.goV Received JUL 082013 I:!ePanment of f'!anning & COmmunity l:nWotunem , ... ~~~Docu.!l1El!1.!pel<l.!I~f!ep~!".t .~ State Clearinghouse Data Base _""~_,_.~~ ··~~ __ ·'_~ •• 0¥~ SCH# Project Title Lead Agency 2011022030 Edgewood Plaza Palo Alto, Cily of Type SIR Supplemental EIR Description The proposed project is a modification of the approved redevelopment of the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center. Under the revised project, Building 1 would be reconstructed with all new materials. The location and design of the building would be consistent with the previously approved project. All other aspects of the approved project, including the renovation of Building 2 and the grocery building, the new parking layout and landscape design. and development of 10 single"family houses, remain the same as the approved project evaluated in the 2012 FEI R. Lead Agency Contact Name Agency Phone email Elena Lee City of Palo Alto 6506173196 Fax Address 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th Floor City Palo Alto State CA Zip 94301 Project Location County Santa Clara City Palo Alto Region Lat I Long 37' 26' 53" N /122' 01' 32" W Cro.ss Streets Parcel No. Township 2080 Channing Avenue, near St Francis Drive and West Bayshore Road 003-18-021 and 003"1 8-023 53 Range 2W Section --.. -----------------~ Proximity to: Highways US101,SR82 Airports Palo Alto Airport Railways UPRRlCaltrain Waterways San Francisco Creek, San Franciso Bay Schools DuveneckElementary Base MDM&M Land Use Comprehensive Plan: Neighborhood Commercial, Zoning: Planned Community District (PC 1643) Project Issues Archaeologic~Historic; Biological Resources; Drainage/Absorption: Flood Plain/Flooding; Geologic/Seismic; Noise; Public Services; Recreation/Parks; Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading; Toxic/Hazardous; Traffic/Circulation; Vegetation; Water Quality; Landuse; CumUlative Effects Reviewing Resources Agency: Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 3; Office of Historic Preservation; Agencies Department of Parks and Recreation; San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission; Department of Water Resources; Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District4; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 2; Department of Toxic Substances Control; Native American Heritage Commission; Public Utilities Commission Date Received 0511512013 Start of Review 0511512013 End of Review 0612812013 Grider, Donna From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Dear Donna, Woodland Creek HOA <woodlandcreekhoa@gmail.com> Tuesday, October 01, 2013 1:51 PM Grider, Donna char@cjmasi.com; hrosmarin@mac.com; Brenda Erwin Council Packet -October 7, 2013 Edgewood Plaza Public Benefit.pdf Attached please find a letter relating to the 2080 Channing Avenue (Edgewood Plaza) Agenda item for inclusion in the Council packet for the October 7, 2013 city council meeting. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you, Brenda Erwin President 1 WOODLAND C~EK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION Street Address: 1982 West Bayshore Road, East Palo Alto, CA 94303 . Mailing Address: c/o CJM Association Services, Inc., P.O Box 190, Pleasanton, CA 94566 October 1,2013 Via Electronic Mail: domia.grider@cityofpaloalto.org Palo Alto City Council City of Palo Alto, Office of the City Clerk 250 Hamilton Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94301 1------:RE.'----2080.Ghanning-Avenue-(Edgewood-Plaza)-Public-Benefit---------------,.----- West Bayshore Road Sidewal~ I Bike lane Dear City CounciImembers: Thank you for considering the improvement of West Bayshore Road'in Palo Alto, including construction of a sidewalk or bike lane (the "Improvement"), as a public benefit in connection with the Edgewood " :--.. -----Plaza reifevelopmerif8f20KO'Cfimmmg Aveiiije(·~agewooa'Plaza")-. --~-:-.-~--------. -----. ------.-. -.. I •. . We strongly support the Improvement because it will provide an important public benefit for residents of Palo Alto and East Palo Alto by improving the saf~ty of West Bayshore Road for pedestrians, bieyclists, and motorists •. . Our' community consists of 90 single-family homes located approximately 1200 feet north of Edgewood Plaza. During the Edgewood Plaza DEIR and EIR review process, our residents raised a nUI1lber of concerns about the safety of the stretch' of West Bayshore Road between San Francisquito Bridge and Edgewood Plaza. West Bayshore Road in Palo Alto is particularly hazardous for children walking or biking to the planned' new neighborh.oodpark and other attraction$' at Edgewood Plaza. We also . submitted a petition with more than 70 signatures requesting safety improvements to West Bayshore. Benefits of West Bayshore Road Sidewalk I Bike Lane to Palo Alto 1. Improves Safety of West Bayshore Road for PedeStrians, Bicyclists,and Motorists ~om Both Palo Aito' and East palo Aito. Residel1ts o(botii'cities"useWesfBayshoie-Roli(i'as'~dZey' corricior between University Avenue and Embarcadero Road. With the increase of pedestrian and bicycle traffic to. and from the new Edgewood Plaza shopping center and planned park, the risk of pedestrian- bicyclist-motorist collisions on West Bayshore Road has escalated. The road has a blind curve, and ---·----·------cars-tra:velaTmgn speeli~ .. There-isalsoa seriousnsk-ofmotorisl-moWristcoilisions as drivers swerve ---\------_ .. _--, to avoid pedestrians and bicyclists who are traveling"on the road because there is no sidewalk or'bike " lane. (Once the San Francisquito Creek Bridge sidewalk ends, there is a 1;200 foot section of West Bayshore road with no bike lane, sidewalk, path or protective divider of any kind until Channing Ave.) The risks are particularly acute for children walking or biking on West Bayshore Road. 2. Implements a Priority Recommendation of the City of Palo Alto's Bicycle + P~destrian Transportation ,Plan. The City of Palo Alto's Bicycle + Pedestrian Transportation Plan recommends that "a sidewalk or Class I path should be provided along West Bayshore between East Palo Alto and ' Channing Avenue to provide access in the area around Edgewood PI8Z8:" (6.3.3 and 6.4.1). . 1 L I 3. Mitigates Hazards. Many residents have attempted to walk or bicycle this stretch of West Bayshore Road and have witnessed a number of near collisions between vehicles and pedestrians and bicyclists. The City has been alerted multiple times in writing to the hazards on this stretch of road, which is within its jurisdiction. The proposed Improvement presents an opportunity for the City to mitigate the hazards as well as to provide a public benefit. 4. Supports Pedestrian and Bicycle Access to Shopping Center in Accordance with City of Palo Alto's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan states that ''Palo Alto will provide accessible, attractive, economically viable and enviropmentally sound transportation options .... Emphasis will be placed on alternatives to the automobile ... Solutions that reduce the growth in the number of automobiles on City streets, calm or slow traffic, and save energy will be supported." Specifically, Policy T -14 states: "Improve pedestrian and bicycle access to and between local destinations, including public facilities, schools, parks, open space, employment districts, shopping centers, and multi-modal transit stations." .5. Promotes Success of Edgewood Plaza. Edgewood Plaza's attractiveness as a destination will be enhanced by safe pedestrian and bicycle access. / 6. Connects Palo Alto Communities. The Improvement will provide another link in the route for Palo Altans who wish to bicycle from Embarcadero to Newell Street or University Avenue. Other Considerations CalTrans Project: CalTrans is planning to rebuild the San Francisquito Creek / Highway 101 Bridge. The project, set to begin in 2014, will involve the temporary complete closure of the stretch of West Bayshore Road under consideration for this improvement, which may provide a window of opportunity to construct the project without re-routing traffic. We recommend that the timing of the proposed Improvement be coordinated with CaITrans. Thank you for your consideration. ~.A1£~ Brenda Erwin President cc: Charlene C. Marquez, CJM Association Services, Inc. 2 9042.txt Project Plans Page 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK November 18, 2013 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Second Reading: Public Hearing: Adoption of Eight Ordinances: (1) Repealing Chapter 16.04 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.04, California Building Code, California Historical Building Code, and California Existing Building Code, 2013 Editions, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (2) Repealing Chapter 16.05 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.05, California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (3) Repealing Chapter 16.06 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.06, California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (4) Repealing Chapter 16.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.08, California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (5) Repealing Chapter 16.14 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.14, California Green Building Standard Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (6) Repealing Chapter 16.16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.16, California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; (7) Repealing Chapter 16.17 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.17, California Energy Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings; and (8) Repealing Chapter 15.04 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 15 to Adopt a new Chapter 15.04, California Fire Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings (First Reading: October 21, 2013 PASSED: 8-0 Klein absent) Recommendation Page 2 Staff recommends that the Council adopt on second reading the attached Ordinances adopting and amending the 2013 California Building Standards Code. Executive Summary Council approved on first reading the attached ordinances at its regular meeting of October 21 2013. The attached ordinances are unchanged with one minor exception. The ordinance adopting and amending the 2013 California Fire Code corrects an omission in the version presented to the Council on first reading. Background At the October 21, 2013 regular meeting of the Palo Alto City Council, the Council approved, on first reading, a series of eight ordinances adopting and amending new building standards as part of the 2013 California Building Standards Code cycle. These ordinances are returning to the Council for adoption on second reading. A full discussion of the California Building Standards Code and local amendments is available in CMR #4082. Discussion The ordinances presented for second reading are unchanged from the versions approved by Council on October 21, 2013 with one minor exception: Staff erroneously omitted a local amendment to the 2013 California Fire Code, which has been inserted into ordinance for the Council’s adoption on second reading. The local amendment, contained in Section 15.04.017 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, deletes Section 103.2 of the 2013 California Fire Code to conform the regulations to the City’s established local policy and practice. Resource Impact Resource impacts from the adoption of these ordinances are limited to staff training costs, purchasing copies of the new codes and implementation of public outreach efforts. Policy Implications The State of California mandates enforcement of the updated California Building Standards Code and it will go into effect regardless of the City’s action or lack of action. The City does have discretion to adopt local amendments to the CBSC, which must be effective by January 1, 2014. Environmental Review This action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. ATTACHMENTS:  : Building Code Ordinances (PDF) Department Head: Donna Grider, City Clerk Page 3 NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131141 1 Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City Of Palo Alto Repealing Chapter 16.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.08, California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 16.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended by repealing in its entirety and adopting a new Chapter 16.08 to read as follows: 16.08 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE 16.08.010 2013 California Plumbing Code adopted. The California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition, Title 24, Part 5 of the California Code of Regulations together with those omissions, amendments, exceptions and additions thereto, is adopted and hereby incorporated in this Chapter by reference and made a part hereof the same as if fully set forth herein. Unless superseded and expressly repealed, references in City of Palo Alto forms, documents and regulations to the chapters and sections of the former California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2010, shall be construed to apply to the corresponding provisions contained within the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2013. Ordinance No. 5102 of the City of Palo Alto and all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby suspended and expressly repealed. Wherever the phrases "California Mechanical Code" or "Mechanical Code" are used in this code or any ordinance of the City, such phrases shall be deemed and construed to refer and apply to the California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, as adopted by this Chapter. One copy of the California Plumbing Code, 2013 edition, has been filed for use and examination of the public in the Office of the Building Official of the City of Palo Alto. 16.08.020 2013 California Plumbing Code Appendix Chapters adopted. The following Appendix Chapters of the California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition, are adopted and hereby incorporated in this Chapter by reference and made a part hereof the same as if fully set forth herein: A. Appendix A – Recommended Rules for Sizing the Water Supply System B. Appendix I – Installation Standards 16.08.030 Cross - References to California Plumbing Code. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131141 2 The provisions of this Chapter contain cross-references to the provisions of the California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition, in order to facilitate reference and comparison to those provisions. 16.08.040 Violations -- Penalties. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of Section 1.08.010 of this code. Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation of this chapter occurs or continues shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable as provided in this section. 16.08.050 Enforcement -- Citation authority. The employee positions designated in this section may enforce the provisions of this chapter by the issuance of citations; persons employed in such positions are authorized to exercise the authority provided in Penal Code section 836.5 and are authorized to issue citations for violations of this chapter. The designated employee positions are: (1) chief building official; (2) building inspection supervisor; and (3) code enforcement officer. 16.08.060 Local Amendments The provisions of this Chapter shall constitute local amendments to the cross-referenced provisions of the California Plumbing Code, 2013 Edition, and shall be deemed to replace the cross-referenced sections of said Code with the respective provisions set forth in this Chapter. 16.08.070 Section 306.3 Palo Alto Sewer Use Section 306.3 is added to the California Plumbing Code to read: 306.3 Palo Alto Sewer Use. All non-domestic waste shall comply with the City of Palo Alto Sewer Use Ordinance (Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.09). Where discrepancies exist between the requirements of this code and said ordinance, the provisions of said ordinance shall apply. 16.08.080 Section 606.9 Hose Bibs. Section 606.9 is added to the California Plumbing Code to read: 606.9 Hose Bibs. All commercial and industrial buildings where the building face is parallel to the city sidewalk shall have a hose bib connection installed, conveniently available to accommodate persons washing the building face or watering plants. 16.08.090 Section 701.1, Part 4 Materials. Section 701.1, Part 4 of the California Plumbing Code is amended to read: NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131141 3 701.1 (4) Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used for building sanitary sewer systems except for domestic waste sink traps and short lengths of associated connecting pipes where alternate materials are not practical. Where permitted by the building official, copper tube for drainage and vent piping shall have a weight of not less than that of copper drainage tube type DWV. 16.08.100 Table 701.1 Materials for Drain, Waste, Vent Pipe and Fittings Footnote 1 is amended to Table 701.1 to read as follows: 1 For limitations on the use of Brass and Copper (Type DWV) refer to Section 701.1, Part 4. 16.08.110 Section 710.2 Sewage Discharge. Section 710.2of the California Plumbing Code is amended to read: 710.2 Sewage Discharge. Drainage piping serving fixtures with flood level rims located below one foot above the elevation of the next upstream manhole cover of the public or private sewer serving such drainage piping shall be protected from backflow of sewage by installing an approved backwater valve. Fixtures above such elevation shall not discharge through the backwater valve except as approved by the local administrative authority. On existing structures, the backwater valve may be installed on the private property sewer lateral upstream of the building’s cleanout at the public right of way. 16.08.120 Section 714.4 Commercial Food Waste Grinders Prohibited. Section 714.4 of the California Plumbing Code is amended to read: 714.4 Commercial Food Waste Grinders Prohibited. The installation of a commercial food waste grinder connecting to a private sewage disposal system is prohibited. 16.08.130 Section 719.7 Cleanouts Section 719.7 is added to the California Plumbing Code to read: 719.7 A cleanout shall be provided at the point of connection between the building sewer and the city lateral and an approved fitting shall be used to bring the cleanout riser to grade. Where sewer cleanouts are to be connected to existing city laterals, such connections shall be accomplished by use of an approved fitting. 16.08.140 Section 808.2 Cooling Water. Section 808.2 of the California Plumbing Code is added to read: 808.2 Single Pass Cooling Water Systems Prohibited. Clean running water used NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131141 4 exclusively as a cooling medium in an appliance, device, or apparatus is prohibited. 16.08.150 Section 908.2 Horizontal Wet Venting for Bathroom Groups Section 908.2 of the California Plumbing Code is deleted. 16.08.160 Section 1014.1.3 Food Waste Disposal Units and Dishwashers. Section 10.14.1.3 of the California Plumbing Code is amended to read: 1014.1.3 Food Waste Disposal Units and Dishwashers. Unless specifically required or permitted by the Authority Having Jurisdiction, no dishwasher shall be connected to or discharge into any grease interceptor. Commercial Food Waste Disposal Units are prohibited. 16.08.170 Section 1101.3 Material Uses. Section 1101.3 of the California Plumbing Code is amended to read: 1101.3 Material Uses. Rainwater piping placed within the interior of a building or run within a vent or shaft shall be of cast iron, galvanized steel, wrought iron, Schedule 40 ABS DWV, Schedule 40 PVC DWV, stainless steel 304 or 316L (stainless steel 304 pipe and fittings shall not be installed underground and shall be kept not less than six (6) inches (152 mm) aboveground), or other approved materials, and changes in direction shall conform to the requirements of Section 706.0. ABS and PVC DWV piping installations shall be installed in accordance with IS 5 and IS 9. Except for individual single-family dwelling units, materials exposed within ducts or plenums shall have a flame-spread index of a maximum of twenty-five (25) and a smoke-developed index of a maximum of fifty (50), when tested in accordance with the Test for Surface-Burning Characteristics of the Building Materials (see the Building Code standards based on ASTM E 84 and UL 723.). ABS or PVC installations are limited to not more than two stories of areas of residential accommodation. 16.08.180 Section 1105.1.2 Roof Drains (Materials). Section 1105.1.2 of the California Plumbing Code is amended to read: 1105.1.2 Roof drains and conductor/leader’s shall be of cast iron, plastic or other approved materials. 16.08.190 Chapter 16A Non-Potable Water Reuse Systems. Chapter 16A of the California Plumbing Code is adopted in entirety. SECTION 2. The Council adopts the findings for local amendments to the California Plumbing Code, 2013Edition, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131141 5 SECTION 3. The Council finds that this project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to Section 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the amendments herein adopted will have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective on the commencement of 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: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Development Services ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131141 6 Exhibit A FINDINGS FOR LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE, 2010 EDITION Section 17958 of the California Health and Safety Code provides that the City may make changes to the provisions in the uniform codes that are published in the California Building Standards Code. Sections 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code require that for each proposed local change to those provisions in the uniform codes and published in the California Building Standards Code which regulate buildings used for human habitation, the City Council must make findings supporting its determination that each such local change is reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. Local building regulations having the effect of amending the uniform codes, which were adopted by the City prior to November 23, 1970, were unaffected by the regulations of Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code. Therefore, amendments to the uniform codes which were adopted by the City Council prior to November 23, 1970, and have been carried through from year to year without significant change, need no required findings. Also, amendments to provisions not regulating buildings used for human habitation, including amendments made only for administrative consistency, do not require findings. Code: CPC Section Title Add Deleted Amended Justification (See below for keys) 306.3 Palo Alto Sewer Use  C 606.9 Hose Bib  C 701.1, Part4 Materials  T Table 701.1 Materials for Drain, Waste, vent Pipe and Fittings  T 710.2 Sewage Discharge  T 714.4 Commercial Food Waste Grinders Prohibited  G & T 719.7 Cleanouts  T & G 808.2 Cooling Water  C & T 908.2 Horizontal Wet Venting for Bathroom Groups  C & T 1014.1.3 Food Waste Disposal Units and Dishwashers  T 1101.3 Material Uses  G T 1105.1.2 Roof Drains (Materials)  T Chapter 16A Non-Potable Water Reuse Syst.  C & T NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131141 7 Key to Justification for Amendments to Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations This amendment is justified on the basis of a local climatic condition. The seasonal climatic conditions during the late summer and fall create severe fire hazards to the public health and welfare in the City. The hot, dry weather frequently results in wild land fires on the brush covered slopes west of Interstate 280. The aforementioned conditions combined with the geological characteristics of the hills within the City create hazardous conditions for which departure from California Building Standards Code is required. C G T This amendment is justified on the basis of a local geological condition. The City of Palo Alto is subject to earthquake hazard caused by its proximity to San Andreas fault. This fault runs from Hollister, through the Santa Cruz Mountains, epicenter of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, then on up the San Francisco Peninsula, then offshore at Daly City near Mussel Rock. This is the approximate location of the epicenter of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. The other fault is Hayward Fault. This fault is about 74 mi long, situated mainly along the western base of the hills on the east side of San Francisco Bay. Both of these faults are considered major Northern California earthquake faults which may experience rupture at any time. Thus, because the City is within a seismic area which includes these earthquake faults, the modifications and changes cited herein are designed to better limit property damage as a result of seismic activity and to establish criteria for repair of damaged properties following a local emergency. The City of Palo Alto topography includes hillsides with narrow and winding access, which makes timely response by fire suppression vehicles difficult. Palo Alto is contiguous with the San Francisco Bay, resulting in a natural receptor for storm and waste water run-off. Also the City of Palo Alto is located in an area that is potentially susceptible to liquefaction during a major earthquake. The surface condition consists mostly of stiff to dense sandy clay, which is highly plastic and expansive in nature. The aforementioned conditions within the City create hazardous conditions for which departure from California Building Standards Code is warranted. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 1 Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Repealing Chapter 16.06 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.06, California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments And Related Findings The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 16.06 of Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended by repealing in its entirety and adopting a new Chapter 16.06 to read as follows:: 16.06.010 2013 California Residential Code adopted. The California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, Title 24, Part 2.5 of the California Code of Regulations, together with those omissions, amendments, exceptions and additions thereto, is adopted and hereby incorporated in this Chapter by reference and made a part hereof the same as if fully set forth herein. Unless superseded and expressly repealed, references in City of Palo Alto forms, documents and regulations to the chapters and sections of the former California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2010, shall be construed to apply to the corresponding provisions contained within the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2013. Ordinance No. 5101 of the City of Palo Alto and all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby suspended and expressly repealed. Wherever the phrases "California Residential Code" or "Residential Code" are used in this code or any ordinance of the city, such phrases shall be deemed and construed to refer and apply to the California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, as adopted by this Chapter. One copy of the California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, has been filed for use and examination of the public in the Office of the Building Official of the City of Palo Alto. 16.06.020 2013 California Residential Code Appendix Chapters adopted. The following Appendix Chapters of the California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, are adopted and hereby incorporated in this Chapter by reference and made a part hereof the same as if fully set forth herein: A. Appendix G – Swimming Pools, Spas and Hot Tubs B. Appendix H – Patio Covers C. Appendix K – Sound Transmission 16.06.030 Cross - References to California Residential Code. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 2 The provisions of this Chapter contain cross-references to the provisions of the California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, in order to facilitate reference and comparison to those provisions. 16.06.040 Section 1.11.2.1.1 Duties and powers of the enforcing agency/Enforcement is amended with the following language: Section 1.11.2.1.1 Duties and powers of the enforcing agency/Enforcement The responsibility for enforcement of building standards adopted by the State Fire Marshal and published in the California Building Standards Code relating to fire and panic safety and other regulations of the State Fire Marshal shall, except as provided in Section 1.11.2.1.2, be as follows: 1. The city, county or city and county with jurisdiction in the area affected by the standard or regulation shall delegate the enforcement of the building standards relating to fire and panic safety and other regulations of the State Fire Marshal as they relate to Group R-3 occupancies, as described in Section 310.1 of Part 2 of the California Building Standards Code, to both enforcement divisions specific to their areas of enforcement disciplines: 1.1 The chief of the fire authority of the city, county or city and county, or an authorized representative and; 1.2. The chief building official of the city, county or city and county, or an authorized representative. 16.06.050 Violations -- Penalties. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of Section 1.08.010 of this code. Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation of this chapter occurs or continues shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable as provided in this section. When the building official determines that a violation of this chapter or chapters 16.04, 16.05, 16.08, 16.14, 16.16 or 16.17 of this code has occurred, he/she may record a notice of pendency of code violation with the Office of the County Recorder stating the address and owner of the property involved. When the violation has been corrected, the building official shall issue and record a release of the notice of pendency of code violation. 16.06.060 Enforcement -- Citation authority. The employee positions designated in this section may enforce the provisions of this chapter by the issuance of citations; persons employed in such positions are authorized to exercise the authority provided in Penal Code section 836.5 and are authorized to issue citations for violations of this chapter. The designated employee positions are: (1) chief building official; (2) building inspection supervisor; and (3) code enforcement officer. 16.06.070 Local Amendments. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 3 The provisions of this Chapter shall constitute local amendments to the cross-referenced provisions of the California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, and shall be deemed to replace the cross-referenced sections of said Code with the respective provisions set forth in this Chapter. 16.06.080 Chapter 1, Division II amended – Administration. Chapter 1, Division II of the California Residential Code is amended to read: DIVISION II ADMINISTRATION The provisions of Chapter 1 (Scope and Administration), Division II of the California Building Code, 2013 Edition, as locally amended and adopted, shall apply to this code. 16.06.090 Section R105.1.2 Demolition permits is added to read: Section R105.1.2 Demolition Permits. In addition to other requirements of law, every person seeking a permit to demolish a unit used for residential rental purposes shall furnish an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury that the unit proposed to be demolished is vacant, or that notice to vacate has been given to each tenant lawfully in possession thereof as required by law or by the terms of such tenancy. No work or demolition shall begin upon any portion of such a unit until each and every portion has been vacated by all tenants lawfully in possession thereof. 16.04.100 Section R105.5 Expiration is amended to read: R105.5 Expiration. Every permit issued shall become invalid unless the work on the site authorized by such permit is commenced within 180 days after its issuance, or if the work authorized on the site by such permit is suspended or abandoned for a period of 180 days after the time the work is commenced. The chief building official is authorized to grant, in writing, one or more extensions of time, for periods not more than 180 days each and may require; 1) that the construction documents be revised to partially or fully comply with current codes, and 2) payment of a fee. Extensions shall be requested in writing and justifiable cause demonstrated. For the purpose of this section, failure to progress a project to the next level of required inspection shall be deemed to be suspension of the work. 16.06.110 Section R108.5 Refunds is amended to read: R108.5 Refunds. The building official or permit center manager may authorize the refund of any fee paid hereunder which was erroneously paid or collected. The building official or permit center manager may authorize the refund of not more than eighty percent (80%) of the permit fee paid when no work has occurred under a permit issued NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 4 pursuant to this Chapter. The building official or permit center manager may authorize the refund of not more than eighty percent (80%) of the Plan Review Fee paid when a permit application is withdrawn or canceled before any plan review work has started. 16.06.120 Section R109.1.3 Floodplain Inspection is amended to read: R109.1.3 Floodplain Inspections. In flood hazard areas, upon placement of the lowest floor, including the basement, and prior to further vertical construction, the elevation certification shall be submitted to City Public Works Engineering for inspection approval prior to foundation inspection by city building inspection. 16.06.130 Section R109.5 Re-Inspection Fees Assessed/Authorized is added to read: R109.5 Re-Inspection Fees. A Re-Inspection Fee may be assessed/authorized by the building official or building inspection supervisor for each re-inspection required when work for which an inspection is requested is not ready for inspection or when required corrections noted during prior inspections have not been completed. A “Re-Inspection Fee” may be assessed/authorized when; 1. The inspection record card is not posted or otherwise available on the work site, 2. The approved plans are not readily available for the inspector at the time of inspection, 3. The inspector is unable to access the work at the time of inspection, or; 4. When work has substantially deviated from the approved plans without the prior approval of the building official. 5. When a Re-Inspection Fee is assessed, additional inspection of the work will not be performed until the fee has been paid. 16.06.140 Section R110.1 Use and Occupancy is amended to read: R110.1 Use and Occupancy. No building or structure shall be used or occupied, and no change in the existing occupancy classification of a building or structure or portion thereof shall be made, until the building official has issued a certificate of occupancy therefor as provided herein. Issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall not be construed as an approval of a violation of the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction. Exception: Certificates of occupancy are not required for work exempt from permits under Section 105.2: 1. Group R - Division 3 occupancies 2. Group U occupancies 16.06.150 Section R202 amended – Definitions added. Section R202 of the California Residential Code is amended to include the following definitions: DUAL SENSOR PHOTOELECTRIC/IONIZATION SMOKE DETECTOR OR ALARM. A smoke alarm or detector that utilizes both photoelectric and ionization methods in a single device. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 5 DUAL SENSOR CARBON MONOXIDE AND SMOKE ALARM. A combination carbon monoxide and smoke alarm or detector that senses both smoke and CO in a single device. IONIZATION SMOKE DETECTOR OR ALARM. A smoke alarm or detector that uses a small amount of radioactive material to detect invisible particles generated by flame. PHOTOELECTRIC SMOKE DETECTOR OR ALARM. A smoke alarm or detector that uses a light-source to detect the presence of smoke. WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE FIRE AREA is a geographical area identified by the State of California as a “Fire Hazard Severity Zone” in accordance with Public Resources Code Sections 4201 through 4202 and Government Code Sections 51175 through 51189, or other areas designated by the enforcing agency to be at a significant risk from wildfires. Within the city limits of the City of Palo Alto, “Wildland-Urban Fire Interface Area” shall also include all areas west of Interstate 280, and all other areas recommended as a “Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone” by the Director of the California Department of Forestry. 16.06.160 Table 301.2(1) Climatic and Geographic Design Criteria: Section Table 301.2(1) of the California Residential Code is added to read: TABLE R301.2(1) CLIMATIC AND GEOGRAPHIC DESIGN CRITERIA GROUND SNOW LOAD WIND DESIGN SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY SUBJECT TO DAMAGE FROM Speed (mph) Topographic effects Weathering Frost line depth Termite 0 85 No D1 thru E Negligible 5” Very High WINTER DESIGN TEMP. (OF) ICE BARRIER UNDERLAYEMENT REQUIRED FLOOD HAZARDS AIR FREEZING INDEX MEAN ANNUAL TEMP. (OF) 40 No See Footnotes a thru c 0 55 a) The City of Palo Alto entered National Flood Insurance Program in 1979. b) The effective date of the current Flood Insurance Study and Flood Insurance Rate Map is May 18, 2009. c) The panel numbers and dates of all currently effective FIRMs and FBFMs: 06085CIND0A, 06085C0010H, 06085C0015H through 06085C0019H, 06085C0030H, 06085C0036H , 06085C0038H , 06085C0180H , 06085C0185H ( May 18, 2009 for all) NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 6 16.06.170 Section R310.2.3 Window Well Fall Protection: Section R310.2.3 of the California Residential Code is added to read: R310.2.3 Window Well Fall Protection. Window wells with a vertical depth greater than 30 inches shall have guards on all sides. The guards shall be provided in accordance with Section R312.1. Window well grates are not allowed. When gates are installed for exit at window wells and the depth of the window well is greater than 30 inches gates shall be installed with a permanent lock to prevent access by unauthorized persons. The gates shall be equipped to accommodate a locking device. The gates shall open outward away from the well, and shall be self-closing and have a self-latching device. Where the release mechanism of the self-latching device is located less than 54 inches from the bottom of the gate, the release mechanism shall be located at least 3 inches below the top of the gate. The gate and guards shall have no opening larger than ½ inch within 18 inches of the release mechanism. Openings, in other parts of gates, shall comply with Section R312.1.3. Access ladder shall comply with Section R310.2.1 and shall extend from the bottom of the well to the top of the guard. 16.06.180 Section R310.4.1 Security Bars: Section R310.4.1 of the California Residential Code is added to read: R310.4.1 Security Bars. Fire Department plan check review and approval of all security bar submittals shall be required prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 16.06.190 Section R313.2 One- and two-family dwellings automatic fire sprinkler systems. Section R313.2 of the California Residential Code is amended to read: R313.2 One- and two-family dwellings automatic fire sprinkler systems. Approved automatic sprinkler systems in new one- and two- family dwellings and in existing modified one- and two- family dwellings shall be provided in accordance with this section. 1. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all new residential buildings and structures. Exception: New detached Group U occupancies, buildings or structures that do not exceed 1,000 square feet of building area. 2. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all existing buildings when modifications are made that create an increase in fire area to more than 4100 square feet or modifications are equal to or greater than 100% of existing square footage of building area, whichever is more restrictive. 3. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all new basements regardless of size and throughout existing basements that are expanded by more than 50%. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 7 4. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all new buildings located in the designated Wild Land-Urban Interface Fire areas. Exception: Any detached non-residential accessory structures to single family residences that have a fire area of 500 square feet or less. 5. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all existing buildings located in the designated Wild Land-Urban Interface Fire areas when modifications are made that increases the fire area. Exception: One-time additions to existing buildings made after January 1, 1994 that do not exceed 500 square feet in fire area. 16.04.193 Section R313.1.1 – Design and installation Section R313.1.1 of the California Residential Code is amended to read as follows: R313.1.1 Design and installation. Where allowed, automatic sprinkler systems installed in townhouses shall be installed throughout in accordance with NFPA 13D and State and local standards. 16.04.195 Section R313.2.1 – Design and installation Section R313.2.1 of the California Residential Code is amended to read as follows: R313.2.1 Design and installation. Where allowed, automatic sprinkler systems installed in one- and two-family dwellings shall be installed throughout in accordance with NFPA 13D and State and local standards. 16.04.198 Section R313.3.1.1 – Required sprinkler locations. Section R313.3.1.1 is amended to the California Residential Code to read as follows: Section R313.3.1.1 – Required sprinkler locations. Sprinklers shall be installed to protect all areas of a dwelling unit. Garages, including Group U occupancies, shall be fully protected with sprinklers designed for residential density calculated with four (4) sprinklers flowing. Attics shall be fully protected to residential density or light hazard as appropriate for the slope of ceiling and configuration of framing. Exception: Non-usable attics in one-and two-family dwellings not located in the Wild Land Urban Interface area may be provided with an intermediate temperature pilot sprinkler above the attic scuttle and above any heat producing equipment in lieu of complete attic protection meeting the requirements above. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 8 16.06.200 Section R314.1– Smoke detection and notification. Section R314.1 of the California Residential Code is amended to read: R314.1 Smoke detection and notification. Listed single- and multiple-station smoke alarms complying with UL 217 shall be installed in accordance with the provisions of this code and the household warning equipment provisions of NFPA 72 and manufacturers installation and use instructions. Smoke alarms more than 10 years old shall not be considered as satisfying any requirement of this code or subject to the provisions of the Health and Safety Code and shall be immediately replaced by the owner with a smoke alarm that complies with this section. Smoke alarms and smoke detectors installed on or after January 1, 2014in compliance with this code or with the provisions of the Health and Safety Code shall also either be listed and approved for enhanced nuisance resistance and rapid response to smoldering synthetic materials or shall meet the following requirements: 1. Smoke detectors or smoke alarms located within 20 feet of a kitchen, or a room containing acooking appliance, wood burning fireplace or stove shall be photoelectric detectors or alarms. 2. In all other required locations dual sensor photoelectric/ionization detectors or alarms, shall be installed. A photoelectric smoke detector or alarm installed together with an ionization smoke detectors or alarms may be used as a substitute for a dual sensor photoelectric/ionization detector or alarm. Exception: A fire alarm or other approved system with interconnected photoelectric smoke detectors or alarms located in accordance with, and meeting the requirements of, this section may be installed. Upon the actuation of a smoke detector or alarm, only those notification appliances or alarms in the dwelling unit or guest rooms where the detectors are actuated shall activate. 16.06.210 Section R322.1 – General. The following paragraph is added to Section R322.1 of the California Residential Code: Palo Alto Flood Hazard Regulations. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, all construction or development within a flood hazard area (areas depicted as a Special Flood Hazard Area on Flood Insurance Rate Maps published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency) shall comply with the City of Palo Alto Flood Hazard Regulations (Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.52). Where discrepancies exist between the requirements of this code and said regulations, the provisions of said regulations shall apply. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 9 16.06.220 Section R327.1.5 Vegetation management compliance. Section R327.1.5 of the California Residential Code is amended to read: R327.1.5 Vegetation management compliance. Prior to building permit final approval, the property shall be in compliance with the vegetation management requirements prescribed-in California Fire Code section 4906, including California Public Resources Code 4291 or California Government Code Section 51182. Acceptable methods of compliance inspection and documentation shall be determined by the enforcing agency and may include any of the following: 1. Local, state, or federal fire authority or designee authorized to enforce vegetation management requirements. 2. Enforcing agency - City of Palo Alto Fire Inspection shall inspect the aforementioned requirements and indicate compliance prior to building division final inspection sign- off. 3. Third party inspection and certification authorized to enforce vegetation management requirements. 4. Property owner certification authorized by the enforcing agency. 16.06.230 Section R403.1.3 Seismic Reinforcing. Section R403.1.3 of the California Residential Code is amended to read: R403.1.3 Seismic reinforcing. Concrete footings located in Seismic Design Categories D0, D1 and D2, as established in Table R301.2(1), shall have minimum reinforcement of at least two continuous longitudinal reinforcing bars, one top and one bottom and not smaller than No. 4 bars. Bottom reinforcement shall be located a minimum of 3 inches (76 mm) clear from the bottom of the footing. In Seismic Design Categories D0, D1 and D2 where a construction joint is created between a concrete footing and a stem wall, a minimum of one No. 4 bar shall be installed at not more than 4 feet (1219 mm) on center. The vertical bar shall extend to 3 inches (76 mm) clear of the bottom of the footing, have a standard hook and extend a minimum of 14 inches (357 mm) into the stem wall. In Seismic Design Categories D0, D1 and D2 where a grouted masonry stem wall is supported on a concrete footing and stem wall, a minimum of one No. 4 bar shall be installed at not more than 4 feet (1219 mm) on center. The vertical bar shall extend to 3 inches (76 mm) clear of the bottom of the footing and have a standard hook. In Seismic Design Categories D0, D1 and D2 masonry stem walls without solid grout and vertical reinforcing are not permitted. Exception: In detached one- and two-family dwellings which are three stories or less in height and constructed with stud bearing walls, plain concrete footings without longitudinal reinforcement supporting walls and isolated plain concrete footings supporting columns or pedestals are permitted. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 10 16.06.240 Section R403.1.8 – Foundations on expansive soils. Section R403.1.8 of the California Residential Code is amended to read: R403.1.8 Foundations on expansive soils. Foundations and floor slabs for buildings located on expansive soils shall be designed in accordance with Section 1808.6 or Table 1809.7 of the California Building Code. Table 1809.7 of the California Building Code is added and amended to read: TABLE 1809.7 Prescriptive Footings Supporting Walls of Light-Frame Constructionabcd Number of Floors Supported by the Footing e Thickness of Foundation Wall (inches) Width of Footing (inches) Thickness of Footing (inches) Depth of Foundation Below Natural Surface of Ground or Finish Grade (inches) 1&2 8 15 8 20 3 8 18 8 30 Group U Occupancies 8 12 8 12 a) The ground under the floor shall be permitted to be excavated to the elevation of the top of the footing. b) Interior stud-bearing walls shall be permitted to be supported by isolated footings. The footing width and length shall be twice the width shown in this table, and footings shall be spaced not more than 6 feet on center. c) See Section 1905 of California Building Code for additional requirements for concrete footings of structures assigned to Seismic Design Category C, D, E or F. d) All foundations as required in the above Table shall be continuous and have a minimum of three #4 bars of reinforcing steel, except for one story, detached accessory buildings of Group U occupancy where two bars are required. e) Footings shall be permitted to support a roof in addition to the stipulated number of floors. Footings supporting roof only shall be as required for supporting one floor. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 11 16.06.250 Table R602.10.3(3) – Bracing Requirements Based on Seismic Design Category. Footnote e is added to Table R602.10. 3(3) to read as follows: e. In Seismic Design Categories D0, D1 and D2, Method GB is not permitted and the use of Method PCP is limited to one-story single-family dwellings and accessory structures. 16.06.260 Section R902.1.4 – Roofing requirements in a Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area. Section R902.1.4 of the California Residential Code is amended to read: R902.1.4 Roofing requirements in a Wild Land-Urban Interface Fire Area. The entire roof covering on new structures and existing structures on which more than 50 percent of the total roof area is replaced within any one-year period, and any roof covering applied in the alteration, repair or replacement of roofs on existing structures, shall be a fire-retardant roof covering that is at least Class A. Roofing requirements for structures located in a Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area shall also comply with Section R327.5. 16.06.270 Section R1003.9.2.1 – Repairs, replacements and alterations. Section R1003.9.2.1 is added to the California Residential Code to read: R1003.9.2.1 Repairs, replacements and alterations. When any repair, replacement or alteration to the roof of an existing structure is performed, a spark arrester shall be installed on the existing chimney in accordance with Section R1003.9.2. SECTION 2. The Council adopts the findings for local amendments to the California Residential Code, 2013 Edition, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference. // // // // // // // // // NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 12 SECTION 3. The Council finds that this project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to Section 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the amendments herein adopted will have a significant effect on the environment. 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: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Development Services ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 13 Exhibit A FINDINGS FOR LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE (CRC) Section 17958 of the California Health and Safety Code provides that the City may make changes to the provisions of the California Building Standards Code. Sections 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code require that for each proposed local change to those provisions of the California Building Standards Code which regulate buildings used for human habitation, the City Council must make findings supporting its determination that each such local change is reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. Code: CRC Section Title Add Deleted Amended Justification (See below for keys) R 202 Definition (Dual Sensor Carbon Monoxide and Smoke Alarm)  T Table R301.2(1) Climatic and Geographic Design Criteria  C, G, T R310.2.3 Window Well Fall Protection  T R 310.4.1 Security Bars  T R313.1.1 Design and installation  T R 313.2 One and Two Family Dwellings Automatic Spr. Syst.  T R313.2.1 Design and installation  T R313.3.1.1 Required sprinkler locations  T R 314.1 Smoke Detection and Notification  C, T R 322.1 Flood Hazard Regulations  T R 327.1.5 Vegetation Management Compliance  T R403.1.3 Seismic Reinforcing  G R 403.1.8 Foundation on expansive Soils  G, T Table R602.10.3(3) Bracing Requirements Based on Seismic Design Category  G R902.1.4 Roofing Requirements in Wildland- Urban Interface Fire Area  T R1003.9.2.1 Repairs, Replacements and Alterations  T Appendix G Swimming Pools, Spas and Hot Tubs  C, G Appendix H Patio Covers  C Appendix K Sound Transmission  C NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131142 14 Key to Justification for Amendments to Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations This amendment is justified on the basis of a local climatic condition. The seasonal climatic conditions during the late summer and fall create severe fire hazards to the public health and welfare in the City. The hot, dry weather frequently results in wild land fires on the brush covered slopes west of Interstate 280. The aforementioned conditions combined with the geological characteristics of the hills within the City create hazardous conditions for which departure from California Building Standards Code is required. C G T This amendment is justified on the basis of a local geological condition. The City of Palo Alto is subject to earthquake hazard caused by its proximity to San Andreas fault. This fault runs from Hollister, through the Santa Cruz Mountains, epicenter of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, then on up the San Francisco Peninsula, then offshore at Daly City near Mussel Rock. This is the approximate location of the epicenter of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. The other fault is Hayward Fault. This fault is about 74 mi long, situated mainly along the western base of the hills on the east side of San Francisco Bay. Both of these faults are considered major Northern California earthquake faults which may experience rupture at any time. Thus, because the City is within a seismic area which includes these earthquake faults, the modifications and changes cited herein are designed to better limit property damage as a result of seismic activity and to establish criteria for repair of damaged properties following a local emergency. The City of Palo Alto topography includes hillsides with narrow and winding access, which makes timely response by fire suppression vehicles difficult. Palo Alto is contiguous with the San Francisco Bay, resulting in a natural receptor for storm and waste water run-off. Also the City of Palo Alto is located in an area that is potentially susceptible to liquefaction during a major earthquake. The surface condition consists mostly of stiff to dense sandy clay, which is highly plastic and expansive in nature. The aforementioned conditions within the City create hazardous conditions for which departure from California Building Standards Code is warranted. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131143 1 Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Repealing Chapter 16.16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code And Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.16, California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 16.16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended by repealing in its entirety 16.16 and adopting a new Chapter 16.16 to read as follows: 16.16 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE 16.16.010 2013 California Electrical Code adopted. The California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, Title 24, Part 4 of the California Code of Regulations together with those omissions, amendments, exceptions and additions thereto, is adopted and hereby incorporated in this Chapter by reference and made a part hereof the same as if fully set forth herein. Unless superseded and expressly repealed, references in City of Palo Alto forms, documents and regulations to the chapters and sections of the former California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2010, shall be construed to apply to the corresponding provisions contained within the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2013. Ordinance No. 5103 of the City of Palo Alto and all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby suspended and expressly repealed. Wherever the phrases "California Electrical Code" or "Electrical Code" are used in this code or any ordinance of the City, such phrases shall be deemed and construed to refer and apply to the California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, as adopted by this Chapter. One copy of the California Electrical Code, 2013 edition, has been filed for use and examination of the public in the Office of the Building Official of the City of Palo Alto. 16.16.020 2013 California Electrical Code Annex Chapters adopted. The following Annex Chapters of the California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, are adopted and hereby incorporated in this Chapter by reference and made a part hereof the same as if fully set forth herein: A. Annex B – Application Information for Ampacity Calculations B. Annex C – Conduit and Tubing Fill Tables for Conductors and Fixture Wires of the Same Size C. Annex I – Unit Recommended Tightening Torque Tables from UL Standard 486A-B NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131143 2 16.16.030 Cross - References to California Electrical Code. The provisions of this Chapter contain cross-references to the provisions of the California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, in order to facilitate reference and comparison to those provisions. 16.16.040 Section 89.102.2.3 Third Part Field Evaluation. Section 89.102.2.3 is added to read: 89.102.2.3. Third-Party Field Evaluation. City of Palo Alto approved applications for Third-Party Field Evaluators shall be submitted for each project submitting evaluation reports on Electrical Systems and others as required for these types of reports. Educational background, training experience, professional licenses, registrations or certificates, and other applicable qualifications for each key personnel shall include information as required and defined in NFPA 790 and 791 including but not limited to: a. Technical Manager, direct Supervisor of FEB operations, and individual(s) managing the management system, minimum competency for personnel completing Field Evaluation projects, including educational background, experience, training, and professional registration. b. Provide information on the basic evaluation process to the building official in determining the adequacy and completeness of submitted evaluations and evaluation reports. 16.16.050 Section 110.13 Mounting and Cooling of Equipment. Section 110.13 (A) (1) is added to read: 110.13 (A) (1) Slab-On-Grade Supporting Electrical Equipment. When electrical equipment is proposed to be installed, including temporary electrical for construction, in locations where the deleterious effects of the environment may create adverse maintenance issues with ground mounted electrical equipment a concrete slab-on- grade shall be installed to elevate, protect, and attach equipment to per City of Palo Alto Electrical Utilities Standards or approved engineering design. 16.16.060 Violations -- Penalties. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of Section 1.08.010 of this code. Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation of this chapter occurs or continues shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable as provided in this section. 16.16.070 Enforcement -- Citation authority. The employee positions designated in this section may enforce the provisions of this chapter by the issuance of citations; persons employed in such positions are authorized to exercise the authority provided in Penal Code section 836.5 and are authorized to issue citations for NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131143 3 violations of this chapter. The designated employee positions are: (1) chief building official; (2) building inspection supervisor; and (3) code enforcement officer. 16.16.080 Local Amendments The provisions of this Chapter shall constitute local amendments to the cross-referenced provisions of the California Electrical Code, 2013 Edition, and shall be deemed to replace the cross-referenced sections of said Code with the respective provisions set forth in this Chapter. SECTION 2. The Council adopts the findings for local amendments to the California Electrical Code, 2013Edition, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 3. The Council finds that this project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to Section 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the amendments herein adopted will have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective on the commencement of 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: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Development Services ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131143 4 Exhibit A FINDINGS FOR LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, 2013 Section 17958 of the California Health and Safety Code provides that the City may make changes to the provisions of the California Building Standards Code. Sections 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code require that for each proposed local change to those provisions of the California Building Standards Code which regulate buildings used for human habitation, the City Council must make findings supporting its determination that each such local change is reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. Local building regulations having the effect of amending the uniform codes, which were adopted by the City prior to November 23, 1970, were unaffected by the regulations of Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code. Therefore, amendments to the uniform codes which were adopted by the City Council prior to November 23, 1970, and have been carried through from year to year without significant change, need no required findings. Also, amendments to provisions not regulating buildings used for human habitation do not require findings. Code: CEC Section Title Add Justification (See below for keys) 110.13 (A) Mounting and Cooling of Equipment  C Annex B Application Information for Ampacity Calculations  G Annex C Conduit and Tubing Fill Tables for Conductors and Fixture Wires of the Same Size  G Annex I Unit Recommended Tightening Torque Tables from UL Standard 486A-B  G NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131143 5 Key to Justification for Amendments to Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations This amendment is justified on the basis of a local climatic condition. The seasonal climatic conditions during the late summer and fall create severe fire hazards to the public health and welfare in the City. The hot, dry weather frequently results in wild land fires on the brush covered slopes west of Interstate 280. The aforementioned conditions combined with the geological characteristics of the hills within the City create hazardous conditions for which departure from California Building Standards Code is required. C G T This amendment is justified on the basis of a local geological condition. The City of Palo Alto is subject to earthquake hazard caused by its proximity to San Andreas fault. This fault runs from Hollister, through the Santa Cruz Mountains, epicenter of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, then on up the San Francisco Peninsula, then offshore at Daly City near Mussel Rock. This is the approximate location of the epicenter of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. The other fault is Hayward Fault. This fault is about 74 mi long, situated mainly along the western base of the hills on the east side of San Francisco Bay. Both of these faults are considered major Northern California earthquake faults which may experience rupture at any time. Thus, because the City is within a seismic area which includes these earthquake faults, the modifications and changes cited herein are designed to better limit property damage as a result of seismic activity and to establish criteria for repair of damaged properties following a local emergency. The City of Palo Alto topography includes hillsides with narrow and winding access, which makes timely response by fire suppression vehicles difficult. Palo Alto is contiguous with the San Francisco Bay, resulting in a natural receptor for storm and waste water run-off. Also the City of Palo Alto is located in an area that is potentially susceptible to liquefaction during a major earthquake. The surface condition consists mostly of stiff to dense sandy clay, which is highly plastic and expansive in nature. The aforementioned conditions within the City create hazardous conditions for which departure from California Building Standards Code is warranted. NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131144 1 Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Repealing Chapter 16.05 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Amending Title 16 to Adopt a New Chapter 16.05, California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, and Local Amendments and Related Findings The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 16.05 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended by repealing in its entirety 16.05and adopting a new Chapter 16.05 to read as follows: 16.05 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE 16.05.010 2013 California Mechanical Code adopted. The California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, Title 24, Part 4 of the California Code of Regulations together with those omissions, amendments, exceptions and additions thereto, is adopted and hereby incorporated in this Chapter by reference and made a part hereof the same as if fully set forth herein. Unless superseded and expressly repealed, references in City of Palo Alto forms, documents and regulations to the chapters and sections of the former California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2010, shall be construed to apply to the corresponding provisions contained within the California Code of Regulations, Title 24, 2013. Ordinance No. 5100 of the City of Palo Alto and all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby suspended and expressly repealed. Wherever the phrases "California Mechanical Code" or "Mechanical Code" are used in this code or any ordinance of the City, such phrases shall be deemed and construed to refer and apply to the California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, as adopted by this Chapter. One copy of the California Mechanical Code, 2013 edition, has been filed for use and examination of the public in the Office of the Building Official of the City of Palo Alto. 16.05.020 2013 California Mechanical Code Appendix Chapters adopted. The following Appendix Chapters of the California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, are adopted and hereby incorporated in this Chapter by reference and made a part hereof the same as if fully set forth herein: A. Appendix B– Procedures to be Followed to Place Gas Equipment in Operation B. Appendix C– Installation and testing of Oil (Liquid) Fuel-Fired Equipment C. Appendix D– Unit Conversion Tables NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131144 2 16.05.030 Cross - References to California Mechanical Code. The provisions of this Chapter contain cross-references to the provisions of the California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, in order to facilitate reference and comparison to those provisions. 16.05.040 Violations -- Penalties. Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this chapter is guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of Section 1.08.010 of this code. Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation of this chapter occurs or continues shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable as provided in this section. 16.05.050 Enforcement -- Citation authority. The employee positions designated in this section may enforce the provisions of this chapter by the issuance of citations; persons employed in such positions are authorized to exercise the authority provided in Penal Code section 836.5 and are authorized to issue citations for violations of this chapter. The designated employee positions are: (1) chief building official; (2) building inspection supervisor; and (3) code enforcement officer. 16.05.060 Local Amendments The provisions of this Chapter shall constitute local amendments to the cross-referenced provisions of the California Mechanical Code, 2013 Edition, and shall be deemed to replace the cross-referenced sections of said Code with the respective provisions set forth in this Chapter. 16.05.70 504.2.1 Kitchen Exhaust Makeup Air: Section 504.2.1 of the California Mechanical Code is added to read: 504.2.1 Kitchen Exhaust Makeup Air. Exhaust hood systems capable of exhausting in excess of 400 cubic feet per minute (0.19 m3/s) shall be provided with makeup air at a rate approximately equal to the exhaust air rate and shall not negatively impact the California Energy Code supply air requirements of ASHRAE 62.2. Such makeup air systems shall be equipped with a means of closure and shall be automatically controlled to start and operate simultaneously with the exhaust system. SECTION 2. The Council adopts the findings for local amendments to the California Mechanical Code, 2013Edition, attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 3. The Council finds that this project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to Section 15061 of the CEQA NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131144 3 Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the amendments herein adopted will have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective on the commencement of 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: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Development Services ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131144 4 Exhibit A FINDINGS FOR LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, 2013 Section 17958 of the California Health and Safety Code provides that the City may make changes to the provisions of the California Building Standards Code. Sections 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code require that for each proposed local change to those provisions of the California Building Standards Code which regulate buildings used for human habitation, the City Council must make findings supporting its determination that each such local change is reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions. Local building regulations having the effect of amending the uniform codes, which were adopted by the City prior to November 23, 1970, were unaffected by the regulations of Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code. Therefore, amendments to the uniform codes which were adopted by the City Council prior to November 23, 1970, and have been carried through from year to year without significant change, need no required findings. Also, amendments to provisions not regulating buildings used for human habitation do not require findings. Code: CMC Section Title Add Justification (See below for keys) 504.2.1 Kitchen Exhaust Makeup Air  C Appendix B Procedures to be Followed to Place Gas Equipment in Operation  G Appendix C Installation and testing of Oil (Liquid) Fuel-Fired Equipment  G NOT YET APPROVED 131003 jb 0131144 5 Key to Justification for Amendments to Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations This amendment is justified on the basis of a local climatic condition. The seasonal climatic conditions during the late summer and fall create severe fire hazards to the public health and welfare in the City. The hot, dry weather frequently results in wild land fires on the brush covered slopes west of Interstate 280. The aforementioned conditions combined with the geological characteristics of the hills within the City create hazardous conditions for which departure from California Building Standards Code is required. C G T This amendment is justified on the basis of a local geological condition. The City of Palo Alto is subject to earthquake hazard caused by its proximity to San Andreas fault. This fault runs from Hollister, through the Santa Cruz Mountains, epicenter of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, then on up the San Francisco Peninsula, then offshore at Daly City near Mussel Rock. This is the approximate location of the epicenter of the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. The other fault is Hayward Fault. This fault is about 74 mi long, situated mainly along the western base of the hills on the east side of San Francisco Bay. Both of these faults are considered major Northern California earthquake faults which may experience rupture at any time. Thus, because the City is within a seismic area which includes these earthquake faults, the modifications and changes cited herein are designed to better limit property damage as a result of seismic activity and to establish criteria for repair of damaged properties following a local emergency. The City of Palo Alto topography includes hillsides with narrow and winding access, which makes timely response by fire suppression vehicles difficult. Palo Alto is contiguous with the San Francisco Bay, resulting in a natural receptor for storm and waste water run-off. Also the City of Palo Alto is located in an area that is potentially susceptible to liquefaction during a major earthquake. The surface condition consists mostly of stiff to dense sandy clay, which is highly plastic and expansive in nature. The aforementioned conditions within the City create hazardous conditions for which departure from California Building Standards Code is warranted. 1 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 1 Ordinance No. ____ Adoption of an Ordinance Repealing and Reenacting Title 15 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Adopt the 2012 Edition of the International Fire Code, as Amended By the State of California, Also Known as the 2013 Edition of the California Fire Code, With Local Amendments and Related Findings (Chapter 15 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code) The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Title 15 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended by repealing in its entirety Title 15 and enacting a new Title 15 to read as follows: 15.04 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE 15.04.010 Adoption of the California Fire Code. The California Fire Code, 2013 Edition, as adopted by the California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 9, and Appendices B, C, D, F, and K is adopted as herein amended. One copy of the California Fire Code is on file and open to public inspection in the Office of the City Clerk. Additional copies of the secondary codes set forth within the California Fire Code, and the amendments set forth in this chapter, are on file and open to public inspection in the fire department administrative office. Whenever the phrase “California Fire Code” appears in this code or in any ordinance of the city, such phrase shall be deemed and construed to refer to and apply to the “California Fire Code, 2013 Edition” as adopted by the California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 9 and this chapter. 15.04.015 Section 102.5 amended – Application of residential code. Section 102.5 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 102.5 Application of residential code. Where structures are designed and constructed in accordance with the California Residential Code, the provisions of this code shall apply as follows: 1. Construction and design provisions: Provisions of this code pertaining to the exterior of the structure shall apply including, but not limited to, premises identification, fire apparatus access and water supplies. Provisions of this code pertaining to the interior of the structure shall apply when specifically required by this code including, but not limited to, Sections 903.2 through 903.3.7 and Section 907.2.10. Where interior or 2 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 2 TYPE OF GAS AMOUNT(cubic feet)2 X 0.0283 for m3 Corrosive 200 Flammable (except cryogenic and liquefied petroleum gases) 200 Highly toxic Any amount Inert and simple asphyxiant 6,000 Irritant 200 Moderately toxic 20 Other health hazards 650 Oxidizing (including oxygen) 504 Pyrophoric Any amount Radioactive Any amount Sensitizer 200 Toxic Any Amount Unstable (reactive) Any amount exterior systems or devices are installed, construction permits required by Section 105.7 of this code shall also apply. 2. Administrative, operational and maintenance provisions: all such provisions of this code shall apply. 15.04.020 Sections 105.3.9 and 105.3.10 added- Permits/Permit fees. Sections 105.3.9 and 105.3.10 are added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 105.3.9 Permits/Permit fees. All permit fees shall be established by the City Council as set forth in the municipal fee schedule. 105.3.10 Operational Permits. Operational permits are valid for one year at which time they must be renewed by paying a fee specified in the municipal fee schedule. 15.04.030 Table 105.6.8 amended- Permit amounts for compressed gases. Table 105.6.8 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: TABLE 105.6.8 PERMIT AMOUNTS FOR COMPRESSED GASES1 For SI: 1 cubic foot = 0.02832m3. 1 Refer to Chapters 27, 30, 32, 35, 37, 40 and 41 for additional requirements and exceptions. 2 Cubic feet measured at normal Temperature and pressure. 15.04.040 Table 105.6.20 amended - Permit amounts for hazardous materials. 3 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 3 Table 105.6.20 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: TABLE 105.6.20 PERMIT AMOUNTS FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS1 TYPE OF MATERIAL AMOUNT Carcinogens 10 pounds Combustible liquids See Section 105.6.16 Corrosive materials: Gases Liquids Solids See Section 105.6.8 55 gallons 500 pounds Cryogens See Section 105.6.10 Explosive materials See Section 105.6.14 Flammable materials: Gases Liquids Solids See Section 105.6.8 See Section 105.6.16 10 pounds Highly toxic materials: Gases Liquids Solids Any amount Any amount Any amount Moderately toxic gas 20 cubic feet Organic peroxides: Liquids: Class I-IV Liquids: Class V Solids: Class I-IV Solids: Class V Any Amount No Permit Required Any Amount No Permit Required Oxidizing materials: Gases Liquids Solids: 504 Cubic Feet Any amount Any amount Other health Hazards: Liquids Solids 55 gallons 500 pounds Pyrophoric materials: Gases Liquids Solids Any amount Any amount Any amount Radioactive materials: Gases Liquids Solids Any Amount See Section 105.6.47 See Section 105.6.47 4 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 4 Toxic materials: Gases Liquids Solids Any amount Any amount Any amount Unstable (reactive) materials: Gases Liquids Solids Any amount Any amount Any amount Water reactive materials: Liquids Solids Any amount Any amount For SI: 1 gallon = 3.785 L, 1 pound = 0.454kg. a. 20 gallons when Table 2703.1.1(1) Note k applies and hazard identification signs in accordance with Section 2703.5 are provided for quantities of 20 gallons or less. b. 200 pounds when Table 2703.1.1(1) Note k applies and hazard identification signs in accordance with Section 2703.5 are provided for quantities of 200 pounds or less. 15.04.050 Sections 105.6.48 and 105.6.49 added – Permits required. Sections 105.6.48 and 105.6.49 are added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 105.6.48 Radioactive materials. To store or handle at any installation more than one microcurie (37,000 becquerel) of radioactive material not contained in a sealed source or more than 1 millicurie (37,000,000 becquerel) of radioactive material in a sealed source or sources, or any amount of radioactive material for which a specific licenses from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is required. 105.6.49 Day Care Permit. To operate a day care facility for more than six children or adults. 15.04.060 Sections 105.7.15 and 105.7.15 added. Sections 105.7.15 and 105.7.16 are added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 105.7.14 Cryogenic fluids. Except where federal or state regulations apply and except for fuel systems of the vehicle, to produce, store or handle cryogens in excess of the amounts listed in Table 105.6.10, to install a cryogenic vessel or piping system for the storage or distribution of cryogens. See Chapter 32. 105.7.15 Underground Fire Service Lines, installation or modification. 15.04.070 Sections 105.8.1 and 105.8.2 added – Fire and life safety. Subsections 105.8.1 and 105.8.2 are added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 105.8.1 Fire and life-safety plan review. Fire and life-safety plan review of all new construction, all remodels, and all additions shall be performed by the Fire Chief or his designee. 5 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 5 105.8.2 Site Map and Floor plans. The Fire Chief or fire code official may require as a condition of final permit approval, a site map including the use of standard or approved Palo Alto Fire Department symbols. Features would include interior floor plans, on-site hydrant locations, FDC locations, key safe locations, alarm panel locations, electrical panel locations, stairwell and elevator locations, water shut off locations, hazardous materials locations, and other significant design elements or fire service features. The site map is to be provided in a format compatible with the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS) at time of construction. This requirement applies to newly constructed buildings, facilities where hazardous materials are used or stored in quantities exceeding permit amounts in Section 105, additions or permitted remodels when in the opinion of the fire code official a site map is warranted. 15.04.080 Section 105.9 added – Certified Unified Program Agency Fees. Section 105.9 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 105.9 Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) Fees. Pursuant to the Participating Agency Agreement between the County of Santa Clara and the City of Palo Alto dated July 1, 1997, or as amended, the Fire Department is authorized to collect fees associated with the CUPA programs. The CUPA fees will be collected on an annual basis or as specified in the Palo Alto Fire Department Fee Schedule. 15.04.090 Section 106.1 amended – Inspection authority. Section 106.1 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 106.1 Inspection authority. The fire code official is authorized to inspect, as often as necessary, buildings and premises, including such other hazards or appliances designated by the fire code official for the purposes of ascertaining and causing to be corrected any conditions which would reasonably tend to cause fire or contribute to its spread, result in an unauthorized discharge of hazardous materials, or any violation of this code or any other law or standard affecting fire and life safety. 15.04.100 Section 109.1.2 added - Enforcement/citation authority. Section 109.1.2 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 109.1.2 Enforcement/citation authority. The following designated employee positions may enforce the provisions of this chapter by the issuance of citations. Persons employed in such positions are authorized to exercise the authority provided in Penal Code Section 836.5 and are authorized to issue citations for violations of this chapter. The designated employee positions are: Fire Chief, Deputy Fire Chief, Fire Marshal, Fire Inspector, Hazardous Materials Specialist and Hazardous Materials Inspector. 6 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 6 15.04.110 Section 109.3 amended – violations and penalties. Section 109.3 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: Any person, firm or corporation violating any provision of this Title 15 shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished as provided in subsection (a) of Section 1.08.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation of the fire code occurs or continues shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense, and upon conviction thereof shall be punishable as herein provided. 15.04.120 Definitions added to section 202- “Device” and “Workstation.” The following definitions are added to Section 202 of the California Fire Code to read as follows: DEVICE. Device is, for the purpose of Exhibit “A,” an appliance or piece of equipment that plays an active part in the proper functioning of the regulated systems. Examples include, but are not limited to the following: smoke detectors, heat detectors, flame detectors, manual pull stations, horns, alarms, bells, warning lights, hydrants, risers, FDCs, standpipes, strobes, control panels, transponders, and other such equipment used to detect, transmit, initiate, annunciate, alarm, or respond according to the system design criteria. WORKSTATION is a defined space or independent principal piece of equipment using hazardous materials where a specific function, laboratory procedure or research activity occurs. Approved or listed hazardous materials storage cabinets, flammable liquid storage cabinets or gas cabinets serving a workstation are included as part of the workstation. A workstation is allowed to contain ventilation equipment, fire protection devices, electrical devices, and other processing and scientific equipment. CONTINUOUS GAS DETECTION SYSTEM. An gas detection system where the analytical instrument is maintained in continuous operation and sampling is performed without interruption. Analysis is allowed to be performed on a cyclical basis at intervals not to exceed 30 minutes. In occupied areas where air is re-circulated and not exhausted to a treatment system (e.g. breathing zone), the fire code official may require a cyclical basis at intervals not to exceed 5 minutes. The gas detection system shall be able to detect the presence of a gas at or below the permissible exposure limit in occupiable areas and at or below ½ IDLH (or 0.05 LC 50 if no established IDLH) in unoccupiable areas. CORROSIVE LIQUID. Corrosive liquid is any liquid which, when in contact with living tissue, will cause destruction or irreversible alteration of such tissue by chemical action; 1) any liquid having a pH of 2 or less or 12.5 or more; 2) any liquid classified as corrosive by the U.S. Department of Transportation; and 7 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 7 3) any material exhibiting the characteristics of corrosivity in accordance with Title 22, California Code of Regulations §66261.22. MODERATELY TOXIC GAS. A chemical or substance that has a median lethal concentration (LC50) in air more than 2000 parts per million but not more than 5000 parts per million by volume of gas or vapor, when administered by continuous inhalation for an hour, or less if death occurs within one hour, to albino rats weighing between 200 and 300 grams each. MAXIMUM THRESHOLD QUANTITY (MAX TQ). Maximum Threshold Quantity (Max TQ) is the maximum quantity of a moderately toxic or toxic gas, which may be stored in a single vessel before a more stringent category of regulation is applied. The following equation shall be used to calculate the Max TQ: Max TQ (pounds) = LC50 (ppm) x 2 lb. For gas mixtures containing one or more toxic, highly toxic or moderately toxic components, LC50 shall be calculated using CGA Standards P-20 and P-23 as referenced in Appendix E, Section 103.1.3.1 OTHER HEALTH HAZARD MATERIAL. A hazardous material which affects target organs of the body, including but not limited to, those materials which produce liver damage, kidney damage, damage to the nervous system, act on the blood to decrease hemoglobin function, deprive the body tissue of oxygen or affect reproductive capabilities, including mutations (chromosomal damage), sensitizers or teratogens (effect on fetuses). SECONDARY CONTAINMENT. Secondary containment is that level of containment that is external to and separate from primary containment and is capable of safely and securely containing the material, without discharge, for a period of time reasonably necessary to ensure detection and remedy of the primary containment failure. WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE FIRE AREA. A geographical area identified by the state as a “Fire Hazard Severity Zone” in accordance with the Public Resources Code Sections 4201 through 4204 and Government Code Sections 51175 through 51189, or other areas designated by the enforcing agency to be at a significant risk from wildfires. See Article 86B for the applicable referenced sections of the Government Code and the Public Resources Code. The Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area shall be defined as all areas within the City of Palo Alto as set forth and delineated on the map entitled "Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area” which map and all notations, references, data and other information shown thereon are hereby adopted and made a part of this chapter. The map properly attested, shall be on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Palo Alto. 15.04.210 Section 605.12 added - Immersion Heaters. Section 605.12 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 8 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 8 605.12 Immersion Heaters. All electrical immersion heaters used in dip tanks, sinks, vats and similar operations shall be provided with approved over- temperature controls and low liquid level electrical disconnects. Manual reset of required protection devices shall be provided. 15.04.220 Section 608.6.1 added - Failure of Ventilation System. Section 608.6.4 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 608.6.1.1 Failure of Ventilation System. Failure of the ventilation system shall automatically disengage the charging system. 15.04.225 Definitions added to section 902.1- “Dual Sensor Photoelectric/Ionization Smoke Detector or Alarm,” “Dual Sensor Carbon Monoxide and Smoke Detector or Alarm”, “Ionization Smoke Detector or Alarm,” and “Photoelectric Smoke Detector or Alarm.” The following definitions are added to Section 902.1 of the California Fire Code to read as follows: DUAL SENSOR PHOTOELECTRIC/IONIZATION SMOKE DETECTOR OR ALARM. A smoke alarm or detector that utilizes both photoelectric and ionization methods in a single device. DUAL SENSOR CARBON MONOXIDE AND SMOKE ALARM. A combination carbon monoxide and smoke alarm or detector that senses both smoke and CO in a single device. IONIZATION SMOKE DETECTOR OR ALARM. A smoke alarm or detector that uses a small amount of radioactive material to detect invisible particles generated by flame. PHOTOELECTRIC SMOKE DETECTOR OR ALARM. A smoke alarm or detector that uses a light-source to detect the presence of smoke. 15.04.230 Section 903.2 amended – Automatic Sprinkler Systems, Where Required. Section 903.2 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 903.2 Automatic sprinkler systems, where required. Approved a utomatic sprinkler systems in new buildings and structures and in existing modified buildings and structures, shall be provided in the locations described in this section. Automatic fire sprinklers shall be installed per the requirements set forth in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.18 and as follows, whichever is the more restrictive: 1. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all new buildings and structures. 9 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 9 Exception: New non-residential occupancies, buildings or structures that do not exceed 1,000 square feet of building area. 2. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided for all existing buildings or structures where modifications have been determined by the Building Official to trigger requirements for seismic retrofit. 3. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all existing buildings when modifications are made that create conditions described in Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.18, or that create an increase in fire area to more than 4100 square feet or when the addition is equal or greater than 100% of the existing building square footage whichever is more restrictive. 4. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all new basements regardless of size and throughout existing basements that are expanded by more than 50%. If the addition is only the basement, then only the basement is required to be sprinklered. 5. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all new buildings located in the designated Wildland-Urban Interface areas. Exception: Any non-residential accessory structures to single family residences that have a fire area of 500 square feet or less. 6. An automatic sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all existing buildings located in the designated Wildland-Urban Interface areas when modifications are made that increases the fire area. Exception: One time additions to existing buildings made after January 1994 that do not exceed 500 square feet in fire area. 15.04.235 Amend Section 903.1.1.1 to read: 903.1.1.1 NFPA 13 sprinkler systems. Where the provisions of this code require that a building or portion thereof be equipped throughout with an automatic sprinkler system in accordance with this section, sprinklers shall be installed throughout in accordance with NFPA 13 and State and local requirements except as provided in Section 903.3.1.1. 1. For new buildings having no designated use or tenant, the minimum sprinkler design density shall be Ordinary Hazard Group 2. Where future use or tenant is determined to require a higher density, the sprinkler system shall be augmented to meet the higher density. 15.04.240 Section 903.3.1.2 amended – NFPA 13R sprinkler systems. Section 903.3.1.2 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 903.3.1.2 NFPA 13R sprinkler systems. Where allowed in buildings of Group R, up to and including four stories in height , automatic sprinkler systems shall be 10 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 10 installed throughout in accordance with NFPA 13R and State and local standards. 15.04.245 Section 903.3.1.2.2 added – Attics and usable crawl spaces. Section 903.3.1.2.2 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 903.3.1.2.2 Attics and usable crawl spaces. Attics and usable under-floor spaces including crawl spaces shall be fully protected to residential or light hazard density as appropriate for the slope of the ceiling and configuration of framing. 15.04.250 Section 903.3.1.3 amended – NFPA 13D sprinkler systems. Section 903.3.1.3 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 903.3.1.3 NFPA 13D sprinkler systems. Where allowed, automatic sprinkler systems installed in one-and two-family dwellings and townhouses shall be installed throughout in accordance with NFPA 13D and State and local standards. 15.04.255 Section 903.3.1.3.1 added - Garages and attics. Section 903.3.1.3.1 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 903.3.1.3.1 Garages and attics. Garages, including Group U occupancies, shall be fully protected with sprinklers designed for residential density calculated with four (4) sprinklers flowing. Attics shall be fully protected to residential density or light hazard as appropriate for the slope of ceiling and configuration n of framing. Exception: Non-usable attics in one-and two-family dwellings not located in the Wildland Urban Interface area may be provided with an intermediate temperature pilot sprinkler above the attic scuttle and above any heat producing equipment in lieu of complete attic protection meeting the requirements above. 15.04.260 Section 903.3.7 amended - Fire department connections. Section 903.3.7 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 903.3.7 Fire department connections. Sprinkler systems shall be equipped with a minimum two-way Siamese Fire Department connection. Connections shall be located on a street front not less than three (3) feet or more than four (4) feet above grade and shall be equipped with an approved straightway check valve. Locations shall be subject to approval by the Fire Chief prior to any installation. Exception: Automatic sprinkler systems installed in accordance with the NFPA standards 13-D for one- and two-family dwellings in the designated Wildland- Urban Interface areas, and 13-R for multi-family dwellings throughout the City Palo Alto, may have a single 2-1/2-inch connection with approved straightway 11 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 11 check valve. 15.04.270 Section 903.4.3 amended - Floor control valves. Section 903.4.3 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 903.4.3 Floor control valves. Automatic sprinkler systems serving buildings two (2) or more stories in height shall have valves installed so as to control the system independently on each floor including basements. Exception: Buildings not over three (3) stories in height containing only R-3 occupancies, or with 10,000 square feet or less above the first story. Floor control valves shall be protected from tampering by installation in lockable enclosures or as approved by the chief. Floor control valve assemblies shall be provided with a flow switch and drain connections. 15.04.275 Section 907.2.11 amended - Single- and multiple-station smoke alarms. Section 907.2.11 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 907.2.11 Single- and multiple-station smoke alarms. Listed single- and multiple-station smoke alarms complying with UL217 shall be installed in accordance with Sections 907.2.11.1 through 907.2.11.5 and manufacturers installation and use instructions. Smoke alarms more than 10 years old shall not be considered as satisfying any requirement of this code or subject to the provisions of the Health and Safety Code and shall be immediately replaced by the owner with a smoke alarm that complies with this section. Smoke alarms and smoke detectors installed on or after January 1, 2014 in compliance with this code or subject to the provisions of the Health and Safety Code shall also either be listed and approved for enhanced nuisance resistance and rapid response to smoldering synthetic materials or shall meet the following requirements: 1. Smoke detectors or smoke alarms located within 20 feet of a kitchen, or a room containing a cooking appliance, wood burning fireplace or stove shall be photoelectric detectors or alarms. 2. In all other required locations dual sensor photoelectric/ionization detectors or alarms, shall be installed. A photoelectric smoke detector or alarm installed together with an ionization smoke detectors or alarms may be used as a substitute for a dual sensor photoelectric/ionization detector or alarm. Exception: For Group R occupancies. A fire alarm or other approved system with interconnected photoelectric smoke detectors or alarms located in accordance with, and meeting the requirements of, this section 12 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 12 may be installed. Upon the actuation of a smoke detector or alarm, only those notification appliances or alarms in the dwelling unit or guest room where the detector is actuated shall activate. 15.04.280 Section 3304.8 added - Fire Walls. Section 3304.8 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 3304.8 Fire Walls. When firewalls are required, the wall construction shall be completed (with all openings protected) immediately after the building is sufficiently weather-protected at the location of the wall(s). 15.04.290 Section 3311.1 amended - Stairways Required. Section 1411.1 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 3311.1 Stairways Required. Each level above the first story in new multi- story buildings shall be provided with at least two usable exit stairways after the floor decking is installed. The stairways shall be continuous and discharge to grade level. Stairways serving more than two floor levels shall be enclosed (with openings adequately protected) after exterior walls/windows are in place. Exit stairs in new and in existing, occupied buildings shall be lighted and maintained clear of debris and construction materials at all times. Exception: For new multi-story buildings, one of the required exit stairs may be obstructed on not more than two contiguous floor levels for the purposes of stairway construction (i.e., installation of gypsum board, painting, flooring, etc.). 15.04.295 Section 3311.1 added - Required Means Of Egress. Section 1411.1.1 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 3311.1 Required Means Of Egress. All new buildings under construction shall have a least one unobstructed means of egress. All means of egress shall be identified in the Fire Protection Plan. 15.04.300 Section 202 amended – Definition of “continuous gas detection system.” The definition of “Continuous Gas Detection System” in Section 202 of the California Fire Code is amended to read: CONTINUOUS GAS DETECTION SYSTEM. An approved gas detection system where the analytical instrument is maintained in continuous operation and sampling is performed without interruption. Analysis is allowed to be performed on a cyclical basis at intervals not to exceed 30 minutes. In occupied areas where air is re-circulated and not exhausted to a treatment system (e.g. breathing zone), the Chief may require a cyclical basis at intervals not to exceed 5 minutes. The gas detection system shall be able to detect the 13 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 13 presence of a gas at or below the permissible exposure limit in occupiable areas and at or below ½ IDLH (or 0.05 LC 50 if no established IDLH) in unoccupiable areas. 15.04.320 Section 507 added - Fire Protection Water Supply System. Section 507 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 507.1.2 Fire Protection Water Supply System. An approved hydrant and hose system or portable fire-extinguishing equipment suitable for the fire hazards involved shall be provided for open storage yards and processing areas. Hydrant and hose systems shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 24. 15.04.325 Section 5001.2.1.1 added – Gas mixtures. Section 5001.2.1.1 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: Section 5001.2.1.1 Gas mixtures. For gas mixtures containing one or more toxic, highly toxic or moderately toxic components, LC50 shall be calculated using CGA Standards P-20 and P-23 as referenced in Appendix E, Section 103.1.3.1 15.04.330 Section 5001.2.2.2 amended - Health Hazards. Section 2701.2.2.2 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 5001.2.2.2 Health Hazards. The material categories listed in this section are classified as health hazards. A material with a primary classification as a health hazard can also pose a physical hazard. 1. Highly toxic, toxic and moderately toxic. 2. Corrosive materials 3. Moderately toxic gas. 4. Other health hazards 15.04.335 Section 5001.5.2.1 added – HMIS Exemptions. Section 2701.5.2.1 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: Section 5001.5.2.1 HMIS Exemptions. The following hazardous materials uses are found to not represent a sufficient degree of hazard in of themselves to justify the filing of a HMMP or HMIS. SMALL COMPRESSED GAS CYLINDER EXEMPTION A facility using compressed gas cylinders containing any of the following hazardous materials used for the purpose specified and stored at each facility in quantities not exceeding the thresholds specified below shall be exempted from the requirements of Chapter 6.95 Section 25501 (p) of the California Health and Safety Code: 14 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 14 (a) Non refrigerated or non-cryogenic helium compressed gas in quantities of not more than 1000 cubic feet at standard temperature and pressure for the purpose of filling party balloons. (b) Non-refrigerated or non-cryogenic carbon dioxide and nitrogen compressed gases used for carbonation of beverages and stored in quantities of not more than 6000 cubic feet at standard temperature and pressure. (c) Refrigerated or cryogenic carbon dioxide compressed gas used for carbonation of beverages and stored in quantities of not more than 6000 cubic feet (116 gallons) at standard temperature and pressure. SMALL PROPANE GAS TANK EXEMPTION Commercial facilities, restaurants and RV hookup stations that handle 300 gallons or less of propane gas in stationary tanks outside of buildings used exclusively for heating, cooling, or cooking shall be exempted from the requirements of Chapter 6.95 Section 25501 (p) of the California Health and Safety Code. This exception does not include sites that dispense propane. CLOSED COOLING SYSTEM EXEMPTION Closed cooling systems containing group A1 refrigerants, including fluorocarbons, chlorocarbons and chlorofluorocarbons used for air conditioning and refrigeration shall be exempted from the requirements of chapter 6.95 Section 25501 (p) of the California Health and Safety Code. CLOSED FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM EXEMPTION Closed fire suppression systems shall be exempted from the requirements of Chapter 6.95 Section 25501 (p) of the California Health and Safety Code. COMPRESSED AIR EXEMPTION Compressed air in cylinders and bottles shall be exempted from Chapter 6.95 Section 25501 (p) of the California Health and Safety Code. 15.04.340 Section 5002.1 amended – addition of definition of “secondary containment.” The following definition is added to section 5002.1 of the California Fire Code to read: SECONDARY CONTAINMENT. Secondary containment is that level of containment that is external to and separate from primary containment and is capable of safely and securely containing the material, without discharge, for a period of time reasonably necessary to ensure detection and remedy of the primary containment failure. 15.04.350 Section 5003.1 amended – addition of definitions of “carcinogen,” “other health hazard material,” and “sensitizer.” 15 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 15 The following definitions are added to section 5003.1 of the California Fire Code to read: CARCINOGEN is a substance that causes the development of cancerous growths in living tissue. A chemical is considered a carcinogen if: 1. It has been evaluated by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and found to be a carcinogen or potential carcinogen, or 2. It is listed a s a carcinogen or potential carcinogen in the latest edition of the Annual Report on Carcinogens published by the National Toxicology program, or 3. It is regulated by OSHA as a carcinogen. OTHER HEALTH HAZARD MATERIAL is a hazardous material which affects target organs of the body, including but not limited to, those materials which produce liver damage, kidney damage, damage to the nervous system, act the blood to decrease hemoglobin function, deprive the body tissue of oxygen or affect reproductive capabilities, including mutations (chromosomal damage) or teratogens (effect on fetuses). SENSITIZER is a chemical that causes a substantial proportion of exposed people or animals to develop an allergic reaction in normal tissue after repeated exposure to the chemical. 15.04.352 Section 5003.1.3.1 added - Toxic, Highly Toxic, Moderately Toxic gases and similarly used or handled materials. Section 2703.1.3.1 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 5003.1.3.1 Toxic, Highly Toxic, Moderately Toxic gases and similarly used or handled materials. The storage, use and handling of toxic, highly toxic and moderately toxic gases in amounts exceeding Table 60004.2 or 60004.3 shall be in accordance with this chapter and Chapter 60. Any toxic, highly toxic or moderately toxic material that is used or handled as a gas or vapor shall be in accordance with the requirements for toxic, highly toxic or moderately toxic gases. 15.04.354 Section 5003.1.5 added - Secondary Containment Requirements. Section 5003.1.5 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 5003.1.5 Other Health Hazards Including Carcinogens, Irritants and Sensitizers. The storage, use and handling of materials classified as other health hazards including carcinogens, irritants and sensitizers in amounts exceeding 810 cubic feet for gases, 55 gallons for liquids and 5,000 pounds for solids shall be in accordance with this Section 5003. 15.04.356 Section 5003.1.6 added - Secondary Containment Requirements. Section 2703.1.6 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 16 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 16 5003.1.6 Secondary Containment Requirements. A containment system shall be required for all hazardous materials, which are liquids or solids at normal temperature, and pressure (NTP) where a spill is determined to be a plausible event and where such an event would endanger, people, property or the environment. Construction shall be substantial, capable of safely and securely containing a sudden release without discharge. Design criteria shall be performance oriented and constructed of physically and chemically compatible materials to resist degradation and provide structural and functional integrity for a period of time reasonably necessary to ensure detection, mitigation, and repair of the primary system. Regardless of quantities, spill control and secondary containment shall also comply with Section 5004.2. 15.04.358 Section 5003.1.6 added – Other health hazards. Section 5003.1.6 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 5003.1.6 Other Health Hazards Including Carcinogens, Irritants and Sensitizers. The storage, use and handling of materials classified as other health hazards including carcinogens, irritants and sensitizers in amounts exceeding 810 cubic feet for gases, 55 gallons for liquids and 5,000 pounds for solids shall be in accordance with this chapter. 15.04.360 Section 5003.2.2.1 amended - Design and Construction. Section 2703.2.2.1 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 5003.2.2.1 Design and Construction. Piping, tubing, valves, fittings and related components used for hazardous materials shall be in accordance with the following: 1. Piping, tubing, valves, fittings and related components shall be designed and fabricated from materials compatible with the material to be contained and shall be of adequate strength and durability to withstand the pressure, structural and seismic stress, and exposure to which they are subject. 2. Piping and tubing shall be identified in accordance with ASME A13.1 and the Santa Clara County Fire Chiefs Marking Requirements and Guidelines for Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste to indicate the material conveyed. 3. Readily accessible manual valves or automatic remotely activated fail-safe emergency shutoff valves shall be installed on supply piping and tubing at the following locations: a. The point of use. b. The tank, cylinder or bulk use. 4. Manual emergency shutoff valves and controls for remotely activated emergency shutoff valves shall be identified and the location shall be clearly visible accessible and indicated by means of a sign. 5. Backflow prevention or check valves shall be provided when the backflow of 17 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 17 hazardous materials could create a hazardous condition or cause the unauthorized discharge of hazardous materials. 6. Where gases or liquids having a hazard ranking of: Health hazard Class 3 or 4 Flammability Class 3 or 4 Reactivity Class 4 in accordance with NFPA 704 are carried in pressurized piping above 15 pounds per square inch gauge (psig)(103 Kpa), an approved means of leak detection, emergency shutoff and excess flow control shall be provided. Where the piping originates from within a hazardous material storage room or area, the excess flow control shall be located within the storage room or area. Where the piping originates from a bulk source, the excess flow control shall be located as close to the bulk source as practical. Exceptions: 1. Piping for inlet connections designed to prevent backflow. 2. Piping for pressure relief devices. 7. Secondary containment or equivalent protection from spills shall be provided for piping for liquid hazardous materials and for highly toxic and toxic corrosive gases above threshold quantities listed in Tables 6004.2 and 6004.3. Secondary containment includes, but is not limited to double walled piping. Exceptions: 1. Secondary containment is not required for toxic corrosive gases if the piping is constructed of inert materials. 2. Piping under sub-atmospheric conditions if the piping is equipped with an alarm and fail-safe-to-close valve activated by a loss of vacuum. 8. Expansion chambers shall be provided between valves whenever the regulated gas may be subjected to thermal expansion. Chambers shall be sized to provide protection for piping and instrumentation and to accommodate the expansion of regulated materials. 15.04.361 Section 5003.2.2.2 amended - Additional Regulation for Supply Piping for Health Hazard Materials. Section 2703.2.2.2 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 5003.2.2.2 Additional Regulation for Supply Piping for Health Hazard Materials. Supply piping and tubing for gases and liquids having a health hazard ranking of 3 or 4 in accordance with ASME B31.3 and the following: 1. Piping and tubing utilized for the transmission of toxic, highly toxic, or highly volatile corrosive liquids and gases shall have welded or brazed connections throughout except for connections within an exhausted enclosure if the material is a gas, or an approved method of drainage or containment is provided for connections if the material is a liquid. 2. Piping and tubing shall not be located within corridors, within any portion of a means of egress required to be enclosed in fire-resistance-rated construction or in concealed spaces in areas not classified as Group H Occupancies. Exception: Piping and tubing within the space defined by the walls of corridors and the floor or roof above or in concealed space above other occupancies when installed in accordance with Section 415.8.6.3 of the California Building Code as required for Group H, Division 5 Occupancies. 18 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 18 3. All primary piping for toxic, highly toxic and moderately toxic gases shall pass a helium leak test of 1x10-9 cubic centimeters/second where practical, or shall pass testing in accordance with an approved, nationally recognized standard. Tests shall be conducted by a qualified “third party” not involved with the construction of the piping and control systems. 15.04.370 Section 5003.3.1 amended - Unauthorized Discharges. Section 2703.3.1 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 5003.3.1 Unauthorized Discharges. When hazardous materials are released in quantities reportable under state, federal or local regulations or when there is a threatened release that presents a threat to health, property or the environment, the fire code official shall be notified immediately in an approved manner and the following procedures required in accordance with Sections 5003.3.1.1 through 5003.3.1.4. 15.04.380 Section 5003.5.2 added - Ventilation Ducting. Section 5003.5.2 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 5003.5.2 Ventilation Ducting. Product conveying ducts for venting hazardous materials operations shall be labeled with the hazard class of the material being vented and the direction of flow. 15.04.381 Section 5003.5.3 added - “H” Occupancies. Section 2703.5.4 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 5003.5.3 “H” Occupancies. In “H” occupancies, all piping and tubing may be required to be identified when there is any possibility of confusion with hazardous materials transport tubing or piping. Flow direction indicators are required. 15.04.390 Section 5003.9.8 amended - Separation of Incompatible Materials. Section 2703.9.8 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 5003.9.8 Separation of Incompatible Materials. Incompatible materials in storage and storage of materials that are incompatible with materials in use shall be separated. When the stored materials are in containers having a capacity of more than 5 pounds (2 kg) or 0.5 gallon (2 L), separation shall be accomplished by: 1. Segregating incompatible materials in storage by a distance of not less than 20 feet (6096 mm) and in an independent containment system. 2. Isolating incompatible materials in storage by a noncombustible partition extending not less than 18 inches (457 mm) above and to the sides of the stored material. 19 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 19 3. Storing liquid and solid materials in hazardous material storage cabinets. 4. Storing compressed gases in gas cabinets or exhausted enclosures in accordance with Sections 5003.8.5 and 5003.8.6. Materials that are incompatible shall not be stored within the same cabinet or exhausted enclosure. 15.04.391 Section 5003.9.11 added - Fire Extinguishing Systems for Workstations Dispensing, Handling or Using Hazardous Materials. Section 5003.9.11 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 5003.9.11 Fire Extinguishing Systems for Workstations Dispensing, Handling or Using Hazardous Materials. Combustible and non-combustible work stations which dispense, handle or use hazardous materials shall be protected by an approved automatic fire extinguishing system in accordance with Section 1803.10. Exception: Internal fire protection is not required for Biological Safety Cabinets that carry NSF/ANSI certification where quantities of flammable liquids in use or storage within the cabinet do not exceed 500 ml. 15.04.400 Section 5004.2.1 amended - Spill Control for Hazardous Material Liquids. Section 2704.2.1 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 5004.2.1 Spill Control for Hazardous Material Liquids. Rooms, buildings or areas used for storage of hazardous material liquids shall be provided with spill control to prevent the flow of liquids to adjoining areas. Floors in indoor locations and similar surfaces in outdoor locations shall be constructed to contain a spill from the largest single vessel by one of the following methods: 1. Liquid-tight sloped or recessed floors in indoor locations or similar areas in outdoor locations. 2. Liquid-tight floors in indoor locations or similar areas provided with liquid-tight raised or recessed sills or dikes. 3. Sumps and collection systems. 4. Other approved engineered systems. Except for surfacing, the floors, sills, dikes, sumps and collection systems shall be constructed of noncombustible material, and the liquid-tight seal shall be compatible with the material stored. When liquid-tight sills or dikes are provided, they are not required at perimeter openings having an open-grate trench across the opening that connects to an approved collection system. 15.04.401 Section 5004.2.2 amended and Table 5004.2.2 deleted - Secondary Containment for Hazardous Material Liquids and Solids. Table 5004.2.2 is deleted and Section 5004.2.2 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 20 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 20 5004.2.2 Secondary Containment for Hazardous Material Liquids and Solids. Buildings, rooms or areas used for the storage of hazardous materials liquids or solids shall be provided with secondary containment in accordance with this section. Amend Section 5004.2.2.2 as follows: 5004.2.2.2 Incompatible Materials. Incompatible materials shall be separated from each other in independent secondary containment systems. 15.04.410 Section 5005.4.4 amended - Emergency Alarm. Section 5005.4.4 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 5005.4.4 Emergency Alarm. When hazardous materials having a hazard ranking of 3 or 4 in accordance with NFPA 704, or toxic gases exceeding 10 cu. ft. and any amount of highly toxic compressed gases are transported through corridors or exit enclosures, there shall be an emergency telephone system, a local manual alarm station or an approved alarm-initiating device at not more than 150-foot (45,720 mm) intervals and at each exit and exit-access doorway throughout the transport route. The signal shall be relayed to an approved central, proprietary or remote station service or constantly attended on-site location and shall also initiate a local audible alarm. 15.04.420 Section 202 amended – addition of definition of “corrosive liquid.” The following definition is added to section 202of the California Fire Code to read as follows: CORROSIVE LIQUID. Corrosive liquid is a liquid which, when in contact with living tissue, will cause destruction or irreversible alteration of such tissue by chemical action. Examples include acidic, alkaline or caustic materials. Such material will be considered corrosive when the Ph is 2 or less or 12.5 or more, except for foodstuffs or medicine. Included are Department of Transportation and Title 22, California Code of Regulations, 66261.22 classed corrosives. 15.04.430 Section 5704.2.7.5.8 amended - Overfill Prevention. Section 3404.2.7.5.8 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 5704.2.7.5.8 Overfill Prevention. An approved means or method in accordance with Section 5704.2.9.6.6 shall be provided to prevent overfill of all Class I, II and IIIA liquid storage tanks. Storage tanks in refineries, bulk plants or terminals regulated by Sections 5706.4 or 5706.7 shall have overfill protection in accordance with API 2350. An approved means or method in accordance with Section 5704.2.9.7.6 shall be provided to prevent the overfilling of Class IIIB liquid storage tanks connected to fuel-burning equipment inside buildings. 15.04.440 Section 5704.2.7.5.9 added - Automatic Filling of Tanks. 21 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 21 Section 5704.2.7.5.9 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 5704.2.7.5.9 Automatic Filling of Tanks. Systems that automatically fill flammable or combustible liquid tanks shall be equipped with an approved overfill protection system that sends an alarm signal to a constantly attended location and immediately stops the filling of the tank. The alarm signal and automatic shutoff shall be tested on an annual basis and records of such testing shall be maintained on-site for a period of five (5) years. 15.04.450 Section 6001.3 added - Moderately Toxic Gases with a LC50 Equal to or Less Than 3000 Parts Per Million. Section 6001.3 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 6001.3 Moderately Toxic Gases With A LC50 Equal To Or Less Than 3000 Parts Per Million. Notwithstanding the hazard class definition in Section 3702, moderately toxic gases with an LC50 less than 3000 parts per million shall additionally comply with the requirements for toxic gases in Section 6004 of this code. 15.04.460 Section 6002.1 amended – add definition of “moderately toxic gas” and “maximum threshold quantity.” The following definition is added to section 6002.1 of the California Fire Code to read as follows: MODERATELY TOXIC GAS. Moderately toxic gas is a chemical or substance that has a median lethal concentration (LC50) in air more than 2000 parts per million but not more than 5000 parts per million by volume of gas or vapor, when administered by continuous inhalation for an hour, or less if death occurs within one hour, to albino rats weighing between 200 and 300 grams each. MAXIMUM THRESHOLD QUANTITY. Maximum Threshold Quantity (Max TQ) is the maximum quantity of a moderately toxic or toxic gas, which may be stored in a single vessel before a more stringent category of regulation is applied. The following equation shall be used to calculate the Max TQ: Max TQ (pounds) = LC50 (ppm) x 2 lb. 15.04.470 Section 6004 amended – Toxic gases including refrigerants. Section 3704 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: Section 6004 HIGHLY TOXIC, TOXIC AND MODERATELY TOXIC GASES INCLUDING THOSE USED AS REFRIGERANTS. 15.04.480 Sections 6004.1.4 through 6004.1.17 added - Controls for toxic gases. Sections 6004.1.4 through 6004.1.17 are added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 22 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 22 6004.1.4 Automatic Shut-Off Valve. An automatic shut-off valve, which is of a fail-safe to close design, shall be provided to shut off the supply of highly toxic gases for any of the following: 1. Activation of a manual fire alarm system. 2. Activation of the gas detection system. 3. Failure of emergency power. 4. Failure of primary containment. 5. Seismic activity. 6. Failure of required ventilation. 7. Manual activation at an approved remote location. 6004.1.5 Emergency Control Station. Signals from emergency equipment used for highly toxic gases shall be transmitted to an emergency control station or other approved monitoring station, which is continually staffed by trained personnel. 6004.1.6 Maximum Threshold Quantity. Toxic gases stored or used in quantities exceeding the maximum threshold quantity in a single vessel per control area or outdoor control area shall comply with the additional requirements for highly toxic gases of Section 6004 of this code. Moderately toxic gases stored or used in quantities exceeding the maximum threshold quantity in a single vessel per control area or outdoor control area shall comply with the additional requirements for toxic gases of Section 3704 of this code 6004.1.7 Reduced Flow Valve. All containers of materials other than lecture bottles containing Highly Toxic material and having a vapor pressure exceeding 29 psia shall be equipped with a reduced flow valve when available. If a reduced flow valve is not available, the container shall be used with a flow- limiting device. All flow limiting devices shall be part of the valve assembly and visible to the eye when possible; otherwise, they shall be installed as close as possible to the cylinder source. 6004.1.8 Annual Maintenance. All safety control systems at a facility shall be maintained in good working condition and tested not less frequently than annually. Maintenance and testing shall be performed by persons qualified to perform the maintenance and tests. Maintenance records and certifications shall be available to any representative of the Fire Department for inspection upon request. 6004.1.9 Fire Extinguishing Systems. Buildings and covered exterior areas for storage and use areas of materials regulated by this Chapter shall be protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system in accordance with NFPA 13. The 23 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 23 design of the sprinkler system for any room or area where highly toxic, toxic and moderately toxic gases are stored, handled or used shall be in accordance with Section 2704.5. 6004.1.10 Local Gas Shut Off. Manual activation controls shall be provided at locations near the point of use and near the source, as approved by the fire code official. The fire code official may require additional controls at other places, including, but not limited to, the entry to the building, storage or use areas, and emergency control stations. Manual activated shut-off valves shall be of a fail-safe- to-close design. 6004.1.11 Exhaust Ventilation Monitoring. For highly toxic gases and toxic gases exceeding threshold quantities, a continuous monitoring system shall be provided to assure that the required exhaust ventilation rate is maintained. The monitoring system shall initiate a local alarm. The alarm shall be both visual and audible and shall be designed to provide warning both inside and outside of the interior storage, use, or handling area. 6004.1.12 Emergency Response Plan. If the preparation of an emergency response plan for the facility is not required by any other law, responsible persons shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, and filed with the fire code official, a written emergency response plan. If the preparation of an emergency response plan is required by other law, a responsible person shall file a copy of the plan with the Fire Chief. 6004.1.13 Emergency Response Team. Responsible persons shall be designated the on-site emergency response team and trained to be liaison personnel for the Fire Department. These persons shall aid the Fire Department in preplanning emergency responses, identifying locations where regulated materials are stored, handled and used, and be familiar with the chemical nature of such material. An adequate number of personnel for each work shift shall be designated. 6004.1.14 Emergency Drills. Emergency drills of the on-site emergency response team shall be conducted on a regular basis but not less than once every three months. Records of drills conducted shall be maintained. 6004.1.15 Cylinder Leak Testing. Cylinders shall be tested for leaks immediately upon delivery and again immediately prior to departure. Testing shall be approved by the fire code official in accordance with appropriate nationally recognized industry standards and practices, if any. Appropriate remedial action shall be immediately undertaken when leaks are detected 6004.1.16 Inert Gas Purge System. Gas systems shall be provided with dedicated inert gas purge systems. A dedicated inert gas purge system may be 24 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 24 used to purge more than one gas, provided the gases are compatible. Purge gas systems inside buildings shall be located in an approved gas cabinet unless the system operates by vacuum demand. 6004.1.17 Seismic Shutoff Valve. An automatic seismic shut-off valve, which is of a fail-safe to close design, shall be provided to shutoff the supply of highly toxic, toxic and moderately toxic gases with an LC50 less than 3000 parts per million upon a seismic event within 5 seconds of a horizontal sinusoidal oscillation having a peak acceleration of 0.3G (1.47m/sec2) and a period of 0.4 seconds. 15.04.490 Section 6004.2 amended – Indoor storage and use of toxic gases. Section 6004.2 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 6004.2 Indoor Storage and Use. The indoor storage or use of highly toxic, toxic and moderately toxic compressed gases shall be in accordance with Sections 6004.1 through 3704.2.2.10.3.3. The threshold quantity for highly toxic, toxic and moderately toxic gases for indoor storage and use are set forth in Table 6004.2. Table 6004.2 Threshold Quantities for Highly Toxic, Toxic and Moderately Toxic Gases for Indoor Storage and Use Highly Toxic 0 Toxic 10 cubic feet Moderately Toxic 20 cubic feet 15.04.491 Sections 6004.2.1 through 6004.2.1.1 amended – Applicability of toxic gas regulations. Sections 6004.2.1 through 6004.2.1.1 of the California Fire Code are amended to read as follows: 6004.2.1 Applicability. The applicability of regulations governing the indoor storage and use of highly toxic, toxic, and moderately toxic compressed gases shall be as set forth in Sections 6004.2.1.1 through 6004.2.1.3. 6004.2.1.1 Quantities Not Exceeding the Maximum Allowable Quantity per Control Area. The indoor storage or use of highly toxic, and toxic and moderately toxic gases in amounts exceeding the threshold quantity per control area set forth in Table 6004.2 shall be in accordance with Sections 5001, 5003, 6001, 6004.1 and 6004.2. 15.04.492 Section 6004.2.2 amended – General requirements for use and storage of toxic gases. Section 6004.2.2 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 25 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 25 6004.2.2 General indoor requirements. The general requirements applicable to the indoor storage and use of highly toxic and toxic compressed gases shall be in accordance with Sections 6004.2.2.1 through 6004.2.2.10.3. Moderately toxic gases with an LC50 less than 3000 parts per million shall comply with the requirements for toxic gases in Sections 6004.2.2.1 through 6004.2.2.10.3 All other moderately toxic gases exceeding the threshold quantity shall comply with the requirements for toxic gases in Sections 6004.2.2.1 through 6004.2.2.7. 15.04.493 Section 6004.2.2.7 amended –Treatment systems. Section 3704.2.2.7 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 6004.2.2.7 Treatment Systems. The exhaust ventilation from gas cabinets, exhausted enclosures, gas rooms and local exhaust systems required in Section 6004.2.2.4 and 6004.2.2.5 shall be directed to a treatment system. The treatment system shall be utilized to handle the accidental release of gas and to process exhaust ventilation. The treatment system shall be designed in accordance with Sections 6004.2.2.7.1 through 6004.2.2.7.5 and Section 505 of the California Mechanical Code. Exceptions: 1.1 Highly toxic, toxic and moderately toxic gases storage. A treatment system is not required for cylinders, containers and tanks in storage when all of the following are provided: 1.2 Valve outlets are equipped with gas-tight outlet plug or caps. 1.3 Hand wheel-operated valves have handles secured to prevent movement. 1.4 Approved containment vessels or containment systems are provided in accordance with Section 6004.2.2.3. 15.04.494 Section 6004.2.2.10.1 amended – Alarms. Section 3704.2.2.10.1 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 6004.2.2.10.1. Alarms. The gas detection system shall initiate a local alarm and transmit a signal to a constantly attended control station when a short- term hazard condition is detected. The alarm shall be both visual and audible and shall provide warning both inside and outside the area where the gas is detected. The audible alarm shall be distinct from all other alarms. 15.04.500 Section 6004.3 amended – Outdoor storage and use. Section 6004.3 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 6004.3 Outdoor Storage and Use. The outdoor storage or use of highly toxic, 26 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 26 toxic and moderately toxic compressed gases shall be in accordance with Sections 6004.3.1 through 6004.3.4. The threshold quantity for highly toxic, toxic and moderately toxic gases for outdoor storage and use are set forth in Table 6004.3. Table 6004.3 Threshold Quantities for Highly Toxic, Toxic and Moderately Toxic Gases for Outdoor Storage and Use Highly Toxic 0 Toxic 10 cubic feet Moderately Toxic 20 cubic feet 15.04.501 Sections 6004.3.1 and 6004.3.1.1 amended – Applicability of toxic gas regulations. Sections 6004.3.1 and 6004.3.1.1 of the California Fire Code are amended to read as follows: 6004.3.1 Applicability. The applicability of regulations governing the outdoor storage and use of highly toxic, toxic, and moderately toxic compressed gases shall be as set forth in Sections 6004.3.1.1 through 6004.3.1.3. 6004.3.1.1 Quantities not exceeding the maximum allowable quantity per control area. The outdoor storage or use of highly toxic and toxic gases in amounts exceeding the threshold quantity per control area set forth in Table 6004.3 shall be in accordance with Sections 5001, 5003, 6001, 6004.1, and 6004.3. Moderately toxic gases with an LC50 less than 3000 parts per million in amounts exceeding the threshold quantity in Table 6004.3 shall comply with the requirements for toxic gases in Sections 5001, 5003, 6001, 6004.1 and 6004.3. Moderately toxic gases in amounts exceeding the threshold quantity in Table 6004.3 shall comply with the requirements for toxic gases in Sections 5001, 5003, 6001, 6004.1 and 6004.3.2.1 through 6004.3.2.5. 15.04.502 Section 6004.3.3 amended – Outdoor storage of tanks and cylinders. Section 6004.3.3 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 6004.3.3 Outdoor storage weather protection for portable tanks and cylinders. Weather protection in accordance with Section 5004.13 and this section shall be provided for portable tanks and cylinders located outdoors and not within gas cabinets or exhausted enclosures. The storage area shall be equipped with an approved automatic sprinkler system in accordance with Section 5004.5. 15.04.510 Section 6101.4 added – Storage and use of liquefied petroleum gas. 27 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 27 Section 6101.4 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 6101.4 Storage and use of liquefied petroleum gas. Storage and use of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) is prohibited within the City limits of Palo Alto where natural gas mains exist. EXCEPTION: The Fire Chief may permit the use of LPG for the following purposes and in the following manner: (1) A single tank of no more than 500-gallon (1892 L) water capacity in connection with portable equipment or devices which are approved for use with LPG. (2) As an emergency standby fuel supply for critical industrial, medical or research equipment. (3) A single tank of no more than 2000-gallon (7570 L) water capacity used in vehicle servicing operations installed in accordance with applicable safety standards. The storage of LPG shall conform to the provisions of applicable state and local Codes and ordinances. 15.04.515 Section 6405.3.1 added – Silane distribution systems automatic shutdown. Section 6405.3.1 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 6405.3.1 Silane distribution systems automatic shutdown. Silane distribution systems shall automatically shut down at the source upon activation of the gas detection system at levels above the alarm level and/or failure of the ventilation system for the silane distribution system. 15.04.520 Section 4902.1 amended – Definition of wildland-urban interface area. The definition of “wildland-urban interface fire area” in Section 4902.1 is amended to read as follows: WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE FIRE AREA is a geographical area identified by the state as a “Fire Hazard Severity Zone” in accordance with the Public Resources Code Sections 4201 through 4202 and Government Code Sections 51175 through 51189. In addition, within the limits of the City of Palo Alto, wildland-urban fire interface area shall include all areas west of Highway 280 and all other areas recommended as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone by the director of Cal Fire. 15.04.530 Sections 4903.1 through 4903.4 added – General Requirements for wildland- urban interface fire areas. Sections 4903.1 through 4903.4 are added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4903.1 General. When required by the fire code official, a fire protection plan shall be prepared. 4903.2 Content. The plan shall be based upon a site-specific wildfire risk 28 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 28 assessment that includes considerations of location, topography, aspect, flammable vegetation, climatic conditions and fire history. The plan shall address water supply, access, building ignition and fire-resistance factors, fire protection systems and equipment, defensible space and vegetation management. 4903.3 Cost. The cost of fire protection plan preparation and review shall be the responsibility of the applicant. 4903.4 Plan retention. The fire protection plan shall be retained by the fire code official. 15.04.540 Sections 4907.1 though 4907.2 amended - Defensible space. Sections 4070.1 through 4907.2 are added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4907.1 General. Persons owning, leasing, controlling, operating or maintaining buildings or structures in, upon or adjoining the Wildland-Urban Interface Fire Area and persons owning, leasing or controlling land adjacent to such buildings or structures, shall at all times: 1. Maintain an effective defensible space by removing and clearing away flammable vegetation and combustible growth from areas within 30 feet (9144 mm) of such buildings or structures. Exception: Single specimens of trees, ornamental shrubbery or similar plants used as ground covers, provided that they do not form a means of rapidly transmitting fire from the native growth to any structure. 2. Maintain additional effective defensible space by removing brush, flammable vegetation and combustible growth located 30 feet to 100 feet (9144 mm to 30480 mm) from such buildings or structures, when required by the fire code official due to steepness of terrain or other conditions that would cause a defensible space of only 30 feet (9144 mm) to be insufficient. Exception: Grass and other vegetation located more than 30 feet (9144 mm) from buildings or structures and less than 18 inches (457 mm) in height above the ground need not be removed where necessary to stabilize the soil and prevent erosion. 3. Remove portions of trees, which extend within 10 feet (3048 mm) of the outlet of a chimney. 4. Maintain trees adjacent to or overhanging a building free of deadwood. 5. Maintain the roof of a structure free of leaves, needles or other dead vegetative growth. 6. Remove flammable vegetation a minimum of 10 feet around liquefied petroleum 29 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 29 gas tanks/containers. 7. Firewood and combustible materials shall not be stored in unenclosed spaces beneath buildings or structures, or on decks or under eaves, canopies or other projections or overhangs. The storage of firewood and combustible material within the defensible space shall be located a minimum of 30 feet (6096 mm) from structures and separated from the crown of trees by a minimum horizontal distance of 15 feet (4572 mm). Exception: Firewood and combustible materials not for consumption on the premises shall be stored as approved by the fire code official. 8. Clear areas within 10 feet (3048 mm) of fire apparatus access roads and driveways to of non-fire-resistive vegetation growth. Exception: Grass and other vegetation located more than 30 feet (9144 mm) from buildings or structures and less than 18 inches (457 mm) in height above the ground need not be removed where necessary to stabilize the soil and prevent erosion. 4907.2 Corrective Actions. The executive body is authorized to instruct the fire code official to give notice to the owner of the property upon which conditions regulated by Section 4907.1 exist to correct such conditions. If the owner fails to correct such conditions, the executive body is authorized to cause the same to be done and make the expense of such correction a lien upon the property where such condition exists. 15.04.550 Sections 4914 through 4914.3 added – Access Requirements for wildland-urban interface fire areas. Section 4914 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4914 ACCESS 4914.1 General. Buildings and structures, or portions thereof, hereafter constructed or relocated into or within wildland-urban interface areas shall be provided with fire apparatus access in accordance with this chapter. 4914.2 Driveways. Driveways with an all-weather surface shall be provided when any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of a building is located more than 150 feet (45 720 mm) from a fire apparatus access road. Driveways shall provide a minimum unobstructed width of 12 feet (3658 mm) and a minimum unobstructed height of 13 feet 6 inches (4115 mm). Driveways in excess of 150 feet (45 720 mm) in length shall be provided with turnarounds. Driveways in excess of 200 feet (60960 mm) in length and less than 20 feet (6096 mm) in width shall be provided with turnouts in addition to turnarounds. An all-weather surface shall be any surface material acceptable to the code official. 30 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 30 A driveway shall not serve in excess of two dwelling units without meeting the requirements for an access road in accordance with this chapter. Driveway turnarounds shall be in accordance with Fire Department Standards. Driveways that connect with a road or roads at more than one point may be considered as having a turnaround if all changes of direction meet the radii requirements for driveway turnarounds. Driveway turnouts shall be an all-weather road surface at least 10 feet (3048 mm) wide and 30 feet (9144 mm) long. Driveway turnouts shall be located as required by the code official. Vehicle load limits shall be posted at both entrances to bridges on driveways and private roads. Design loads for bridges shall be established by the code official. 4914.3 Fire apparatus access roads. Fire apparatus access roads shall be all weather roads with a minimum width of 20 feet (6096 mm) and a clear height of 13 feet 6 inches (4115 mm); and shall be designed in accordance with Fire Department Standards. Dead-end roads in excess of 150 feet (45 720 mm) in length shall be provided with turnarounds designed in accordance with Fire Department Standards. An all-weather road surface shall be any surface material acceptable to the code official. 15.04.560 Sections 4915 through 4915.9 added – Water supply requirements for wildland- urban interface fire areas. Section 4915 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4915 WATER SUPPLY 4915.1 General. Buildings and structures, or portions thereof, hereafter constructed or relocated into or within wildland-urban interface areas shall be provided with fire protection water supplies in accordance with this chapter. Exception: Buildings containing only private garages, carports, sheds and agricultural buildings with a building area of not more than 500 square feet (56 m2). 4915.2 Water sources. The point at which a water source is available for Fire Department use shall be located not more than 600 feet from all portions of the exterior walls of the building and be approved by the code official. The distance shall be measured along an unobstructed line of travel. Water sources shall have a minimum usable water volume as determined by the adequate water supply needs in accordance with Section 4915.4. This water 31 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 31 source shall be equipped with an approved hydrant. The water source shall be provided and maintained by a recognized water purveyor, mutual water company or water pumped from a well. The design, construction, location, water level maintenance, access, and access maintenance of man-made water sources shall be approved by the code official. 4915.3 Hydrants. All hydrants shall be designed and constructed in accordance with nationally recognized standards. The location and access shall be approved by the code official. 4915.4 Adequate water supply. Adequate fire protection water supplies shall be as follows: 1. One and two-family dwellings. The required fire protection water supply for one- and two- family dwellings shall be in accordance with Appendix B. Exception: The water supply duration need not exceed 30 minutes for structures not exceeding 2,400 sq. ft. 2. Buildings other than one- and two-family dwellings. The water supply required for buildings other than one-and two-family dwellings shall be in accordance with Appendix B. Exception: The water supply duration need not exceed 2 hours. 4915.5 Obstructions. Access to all water sources required by this code shall be unobstructed at all times. The code official shall not be deterred or hindered from gaining immediate access to water source equipment, fire protection equipment or hydrants. 4915.6 Identification. Water sources, hydrants and fire protection equipment shall be clearly identified in a manner approved by the code official to identify location and to prevent obstruction by parking and other obstructions. 4915.7 Testing and maintenance. Water sources, hydrants and other fire protection equipment required by this code shall be subject to periodic tests as required by the code official. All such equipment installed under the provisions of this code shall be maintained in an operative condition at all times and shall be repaired or replaced where defective. Additions, repairs, alterations and servicing of such fire protection equipment and resources shall be in accordance with approved standards. 4915.8 Clearance of fuel. Defensible space shall be provided around water tank structures, water supply pumps and pump houses in accordance with Section 4907. 4915.9 Standby power. Stationary water supply facilities within the wildland- 32 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 32 urban interface area dependent on electrical power to meet adequate water supply demands shall provide standby power systems in accordance with the Electrical Code to ensure that an uninterrupted water supply is maintained. The standby power source shall be capable of providing power for a minimum of two hours. Exceptions: 1. When approved by the code official, a standby power supply is not required where the primary power service to the stationary water supply facility is underground. 2. A standby power supply is not required where the stationary water supply facility serves no more than one single-family dwelling. 15.04.570 Sections 4916 through 4916.3 added – Fire sprinkler requirements for wildland- urban interface fire areas. Section 4916 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4916 AUTOMATIC FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS 4916.1 General. Buildings and structures located in wildland-urban interface areas shall be provided with automatic fire sprinkler protection in accordance with this chapter. 4916.2 New buildings. An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all new buildings located in the wildland-urban interface area. Exception: Accessory structures to single-family residences that are non- residential and that have a building area of 500 square feet or less. 4916.3 Existing buildings. An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be provided throughout all existing buildings located in the wildland-urban interface area when modifications are made that increase the building area. Exception: One-time additions to existing buildings made after January 1, 1994 that do not exceed 500 square feet in building area. 15.04.580 Sections 4917 through 4917.3.5 added – General Requirements for wildland- urban interface fire areas. Sections 4917 through 4917.3.5 are added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4917 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SUPPRESSION AND CONTROL 4917.1 General 4917.1.1 Scope. The provisions of this chapter establish general requirements applicable to new and existing properties located within wildland-urban interface areas. 33 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 33 4917.1.2 Objective. The objective of this appendix is to provide necessary fire- protection measures to reduce the threat of wildfire in a wildland-urban interface area and improve the capability of controlling such fires. 4917.2 Vegetation Control 4917.2.1 General. Vegetation control shall comply with Sections 4917.2.2 through 4917.2.5. 4917.2.2 Maintenance of Defensible Space 4917.2.2.1 General. Defensible spaces required by 4907 shall be maintained in accordance with Section 4917.2.2. 4917.2.2.2 Modified Area. Non-fire-resistive vegetation or growth shall be kept clear of buildings or structures, in accordance with Section 4907, in such a manner as to provide a clear area for fire suppression operations. 4917.2.2.3 Responsibility. Persons owning, leasing, controlling, operating or maintaining buildings or structures are responsible for maintenance of defensible spaces. Maintenance of the defensible space shall include modifying or removing nonfire-resistive vegetation and keeping leaves, needles and other dead vegetative material regularly removed from roofs of buildings and structures. 4917.2.2.4 Trees. Tree crowns extending to within 10 feet (3048 mm) of any structure shall be pruned to maintain a minimum horizontal clearance of 10 feet (3048 mm). Tree crowns within the defensible space shall be pruned to remove limbs located less than 6 feet (1829 mm) above the ground surface adjacent to the trees. Portions of tree crowns that extend within 10 feet (3048 mm) of the outlet of a chimney shall be pruned to maintain a minimum horizontal clearance of 10 feet (3048 mm). Deadwood and litter shall be regularly removed from trees. 4917.2.3 Clearance Of Brush Or Vegetative Growth From Roadways. The code official is authorized to require areas within 10 feet (3048 mm) on each side of portions of fire apparatus access roads and driveways to be cleared of non-fire- resistive vegetation growth. Exception: Single specimens of trees, ornamental vegetative fuels or cultivated ground cover, such as green grass, ivy, succulents or similar plants used as ground cover, provided they do not forma means of readily transmitting fire. 4917.2.4 Clearance of brush and vegetative growth from electrical transmission 34 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 34 and distribution lines. 4917.2.4.1 General. Clearance of brush and vegetative growth from electrical transmission and distribution lines shall be in accordance with Section 4917.2.4. Exception: Section 4917.2.4 does not authorize persons not having legal right of entry to enter on or damage the property of others without consent of the owner. 4917.2.4.2 Support clearance. Persons owning, controlling, operating or maintaining electrical transmission or distribution lines shall have an approved program in place that identifies poles or towers with equipment and hardware types that have a history of becoming an ignition source, and provides a combustible free space consisting of a clearing of not less than 10 feet (3048 mm) in each direction from the outer circumference of such pole or tower during such periods of time as designated by the code official. Exception: Lines used exclusively as telephone, telegraph, messenger call, alarm transmission or other lines classed as communication circuits by a public utility. 4917.2.4.3 Electrical distribution and transmission line clearances. 4917.2.4.3.1 General. Clearances between vegetation and electrical lines shall be in accordance with 4917.2.4.3. 4917.2.4.3.2 Trimming clearance. At the time of trimming, clearances not less than those established by Table 4917.2.4.3.2 shall be provided. The radial clearances shown below are minimum clearances that shall be established, at time of trimming, between the vegetation and the energized conductors and associated live parts. Table 4917.2.4.3.2 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: TABLE 4917.2.4.3.2 MINIMUM CLEARANCES BETWEEN VEGETATION AND ELECTRICAL LINES AT TIME OF TRIMMING LINE VOLTAGE MINIMUM RADIAL CLEARANCE FROM CONDUCTOR (feet) 2,400-72,000 4 72,001-110,000 6 110,001-300,000 10 300,001 or more 15 For SI: 1 foot = 304.8 mm. 35 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 35 Exception: The code official is authorized to establish minimum clearances different than those specified by Table 4917.2.4.3.2 when evidence substantiating such other clearances is submitted to and approved by the code official. 4917.2.4.3.3 Minimum Clearance To Be Maintained. Clearances not less than those established by Table 4917.2.4.3.3 shall be maintained during such periods of time as designated by the code official. The site-specific clearance achieved, at time of pruning, shall vary based on species growth rates, the utility company- specific trim cycle, the potential line sway due to wind, line sag due to electrical loading and ambient temperature and the tree’s location in proximity to the high voltage lines. Exception: The code official is authorized to establish minimum clearances different than those specified by 4917.2.4.3.3.3 when evidence substantiating such other clearances is submitted to and approved by the code official. Table 4917.2.4.3.3 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: TABLE 4917.2.4.3.3 MINIMUM CLEARANCES BETWEEN VEGETATION AND ELECTRICAL LINES TO BE MAINTAINED LINE VOLTAGE MINIMUM CLEARANCE (inches) 750-35,000 6 35,001-60,000 12 60,001-115,000 19 115,001-230,000 30.5 230,001-500,000 115 For SI: 1 inch = 25.4 mm. 4917.2.4.3.4 Electrical Power Line Emergencies. During emergencies, the utility shall perform the required work to the extent necessary to clear the hazard. An emergency can include situations such as trees falling into power lines, or trees in violation of Table 4917.2.3.3.3. 4917.2.5 Correction Of Condition. The fire code official is authorized to give notice to the owner of the property on which conditions regulated by Section 4917.2 exist to correct such conditions. If the owner fails to correct such conditions, the legislative body of the jurisdiction is authorized to cause the same to be done and make the expense of such correction a lien on the property where such condition exists. 4917.3 ACCESS RESTRICTIONS 4917.3.1 Restricted Entry To Public Lands. The fire code official is authorized to 36 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 36 determine and publicly announce when wildland-urban interface areas shall be closed to entry and when such areas shall again be opened to entry. Entry on and occupation of wildland-urban interface areas, except public roadways, inhabited areas or established trails and campsites that have not been closed during such time when the wildland-urban interface area is closed to entry, is prohibited. Exceptions: 1. Residents and owners of private property within wildland-urban interface areas and their invitees and guests going to or being on their lands. 2. Entry, in the course of duty, by peace or police officers, and other duly authorized public officers, members of a fire department and members of the Wildland Firefighting Service. 4917.3.2 Trespassing On Posted Private Property. 4917.3.2.1 General. When the fire code official determines that a specific area within a wildland-urban interface area presents an exceptional and continuing fire danger because of the density of natural growth, difficulty of terrain, proximity to structures or accessibility to the public, such areas shall be restricted or closed until changed conditions warrant termination of such restriction or closure. Such areas shall be posted in accordance with Section 4917.3.2.2. 4917.3.2.2 Signs. Approved signs prohibiting entry by unauthorized persons and referring to this code shall be placed on every closed area. 4917.3.2.3 Trespassing. Entering and remaining within areas closed and posted is prohibited. Exception: Owners and occupiers of private or public property within closed and posted areas; their guests or invitees; authorized persons engaged in the operation and maintenance of necessary utilities such as electrical power, gas, telephone, water and sewer; and local, state and federal public officers and their authorized agents acting in the course of duty. 4917.3.3 Use Of Fire Roads And Defensible Space. Motorcycles, motor scooters and motor vehicles shall not be driven or parked on, and trespassing is prohibited on, fire roads or defensible space beyond the point where travel is restricted by a cable, gate or sign, without the permission of the property owners. Vehicles shall not be parked in a manner that obstructs the entrance to a fire road or defensible space. Exception: Public officers acting within their scope of duty. Radio and television aerials, guy wires thereto, and other obstructions shall not be installed or maintained on fire roads or defensible spaces, unless located 16 feet (4877 mm) or more above such fire road or defensible space. 4917.3.4 Use of Motorcycles, Motor Scooters, Ultra light Aircraft And Motor Vehicles. Motorcycles, motor scooters, ultra light aircraft and motor vehicles 37 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 37 shall not be operated within wildland-urban interface areas, without a permit by the code official, except on clearly established public or private roads. Permission from the property owner shall be presented when requesting a permit. 4917.3.5 Tampering With Locks, Barricades, Signs and Address Markers. Locks, barricades, seals, cables, signs and address markers installed within wildland- urban interface areas, by or under the control of the code official, shall not be tampered with, mutilated, destroyed or removed. Gates, doors, barriers and locks installed by or under the control of the code official shall not be unlocked. 15.04.584 Sections 4917.4 through 4917.4.10 added – Ignition source control requirements for wildland-urban interface fire areas. Sections 4917.4 through 4917.4.10 are added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4917.4 IGNITION SOURCE CONTROL 4917.4.1 General. Ignition sources shall be in accordance with Section 4917.4. 4917.4.2 Objective. Regulations in this section are intended to provide the minimum requirements to prevent the occurrence of wildfires. 4917.4.3 Clearance From Ignition Sources. Clearance between ignition sources and grass, brush or other combustible materials shall be maintained a minimum of 30 feet (9144 mm). 4917.4.4 Smoking. When required by the fire code official, signs shall be posted stating NO SMOKING. No person shall smoke within 15 feet (4572 mm) of combustible materials or non-fire-resistive vegetation. Exception: Places of habitation or in the boundaries of established smoking areas or campsites as designated by the fire code official. 4917.4.5 Equipment and Devices Generating Heat, Sparks Or Open Flames. Equipment and devices generating heat, sparks or open flames capable of igniting nearby combustibles shall not be used in wildland-urban interface areas without a permit from the code official. Exception: Use of approved equipment in habitated premises or designated campsites that are a minimum of 30 feet (9144 mm) from grass-, grain-, brush- or forest-covered areas. 4917.4.6 Fireworks. Fireworks shall not be used or possessed in wildland- urban interface areas. 38 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 38 4917.4.7 Outdoor Fires. 4917.4.7.1 General. No person shall build, ignite or maintain any outdoor fire of any kind for any purpose in or on any wildland-urban interface area, except by the authority of a written permit from the code official. Exception: Outdoor fires within inhabited premises or designated campsites where such fires are in a permanent barbecue, portable barbecue, outdoor fireplace or grill and are a minimum of 30 feet (9144 mm) from any combustible material or nonfire-resistive vegetation. 4917.4.7.2 Permits. Permits shall incorporate such terms and conditions that will reasonably safeguard public safety and property. Outdoor fires shall not be built, ignited or maintained in or on hazardous fire areas under the following conditions: 1. When high winds are blowing, 2. When a person 17 years old or over is not present at all times to watch and tend such fire, or 3. When a public announcement is made that open burning is prohibited. 4917.4.7.3 Restrictions. No person shall use a permanent barbecue, portable barbecue, outdoor fireplace or grill for the disposal of rubbish, trash or combustible waste material. 4917.4.8 Outdoor Fireplaces, Permanent Barbecues And Grills. Outdoor fireplaces, permanent barbecues and grills shall not be built, installed or maintained in wildland-urban interface areas without approval of the fire code official. Outdoor fireplaces, permanent barbecues and grills shall be maintained in good repair and in a safe condition at all times. Openings in such appliances shall be provided with an approved spark arrestor, screen or door. Exception: When approved by the fire code official, unprotected openings in barbecues and grills necessary for proper functioning. 4917.4.9 Reckless Behavior. The fire code official is authorized to stop any actions of a person or persons if the official determines that the action is reckless and could result in an ignition of fire or spread of fire. 4917.4.10 Planting Vegetation Under Or Adjacent To Energized Electrical Lines. No vegetation shall be planted under or adjacent to energized power lines that, at maturity, shall grow within 10 feet (3048 mm) of the energized conductors. 15.04.585 Section 4917.5 added – Storage control requirements for wildland-urban interface 39 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 39 fire areas. Section 4917.5 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4917.5 CONTROL OF STORAGE 4917.5.1 General. In addition to the requirements of the California Fire Code, storage and use of the materials shall be in accordance with Section 4917.5. 4917.5.2 Hazardous materials. Hazardous materials in excess of 10 gallons (37.8 L) of liquid, 200 cubic feet (5.66 m 3) of gas, or 10 pounds (4.54 kg) of solids require a permit and shall comply with nationally recognized standards for storage and use. 4917.5.2.1 Liquefied Petroleum Gas Installations 4917.5.2.1.1 General. The storage of liquefied petroleum gas (LP gas) and the installation and maintenance of pertinent equipment shall be in accordance with the California Fire Code and recognized standards. 4917.5.2.1.2 Location of containers. LP-gas containers shall be located within the defensible space in accordance with the California Fire Code. 4917.5.3 Explosives. Explosives shall not be possessed, kept, stored, sold, offered for sale, given away, used, discharged, transported or disposed of within wildland- urban interface areas. 4917.5.4 Combustible Materials. 4917.5.4.1 General. Outside storage of combustible materials such as, but not limited to, wood, rubber tires, building materials or paper products shall comply with the other applicable sections of this code and this section. 4917.5.4.2 Individual Piles. Individual piles shall not exceed 5,000 square feet (465 m 2) of contiguous area. Piles shall not exceed 50,000 cubic feet (1416 m 3) in volume or 10 feet (3048 mm) in height. 4917.5.4.3 Separation. A clear space of at least 40 feet (12 192 mm) shall be provided between piles. The clear space shall not contain combustible material or nonfire-resistive vegetation. 4917.5.4.4 Storage of Firewood and Combustible Materials 4917.5.4.4.1 General. Firewood and combustible material shall not be stored in unenclosed spaces beneath buildings or structures, or on decks or under 40 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 40 eaves, canopies or other projections or overhangs. When required by the code official, storage of firewood and combustible material stored in the defensible space shall be located a minimum of 20 feet (6096 mm) from structures and separated from the crown of trees by a minimum horizontal distance of 15 feet (4572 mm). 4917.5.4.4.2 Storage For Off-Site Use. Firewood and combustible materials not for consumption on the premises shall be stored so as to not pose a hazard. 15.04.586 Section 4917.6 added –Dumping in wildland-urban interface areas. Section 4917.6 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4917.6 DUMPING 4917.6.1 Waste Material. Waste material shall not be placed, deposited or dumped in wildland-urban interface areas, or in, on or along trails, roadways or highways or against structures in wildland-urban interface areas. Exception: Approved public and approved private dumping areas. 4917.6.2 Ashes And Coals. Ashes and coals shall not be placed, deposited or dumped in or on wildland-urban interface areas. Exceptions: 1. In the hearth of an established fire pit, camp stove or fireplace. 2. In a noncombustible container with a tight fitting lid, which is kept or maintained in a safe location not less than 10 feet (3048 mm) from nonfire- resistive vegetation or structures. 3. Where such ashes or coals are buried and covered with 1 foot (305 mm) of mineral earth not less than 25 feet (7620 mm) from nonfire-resistive vegetation or structures. 15.04.587 Section 4917.7 added - Protection Of Pumps And Water Storage Facilities. Section 4917.7 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4917.7 PROTECTION OF PUMPS AND WATER STORAGE FACILITIES 4917.7.1 General. The reliability of the water supply shall be in accordance with Section 4917.7. 4917.7.2 Objective. The intent of this section is to increase the reliability of water storage and pumping facilities and to protect such systems against loss from intrusion by fire. 4917.7.3 Fuel Modification Area. Water storage and pumping facilities shall be provided with a defensible space of not less than 30 feet (9144 mm) clear of non-fire- resistive vegetation or growth around and adjacent to such facilities. 41 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 41 Persons owning, controlling, operating or maintaining water storage and pumping systems requiring this defensible space are responsible for clearing and removing nonfire-resistive vegetation and maintaining the defensible space on the property owned, leased or controlled by said person. 4917.7.4 Trees. Portions of trees that extend to within 30 feet (9144 mm) of combustible portions of water storage and pumping facilities shall be removed. 4917.7.5 Protection of Electrical Power Supplies. When electrical pumps are used to provide the required water supply, such pumps shall be connected to a standby power source to automatically maintain electrical power in the event of power loss. The standby power source shall be capable of providing power for a minimum of two hours in accordance with the Electrical Code. Exception: A standby power source is not required where the primary power service to pumps are underground as approved by the code official. 15.04.588 Section 4917.8 added – Land use limitations in wildland-urban interface fire areas. Section 4917.8 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 4917.8 LAND USE LIMITATIONS 4917.8.1 General. Temporary fairs, carnivals, public exhibitions and similar uses must comply with all other provisions of this code in addition to enhanced ingress and egress requirements. 4917.8.2 Objective. The increased public use of land or structures in wildland- urban interface areas also increases the potential threat to life safety. The provisions of this section are intended to reduce that threat. 4917.8.3 Permits. Temporary fairs, carnivals, public exhibitions or similar uses shall not be allowed in a designated wildland-urban interface area, except by permit from the code official. Permits shall incorporate such terms and conditions that will reasonably safeguard public safety and property. 15.04.590 Addition of Chapter 19 – Life safety requirements for existing high rise buildings. Chapter 19 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: CHAPTER 19 LIFE SAFETY REQUIREMENTS FOR EXISTING HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS SECTION 1901 42 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 42 GENERAL 1901.1 Purpose. The purpose of this appendix is to provide a reasonable degree of safety to persons occupying existing high-rise buildings by requiring minimum standards for exit corridors, exit stairways and elevator shafts, monitored alarm systems and emergency plans. 1901.2 Scope. The requirements shall apply to all high-rise buildings constructed prior to January 1, 1994 which have floors used for human occupancy located more than 75 feet above the lowest level of approved fire department vehicle access or other physical configuration that qualifies a building as high rise by local ordinance. 1901.3 Permits Required. 1. Building permits shall be obtained as required by the Building Code. 2. Not less than 30 days prior to submitting plans for a building permit, a preplan review meeting shall be held, including the owner’s design team, building official and the chief, to determine the adequacy of the life-safety emergency systems concept for the building. The life-safety emergency systems shall be reflected on the plans for the building and become a permanent part of the building department’s records. The building official and the chief may require sufficient documentation, based upon engineering analysis, that the concept meets the intent of nationally recognized good practices and such guidelines as the building official and chief have published. 1901.4 Enforcement. The provisions of this appendix shall be enforced by the chief. 1901.5 Compliance. All buildings shall be made to conform with the requirements of Section 1902 within the following time periods: 1. Subsections 1902.11, 1902.12 and 1902.13 shall be completed within six months of the adoption date of this Chapter. 2. The owners of buildings affected by this appendix or their representatives shall submit plans to the building official showing intended methods of compliance with subsections 1902.1 through 1902.10 on or before June 30, 1990. 3. Subsections 1902.5, 1902.8, and 1902.9 shall be completed on or before January 1, 1991. 4. Subsections 1902.1, 1902.2, 1902.3, 1902.4, 1902.5, 1902.6 and 1902.8 shall 43 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 43 be completed on or before April l, 1994. Note: Regardless of any specific compliance date stipulated above, a building shall not be deemed in violation of this Chapter until such date has expired. 1901.6 Exceptions. The Fire Chief may grant certain exceptions to the requirements of this Chapter, under the following circumstances: 1. The Fire Chief may allow the use of alternate materials or methods of compliance upon a finding that the use of such alternate materials or methods of compliance will provide levels of fire and life safety equal to or greater than those otherwise required in this Chapter. 2. The Fire Chief may waive individual requirements of this Chapter or grant reasonable extensions of time in which to comply with said requirements upon a finding that such requirements are not practical or possible, or pose an unreasonable hardship. The determination of whether compliance is not practical or possible, or an unreasonable hardship, shall be based upon an overall evaluation of the following factors: (i) The amount of fire and life safety that would be lost if the requirements were waived or deferred; (ii) The cost of complying with the requirements; (iii) The financial hardship and disruption to occupants and users of the building in question; (iv) The type and nature of the use of the building in question; and (v) Such other factors as in the judgment of Fire Chief will result in providing a reasonable degree of safety as required by this Uniform Fire Code, to persons occupying or using the building. 3. The Fire Chief may grant reasonable extensions of time, up to two additional years, within which to comply with the requirements of subsections 1902.1, 1902.2, 1902.3, 1902.4, 1902.6, 1902.7 and 1902.9 of this Chapter, upon making a finding of hardship based upon the factors set forth in subsection (2) of this subsection 1901.6(f), or upon the agreement of the building owner that within said time, the building will be 100% sprinklered, in accordance with NFPA 13. 4. The Fire Chief shall prepare written notice of determination to grant or not to grant exceptions pursuant to this paragraph. The Fire Chief shall distribute the notice of determination in the next available council packet; shall mail 44 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 44 notice, postage prepaid, to the affected building owner; and shall publish such notice once in a newspaper of general circulation not later than five (5) days after the distribution of the notice on the city council packet. The notice shall state the address and general description of the subject property and the nature of the determination. The notice shall also state that the details regarding the decision will be available in the Fire Chief’s office, and that an appeal may be taken within ten (10) days after the date of publication of the notice. 1901.7 Appeals. 1. Any person aggrieved or affected by any determination made by the Fire Chief pursuant to subsection 1901.6 of this Chapter may appeal that determination in accordance with this subsection 1901.7. 2. An appeal from the decision of the Fire Chief shall be initiated within ten (10) days after the publication of notice, as provided in Paragraph 1901.6, by the filing at the office of the City Manager of a written, dated appeal, signed by all parties named as appellants, stating the names and official mailing addresses of all appellant(s) participating in the appeal and their relationship to the matter being appealed. 3. The appeal shall contain a statement of all facts supporting the contention of the appellant(s) and all reasons why the decision of the Fire Chief should be reversed, modified or set aside. 4. The appeal shall be accompanied by a fee, as set forth in the Municipal Fee Schedule for Fire Department appeals. 5. Upon receipt of any appeal, the City Manager or designee shall set a date for a hearing. Such hearing shall be held within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the appeal. A notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given to the appellant(s) by the City Manager or designee in writing. The notice shall be mailed, postage prepaid, addressed to the appellant(s) at the address(es) listed on the appeal, or it shall be delivered to the appellant(s) personally, at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing date. If the appellant is other than the building owner, the building owner shall also be notified of the hearing. 6. The City Manager or designee (other than any personnel from the Fire Department), shall hear the appeal. At the time and place set for the hearing, the City Manager or designee shall receive all testimonial, documentary and tangible evidence bearing on the issues. The City Manager or designee may continue the hearing from time to time. The City Manager or designee may approve, modify or disapprove the 45 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 45 determination of the Fire Chief. Within three (3) working days of the close of the hearing, the City Manager or designee shall render a decision in writing. The decision shall be mailed, postage prepaid, to the appellant(s) at the address(es) listed on the appeal or delivered to the appellant(s) personally. If the appellant is other than the building owner, the building owner shall also be notified of the decision. 7. The decision of the City Manager or designee shall be final. 1901.8 Penalty. Failure to comply with subsection (e) above is unlawful and any person, firm or corporation, whether as principal, agent, employee or otherwise, violating any provisions of the above requirements shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Such person, firm or corporation is guilty of a separate offense for each and every day during any portion of which any violation of these requirements is committed, continued or permitted by such person, firm or corporation. 1901.9 Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this appendix be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of these requirements. SECTION 5002 REQUIREMENTS 1902.1 Automatic Sprinklers. All required exit corridors, stairwells, elevator lobbies, public assembly areas occupied by 100 or more persons and commercial kitchens shall be protected by an approved automatic sprinkler system meeting the design criteria of NFPA 13. One sprinkler head shall be provided on the room side of every corridor opening. Exception: Sprinkler heads may be omitted in stairwells of noncombustible construction. 1902.2 Corridor Doors. All doors opening into required exit corridors shall be in conformance with the Building Code. Exception: Existing 1-3/8 inch bonded, solid-core wood doors, if equipped with self-closures, need not be replaced. 1902.3 Corridor Openings. All openings into required exit corridor, other than doors, shall be in conformance with the Building Code. 1902.4 Exit Stairways. All high-rise buildings shall have a minimum of two approved exit stairways. The Fire Chief may allow a minimum of one approved stairway upon a finding that additional automatic sprinkler protection is provided that meets the spirit of this Appendix and provides at least the equivalent protection of that prescribed in this Appendix. 46 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 46 1902.5 Exit Stairwell Doors. All stairwell doors which are to be locked from the stairwell side shall automatically unlock, without unlatching, when the alarm system activates. 1902.6 Elevator Lobby Separation. All elevators on all floors shall open into elevator lobbies which are separated from the remainder of the building as is required for corridor construction in the Building Code. The Fire Chief may waive this requirement upon a finding that additional automatic sprinkler protection is provided that meets the spirit of this Appendix and provides at least the equivalent protection of that prescribed in this Appendix. 1902.7 Elevator Recall. All automatic elevators shall be equipped for emergency operation in conformance with the Building Code. 1902.8 Fire Alarm Systems. All high-rise buildings shall have an alarm system meeting the requirements of this section. All required fire alarm systems shall be designed to be heard clearly by all occupants within the building but in no case shall it be less than 60 dB, or 15 dB above ambient noise levels, as measured in the A scale, within all habitable areas of the building. All required alarm systems shall operate automatically by smoke or products of combustion detectors and by manual pull stations as approved by the chief. 1902.9 Fire Alarm Supervision. All fire alarm systems shall be connected to an approved central station or the local fire department dispatch office in conformance with the Fire Code as approved by the chief. 1902.10 Exit Illumination. Exits shall be illuminated at any time the building is occupied with lights having an intensity of not less than 1 foot-candle at floor level. Such lighting shall have an independent alternate source of supply such as an emergency battery pack. 1902.11 Emergency Plan. The management for all buildings shall establish and maintain a written fire and life safety emergency plan which has been approved by the chief. The chief shall develop written criteria and guidelines upon which all plans shall be based. 1902.12 Posting of Emergency Plan and Exit Plans. Copies of the emergency plan and exiting plans (including elevator and stairway placarding) shall be posted in locations approved by the chief. 1902.13 Fire Drills. The management of all buildings shall conduct fire drills for their staff and employees at least every 120 days. The fire department must be advised of such drills at least 24 hours in advance. A written record of 47 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 47 each drill shall be maintained in the building management office and made available to the fire department for review. 15.05 INTERNATIONAL FIRE CODE 15.05.10 Adoption of Chapters 3, 4, 5, 8, 25, and 56 of the International Fire Code. Chapters 3, 4, 5, 8, 25, and 56 of the International Fire Code, 2012 Edition, are adopted, as herein amended. One copy of the International Fire Code is on file and open to public inspection in the office of the city clerk. Three copies of the secondary codes set forth within the International Fire Code, and the amendments set forth in this chapter, are on file and open to public inspection in the fire department administrative office. Whenever the phrase “International Fire Code” appears in this code or in any ordinance of the city, such phrase shall be deemed and construed to refer to and apply to the “International Fire Code, 2009 Edition” and this chapter. 15.05.015 Section 304.1.2.1 added – Weed and Combustible Debris removal. Section 304.1.2.1 is added to the International Fire Code to read as follows: 304.1.2.1 Weed and Combustible Debris removal. The fire chief may cause the removal of weeds or combustible debris on properties in which further delay of such removal would promote a hazard. The chief may also at his option bill subject properties for any and all expenses related to the removal or as outlined in Chapter 8.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. 15.05.020 Section 308.3.5 deleted – Religious Ceremonies. Section 308.3.5 of the International Fire Code is deleted. 15.05.030 Sections 311.5 through 311.5.3 deleted – Vacant premises. Sections 311.5 through 311.5.3 of the International Fire Code are deleted. 15.05.035 Section 316.4 added – Roof guardrails at interior courts. Section 316.4 is added to the International Fire Code to read as follows: 316.4 Roof guardrails at interior courts. Roof openings into interior courts that are bounded on all sides by building walls shall be protected with guardrails. The top of the guardrail shall not be less than 42 inches in height above the adjacent roof surface that can be walked on. Intermediate rails shall be designed and spaced such that a 12-inch diameter sphere cannot pass through. Exception: Where the roof opening is greater than 600 square feet in area. 15.05.040 Section 404.2 amended – Fire safety and evacuation plan required. Section 404.2 of the International Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 48 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 48 404.2 Where Required. An approved fire safety and evacuation plan shall be prepared and maintained for the following occupancies and buildings. 1. Group A buildings having an occupant load of 100 or more persons. 2. Group B buildings having an occupant load of 500 or more persons, or 2 or more stories in height. 3. Group E: See §3.13 Title 19, CCR for regulations. 4. Group H. 5. Group I. See §3.09 Title 19, CCR for regulations. 6. Group R-1. See §3.09 Title 19, CCR for regulations. 7. Group R-2 college and university buildings. 8. Group M buildings having an occupant load of 500 or more persons. 9. Covered malls exceeding 50,000 square feet (4645 m2) in aggregate floor area. 10. Underground buildings. 15.05.050 Section 404.3.1 amended – Fire evacuation plans. Section 404.3.1 of the International Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 404.3.1 Fire Evacuation Plans. Fire evacuation plans shall include the following: 1. Emergency egress or escape routes and whether evacuation of the building is to be complete or, where approved, by selected floors or areas only. 2. Description of what the fire alarm, if required, sounds and looks like (audible and visual warning devices). 3. Procedures for employees who must remain to operate critical equipment before evacuating. 4. Procedures for accounting for employees and occupants after evacuation has been completed. 5. Identification and assignment of personnel responsible for rescue or emergency medical aid. 6. The preferred and any alternative means of notifying occupants of a fire or emergency. 7. The preferred and any alternative means of reporting fires and other emergencies to the fire department or designated emergency response organization. 8. Identification and assignment of personnel who can be contacted for further information or explanation of duties under the plan. 9. A description of the emergency voice/alarm communication system alert tone and preprogrammed voice messages, where provided. 15.05.060 Table 405.2 amended – Fire and evacuation drills. Table 405.2 of the International Fire Code is amended to read as follows: // // 49 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 49 TABLE 405.2 FIRE AND EVACUATION DRILL FREQUENCY AND PARTICIPATION GROUP OR OCCUPANCY FREQUENCY PARTICIPATION Group A Quarterly Employees Group Bb Annually Employees Group E See §3.13 Title 19, CCR Group I See §3.13 Title 19, CCR Group R-1 See §3.13 Title 19, CCR Group R-2c Four annually All occupants 1. The frequency shall be allowed to be modified in accordance with Section 408.3.2. b. Group B buildings having an occupant load of 500 or more persons. c. Applicable to Group R-2 college and university buildings in accordance with Section 408.3. 15.05.070 Sections 408.3.1 through 408.3.4 deleted. Sections 408.3.1 through 408.3.4 of the International Fire Code are deleted. 15.05.075 Sections 408.5.1 through 408.5.5 deleted. Sections 408.5.1 through 408.5.5 of the International Fire Code are deleted. 15.04.076 Sections 408.6 through 408.6.2 deleted. Sections 408.6 through 408.6.2 of the International Fire Code are deleted. 15.04.077 Sections 408.7 through 408.7.4 deleted. Sections 408.7 through 408.7.4 of the International Fire Code are deleted. 15.04.078 Sections 408.8 through 408.8.3 deleted. Sections 408.8 through 408.8.3 of the International Fire Code are deleted. 15.05.079 Section 408.9 amended – Group R-2 occupancies. Section 408.9 of the International Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 408.9 Group R-2 Occupancies. Group R-2 occupancies shall comply with the requirements of Sections 408.9.1 through 408.9.3 and Sections 401 through 406. Group R-2 college and university buildings shall comply with the requirements of Sections 408.9.1 through 408.9.6 and Sections 401 through 406. 50 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 50 15.05.080 Sections 408.9.4 through 408.9.5 added – First Emergency Evacuation Drill. Sections 408.9.4 through 408.9.5 are added to the International Fire Code to read as follows: 408.9.4 First Emergency Evacuation Drill. The first emergency evacuation drill of each school year shall be conducted within 10 days of the beginning of classes. 408.9.5 Time of Day. Emergency evacuation drills shall be conducted at different hours of the day or evening, during the changing of classes, when the school is at assembly, during the recess or gymnastic periods, or during other times to avoid distinction between drills and actual fires. 15.04.090 Sections 408.10 through 408.10.5 deleted. Sections 408.10 through 408.10.5 of the International Fire Code are deleted. 15.05.100 Section 408.11.1.2 amended – Plan Revisions. Section 408.11.1.2 of the International Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 408.11.1.2 Revisions. The lease plans shall be revised annually or as often as necessary to keep them current. 15.05.110 Section 503.1.1 amended – Buildings and facilities. Section 503.1.1 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 503.1.1 Buildings and facilities. Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall comply with the requirements of this section and Fire Department access road standards and shall extend within 150 feet 945,720 mm) of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. Exception: When Group R, Division 3, or Group U occupancies are equipped throughout with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the provisions of Sections 503.1.1 and 503.2.1 may be modified by the fire code official. 15.05.120 Section 503.2.1 amended – Dimensions. Section 503.2.1 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 503.2.1 Dimensions. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet (6096 mm), except for approved security gates in accordance with Section 503.6, and an unobstructed vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches (4115 mm). Exception: When there are not more than two Group R, Division 3, or Group U occupancies, the access road width may be modified by the fire code official. 51 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 51 15.05.130 Section 503.7 added – Traffic Calming Devices. Section 503.7 is added to the California Fire Code to read as follows: 503.7 Traffic Calming Devices. Traffic Calming Devices such as speed humps, traffic circles or other physical measures intended to control vehicle speed on fire apparatus access roads are prohibited unless approved by the fire code official. 15.05.140 Section 504.4 amended – Access Control Devices. Section 504.4 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 504.4 Access Control Devices. When access control devices including bars, grates, gates, electric or magnetic locks or similar devices, which would inhibit rapid fire department emergency access to the building, are installed, such devices shall be approved by the fire code official. All access control devices shall be provided with an approved means for deactivation or unlocking by the fire department. Access control devices shall also comply with Chapter 10 Egress. 15.05.150 Section 507.4 added – Roof guards at interior courts. Section 507.4 is added to Chapter 5 of the International Fire Code to read as follows: 507.4 Roof Guards At Interior Courts. Roof openings into interior courts that are bounded on all sides by building walls shall be protected with roof guards. The top of the roof guard shall not be less than 42 inches in height above the adjacent roof surface that can be walked on. Intermediate rails shall be designed and spaced such that a 12-inch diameter sphere cannot pass through. Exception: Interior courts with roof opening greater than 600 square feet in area. 15.05.160 Section 510.1 amended – Emergency responder radio coverage in buildings. Section 510.1 of the International Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 510.1 Emergency responder radio coverage in buildings. All buildings shall have approved radio coverage for emergency responders within the building based upon the existing coverage levels of the public safety communications system of the jurisdiction at the exterior of the building. This section shall not require improvement of the existing public safety communications system. Emergency responder radio coverage systems shall be installed in accordance with Section 510 and Appendix J. 15.05.170 Section 510.1.1 added – Obstruction by New Buildings. Section 510.1 of the California Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 510.1.1 Obstruction by new buildings. When determined, a new structure 52 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 52 obstructing line of sight emergency radio communications to existing buildings or to any other locations, the developer of the structure shall provide and install the radio retransmission equipment necessary to restore communications capabilities. The equipment shall be located in an approved space or area within the new structure. 15.05.180 Section 806.1.1 amended – Display inside buildings. Section 510.1 of the International Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 806.1.1 Display inside buildings. The display of decorative vegetation, including Christmas trees, in new and existing buildings shall be in accordance with the California Code of Regulations, Title 19, Division 1, §3.08 and Sections 806.1 through 806.5 of this Code. 15.05.190 Section 5601.1 amended - Scope- Explosives and Fireworks Section 5601.1 of the International Fire Code is amended to read as follows: 5601.1 Scope- Explosives and Fireworks. For explosives requirements see Title 19 California Code of Regulations Chapter 10 and section 5601.1.1 of this chapter. For fireworks requirements see Title 19 California Code of Regulations Chapter 6 and section 5601.1.2 of this chapter. Exceptions: 1. The armed Forces of the United States, Coast Guard or National Guard. 2. Explosives in forms prescribed by the official United States Pharmacopoeia. 4. The use of explosive materials by federal, state and local regulatory, law enforcement and fire agencies acting in their official capacities. 5. Items preempted by federal regulations. 15.05.200 Sections 5601.1. through 5608.1.1 added – Explosives, fireworks, and rocketry. Sections 5601.1.1 through 5601.5.3.2.3 are added to the International Fire Code to read as follows: 5601.2 Explosives. The possession, manufacture, storage, sale, handling, and use of explosives are prohibited. Exceptions: 1. Possession, storage, handling and use of explosives for test and research purposes is allowed with permit and approval of the fire code official. 2. Possession, storage, handling and use of squibs, explosive nuts or bolts and similar small quantity explosive devices is allowed with permit and approval of the fire code official. 5601.3 Fireworks. The possession, manufacture, storage, sale, handling, and 53 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 53 use of fireworks, including those fireworks classified as Safe and Sane by the California State Fire Marshal, are prohibited. Exceptions: 1. Storage, handling and use of fireworks and pyrotechnic special effects outside of buildings when used for public or proximate audience displays, motion picture, television, theatrical and group entertainment productions and when in accordance with Title 19 of the California Code of Regulations. 2. Storage, handling and use of pyrotechnic special effects fireworks inside of buildings when used for proximate audience displays or special effects in theatrical, television, motion picture and group entertainment productions when in accordance with Title 19 of the California Code of Regulations and when in buildings equipped throughout with an approved fire sprinkler system. 5601.4 Rocketry. The storage, handling, and use of model rockets shall be in accordance with Title 19 of the California Code of Regulations and as approved by the Fire Code Official. Add Sections 5601.5 through 5601.5.3.2.3 to read: 5601.5 Small Arms Ammunition-General. Indoor storage and display of black powder, smokeless propellants and small arms ammunition shall comply with Sections 5601.5.1 through 5601.5.4.2.3. 5601.5.1 Packages. Smokeless propellants shall be stored in approved shipping containers conforming to DOTn 49 CFR, Part 173. 5601.5.1.1 Repackaging. The bulk repackaging of smokeless propellants, black powder and small arms primers shall not be performed in retail establishments. 5601.5.1.2 Damaged packages. Damaged containers shall not be repackaged. Exception: Approved repackaging of damaged containers of smokeless propellant into containers of the same type and size as the original container. 5601.5.2 Storage in Group R occupancies. The storage of small arms ammunition in Group R occupancies shall comply with Sections 5601.5.2.1 through 5601.5.2.3. 5601.5.2.1 Smokeless propellants. Smokeless propellants intended for personal use in quantities not exceeding 20 pounds (9 kg) are permitted to be stored in Group R-3 occupancies where kept in original containers. Smokeless powder in quantities exceeding 20 pounds (9 kg) but not exceeding 50 pounds (23 kg) are permitted to be stored in Group R-3 occupancies where kept in a wooden box or cabinet having walls of at least 1 inch (25 mm) nominal thickness. 5601.5.2.2 Black powder. Black powder intended for personal use in quantities not exceeding 20 pounds (9 kg) are permitted to be stored in Group R-3 occupancies where kept in original 54 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 54 containers and stored in a wooden box or cabinet having walls of at least 1 inch (25 mm) nominal thickness 5601.5.2.3 Small arms primers. No more than 10,000 small arms primers shall be stored in Group R-3 occupancies. 5601.5.3 Display and storage in Group M occupancies. The display and storage of small arms ammunition in Group M occupancies shall comply with Sections 5601.5.3.1 through 5601.5.3.2.3. 5601.5.3.1 Display. The display of small arms ammunition in Group M occupancies shall comply with Sections 5601.5.3.1.1 through 5601.5.3.1.3. 5601.5.3.1.1 Smokeless propellant. No more than 20 pounds (9 kg) of smokeless propellants, each in containers of 1 pound (0.454 kg) or less capacity, shall be displayed in Group M occupancies. 5601.5.3.1.2 Black powder. No more than 1 pound (0.454 kg) of black powder shall be displayed in Group M occupancies. 5601.5.3.1.3 Small arms primers. No more than 10,000 small arms primers shall be displayed in Group M occupancies. 5601.5.3.2 Storage. The storage of small arms ammunition in Group M occupancies shall comply with Sections 5601.5.3.2.1 through 5601.5.3.2.3. 5601.5.3.2.1 Storage of Smokeless propellant. Commercial stocks of smokeless propellants not on display shall not exceed 100 pounds (45 kg). Quantities exceeding 20 pounds (9 kg), but not exceeding 100 pounds (45 kg) shall be stored in portable wooden boxes having walls of at least 1 inch (25 mm) nominal thickness. 5601.5.3.2.2 Black powder. Commercial stocks of black powder not on display shall not exceed 50 pounds (23 kg) and shall be stored in a type 4 indoor magazine. When black powder and smokeless propellants are stored together in the same magazine, the total quantity shall not exceed that permitted for black powder. 5601.5.3.2.3 Small arms primers. Commercial stocks of small arms primers not on display shall not exceed 750,000. Storage shall be arranged such that not more than 100,000 small arms primers are stored in any one pile and piles are at least 15 feet (4572 mm) apart. SECTION 2. The Council adopts the findings for local amendments to the California Fire Code, 2013 Edition, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 3. The Council finds that this project is exempt from the provisions of 55 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 55 the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to Section 15061 of the California Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the amendments herein adopted will have a significant effect on the environment. SECTION 4. This Ordinance shall become effective on the commencement of the thirty-first day after the day of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Senior Deputy City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Human Resources ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services 56 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 56 EXHIBIT A Findings for Local Amendments to the 2013 California Fire Code The following local amendments to the 2013 California Fire Code make modifications as authorized by the California Health and Safety Code. In accordance with Section 18941.5 of said Code, Findings are hereby made to show that such modifications or changes are reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological or topographical conditions. PREAMBLE I. Findings of fact: A. Pursuant to Section 17958.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, the report contained herein is submitted as the “Findings of Fact” document with regard to the adoption of the California Fire Code, 2013 Edition, and amendments. Under this adopting ordinance, specific amendments have been established which are more restrictive in nature than those adopted by the State of California (State Building Code Standards, State Housing and Community Development Codes) commonly referred to as California Code of Regulations, Titles 19, 24 and 25. B. These amendments to the California Fire Code, 2013 Edition, have been recognized by the City of Palo Alto (“City”) as tools for addressing the fire problems, concerns and future direction by which the authority can establish and maintain an environment which will afford a level of fire and life safety to all who live and work within the City’s boundaries. C. Under the provisions of Section 17958.5 of the Health and Safety Code, local amendments shall be based upon the following: climatic, geological/geographical, and topographical conditions. The findings of fact contained herein shall address each of these situations and shall present the local situation which, either singularly or in combination, caused the established amendments to be adopted. 1. Climactic Conditions: The City, on an average, experiences an annual rainfall of 16" - 18". This rainfall can be expected between October and April of each year. However, during the summer months there is little, if any, measurable precipitation. During this dry period the temperatures are usually between 70-90 degrees with light to gusty westerly winds. These drying winds, combined with the natural vegetation which is dominant throughout the area, create a hazardous fuel condition which can cause, and has caused in the past, extensive grass and brush land fires. With more and more development encroaching into these wooded and grass covered areas, wind-driven fires could have severe consequences, as has been demonstrated on several occasions in Palo Alto and other areas of the state. Fires in structures can easily spread to the wildland as well as a fire in the wildland into a structure. 57 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 57 Because of the weather patterns, a normal rainfall cannot always be relied upon. This can result in water rationing and water allocation systems, as demonstrated by the drought years of 1986- 1991. Water shortages can also be expected in the future due to the current water storage capacities and increased consumption. The water supply for the Palo Alto fire department makes use of automatic fire sprinkler systems feasible as a means to reduce our dependency on large volumes of water for fire suppression. 2. Geological & Geographical Conditions Geographical Location. Palo Alto is located at the northern most part of Santa Clara County. Palo Alto is a major focus of the “Silicon Valley,” the center for an expanding and changing electronics industry, as well as pharmaceutical, biomedical, and genetic research. Seismic Location. Palo Alto is situated on alluvial solids between San Francisco Bay and the San Andreas Fault zone. The City’s location makes it particularly vulnerable to damage to taller and older structures caused by seismic events. The relatively young geological processes that have created the San Francisco Bay Area are still active today. Seismically, the city sits between two active earthquake faults (San Andreas and the Hayward/Calaveras), and numerous potentially active faults. Approximately 55% of the City’s land surface is in the high-to- moderate seismic hazard zones. Seismic and Fire Hazards. Fire following an earthquake has the potential of causing greater loss of life and damage than the earthquake itself. The majority of the City’s high-rise structures are located in seismic risk zones. Should a significant seismic event occur, Public Safety resources would have to be prioritized to mitigate the greatest threat, and may not be available for every structural fire. In such event, individual structures, including high-rise buildings, should be equipped to help in mitigating the risk of damage. Other variables may tend to intensify the situation: a. The extent of damage to the water system; b. The extent of isolation due to bridge and/or freeway overpass collapse; c. The extent of roadway damage and/or amount of debris blocking the roadways; d. Climatical conditions (hot, dry weather with high winds); e. Time of day will influence the amount of traffic on roadways and could intensify the risk to life during normal business hours; f. The availability of timely mutual aid or military assistance; g. Many high-rise structures are located near areas of high fire danger necessitating special 58 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 58 precautions. Transportation. Palo Alto is dissected by a major state highway (El Camino Real) and two major freeways (I-280 and U.S. 101), which potentially could negatively affect response times of fire suppression equipment. Soil Conditions. Palo Alto lies at the southern end of San Francisco Bay and is built atop the alluvial deposits that surround the margins of the Bay. The alluvium was created by the flooding of many streams emptying into the San Francisco Bay depression, and from intermittent sea water inundation that has occurred over the last 2 or 3 million years. The areas closest to the Bay are overlain by unconsolidated fine silty clay, known as Bay Mud which varies in thickness from a few feet to as much as 30 feet. Generally, the older more stable alluvium is to the south and the younger less stable material is to the north. Bedrock lies beneath the area at depths of generally 300' or more. 3. Topographical Conditions: The findings of fact for the topographical element, as would be expected, are closely associated with the geological/geographical element. With the elevation changes within the district, development is of course following the path of least resistance, creating a meandering pattern. This then does not lend itself to a good systematic street and road layout, which would promote easy traffic flow. It has, in fact, resulted in few major crosstown thoroughfares which tend to be heavily congested, primarily during commute hours and seasonal periods of the year. This creates barriers which reduce the response time of fire equipment and other emergency services. The topography of the district is being burdened by major structures. Employment areas are throughout the district. The people who work in these complexes have added to the traffic congestion throughout the city, thereby reducing the fire department’s response time capabilities. Inherent delays caused by the traffic patterns to many of these types of projects, make it necessary to mitigate this problem by requiring additional built-in automatic fire protection systems to provide early detection and initial control until the arrival of the fire department. The topography of the district in much of the commercial and residential zones lies within or near a flood plane. Periodically, heavy rains and high tides cause region-wide flooding which not only delays response but also increases demands on fire personnel. The fire code amendments increase safeguards and initialize early response to help compensate for these physical delays. As a result of the findings of facts which identify the various climatic, geological/geographical and topographical elements, those additional requirements as specified in the amendments to adopting ordinance for the California Fire Code 2013 Edition, by the City of Palo Alto area are considered reasonable and necessary modifications. The experience of several disastrous fires within the city in addition to Santa Clara, Monterey, San Mateo, Alameda and Contra Costa counties have demonstrated the need for other fire protection features, the most significant of which was located in the Oakland/Berkeley Hills in which over 3,000 homes were destroyed and 25 human lives were lost. While it is clearly understood that the adoption of 59 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 59 such regulations may not prevent the incidence of fire, the implementation of these various amendments to the Code may reduce the severity and potential of loss of life and property. II. Specific Findings for Local Amendments The majority of local amendments (those not specifically listed below) are made strictly to conform to other parts of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) and for similar administrative purposes. Based upon the findings of fact described in section I, the City Council also makes the following specific findings regarding local climatic, geological, and topographic conditions related to local amendments to the California and International Fire Codes found in Chapters 15.04 and 15.05 of Title 15 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (“PAMC”): 1. The local amendments contained in PAMC sections 15.04.030 through 15.04.070 and sections 15.04.325 through 15.04.441 relating to general conditions for hazardous materials are necessary modifications to the California Fire Code flammable and hazardous materials sections because they maintain consistency with the Hazardous Materials Storage Ordinance which has been adopted county-wide since 1983. Requirements include safeguards such as monitoring, secondary containment, separation of non compatibles which prevent incidents should a seismic event, unauthorized release or accident occur. 2. The local amendment contained in PAMC section 15.05.015- Weed removal- is necessary to require weeds to be removed from properties when determined to be a hazard at the expense of the responsible party. Weeds can be a fire hazard that may also contribute to the uncontrolled spread of fire as a result of the climatic, geographical, and topographical conditions described in Findings 1, 2, and 3 above. 3. The local amendments contained in PAMC section 15.05.140 through 15.05.170 set forth measures to limit delays in response time and reduce hazards to firefighters. These measures are necessary to prevent exacerbation of response delays associated with the Climatic, Geographical and Topographical conditions listed in Findings 1, 2 and 3 above. 4. The local amendment contained in PAMC section 15.04.210- Immersion Heaters- is necessary as a fire control measure because it requires additional controls on process heating devices which are often activated when unattended. See Geological Findings 2. 5. The local amendments contained in PAMC 15.04.230 through 15.04.260 relating to fire sprinkler systems are necessary for faster control of fires in the dense populated area of our community to confine a fire to the area of origin rather than spread to neighboring structures. The modifications contained in these amendments provide additional fire extinguishing systems in new construction, major remodels, additions, and occupancy classification changes to help mitigate the problems identified in Findings 1, 2, and 3, above- Climatic, Geographical and Topographical. 60 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 60 6. The local amendment contained in PAMC section 15.04.270 - Floor control valves- is necessary to provide fire extinguishing control devices that allow systems to remain partially in service while repairs or maintenance are ongoing. See Findings 1 and 2 above- Climatic and Geographical. 7. The local amendment contained in Section 15.04.275- Single- and multiple-station smoke alarms- is necessary to alert occupants at the earliest possible stage of smoldering residential fires. This modification requires smoke detection provided in new construction, remodels, additions, rental housing and newly purchased homes to be photoelectric or dual sensor technology to allow greater likelihood of occupants safely escaping residential fires and notifying the fire department during the earliest possible stage of fire growth. This will help mitigate the problems identified in Findings 1, 2, and 3, above- Climatic, Geographical and Topographical. 8. The local amendments contained in PAMC sections 15.04.280 through 15.04.295 provide for additional fire and life safety measures during construction and demolition. See Findings 2 and 3, above- Geographical and Topographical. 9. The local amendments contained in PAMC 15.04.300– Definition of “continuous gas detection system” and sections 15.04.325, 15.04.352 and 15.04.450 through 15.04.502 regarding toxic gases incorporate requirements established by the Model Toxic Gas Ordinance and California Fire Code. Administrative and restrictive measures include changes in definitions, quantities regulated, and utilizes County consensus guidelines established by other regional agencies which share similar climatic, geological/geographical, and topographical conditions. See Findings 1, 2 and 3, above- Climatic, Geographical and Topographical. 10. The local amendment contained in PAMC sections 15.04.310 and 15.04.320- Fire Protection Water Supply System, requires an adequate water supply in areas used for storage of highly combustible organic waste materials. This requirement mitigates the added hazards and limited access conditions described in Findings 1 and 3, above- Climatic and Topographical. 11. The local amendments contained in PAMC section 15.04.510 - Storage and use of liquefied petroleum gas- place restrictions on liquid petroleum gas where natural gas is provided. These restrictions are appropriate given Palo Alto’s seismically active local geological conditions because they will reduce portable container releases in the event of seismic activity and mitigate the geological risk described in Finding 2, above- Geographical. 12. The local amendments contained in PAMC section 15.04.515 – Silane distribution systems automatic shutdown- place restrictions on silane distribution systems. These restrictions are appropriate given Palo Alto’s seismically active local geological conditions because they will reduce release volume in the event of seismic activity or unauthorized release and mitigate the geological risk described in Finding 2, above- Geographical. 13. The local amendments contained in PAMC sections 15.04.520 through 15.04.588 set forth protections for urban-wildland interface areas that are necessary to mitigate the additional fire risks in the Palo Alto foothills hazardous fire zone. The modifications contained 61 NOT YET APPROVED 131015 jb 0131145-A 61 in these amendments provide for additional precautions against fire risks and additional fire extinguishing systems necessitated by the conditions listed in Findings 1, 2, and 3, above- Climatic, Geographical and Topographical. 14. The local amendments contained in PAMC section 15.04.590- Life safety requirements for existing high rise buildings- are designed to provide additional fire and life safety features in existing high-rise buildings given the seismically sensitive geological conditions described in Findings 2 and 3, above- Geographical and Topographical. 15. The local amendments contained in PAMC section 15.05.035- Roofguards at interior courts provides for additional fire and life safety measures for firefighters on buildings with unconventional lightwells. See Findings 2 and 3, above- Geographical and Topographical. City of Palo Alto (ID # 4218) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Council Priority: Environmental Sustainability Summary Title: Ameresco San Joaquin LLC Contract Amendment Title: Approval of Amendment No. 1 to the City's Power Purchase Agreement with Ameresco San Joaquin, LLC to Extend the Landfill Gas Electric Generating Facility's Commercial Operation Date to January 31, 2014 From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached amendment (Attachment A) to the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) with Ameresco San Joaquin LLC (San Joaquin) to extend the landfill gas electric generating facility’s Commercial Operation Date deadline to January 31, 2014. Executive Summary The City signed a 20-year PPA with San Joaquin for a landfill gas electric generating facility and the project is almost ready to begin operating, but it is being held up by PG&E, which is delayed in completing a backlog of projects to interconnect to the electric grid. When operational, the San Joaquin project will provide about 3% of the City’s total electric needs and increase the City’s percentage of renewable resources from 21% to 24% of its total needs. The PPA with San Joaquin includes a milestone for the project to achieve its Commercial Operation Date (COD) on November 23, 2013, but the PG&E backlog is causing the project to be delayed beyond that date. San Joaquin, therefore, asked the City to extend the COD to January 31, 2014. Staff recommends that the City amend the PPA to accommodate this request. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Background In May 2010, Council approved the PPA with San Joaquin to obtain all of the electric output of a landfill gas electric generating facility over a 20-year term (Resolution 9055, CMR 226:10). When it begins operating, the plant, located at the Foothill Sanitary Landfill in San Joaquin County, is expected to produce enough renewable electricity to satisfy approximately 3% of the City’s total supply needs and help the City meet its RPS requirements. The PPA listed several project development “milestones” and established deadlines for their completion. The milestones included: obtaining site control, obtaining all necessary permits, executing an interconnection agreement with the owner of the local transmission and distribution system, Pacific Gas and Electric Company, (PG&E), obtaining construction financing, starting construction, and achieving commercial operation. In the event that San Joaquin failed to meet any of these development milestones, the PPA provided that Palo Alto could assess liquidated damages against San Joaquin, and, in some instances, terminate the contract. At the time the City executed the PPA in 2010, San Joaquin indicated that the plant expected to achieve commercial operation in January 2013. The contractual deadline for achieving COD, however, is tied to the date San Joaquin obtained construction financing for the project. Based on the actual date of that occurrence, the contractual COD deadline is November 23, 2013. In addition to meeting the above development milestones, the PPA also requires San Joaquin to provide Palo Alto with monthly reports describing their progress towards meeting the various development milestones. San Joaquin has substantially complied with that requirement. Attachment B is an example of a recent monthly report. Discussion According to San Joaquin’s attestations in recent monthly progress reports, and as noted in a letter to the City requesting this contract amendment (Attachment C), the facility is fully permitted, San Joaquin has an executed small generator interconnection agreement (SGIA) with PG&E, and construction of the facility was substantially complete as of July 2013. Since that time, the only obstacle preventing San Joaquin from achieving commercial operation is PG&E’s failure to complete the necessary transmission line work to connect the facility to a nearby electrical substation. When new renewable energy facilities are constructed, it is quite common for moderate to extensive transmission system upgrade work to be required in order to connect these sometimes remote projects to the grid. As more and more renewable energy facilities have been built in recent years to meet the state’s aggressive RPS requirements, significant delays in City of Palo Alto Page 3 interconnection upgrade work have become the norm. As the predominant owner of the transmission system in northern and central California, PG&E is responsible for completing this work for San Joaquin and many other projects. PG&E’s obligations to complete this interconnection work are detailed in its SGIA with San Joaquin (an agreement to which the City is not a party). The SGIA contains its own set of milestones and associated deadlines, with the deadline for completing all interconnection work necessary for the facility to achieve commercial operation being December 24, 2012. However, PG&E’s backlog of interconnection construction projects has caused the schedule for the San Joaquin interconnection work to be pushed back repeatedly, which in turn has caused the delay in the project’s expected COD. According to San Joaquin’s project management staff, while San Joaquin is frustrated with PG&E’s delays in meeting the SGIA milestones, San Joaquin feels, based on its recent communications with PG&E, that PG&E is on track to complete the project’s interconnection in the coming weeks. In reliance on this, and on reports from other parties who have sought damages from PG&E in similar cases with limited success, San Joaquin has opted not to pursue damages against PG&E for these delays at this point. Section 7.4(c) of the PPA states that failure to achieve the COD deadline results in San Joaquin becoming liable for liquidated damages of approximately $28,000 for each month the COD is delayed beyond the contractual deadline. Staff recommends that Council approve an extension of the Commercial Operation Date deadline to January 31, 2014 and waive its right to seek liquidated damages, for several reasons. First, the delayed COD is principally due to PG&E’s inability to complete the interconnection upgrade work in a timely manner, not San Joaquin’s failure to diligently pursue completion of the contractually required milestones. Second, in light of the 20-year agreement between San Joaquin and Palo Alto, and both parties’ interest in the project achieving successful commercial operation as soon as possible, staff recommends against taking action to compromise that partnership at this early stage. Lastly, staff feels comfortable recommending that the Council rely on San Joaquin’s assurances that the delay will not extend past January 31, 2014. Staff will continue to monitor the project’s progress closely, and consult with Council if the project is further delayed. Resource Impact Approving the recommendation will result in the City forfeiting its right to collect up to about $60,000 ($28,000 per month for slightly more than two months) in liquidated damages from San Joaquin for failing to achieve commercial operation by the deadline set forth in Section 4.3(b)(v) of the PPA, in reliance on San Joaquin’s assurances that it can meet the January 31, 2014 deadline. Not approving the recommendation would enable the City to seek collection of these damages. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Policy Implications This recommendation does not represent any change to existing City policies. Environmental Review Approval of the recommended action does not meet the definition of a project, pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments:  Attachment A: Resolution (PDF)  Attachment B: San Joaquin Monthly Progress Report - September 2013 (PDF)  Attachment C: Ameresco San Joaquin LLC Letter Requesting Contract Amendment (PDF) 131106 dm 6051998 1 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND AMERESCO SAN JOAQUIN, LLC This Amendment No. 1 to the Power Purchase Agreement (“Agreement”) is entered into on November 18, 2013, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation of the State of California (“CITY” or “BUYER”), and Ameresco San Joaquin LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company, located at 111 Speen Street, Suite 410, Framingham, MA 01701 (“Ameresco” or “SELLER”). R E C I T A L S 1. The Agreement was entered into between the parties for the sale of energy to BUYER from SELLER’S Landfill Gas electric generating facility to be located at the Foothill Sanitary Landfill; and 2. The parties wish to amend the Agreement to grant SELLER additional time to achieve the Commercial Operation Date for the Landfill Gas electric generating facility. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 4.3(b)(v) is amended to read as follows: “By January 31, 2014, Seller shall have achieved the Commercial Operation Date.” SECTION 2. Except as modified by this Amendment, all other provisions of the Agreement, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments, shall remain in full force and effect. // // // // // // 131106 dm 6051998 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Senior Deputy City Attorney APPROVED: __________________________ Director of Utilities CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ City Manager Ameresco San Joaquin, LLC By:___________________________ Name:_________________________ Title:________________________ By:___________________________ Name:_________________________ Title:________________________ San Joaquin Co. / Foothill LFGTE Project Development Progress Summary Through September 2013 Name: Telephone: Mobile: E-mail: San Joaquin Co. Desi Reno Solid Waste Director (209) 468-3066 (209) 351-0693 dreno@sjgov.org Mike Carroll Engineer (209) 468-8504 (209) 601-1780 mcarroll@sjgov.org City of Palo Alto James Stack (650) 329-2314 (650) 209-0315 James.stack@CityofPaloAlto.org Ameresco Mike Bakas (MB) Sr. VP Renewable Energy (508) 661-2223 (617) 448-8059 mbakas@ameresco.com James D. Bier (JB) Senior Project Developer (480) 275-8228 (209) 610-4318 jbier@ameresco/com Carl von Saltza, P.E. (CVS) Director of Eng. 207.842-6333 207.842-6300 cvonsaltza@ameresco.com Dean Robinson (DR) Project Engineer (508) 598-4687 (763) 218-6038 drobinson@ameresco.com Jim Koulovatos (JK) 704.916.3526 704.344.9473 jkoulovatos@ameresco.com Task No. Task Description Responsibility / Comments 1. Gas Purchase and Site Lease Agreement:  GPA & Site Lease Agreements w/ San Joaquin Co.: 3/16/2010  Amendment No. 1: (royalty clarification): executed 12/16/2010  Amendment No. 2: (royalty reduction): executed 9/27/2011 JB /MB 2. Power Purchase Agreement:  PPA w/ Palo Alto: executed 5/3/2010 JB/MB 3. Electrical Interconnect w/ PG&E:  Interconnect Application: submitted 5/27/2010  System Impact Study (SIS): completed on 9/3/2010  Palo Alto Rejection Letter for Interconnection Agreement draft: 11/29/11  Interconnection Agreement: Executed Feb 22, 2012  Deliverability Assessment CAISO Capacity Reports: Study to be issued by PG&E  FERC review and approval: FERC approval received March 19, 2012  PG&E interconnection lines: timing to be determined CVS/DR Page 2 4. Air Permitting by San Joaquin Valley APCD:  Permit: Application to SJVAPCD: submitted 7/5/2010  Authority to Construct Permit: Issued 6/8/2011 Other Permits:  CEQA: completed by San Joaquin Co.  Planning Permit: issued by County 9/15/2011  Generation Building: issued by County 5/11/2012  Grading: issued by County 5/11/2012  Restroom Building: issued by County 5/11/2012  Foundations: issued by County 5/11/2012, revisions approved 11/27/2012  Electrical, Electrical Underground: 5/11/2012  Interconnect and Mechanical Building Permits: 5/11/2012 JB/DR 5. Financing:  Arranging of financing for construction of the plant: AMERESCO has closed the financing of the facility JK 6. Plant Design & Engineering Schedule:  Initial Plant Design: completed  Final Plant Design: completed  Equipment Procurement: engines ordered October 7, 2011; Siloxane Pretreatment System ordered September 15, 2011, All major plant equipment procurement complete CVS/DR 7. Construction Schedule:  Commence Construction: Grading mobilization 9/17/2012  Construction Activities This Period: Final surfacing of the plant yard, tie-in of LFG condensate piping to San Joaquin collection system.  Construction Activities Next Period: Tie-in of LFG bypass line to San Joaquin County flare.  Complete Construction: Construction substantial completion July 2013.  Commissioning and Start-up: Completed August 2013. The commission of the controls, electrical, and mechanical systems was accomplished this period with AMERESCO in house Engineering along with numerous vendor startup technicians. Electrical testing completed by Hart High Voltage. AMERESCO along with technicians from Western Energy successfully idled Engine 1 on August 29th and Engine 2 on August 30th. CVS/TBD 8. Transmission Scheduling: No action required at this time, dependent on PG&E’s transmission line activity scheduled for completion on September 30th. NCPA Page 3 9. Planned Operation: PG&E has completed the transmission line work into the plant location. Work began in early August and was completed on schedule at the end of September. The PG&E work at the substation is scheduled to be completed on October 30th. The current schedule for PG&E to backfeed power to our facility is October 28th. We continue to work closely with Verizon and AT&T to provide required phone/internet/transfer trip communications to our facility. PG&E’s completion of the transmission line work was critical to Verizon beginning their work on the installation. We have not been able to get a confirmation from PG&E that their power poles have been released for work by Verizon. The original schedule for that release was October 5th. CVS 10. Ribbon Cutting: T.B.D. JB City of Palo Alto (ID # 4228) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Budget Amendment Ordinance for Homeless Case Management Services Title: Adoption Of A Budget Amendment Ordinance In The Amount Of $125,000 For The First Year Funding Of A $250,000 Two-Year Agreement For Intensive Case Management In Collaboration With The Housing Subsidies From The County Of Santa Clara From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommendation Staff recommends that Council Adopt a Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment A) to replenish the City Council Contingency in the amount of $125,000 which was previously allocated for funding of intensive case management in collaboration with housing subsidies provided by the County of Santa Clara. Intensive case management provides strategic housing solutions for individuals with demonstrated critical needs. Background On October 7, 2013, staff presented to Council a recommendation that the City collaborate with the County of Santa Clara (County) in an effort to provide permanent housing solutions for at least twenty homeless individuals. Utilizing housing subsidies provided by the County, funding for intensive case management would be provided by the City at a cost of $125,000 a year, with a two-year commitment. After discussion, the following motion was passed: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Price, to approve a one-time City allocation of $250,000 to be disbursed over two years for support of its homeless outreach and placement plan and that the Fiscal Year 2014 allocation in the amount of $125,000 is authorized to be paid from the City Council Contingency due to the urgency of providing this service. The homeless outreach and placement plan will be comprised of intensive case management in connection with housing subsidies for the homeless to be provided by the County of Santa Clara (County). Further, the City of Palo Alto Page 2 City Council directed staff to bring forward a Budget Amendment Ordinance in November to increase the City Council Contingency in the amount of $125,000 with a corresponding decrease of the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve and include funding of the Fiscal Year 2015 allocation in the amount of $125,000 in the FY 2015 Proposed Budget. (MOTION PASSED: 8-0, Scharff absent.) Discussion In accordance with City Council direction, this report and attached Budget Amendment Ordinance recommend increasing the Council Contingency by $125,000 to the previously authorized amount ($225,000) prior to the approal of the homeless outreach and placement plan (City Council meeting, October 7, 2013) offset with a decrease in the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve in the amount of $125,000. Resource Impact The attached Budget Amendment Ordinance will increase the Council Contingency to the previously authorized amount of $225,000 prior to the approal of the homeless outreach and placement plan (City Council meeting, October 7, 2013) and decreases the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve by the same amount. Policy Implications Authorization of this change order does not represent a change to any existing policy. Attachments:  Attachment A - Budget Amendment Ordinance (DOC) ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2014 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION OF $125,000 FOR REPLENISHMENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL CONTINGENCY FUND FROM THE GENERAL FUND BUDGET STABILIZATION RESERVE. 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. On October 7th, 2013, staff presented to Council a recommendation that the City collaborate with the County of Santa Clara in an effort to provide permanent housing solutions for at least twenty homeless Palo Alto individuals; and C. The County of Santa Clara has allocated $50,000 per year with a two-year commitment from Homeless Systems of Santa Clara County for housing subsidies. City of Palo Alto funding will cover intensive case manager costs associated with interviewing, transporting, and ultimately securing housing for these individuals; and D. The City Council recommended use of the City Council Contingency Fund due to the immediate nature of this request, with a subsequent replenishment from the General Fund Stabilization Reserve in the amount of $125,000; and E. City Council authorization is needed to amend the Fiscal Year 2014 Operating Budget as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. The sum of One Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($125,000) is hereby appropriated for replenishment of ATTACHMENT A the City Council Contingency Fund from the General Fund Stabilization Reserve. SECTION 3. The City Council Contingency is hereby increased by One Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand ($125,000) to Two Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand and the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by One Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand ($125,000) to Twenty-Nine Million Three Hundred Seventy-One Thousand ($29,371,000). 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 Community Services Director of Administrative Services City of Palo Alto (ID # 4206) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Mobile In-Car Video Replacement Contract Approval Title: Approval of a Contract With WatchGuard Video in the Amount of $296,470 and Additional Services of $8,530 for a Total Not to Exceed $305,000 for the Upgrade of Police Mobile In-Car Video System, Capital Improvement Program Project TE-11002 From: City Manager Lead Department: Police RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract with WatchGuard Video (Attachment B) in an amount not to exceed $296,470 for the Upgrade of Police Mobile In-Car Video System, Capital Improvement Program Project TE-11002. Staff also recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract with WatchGuard Video for additional related, but unforeseen, work which may develop during the project, the total of which shall not exceed $8,530. Staff is therefore requesting a total authorization amount of $305,000 to cover the contract amount of $296,470 plus a contingency amount of $8,530. BACKGROUND Video technology has become instrumental in law enforcement training, evidence collection, and for officer safety and accountability. The Police Department installed a Mobile In-Car Video System in all of the police patrol vehicles in 2006 and the existing system has been in place with several minor upgrades since that time. Camera technology, audio capabilities and video storage and retrieval have all improved dramatically over the last seven years and the existing system is at the end of its technical lifecycle. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Upgrading the system provides greater resolution and visibility, increased camera placement, and significantly improved audio capture that reduces background noise. In addition to the improved evidence capture capabilities, the compression technology allows for reduced storage requirements and ensures protection of evidence against loss with duplication. DISCUSSION Project Description This project includes upgrading the Mobile In-Car Video System of the entire police department fleet (28 vehicles), testing of nine body-worn cameras by the Traffic Safety Team and patrol officers, and the outfitting of one Fire Service vehicle with a Mobile In-Car Video System. Patrol Cars WatchGuard Video will remove the current Mobile In-Car Video System on 22 of the Police Department patrol cars, and install the new WatchGuard 4RE Video System. Six patrol cars were recently replaced and are anticipated to be delivered by June 2014, so the installation of the new will Mobile In-Car Video System will take place after the replacement vehicles are delivered. Key improvements from the current system include:  Improved Video and Audio Quality  Greater Field of Vision  3 Additional Cameras per Vehicle (side and rear views)  Video Uploaded Wirelessly  Automatic Recording Triggers (i.e. lights and sirens)  Selective Resolution and File Compression that Saves Storage  Live Streaming Capability  Extended Warranty, Including Software Updates Body Worn A small number (nine) of body-worn audio/visual systems are also included, which will be pilot tested with the Police Department’s Traffic Safety Team and patrol officers. This will allow officers, primarily on motorcycles, to capture video evidence when they are away from their vehicles. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Fire Apparatus The Fire Department is exploring the use of Mobile Audio Visual systems on apparatus to capture video during transport and incidents to increase the safety and accountability of line personnel. This contract includes the outfitting of the Battalion Chief van, which will capture activities during major incidents. Other Project Elements Included with the system is a server and 196TB of storage, a robust video management client, user training, and 24/7 technical support throughout the life of the equipment. Bid Process On July 23, 2013, a notice inviting formal bids for the Mobile In-Car Video System Project was posted at City Hall and sent to nine known Mobile In-Car Video System companies. The bidding period was 20 working days. Bids were received from seven companies on August 20, 2013. The selection committee comprised of City Staff from the Police and Information Technology Departments reviewed all bids submitted and scored on a variety of technical requirements and desired features. Original bids ranged in price from $322,320 to $412,965. The top two companies were invited to demonstrate their products on October 2, 2013. After careful analysis, incorporating feedback from line personnel, and pricing negotiation the committee selected WatchGuard Video as the lowest responsible bidder. WatchGuard only manufactures Mobile In-Car Video Systems and their product features state of the art video and audio technology including a High Definition (HD) video recording option. Reference checks indicate their customer service, installation process and support are exemplary. The contract includes a 5 year warranty for the equipment. RESOURCE IMPACT Funding for the Mobile In-Car Video System is available in the Mobile In-Car Video System Capital Improvement Program Project TE-11002. Funding in the Police Department’s budget for ongoing operating and maintenance (O&M) costs of the current Mobile In-Car Video System will be sufficient to cover the O&M costs for the new system. Warranty costs for the current system are funded through the IT Fund charges allocated to the Police Department. The first year warranty costs for the new system are included in the contract and ongoing costs will be updated annually as part of the budget process starting in FY 2015. City of Palo Alto Page 4 POLICY IMPLICATIONS This agreement is consistent with existing City policy. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This agreement and the project to install in-car video recording systems, is not subject to CEQA pursuant to Title 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15061(b)(3), and it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility of a significant effect on the environment. Attachments:  ATTACHMENT A - 2011 ADOPTED Capital Budget_MAV Project (PDF)  Attachment B - Watchguard Contract (PDF) Professional Services Rev. Nov. 1, 2011 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C14151062 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND WATCHGUARD VIDEO FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 18th day of November, 2013, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and WATCHGUARD VIDEO, a Texas corporation, located at 415 Century Parkway, Allen, Texas 75013 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to update the Police Department’s mobile audio visual (MAV) system (“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant to design the MAV system in connection with the Project (“Services”). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit “A”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit “A” in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through November 25, 2018 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of Professional Services Rev. Nov. 1, 2011 damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Two Hundred Ninety Six Thousand Four Hundred Seventy Dollars ($296,470.00). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Eight Thousand Five Hundred Thirty Dollars ($8,530.00) for a total not to exceed amount of Three Hundred Five Thousand Dollars ($305,000.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit “A”. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT’s billing rates (set forth in Exhibit “C-1”). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. Professional Services Rev. Nov. 1, 2011 SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct any and all errors, omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project. This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%) of the CITY’s stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to the CITY for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. Subcontracts Authorized: Notwithstanding Section 11 above, CITY agrees that subconsultants may be used to complete the Services. The subconsultants authorized by CITY to perform work on this Project are listed Server Full Service Warranty: CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Joe VanSchuyver as the Director of Technical Services to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and Matt Cutts as the project’s Director of Customer Service to represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY’s project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. The City’s project manager is Amber Cameron, Police Department, Communications Division, 275, Forest Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone (650) 329-2374. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. The CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Purchasing Manager during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the City’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at the City’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of the City’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, Consultant shall comply with the following zero waste requirements:  All printed materials provided by Consultant to City generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks.  Goods purchased by Consultant on behalf of the City shall be purchased in accordance with the City’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Office.  Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by the Consultant, at no additional cost to the City, for reuse or recycling. Consultant shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION 24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, City shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City’s express written consent. 25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF WORK WatchGuard Video shall provide to the City of Palo Alto services resulting in the successful and satisfactory replacement of the mobile in-car video system. This includes the removal of the current system, as well as installation and configuration of the WatchGuard Video 4RE Digital In-Car Video system and Evidence Library software. A. Planning and Design a. WatchGuard will design the specifications of the solution to fit the department’s needs to integrate the 4RE system with City’s network. b. This includes final agreement on the amount and location of video storage, site survey for wireless access, plan network topology, and obtaining all system settings and parameters. B. Removal of Current Mobile Audio Visual System Watch Guard, and its subcontractor Emergency Vehicle Specialists Hollister, will remove the current Mobile Audio Visual (MAV) system from Twenty-Two (22) Police Department vehicles. C. Installation of New 4RE Mobile Audio Visual System Watch Guard, and its subcontractor Emergency Vehicle Specialists Hollister, will install the new 4RE MAV system in a total of Twenty-Nine (29) Police and Fire Department vehicles: a. Twenty-Eight (28) Police Department Vehicles will be outfitted with new 4RE base system and 4RE elite upgrade including the following for each vehicle: i. One (1) High Definition Zero Sightline (720p) forward facing camera ii. One (1) interior infrared color cabin camera iii. Three (3) exterior infrared color cameras iv. DVR v. Integrated 200 GB automotive grade hardware vi. 16GB USB removable thumb drive vii. Cabin microphone viii. Two (2) 900 MHz Hi Fidelity wireless microphones ix. 4RE In-Car 5GHz Wireless Kit x. 4RE Power Over Ethernet, Gigabit 4-port switch xi. All required hardware and cabling b. Six (6) of the Twenty-Eight (28) vehicles will be recently purchased, with planned delivery in June 2014. Installation of the 4RE base and elite systems in these vehicles will take place at a date to be determined by the Project Manager. c. One (1) Fire Department Vehicle will be outfitted with the new 4RE base system and 4RE elite upgrade including the following: i. One (1) HD Zoom Front Camera ii. Three (3) exterior infrared color cameras iii. DVR iv. Integrated 200 GB automotive grade hardware v. 16GB USB removable thumb drive vi. Cabin microphone vii. One (1) 900 MHz Hi Fidelity wireless microphones viii. 4RE In-Car 5GHz Wireless Kit ix. 4RE Power Over Ethernet, Gigabit 4-port switch x. All required hardware and cabling D. On-Site Technical Services Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 a. 4RE System Setup, Configuration and Testing i. Install and configure server and wireless ii. Install and run client software locally from the network iii. Configure all system settings and parameters, and run clients an all specified machines. iv. Test solution as cars are deployed b. Apply updates and fixes as necessary, deliver solution c. WatchGuard will closely monitor the deployment of the 4RE system and provide solutions as required E. Staff Training a. WatchGuard will provide 4RE User, 4RE Administrative, and Evidence Library User Training to City Staff in-person during the first week of installation and configuration b. WatchGuard will provide Video and Web-Based training for the City to utilize as necessary during the life of the 4RE system. F. Additional Equipment and Software to be Purchased a. Microphones i. An additional four (4) Wireless microphones will be provided ii. Five (5) Multiple HiFi Desktop Charging Bases will be provided iii. One (1) Desktop Charging unit will be provided b. Wearable Cameras i. Nine (9) CopVu Wearable Cameras will be provided ii. These cameras will be integrated into network and the video data will archive to the library server. c. Evidence Library Server and Client Software i. Evidence Library Software 3 ii. Twenty-Nine (29) Remote Client License Keys d. Server Hardware and Software i. 3U Rack Mount 16 SATA Drive Server, Intel Xeon E5-2620 2.0GHz 6-Core, 32GB RAM, 2x128GB SSD 6GB/S MLC drives (boot) 3x500GB SATA 7,200 RPM drives (sql), Windows Server 2008 R2 64-bit, SQL Server 2008 R2 (5CAL), 3-Year full service (on-site or reimbursed) warranty. e. Upload Server and Software i. Tower Server, Intel i7 3.40 GHz, 8GB RAM, 4x2TB SATA 7,200 RPM drives, 5TB usable video storage, Windows 7 Pro 64-bit, SQL Server 2008 R2 (1CAL), 3-Year full service (on-site or reimbursed) warranty. f. Video Storage i. Regular storage 1. 37 count 4TB Hard Drives, Server Class, 7,200rpm, 64MB Cache 2. 1 count JBOD Enclosure, 24-bay, 4U, including SAS Cable ii. Critical Video Back Up 1. 12 count 4TB Hard Drives, Server Class, 7,200rpm, 64MB Cache 2. 1 count JBOD Enclosure, 12-bay, 4U, including SAS Cable g. Watch Commander G. Ongoing Support a. WatchGuard will provide close monitoring of the 4RE system in the initial weeks of deployment b. WatchGuard will follow-up with the City on the 3rd, 30th, 45th, and 60th days after delivery and installation Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 c. An acceptance period of 30 days will occur prior to signoff d. Once the City has taken over day to day use of the 4RE system, WatchGuard will provide 24/7 Telephone Technical Support H. Warranties a. Both hardware and software components of the 4RE base and elite systems are covered by warranties. Warranty details are included as Appendix A. b. Replacement parts covered under warranty will be provided to the City within 24 hours to avoid interruption to City operations c. The first year of warranty coverage is included d. Warranty of additional years will be purchased according to the payment schedule and pricing sheets  Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 EXHIBIT “B” - SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE The project will follow the schedule outlined below. Any changes to the project schedule must be pre-approved by the Project Manager.   Task Number Deliverable  Time Period  1.0 Planning and Design    1.1 System Design and Storage 11/25/13 – 12/9/13  1.2 Finalize server, network and wireless plan 11/25/13 – 12/9/13  1.3 Finalize installation locations and procedures 11/25/13 – 12/9/13  2.0 Information systems installation   2.1 Provision network connectivity and allocate  address space  12/9/13 – 12/27/13  2.2 Install and configure wireless infrastructure 12/9/13 – 12/27/13  2.3 Provision server and install base components 12/9/13 – 12/27/13  2.4 Install, configure and test Evidence Library 12/9/13 – 12/27/13  2.5 Perform end‐to‐end system testing 12/9/13 – 12/27/13  2.6 Complete information system installation 12/9/13 – 12/27/13  3.0 Fleet Installations   3.1 Remove current Mobile Audio Visual System from  22 Police vehicles  12/9/13 – 12/27/13  3.2 Install and test 4RE system in 22 Police vehicles  and 1 Fire vehicle  12/9/13 – 12/27/13  3.3 Acceptance Period 12/27/13‐01/27/14  3.3 Install and test 4RE system in 6 new Police vehicles Estimated for June 2014, final  date to be determined by Project  Manager  4.0 Training   4.1 Administrator training 12/9/13 – 12/13/13  4.2 User Training 12/9/13 – 12/13/13  4.3 Technician training 12/9/13 – 12/13/13  5.0 Monitoring and Support   5.1 Close monitoring of system  12/9/12 – 2/28/13  5.2 24/7 Telephone Technical Support  Ongoing for life of product    Payment Schedule   WatchGuard Video will demonstrate to the City of Palo Alto through testing and demonstrations, that the 4RE solution, and all its related components and software, are fully functional and representative of the products and services represented by WatchGuard Video. WatchGuard Video will invoice the City of Palo Alto according to the attached Price Sheet. WatchGuard shall submit all invoices to the Project Manager for approval within 30 days of Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 completed work. Payments will be made according to the following milestones: Milestone 1: Successful removal of current system and installation 4RE system for twenty-two (22) current Police Department vehicles and associated server, storage and video management components. Milestone 2: Successful installation of 4RE system for one (1) Fire Department vehicle and associated server, storage and video management components. Milestone 3: Delivery and set up of all additional equipment and software purchased by the City Milestone 4: Successful 4RE system setup, configuration, testing and on-site staff training Milestone 5: Successful completion of 30 day acceptance period Milestone 6: Successful installation of 4RE system for six (6) new Police Department vehicles and associated server, storage and video management components. Post-Replacement Project Costs WatchGuard will invoice the City annually, at least 90 days prior to the expiration of the current warranty, for extended warranties in accordance with the Price Sheet. Any additional equipment, replacement parts, or services ordered during the life of this contract will be invoiced in accordance with the Price Sheet. Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011                              4RE Pricing Sheet                                    Provided By:   Fran Judge ‐ RSM  Marc Palmieri ‐ Technical Sales Dir.                                    TOTAL PROJECT COST AT  Agency  Name: Palo Alto PD      Contact  Person: Amber Cameron     $296,468.81  Address: 275 Forest Ave       Address: Palo Alto, CA 94301      Date: October 23, 2013                     4RE Base System and Options Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   4RE‐200‐GPS‐ ZSL  4RE In‐Car Camera System. Includes GPS, High  definition Zero Sightline (720P) forward facing  camera, Infrared color cabin camera, DVR,  integrated 200GB automotive grade hard drive,  16GB USB removable thumb drive, cabin  microphone, 900 MHz Hi Fidelity wireless  microphone, hardware & cabling, 1 yr. warranty.  Includes Evidence Library Express software.  29      $      5,450.00   $   4,355.00   $        126,295.00                                    4RE ELITE Upgrade to 4RE Elite.  Adds support for up to 6  cameras. 29    $         300.00   $      260.00   $            7,540.00                  MOBILE APP 4RE Mobile App. Laptop interface software. 29    $            85.00   $         50.00   $            1,450.00                  Wireless Video Transfer and Networking Options Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   4RE‐WRL‐KIT‐ 05G  4RE In‐Car 802.11n Wireless Kit, 5GHz (2.4GHz is  available) 29    $         345.00   $      190.00   $            5,510.00                  HDW‐ETH‐ SWT‐001 4RE, Power Over Ethernet / Gigabit 4‐port Switch 29    $         180.00   $      140.00   $            4,060.00                  Camera Configuration Options Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   CAM‐BST‐ 102‐NEW  Infrared Color Cabin Camera, Additional (requires  4RE Elite) 86    $         220.00   $      185.00   $          15,910.00                  WGA00485 Auxiliary Camera 0    $         220.00   $      185.00   $                         ‐                                   415 Century  Parkway Allen, TX 75013 (800) 605‐6734 www watchguard Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 Microphone Options Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   DUAL MIC  UPGRADE  Dual Wireless Mics. Includes second wireless  microphone kit. 28    $         875.00   $      685.00   $          19,180.00                  MIC‐WRL‐ DTC‐400 Desktop Charging unit for Wireless Transmitter 1    $         110.00   $         90.00   $                  90.00                  MIC‐HFI‐MLT‐ CHG  Multiple HiFi Desktop Charging Bases (charges 8  HiFi mics) 5    $         775.00   $      725.00   $            3,625.00                  MIC‐WRL‐ TRN‐400 Wireless Transmitter (additional / replacement) 4    $         385.00   $      345.00   $            1,380.00                  4RE‐DIS‐RCP 4RE Remote Display 0    $         800.00   $      750.00   $                         ‐                    In‐Car Hardware Warranties  1st year is included with a new 4RE  purchase. Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   WAR‐4RE‐ CAR‐2ND Warranty, 4RE, In‐Car, 2nd Year (Months 13‐24) 29    $         155.00   $      100.00   $            2,900.00                    WAR‐4RE‐ CAR‐3RD Warranty, 4RE, In‐Car, 3rd Year (Months 25‐36) 29    $         255.00   $      200.00   $            5,800.00                    WAR‐4RE‐ CAR‐4TH Warranty, 4RE, In‐Car, 4th Year (Months 37‐48) 0    $         380.00   $      325.00   $                         ‐                    WAR‐4RE‐ CAR‐5TH Warranty, 4RE, In‐Car, 5th Year (Months 49‐60) 0    $         505.00   $      450.00   $                         ‐                    Software Protection Plan  Create, amend or extend a Software  Protection Plan Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   SFW‐MNT‐ ELB‐2YR  Software Protection, Evidence Library, 2nd Year  (per 4RE) 29    $         110.00   $         95.00   $            2,755.00              $                ‐       SFW‐MNT‐ ELB‐3YR  Software Protection, Evidence Library, 3rd Year (per  4RE) 29    $         110.00   $         95.00   $            2,755.00                  SFW‐MNT‐ ELB‐4YR  Software Protection, Evidence Library, 4th Year (per  4RE) 0    $         110.00   $         95.00   $                         ‐                    SFW‐MNT‐ ELB‐5YR  Software Protection, Evidence Library, 5th Year (per  4RE) 0    $         110.00   $         95.00   $                         ‐                    5 Year  HW/SW  Warranty  Discount  Discount for purchase of 5 year hardware and  software warranty at time of 4RE purchase. 0    $                   ‐     $                ‐     $                         ‐                    Miscellaneous Options and Accessories Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   RADAR CABLE Radar Interface Cable (Stalker, Decatur Genesis I  and II Select, Kustom Eagle or Raptor, MPH Bee 3) 0    $            85.00   $         75.00   $                         ‐                    Trade‐In Trade‐In Credit, if applicable 0    $                   ‐     $                ‐     $                         ‐     Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011                CopVu CopVu Wearable Camera 9    $         895.00   $      750.00   $            6,750.00                       Total In‐Car Hardware   $       206,000.00                  Evidence Library Server and Client Software Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   KEY‐ELB‐SRV‐ 300 Evidence Library 3 Server Software 1    $                   ‐     $   3,660.00   $            3,660.00                  SFW‐ELB‐CLI‐ 300  Included Remote Client License Key, Evidence  Library 3 0    $            85.00   $                ‐     $                         ‐                    SFW‐ELB‐CLI‐ 301  Additional Remote Client License Key, Evidence  Library 3 29    $            85.00   $         70.00   $            2,030.00                  SFW‐SQL‐CAL‐ R25  Additional Software CALs, SQL Server 2008 R2, 5  CAL Pack 0    $         460.00   $      410.00   $                         ‐                    SFW‐SQL‐CAL‐ R21  Additional Software CAL, SQL Server 2008 R2, 1 CAL  Pack 0    $         100.00   $         90.00   $                         ‐                    Server Hardware and Software Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   HDW‐4RE‐ SRV‐201 3U Rack Mount 16 SATA Drive Server, Intel Xeon E5‐ 2620 2.0GHz 6‐Core, 32GB RAM, 2x128GB SSD  6GB/S MLC drives (boot) 3x500GB SATA 7,200 RPM  drives (sql), Windows Server 2008 R2 64‐bit, SQL  Server 2008 R2 (5CAL), 3‐Year full service (on‐site or  reimbursed) warranty. 1      $      8,820.00   $   7,935.00   $            7,935.00         Medium to  Large sized  agency.  16‐35  concurrent  cars.           This server system does NOT include supporting  equipment like keyboards, network switches,  monitor, etc.                        Upload Server and Software          HDW‐4RE‐ SRV‐001 Tower Server, Intel i7 3.40 GHz, 8GB RAM, 4x2TB  SATA 7,200 RPM drives, 5TB usable video storage,  Windows 7 Pro 64‐bit, SQL Server 2008 R2 (1CAL),  3‐Year full service (on‐site or reimbursed) warranty. 0      $      3,880.00   $   3,490.00   $                         ‐        Upload Server  at Fire Station  to collect  video & then  transfer  across  network.           This server includes tower, keyboard, monitor with  built in speakers and mouse.                   Video Storage  Drives will be added to server and/or JBOD Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   HDW‐4RE‐ HDD‐4TB  4TB Hard Drives, Server Class,7,200 rpm, 64MB  Cache 37    $         555.00   $      490.00   $          18,130.00                    HDW‐4RE‐ JBD‐024  Storage, JBOD Enclosure, 24‐bay, 4U, includes SAS  Cable 1    $      2,850.00   $   2,375.00   $            2,375.00                    HDW‐4RE‐Critical Video Backup Storage ‐ JBOD Enclosure, 12‐1    $      2,030.00   $   1,580.00   $            1,580.00   Professional Services Rev Nov. 1, 2011 JBD‐012 bay                   HDW‐4RE‐ HDD‐4TB Critical Video Backup ‐ 4TB Hard Drives 12    $         555.00   $      490.00   $            5,880.00                    Wireless Access Points Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   WAP‐BLD‐ 245‐001  Wi‐Fi Access Point, 802.11n, 2.4/5GHz, Digital  Steering 0    $      3,270.00   $   2,955.00   $                         ‐                      WAP‐KIT‐05G‐ 001  WiFi Access Point Kit, 802.11n, 5GHz, Omni‐ Directional 0    $         455.00   $      405.00   $                         ‐                      WAP‐BLD‐ 05G‐001 Wi‐Fi Access Point, 802.11n, 5GHz, Sector Antenna 0    $         285.00   $      250.00   $                         ‐                           Total IT Hardware and Software   $         41,590.00                  WatchGuard Video Technical Services Quantity    MSRP   Direct   Extended   SVC‐4RE‐INS‐ 100 4RE System Installation, In‐Car (Per Unit Charge) 29    $         445.00   $      400.00   $          11,600.00                  SVC‐VID‐REM‐ 100  Video System Removal (Per Unit Charge Included  with Install) 29    $                   ‐     $                ‐     $                         ‐                    SVC‐4RE‐ONS‐ 400  4RE System Setup, Configuration, Testing and  Training  (Quantity represents number of sites)  1    $      2,780.00   $   2,500.00   $            2,500.00                  SVC‐WGV‐ ONS‐300  Access Point installations including cable runs  (Work may be performed by a sub‐contractor) 0    $      1,100.00   $   1,000.00   $                         ‐                         Total Technical Services   $         14,100.00   Manual Adjustments            Description:  Watch Commander LVS ($2500 + $250 / car / year ‐ includes 1st year)    $            9,750.00                       Subtotal:  $        271,440.00     UPS Ground Shipping:  $            1,175.00      Taxes: 8.75%  $          23,853.81      ESTIMATE TOTAL:  $  296,468.81   EXHIBIT “D” - INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Rev. 11/07 CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY EXHIBIT “D” - INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Rev. 11/07 THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303. HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT WatchGuard Video, in recognition of its responsibility to provide quality systems, components, and workmanship, warrants each system, part, and component it manufactures first sold to an end user to be free from defects in material and workmanship for a period of ONE YEAR from the date of purchase. A defective component that is repaired or replaced under this limited warranty will be covered for the remainder of the original warranty period. Where defects in material or workmanship may occur, the following warranty terms and conditions apply: WARRANTOR – This warranty is granted by WatchGuard Video, 415 Century Parkway, Allen, TX 75013, Telephone: 972-423-9777, Facsimile: 972-423-9778. PARTIES TO WHOM WARRANTY IS INTENDED – This warranty extends to the original end user of the equipment only and is not transferable. Any exceptions must be approved in writing from WatchGuard Video. PARTS AND COMPONENTS COVERED – All parts and components and repair labor of the warranted unit manufactured and/or installed by WatchGuard Video are covered by this warranty, except those parts and components excluded below. PARTS AND COMPONENTS NOT COVERED – The Limited Warranty excludes normal wear-and-tear items such as frayed or broken cords, broken connectors, and scratched or broken displays. WatchGuard reserves the right to charge for damages resulting from abuse, improper installation, or extraordinary environmental damage (including damages caused by spilled liquids) to the unit during the warranty period at rates normally charged for repairing such units not covered under the Limited Warranty. In cases where potential charges would be incurred due to said damages, the agency submitting the system for repairs will be notified. Altered, damaged, or removed serial numbers results in voiding this Limited Warranty. If while under the warranty period, it is determined that the WatchGuard Video system was internally changed, modified, or repair attempted, the system warranty will become null and void. LIMITED LIABILITY – WatchGuard Video’s liability is limited to the repair or replacement of components found to be defective by WatchGuard Video. WatchGuard Video will not be liable for any direct, indirect, Limited In-Car Hardware Warranty HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT consequential, or incidental damages arising out of the use of or inability to use the system even if the unit proved to be defective. WatchGuard Video will not be responsible for any removal or re-installation cost of the unit or for damages caused by improper installation. REMEDY – If, within the duration of this warranty, a unit or component covered by this warranty is returned to WatchGuard Video and proves to be defective in material or workmanship, WatchGuard Video shall (at its option) repair or replace any defective components or offer a full refund of the purchase price . Replacement of a defective component(s) pursuant to this warranty shall be warranted for the remainder of the warranty period applicable to the system warranty period. SHIPPING – During the first ninety (90) days of the initial warranty period, WatchGuard Video will provide a prepaid shipping label to return any defective unit for end users in the continental United States provided serial numbers are submitted with request. In such event, contact WatchGuard’s Customer Service Department to request a return material authorization (RMA) number. Failure to obtain and use a WatchGuard Video prepaid shipping label in the first ninety days (90) on the return shipment will result in the end user being responsible for shipping costs to WatchGuard Video. After the first ninety (90) days, the end user will be responsible for any shipping charges to WatchGuard Video. WatchGuard Video will return ship the product to a customer within the continental United States by prepaid ground shipping only. Any expedited shipping costs are the responsibility of the end user. Customers that are outside the continental United States will be responsible for all transportation costs both to and from WatchGuard Video’s factory for warranty service, including without limitation to any export or import fees, duties, tariffs, or any other related fees that may be incurred during transportation. HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT You may also obtain warranty service by contacting your local WatchGuard Authorized Service Center (ASC) for shipping instructions. A list of local ASCs may be obtained by contacting WatchGuard’s Customer Service Department. Customers will be responsible for all transportation costs to and from the local ASC for warranty service. EXTENDED WARRANTY – Extended Warranties may be purchased directly from WatchGuard Video. Any and all extended warranties must be purchased prior to the expiration of any previous warranty. Failure to purchase an extended warranty prior to the expiration of the warranty period will require the covered unit to be physically inspected at the facility of the manufacturer and any repairs necessary to bring the unit back to full working order must be performed prior to the issuance of any new warranty. The customer will be responsible for the cost of the inspection (equal to 1 hour of labor) plus the standard costs associated with any required repairs. Should you have any further questions regarding the WatchGuard Video limited warranty, please direct them to: WatchGuard Video Attn: Customer Service Department 415 Century Parkway Allen, Texas 75013 (800) 605-6734 Toll Free Main Phone (866) 384-8567 Toll Free Queued Customer Service (972) 423-9777 Main (972) 423-9778 Fax www.watchguardvideo.com support@watchguardvideo.com Exhibit “F” – Server Full Service Warranty HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ACTIVATION - This Service Plan is activated, and the below terms and conditions apply, on the date of shipment of the Equipment by the Manufacturer (“WatchGuard Video”). User registration is not required to activate this Service Plan. SERVICE PLAN - This Service Plan applies to on-site computer repair services that are available to you from Exelus, LLC (“Exelus”) for the Equipment you purchased. Exelus shall provide to the User the services described in this Service Plan for a period of three (3) years. COVERAGE - (1) To obtain performance under this Service Plan, an End User should call Exelus at their toll- free number 866-668-2773 and report the nature of the problem with the Equipment. Only representatives of Exelus or authorized Exelus service providers may perform repairs on the Equipment under this Service Plan. (2) During the Service Plan Period, Exelus will repair or replace, at the option of Exelus, any Equipment having a defect in material or workmanship. All replacement parts shall be provided by WatchGuard Video at no cost to End User. Exelus will return the Equipment to a like factory shipped condition. Exelus will not reload User’s software. Circumstances may; however, require the reloading of the operating system as originally installed by the Manufacturer. Replacement parts are new or like-new (tested equivalent to new). Exelus may provide replacement parts made by various manufacturers when supplying parts to User. All replacement parts shall also be covered under this Service Plan for the remainder of the Service Plan Period or thirty (30) days (whichever is longer) and WatchGuard Video warrants that replacement parts will be interchangeable with the parts they are to replace, and will conform to the specifications current when they are shipped. (3) Some problems or defects may require Exelus to reformat or replace a Hard Disk Drive. Under such circumstances all data on the disk drive may be lost. The User is solely responsible for the security of User’s data. Neither Exelus nor the authorized Exelus service providers shall be liable for the loss or destruction of data or media resulting from a defect in materials or workmanship covered by this Service Plan or resulting from the services performed hereunder. Exelus strongly advises End User to implement and maintain a daily routine to backup data to minimize the loss of data in the event of Equipment failure. Exelus service providers are required to return all replaced and/or unused components including Hard Disk Drives. Users that intend to keep a failed Hard Disk Drive to attempt data recovery or protect the data must make arrangements to purchase a replacement Hard Disk Drive prior to the service incident. Neither Exelus nor WatchGuard Video will accept the failed Hard Disk Drive after the service incident has been closed. (4) Server Full Service Warranty Exhibit “F” – Server Full Service Warranty HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT Exelus representatives will initially attempt to diagnose problems over the telephone. Telephone technical services are available on the Exelus toll-free service line, 866-668-2773, during normal business hours (7 AM to 7 PM CST) Monday through Friday. EXCLUSIONS - This Service Plan does not include: (1) Service or replacement of peripherals including, but not limited to, keyboards, mice, monitors, scanners, speaker sets, external drives, backup media, power protection devices, or Equipment specified by WatchGuard Video as special, non-stock, or custom ordered goods. These items may be warranted by WatchGuard Video or Manufacturer; (2) Installation or set-up of the Equipment; (3) Service needed as a result of moving the Equipment; (4) Physical and/or cosmetic damage to the exterior surface or housing of the Equipment; (5) Problems resulting from negligence, misuse, abuse, or other physical casualty to the Equipment; improper maintenance; electrical disturbances; acts of nature; or work, attachments, additions, alterations, or modifications by persons other than qualified service providers; (6) Service needed as a result of improper operating environment; (7) Any problem not involving a defect in the Equipment hardware, including, but not limited to software problems and errors, programming problems and errors, software incompatibility problems, software installation problems and errors, and operating system problems and errors; (8) Any problem deemed by Exelus, in its sole discretion, that cannot be solved by on-site replacement of defective Equipment hardware; or (9) Use of any item with the Equipment if the item is not designated by WatchGuard Video for use with the Equipment. RESPONSIBILITIES OF USER - User shall: (1) operate the Equipment in an environment meeting WatchGuard Video’s specifications; (2) protect the supply of electricity to the Equipment through the use of appropriate surge protection devices; (3) comply with WatchGuard Video’s operating manual; (4) if you are experiencing hardware difficulties and are receiving diagnostic messages, print out or make note of the error message and communicate it to an Exelus help desk technician; (5) permit no work on the Equipment except by qualified service providers who are properly trained; (6) have an adult representative present whenever Exelus provides support services; (7) perform such diagnostic procedures or programs as requested by an authorized Exelus representative; (8) safeguard and deliver to an authorized Exelus service provider all replacement parts and/or accessories shipped by the Manufacturer to End User. Either the part(s) to be replaced or the replacement part(s) or item(s) shipped to End User must be returned to the Service Provider at the time of service. End User assumes financial responsibility for all parts and accessories, including, but not limited to, cables, diskettes, manuals and other accessories bundled with Exhibit “F” – Server Full Service Warranty HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT component(s), shipped to User until the items or parts replaced are returned to the Service Provider. User may be required to supply a valid credit card number and expiration date (i.e. VISA or Master Card) to secure reimbursement to WatchGuard Video in the event of physical or cosmetic damage and/or all defective or unused parts, components and accessories are not returned to the Service Provider at the time of service. TRANSFER OF SERVICE PLAN - This Service Plan may be transferred at any time during the original term hereof. The transferee succeeds to the remaining term of the Service Plan. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY - NEITHER EXELUS NOR ITS AUTHORIZED SERVICE PROVIDERS HAVE ANY LIABILITY TO USER(S) FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, PUNITIVE, CONSEQUENTIAL OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOST PROFITS OR LOSS OF BUSINESS OR DOWN TIME, YOUR TIME, THE CLAIMS OF THIRD PARTIES OR INJURY TO PROPERTY, REGARDLESS OF THE NATURE OF THE CLAIM, EVEN IF EXELUS OR ITS SERVICE PROVIDERS HAVE BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. USER UNDERSTANDS AND AGREES THAT EXELUS AND/OR ITS AUTHORIZED SERVICE PROVIDERS ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR LOSS, DESTRUCTION OR DAMAGE TO SOFTWARE AND DATA. YOUR SOLE REMEDY AGAINST EXELUS OR ITS AUTHORIZED SERVICE PROVIDERS IS LIMITED TO THE COST OF REPLACING THE DEFECTIVE EQUIPMENT AND/OR TO SEEK RECOVERY OF THE AMOUNTS YOU HAVE PAID FOR THIS SERVICE PLAN. LAWS VARY FROM STATE TO STATE SO THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS MAY NOT APPLY. PARTS AVAILABILITY - Because of the rapid development of technology in the computer industry, or for other reasons, a particular part may not be available from WatchGuard Video. In such an event, Exelus will make reasonable efforts to locate a compatible replacement part(s) from other sources. If Exelus cannot locate a compatible replacement part(s), then, if possible, Exelus will offer to upgrade User’s system to the least expensive configuration that can be serviced. If User elects to accept the offer to upgrade, then User shall repay Exelus for the cost of the upgrade. In the event User chooses not to accept the upgrade Exelus shall not be responsible to make repairs under this Service Plan. MISCELLANEOUS - This Service Plan shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. If any provision of this Service Plan is void or unenforceable, the parties agree to delete it and agree that the remainder of this Service Plan will continue to be in effect. Exelus may assign this Exhibit “F” – Server Full Service Warranty HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT Agreement to any entity owned or controlled by Exelus LLC. This Service Plan contains the entire understanding of the parties and supersedes all previous verbal and written agreements with regard to the subject hereof. No term or condition of any purchase order or other writing issued by User inconsistent with this Service Plan will be binding upon Exelus.       EXHIBIT “G” – EVIDENCE LIBRARY SOFTWARE PROTECTION PLAN   HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TERMS AND CONDITIONS Your WatchGuard Software Protection Plan for Evidence Library (herein referred to as the “Software Protection Plan”) is governed by these Terms and Conditions and constitutes your contract with WatchGuard as described below. Subject to these Terms and Conditions, (i) The Evidence Library Software (“Covered Software”) first sold to an end user is guaranteed to be free from defects in material or workmanship for the duration of the Coverage Period. (ii) The Software Protection Plan provides you with access to telephone technical support and web-based support resources for the Covered Software. (iii) The Software Protection Plan provides you with access to software service packs and minor software updates, The Software Protection Plan can be extended beyond the first year for years 2-5 provided payment for the annual Software Protection Plan for each year is made to WatchGuard prior to the end of the Coverage Period. The Software Protection Plan must be carried consecutively without any lapses in yearly coverage across the entire fleet of vehicles in which a 4RE unit was purchased. WatchGuard will track the serial numbers of each 4RE unit and associate coverage with the Software Protection Plan respectively. All 4RE In-Car and 4RE IT related hardware is excluded under the Software Protection Plan. The duration of the Software Protection Plan (“Coverage Period”) is for the period specified in the Coverage Period on the preceding page. WatchGuard may restrict service provided under this Software Protection Plan to the Covered Software’s original country of purchase. Service Options: (i) Remote Service which includes call center, on-line chat, email, will call, and remote desktop service, is provided free of charge for the Coverage Period. In instances where remote desktop capability is accessible, WatchGuard will make every reasonable effort to provide a solution remotely. (ii) On-Site Technical Service must be scheduled in advance and is available at a minimum daily rate. Contact WatchGuard for further information regarding rates and availability. Evidence Library Software Protection Plan       EXHIBIT “G” – EVIDENCE LIBRARY SOFTWARE PROTECTION PLAN   HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TECHNICAL SUPPORT Telephone and Web Support. During the Coverage Period WatchGuard will provide you with access to telephone technical support and web-based technical support resources. Technical support may include assistance with installation, launch, configuration, troubleshooting, recovery, interpreting system error messages, and determining when hardware repairs are required. WatchGuard will provide technical support for the Covered Software including software applications that are installed by WatchGuard or an Authorized Service Center. WatchGuard will provide support for the then-current version of the software. Support Limitations. The Software Protection Plan does not cover: (i) Issues that could be resolved by upgrading the software to the then-current version. (ii) Your use of or modification to the Covered Software in a manner for which the Covered Software is not intended to be used or modified. (iii) Third-party products or their effects on or interactions with the Covered Software. (iv) Your use of a computer or operating system that is unrelated to Covered Software (v) Connectivity issues with the Covered Software over networks not built or supported by WatchGuard. (vi) Covered Software that has been deleted or uninstalled. (vii) Preventative maintenance on the Covered Software. (viii) Damage to, or loss of, any software or data residing or recorded on the same computer as the Covered Software. The contents of the hard drive may be deleted in the course of service. WatchGuard may install system software updates as part of your service that will prevent the software from reverting to an earlier version. Reinstallation of software programs and user data are not covered under this Plan. (ix) IT hardware and software which includes, but is not limited to, servers, computers, DVD burners, NAS, SAN, or JBOD online storage devices, uninterruptable power supplies, building mounted wireless access points, antennas, and all related brackets and mounting hardware (“IT Equipment”).       EXHIBIT “G” – EVIDENCE LIBRARY SOFTWARE PROTECTION PLAN   HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT (x) On-Site technical service. (xi) Problems caused by the function of a network or viruses or other software problems introduced into the Covered Software or computer the Covered Software is running on. (xii) Except as specifically provided herein, any other damages that do not arise from defects in materials and workmanship or ordinary and customary usage of the Covered Software. Any Incident deemed out of scope as defined in this Software Protection Plan or any incident that occurs while no Software Protection Plan Agreement is in place, shall be subject to additional fees and/or charges. The Customer will be quoted applicable charges and rates prior to any service(s) being performed. Approved service(s) will commence upon receipt of a purchase order. Obtaining Technical Support You may obtain technical support by calling the telephone number listed below. The Customer Service Representative will provide you technical support. YOUR RESPONSIBILITY To receive service or support under the Plan, you agree to comply with the following: (i) Provide your agency name and serial number (if required) of the Covered Software. (ii) Provide information about the symptoms and causes of the problems with the Covered Software. (iii) Respond to requests for information, including but not limited to the associated serial number of Covered Software, version, model, IT hardware, and software including operating system and database software, third-party software installed, any peripherals devices connected or installed with the Covered Software, any error messages displayed, actions taken before the Covered Software experienced the issue and steps taken to resolve the issue. (iv) Update software to currently published releases prior to seeking service. (v) You shall maintain all IT Equipment related to or required by the Covered Software. Any incident arising from inadequate maintenance of these systems shall be subject to additional per incident charges (vi) Any changes to the hardware or software environment for both the Covered Software and IT Equipment made by Customer that results in any degradation in performance will be the responsibility of you including any related costs to correct the issue. Changes include, but are       EXHIBIT “G” – EVIDENCE LIBRARY SOFTWARE PROTECTION PLAN   HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT not limited to, in-car installation resulting in a non-approved installation, damaged or misalignment of wireless antennas caused by the customer or weather, untrimmed trees or added obstacles that degrade wireless signal strength, added vehicles without regard for adding additional wireless access points that results in degraded performance, adding or changing video storage locations in an improper manner, adding or updating server software without the approval of WatchGuard, changes to the 4RE related network topology or architecture without consultation of WatchGuard. GENERAL TERMS (i) WatchGuard may subcontract or assign performance of its obligations to third-parties but will not be relieved of its obligations to you in doing so. (ii) WatchGuard is not responsible for any failures or delays in performing under the Plan that are due to events outside WatchGuard’s reasonable control. (iii) This Plan is offered and valid only in the United States of America. This Plan may not be available in all states, and is not available where prohibited by law. (iv) In carrying out its obligations WatchGuard may, at its discretion and solely for the purposes of monitoring the quality of WatchGuard’s response, record part or all of the calls between you and WatchGuard. (v) WatchGuard is not obligated to renew the Software Protection Plan after termination. If a new Software Protection Plan is offered, WatchGuard will determine the price and terms. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY EXCEPT FOR THE LIMITED WARRANTIES AND REMEDIES CONTAINED HEREIN, THIS PRODUCT IS PROVIDED ON AN “AS IS” BASIS, WITHOUT ANY OTHER WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS, EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABLE QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR THOSE ARISING BY LAW, STATUTE, USAGE OF TRADE, OR COURSE OF DEALING.       EXHIBIT “G” – EVIDENCE LIBRARY SOFTWARE PROTECTION PLAN   HIGH DEFINITION, WIRELESS TRANSFER, SERVER-BASED IN-CAR VIDEO FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT NEITHER WATCHGUARD NOR ITS DEALERS OR SUPPLIERS WILL HAVE ANY LIABILITY FOR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES WHATSOEVER, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, LOSS OF REVENUE OR PROFIT, WHETHER RESULTING FROM THE USE, MISUSE OR INABILITY TO USE THIS PRODUCT OR FROM DEFECTS IN THE PRODUCT, EVEN IF WATCHGUARD HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBLITIY OF SUCH DAMAGES, OR THEY ARE FORESEEABLE. WATCHGUARD IS ALSO NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR CLAIMS BY A THIRD PARTY. WATCHGUARD’S MAXIMUM AGGREGATE LIABILITY TO YOU, AND THAT OF ITS DEALERS AND SUPPLIERS, SHALL NOT EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU FOR THIS PRODUCT AS EVIDENCED BY YOUR PURCHASE RECEIPT. This limited warranty gives you specific legal rights. You may also have other rights that may vary from state to state or from country to country. You are advised to consult applicable state or country laws for a full determination of your rights. SUPPORT CONTACT INFORMATION WatchGuard Video Attn: Customer Service Department 415 Century Parkway Allen, Texas 75013 (800) 605-6734 Toll Free Main Phone (866) 384-8567 Toll Free Queued Customer Service (972) 423-9777 Main (972) 423-9778 Fax www.watchguardvideo.com support@watchguardvideo.com City of Palo Alto (ID # 4242) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of a Contract for the Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan Project Title: Approval of a Contract in the Amount of $327,535 with MIG, Inc. for the Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan Project PE-13003 From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Contract No. C14150749 with MIG, INC. (Attachment A) in a Not to Exceed Amount of $376,665 for the Parks, Trails, Opens and Recreation Master Plan (PE-13003), including $327,535 for basic services and $49,130 for additional services. Background The City of Palo Alto has 32 parks comprising 187 acres, an extensive trail system, and four open space preserves that include 4,000 acres. Individual parks range from very small neighborhood parks such as Cogswell Plaza to regional parks such as Rinconada and Mitchell Parks. Additionally, the City provides a variety of other recreation facilities and programming with the mission to deliver high quality recreational opportunities for the community by: City of Palo Alto Page 2 "Engaging individuals and families to create a strong and healthy community, through parks, open space, recreation, social services, arts and sciences." The purpose of the Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan project is to prepare a Master Plan to guide the City’s implementation of improvements over the next 25 years. The Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) were closely involved in the development of the scope of work for the Master Plan project. The initial scope, as described in the FY 2013 Capital Budget, was limited to the City’s urban parks and appropriated $350,000 for the project. Following feedback from the PRC, the scope of the project was expanded to include the trail system, the developed areas of the open space preserves and the City’s recreational programming. The expanded scope and an additional appropriation of $100,000 were approved in the FY 2014 Capital Budget, bringing the total project budget to $450,000. Upon approval of the increased funding, an Ad Hoc Committee of the PRC was formed to provide further input and direction concerning the draft scope of work. The finalized scope reflects the joint participation between staff and the Commission. Discussion The Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan will provide the City with clear guidance regarding future renovations, improvements and funding needs, incorporating demands for projected recreational, programming, and maintenance needs and establishing a prioritized schedule of future park renovations and facility improvements. The Master Plan process will include the creation of a comprehensive inventory of all Palo Alto parks, trails, open spaces and recreational facilities; an analysis of current and forecasted community recreation needs using a 25-year planning horizon;a prioritization of needed renovations and improvements;and a strategy and timeline for funding the improvements. The process will engage the Community for their feedback to best determine how priorities should be established, and will include significant review by Palo Alto boards and commissions and City Council. City of Palo Alto Page 3 The key tasks to be performed in development of the Master Plan are summarized as follows: ·Review and analysis of all city parks, trails (gaps in trail system) and open space developed areas ·Review and analysis of recreational services and programs ·Analysis of sustainability opportunities ·Demographic analysis and identification of any underserved user groups ·Extensive community and stakeholder input ·Prioritization of recommended renovations and improvements ·Development of Master Plan to guide future parks and recreation projects ·Analysis of funding levels needed for maintenance of and improvements to the parks and recreation system These tasks are described in greater detail in the project scope of work included in Attachment A. Summary of Solicitation Process Proposal Description/Number PARKS, TRAILS, OPEN SPACES AND RECREATION MASTER PLAN/ REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NUMBER 150749 Proposed Length of Project Approximately 21 months Number of Proposals Mailed 15 Total Days to Respond to Proposal 31 Pre-proposal Meeting Date July 13, 2013 Number of Company Attendees at Pre- proposal Meeting 5 City of Palo Alto Page 4 Number of Proposals Received:5 Company Name Location (City, State) Selected for oral interview? 1. Gates & Associates San Ramon, CA No 2. Bellinger Foster Steinmetz Landscape Palo Alto, CA Yes 5. Royston Hanamoto Alley & Abey Mill Valley, CA Yes 4. RJM Design Group Sacramento, CA No 5. MIG, Inc. Berkeley, CA Yes Total Proposal Range Amounts $294,005 -$415,176 An evaluation committee consisting of staff from the Community Services Department and the Public Works Department’s Engineering Services Division as well as a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee reviewed the proposals. From the proposal evaluations three firms were invited for interviews on August 28, 2013. The Committee carefully reviewed each firm's qualifications and submittals in response to the criteria identified in the RFP. The evaluation committee unanimously selected MIG, Inc. as the top proposer. MIG, Inc. was selected because of their experience with community outreach, other similar park master plan projects and their clearly defined team roles. The additional services amount of 15% is larger than the standard 10% amount. The higher amount is recommended due to the expected extensive input and review from the public and the boards and commissions, which is likely to result in requests for inclusion of unforeseen analysis and/or studies not included in the contract scope of work. Timeline The Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Planning process duration is approximately 21 months. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Resource Impact Funding for this contract is available in Capital Improvement Program project PE- 13003 (Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan). Policy Implications The proposed Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan 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. Environmental Review This is a planning study and therefore exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review pursuant to Section 15262 of the CEQA guidelines. Attachments: ·A - Contract -Park, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan (PDF) ·B -Performance Schedule (PDF) Page 1 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C14150749 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND MIG, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 18 day of November, 2013, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and MIG, INC., a Land Planning Consultant Firm, located at 800 Hearst Ave, Berkeley, CA 94710 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to develop a Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan (“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant to provided the needed services in connection with the Project (“Services”). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit “A”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit “A” in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through September 30, 2015 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of Page 2 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Three hundred and twenty seven thousand five hundred and thirty five Dollars ($327,535.00). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Three hundred seventy six thousand six hundred and sixty five Dollars ($376,665.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit “A”. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT’s billing rates (set forth in Exhibit “C-1”). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. Page 3 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct any and all errors, omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project. This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%) of the CITY’s stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to the CITY for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Lauren Schmitt as the Principal -in-Charge to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and Ryan Mottau as the project Manager 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 Page 4 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. The City’s project manager is Elizabeth Ames, Public Works Department, Engineering Division, 250 Hamilton Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone:(650) 329-2502. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. The CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not Page 5 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Purchasing Manager during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. Page 6 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. Page 7 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the City’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at the City’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of the City’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, Consultant shall comply with the following zero waste requirements:  All printed materials provided by Consultant to City generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks.  Goods purchased by Consultant on behalf of the City shall be purchased in accordance with the City’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Office.  Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by the Consultant, at no additional cost to the City, for reuse or recycling. Consultant shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION 24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Page 8 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 Agreement. SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, City shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City’s express written consent. 25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they DocuSign Envelope ID: 7F006382-7D20-413D-826E-153784CEAEE7 have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. 25.11 This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parti es, constitute a single binding agreement IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO MIG, Inc. City Manager I. au re ft Schmitt Principal APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Ass!. City Attorney Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": EXHIBIT "B": EXHIBIT "C": EXHIBIT "C-I ": EXHIBIT "D": II II II II Page 9 of25 SCOPE OF WORK SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE COMPENSATION SCHEDULE OF RATES INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS Professional Services Rev. November 11 , 2011 Page 10 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES OBJECTIVES The purpose of the Master Plan is to create a clear set of objectives that will provide direction to City staff, the Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC), the Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council for development, re-development, expansion and enhancement of the City’s parks system, open spaces, trails, recreation facilities, and recreation programs and services for a short-term (5 year), mid-term (10 year) and long-term (25 year) range. Specific items to include in the Master Plan, but not limited to, are: 1. Park Analysis/Assessment Study – Analyze and assess the current conditions of all of Palo Alto 32 Parks, 4 open space preserves (developed areas within the preserves only such as picnic and parking areas, restrooms, boardwalks, etc.), trails (links/connections of existing trails) and recreation facilities (community gardens, gymnasiums, exercise rooms, basketball courts, pools, etc.). This assessment will include a review of recreational services and programs offered at the Lucie Stern Community Center, leased and contracted public facilities such as the Cubberley Community Center and Palo Alto Unified School District fields and courts. 2. Recreation Program and Services Analysis/Assessment Study - Analyze and assess the current recreation programs and services provided by the City, and identify opportunities and deficiencies for future recreation programs and services. 3. Demographic Analysis Study– Review and interpret demographic trends and characteristics of Palo Alto using available statistical information from the annual Service Efforts and Accomplishments report for the City of Palo Alto available at (http://www.Cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/29490). Utilize the demographic information to project future park, trails, open space and recreational needs. 4. Community Needs Study – Determine the communities interests and needs for enhancements to the parks system through community meetings/outreach (topics of interest to review but not limited to: dog parks, skate parks, bocce ball, number of athletic fields needed, synthetic turf vs natural grass turf fields, etc). 5. Capital Development Study - Identify and prioritize important capital issues and projects to consider to be incorporated into a short term (5 year), mid-term (10 year) and the long term (25 year) capital improvement program time table. 6. Costs and Funding Sources Study - Identify probable costs, operations, maintenance costs and potential revenue and funding sources including an evaluation of the best use of park development impact funds TASK 1: Work Plan Prior to embarking on the tasks to be performed under this Scope of Work, MIG will meet with City Staff to finalize a detailed work scope and schedule and identify all information to be provided by City Staff. This task will also include the development of a public input plan identifying the information needs as well as the activities, outreach methods, targets audiences Page 11 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 and key stakeholders. Meetings to Include: • City Staff review meeting of scope and schedule Deliverables  Revised scope and schedule  Community input plan  List of Identify relevant stakeholders  Request for information letter TASK 2: CITY POLICY AND STANDARDS REVIEW MIG shall conduct an interdepartmental meeting with City Staff to review: • Existing conditions of parks, trails and opens spaces • Current Recreational Services • Maintenance practices • Identify policies and standards • Infrastructure • Interconnections between park and recreation system and city services • Related planning efforts (past and present) A City Staff Project Review Team will be selected at the time of the intradepartmental meeting composed of key staff members who will guide the process by providing technical and political feedback on interim products. MIG shall assemble and review all existing City of Palo Alto strategic planning documents to ensure compatibility with the final Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan recommendations. Meetings to Include: • Intra-Department City Staff Meeting • City Staff Project Review Team Meeting #1 - Review draft of Task 2 summary Materials to be provided:  City Comprehensive Plan: To include the new and updated document  Park & Open Space ‘As-Built’ Plans and/or GIS base maps  List of Recreational Services/Programs  Past Parks and Recreation Plans  Trails Maintenance and Master Plans  City details and specifications  2011 Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission Report and associated Park/Open Space condition assessment and list of Parks and Open Space Capital Improvement Projects scheduled for the next five years.  Infrastructure spreadsheet  Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Deliverables The findings of this task will be summarized in the Draft and Final Planning summary for Task 2, which will include a summary of relevant policies, standards and plans and land use data.  Electronic format of Draft Summary for review and commenting – one revision only Page 12 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011  Finalized Draft Summary of Task 2 TASK 3: Existing Park, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Facilities and Programs Inventory/Analysis MIG is to compile a comprehensive inventory and analysis of all parks, open spaces (developed areas only) , trails ( Areas lacking ADA compliance or gaps in trail system), and programs/services offered by the City. This inventory will be conducted on a parks, trails and open space tour of all sites with city staff. At specific locations identified in Task 2 community/stakeholder members may also be invited to tour the facility and add further feedback. A special topics meeting with the Palo Alto Unified School District will also be held to review recreational uses and programs at athletic field facilities. Inventory data will be collected for both the physical system and the city’s offered recreational programming. Physical Inventory & Analysis The physical inventory of the system will include the complete system, summarized on a base map of the city as well as an inventory table detailing the following for all parks, trails and developed areas in open spaces. This inventory is to include:  Locations – Update City Plan  Size & boundary  Use – Neighborhood or Regional  History – Provided by City (history and past renovations)  Current condition  Facilities – Inventory of all park and recreational facilities (playgrounds, playfields, ball courts, pools, gyms, trails, restroom, structures, parking capacity)  School facilities  Constraints - Consultant to identify the constraint to sites and system  Opportunities – Consultant to identify opportunities to expand or enhance recreational opportunities  Access to key features Upon review by the Staff Project Team to ensure accuracy and completeness of the physical inventory; the analysis of the physical inventory is to include:  Facility and recreation (system) gaps - Analysis is to utilize input from the survey and Geographic analysis  Identification of ADA compliance issues  Operation and maintenance  Identification of suitable locations for potential new or expanded facilities (example: dog parks)  Recommendations to expand recreational facilities  Evaluate opportunities to increase sustainability practices such as & reducing turf, energy and water consumption, waste, etc. Recreational Inventory & Analysis An inventory of the City’s recreational programs is to be performed as part of this task to determine the level of recreational needs currently being achieved by the City and to identify those recreational areas that are lacking or not being served in Palo Alto. The recreational Page 13 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 programmatic inventory will include the following:  Mix and distribution of recreation opportunities  Program areas  Market segments served  User groups for primary facilities  Times of usage of primary facilities  Schedule of programs offered Upon review by the Staff Project Team to ensure accuracy and completeness of the recreational programs; the analysis of the recreational program inventory is to include:  Recommendations to expand recreational programs  Identify potential revenue sources  Operational requirements Meetings to Include: • City Staff and maintenance review meetings at each park and open space • (1) Palo Alto Unified School District review meetings Deliverables The inventory and analysis summary is to include along with the all inventory and analysis information is to include:  Key findings of the inventory and analysis of the existing system  Electronic format Draft of System Analysis Summary for review and commenting – one revision only  Finalized System Analysis Summary Other deliverable items to include:  PAUSD meeting agenda  Existing and Potential Recreations Facilities and Programs Inventory/Analysis draft Report TASK 4: Demographic Analysis MIG shall analyze demographic trends in the region from the annual Service Efforts and Accomplishments report for the City of Palo Alto that may impact or affect the needs and demands on the Palo Alto parks, trails, open space and recreation system for the next 25 years. A demographic analysis report is to include an overview of all the major demographic elements that will impact Palo Alto’s park system, open spaces, trails, recreational facilities and recreational programs. The analysis should also identify underserved user groups, including those park users with disabilities as well as the needs of dog owners. The method and approach proposed for analyzing and incorporating the information from the demographic study into the Master Plan should be detailed in the proposal. Demographics to review:  City Demographic Information http://www.Cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/29490  City of Palo Alto Unified School district data  National Parks and Recreation Society survey data Local and national trends in park use will be interpreted to parks, open spaces, facilities and programs offered by Palo Alto. By identifying the activities to experience growth, plateau or decline, the impact of these trends on the physical system and programs offerings can be Page 14 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 projected. MIG will prepare a demographic analysis summary document, including a community demographic profile, highlighting key findings and trends likely to influence community outreach and the master planning process. Meetings to Include: • City Staff Project Review Team Meeting #2 - Review draft summary from task 3 & 4, review community meeting format and survey questions. Deliverables The findings of this task will be summarized in the Draft and Final Demographic Analysis summary, which will also special topics of including park users with disabilities and those impacting the needs of dog owners.  Electronic format of Draft Summary for review and commenting – one revision only  Finalized Demographic Summary TASK 5: Gather & Assess Community Needs & Community Survey MIG shall prepare a study session presentation with the City of Palo Alto’s Parks and Recreation Commission to review goals and objectives of the Parks, Trails & Recreation Master Plan Project and a review of the work performed on the previous tasks to date, as well as to receive input and feed-back from the Commissioners. The summaries of the previous tasks will consolidated and presented to the commission in a concise presentation, a portion of the presentation shall discuss the community meeting format and community survey questions. MIG will organize a community outreach process to solicit community input to assist with determining how Palo Alto parks, trails, open spaces and recreation facilities can better meet the needs of the community. The community outreach and public input process will be integral to the Master Planning process. MIG will prepare an interactive community workshop program and facilitate (3) sessions with the broad community. These meetings will provide a variety of ways for participants to interact, learn about the broad range of issues and desires, and engage in a way that is both meaningful and comfortable. Experienced MIG facilitators will guide the community participants through the work shop and ensure that all voices are heard and acknowledged. MIG will convene two (2) stakeholder focus group meetings– one (1) before the first community meeting and one (1) after the final community meeting - with key community leaders) , advocates and critics as identified by City Staff. The first meeting will be structured for issue identification and framed with the understanding that the planning process has not yet reached any decisions and is trying to frame the community’s choices with the best information possible. The second meeting will review findings from the survey and discuss prioritize. MIG will develop a bilingual survey prepared for implementation via the City’s Vovici outreach. The broad distribution of the survey tool (available both online and on paper) will allow for quota based sampling to achieve a statistically valid result while also opening the results to collect ideas from the larger population. If appropriate, the survey questions will be developed in coordination with the City’s bond polling firm to ensure alignment of the potential projects and Page 15 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 costs developed for testing. Following the previous meetings and survey in Task 5, a second meeting with the Parks and Recreation Commission will review the feedback received from the community/stakeholder meetings and the designation of an Ad Hoc Committee to work through the recommendation development and prioritization process in Task 6. MIG will present to the City Council regarding the projects status and the input from the community and allow the council the opportunity to provide feedback. Meetings to Include: • Bond Measure polling firm meeting review • Staff project review meeting – prior to survey and community/stakeholder meetings • (3) Community meetings • (2) Stakeholders meetings • Staff project review meeting – PRC and Council meetings • (2) Parks and Recreation Commission presentations (#1 & 2) • (1) City Council presentation Deliverables  Community Survey draft and final  Community Meeting agendas and summary (3 total)  Stakeholders Meeting agendas and summary (2 total)  Parks and Recreation Commission study session agenda, presentation and summary (2)  City Council study session agenda, presentation & summary (1)  Parks and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee study session agenda and summary (1) TASK 6: Draft Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan Report The Draft Park, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan Report is to analyze all of the data from the previous tasks and synthesize that information into a comprehensive report. MIG is to make recommendations which take into account the current and future needs related to parks, conditions of existing facilities, and cost of modifications in recommending how the current parks, trails, open space and recreational facilities should be maintained, modified or enhanced to serve short, medium and long term needs of the community. The report should include a matrix that summarizes the findings for each park, trail, open space and recreational facility, in a clear a concise format. MIG will prepare a series of prioritization meeting workshops with the community, stakeholders and the Park and Recreation Ad Hoc Committee. These meetings will build on the ideas generated in the previous tasks. These workshops will be based around a decision making game that elicits input and provides education to the participants. The input from these meetings will be used to finalize the prioritization process and the project list which will be integrated into an administrative draft Master Plan Report outline that will be presented to city staff for approval. Upon approval of the outline MIG will prepare the initial draft of the Master Plan Report for staff submittal. A Staff Project Team meeting will be conducted by MIG that will focus on revisions of the administrative draft of the Master Plan Report. The resulting Public Draft Report will be the Page 16 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 document used for review by the community, the City’s boards and commissions and the City Council. MIG will develop the necessary policies, recommendations, actions items and processes to create a relevant, useful and easy to follow Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan. This plan will include sections that provide the necessary and relevant information distilled from the previous tasks. The Draft Master Plan Report is to include, but is not limited to the following information: Inventory and Analysis Section The report is to gather and summarize the analysis aspect of the Master Planning process. This Section is to include information from:  Development of a priority matrices that assists in the selection of short, medium and long term improvements  Analysis, prioritization and assessment of the parks, trials, open space and recreational facilities  City Comprehensive Plan  City staff input  Demographic analysis  Community/stakeholder input  Community survey information  Parks and Recreation Commission input  Consultant to identify areas within Palo Alto where park land or open space could be acquired to expand recreational areas. (i.e. parking lots, easements, open space, etc.)  Consultant to identify parks that should be considered for size expansion where possible. Development Study of Short, Medium and Long-Term Projects The report is to include the identification of short, medium and long–term capital projects, including both standard renovations and installation of new facilities.  Areas where certain outdated or underutilized facilities should be redeveloped  New specialized facilities (skate park, dog parks, gymnasium, etc. ) that should be considered.  New large scale facilities (pool, gymnasium, play fields ext.) that should be considered.  Playgrounds or facilities that are not in conformance with ADA standards  A timeline phasing plan and budget to accomplish the goals of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan  Develop a cost analysis for future capital, operational and maintenance costs for all expansions and improvements that are recommended in the Master plan Management and Implementation Section The report is to include a Management and Implementation section. This section is to include:  Goal, strategies, priorities and action items  Identify areas of possible revenue generation  Identify potential sources of funding  Identify the responsible party or group for achieving the goals and objectives of the Master Plan  Identify items that will require additional staff time needed for operations and maintenance  Establish a time frame for accomplishing each task Page 17 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011  Establish cost analysis for future capital, operational and maintenance recommendations for all expansions and improvements that are recommended in the Master plan Meetings to Include: • (1) Community prioritization meeting • (1) Stakeholder prioritization meeting • (2) PRC Ad Hoc Committee (#1 & #2) • City Staff Project Review Team Meeting #3 Deliverables  Staff project review meeting – prior to community/stakeholder meetings  Community prioritization meeting agenda, presentation and summary  Stakeholder prioritization meeting agenda, presentation and summary  Parks and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee agenda, presentation and summary  City Staff Project Review Team meeting agenda, presentation and summary  Administrative Draft Master Plan Report Outline  Administrative Draft Master Plan Report - Electronic copy for comment  Public Draft Master Plan Report TASK 7: Park Master Plans MIG will develop individual park master plans (bubble diagram of proposed renovations/modifications) and a written summary of each Palo Alto park site to illustrate the planned impacts. Each site plan will be based on available aerial imagery. Each site plan and summary will identify:  New facility or amenities components  Potential for expansion: Size or facilities  Components to be removed  Site improvements  Timing – Schedule of improvements/renovation over the next 25 years (short, medium and long term improvements)  Planning level cost analysis of operations, maintenance and capital improvements  Operations and Maintenance recommendations  Sustainable upgrade recommendations  Other key recommendations on a site-by-site basis A City Staff review of draft site master plans will be integrate into the Staff Project Team Review Meeting #4, aligned with the review of the Administrative Draft Master Plan Report. Site master plans will be revised with input from Staff Project Team Review, aligned with the Revised Draft Plan that will be put forward for adoption. Final modifications (if necessary) following the adoption process will be completed along with the final edits to the Adopted Plan. Meetings to Include: • City Staff Project Review Team Meeting #4 • (1) PRC Ad Hoc Committee (#3) Deliverables  Administrative draft Parks Master Plan - PDF versions for staff review Page 18 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011  City Staff Project Review Team meeting agenda, presentation and summary  Parks and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee agenda, presentation and summary TASK 8: City Boards and Commissions Study Session MIG will develop a presentation and walk-through of the Draft Master Plan Report and Park Master Plans for the City’s Boards and Commissions for input and feed-back. This task includes a reusable presentation and display materials. The City Council study session will be scheduled last and will include an update on the input from the other study sessions as well as the Community Master Plan Review Meeting (Task 9). Meetings to Include:  Parks and Recreation Commission Study Session #2  Planning and Transportation Commission (Study Session)  Public Arts Commission (Study Session)  Historical Review Board (Study Session)  City Council (Study Session) Deliverables  Meeting agendas, presentations and summaries TASK 9: Community Master Plan Review Meeting Utilizing the information developed for the study session (Task 8), MIG will design a community-wide review meeting to solicit feedback on the Draft Master Plan Report and individual Park Master Plans. This meeting will be designed to allow participants to quickly learn about the broad directions of the plan and zero in on the topics they are most interested in providing feedback about. Meetings to Include: • Community Master Plan review meeting Deliverables  Community Meeting agenda, presentation and summary TASK 10: Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan Based on the combined input of City Boards, Commissions, City Council and the community, MIG and the Staff Project Team will identify the necessary revisions and update the Draft Master Plan Report to reflect the input received. The site master plans will be revised in parallel as part of the effort in Task 7. This revised document will be finalized as the Revised Drat Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan. This version of the document will be presented to the Parks and Recreation Commission for their review and recommendations and to City Council for adoption. Following adoption and final changes will be integrated into the Adopted Parks, Trails, Opens Space and Recreation Master Plan. Meetings to Include:  City Staff Project Review Team Meeting #4  Parks and Recreation Commission Study Session #3 – Presentation of Master Plan  Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting #4 – Approval of the Master Plan  City Council Meeting #2 - Adoption of the Master Plan Deliverables Page 19 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011  Administrative draft Parks Master Plan - PDF versions for staff review  City Staff Project Review Team meeting agenda, presentation and summary  Parks and Recreation Commission meeting agendas, presentations and summaries  City Council meeting presentations Page 20 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed. Milestones Completion No. of Days/Weeks From NTP 1. Task 1 6 weeks 2. Task 2 15 weeks 3. Task 3 32 weeks 4. Task 4 30 weeks 5. Task 5 60 weeks 6. Task 6 75 weeks 7. Task 7 79 weeks 8. Task 8 80 weeks 9. Task 9 82 weeks 10. Task 10 96 weeks Page 21 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION 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” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $327,535. 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 $376,665. 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 $327,535and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $376,665. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task 1 $8,465 (Work Plan) Task 2 $22,731 (City Policy and Standard Review) Task 3 $59,078 (Inventory and Analysis) Task 4 $8,138 (Demographic Analysis) Task 5 $53,298 (Community Needs and Survey) Task 6 $80,427 (Draft Master Plan Report) Task 7 $43,993 (Parks Master Plans) Task 8 $20,567 (Boards and Commissions Study) Task 9 $9,201 (Community Master Plan Review) Task 10 $18,263 (Finalize Master Plan) Page 22 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 Sub-total Basic Services $324,160 Reimbursable Expenses $3,375 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $327,535 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $49,130 Maximum Total Compensation $376,665 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. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: all items necessary to complete the Master Planning project up to $3,375. A. Travel outside the San Francisco Bay area, including transportation and meals, will be reimbursed at actual cost subject to the City of Palo Alto’s policy for reimbursement of travel and meal expenses for City of Palo Alto employees. B. Long distance telephone service charges, cellular phone service charges, facsimile transmission and postage charges are reimbursable at actual cost. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $3,375 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. Work required because the following conditions are not satisfied or are exceeded shall be considered as additional services: Any further work outside the work detailed in the project scope that is required to complete the Master Plan Project. Page 23 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 EXHIBIT “C-1” HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Carolyn Verheyn, Consulting Principal $192.80 Lauren Schmitt, Principal-in-Charge $152.18 Principal $175.04 Ryan Mottau, Project Manager $114.16 Ellie Fiore, Deputy Project Manager $114.13 Joyce Vollmer, Strategic Communications Specialist $190.26 Communications and Media Associate $152.21 John Baas, Outdoor Recreation & Trails $175.04 Matthew Gaber, Landscape Architect $152.21 Tim Gilbert, ADA/Access Specialist $159.81 Steve Leathers, GIS Specialist $79.15 Project Associate $79.15 Project Assistant $72.84 Page 24 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 EXHIBIT “D” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY (30) DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. Page 25 of 25 Professional Services Rev. November 11, 2011 B. CROSS LIABILITY THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 ATTACHMENT B ID4242 Week 123451234512341234123451234123412345123412341234512341234512341234123451234123412345123412341234 1 Work Plan HHHH HH H H H HHHHHH HH 1.1 Project Initiation Meeting, Request for Information1.2 Work Schedule Updates (assume 6 updates over 20 months)1.3 Update Work Scope1.4 Public Input Plan (including relevant stakeholders/target 1.5 Project Management, Communications and Administration 2 City Policy and Standards Review 2.1 Interdepartmental Staff Workshop 2.2 Information Request and Background Material Collection 2.3 Base Map2.4 Policy and Standards Evaluation2.5 Existing Plan Review2.6 Draft Summary2.7 Staff Review Draft / Meeting #12.8 Final Summary2.9 Project Management, Communications and Administration33.1 Park, Open Space, School, Community Tour and Assessment3.2 Maintenance Review Meeting3.3 Palo Alto Unified School District Review Meeting3.4 Inventory Development3.5 Program Review and Analysis3.6 Develop and Review Mapita Online Survey3.7 Mapita Online Survey 3.8 Geographic Analysis 3.9 Sustainability Review 3.1 Revenue Analysis3.11 Draft Summary 3.12 Staff Review Draft / Meeting #23.13 Final Existing System Analysis Summary3.14 Project Management, Communications and Administration4Demographic Analysis4.1 Develop demographic projection (25 years)4.2 Apply local and national trends to Palo Alto 4.3 Draft Demographic Summary 4.4 Staff Review Draft / Meeting #34.5 Final Demographic Summary & City Review4.6 Project Management, Communications and Administration5 Gather & Assess Community Needs5.1 Prepare Presentation, Meeting Materials and Staff Report 5.2 Staff Review / Meeting #4 5.3 Parks and Recreation Commission #1 5.4 Park and Recreation Commission Study Session Summary 5.5 Community Workshop Meetings (3) 5.6 Community Workshop Summary (3) 5.7 Stakeholder Focus Group Meetings (2)5.8 Stakeholder Focus Group Summary (2)5.9 Draft Community Survey Questions5.10 City Review Survey Questions5.11 Polling Firm Coordination Meeting5.12 Park and Recreation Commission Ad Hoc Committee Review 5.13 Develop Survey Outreach Materials5.14 City Review Survey Materials5.15 Final Survey and Outreach Materials5.16 Administer Survey and Monitor Results5.17 Post Sampling Quotas 5.18 Survey Analysis5.19 Draft Survey Report5.20 City Review Draft Survey Report / Meeting #45.21 Final Survey Report 5.22 Prepare Presentation, Meeting Materials and Staff Report 5.23 City staff Briefing and Presentation for PRC and Council5.24 Park and Recreation Commission Meeting #25.25 City Council Update Presentation 5.26 Project Management and Administration Ju l y 2 0 1 4 De c e m b e r 2 0 1 3 Se p t e m b e r 2 0 1 5 Ap r i l 2 0 1 4 Ju l y 2 0 1 5 Au g u s t 20 1 5 Ma r c h 2 0 1 5 Ap r i l 2 0 1 5 Ma y 2 0 1 5 Ju n e 2 0 1 5 Existing Park, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Facilities and Programs Inventory/A Project Schedule Ma y 2 0 1 3 Ju n e 2 0 1 4 Ja n u a r y 2 0 1 4 Fe b r u a r y 2 0 1 4 Ma r c h 2 0 1 4 Au g u s t 20 1 4 Se p t e m b e r 2 0 1 4 Oc t o b e r 2 0 1 4 No v e m b e r 2 0 1 4 De c e m b e r 2 0 1 4 Fe b r u a r y 2 0 1 5 Ja n u a r y 2 0 1 5 Palo Alto Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan l 11/13/2013 ATTACHMENT B ID4242 Ju l y 2 0 1 4 De c e m b e r 2 0 1 3 Se p t e m b e r 2 0 1 5 Ap r i l 2 0 1 4 Ju l y 2 0 1 5 Au g u s t 20 1 5 Ma r c h 2 0 1 5 Ap r i l 2 0 1 5 Ma y 2 0 1 5 Ju n e 2 0 1 5 Project Schedule Ma y 2 0 1 3 Ju n e 2 0 1 4 Ja n u a r y 2 0 1 4 Fe b r u a r y 2 0 1 4 Ma r c h 2 0 1 4 Au g u s t 20 1 4 Se p t e m b e r 2 0 1 4 Oc t o b e r 2 0 1 4 No v e m b e r 2 0 1 4 De c e m b e r 2 0 1 4 Fe b r u a r y 2 0 1 5 Ja n u a r y 2 0 1 5 6 Draft Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan6.1 Recommended Project List6.2 Prioritization Framework and Process6.3 Project Cost Model6.4 Revenue Generation and Funding Options6.5 Timeline and Phasing Recommendations6.6 Identification of Existing Park Site Expansion Opportunities6.7 Identification of New Park and Open Space Opportunities6.8 Integration of Park System Expansion Opportunities6.9 Outline of Administrative Draft Plan 6.10 City Review of Draft Work Products and Meeting Materials6.11 Staff Project Review Team Meeting #56.12 Revise Draft Products and Materials & city staff review6.13 Community Prioritization Meeting6.14 Stakeholder Prioritization Meeting6.15 PRC Ad Hoc Committee Meeting #16.17 Prepare Staff Report6.18 Park and Recreation Commission Meeting #36.19 PRC Ad Hoc Committee Meeting #26.20 Administrative Draft Plan6.21 City Review Administrative Draft6.22 Staff Project Review Team Meeting #66.23 Public Draft Plan6.24 Project Management, Communications and Administration 7 Park Master Plans 7.1 Develop template and base materials 7.2 Draft Site Plans including written summary (36) 7.3 City Review and Revise Site Plans including written summary (36) 7.4 Citiy Revierw and Final Site Plans including written summary (36) 7.5 Project Management, Communications and Administration8City Boards and Commissions Study Session8.1 Presentation and Materials Development8.2 Prepare Staff Reports8.3 Parks and Recreation Commission (Study Session)8.4 Planning and Transportation Commission (Study Session)8.5 Prepare Staff Reports8.6 Public Arts Commission (Study Session)8.7 Historical Review Board (Study Session)8.8 Prepare Staff Report8.9 City Council (Study Session)8.10 City review and finalize Summaries (5)8.11 Project Management, Communications and Administration9 Community Master Plan Review Meeting9.1 Design Meeting/Materials9.2 Community Master Plan Review Meeting9.3 City Review and finalize Summary9.4 Project Management, Communications and Administration10 Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan10.1 Staff Project Review Team Meeting #5 10.2 Revised Draft Plan 10.3 City Review Draft Plan 10.4 Finalize Plan and City Review 10 Prepare Staff Report 10.6 Park and Recreation Commission Presentation Meeting/Approval 10.8 City Council staff report adoption Meeting10.9 Adopted Plan Document 10.10 Project Management, Communications, Administration and Close Palo Alto Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan l 11/13/2013 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4214) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Contract with Ghirardelli Associates for Cal Ave Transit Hub Corr. Title: Approval of a Contract with Ghirardelli Associates in the Amount of $638,599.82 for Construction Management Services for the California Avenue Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape Project From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager or designee to execute a contract with Ghirardelli Associates (Attachment A) in the amount of $638,599.82 for Construction Management Services for the California Avenue Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape Improvements Project. Background The proposed California Avenue Transit Hub Corridor Improvements project provides for streetscape improvements along California Avenue between El Camino Real and the California Avenue Caltrain Station. Improvements include streetscape elements, sidewalk widening, landscaping, utilities, new street lighting and improvements to the Park Blvd. Park Plaza. This Construction Management Services contract includes a Construction Manager and a Project Inspector to support staff during the construction of this project. The contract also includes an extensive outreach process intended to inform the business community and residents of upcoming activities and to minimize physical impacts to the businesses during construction phase. Construction of the project is expected to begin in January 2014. Staff will return to Council in January for an updated project cost, schedule and Construction Contract Award. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Discussion The City received ten proposals in response to the Request for Proposals (RFP) solicitation for the Constrcution Management Services. The solicitation and selection process is outlined below. Proposal Description/Number Construction Management Services Proposed Length of Contract: Approx 1 year Total Days to Respond to RFP: 36 days Pre-proposal Meeting Date: August 20, 2013 Number of Proposals Received: 10 Proposals Received from: Location (City, State) Selected for oral interview? CSG Ghirardelli S&C Swinerton Vali Cooper 4 Leaf CalTrop DCMI Hatch Mott McDonald Townsend San Mateo, CA Oakland, CA Oakland, CA San Francisco, CA Emeryville, CA Pleasanton, CA Emeryville, CA Capitola, CA San Jose, CA San Francisco, CA Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No City of Palo Alto Page 3 The proposals were judged by the following criteria:  Consultant Experience with Streetscape projects;  Community Outreach Experience;  Ability to perform the work;  Proposal quality and completeness;  Cost to the City Five firms were selected for oral interviews upon review of the proposals and Ghirardelli was unanimously selected as the preferred team to serve as a project inspector and to represent the City during the construction stage of the California Avenue – Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape Improvement project. Ghirardelli has direct experience in working with the City of Palo Alto in the construction of streetscape-type projects including having served as project inspectors for the El Camino Real and Stanford Avenue Intersection Improvements project. The incorporation of Utilities’ water line replacement was just introduced into the project over the fall and is estimated to increase the contract duration, up to 2 additional months. Staff has included additional hours for both the Construction Manager and Inspector, as an Additional Service, to the existing contract. Ghirardelli will serve as lead inspectors for the entire project. The Utilities Department will manage the inspection of the waterline replacement element of the project. Timeline Immediately upon execution of a contract, Ghirardelli Associates will begin review of the construction documents and assist staff with the pre-bid and award process. Project is scheduled to go out to bid in November with construction to begin Janaury 2014 and end in Fall 2014. Resource Impact Funding in the amount of $638,599.82 for the Construction Management Services is included in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Project PL-11002- California Avenue Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape Project. Policy Implications City of Palo Alto Page 4 The City’s Comprehensive Plan recommends that the City enhance the California Avenue streetscape by upgrading the visual quality of the street to attract additional business and visitors to the area. Consistent with those Comprehensive Plan goals, the proposed streetscape and place-making improvements along California Avenue should ensure continued vitality of the California Avenue Business District. The Comprehensive Plan also encourages a mix of residential and non-residential uses at a scale of development that is comfortable for pedestrian use. The Plan encourages improving the appearance of the street while preserving its “hometown” character. Also, Program L-18 specifically calls for street improvements that could make a substantial contribution to the character of Commercial Centers, including narrowing travel lanes. Environmental Review A preliminary Initial Study and the Negative Declaration - CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) checklist for the project were completed, circulated for public review in December 2010 and approved by Council on February 14, 2011. The Negative Declaration concluded that the project will not result in any significant environmental impacts and may be reviewed online at www.cityofpaloalto.org/calave. Some of the California Avenue businesses challenged the sufficiency of the MND and the Court of Appeal recently confirmed its adequacy. There are no substantial changes to the project or circumstances under which the project is being undertaken that require additional environmental review. No further environmental review is required for this scope of work. Attachments:  Attachment A - Contract with Ghirardelli Associates (PDF) lFl1 ~ ((; ~ ~ \y/ ~ lQ) NOV -72013 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C14151310 Ghlrardulll Associ.'os, Inc. A REEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND RDELLl ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this day of November, 2013, ("Agreement") by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("CITY"), and GHffiARDELLl ASSOCIA TES,INC. a California Corporation, located at 2375 Zanker Road, Suite #235, San Jose, CA, 95131, Phone Number (408) 435-5503 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to contract a Part -Time Constmction Manager and a Full-time Project 1 nspector to support CITY staff during the construction of the Catifomia Avenue Transit Hub Corridor Streetscape Improvements Project in the City of Palo Alto. ("Project") and desires to engage a consultant to provide construction management and project inspection services in connection with the Project ("Services"). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has thc necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or celiifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULT ANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit "A", attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenant~, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT S.ECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perfOlm the Services described in Exhibit "A" in accordance witb tbe terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. The term of thi s Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through completion of the services in accordance with the Schedule of Performance attached as Exhibit "B" unless terminated earlier p1ll'suant to Section 19 of tbis Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is ofthe essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULT ANT shall complete tbe Services within the tenn of this Agreement and in accordance with tbe schedule set forth in Exhibit "B", attached to and made a part ofthis Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY's agreement to extend the (elm or the schedule for perfonnance shall not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. Professional Selvices Rev. Nov. 1,2011 SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. Tho compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for pelformance of the Services described in Exhi bit "A", includ ing both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Three Hundred Seventy Thousand Two Hundred Forty Seven Dollars ($370,247.00). In the event Additi onal Services arc authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Six Hundred Thirty Eight Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($638,600.00) The appli cable rates and schedule of payment are set out ill Exhibit "C-I ", entitled "HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE," which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit "C". CONSUL TANTshall not receive any compensation for Additional Services perfonned 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 illcluded witbln the Scope of Services described in Exhibit "A". SECTION 5. lNVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services perfonned and the applicable charges (including an identi fication of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT's billing rates (set forth in Exhibit "C-I "). If applicable, tbe invoice shall also describe the percentage of com pletion of eacb task. The infolmation in CONSULTANT's payment requests will be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULT ANT shall send all invoices to the City's project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. OUALlFICATIOJ'o[S/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be perfOimed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT's supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel neccssary to perform the Services requircd by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services ass igned to them. CONSULT ANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall mainta in during the term of this Agreement all Licenses, permits, qualifications, insW"ance and approvals of whatever nature that are legall y required to perform the Services. All of the services to be fumished by CONSULTANT under thi s agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same disciplille and of simil ar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout Califomia under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONS UL T ANT shall ke ep itself infonned of and in compl iance with all fed eral, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect ill any manner the Project or th e performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all pennits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the perfonnance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall conect, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives Profe.~sional Services Rev. Nov. 1,20 11 notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design documents to constlUct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to corrcct any and all ClTors, omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of constlUction of the Project. This obligation shall survive tennination of the Agreement. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (l0%) of the CITY's stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to the CITY fo r aligni.ng the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed th at in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULT ANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to fumi sh labor andlor materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY. SECTION J I. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTA NT's obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment shall not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval orthe city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. Notwithstanding Section 11 above, CITY agrees that subconsultants may be used to complete the Services. The sub consultants authorized by CITY to perfonn work on this Project are: Inspection Services, Inc. 1798 University Avenue Berkeley, CA 94203 (510) 900·2100 CONSl.JLT ANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be Il.dJ y responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsuJtant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsullants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MA..l'IlAGEMENT. CONSlJLTANTwill assign Randall Bruner as the Principal in Charge to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and William Davis as the project Construction Manager & James Beauchamp as Project Inspector to represent CONSULTANT during the day·to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the sub stitution of the project director, proj ect 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 Professional Selvices Rev. Nov. 1,2011 who CITY finds do not perfOlm the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a thre8t to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. The City's project manager is Shahla Yazdy, Planning & community Environnlcnt Department, Transportation Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94303, Te1ephone:(650) 617-3151. The project manager will be CONSULTANT's point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution ofthe Services. The CiTY maydesignate an alternate projcct manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OVl<'NERSHlP OJ;' MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specil1cations, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shaH be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual propClty rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall makt; any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to cireumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to andit, at any reasonable time during the [enn ofthis Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT's records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT JiJrther agrees to maintain and retain such records for alleast three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16, INDEMNI1'Y. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold hannless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (eaeh an "Indemnified Party") from and against any and ali demands, ciaims, or iiability of any nature, including dcath or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, includi ng all costs and expenses of whatever nature inclnding attorneys fees, experts fees, COUlt costs and disbursements ("Claims") that arise out of, peltain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by 3nindemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be constlued to require CONSULT ANT to indemnify an indemnified Party from Claill1s arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT's services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemni/lcation. The provisions of this Section 16 shall sUI'Vive the expiration or early tennination of this Agreement. SECTION J 7. W MVERS. The waiver by either party of any breaeh or violation of any covenant, term, eondition or provision of this Agreement, or ofthe provisions of any ordinance or law, will not Pforessionai Services Rev. Nov. 1, 2011 be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in lull force and effeet during the tenu ofthis Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any generalliabilily or automobile policy or policies. J 8.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through catTiers with AM Best's Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:Vll or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this A!,'Teement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concun-ently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval ofClTY's Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and Will1101 be canceled, or materially reduced in covcmge or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the i.nsurance and provides less than thirty (30) days' notice to CO~SUL TANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation OJ modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT's receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current cCliiiicates evidencing the insura.flce are provided to CITY's Purchasing I\1anager during the entire terrn of this Agrccrn.cnt. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be consttued ro limit CONSULTANT's iiability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. ~otwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the ten11 has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the perfOimance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereorto CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its pertormance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereoflo CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. Professional Services Rev. Nov. 1, 2011 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its cotltraetors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become thc property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or tcnnination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, ifthis Agreement is suspended or terminated on acconnt of a default by CONSULTANT, ClTY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT ordy for that portion of CONSULTANT's services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination ofthis Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4,20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acccptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY or any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by cCltified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: OHiec oflhe City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, dirc{;\ or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would contlict in any manner or degree with the perfonnanee of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT furthcr covenants that, in the pelformance ofthis Agreement, it will not employ subconsuitants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTAl\'T eel1ifies that no person who has or will ha ve any financial interest under this A gr'cement is an onicer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code ofthe State of California. Professional Services Rev, Nov, 1, 20i 1 21.3, Tfthe Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a "Consultant" as that tenn is de lined by the Regulations of tho Fair Political Practices Cotn.'llission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Refolln Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2,30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because oftha race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person, CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. Professional Scrvk-es Rev. Nov, 1> 2011 SECTION 23. ENVIROl'llVlENT ALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REOUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the City's Environmentally Preferred Pm'chasing policies which are available at the City's Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements oftbe City's Zero Waste Program. Zero Wasle best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, Consultant shall comply with the following zero waste requirements: • All printed materials provided by Consultant to City generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimmn or30% Of grcater post-consumcr content paper, unless otherwise approved by the City's Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks. • Goods purchased by Consultant on behalf of the City shall be purchased in accordance with the City's Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the PUI'chasing 0 lTiee. • Reusablclrcturnable pallets shall be taken back by the Consultant, at no additional cost to the City, for reuse Of recycling. Consultant shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION 24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions onhe 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 fili">}ds arc not appropriated for the follo\ving fiscal year. or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the even I that lil11ds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. Thrs section shall take precedence in the event of a con!1iet With any other covenant, term, conditIOn, or provision orthis Agreement. SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreemen( will be govemed by the laws of the State ofCalifomia. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the paliies agree thai trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the slale COUl'ts of Califomia in the County of Sanla Clara, State of Califomia. 25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enlorce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and aUomcys' fees expended in comlcction with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attomeys' fees paid to third parties. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the Professiurnd SerViCL'h Rev. Nov. L 2011 parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is si§,'1led by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions ofthis Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants oflhe parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment [hereto is void or unenrorceable, the unaftected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in lidl force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits reIetTcd to in !his Agrcement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, ii'om time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will bc deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If; pwsuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, City shares with CONSULTANT pcrsonal infOlmation as defincd in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5( d) about a California resident ("Personal Infonnation"), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Tnfonnation, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security ofthe system or in the secLUity ofthe Personal Infonnation. CONSULT ANT shall not usc Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City's express written consent. 25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 25, 10 The individuals executing this Agreelucnt represent and warrant thai they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. 25.11 This }\greetnent Inay be signed in multiple cQuntcl1Jarts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement Pr(ltessionat Services Rev. Nov. 1,2011 1. INTRODUCTION EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES CITY shall engage a pari ~~time Construction Manager and a full-time Project Inspector to support CITY staff dUling thc construction of the California A venue Transit Hub Corridor Strcctscape Improvements Projeet in the City of Palo Alto. The construction project will entail demolition, removal and replacement of the existing roadway, crossings, sidewalk, curb & gutter; underground utilities; streetlights; and addition of landscaped areas. The services herein shall include filI1 Construction Management Services as required to assist staff in the management of the construction of the above project. 2. SCOPE OF SERVICES General Requirements The Construction Management film (CONSULTANT) shall provide eonstmetion professionals to represent CITY at the constmction site on a full time basis. The on-site representative(s) of the CONSULTANT such as a Constmction Manager and a Project Inspector shall be approved by CITY as having appropriate work experience for the position, Ifat any time, CITY is not satisfied with the per/onnanee of CONSULTANT stan; the CITY reserves the right to request the services of di fferent individnals, If lor any reason the CONSULTANT proposes a change of staffing during the course of the project, the CITY reserves the right to approve any new staff. An offiee space will be provided by CITY. Any eq ui pmcnt needed for CONSULTANTS staff shall be provided by the CONSULT A l\'T~ Any desired trailers or related equipment needed by the CONSULT ANT may require permits from CITY, for which CONSULTANT shall obtain and pay, Knowledge of civil engineering roadway or related streelscape eOllstmction, tramc control, public outreach, Caltrans standard and specification, puhlic works and utitilities contracting principles and regulations, and Critical Path Management shall be required of the CONSULTANT. I -Construction Pllase: Project Inspector lind Construction Manager General: CONSULTANT shall be [he point of contact for the project's contractor (CONTRACTOR), CONSULTANT shall work with [he DESIGNER and CITY to resolve any issues that may arise during constmetion. PROJECT INSPECTOR: Pmressioual Services Rev, Nov. L 20J 1 CONSULTANT will oversee the day-lo-day conshuclion activities performed by the CONTRA CTOR and subcontractors. CONSUL Ti\NT will track the construction process, schedule, maintaining daily reports, verifying submittal compliance, logistics, and activities and direct precautionary measures to ensure that all aspects of construction are followed and documented per contract documents and adhere to all CITY standards. CONSULTANT shall also work with the CONTRACTOR to implcmcntlogisticalmcasurcs to minimize any impacts to CITY operations and the nearby businesses, customers and residential neighborhood. CONSULT ANT will ensure that coordination is maintaincd between all parties that must be made aware of daily construction activities and thaI good communication is maintained. CONSULT ANI' shall implement expeditious methods for resolving conllicts. Change Order Monitoring and Processing; CONSULTANT will review and evaluate all CONTF.ACTOR extra work requests. CONSULTANT will review the contract documents to determine entiliement, complete an independent estimate of the cost of the changes, and reconcile with the CONTRACTOR'S change order request. CONSULTANT will prepare extra scope of work authorizations, field orders for CITY approval and track all scope and schedule changes. Should there be disagreements with the validity of change orders; CONSULTANT will implement expeditious methods [or rcsolving eonnicts. Testing: CONSULTAKT shall provide the services of a lesting agency and coordinate scheduling of the testing agency services for any needed materials lesting and/or special inspections. CONSULTANT shall ensure that all required sign-offs are reviewed and distributed and are in compliance with CITY's specification. Claims: CONSULTANT shall analyze various claims from the CONTRi\CTOR (i.e. compensation and delay) as io whether Ihey arc excusable, inexcusable, or compensable. CONSULTANT shall advise CITY rcgarding what action(s) to take in a timely manner. Miscellaneous: CONSULTANT shall monitor CONTRACTOR'S compliance in general with the construction documents and contract CONSULTANT shall address comments and concerns of the CONTRACTOR and the DESIGNER as needed. Qllality Control and Assurance: CONSULTANT shall monitor and document the CONTRACTOR'S work for any deviations in scope, schedule or perfOimanee and keep CITY infoffilcd of any issues that may arise. Substantial Completion: ProfeSSional Scnices Rev. Nov, 1,2011 When the CONTRACTOR nears the end of their contracted work and requests 'substantial completion' status, CONSULTANT shall work with the DESIGNER who shall preparcand compile a project punch list that shall be forwarded to the CONTRACTOR, CONSULTANT shall oversee the completion of the punch list items before the final Notice of Completion is issued, Night time and weekend work arc required to minimize impacts to businesses or due to delay in schedule, therefore CONSULTANT services shall stilI be required in full affect. CONSULTANT shall assume one hundred (100) hours of night time and weekend work for the life of the project. Any additional hour beyond the one hundred hours shall be compensated as an Additional Service, Unless otherwisc directed by Crry, the CONSULT ANT shall budget for and be prepared to work on all State and Federal holidays except for the fourth Thursday of November (Thanksgiving Day); December 24 and 25, January 1 "I, Memorial Day, Jnly 4<h and Labor Day, lfwork is needed on any of these days in the years 2013 andlor 20 14 in order to meet the project schedule, CONSULTANT shall be compensated for overtime as an Additional Service, CONSTRUCTION MANAGER ICOMMUNlTY OUTREACH COORDINATOR: Construction Manager shall also act as a Community Outreach Coordinator to assist with regular communications to the stakeholders in the area. The Community Outreach Coordinator should be knowledgeable about the day-to-day construction activities, and should proactively outreach on a regnJar basis with updates about what to expect in thc near term such as lane closures, noise impacts, night and weekend work, ctc, This may be by a weekly handout madc available near the jobsite, mailings, speaking with the neighbors, door-hangers or a combination of all these, The Commnnity Outreach Coordinator must be accessible as a point of contact to address any merchant questions or eonccrns, C'nN<':;IH TA "j' shall '''mk \"l'th a ('lTV "pm"pscnlall'ue to prepal'c p"~;ept ,,~rlotps "or C'TTV websl'! .. ~",L, ...... ~_~.~l'i", ~L "~L~" ...... --'-... .L ->-'.']-''''-''' ... .tv", -v-u.puun .. :, iI lJ..l "" as well as to prepare a monthly community c-mail bulletin needed to keep residents and businesses informed of project status and upcoming work efforts, CONSULTANT shall review and comment on any project-related correspondence as requested by CITY'S Project Manager (PM), Routine correspondence that is related to product infonnation or minor design issues may be prepared and answercd by CONSULTANT on its letterhead, with a copies ofthe response directed to PM and DESIGh'ER. Correspondence requiring CITY response shall be reviewed, approved, and signed only by PM, Submittals: CONSULTANT shall log, track, check for errors, review, and route to appropriate personnel all project submittals (Le. shop drawings, product infolTIlation, substitution request, and samples) for approval in timely manner as required by the constmetion documents and in order to prevent any delays to the project. Comments from different reviewers ofthe submittal shall be compiled before being retumed to the CONTRACTOR for revisions. Construction Schedule: Professional Services Rev. Nov. 1, 201 I CONSULTANT shall review the CONTRACTOR'S construction schedule. CONSULTANT shall analyze, monitor, and request updates for the master schedule as the project progresses. CONSULTANT shall analyze the schedule for logical construction, constraints, level of clitical activities and to verify progress in conjunction with the ana lysis of pay applications . CONSULTANT shall review CONTRACTOR'S individual CPM schedules, monitor the CONTRACTOR'S progress, notify CITY of any slippage, and coordinate CONTRACTOR reco very plans. Meetings: CONSULTANT shall schedule, coordinate and keep record of weekly field meeting with CONTRACTOR, sub-contractor and CITY staff including staff from Public Works, Utili ties Engineering and Operations for the duration for the project. Throughout the construction process, CONSULTANT shall be prepared to address comments and concerns of the construction CONTRACTORS, CITY staff, merchants and the general public on an as-needed bas is . CONSULTANT shall set up and conduct weekly progress meetings and any other meetings necessary to facilitate the project work. CONSULTANT shall write and distribute the meeting agendas, and meeting minutes, including: CITY -CONSULTANT meetings, regular site meetings, meetings with the CITY staff, CONTRACTORs, various CITY departments and also the public. CONSULTANT shall also be responsible for informing merchants of upcoming weekly activities occurring at or near their business and of any other construction-related impacts to their business. The meeting minutes shall explicitly track who has the responsibility for each action item with e>lpected completion dates. Documentation: CONSULTANT shall prepare and/or review all necessary documentation for the project including, but not limited to, daily logs and inspection progress reports, pho tos/videos, RFJ, correspondence, shop drawings, and oth er CONTRACTOR submittals. CONSULTANT shall maintain all files and documentation for properly managing the project. CONSULTANT shall boack all RFI, correspondence and submittal status. Responses, approvals, and decisions to CONTRACTOR'S documents shall be provided in a timely manner and as required in the construction documents. Progress Pa yments: CONSULTANT shall review progress payment requests submitted by CONTRACTOR, within five (5) days of receipt and velify the accuracy and percentage of completion against the schedule, and resolve any discrepancies in the invoices. CONSULT ANT shall review the invoices and backup for completeness and compliance with co ntract documents and make a recommendation to PM for payment of the progress payment requests. II: Post Construction -Project Close Out Record Drawings: Professional Services Rev. Nov. 1,2011 CONSULTANT shall coordinate the preparation of record drawings with the CONTRACTORS and DESIGNER on a regular basis, both during the constlUction and post construction phases, and review the drawings for "as-built" accuracy. Close-Out: CONSULTANT shall ensurc completion and delivery of all required close out documentations including operation and maintenance manuals, record drawings, and warranties. CONSULTANT shall review all these materials t()r compliance with the contract documents and for completeness. Any deficiencies of discrepancies shall be reported to CONTRACTOR for corrections and re- submittal. CONSULTANT shall work under the direction ofthe PM to resolve any contract claim issues that may arise (stop work noticcs, bonding, delays, cxtra work, ctc.). F'Ues to CITY: CONSULTANT shall consolidate and deliver all project files and documentation maintained to be retained by CITY. HI: Reimbursables Reimbursabks shall include, but are not limitcd to outreach materials, postage, signage or other items not included herein. Travel, mileage, computer and phone charges shall be considered as included in the CONSULTANT overhead costs. Any needed office supplies shall be provided by CONSULTANT and shall bc considered to be included in the Scope of Services above. CITY shall be responsible tor paying for reproduction of bid sets required for the bid phase and for the conformed set that includes Addenda changes incorporated during the bidding phase. The CONTRACTOR shall be responsible lor pa ymg for copies of the bid sets required for their own use. IV: Additional Services No work shall be done prior to written authorization by the City's Project Manager. Additional Services shall include, but are not limited to, additional meetings, extended work hours, additional testing or inspection. I. Additional hours for the Constmetion Manager to provide full -time service during thc duration of the project. 2. Due 10 the addition ora Waterline replacement project to projeci scopc, up to two additional months of services may be requll-ed. EXHIBIT "B" SClIEDULE OF PERI<ORl\fANCE P"rolcs&ionai Services Rev, Nov. 1,2011 CONSULTANT shall perfonn the Services so as to complete eaeh milestone within the number of days/weeks specified below. 'lbe time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers lor CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term ofthe Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed. Milestones 1-Construction Phase: Construction Contract Substantial completion Final completion n -Post-Construction Project Close Out: Record dra wings and close-out activities ends Completion No. of Days/Weeks FromNTP 6 Weeks II Months 12 Months 6 Weeks Professional Services Rev. Nov. 1,2011 EXHIBIT "C" COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services pcrfonned in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as scI forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-I up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit "A" ("Basic Services") and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $370,247.00. CONSULTk'lT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amonnt. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $638,600.00. Any work perf0l1l1cd or expenscs incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation sct f0l1h herein shall be at no cost 10 the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as oullincd and budgeted below. The CITY's Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listcd below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursahle expenses, does not exceed $370,247.00 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $638,600.00. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task I (Construction Phase: Constructioll Manager (half'rime) Project Inspector (full-rime) Materials Testing (as needed) Task 2 (Post-Constl1lction Construction Manager Project Inspector) $345,740.00 $24,007.00 Sub-total Basic Services $369,747.00 Reimbursable Expenses $500.00 Total Basic Services and Reimbursahle expenses $370,247.00 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $268,353.00 Professional Services Rev. Nov. L 2011 Maximum Total Compensation $638,600.00 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. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost Expenses for which CONSULT ANT shall bc reimbursed arc: Reimbursables shall include, but are not limited to outreach materials, postage, signage or other items not included herein. Travel, mileage, computer and phone charges shall be considered as included in the CONSULTANT overhead costs. Any needed olllce supplies shall be provided by CONSULTANT and shall be considereu to bc included in the Scope of Services, Exhibit "A". CITY shall be responsible for paying lor reproduction of bid sets required for the bid phase and for the conformed set that includes Addenda changes incorporated during the bidding phase. The CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for paying for copies of the bidsels required for their own use. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup infonnation. Any expense anticipated to be more than $500.00 shall be approved in advance by the CITY's project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The COl'JSLJLTi1J-.IT shaH provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY The CONSULTANT, at the CITY's project manager's request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSlJLTAN1"s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based ou the rates set forth in Exhibit C-I. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY's Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services, Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement Pmfessional Senriccs Rev. !,ov. 1,201 t I ~ -. Task I -Construction Phase: Construction Manager (half-time) Project Inspector (full-time) Materials Testing (as needed) Total Not to Exceed, Task I Task II -Post-Construction Construction Manager Project In spector Total Not to Exceed, Task II Task III -Reimbursables Total Not to Exceed, Task III Subtotal (Items I -III) (15% of Subtotal Item I -III) TOTAL (Task 1-III and 15% of Subtotal) EXHIBIT "C-l" HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE ... . -:. :!II'I:l , Bill Davis, P.M.P. James Beau champ, E.I.T. Inspection Services, Inc. Bill Davis, P.M.P. James Beauchamp, E.I.T. See Note 3 18 • III • . I 704 $165.89 1408 $134.20 80 $165.89 80 $134.20 I' ·0 t ., '. • $116,786.56 $188,953.60 $40,000.00 $345,740.16 $13,271.20 $10,736.00 I $24,007.20 $5 00.00 $500.00 $370,247.36 $55,537.10 $425,784.46 Professional Services Rev Nov. 1.2011 Task IV -Additional Services 1 "" "''', '.M .,. 1. Construction Manager (full-time) 2. Waterline Replacement 2 mas I Bill Davis, P.M.P. extension (Construction Manager) -/ Waterline Replacement -2 mos extension (Project Inspector) I James Beauchamp, E.I.T. Total Not to Exceed, Task IV TOTAL (Task I -IV) 19 ----r" , 704 5165.89 , ! 320 $165.89 I 320 $134.20 L _____ $116,786.56 $53,084.80 /-----_.-- $42,944.00 $212,815.36 $638.599.8~ ---<._----------- Professional Services Rev Nov. 1.2011 EXHIBIT "D" INSUR~'1CE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (ClTY), AT TIlElR SOLE EXPENSE, SI!ALLFORTHE TERM OF TIlE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAL"'TAlK INSURANU: IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPEClFlED BELOW, AFFOllliED BY COMPANIFA~ WITH AM BF'sT'S KEY RA TlliG m' A"VII, OR llIGHER, LICENSE]) OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BIJSIN~:SS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, A WARD IS CONTINGENT ON COIV1PLlANCE Wrnl CITY'S INSURANCE REQ\JffiEiI..1ENTS, AS SPE(,·'Il~'_lED~,. _B.~E"L<,),\,!V", H '·:Ol! ''':0 I 1'Yl'EOr COVSFAG" .... 1 FEU\! I RE"S~T .~.---.. MINnWi': LIMITS Cheri YZS n::; Y28 YES WORKER'S CONIPENSATION EMPLOYER'S LVIllILITY ---_.- GENERAl. LlASnJTY, WCLVDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY AUTOMOBILe LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OVINEll, HlRED, NON,OWNED PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE STATlrroRY STA1lITORY ----_. 1l0DILY INJURY PROPERTY DAM AGE BODILY INlL'RY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. SOOlLY INJURY EACHPERS ON JRRENCE EACHOCCU PROPERTY DAM, A..GE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY [NED DAMAQE,COMB ALL DAMAGES i'\GGREGA':'I·; 'l:" $]'000,000 SI,OOO,OOO $l,OO(),()OO SI,OOQ,()OO S[,OOO,()O() S)J1OO,OOO ---------, $1,000,000 Sl,OOO,OOO $l,()()O,OOO Sl,OOO,OOO $J,(}OO,QOO 31,000,000 SI,OOO,OOO S[,OOO,OOO $!,oon,ooo $1,OOQ,OOD THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO 8E NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN A},']) MAINTAIN, IN feLL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT TIlE HITlRETERMOF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE fNSlJRANCECOVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURL"IG NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR tL'\'D ITS SUBCONSULTANIS, IF ANY, BUT Al .")0, \VlTH THE. EXCEPTION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION, EiMPLOYER'S LY·.BILITY AND PROFESS!ONAL ll'JSlJRl\ .. hJCE, NA.MI:t-,J"G AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, iTS CO{INCiL MEMBERS, OFFI(;ERS, AGENTS, AN!} EMPLOYE.ES. L INSCTt.:'i.NCE COVERAGE MUST ~JCLUDE: A A PROVISION FOR A WRIITEN THIRTY (30) DAY ADV A'ICE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE 11\ COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE C ANCELLA 110N; AND B. A lX)NTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURA'ICE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR'S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY, C DEDCCTIBLE AMOlINTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CnY'S PRIOR APPROV At. II. CONTACTORMUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURA'ICE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE [II. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, \\>1TI1 RESPECT TO THE INSUllA-'1CE AFFORDED TO "ADDInONAL INSUREDS" A PRIMARY COVERAGE WITII RESPECT TO CLAlMS AlllSING our OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NMIED INSLRED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY TIllS POLICY IS PRIMARY AIm IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WrIH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR fOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS, 18 Professional Services RevNoY.l,20l1 B. CROSS L1ABrLlTY THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSIJlU!IJS UNDER THE POLlC Y SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUItEDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COM1'ANY UNDER THIS POLICY. c NonCE OF CA NCELLATION I. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPUtA nON DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, TI-IE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE cny AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRlTTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF TI-IE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXP IRA TION DATE FOR TI-IE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, TIlE ISSUING COMP ANY SHALL PROVIDE CI'IY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. D ADDITIONAL INSl ill ED I. CONSULTANT SHALL BE NAMED, CERTIFIED BY ENDORSEMENT AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED BY THE SUCCESSFUL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR TO THE SAME EXTENT THAT THE SUCCESSFUL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTOR IS REQUmES/OBLlGATED TO NAME AND CERTIFY BY ENDORSEMENT. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRA nON CITY OF PALO ALTO 1',0, BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 19 Professional Services Rev Nov. 1,2011 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4261) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Weed Abatement Resolution Title: Adoption of a Resolution Declaring Weeds to be a Public Nuisance and Setting December 9th, 2013 for a Public Hearing for Objections to Proposed Weed Abatement From: City Manager Lead Department: Fire Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1) Adopt the attached resolution declaring weeds to be a public nuisance and setting December 9th, 2013 for a public hearing; and 2) Direct staff to publish a notice of hearing in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 8.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Background On March 21, 1977, the City Council approved an agreement with Santa Clara County for the administration of weed abatement within the City of Palo Alto. This agreement has reduced the City’s costs and staff time required for administration of weed abatement. For the past 35 seasons, the weed abatement program has been expeditiously carried out by the County Department of Agriculture and Resource Management with results satisfactory to Palo Alto residents. Discussion Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 8.08 specifies weed abatement procedures. The chapter requires property owners or occupants to remove certain weeds, as defined in Section 8.08.010 that exist upon their premises, public sidewalks, streets or alleys. It also specifies the procedures to be followed to abate weeds, in the event owners do not remove them. These procedures are: City of Palo Alto Page 2 - Resolution of the City Council declaring weeds to be a public nuisance. This resolution sets the time and place for hearing any objections to the proposed weed abatement. - Public Notice. This notice informs property owners of the passage of the resolution and provides that property owners shall remove weeds from their property, or the abatement will be carried out by Santa Clara County (County). The City then publishes a legal advertisement in the local newspaper announcing the date of the public hearing. - Public Hearing. The Council must conduct a public hearing, at which time any property owner may appear and object to the proposed weed destruction or removal. After the City Council hearing and considering any objections the Council may allow or overrule any or all objections. If objections are overruled, the Council is deemed to have acquired jurisdiction to proceed, at which point the County will be asked to perform the work of destruction and removal of weeds. The action taken by the Council at the November 18th, 2013 meeting will set the public hearing date for December 9th, 2013. Resource Impact There is no direct fiscal impact of this action to the City. The City of Palo Alto administers the weed abatement program with the County Department of Agriculture and Resource Management with a minimal amount of staff time. All charges for the weed abatement services are included as a special assessment on bills for taxes levied against the respective lots and parcels of land. Such charges are considered liens on these properties. The Weed Abatement Program is a cost recovery program and does not receive funding from City or County general funds. Policy Implications This procedure is consistent with existing City policies. Environmental Review The Santa Clara County Counsel has determined the Weed Abatement Program to be categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15308. Attachments: City of Palo Alto Page 3  Weed Abatement Resolution 11-18-2013 (PDF) 1 111117 sh 8261770 ** NOT YET APPROVED ** Resolution No. ---- Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Declaring Weeds to be a Nuisance and Setting December 9th, 2013 for a Public Hearing for Objections to Proposed Weed Abatement WHEREAS, weeds, as defined in Section 8.08.010(b) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, are anticipated to develop during calendar year 2013 upon streets, alleys, sidewalks, and parcels of private property within the City of Palo Alto sufficient to constitute a public nuisance as a fire menace when dry or are otherwise combustible, or otherwise to constitute a menace to the public health as noxious or dangerous. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. Weeds, as defined in Section 8.08.010(b) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, which are anticipated to develop during calendar year 2013 upon streets, alleys, sidewalks, and parcels of private property within the City of Palo Alto, are hereby found and determined to constitute a public nuisance. Such nuisance is anticipated to exist upon some of the streets, alleys, sidewalks, and parcels of private property within the City, which are shown, described, and delineated on the several maps of the properties in said City which are recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, reference in each instance for the description of any particular street, alley, or parcel of private property being hereby made to the several maps aforesaid, and, in the event of , there being several subdivision maps on which the same lots are shown, reference is hereby made to the latest subdivision map. SECTION 2. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the said public nuisance be abated in the manner provided by Chapter 8.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a public hearing shall be held on Monday, the 9thth day of December, 2013, at the hour of 7:00 pm, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, at the Council Chambers of the Civic Center of said City, at which the Council shall hear objections to the proposed weed abatement of such weeds and give any objections due consideration; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Fire Chief of the City of Palo Alto is directed to give notice of the public hearing in the time, manner and form provided in Chapter 8.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. SECTION 3. Unless the nuisance is abated without delay by the destruction and removal of such weeds, the work of abating such nuisance will be done by the County of Santa Clara Department of Agriculture and Resource Management Office on behalf of the City of Palo Alto, and the expenses thereof assessed upon the lots and lands from which, and/or in the front and rear of which, such weeds shall have been destroyed and removed. 2 111117 sh 8261770 ** NOT YET APPROVED ** SECTION 4. The Santa Clara County, County Counsel has determined the Weed Abatement Program to be categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15308. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ___________________________________ ______________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ___________________________________ _______________________________ Senior Deputy City Attorney City Manager ________________________________ Director of Administrative Services _________________________________ Fire Chief ~ 2014 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM . COMMENCEMENT REPORT ~ CITY OF PALO ALTO ~iDUi a£li EXHIBIT A cITVlSIaIE 931 GUINDA ST 003-34-006 GOUYET, ALBERT AND GOUYET, 931 GUINDA ST PALO ALTO CA 94301-3319 733 RAMONA ST 120-27-063 KODA, ROSS K TRUSTEE POBOX 156 SOUTH DOS PALOS CA 93665 128 KINGSLEY AV 124-15-038 I KHAN,ANWAR AND KHAN, NAYYAR 2341FALLINGWATERCT SANTA CLARA CA 95054-1316 2225 ALMA ST 124-20-001 LI,GRACEX 2225ALMAST PALO ALTO CA 94301-3905 425 STANFORD AV 124-31-027 ' NICHOLLS,MARIEL 425 STANFORD AV PALO ALTO CA 94306-1149 790 MONTROSE AV 127-16-028 TEICHER, ZELMA TRUSTEE POBOX 899 PALO ALTO CA 94302-0899 739 COLORADO AV 127-34-101 HUANG, HSING YI ET AL 757 SEMINOLE WY PALOALTO' CA 94303-4723 780 CLARA DR 1~7'-35-030 BANQUE, RAYMOND J 780 CLARA DR PALO ALTO CA 94303-3905 3101 MIDDLEFIELD RD 127-53-007 FISHERLLC 178ELY·PL PALO ALTO CA 94306-4552 3085 MIDDLEFIELD RD, ;:1.27-53-008 WINDY HILL PV 30LP 1950 UNIVERSITY A V #220 PALO ALTO CA 94303 609 ASHTON AV_132-04-102 DOROTHEA, DIANA PO BOX 4366 MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94040 3489 COWPER SL ~ 32-05-1 08 MC CALLEY, RODERICK C ET AL 3489 COWPER ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-3617 375 OLIVE A V 132-32-026 HARRISON,MICHAEL TRUSTEE 3750LIVEAV PALO ALTO CA 94306-2224 315 OLIVE A V 132-32-029 SMITH, BOYD C AND SMITH, JILL 3201 ASHST PALO ALTO CA 94306 . OLIVE AV 132-32-037 SI43LLC 10600 N DE ANZA BL STE 200 CUPERTINO CA 95014 195 . PAGE MILL RD 132-32-054 HOHBACH REALTY CO LP 29 LOWERY DR ATHERTON CA 94027 132-33-050 AT&TCOMMllNICATIONS INC. 870 N. McCARTIIY BLVD MILPITAS CA 95035-5125 325 ~ERNANDO AV 132-~-012! REHABILITATION HOUSING ~796BAYRD EAST PALO ALTO CA 94303 405 CURTNER 132-41-072 CURTNER INVESTMENT GROUP LLC 18801 BELGROVE CL SARATOGA CA 95070 4035 ELCAMINO WY 132-43-139 PALO ALTO COMMONS 664 GILMAN ST PALO ALTO CA 94301 4073 ELCAMINO 132-46-107 ETON CAPITAL LLC 2521 SOUTH CT PALO ALTO CA 94301-4241 2321 WELLESLEY S'I: 137-02.,024 CULPEPPER, JAMES A TRUSTEE 2121 AMHERST ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-1205 2240 COLUMBIA ST 137-05-094 GUERRERO, CHARLES J TRUSTEE 58 VALLEY ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94110 NO-SITUS 137-05-095 GUERRERO, CHARLES J TRUSTEE 58VALLEYST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94110 24 records of 44 Santa Clara County Weed Abatement Program Page 1 '-1 -... .. 'T --... 2014 WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM COMMENCEMENT REPORT CITY OF PALO ALTO ~i.tu~ ~~ EXHIBIT A C,TV/STallj I 2195 COLUMBIA ST 137-06-036 I EDELMAN,ANDREA TRUSTEE 2195 COLUMBIA ST PALO ALTO CA 94306-1233 2120 COLUMBIA ST 137-06-088 I HALL, LOIS M TRUSTEE 1135 HOPKINS A V PALO ALTO CA 94301-3435 , 3606 ELCAMINO ·137-08-080 i CAMINO REAL DEVELOPMENT LLC P.O. BOX 60177 PALO ALTO CA 94306 3700 ELCAMINO 137-11-078 ! KSS INVESTMENT LLC 1380 MIRA VALLE AV LOS ALTOS CA 94024-5744 3747 LAGUNA AV 137-14-069 ! BENES, FRANCIS MET AL 3747 LAGUNA A V PALO-ALTO CA 94306-2625 4031 AMARANTA AV 137-21-034 HAMLETT, MILDRED 4031 AMARANTA A V PALO ALTO CA 94306-3103 4197 BAKER AV 137-25-038 • YANG, MICHAEL X AND XU, YING-ZI 4197BAKERAV PALO ALTO CA 94306-3908 3460 HILLVIEW RD 142-16-059 • LELANDATANFORDJRUNIVTHEBD 13155NOELRDSTE500 DALLAS TX 75240 3495 DEER CREEK RD 142-16-062 LELAND STANFORD JR UNIV BOARD 150 PORTOLA RD PORTOLA VALLEY CA 94025 3500 DEER CREEK RD 142-16:.066 LELAND STANFORD JR UNIVERSITY 2755 SAND HILL RD STE 100 MENLO PARK CA 94025 262 wmTCLEM DR 148-02-044 VANZANT, STEVEN L 262 WHITCLEM DR PALO ALTO CA 94306-4112 4247 . MANUELA CT 175-02-051 WEAKLAND, ANNA WUTRUSTEE 620 SAND HILL RD APT 300C PALO ALTO CA 94304 4243. MANUELA CT175-02-053 WEAKLAND, ANNA WU TRUSTEE & 620 SAND HILL RD 300 C PALO ALTO CA 94304 4103 OLD:TRACE RD .175..,20-078 SMITHWICK, ALTON D AND .. : PO BOX 60065 PALO ALTO CA 94306 4110 OLD TRACE RD 175-20-080 OLIFF, JAY R AND OLIFF, ADRIENNE 4110 OLD TRACE RD PALO ALTO CA 94306-3727 890 MOCKINGBIRD LN 175-20-082 JOSHI, VlVEK TRUSTEE & ET AL 890 MOCKINGBIRD LN PALO ALTO CA 94306-3719 900 MOCKINGBIRD LN 175-20-083 : LIVINGSTON, DANIEL S TRUSTEE 900 MOCKINGBIRD LN PALO ALTO CA 94306-3719 OLD ADOBE RD 175-20-0.92 GROVE~ ANDREW ~ AND GROVE, 17l.MAIN ST #278 LOS ALTOS CA 94022 3111 ALEXIS DR 182-43-018 CABACCAN, JOSELITO C 3111 ALEXIS DR PALO ALTO CA 94304-1306 ALEXIS DR 182-43-034 HW A, EILEEN AND HWA, GEORGE 29 VENTRIS RD B-4 91F SAN FRANCISCO CA 44 records of 44 Santa Clara County Weed Abatement Program Page 2 r ---~-----..•......... City of Palo Alto (ID # 4239) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Sherry Lund Contract Amendment No. 2 Title: Recommendation from the Council Appointed Officers Committee to Approve Amendment No. 2 to a Consulting Contract with Sherry L. Lund Associates to Increase the Scope of Services and Cost by $10,000 for a Total Year-Two Cost Not To Exceed $61,850, to be Funded from the Council Contingency Fund From: City Manager Lead Department: City Attorney Recommendation The Council Appointed Officers Committee (CAO Committee) recommends that Council approve an Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. S12145456 between the City of Palo Alto and Sherry L. Lund Associates to increase the scope of services and cost for year two of the contract (2013-2014) by $10,000, for a total year two not to exceed amount of $61,850, to be funded by the Council Contingency Fund. Background In April 2012, the Council approved a one-year consulting contract with two one-year options to extend with Sherry L. Lund Associates for the purpose of assisting the Council in conducting annual and mid-year performance evaluations for the City Manager, City Attorney, City Clerk and City Auditor. On March 18, 2013, the Council approved Amendment No. 1 to exercise the first option to extend for one year (July 1, 2013 through July 30, 2014) and approve a scope, schedule and budget of $51,850 for the second year of services. Discussion On October 28th, the CAO Committee met to review the work performed to date by Sherry L. Lund Associates and plan for completion of work for the 2013-2014 year. The Committee noted that the consultant’s services have exceeded initial estimates due to a number of factors, including additional and rescheduled meetings, increased support for compensation review City of Palo Alto Page 2 (including planning, research, analysis and coordination), and added consulting and coaching services. Some of this work has been performed using a small allocation for additional services in the original Year Two budget; most is anticipated in the coming months. In total, the Committee anticipated that completing the 2013-2014 services will require an estimated $10,000 in additional support beyond what is available in the additional services allocation. The Committee unanimously recommended approving the attached Amendment No. 2 to the contract with Sherry L. Lund Associates to increase the scope of services and budget for the 2013-2014 year by $10,000 for a total year-two budget of $61,850. Attachments:  : Sherry L. Lund Associates Amendment No. 2 (PDF) 1 Revision November 13, 2013 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. S12145456 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND SHERRY L. LUND ASSOCIATES This Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. S12145456 (“Contract”) is entered into November __, 2013, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and SHERRY L. LUND ASSOCIATES, a sole Proprietor, located at 247 La Cuesta Drive, Portola Valley, CA 94028 (“CONSULTANT”). R E C I T A L S: WHEREAS, in April 2012, the Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of performance evaluation services for Council Appointed Officers (CAOs), with an initial contract term of one year with two options to extend for one additional year each; and WHEREAS, in March 2013, the parties amended the Contract to exercise the first option and extend the term of the Contract for one year (July 2013 through June 2014) and adopt a scope of services, schedule and budget of not to exceed $51,850 for the second year of services; and WHEREAS, the parties now wish to amendment the Contract to increase the scope of services and budget for year two by an additional Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) for a total year two not to exceed amount of $61,850. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 4 is hereby amended to read as follows: “SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses for year one shall not exceed Thirty Eight Thousand Five Hundred and Fifty Dollars ($38,550.00) and for year two shall not exceed Forty Nine Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Dollars ($49,350.00), assuming that no cancellation/rescheduling of fees due to CITY’s missing project milestones would apply. In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for those additional services and reimbursable expenses for year one shall not exceed Three Thousand Eight Hundred and Fifty-Five Dollars ($3,855) for a total contract not to exceed amount of Forty Two Thousand Four Hundred and Five Dollars ($42,405.00) and for year two shall not exceed Twelve Thousand Five Hundred ($12,500) for a total contract not to exceed amount of Sixty-One Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty Dollars ($61,850.00). 2 Revision November 13, 2013 Additional Services, as defined in Exhibit C, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit “A”.” SECTION 2. 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 SERVICES” b. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”. SECTION 3. 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 ____________________________ Purchasing Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ City Attorney SHERRY L. LUND ASSOCIATES By:___________________________ Name:_________________________ Title:________________________ Attachments: EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT “C”: COMPENSATION 3 Revision November 13, 2013 Year One 04/24/2012 to 06/30/2013 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. PROJECT ELEMENT #1: CAO Annual Performance Evaluations (June/July Timeframe) Phase I – Preparation for Review Session Consultant:  Works with internal liaison to develop contract and schedule project meetings and milestones.  Solicits CAO self-evaluations, reviews them and provides feedback and advice.  Assures CAO questions are clarified and raised with Council.  Prepares and distributes binders to Council, including instructions, CAO self- evaluations and blank evaluation hard copies. Distributes soft copies of forms on the same day.  Reviews Council evaluation feedback; meets with each Council member in person or by phone to refine and clarify written feedback prior to performance review session.  Compiles written comments and numerical feedback from Council and develops a written evaluation summary for each CAO. Prepares and sends confidential hardcopy packet with this information prior to each CAO review session.  Prepares information for closed review sessions that enable Council members to focus their discussion efficiently. Phase II – Performance Review Session Consultant:  Provides facilitation and technical assistance as needed during closed session Council performance review meetings with each CAO. Phase III - Post-Session Wrap-Up Consultant:  Documents agreed-upon unified Council feedback for written reviews.  Meets with each CAO to debrief evaluation meetings.  Prepares final evaluation file copies and obtains necessary signatures. Copies are given to CAO Committee Chair for filing and to each individual CAO. Final action on Council agenda is scheduled with Liaison.  Follows up with CAO Chair to debrief and solicit any additional process improvements. 4 Revision November 13, 2013 2. PROJECT ELEMENT #2: Mid-Year Check-In Performance Discussions (Nov./Dec. Timeframe) The Mid-Year is a simpler, more streamlined process than the annual review, and it has a different purpose. Mid-Year discussions allow CAOs and Council to do four things: 1) Provide answers to CAOs’ performance-based questions from the entire Council; 2) Address any misalignments in expectations; 3) Discuss goals that require mutual involvement and participation; and 4) Address emergent issues. They allow Council to more actively support and manage performance rather than letting a goal potentially drift for an entire year. Consultant:  Gathers feedback from CAOs and Council Members in advance.  Creates a summary of key issues for discussion and distributes it to Council and CAOs in advance.  Facilitates closed session meetings.  Provides post-meeting summaries. 3. PROJECT ELEMENT #3: Staff Member Input for CAO Annual Performance Reviews 1. Interview CAOs to get their context and input for employee feedback (e.g., who, if anyone, is on a performance plan, any other circumstances I should know about. 2. Attend a meeting of each CAO with those being surveyed to introduce myself, describe what we are doing and why. Input will be gathered from the direct reports of the City Manager (12), the City Attorney (9), and the City Auditor (6). In the latter two cases, all employees in the department are also all direct reports. I would also gather input from all 4 employees in the City Clerk’s office. They are not all direct reports, but the small numbers make it essential to include everyone in order to preserve anonymity. 3. Collect written feedback through a combination of a few (probably 5-6) simple written survey questions. I will make some brief follow-up phone calls to explore resulting questions that may arise in the written feedback, and to gather more examples to clarify patterns of comments. Staff feedback will be anonymous to CAOs and to Council but not to the Consultant. Council members will receive a brief (1-3 pages) summary to inform their annual review feedback to CAOs. Due to the highly confidential nature of this assignment, I personally perform all work on this contract. 5 Revision November 13, 2013 4. CITY OF PALO ALTO (Client) Responsibilities In order to support the success of the project and to stay within quoted costs, Client agrees to:  Assure involved parties a) are available for one-on-one and group meetings; and b) complete evaluations on time in order to meet project milestones.  Identify a project manager/internal liaison who can schedule appointments and provide support in getting evaluation items on Council agendas.  Provide an efficient and coordinated contracting process through a single liaison.  Provide meeting space and A-V equipment required.  Commit to a professional and respectful process. 6 Revision November 13, 2013 Year Two 04/24/2013 to 06/30/2014 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES 1. PROJECT ELEMENT #1: CAO Annual Performance Evaluations (April-August Timeframe) Phase I – Preparation for Review Session Consultant:  Works with internal liaison to schedule project meetings and milestones.  Solicits CAO self-evaluations, reviews them and provides feedback and advice.  Works with CAOs and Council, as needed to refine performance measures.  Assures CAO questions are clarified and raised with Council  Prepares and distributes binders to Council, including instructions, CAO self- evaluations, blank evaluation, and staff feedback summary in hard copy. Distributes soft copies of forms on the same day.  Meets with each Council member by phone or in person to collect evaluation feedback on each CAO.  Compiles written comments and numerical feedback from Council and develops a written evaluation summary for each CAO. Prepares and sends confidential soft copy and hard copy packet and with this information prior to each CAO review session.  Prepares information for closed review sessions which enables Councilmembers to focus their discussion efficiently. Phase II – Performance Review Session Consultant:  Provides facilitation and technical assistance during closed session Council performance review meetings, and performance goal-setting with each CAO.  Documents agreed-upon unified Council feedback for written reviews and goals. 7 Revision November 13, 2013 Phase III – Post-Session Wrap-Up Consultant:  Meets with CAOs to debrief evaluation meetings.  Prepares final evaluation file copies and obtains necessary signatures. Copies are given to CAO Committee Chair for filing and to each individual CAO. Final action on Council agenda is scheduled with City Liaison.  As needed, meets with CAO Chair and/or Committee members to get additional feedback and/or refine future process. Phase IV – Compensation Analysis, Discussions and Potential Action Consultant:  Provides guidance and format to City HR staff member, who collects competitive compensation data and formats it as requested by Consultant.  Analyzes results and works with CAO Chair to prepare for closed session discussions.  Documents decisions. CAO Chair works with internal staff to agendize compensation items for Council meetings and to prepare any resulting changes in contracts.  Performs other compensation-related tasks as requested by CAO Chair or Council. Phase V – Supplemental Consulting and Coaching Consultant agrees to provide supplemental coaching and performance consulting services as requested by the Council. 2. PROJECT ELEMENT #2: Mid-Year CAO Check-In Performance Updates (Nov./Dec. Timeframe) Phase I – Advance Preparation for Discussions 8 Revision November 13, 2013 Consultant:  Interviews each Councilmember for 45-60 minutes to gather update feedback on the four CAOs, including a) whether CAO is on track with goals/objectives, b) whether Councilmember wishes to make any changes/course corrections in Councilmember expectations or CAO performance, and c) whether Councilmember wishes to provide other feedback  Interviews each CAO for 30 minutes to see if there are questions or issues they would like to raise with the Council  Summarize Council feedback and CAO questions and prepare agendas and materials for closed sessions to support efficient and effective discussion Phase II – Closed Session Performance Check-in Discussions Consultant:  Meets with Council in closed session to agree on update feedback  Meets with Council and each CAO for feedback and discussion Phase III – Wrap Up Consultant:  Documents agreed-upon Council feedback  Answers follow-up questions with CAOs  Refines process for future, as requested by Council 3. PROJECT ELEMENT #3: Staff Member Input for CAO Annual Performance Reviews Consultant:  Attends each CAO’s staff meeting to introduce self, explain purpose of soliciting feedback and process 9 Revision November 13, 2013  One-on-one with each CAO, listen to CAO’s perspective and weigh context  For Attorney, Auditor and Clerk – Ask staff members to respond in writing to 4-6 targeted questions that require comments. Read comments and follow-up with brief phone interviews.  For Manager – Conduct individual interviews of approximately one-hour in length  Summarize final feedback and include it in Council’s feedback package  Provide follow-up consulting as requested 4. CITY OF PALO ALTO (Client) Responsibilities In order to support the success of the project and to stay within quoted costs, Client agrees to:  Assure involved parties a) are available for one-on-one and group meetings; and b) complete evaluations on time in order to meet project milestones.  Identify an internal liaison that can schedule appointments and provide support in getting evaluation items on Council agendas.  Provide meeting space and A-V equipment required.  Commit to a professional and respectful process 10 Revision November 13, 2013 Year One 04/24/2012 to 06/30/2013 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION 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 for each task. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $38,550.00. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, either due to expanded scope or due to the CITY’S not meeting project milestones, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $42,405.00. 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 11 Revision November 13, 2013 Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $38,550.00 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $42,405.00. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task 1 $26,000.00 PROJECT ELEMENT #1: Task 2 $6,550.00 PROJECT ELEMENT #2: Task 3 $6,000.00 PROJECT ELEMENT #3: Sub-total Basic Services $38,550.00 Reimbursable Expenses $0.00 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $38,550.00 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $3,855.00 Maximum Total Compensation $42,405.00 12 Revision November 13, 2013 CANCELLATION/RESCHEDULING POLICY Cancellation/Rescheduling Policy: There is no charge made if an onsite consulting date can be mutually rescheduled by Client and Consultant within 3 weeks of the original date; if the session cannot be rescheduled during this time frame, the cancellation schedule applies. (For example: If a consulting date has been set for June 1st, the mutually agreed upon rescheduled date must fall between June 2-22nd. A rescheduled date later than June 22nd would incur a cancellation/rescheduling fee as indicated below). Fees for cancellation (or rescheduling as previously described) for any reason are applied on the following schedule, which reflects both advance preparation and exclusive holding of a date for a client: 6 weeks in advance - 25% fee; 5 weeks in advance - 50% fee; 4 weeks in advance - 100% fee. A cancellation fee also applies to individual appointments missed without 24 hours notice based on an hourly rate of $250 per hour multiplied by the number of hours scheduled for the missed appointment. Expenses will be charged according to their cost accrued at time of cancellation. 13 Revision November 13, 2013 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. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: None A. Travel outside the San Francisco Bay area, including transportation and meals, will be reimbursed at actual cost subject to the City of Palo Alto’s policy for reimbursement of travel and meal expenses for City of Palo Alto employees. B. Long distance telephone service charges, cellular phone service charges, facsimile transmission and postage charges are reimbursable at actual cost. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $0.00 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. 14 Revision November 13, 2013 ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced authorization from the CITY’s project manager or council member direction. The parties recognize that on occasion the CONSULTANT may be directed to immediately perform Additional Services and in such cases it is not possible to obtain a written proposal in advance. However, when timing permits before performing Additional Services, the CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement Work required because the following conditions are not satisfied or are exceeded shall be considered as additional services: 1. Re-work that results from City Council members, officials, or City staff not performing their responsibilities as set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 4 in a timely fashion (thus requiring re-work in order to complete the project); 2. Meetings missed without 24 hours notice; and 3. Additional scope of services not covered in Exhibit “A”. 15 Revision November 13, 2013 Year Two 04/24/2013 to 06/30/2014 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION 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 for each task. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $49,350.00. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, either due to expanded scope or due to the CITY’S not meeting project milestones, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $61,850.00. 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 16 Revision November 13, 2013 between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $49,350.00 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $61,850.00. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task 1 $32,300.00 PROJECT ELEMENT #1: Task 2 $7,550.00 PROJECT ELEMENT #2: Task 3 $9,500.00 PROJECT ELEMENT #3: Sub-total Basic Services $49,350.00 Reimbursable Expenses $0.00 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $49,350.00 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $12,500.00 Maximum Total Compensation $61,850.00 17 Revision November 13, 2013 CANCELLATION/RESCHEDULING POLICY Cancellation/Rescheduling Policy: There is no charge made if an onsite consulting date can be mutually rescheduled by Client and Consultant within 3 weeks of the original date; if the session cannot be rescheduled during this time frame, the cancellation schedule applies. (For example: If a consulting date has been set for June 1st, the mutually agreed upon rescheduled date must fall between June 2-22nd. A rescheduled date later than June 22nd would incur a cancellation/rescheduling fee as indicated below). Fees for cancellation (or rescheduling as previously described) for any reason are applied on the following schedule, which reflects both advance preparation and exclusive holding of a date for a client: 6 weeks in advance - 25% fee; 5 weeks in advance - 50% fee; 4 weeks in advance - 100% fee. A cancellation fee also applies to individual appointments missed without 24 hours notice based on an hourly rate of $250 per hour multiplied by the number of hours scheduled for the missed appointment. Expenses will be charged according to their cost accrued at time of cancellation. 18 Revision November 13, 2013 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. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: None A. Travel outside the San Francisco Bay area, including transportation and meals, will be reimbursed at actual cost subject to the City of Palo Alto’s policy for reimbursement of travel and meal expenses for City of Palo Alto employees. B. Long distance telephone service charges, cellular phone service charges, facsimile transmission and postage charges are reimbursable at actual cost. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $0.00 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. 19 Revision November 13, 2013 ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced authorization from the CITY’s project manager or council member direction. The parties recognize that on occasion the CONSULTANT may be directed to immediately perform Additional Services and in such cases it is not possible to obtain a written proposal in advance. However, when timing permits before performing Additional Services, the CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement Work required because the following conditions are not satisfied or are exceeded shall be considered as additional services: 1. Re-work that results from City Council members, officials, or City staff not performing their responsibilities as set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 4 in a timely fashion (thus requiring re-work in order to complete the project); 2. Meetings missed without 24 hours notice; and 3. Additional scope of services not covered in Exhibit “A”. City of Palo Alto (ID # 4000) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 3159 El Camino Real Init. Study/Mit Neg Dec/ROLUA Title: Public Hearing: City Council Review of a Proposed Mixed-use Development on a 1.6 Acre Site Located at 3159 El Camino Real (between Acacia and Portage Avenues), Adoption of the Environmental Review Document (Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration) and Approval of the Site and Design Review, CUP for Over 5,000 Square Feet of Office and Design Enhancement Exceptions Application (via Record of Land Use Action). The Proposed Four-story, 55-Foot Tall, 74,122 s.f. Development Would Include Retail Space, Office Space, 48 Small Rental Residential Units, Two Zoning Concessions (Increased Floor Area and Reduced Parking Spaces) Under the State Density Bonus Law, and Would Replace the Existing 900 s.f. “We Fix Macs” Commercial Building From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff, the Planning and Transportation Commission, and the Architectural Review Board recommend that the City Council approve the draft Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A) approving: (1) A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Mitigation Monitoring Report; (2) The Site and Design Review application for a four story, mixed-use building (67,506 square feet of new floor area added to an existing 6,616 s.f. building) having a floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.06:1 on a 1.6 acre site (74,122 s.f. floor area:69,503 s.f. site area) to provide 48 apartment units, including five Below Market Rate (BMR) units, and office and retail uses, with structured parking facilities (at surface and underground) providing 216 parking spaces (including 11 puzzle lifts for 196 cars), (3) A Density Bonus concession permitting increased floor area for both residential and City of Palo Alto Page 2 commercial components of the project in the total amount of 4,619 square feet; and (4) A Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow 16,118 sq. ft. of office space on one parcel where the limit is 5,000 s.f., recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) on July 10, 2013, and (5) Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEEs) for five feet of additional building height and alleviation of the build to line by two and a half feet for a greater setback, recommended by the Architectural Review Board (ARB) on August 1, 2013. Executive Summary This vertical mixed-use project on El Camino Real in the Commercial Service (CS) zone district includes the demolition of a one story building (We Fix Macs store), and construction of a four- story, 74,122 s.f. building incorporating two existing buildings (the Equinox Fitness annex and Portage Avenue parking structure). This project would provide 48 rental apartments including five below market rate units, ground floor spaces for retail, commercial recreation and restaurant uses, and first and upper floor office space. The parking facilities, which meet city requirements, provide a total of 216 parking spaces and the project is largely compliant with the CS zone district development standards. Design Enhancement Exceptions and one Concession under State Density Bonus Law are requested for features that are not compliant with the CS zone standards. The Council is requested to approve the attached Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A) for the entitlement application that includes Site and Design Review, a CUP, and two DEEs. The RLUA references approval of the project’s environmental review document (MND, Attachment M). The Planning & Transportation Commission and the Architectural Review Board reviewed the application and recommended that the City Council approve this project. Background Site Location/Existing Conditions A site location map, provided as Attachment B, shows the 1.6 acre project site is located south of Page Mill Road on State Route 82 (El Camino Real), bounded by Portage Avenue to the southeast, Acacia Avenue to the northwest, and the developed site at 435 Acacia Avenue (Equinox Gym building). The site consists of four parcels. A preliminary parcel map application has recently been filed to merge the parcels, and a public hearing to consider the map application was held on November 7, 2013. The site includes the 6,616 s.f. Equinox Gym annex at 3127 El Camino Real, the 900 s.f. “We Fix Macs” building at 3159 El Camino Real, the parking structure at 440 Portage and two surface parking lots. The site has five curb cuts onto public rights of way: two curb cuts on Portage Avenue, one curb cut on the El Camino Real, and two curb cuts on Acacia Avenue. To the north of Acacia Street is a surface parking lot, across El Camino Real to the west are restaurants (McDonalds and Fish Market), across Portage Avenue to the south is a retail use (Footlocker) and office buildings, and across the alley to the east is a City of Palo Alto Page 3 retail use (Fry’s Electronics). The site is zoned CS and development standards are set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 18.16. The site’s Comprehensive Plan land use designation for this site is also Service Commercial. Project Description, Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Compliance The proposed project is a 67,506 s.f. mixed use building which, when combined with the existing 6,616 s.f. Equinox gym annex located on the site, would result in a floor area total of 74,122 s.f.. At the ground floor level, retail/restaurant/commercial recreation uses, and active outdoor areas including a dining terrace, are proposed. A total of 48 residential apartment units would be provided on the second, third, and fourth floors. The apartment units would be small workforce type housing generally smaller than 900 square feet. There would be 28 studio units, 19 one bedroom units and one, two bedroom unit. The residential component includes five below market rate apartment units (10% of the total units). Under State Law, a project that provides a certain amount of affordable housing must be granted a “concession” from local zoning standards. The project applicant requested concesssion is for greater floor area than the maximum allowable area. The Density Bonus law also allows the residential component of the project to provide fewer parking spaces than would otherwise be required for the residential component of the project. Office space would be provided on portions of the first, second, and third floors. New street trees would be planted (three on Acacia Avenue and one on Portage Avenue) and the existing street trees around the perimeter of the project would remain. A zoning table (Attachment C) provides data regarding the building’s compliance with CS zone development standards. A Comprehensive Plan policy conformance table is provided as Attachment D. The applicant’s project description is provided as Attachment E, and Attachment F provides information on parking facilities. The Commission staff report (Attachment G) and ARB staff reports (Attachments I and K) provide additional detail about the building treatments, site improvements and landscaping. The building’s maximum height would be 55 feet above grade. One DEE is a request for the height of the residential loft spaces to exceed the 50 foot height limit by five additional feet. A second DEE is requested to depart from the build-to requirement along the Portage Avenue frontage. This would allow for a greater setback of seven feet six inches rather than a five foot setback required by code. The DEEs are described in the Discussion section of this report. The building setback on El Camino Real would provide an effective 12 foot sidewalk width as required in the CS development standards. Parking Facilities The project includes surface parking and one level of underground parking facilities (13 feet below grade). A total of 216 onsite parking spaces are proposed. This includes 11 puzzle parking lift machines, which would provide 196 of the parking spaces. The below grade garage would connect to the existing below grade garage on Portage Avenue (serving tenants of 411-435 City of Palo Alto Page 4 Acacia Avenue) at the south east corner of the site. The main, finished garage floor level would be located below the existing site grades, and three-level car stackers would be installed in the garage. The lifts would extend approximately six to seven feet below the main garage floor. Vehicular access to the site would be provided exclusively on Portage Avenue via two curb cuts; all other existing curb cuts (on El Camino Real and Acacia Avenue) would be removed. The parking spaces would be provided in both the existing two-level garage on Portage Avenue, and in the new underground garage that would be accessed from a below grade connection to the existing Portage Avenue garage. Fifteen (15) surface-level visitor parking spaces are proposed beneath the residential wing of the proposed building. Board and Commission Review Planning and Transportation Commission On July 10, 2013 the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) conducted a public hearing and recommended City Council approval. There were four public speakers. Two speakers voiced concerns over traffic and parking while the other two speakers spoke in favor of the project noting the benefits of higher density housing. The Commission voted 5-0-2-0 to recommend approval of the project and discussed the following items: 1. Parking lifts; 2. Parking requirements; 3. DEE for height; and 4. State density bonus law. The Commission was supportive of the project and commented that it was real mixed use and good urban design. The Commission agreed that the project implements the policies of the Comprehensive plan. There were questions were primarily about the parking lifts. The Commissioners asked if the occupants will be able to charge electric vehicles, how much power the lifts used to operate, and if tenants would opt to use the other open parking spaces rather than their own dedicated space within the parking lift. The Commission expressed the desire for projects to be fully parked per the City’s parking code despite the reductions permitted by the State when providing BMR units in a project. Much of the Commission’s discussion was related to the requested DEE for height. Many agreed that the additional five feet in height, associated with the loft spaces, was an appropriate use of the DEE, resulting in a more unified roof element that was no taller than the roof screens alone would have been. Since habitable space would result within the loft spaces, due to the head room afforded by the increased height, one Commissioner stated that the DEE process was not the appropriate process for the height exception. The State Density Bonus Law City of Palo Alto Page 5 was also discussed. The Commission asked if the City was compelled to accept the BMR units and the associated concessions that go along with them or if the City could refuse the BMRs and eliminate the concessions. Staff responded that specific findings were required to deny the applicant’s request for concessions under the Density Bonus law. Meeting minutes are provided as Attachment H. Architectural Review Board Following the Commission’s review and recommendation, the ARB conducted a public hearing on August 1, 2013 and continued its review to the August 15, 2013 ARB meeting, requesting the applicant and staff address the following items: 1. Review the landscape plan for overall design and way finding; 2. Ensure the traffic ingress and egress points are understood and evaluate carefully in relation to deliveries, move ins and outs, and visitors. 3. Look at providing private open spaces (balconies) at all of the residential units; 4. Review and further develop the privacy walls and railings at the balconies; 5. Include in the Conditions of Approval restrictions on the storage of items on the balconies; 6. Review the wall at the trash enclosure on the Portage Avenue side of the project; 7. Provide specifics for material placement, clearly identified on the drawings; 8. Review the Acacia Avenue corner for design, and consider reorganizing the plan; 9. Consider the sidewalk width and evaluate the width relative to current Council discussions. The applicant requested a postponement of the public hearing to the August 29, 2013 ARB meeting, when the ARB recommended approval of the project with a condition that the following items return to the subcommittee for review: 1. Continuation of the trellis/projecting element around the Acacia corner; 2. Articulation of the fourth floor slab as it hits the elevator; and 3. Illumination of the portal (up lighting). Meeting minutes of the ARB meetings of August 1, 2013 and August 29, 2013 are provided as Attachments J and L, respectively. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Discussion The site’s CS zone district and comprehensive plan land use designation allow approval of a mixed-use project providing citywide and regional services and relying on customers arriving by car. The project is also considered a pedestrian, bicycle and transit friendly development supported by the Comprehensive Plan policies. The Policy Implications section of this report provides further discussion on policy compliance and benefits of the project. The Council’s purview is to take final action on the MND and project application. Under the Zoning Code the Council is the final decisionmaker for Site and Design review for this project since it involves a mixed use project with more than four residential units. In situations where Council is the final decisionmaker on Site and Design review, staff’s practice has also been to bring other related project entitlments directly to Council for approval. Therefore Council is also being asked to approve two related DEE’s and a CUP. Commission, ARB and staff have recommended approval of the MND and all application components of the project, described below for the Council. Site and Design Review The Site and Design Review process is required for mixed use projects providing more than four residential dwelling units. The Site and Design Review process includes review by the Commission, the ARB and the City Council. The Commission and ARB have both made positive recommendations to City Council for final approval of the proposed mixed use project. The Site and Design Review findings are provided within the RLUA. DEE for Height The height limit for the CS zone is 50 feet. The applicant has proposed a DEE to exceed the 50 foot height limit by 5 feet, for a total height of 55 feet. This additional five feet in height would only occur at the loft roofs that pop up above the 50 foot height limit. The code allows mechanical roof screens to exceed the 50 foot height limit by 15 feet. The proposed mechanical roof screens are only proposed to be five feet tall. The exception is requested so the height of the mechanical roof screens and the loft roofs could be integrated into one single cohesive roof element, rather than having multiple roof screens randomly scattered across the top of the building. The draft DEE findings are provided in the draft Record of Land Use Action. DEE for Build-to-Line The CS zone district requires that 33% of the building be built up to the setback on the side streets (Acacia and Portage Avenues), and that 50% of the main building frontage (El Camino Real) be at the setback line of zero to ten feet to create a 12 foot effective sidewalk width (curb City of Palo Alto Page 7 to building face). On the 150 foot long Acacia Avenue frontage, 39% or 59’ of the building wall is proposed to be placed at the five foot setback, therefore the requirement is met. On the 458 foot long Portage Avenue frontage, the length of the building wall is approximately 149 feet long. To meet the 33% build to setback requirement, at least 49 linear feet of the building wall would need to be built up to the five foot required setback. To accommodate the extension of the residential balconies and the accessible ramp up to the elevated plaza, the building would be built with a minimum seven foot six inch setback, rather than up to the required five foot setback. This would be two and one half feet further back form the street than is required by the code for 33% of the wall length. This greater setback than the build to requirement allows, necessitates this DEE request. While the building wall is further from the setback than required, the residential balconies at the second, third, and fourth floors would extend out forward 11 inches beyond the property line. Findings for this DEE are provided in the RLUA. Conditional Use Permit The CS zoning limits office uses to no more than 5,000 square feet per parcel. The zoning also contains a provision that allows the parcel to exceed the 5,000 s.f. office limit with a Conditional Use Permit. Since the four parcels will be combined into one parcel a Conditional Use permit to exceed the 5,000 s.f. limit of office space per parcel is included as part of the application. The total amount of office space proposed within the project is 16,118 square feet. This is only 21.7% of the total floor area within the project. The amount of office square footage is similar to the amount of retail floor area, providing a balance between the two uses while being considerably less than the proposed residential floor area proposed within the project. The CUP findings are provided within the RLUA (Attachment A). Concessions for FAR Five of the proposed 48 rental apartment units would be provided as below market rate units. This is 10% of the total number of units. The floor area allowance in the CS zone district is 1:1 or 69,503 square feet for this site. The maximum nonresidential floor area is 0.4:1 of the site or 27,801 sq.ft., where the proposed nonresidential floor area is 31,262 sq.ft. (3,460 sq.ft. over the 0.4:1 nonresidential FAR). Of the nonresidential floor area, .15:1 FAR or 10,425 sq.ft. of floor area must be ground floor commercial area; the project includes 17,073 s.f. of ground floor commercial area, meeting the minimum standard. The maximum residential floor area is 0.6:1 or 41,701 sq.ft. where 42,860 sq.ft. is proposed (1,158 sq.ft. over the 0.6:1 residential FAR). In accordance with State Law, and to assist in providing the proposed BMR units, the applicant has proposed to exceed the allowable 1:1 FAR (69,503 sq.ft. of floor area) by 4,619 square feet for a total floor area of 74,122 square feet. The State Density Bonus Law allows for concessions when at least 10% of the housing units proposed are affordable units. The requested concession is an FAR of .06:1 over the maximum allowable 1:1 FAR. The housing component of this project is a good example of the type of housing development envisioned by the new City of Palo Alto Page 8 Housing Element. The sites were located on the City’s inventory. The project combines smaller sized parcels to maximize density. The small units are designed to appeal to an urban commuter and they are located close to transit. The requested concession is also consistent with the Density Bonus recently recommended by the Commission. Parking Reductions The total number of parking spaces that would generally be required for the project based on the city’s zoning requirements is 247 parking spaces. State density bonus law (Government code Section 65915, also formerly known as SB 1818) provides the ability to use a lower number of parking spaces when a project provides a minimum of 10% BMR units in a project. The State law allows for a 31 space reduction in the number of parking spaces required in the project. While the project would provide 31 spaces fewer than the City’s parking code requires, with the state incentives for parking reductions, the project will be otherwise zoning compliant for required parking. A breakdown of the parking regulations is provided as Attachment F. Timeline Application submittal: January 29, 2013 Mitigated Negative Declaration available for Public comment: May 31, 2013 Planning and Transportation Commission Review: July 10, 2013 Architectural Review Board Review: August 1, 2013 Architectural Review Board Review (2nd hearing): August 29, 2013 City Council Review: November 18, 2013 Resource Impact The project’s creation of 16,118 square feet of office space, 8,746 square feet of commercial, retail and restaurant space, and 42,642 square feet of residential space would yield the City additional annual revenues in the form of property taxes, sales taxes, and utility user taxes, estimated in the range of $35,000 to $45,000. One-time revenues would include development impact fees of approximately $986,642.00. The additional demand created by this project for general City services, such as public safety, will be absorbed within current service levels. Policy Implications City of Palo Alto Page 9 The proposal would establish a mixed use development within the Cal-Ventura Mixed Use Area, a location specified in the Comprehensive plan as a mixed use district where mixed use development is encouraged. The project would be compliant with a multitude of additional Policies of the Comprehensive plan as shown in Attachment D. Many of the City’s policies are reflected in the project’s design. The South El Camino Real Guidelines, the Context-Based Design Criteria, and Comprehensive Plan policies are implemented by this proposal. The project has pieced together smaller parcels to form a large enough parcel that is able to realize the elements of the various City Guidelines. The building would provide a strong street edge along El Camino Real while providing a wide 12 foot wide effective sidewalk, at minimum, and various other pedestrian amenties. The building would have four floors but the upper floors would be set back to reduce the apparent height and mass of the building on the street. The building would have an elevated corner plaza at the intersection of Portage Avenue and El Camino Real for outdoor seating, storefront entries that face the street, two arcades providing pedestrian weather protection, and residential balconies that relate to the street. The building façade is well articulated with ample fenestration and a multitude of design elements including a corner glass element with sunshades, balconies at the residential floors, a wide opening to an interior couryard and stair tower, and multiple transitions in building materials with numerous colors and textures. The project would replace surface parking lots, visible from El Camino Real, with underground parking and surface parking that is at grade behind and beneath the new building. All curb cuts along El Camino Real would be removed, resulting in improved pedestrian safety. Many of the project elements work together to improve pedestrian access and serve to implement the vision of a more pedestrian- oriented El Camino Real. In addition to the physical elements, the proposed uses within the project also serve to reduce auto usage and encourage pedestrian activity. This is a true mixed use project with a high number of small rental residential units not typically seen in mixed use projects of the recent past. This is a housing product that is not commonly built in Palo Alto and would be a welcome addition to the City’s rental housing stock. In addition to the residential uses, the proposal also includes a reasonable balance of office and retail spaces. Environmental Review An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment M) were prepared for the project and the 30 day public review and comment period began on May 31, 2013 and ended on July 1, 2013. The environmental analysis notes there are a few potentially significant impacts that would require mitigation measures to reduce them to a less than significant level. These include mitigations for dust control during excavation, protection for nesting birds, building design for earthquake resistance, basement shoring, a Health and Safety Plan for construction workers, a Remedial Risk Management Plan, collection of additional soil samples, installation of a vapor barrier, vapor collection, and venting system, third party inspection of vapor barrier and venting system, a Groundwater Mitigation Plan, development of a Groundwater Extraction design, technical documents uploaded to the appropriate agencies, and the evaluation and implementation of signal cycle length optimization and reallocation of the green time. City of Palo Alto Page 10 Attachments:  Attachment A: Record of Land Use Action (DOCX)  Attachment B: Site Location Map (PDF)  Attachment C: Zoning Compliance Table (DOCX)  Attachment D: Comprehensive Plan Compliance Table (DOC)  Attachment E: Applicant's Project Description Letter (PDF)  Attachment F: Parking Allocation Diagram (PDF)  Attachment G: P&TC Staff Report July 10, 2013 w/o attachments (PDF)  Attachment H: P&TC Minutes July 10, 2013 (PDF)  Attachment I: ARB Staff August 1, 2013 w/o attachments (PDF)  Attachment J: ARB minutes August 1, 2013 (DOC)  Attachment K: ARB Staff Report August 29, 2013 w/o attachments (PDF)  Attachment L: ARB Minutes August 29, 2013 (DOC)  Attachment M: MND and Initial Study (PDF)  Attachment N: Plans (TXT) 1 ACTION NO. 2013-0X RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE APPROVAL FOR 3159 EL CAMINO REAL: SITE AND DESIGN REVIEW, DENSITY BONUS CONCESSION; DESIGN ENHANCEMENT EXCEPTIONS AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPROVAL (13PLN-00040) On November 18, 2013, the Council of the City of Palo Alto approved the Site and Design Review, Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEE) and Conditional Use Permit application for a mixed use building in the Service Commercial (CS) zone district, making the following findings, determination and declarations: SECTION 1. Background. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”) finds, determines, and declares as follows: A. Fergus Garber Young (FGY) Architects, on behalf of Portage Avenue Portfolio, LLC has requested the City’s adoption and approval for the following items: (1) A Mitigated Negative Declaration, prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); (2) Site and Design Review application for a new 67,506 s.f. mixed-use building (added to an existing 6,616 s.f. building) on a 1.6 acre site (resulting in a total 74,122 s.f. of floor area on a 69,503 s.f. site, and FAR of 1.06:1) to provide 48 residential apartment units, including five below market rate units, and office and retail uses, with structured parking facilities (at surface and underground) providing 216 parking spaces (including 11 puzzle lifts for 196 cars), including Design Enhancement Exceptions (to be further described in ARB draft ROLUA); (3) A Conditional Use Permit (to allow 16,118 sq. ft. of office space on one parcel where the limit is 5,000 s.f.); (4) An FAR concession in the total amount of 4,619 under the density bonus law; (5) A Parcel Map to merge into one parcel of land the following four parcels: 2 i) One parcel is occupied by a parking structure with one level of surface parking, one level of below grade parking and an existing elevated swimming pool. ii) The second parcel is occupied by a 6,616 square foot annex to the Equinox Fitness facility which is a commercial recreation use (formerly The Pet Food Depot), with associated surface parking. iii) The third parcel is occupied by the 900 square foot We Fix Macs store and its associated surface parking. iv) The fourth parcel is a vacant parking lot with a small attendant shack. These properties are designated on the Comprehensive Plan land use map as Service Commercial, and are located within the Service Commercial (CS) zone district. B. The Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) reviewed the Site and Design Review and Conditional Use Permit applications, density bonus FAR concession and Mitigated Negative Declaration on July 10, 2013, and recommended approval. C. The Architectural Review Board (ARB) reviewed the application for Site and Design Review and Design Enhancement Exceptions on August 1, 2013, and continued the item for further review. The ARB heard the item for a second time on August 29, 2013 and recommended approval. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City, as the lead agency for the Project, has determined that a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) will be required for the project subject to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Public Notice period for the MND began on May 31, 2013 and concluded on July 1, 2013. SECTION 3. Site and Design Review Findings 1. The use will be constructed and operated in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. The proposed mixed use building would introduce compatible and harmonious uses in relation to adjacent and nearby uses in this diverse and eclectic neighborhood. The proposed building and uses would be sited such that they would not result in an 3 impact on adjacent properties. The traffic and parking for the project have been reviewed and it has been determined that the use would be adequately parked and that the traffic volumes would not result in an impact to local intersections or roadways. The proposal removes several existing curb cuts and widens the sidewalk on the El Camino Real frontage, improving pedestrian safety. 2. The project is consistent with the goal of ensuring the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas. The approval of the project would maintain the desirability of investment by providing a project with a mix of uses that would assist in the reduction of vehicular trips by providing small unit rental housing for workers in close proximity to jobs and transit and would assist in improving the neighborhood by making use of a series of underutilized parcels and implementing the City’s Guidelines in relationship to El Camino Real development. The proposal would be executed in a manner that has the potential to improve the aesthetic quality of the area. Construction of all improvements will be governed by the regulations of the current Zoning Ordinance, the Uniform Building Code, and other applicable codes to assure safety and a high quality of development. 3. Sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance are observed in the project. The proposal, as a mixed use infill project, is intended to benefit the environment by providing new housing within the city, to reduce vehicle commute times. Efficient use of space, reductions in the depth of excavation, and the reduction in the volume of soil excavation are achieved with the use of 11 parking lifts rather than additional levels of below grade parking. The proposal also provides deep overhangs and sunscreens to reduce solar heat gain. 4. The use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The project is compliant with several comprehensive plan policies as noted in the Comprehensive Plan Compliance Table SECTION 4. Conditional Use Permit Findings 4 1. Not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; The project, as conditioned, would not result in detrimental or injurious impacts to property or improvements in the vicinity. The proposal has no significant impacts that are not able to be mitigated and would improve the area by providing a mix of uses to better serve the needs of the community. The proposed office use is a reasonable amount of office space in comparison to the other uses proposed for the site. The proposed commercial area would be a total of 31,262 s.f. Approximately half of the commercial square footage (15,144 s.f.) would be retail, commercial recreation (gym), or restaurant uses. The 16,118 square feet of office space is only slightly over half of the commercial square footage in the project. 2. Be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this title (Zoning). The project is compliant with several comprehensive plan policies as noted in the Comprehensive Plan Compliance Table. SECTION 5. ARB/Design Enhancement Exception Findings 1) The design of the proposed mixed use development is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan in that the site is designated as Service Commercial, which allows for mixed use development and compliance with applicable Comprehensive Plan policies is outlined in the Comprehensive Plan compliance table. 2) The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site in that the proposed building is located within a commercial zone district where a mixture of uses is common. The building would be located on a significant arterial roadway where larger commercial buildings with mixed uses are encouraged; 3) The design is appropriate to the function of the project in that the design appropriately accommodates all the proposed uses, providing access in the right places, elevating the residences off the street, improving pedestrian accessibility 5 and safety, and addressing the street in such a way as to provide building mass close to the street without overwhelming it; 4) In areas considered by the board as having a unified design character or historical character, the design is compatible with such character. Not applicable. The area does not have a unified design character. 5) The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between different designated land uses in that the adjacent land uses are also commercial in nature and the proposed project integrates with them rather than conflicting; 6) The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site in that the proposed mixed use building would be compatible with the other uses in the area and the uses within the building would be compatible with each other. For instance, one could live and work within the project as well as use the gym facility and the restaurant services without leaving the project site; 7) The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general community in that the proposed design provides a large central courtyard area that provides easy pedestrian access through the project; 8) The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the function of the structures in that ample open space is provided in the form of private patio areas for the residences and office users, large dinning terrace that is both covered and uncovered, and the large central courtyard that would be open to all building occupants; 9) Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the project in that the proposal includes 6 sufficient parking and areas to accommodate trash and recycling needs of the development; 10) Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles in that adequate parking areas are proposed both at the surface and below grade, bicycle parking provided at various locations throughout the site, and safe pedestrian access through the project; 11) Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project in that the proposal will ensure the preservation of all existing street trees; 12) The materials, textures, colors and details of construction and plant material are appropriate expressions of the design and function in that the building is proposed to have a multitude of exterior finish materials with different colors and textures providing a high level of detail and visual interest; 13) The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of plant masses, open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create a desirable and functional environment in that the proposal includes landscape material where possible considering that the project sits upon a below grade parking structure. Landscape planters and potted plants are placed around the perimeter and through the open courtyard; 14) Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly maintained on the site, and is of a variety, which would tend to be drought-resistant and to reduce consumption of water in its installation and maintenance; 15) The project exhibits green building and sustainable design that is energy efficient, water conserving, durable and nontoxic, with high quality spaces and high recycled content materials. The project would comply with the stricter CalGreen 7 tier 2 requirements. The residential portion would comply with Build-it-Green requirements. 16) The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review, which is to: a. Promote orderly and harmonious development in the city; b. Enhance the desirability of residence or investment in the city; c. Encourage the attainment of the most desirable use of land and improvements; d. Enhance the desirability of living conditions upon the immediate site or in adjacent areas; and e. Promote visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety and which, at the same time, are considerate of each other. The project as designed, and as conditioned, would promote an environment that is of high design quality and variety. The requested Design Enhancement Exceptions are consistent with the following findings as stated in PAMC 18.76.050 (c). DEE Findings for Height (five feet over the 50 foot code limitation) (1) There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or site improvements involved that do not apply generally to property in the same zone district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed building would span the entire block, resulting in an expansive roof that would require multiple roof screen areas to condition the various spaces within the building. (2) The granting of the application will enhance the appearance of the site or structure, or improve the neighborhood character of the project and preserve an existing or proposed 8 architectural style, in a manner which would not otherwise be accomplished through strict application of the minimum requirements of this title (Zoning) and the architectural review findings set forth in Section 18.76.020(d). This finding can be made in the affirmative. The five feet in additional height would allow the loft roof spaces to pop up out of the roof allowing for the combination of these elements with the mechanical roof screen to create one seamless and cohesive screening element that is architecturally compatible with the building and more visually attractive than multiple individual mechanical roof screens. (3) The exception is related to a minor architectural feature or site improvement that will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed height exception for the individual loft spaces would not result in additional height beyond the height of the permitted height of the mechanical roof screens. The loft and roof screen element would also be set back 14 feet from the face of the fourth floor and 39 feet back from the front face of the building, reducing its visibility from the street. DEE for alleviation of the build to line requirement by 2.5 feet on the Portage Avenue frontage. (1) There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or site improvements involved that do not apply generally to property in the same zone district. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The project site is not a level site and is lower at the El Camino Real and Portage Avenue corner. The State accessibility requirements dictate that access be provided to the elevated dinning terrace from the sidewalk. 9 (2) The granting of the application will enhance the appearance of the site or structure, or improve the neighborhood character of the project and preserve an existing or proposed architectural style, in a manner which would not otherwise be accomplished through strict application of the minimum requirements of this title (Zoning) and the architectural review findings set forth in Section 18.76.020(d). This finding can be made in the affirmative. The 2.5 foot additional setback from the required build to line of five feet would allow for an accessible ramp from the sidewalk to the dinning terrace/corner plaza and would move the building slightly further from the street, providing a little extra breathing room in that location. (3) The exception is related to a minor architectural feature or site improvement that will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare or convenience. This finding can be made in the affirmative in that the proposed additional setback of 2.5 feet beyond the required build to line of five feet is very minor in nature and would not result in a detrimental visual impact to the street. SECTION 6. Site and Design Review and Conditional Use Permit Approval Granted. Site and Design Review, DEEs and Conditional Use Permit Approval are granted by the City Council under Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.30(G).070, and Section 18.76.010 for application 13PLN-00040, subject to the conditions of approval in Section eight of the Record. SECTION 7. Plan Approval. The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in substantial conformance with those plans prepared by FGY Architects, consisting of 39 pages, dated July 25, 2013, and received July 25, 2013, except as modified to incorporate the 10 conditions of approval in Section Seven. A copy of these plans is on file in the Department of Planning and Community Environment. This document, including the conditions of approval in Section eight, shall be printed on the cover sheet of the plan set submitted with the Building Permit application. SECTION 8. Conditions of Approval. Department of Planning and Community Environment 1. The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in substantial conformance with plans received on August 22, 2013, except as modified to incorporate the following conditions of approval and any additional conditions placed on the project by the Planning Commission, Architectural Review Board, or City Council. The following conditions of approval shall be printed on the cover sheet of the plan set submitted with the Building Permit application. 2. All noise producing equipment shall not exceed the allowances specified in Section 9.10 Noise of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. 3. Any existing city street trees shall be maintained and protected during construction per City of Palo Alto standard requirements. 4. All landscape material shall be well maintained and replaced if it fails. 5. Any exterior modifications to the building or property shall require Architectural Review. This includes any new signs. 6. Mitigation Measures C-1: The effects of construction activities would be increased dustfall and locally elevated levels of particulate matter downwind of construction activity. Construction dust has the potential for creating a nuisance at nearby properties. This impact is considered potentially significant but normally mitigatable by implementing the following control measures: During demolition of existing structures: 11 Water active demolition areas to control dust generation during demolition and pavement break-up. Cover all trucks hauling demolition debris from the site. Use dust-proof chutes to load debris into trucks whenever feasible. During all construction phases: Pave, apply water 3x/daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more). Enclose, cover, water 2x/daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. The above measures include feasible measures for construction emissions identified by the BAAQMD for large sites. According to the District threshold of significance for construction impacts, implementation of the measures would reduce construction impacts of the project to a less than significant level. 7. Mitigation Measures B-1: The applicant shall abide by all provisions of Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the State Fish and Game Code and Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) as published in the Federal Register (Vol. 70, No. 49; March 15, 2005). Although there is no vegetation on the project site that may contain nesting birds, there may be nesting birds in existing vegetation abutting the proposed project site. To protect any nesting birds, the proposed project may avoid construction during the nesting period. Alternatively, a qualified wildlife biologist (to be hired by the applicant) shall conduct a survey for nesting birds that are covered by the MBTA and/or Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the State Fish and Game Code in the vicinity of the project site. This survey shall cover all areas that 12 would be disturbed as a result of construction-related activities during the nesting period, and shall include a “buffer zone” (an area of potential sensitivity, beyond the bounds of the proposed project construction area) which shall be determined by the biologist based on his or her professional judgment and experience. This buffer zone may include off-site habitat. This biological survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the commencement of construction activities. The wildlife biologist shall provide a report to the City promptly detailing the findings of the survey. No construction shall be conducted until this report has been provided to the City and the City has authorized in writing the commencement of construction activities in accord with the biologist’s findings. 8. Mitigation Measures F-1: The design of all buildings shall be designed in accordance with current earthquake resistant standards, including the 2007 CBC guidelines and design recommendations regarding the potential for localized liquefaction presented in the Geotechnical Investigation provided by Murray Engineers. 9. Mitigation Measure F-2: Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall submit a well-designed shoring system for the basement excavation to be designed by a licensed engineer subject to review and approval by Public Works Department. 10. Mitigation Measures H-1: A project specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) and a Site Mitigation Plan (SMP), would be implemented, and adhered to during construction and excavation activities. All workers on site should be read and understand the HASP and SMP, and copies should be maintained on site during construction and excavation at all times. 11. Mitigation Measures H-2: A Remedial Risk Management Plan (RRMP) should be developed and followed by current and future owners, tenants, and operators. The plan will include the implementation of the described remedies and engineering design. 12. Mitigation Measures H-3: Additional collection of four soil samples at the site should be completed after the base excavation to 14 feet bgs is achieved. This soil-gas collection will verify if the removal of the clay cap has resulted in a reduction of residual soil gas below the residential ESLs. Current PCE and TCE concentrations in soil-gas are one or two orders of magnitude greater that what would be expected to accumulate based on current groundwater concentrations of PCE and TCE, and would not be likely to reach the current 13 concentrations in the future if the reduction of groundwater contaminants continues as it is expected to. 13. Mitigation Measures H-4: If soil-gas concentrations collected following the initial base excavation phase have not resulted in significant decrease, a sub slab passive vapor collection and passive vapor collection and passive venting system designed full vapor barrier would be implemented to mitigate against the identified VOC soil-vapor intrusion (see Mitigation Measure H-5 for vapor intrusion mitigation system). 14. Mitigation Measure H-5: Prior to issuance of the occupancy permit the applicant shall file documentation from an independent consultant specializing in vapor mitigation system design and installation for final approval by a third party inspection service reporting to the City financed by the applicant confirming that each component (collection pipes, transmission pipes, inlets, risers, vents, etc.) of the vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS) has been installed in accordance with recommendations of the Vapor Mitigation System and Monitoring Plan, and includes the installation of a full vapor barrier, which shall be a 60-mil thick, spray applied membrane below elevator shafts, stairwells, pipe chases, and entire floor slab, as part of the active vapor collection and venting system (i.e., driven by electric fans at the effluent end of the VMS riser pipes enhanced by outside air entering through inlet vents) to be installed in the building to mitigate potential soil vapor intrusion. 15. Mitigation Measure H-6: A Groundwater Mitigation Plan shall be provided for lowering ground water levels during the excavation phase that may reach depths to 22-feet bgs which is about 4-feet below the expected level of first encountered groundwater. The mitigation plan shall specify the number of groundwater dewatering wells with dedicated pumps to be installed around the site perimeter throughout the project duration. This plan shall be prepared and submitted for final approval by the City’s Public Works Department prior to issuance of City permits. 16. Mitigation Measure H-7: A detailed groundwater extraction design shall be developed including a staging plans for dewatering system, including all required chemical testing, dewatering systems layout, well depths, well screen lengths, dewatering pump locations, pipe sizes and capacities, grades, filter sand gradations, surface water disposal method, permitting and location. This design shall be prepared and submitted for final approval by the City’s Public Works Department prior to issuance of City permits. 14 17. Mitigation Measure H-8: This and future technical reports should be uploaded (as required) to the appropriate regulatory agencies- including uploads to the SCCDEH’s ftp system and the State Geo Tracker system. 18. Mitigation Measures T-1: The applicant shall conduct an evaluation and implementation of signal cycle length optimization and reallocation of the green time at the intersection of El Camino Real and West Charleston Road. 19. An Affordable Rental Housing Agreement for the five units designated for Lower Income Households shall be executed and recorded prior to building permit issuance. 20. The Development Impact Fees, approximated at $986,642.00, shall be paid prior to building permit issuance. Water Gas Wastewater Utilities Department 21. Prior to demolition, the applicant shall submit the existing water/wastewater fixture unit loads (and building as- built plans to verify the existing loads) and verify the existing water meters and sizes of fire services to determine the capacity fee credit for the existing load. The properties 440 Portage (existing 6” fire service and two 1” water meters), 3159 El Camino Real (existing one 5/8” water meter), 3111 El Camino Real (existing one 5/8” water meter) and 3127 El Camino Real (existing 6” fire service, one 5/8” water meter and one 1- 1/2” water meter) are being combined for the new building. 22. Prior to demolition, the applicant shall submit a request to disconnect all utility services and/or meters including a signed affidavit of vacancy. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within 10 working days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued by the building inspection division after all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected and removed. 23. The applicant shall submit a completed water-gas- wastewater service connection application - load sheet(s) (one load sheet required for each unit or place of business for City of Palo Alto Utilities. The applicant must provide all the information requested for utility service demands (water in fixture units/g.p.m., gas in b.t.u.p.h, and sewer in fixture units/g.p.d.). The applicant shall provide the existing (prior) loads, the new loads, and the combined/total loads (the new loads plus any existing loads to remain). 15 24. The applicant shall submit improvement plans for utility construction. The plans must show the size and location of all underground utilities within the development and the public right of way including meters, backflow preventers, fire service requirements, sewer mains, sewer cleanouts, sewer lift stations and any other required utilities. 25. New water, gas or wastewater utilities shall be connected to Portage or Acacia Ave. No new utilities are allowed from El Camino Real. 26. The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any auxiliary water supply, (i.e. water well, gray water, recycled water, rain catchment, water storage tank, etc.). 27. The applicant shall be responsible for installing and upgrading the existing utility mains and/or services as necessary to handle anticipated peak loads. This responsibility includes all costs associated with the design and construction for the installation/upgrade of the utility mains and/or services. 28. The applicant's engineer shall submit flow calculations and system capacity study showing that the on-site and off-site water and sanitary sewer mains and services will provide the domestic, irrigation, fire flows, and wastewater capacity needed to service the development and adjacent properties during anticipated peak flow demands. Field testing may be required to determined current flows and water pressures on existing water main. Calculations must be signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. The applicant is required to perform, at his/her expense, a flow monitoring study of the existing sewer main to determine the remaining capacity. The report must include existing peak flows or depth of flow based on a minimum monitoring period of seven continuous days or as determined by the senior wastewater engineer. The study shall meet the requirements and the approval of the WGW engineering section. No downstream overloading of existing sewer main will be permitted. 29. For contractor installed water and wastewater mains or services, the applicant shall submit to the WGW engineering section of the Utilities Department four copies of the installation of water and wastewater utilities off-site improvement plans in accordance with the utilities department design criteria. All utility work within the public right-of-way shall be clearly shown on the plans that are prepared, signed and stamped by a registered civil engineer. The contractor shall also submit a complete schedule of work, method of 16 construction and the manufacture's literature on the materials to be used for approval by the utilities engineering section. The applicant's contractor will not be allowed to begin work until the improvement plan and other submittals have been approved by the water, gas and wastewater engineering section. After the work is complete but prior to sign off, the applicant shall provide record drawings (as-builts) of the contractor installed water and wastewater mains and services per City of Palo Alto Utilities record drawing procedures. For contractor installed services the contractor shall install 3M marker balls at each water or wastewater service tap to the main and at the City clean out for wastewater laterals. 30. An approved reduced pressure principle assembly (RPPA backflow preventer device) is required for all existing and new water connections from Palo Alto Utilities to comply with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive. The RPPA shall be installed on the owner's property and directly behind the water meter within 5 feet of the property line. RPPA’s for domestic service shall be lead free. Show the location of the RPPA on the plans. 31. An approved reduced pressure detector assembly is required for the existing or new water connection for the fire system to comply with requirements of California administrative code, title 17, sections 7583 through 7605 inclusive (a double detector assembly may be allowed for existing fire sprinkler systems upon the CPAU’s approval). Reduced pressure detector assemblies shall be installed on the owner's property adjacent to the property line, within 5’ of the property line. Show the location of the reduced pressure detector assembly on the plans. 32. All backflow preventer devices shall be approved by the WGW engineering division. Inspection by the utilities cross connection inspector is required for the supply pipe between the meter and ++the assembly. 33. Existing wastewater laterals that are not plastic (ABS, PVC, or PE) must be abandoned per WGW Utilities standards. 34. The applicant shall pay the capacity fees and connection fees associated with new utility service/s or added demand on existing services. The approved relocation of services, meters, hydrants, or other facilities will be performed at the cost of the person/entity requesting the relocation. 35. Each unit or place of business shall have its own water and gas meter shown on the plans. Each parcel shall have 17 its own water service, gas service and sewer lateral connection shown on the plans. 36. A separate water meter and backflow preventer is required to irrigate the approved landscape plan. Show the location of the irrigation meter on the plans. This meter shall be designated as an irrigation account an no other water service will be billed on the account. The irrigation and landscape plans submitted with the application for a grading or building permit shall conform to the City of Palo Alto water efficiency standards. 37. A new gas service line installation is required. Show the new gas meter location on the plans. The gas meter location must conform with utilities standard details. 38. All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be abandoned at the main per WGW utilities procedures. 39. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures cannot be placed over existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain 1’ horizontal clear separation from the vault/cabinet/concrete base to existing utilities as found in the field. If there is a conflict with existing utilities, Cabinets/vaults/bases shall be relocated from the plan location as needed to meet field conditions. Trees may not be planted within 10 feet of existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services or meters. New water, gas or wastewater services/meters may not be installed within 10’ or existing trees. Maintain 10’ between new trees and new water, gas and wastewater services/mains/meters. 40. To install new gas service by directional boring, the applicant is required to have a sewer cleanout at the front of the building for each lateral exiting the building. This cleanout is required so the sewer lateral can be videoed for verification of no damage after the gas service is installed by directional boring. 41. All utility installations shall be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto utility standards for water, gas & wastewater. 42. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans for all utility work in the El Camino Real right-of- way. The applicant must provide a copy of the permit to the WGW engineering section. 18 Environmental Services Division General Comments: 43. Consider providing separate service for residential and commercial units Service Levels: Commercial: Garbage – 4-yard bin, Recycling – 3-yard bin, Compostables – 2-yard bin. Residential: Garbage – 1-yard bin, Recycling – 2-yard bin, Compostables – 96-gallon cart. 44. PAMC 18.23.020 Trash Disposal and Recycling (A) Assure that development provides adequate and accessible interior areas or exterior enclosures for the storage of trash and recyclable materials in appropriate containers, and that trash disposal and recycling areas are located as far from abutting residences as is reasonably possible. (B) Requirements: (i) Trash disposal and recyclable areas shall be accessible to all residents or users of the property. (ii) Recycling facilities shall be located, sized, and designed to encourage and facilitate convenient use. (iii) Trash disposal and recyclable areas shall be screened from public view by masonry or other opaque and durable material, and shall be enclosed and covered. Gates or other controlled access shall be provided where feasible. Chain link enclosures are strongly discouraged. (iv) Trash disposal and recycling structures shall be architecturally compatible with the design of the project. (v) The design, construction and accessibility of recycling areas and enclosures shall be subject to approval by the architectural review board, in accordance with design guidelines adopted by that board and approved by the city council pursuant to Section 18.76.020. 19 45. PAMC 5.20.120 Recycling storage design requirements 46. The design of any new, substantially remodeled, or expanded building or other facility shall provide for proper storage, handling, and accessibility which will accommodate the solid waste and recyclable materials loading anticipated and which will allow for the efficient and safe collection. The design shall comply with the applicable provisions of Sections 18.22.100, 18.24.100, 18.26.100, 18.32.080, 18.37.080, 18.41.080, 18.43.080, 18.45.080, 18.49.140, 18.55.080, 18.60.080, and 18.68.170 of Title 18 of this code. All Services: 47. Collection vehicle access (vertical clearance, street width and turnaround space) and street parking are common issues pertaining to new developments. Adequate space must be provided for vehicle access. 48. Weight limit for all drivable areas to be accessed by the solid waste vehicles (roads, driveways, pads) must be rated to 60,000 lbs. This includes areas where permeable pavement is used. 49. Containers must be within 25 feet of service area or charges will apply. 50. Carts and bins must be able to roll without obstacles or curbs to reach service areas "no jumping curbs" 51. Garbage, Recycling, and Yard Waste/Compostables cart/bin location and sizing Office Building 52. The proposed commercial development must follow the requirements for recycling container space . Project plans must show the placement of recycling containers, for example, within the details of the solid waste enclosures. Collection space 20 should be provided for built-in recycling containers/storage on each floor/office or alcoves for the placement of recycling containers. 53. Enclosure and access should be designed for equal access to all three waste streams – garbage, recycling, and compostables. 54. Collection cannot be performed in underground. Underground bins locations require a minimum of 77” of vertical clearance. Pull out charges will apply. In instances where push services are not available (e.g., hauler driver cannot push containers up or down ramps), the property owner will be responsible for placing solid waste containers in an accessible location for collection. 55. All service areas must have a clearance height of 20’ for bin service. 56. New enclosures should consider rubber bumpers to reduce wear and tear on walls. 57. For questions regarding garbage, recycling, and compostables collection issues, contact Green Waste of Palo Alto (650) 493-4894. Restaurants and food service establishments only: 58. Please contact Green Waste of Palo Alto (650) 493-4894 to maximize the collection of compostables in food preparation areas and customer areas. 59. For more information about compostable food service products, please contact City of Palo Alto Zero Waste at (650) 496-5910. 60. Multi-Family Residential 61. The proposed multi-family development must follow the requirements for recycling container space . All residential developments, where central garbage, recycling, and compostables containers will serve five or more dwelling units, must have space for the storage and collection of recyclables and compostables. This includes the provision of recycling chutes where garbage chutes are provided. Project plans must show the placement of recycling and compostables containers, for example, within the details of the solid waste enclosures. 21 62. Enclosure and access should be designed for equal access to all three waste streams – garbage, recycling, and compostables. 63. Collection cannot be performed in underground. Underground bins locations require a minimum of 77” of vertical clearance. Pull out charges will apply. In instances where push services are not available (e.g., hauler driver cannot push containers up or down ramps), the property owner will be responsible for placing solid waste containers in an accessible location for collection. 64. All service areas must have a clearance height of 20’ for bin service. 65. New enclosures should consider rubber bumpers to reduce wear and tear on walls. 66. For questions regarding garbage, recycling, and compostables collection issues, contact Green Waste of Palo Alto (650) 493-4894. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(10) Dumpsters for New and Remodeled Facilities 67. New buildings and residential developments providing centralized solid waste collection, except for single-family and duplex residences, shall provide a covered area for a bin/dumpster. The area shall be adequately sized for all waste streams (garbage, recycling, and yard waste/compostables) and designed with grading or a berm system to prevent water runon and runoff from the area. Covered Dumpsters, Recycling and Tallow Bin Areas PAMC, 16.09.075(q)(2) 68. Newly constructed and remodeled Food Service Establishments (FSEs) shall include a covered area for all dumpsters, bins, carts or container used for the collection of trash, recycling, food scraps and waste cooking fats, oils and grease (FOG) or tallow. 69. The area shall be designed and shown on plans to prevent water run-on to the area and runoff from the area. 70. Drains that are installed within the enclosure for recycle and waste bins, dumpsters and tallow bins serving FSEs are optional. Any such drain installed shall be connected to a Grease Control Device (GCD). 22 71. If tallow is to be stored outside then an adequately sized, segregated space for a tallow bin shall be included in the covered area. 72. These requirements shall apply to remodeled or converted facilities to the extent that the portion of the facility being remodeled is related to the subject of the requirement. 73. It is frequently to the FSE’s advantage to install the next size larger GCD to allow for more efficient grease discharge prevention and may allow for longer times between cleaning. There are many manufacturers of GCDs which are available in different shapes, sizes and materials (plastic, reinforced fiberglass, reinforced concrete and metal). 74. The requirements will assist FSEs with FOG discharge prevention to the sanitary sewer and storm drain pollution prevention. The FSE at all times shall comply with the Sewer Use Ordinance of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. The ordinances include requirements for GCDs, GCD maintenance, drainage fixtures, record keeping and construction projects. PAMC 5.24.030 Construction and Demolition Debris (CDD) 75. Covered projects shall comply with construction and demolition debris diversion rates and other requirements established in Chapter 16.14 (California Green Building Code). In addition, all debris generated by a covered project must haul 100 percent of the debris not salvaged for reuse to an approved facility as set forth in this chapter. 76. Contact the City of Palo Alto’s Green Building Coordinator for assistance on how to recycle construction and demolition debris from the project, including information on where to conveniently recycle the material. Public Works Engineering Department OFFSITE IMPROVEMENTS: 77. SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER: As part of this project, the applicant must replace the existing sidewalks, curbs, gutters or driveway approaches in the public right-of-way along the frontages of the property on all streets. Contact the Public Works’ inspector at 650-496-6929 to arrange a site visit so the inspector can determine the extent of replacement work. The site plan must show the extent of the replacement work or include a note that Public Works’ inspector has determined no 23 work is required. The plan must note that any work in the right-of-way must be done per Public Works’ standards by a licensed contractor who must first obtain a Permit for Construction in the Public Right-of-Way (“Street Work Permit”) from PWE at the Development Center. Additional review from Caltrans may be required. Please see the “Caltrans” note on page 5. 78. STREET RESURFACING: The full width of the street shall be resurfaced (grind and overlay) along the frontages of the project on Portage Avenue and Acacia Avenue. 79. PEDESTRIAN & STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS: Directional curb ramps, median refuges, or other improvements to the pedestrian crossing at El Camino Real and Portage Avenue will be considered in accordance with input from the Planning and Transportation Division. Additional streetscape design elements such as bike racks, trash cans, and decorative street lights will be considered and placed in the public sidewalk per design guidelines outlined in the El Camino Real Master Planning Study and future input from the Architectural Review Board. 80. VTA BUS STOP: The existing VTA bus stop in the Westbound direction on the near side of the Portage and El Camino Real intersection is substandard. The location negatively impacts VTA bus and Stanford Marguerite Shuttle operations and the location presents a safety hazard due to conflicts with offset intersecting streets and driveways. The following is requested of the applicant and not a required condition: VTA has requested that the stop be relocated to the sidewalk along the project frontage and that a concrete bus pad be installed as part of the project. VTA encourages the applicant to design a bus shelter that mirrors the project architecture, but the applicant would be required to maintain the structure. Alternatively, VTA may provide a standard shelter. 81. STREET TREES: The applicant may be required to replace existing and/or add new street trees in the public right-of-way along the property’s frontage. Call Public Works’ arborist at 650-496-5953 to arrange a site visit so he can determine what street tree work will be required for this project. The site or tree plan must show street tree work that the arborist has determined including the tree species, size, location, staking and irrigation requirements. Any removal, relocation or planting of street trees; or excavation, trenching or pavement within 10 feet of street trees must be approved by the Public Works’ arborist. The plan must note that in order to do street tree work, the applicant must first obtain a Permit 24 for Street Tree Work in the Public Right-of-Way (“Street Tree Permit”) from Public Works’ Urban Forestry. 82. CALTRANS: Caltrans review and approval of this project is required. Caltrans right-of-way across El Camino Real extends from back-of-walk to back-of walk. The City has a maintenance agreement with Caltrans that requires the City to maintain the sidewalk and to issue Street Work Permits for work done on the sidewalks by private contractors. Caltrans has retained the right to review and permit new or proposed abandonments of ingress/egress driveways off El Camino Real as well as the installation of traffic control devices as part of this project. Please include a record of Caltrans approval on the plan set submitted for a building permit. 83. PARCEL MAP: This project is merging several properties under planning application 12PLN-00468. Prior to building permit issuance, the Parcel Map shall be approved by the City of Palo Alto and recorded by Santa Clara County. 84. PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENTS: Public access agreements are required for the additional sidewalk space between the building edge and the property line. 85. STORM WATER TREATMENT: This project must meet the latest State Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (SRWQCB) C.3 provisions. The applicant is required to satisfy all current storm water discharge regulations and shall provide calculations and documents to verify compliance. All projects that are required to treat stormwater will need to treat the permit- specified amount of storm water runoff with the following low impact development methods: rainwater harvesting and reuse, infiltration, evapotranspiration, or biotreatment. However, biotreatment (filtering stormwater through vegetation and soils before discharging to the storm drain system) will be allowed only where harvesting and reuse, infiltration and evapotranspiration are infeasible at the project site. Vault- based treatment will not be allowed as a stand-alone treatment measure. Where stormwater harvesting and reuse, infiltration, or evapotranspiration are infeasible, vault-based treatment measures may be used in series with biotreatment, for example, to remove trash or other large solids. Reference: Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 16.11.030(c) The applicant must incorporate permanent storm water pollution prevention measures that treat storm water runoff that are site specific. The prevention measures shall be reviewed by a qualified third-party reviewer who needs to certify that it complies with the Palo Alto Municipal Code requirements. This 25 is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. The third-party reviewer shall be acquired by the applicant and needs to be on the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program’s list of qualified consultants. (http://www.scvurppp-w2k.com/consultants2012.htm) Any consultant or contractor hired to design/and/or construct a storm water treatment system for the project cannot certify the project as a third-party reviewer. Within 45 days of the installation of the required storm water treatment measures and prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for the building, third-party reviewer shall also submit to the City a certification for approval that the project’s permanent measures were constructed and installed in accordance to the approved permit drawings. The project must also enter into a maintenance agreement with the City to guarantee the ongoing maintenance of the permanent C.3 storm water discharge compliance measures. The maintenance agreement shall be executed prior to permit issuance. The applicant is required to paint the “No Dumping/Flows to Matadero Creek” logo in blue color on a white background, adjacent to all storm drain inlets. Stencils of the logo are available from the Public Works Environmental Compliance Division, which may be contacted at (650) 329-2598. A deposit may be required to secure the return of the stencil. Include the instruction to paint the logos on the construction grading and drainage plan. Include maintenance of these logos in the Hazardous Materials Management Plan, if such a plan is part of this project. 86. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP’s): The applicant is required to submit a conceptual site grading and drainage plan. In order to address potential storm water quality impacts, the plan shall identify BMP’s to be incorporated into the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that will be required for the project. The SWPPP shall include permanent BMP’s to be incorporated into the project to protect storm water quality. (Resources and handouts are available from PWE. Specific reference is made to Palo Alto’s companion document to “Start at the Source”, entitled “Planning Your Land Development Project”). The elements of the PWE-approved conceptual grading and drainage plan shall be incorporated into the building permit plans. 26 The developer shall require the contractor to incorporate BMP's for storm water pollution prevention in all construction operations, in conformance with the SWPPP prepared for the project. It is unlawful to discharge any construction debris (soil, asphalt, sawcut slurry, paint, chemicals, etc.) or other waste materials into gutters or storm drains. (PAMC Chapter 16.09). 87. PARKING STRUCTURE DRAINS: Drains within the covered floors of the parking structures shall be connected to oil-water separators and sanitary sewer lines. Stormwater runoff from any exposed surface or roof parking areas without canopies need to be treated per C.3 requirements. 88. GREASE/OIL REMOVAL DEVICE: If there will be a kitchen and food serving area in the new building, any drains in the food service facilities shall be connected to a grease removal device and located on private property. 89. LOADING DOCK: Any loading dock areas shall be covered and graded so that no storm water enters and flows through the space. Any runoff from the loading dock area shall be kept isolated from the storm drainage system. If the loading area/dock contains a drain, it shall be connected to the sanitary sewer through a manually operated fail-safe valve. 90. CENTRALIZED DUMPSTER AND RECYCLING ENCLOSURE: Please label the location of the dumpster and recycling enclosure for the project. If there will be a separate enclosure for the restaurant, please label the location. The dumpster and recycling areas for the food service facility must be adequately roofed or covered; it is recommended that the dumpster and recycling enclosure for other uses be covered. The following comments are provided to assist the applicant at the building permit phase. You can obtain various plan set details, forms and guidelines from Public Works at the City's Development Center (285 Hamilton Avenue) or on Public Works’ website: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/permits.asp Include in plans submitted for a building permit: 91. GRADING & EXCAVATION PERMIT: Since more than 10,000 square feet of the land area on the project site is being disturbed, a Grading and Excavation Permit needs to be obtained from PWE at the Development Center before the building permit 27 can be issued. Refer to the Public Works’ website for “Excavation and Grading Permit Instructions.” For the Grading and Excavation Permit application, various documents are required including a grading and drainage plan, soils report, Interim and Final erosion and sediment control, storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), engineer-stamped and signed shoring plan, and a copy of the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) excavation permit. Refer to our website for “Grading and Excavation Permit Application” and guidelines. Except for the soils report and the DOSH permit, include the required documents and drawings in the building permit set drawings. Indicate the amount of soil to be cut and filled for the project. 92. GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set must include a grading and drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and proposed spot elevations and showing drainage flows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site. Other site utilities may be shown on the grading plan for reference only, and should be so noted. No utility infrastructure should be shown inside the building footprint. Installation of these other utilities will be approved as part of a subsequent Building Permit application. Site grading, excavation, and other site improvements that disturb large soil areas may only be performed during the regular construction season (from April 16 through October 15th) of each year the permit is active. The site must be stabilized to prevent soil erosion during the wet season. The wet season is defined as the period from October 15 to April 15. Methods of stabilization are to be identified within the Civil sheets of the improvement plans for approval. 93. SOILS REPORT: A detailed site-specific soil report prepared by a licensed soils or geo-technical engineer must be submitted which includes information on water table and sub- grade construction issues. Measures must be undertaken to render the basement waterproof and able to withstand all projected hydrostatic and soil pressures. No pumping of groundwater is allowed. In general, PWE recommends that structures be constructed in such a way that they do not penetrate existing or projected ground water levels. 94. DEWATERING: Excavation for sub-grade structures may require dewatering. PWE only allows groundwater drawdown well dewatering. Open pit groundwater dewatering is not allowed. If 28 dewatering is required, the dewatering plan must be submitted to Public Works as part of a Street Work Permit. Dewatering is only allowed from April through October due to inadequate capacity in our storm drain system. The geotechnical report for this site must list the highest anticipated groundwater level. If the deepest excavation is expected to be within 3 feet of the highest anticipated groundwater level, the contractor can determine the actual groundwater depth immediately prior to excavation by installing piezometers or by drilling exploratory holes. Alternatively, the contractor can excavate and hope not to hit groundwater, but if he does, he must immediately stop excavation and submit a dewatering plan to PWE for approval and install a drawdown well system before he continues to excavate. Public Works may require the water to be tested for contaminants prior to initial discharge and at intervals during dewatering. If testing is required, the contractor must retain an independent testing firm to test the discharge water for the contaminants as specified by Public Works. 95. BASEMENT DRAINAGE: Due to high groundwater throughout much of the City, PWE prohibiting the pumping and discharging of groundwater. Sub-grade drainage systems such as perforated pipe drainage systems at the exterior of the basement walls or under the slabs are not allowed. PWE recommends that a waterproofing consultant be retained to design and inspect the vapor barrier and waterproofing systems for the basement. 96. BASEMENT SHORING: Shoring for the basement excavation, including tiebacks, must not extend onto adjacent private property or into the City right-of-way without having first obtained written permission from the private property owners and/or an encroachment permit from PWE at the Development Center. 97. SWPPP: If the proposed development will disturb more than one acre of land, the applicant will be required to comply with the State of California’s General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity. This entails filing a Notice of Intent to Comply (NOI), paying a filing fee, and preparing and implementing a site specific storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) that addresses both construction-stage and post-construction BMP’s for storm water quality protection. The applicant is required to submit two copies of the NOI and the draft SWPPP to PWE for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit. 98. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: The City's full- sized "Pollution Prevention - It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in the plan set. Copies are available from 29 Development Center or on our website. Also, the applicant must provide a site-specific storm water pollution control plan sheet in the plan set. 99. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA: Since the project will be creating or replacing 500 square feet or more of impervious surface, the applicant shall provide calculations of the existing and proposed impervious surface areas. The calculations need to be filled out in the Impervious Area Worksheet for Land Developments form which is available at the Development Center or on our website, then submitted with the building permit application. 100. WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY - If any work is proposed in the public right-of-way, such as sidewalk replacement, driveway approach, curb inlet, storm water connections or utility laterals, the following note shall be included on the Site Plan next to the proposed work: “Any construction within the city right-of-way must have an approved Permit for Construction in the Public Street prior to commencement of this work. THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS WORK IS NOT AUTHORIZED BY THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE BUT SHOWN ON THE BUILDING PERMIT FOR INFORMATION ONLY.” 101. LOGISTICS PLAN: The contractor must submit a logistics plan to PWE prior to commencing work that addresses all impacts to the City’s right-of-way, including, but not limited to: pedestrian control, traffic control, truck routes, material deliveries, contractor’s parking, concrete pours, crane lifts, work hours, noise control, dust control, storm water pollution prevention, contractor’s contact, noticing of affected businesses, and schedule of work. The plan will be attached to a street work permit. 102. FINALIZATION OF BUILDING PERMIT: The Public Works Inspector shall sign off the building permit prior to the finalization of this permit. All off-site improvements shall be finished prior to this sign-off. Similarly, all as-builts, on- site grading, drainage and post-developments BMP’s shall be completed prior to sign-off. Water Quality 103. PAMC 16.09.170, 16.09.040 Discharge of Groundwater 30 The project is located in an area of suspected or known groundwater contamination with Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). If groundwater is encountered then the plans must include the following procedure for construction dewatering: 104. Prior to discharge of any water from construction dewatering, the water shall be tested for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) using EPA Method 601/602 or Method 624. The analytical results of the VOC testing shall be transmitted to the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) 650-329-2598. Contaminated ground water that exceeds state or federal requirements for discharge to navigable waters may not be discharged to the storm drain system or creeks. If the concentrations of pollutants exceed the applicable limits for discharge to the storm drain system then an Exceptional Discharge Permit must be obtained from the RWQCP prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. If the VOC concentrations exceed the toxic organics discharge limits contained in the Palo Alto Municipal Code (16.09.040(m)) a treatment system for removal of VOCs will also be required prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer. Additionally, any water discharged to the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system must be free of sediment. 105. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(11) Carwash Required New Multi-family residential units and residential development projects with 25 or more units shall provide a covered area for occupants to wash their vehicles. A drain shall be installed to capture all vehicle wash waters and shall be connected to an oil/water separator prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer system. The oil/water separator shall be cleaned at a frequency of at least once every six months or more frequently if recommended by the manufacturer or the Superintendent. Oil/water separators shall have a minimum capacity of 100 gallons. The area shall be graded or bermed in such a manner as to prevent the discharge of storm water to the sanitary sewer system 106. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(9) Covered Parking Drain plumbing for parking garage floor drains must be connected to an oil/water separator with a minimum capacity of 100 gallons, and to the sanitary sewer system 31 107. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(10) Dumpsters for New and Remodeled Facilities New buildings and residential developments providing centralized solid waste collection, except for single-family and duplex residences, shall provide a covered area for a dumpster. The area shall be adequately sized for all waste streams and designed with grading or a berm system to prevent water runon and runoff from the area. 108. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(14) Architectural Copper On and after January 1, 2003, copper metal roofing, copper metal gutters, copper metal down spouts, and copper granule containing asphalt shingles shall not be permitted for use on any residential, commercial or industrial building for which a building permit is required. Copper flashing for use under tiles or slates and small copper ornaments are exempt from this prohibition. Replacement roofing, gutters and downspouts on historic structures are exempt, provided that the roofing material used shall be prepatinated at the factory. For the purposes of this exemption, the definition of "historic" shall be limited to structures designated as Category 1 or Category 2 buildings in the current edition of the Palo Alto Historical and Architectural Resources Report and Inventory. 109. PAMC 16.09.175(k) (2) Loading Docks (i) Loading dock drains to the storm drain system may be allowed if equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non- rainy season and during periods of loading dock operation. (ii) Where chemicals, hazardous materials, grease, oil, or waste products are handled or used within the loading dock area, a drain to the storm drain system shall not be allowed. A drain to the sanitary sewer system may be allowed if equipped with a fail-safe valve or equivalent device that is kept closed during the non-rainy season and during periods of loading dock operation. The area in which the drain is located shall be covered or protected from rainwater run-on by berms and/or grading. Appropriate wastewater treatment approved by the Superintendent shall be provided for all rainwater contacting the loading dock site. 32 110. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(5) Condensate from HVAC Condensate lines shall not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system. 111. 16.09.215 Silver Processing Facilities conducting silver processing (photographic or X- ray films) shall either submit a treatment application or waste hauler certification for all spent silver bearing solutions. 650-329-2421. 112. PAMC 16.09.205 Cooling Towers No person shall discharge or add to the sanitary sewer system or storm drain system, or add to a cooling system, pool, spa, fountain, boiler or heat exchanger, any substance that contains any of the following: (1) Copper in excess of 2.0 mg/liter; (2) Any tri-butyl tin compound in excess of 0.10 mg/liter; (3) Chromium in excess of 2.0 mg/liter. (4) Zinc in excess of 2.0 mg/liter; or (5) Molybdenum in excess of 2.0 mg/liter. 113. The above limits shall apply to any of the above- listed substances prior to dilution with the cooling system, pool, spa or fountain water. 114. A flow meter shall be installed to measure the volume of blowdown water from the new cooling tower. Cooling systems discharging greater than 2,000 gallons per day are required to meet a copper discharge limit of 0.25 milligrams per liter. 115. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(b) Copper Piping Copper, copper alloys, lead and lead alloys, including brass, shall not be used in sewer lines, connectors, or seals coming in contact with sewage except for domestic waste sink traps and short lengths of associated connecting pipes where alternate 33 materials are not practical. The plans must specify that copper piping will not be used for wastewater plumbing. 116. PAMC 16.09.220(c)(1) Dental Facilities That Remove or Place Amalgam Fillings An ISO 11143 certified amalgam separator device shall be installed for each dental vacuum suction system. The installed device must be ISO 11143 certified as capable of removing a minimum of 95 percent of amalgam. The amalgam separator system shall be certified at flow rates comparable to the flow rate of the actual vacuum suction system operation. Neither the separator device nor the related plumbing shall include an automatic flow bypass. For facilities that require an amalgam separator that exceeds the practical capacity of ISO 11143 test methodology, a non-certified separator will be accepted, provided that smaller units from the same manufacturer and of the same technology are ISO-certified. 117. PAMC 16.09.175(a) Floor Drains Interior (indoor) floor drains to the sanitary sewer system may not be placed in areas where hazardous materials, hazardous wastes, industrial wastes, industrial process water, lubricating fluids, vehicle fluids or vehicle equipment cleaning wastewater are used or stored, unless secondary containment is provided for all such materials and equipment 118. 16.09.180(12) Mercury Switches Mercury switches shall not be installed in sewer or storm drain sumps. 119. PAMC 16.09.205(a) Cooling Systems, Pools, Spas, Fountains, Boilers and Heat Exchangers It shall be unlawful to discharge water from cooling systems, pools, spas, fountains boilers and heat exchangers to the storm drain system. 120. PAMC 16.09.165(h) Storm Drain Labeling Storm drain inlets shall be clearly marked with the words "No dumping - Flows to Bay," or equivalent. Undesignated Retail Space: 34 121. PAMC 16.09 Newly constructed or improved buildings with all or a portion of the space with undesignated tenants or future use will need to meet all requirements that would have been applicable during design and construction. If such undesignated retail space becomes a food service facility the following requirements must be met: Designated Food Service Establishment (FSE) Project: 122. A. Grease Control Device (GCD) Requirements, PAMC Section 16.09.075 & cited Bldg/Plumbing Codes 123. The plans shall specify the manufacturer details and installation details of all proposed GCDs. (CBC 1009.2) 124. GCD(s) shall be sized in accordance with the 2007 California Plumbing Code. 125. GCD(s) shall be installed with a minimum capacity of 500 gallons. 126. GCD sizing calculations shall be included on the plans. See a sizing calculation example below. 127. The size of all GCDs installed shall be equal to or larger than what is specified on the plans. 128. GCDs larger than 50 gallons (100 pounds) shall not be installed in food preparation and storage areas. Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health prefers GCDs to be installed outside. GCDs shall be installed such that all access points or manholes are readily accessible for inspection, cleaning and removal of all contents. GCDs located outdoors shall be installed in such a manner so as to exclude the entrance of surface and stormwater. (CPC 1009.5) 129. All large, in-ground interceptors shall have a minimum of three manholes to allow visibility of each inlet piping, baffle (divider) wall, baffle piping and outlet piping. The plans shall clearly indicate the number of proposed manholes on the GCD. The Environmental Compliance Division of Public Works Department may authorize variances which allow GCDs with less than three manholes due to manufacture available options or adequate visibility. 130. Sample boxes shall be installed downstream of all GCDs. 35 131. All GCDs shall be fitted with relief vent(s). (CPC 1002.2 & 1004) 132. GCD(s) installed in vehicle traffic areas shall be rated and indicated on plans. 133. B. Drainage Fixture Requirements, PAMC Section 16.09.075 & cited Bldg/Plumbing Codes 134. To ensure all FSE drainage fixtures are connected to the correct drain lines, each drainage fixture shall be clearly labeled on the plans. A list of all fixtures and their discharge connection, i.e. sanitary sewer or grease waste line, shall be included on the plans. 135. A list indicating all connections to each proposed GCD shall be included on the plans. This can be incorporated into the sizing calculation. 136. All grease generating drainage fixtures shall connect to a GCD. These include but are not limited to: Pre-rinse (scullery) sinks Three compartment sinks (pot sinks) Drainage fixtures in dishwashing room except for dishwashers shall connect to a GCD Examples: trough drains (small drains prior to entering a dishwasher), small drains on busing counters adjacent to pre-rinse sinks or silverware soaking sinks Floor drains in dishwashing area and kitchens Prep sinks Mop (janitor) sinks Outside areas designated for equipment washing shall be covered and any drains contained therein shall connect to a GCD. Drains in trash/recycling enclosures Wok stoves, rotisserie ovens/broilers or other grease generating cooking equipment with drip lines Kettles and tilt/braising pans and associated floor drains/sinks 36 137. The connection of any high temperature discharge lines and non-grease generating drainage fixtures to a GCD is prohibited. The following shall not be connected to a GCD: Dishwashers Steamers Pasta cookers Hot lines from buffet counters and kitchens Hand sinks Ice machine drip lines Soda machine drip lines Drainage lines in bar areas 138. No garbage disposers (grinders) shall be installed in a FSE. (PAMC 16.09.075(d)). 139. Plumbing lines shall not be installed above any cooking, food preparation and storage areas. 140. Each drainage fixture discharging into a GCD shall be individually trapped and vented. (CPC 1014.5) 141. C. Covered Dumpsters, Recycling and Tallow Bin Areas PAMC, 16.09.075(q)(2) Newly constructed and remodeled FSEs shall include a covered area for all dumpsters, bins, carts or container used for the collection of trash, recycling, food scraps and waste cooking fats, oils and grease (FOG) or tallow. 142. The area shall be designed and shown on plans to prevent water run-on to the area and runoff from the area. 143. Drains that are installed within the enclosure for recycle and waste bins, dumpsters and tallow bins serving FSEs are optional. Any such drain installed shall be connected to a GCD. 144. If tallow is to be stored outside then an adequately sized, segregated space for a tallow bin shall be included in the covered area. 145. These requirements shall apply to remodeled or converted facilities to the extent that the portion of the 37 facility being remodeled is related to the subject of the requirement. 146. D. Large Item Cleaning Sink, PAMC 16.09.075(m)(2)(B) FSEs shall have a sink or other area drain which is connected to a GCD and large enough for cleaning the largest kitchen equipment such as floor mats, containers, carts, etc. Recommendation: Generally, sinks or cleaning areas larger than a typical mop/janitor sink are more useful. SECTION 9. Term of Approval. Site and Design Approval. In the event actual construction of the project is not commenced within two years of the date of council approval, the approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.30(G).080. SECTION 10. Term of Approval. Conditional Use Permit Approval. In the event actual construction of the project is not commenced within one year of the date of council approval, the approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.77.090(a). SECTION 11. Standard Conditions A. Except as expressly specified herein, the site plan, floor plans, building elevations and any additional information or representations, submitted by the Applicant during the Staff review and public hearing process leading to the approval of this entitlement, whether oral or written, which indicated the proposed structure or manner of operation, are deemed conditions of approval. B. The approved use and/or construction are subject to, and shall comply with, all applicable City ordinances and laws and regulations of other governmental agencies. C. California Government Code Section 66020 provides that a project applicant who desires to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions imposed on a development project must initiate the protest at the time the development project is approved or conditionally approved or within ninety (90) days after the date that fees, dedications, 38 reservations or exactions are imposed on the Project. Additionally, procedural requirements for protesting these development fees, dedications, reservations and exactions are set forth in Government Code Section 66020. IF YOU FAIL TO INITIATE A PROTEST WITHIN THE 90-DAY PERIOD OR FOLLOW THE PROTEST PROCEDURES DESCRIBED IN GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66020, YOU WILL BE BARRED FROM CHALLENGING THE VALIDITY OR REASONABLENESS OF THE FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS, AND EXACTIONS. D. This matter is subject to the California Code of Civil Procedures (CCP) Section 1094.5; the time by which judicial review must be sought is governed by CCP Section 1094.6. E. To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City for its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: _________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Director of Planning and Community Environment APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________ 39 Senior Asst. City Attorney PLANS AND DRAWINGS REFERENCED: 1. Those plans prepared by Heather Young entitled “3159 El Camino Real”, consisting of 40 pages, dated August 22, 2013, and received on August 22, 2013. ,. " I " $ .... . , 3159 El Camino Real The City of Palo Alto Attachment B ThIS map Is a product of the Cily of PoloA"o GIS ---• ..,' Attachment C Zoning Compliance Table 3159 El Camino Real 13PLN-00040 CS Proposed Compliance Minimum setbacks Front yard (ft.) 0’-10’ to create an effective 8’-12’ effective sidewalk width 4 feet (provides 12 wide effective sidewalk) conforms Rear yard (ft.) 10’ for residential 0’ for commercial portion 10’ minimum at residential conforms Street side yard (right, Portage) 5’ 7’-6” conforms Street side yard (left, Acacia) 5” 5’ conforms Build to Lines (required % of wall to be built up to the required setback line) 50% of frontage built to setback 33% of side street built to setback 55% at El Camino Real 39% at Acacia Ave. 0% at Portage Ave. conforms Conforms DEE (exceeds by 2 feet 6 inches) Permitted setback encroachments 6 feet for balconies 5 feet 11 inches at Portage Ave. for balconies conforms Maximum Site Coverage 50% = 34,752 s.f. 27,432 s.f. conforms Minimum Landscape Open Space 30% = 20,851 s.f. 27,785 s.f. conforms Usable Open Space 150 s.f. per unit 9209 s.f. private 9,526 s.f. common conforms Residential Density 30 dwelling units per acre = 48 units 48 units conforms Maximum Height 50 feet 55 feet DEE (exceeds by 5 feet) Attachment C Zoning Compliance Table 3159 El Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Floor Area Maximum Residential Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Allowable Commercial Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Total Mixed Use Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 0.6:1 = 41,702 s.f. 0.4:1 = 27,801 s.f. 1.0:1 = 69,503 s.f. 42,860 s.f. 31’262 s.f. 74,122 s.f. FAR concession (1,158 over) FAR concession (3,461 over) FAR concession (4,619 over) Vehicle Parking Existing commercial recreation New commercial recreation Restaurant (public service area) Restaurant (back of house) Retail Office Residential Studio units 1 per each 4 person capacity( 6,616 s.f.) = 33 spaces 1 per each 4 person capacity (2,447) = 11 spaces 1 space for each 60 gross s.f. 2,483/60 = 41 spaces 1 space for each 200 gross s.f. 2,598/200 = 13 spaces 1 space for each 200 gross s.f. 1,000/200 = 5 spaces 1 space for each 250 gross s.f. 16,118/250 = 64 spaces 1.25 spaces per unit 33 units x 1.25 =41.25 spaces 33 spaces provided 11 spaces provided 41 spaces provided 13 spaces provided 5 spaces provided 64 spaces provided 33 spaces (8.25 fewer spaces due to state code reductions in parking requirements) Attachment C Zoning Compliance Table 3159 El Camino Real 13PLN-00040 One bedroom units Two bedroom units Guest Spaces Total Spaces Required (per PAMC) 1.5 spaces per unit 14 units x 1.5 = 21 spaces 2 spaces per unit 1 unit x 2 = s spaces 33% of units 16 spaces 247 spaces With state code reductions for residential parking, the total parking requirement is = 216 spaces 14 spaces (7 spaces fewer due to state code parking reductions) 2 spaces 0 spaces 216 spaces provided 216 spaces provided 31 spaces less than PAMC conforms Bicycle Parking Commercial Recreation Restaurant (Public Service Area) Restaurant (back of house areas) Retail 1 space /16 occupants 20% LT 80%ST 44/4=11 2 LT + 9 ST spaces 1 space/600 dross s.f. 40%LT, 60%ST 2,483/600 =4 2 LT + 2ST 1 space/2000 gross s.f. 40%LT, 60%ST 2,017/2000 = 1 ST 1 space/2000 gross s.f. 20%LT, 80%ST 1,000/2,000 = 1 ST 11 spaces 4 spaces 1 space 1 space Attachment C Zoning Compliance Table 3159 El Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Office Residential Total Bike Spaces 1 space/2,500 gross s.f. 80%LT, 20%ST 16,1189/2500 =6 5LT + 1ST 1 space/unit LT = 48LT 57 Long term (LT) and 14 short term (ST) 6 spaces 48 spaces 61 LT and 30 ST conforms ______________________________________________________________________________ ATTACHMENT D APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES 3159 El Camino Real 13PLN-00140 ______________________________________________________________________________ Land Use and Community Design Element The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for the site is Service Commercial Goal L-1: A well-designed, compact city, providing residents and visitors with attractive neighborhoods, work places, shopping district, public facilities and open spaces. The proposed mixed use building is of an attractive design providing a diverse mix of uses within a single project providing retail , office and residential uses. Policy L-5: Maintain the scale and character of the City. Avoid land uses that are overwhelming and unacceptable due their size and scale. The proposed mixed use building follows the city’s guidelines providing an urban edge along El Camino Real. Portions of the building’s first and second floor are at the setback while the third and fourth floors are set further back such that the height of the building does not overwhelm the street. Policy L-7: Evaluate changes in land use in the context of regional needs, overall City welfare and objectives, as well as the desires of surrounding neighborhoods. The redevelopment of the site with the proposed mixed use project is an appropriate land use change for the site. It places a mixture of uses along a transit corridor, including small rental units, where increased densities are encouraged. Goal L-6: Well-designed buildings that create coherent development patterns and enhance city streets and public spaces. The proposed architectural design of the new mixed use building appears to be of a high quality and would enhance the existing El Camino Real streetscape. The proposal eliminates all existing curb cuts along El Camino Real, improving pedestrian safety and provides a raised plaza at the corner of El Camino and Portage Avenue. A covered pedestrian arcade is also proposed at the retail space fronting El Camino Real. Goal L-4: Inviting, pedestrian-scale centers that offer a variety of retail and commercial services and provide focal points and community gathering places for the City’s residential neighborhoods and Employment Districts. The attractive design of the new mixed use building would be inviting and would provide a multitude of uses to benefit the community. The ground floor spaces include a possible restaurant, retail spaces, a fitness facility, office space and at grade parking. The facility is designed with a large central portico that invites pedestrians into the space and facilitates increased mobility through the project. Policy L-31: Develop the Cal-Ventura area as a well-designed mixed use district with diverse land uses, two-to three-story buildings, and a network of pedestrian oriented streets providing links to California Avenue. The proposed mixed use project fulfills this policy that encourages mixed use development in the Cal-Ventura area. Goal L-9: Attractive, inviting public spaces and streets that enhance the image and character of the City. The proposed new wider sidewalk, consistent along the entire block frontage at El Camino Real, with an elevated plaza area, would improve the character of the City Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative design and site planning that is compatible with the surrounding development and public spaces. The proposed mixed use project is a quality, creatively designed project. The modern design is of a character that would be consistent with the surrounding eclectic architecture. Policy L-49: Design buildings to revitalize streets and public spaces and to enhance a sense of community and personal safety. Provide an ordered variety of entries, porches, windows, bays, and balconies along public ways where it is consistent with neighborhood character; avoid solid walls at street level; and include human- scale details and massing. The mixed use project would revitalize the area that is currently underutilized with a vacant parcel and structures that do not maximize the sites land use potential. The project would enhance the street and improve personal safety with wider sidewalks and elimination of curb cuts. The building would have many balconies that overlook the street, ample window fenestration, bays, courtyards, porches, arcades, and doorways that would activate the public right of way. Policy L-75: Minimize the negative impacts of parking lots. Locate parking behind buildings or underground wherever possible. All new parking is located behind and under the building or located underground such that no open parking lots are visible form El Camino Real. Policy L-77: encourage alternatives to surface parking lots to minimize the amount of land that must be devoted to parking, provided that economic and traffic safety goals can still be achieved. Most of the parking associate with the project is proposed below grade such that it is not visible. Policy L-78 Encourage development that creatively integrates parking into the project by providing for shared use of parking areas. This project proposes multiple uses that have a combination of dedicated and shared parking facilities to maximize the use of available parking and a large number of parking lifts to maximize the amount of parking provided while minimizing the area devoted to parking. Transportation Element Goal T-3: Facilities, services and programs that encourage and promote walking and bicycling. The mixed use nature of the project enhances the ability for people to live and work in the same location. The wider sidewalks with the elimination of curb cuts improve pedestrian access. The provision of at grade and secured bicycle parking along with shower facilities would assist in encouraging bicycle ridership. Policy T-19: Improve and create additional, attractive, secure bicycle parking at both public and private facilities, including multi-modal transit stations, on transit vehicles, in City parks, at public facilities, in new private developments, and other community destinations. The new project would provide both at grade and secured bicycle parking. Policy T-23: Encourage pedestrian-friendly design features such as sidewalks, street trees, on-site parking, public spaces, gardens, outdoor furniture, art, and interesting architectural details. The proposal for a new mixed use building would greatly enhance the existing street with the construction of a new building with ample pedestrian level fenestration and detail, preservation of large mature street trees, wider sidewalks, and an activated plaza area for pedestrian interest. Policy H-2: Identify and implement a variety of strategies to increase housing density and diversity in appropriate locations. Emphasize and encourage the development of affordable and attainable housing. The proposal increases housing density and provides studio and one bedroom units that are small and more affordable than the larger residential units typically proposed within the City. Policy H-3: Continue to support the re- designation of suitable vacant of underutilized lands for housing and mixed uses containing housing. The proposal redevelops underutilized land for mixed use, including housing. Policy H-4: Encourage mixed use projects as a means of increasing the housing supply while promoting diversity and neighborhood vitality. The proposed mixed use project increases the housing supply by providing small rental housing units that are not typically seen in new developments while also adding new retail and commercial uses to the site to promote diversity and neighborhood vitality. August 22, 2013 Russ Reich, Senior Planner City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 RE: 3159 EI Camino Real Site and Design Review ARB Resubmittal Russ, Attachment E On July 25'h the proposed Mixed Use development at 3159 ECR was presented to the Architectural Review Board. Although the project was well received in many respects, the ARB requested that the team investigate the following 9 items and come back for further review and discussion. The design has been reviewed and in many cases developed or modified to reflect the issues brought up during the hearing. The ARB drawing set has been updated and several new side-by-side comparison drawings have been prepared to illustrate the development of several topics. Please note that many of the new images don't reflect the full rendering quality of the 1 Aug images 'and presentation; the intent is to show development rather than color correctness which is best demonstrated by the material samples. Comments on each item are provided below. Item 1: landscape Review Concern was expressed that the landscape design should be more integrated with the architectural design of the building. The triangles in particular were noted as not a good fit for the project. The landscape and courtyard have been redesigned to better coordinate with the architectural deSign; the triangle design approach has been replaced with an orthogonal paving and planter approach that works in harmony with the projects architectural design. Specific highlights include improved pedestrian connectivity between the ECR sidewalk and dining areas, rectangular planting beds and seat benches in the ECR Portal and courtyard, rectangular paving and accent pavers that continue into the central and Portage stair lobbies, and a rectangular fountain connecting the courtyard and the lower level Equinox entry. Please refer to sheets l-2.1 and l-2.2 for additional details. Item 2: Traffic and Site Access The topics of parking access and queuing at the entrances and exits along Portage Ave were brought up during the August 1" hearing. An Intersection Queuing Analysis was prepared as part of the Traffic' Impact Analysis report prepared for this project and referenced in the Mitigated Negative'Deciaration. The analysis determined that the net impact ofthe project had a "less than Significant Impact" on the existing conditions. Please refer to pages 16-20, and table 10 of the Kimley-Horn Traffic Impact Analysis report (attached) for specific details; the addition of the project to the site was found to add "nominal additional queuing". Transcripts of the PTC discussion on parking and site access are included as . Attachment G of the ARB Staff Report. Rafael Rius from CoPA Public Works Transportation and Traffic Engineer James Daisa from Kimley-Horn and Associates were on hand to answer questions. The fergus Garber Young Architects 81 Encino Avenue polo Alto CA 94301 phone 650'/473-0400 fox 650/473-0410 ! ( August 22, 2013 safety plan, The goals are to increase physical and visual privacy while maintaining light and views, Please refer to supplemental sketch ARB-2 for a comparison of the August 1st arid August 29'h designs. item 5: Residential Balconies to have Restricted Storage The topic of storage on the exterior residential balconies was brought up during the August 1st hearing as this can visually impact neighbors and community members visiting the project.· The units have been designed to give residents internal storage options for large items such as bicycles, oversize sporting equipment, and other large items that are sometimes found on exterior balconies, 38 of the 48 units include dedicated bicycle storage and secure on-floor storage areas area provided for each of the 48 units. These on-floor "deep" storage areas typically vary in size from 13-19 sf but some are as large as 24-35 sf, The following language will be incorporated into the residential unit lease: Appropriate tenant provided patio and terrace furnishings are allowed on the residential balconies and terraces. This . includes exterior quality tables, choirs, and side tables; umbrellas are permitted on the EI CamIno Real facing terraces, The following items are prohibIted from being stored, hung, displayed, or used for any period of time on the resIdential balconies and terraces: Bicycles or sporting equipment; Grills, fryers, hibachis or cookers of any type or style; Hanging or drying of clothes, sheets or other materials; Storage of items other than exterior quality tables, chairs and side tables, Item 6: Review Portage Service Wall Elevation FGY was asked to look more closely at the Portage service wall elevation -the area between the glazed retail corner and the residential units along Portage Ave. In working with GreenWaste and the City of Palo Alto, the Trash/Recycling room that serves the ground floor restaurant and commercial office space has been broken into 2 spaces with 2 separate roll-up doors. The Recycling room still opens towards Portage Ave with a 5'-4" wide roll-up door but the Trash enclosure has been rotated 90 degrees with its 8'-8" roll-up door opening onto the parking plaza, Not only is the width ofthe Trash door moved off Portage but the raised planter width has been increased from less than 8' to over 21', increasing the landscape frontage on Portage Ave. Additionally the 2nd floor louvers have been reduced in size and the 3'd floor windows re-proportioned to better relate to the residential rainscreen wall proportions. Please refer to supplemental sketch ARB-3 for a comparison of the August 1st and August 29'h designs. Item 7: Material Notes on Elevations The team was asked to provide notes indicating the proposed materials for the exterior elevations, Material selection notes have been coordinated and updated; please refer to sheets A3,1, A3.2 and A3,3 in the main set, Item 8: Acacia Corner The team was asked to review the proposed design for the Acacia Avenue elevation and investigate opportunities for increasing pedestrian activity and connectivity to the courtyard, A number of variations were explored resulting in four primary improvements: • The exterior wall of the Acacla/ECR corner retail/commercial recreation space has been set back to align with that of the restaurant along the Dining Arcade creating a new arcade, the Acacia Arcade, Not only does this visually open the Acacia/ECR corner and increase the pedestrian activity and usability of the ECR frontage, but it better connects. with the overall elevation deSign along the ECR frontage. • As the double-height retail/commercial recreation space moves away from ECR, the board form concrete and glass wall extends and a new glazed opening has been added to balance the Acacia Arcade portal. A triple stack of projecting sunscreens to match those at the third floor above the restaurant have been added to the Acacia windows. The new sunscreens can be seen in Page 3 of 5 August 22, 2013 sidelights, and windows. The revisions have been incorporated into the project design. Please referto supplemental sketch ARB-10 for a comparison of the August 1" and August 29th designs. Item 13: EI Camino Real-Color Palette & Central Stair Tower In general the material and color palette presented on Aug 1 was well received. The team reviewed the overall color palette as part ofthe revision from zinc to composite cement panel cladding at the stair towers and explored two additional improvements. The location of the two terra cotta colors on EI Camino Real (grey and red/brown) have been switched such that the stronger red/brown is on the 4th floor, set back from the main fa~ade, and the more neutral grey is on the 3,d floor. The gives the ECR elevation less of a horizontal stripe/layered feel. Also, rich and beautiful as the dark brown wood cladding of the courtyard stair tower is, It tends to go very dark in shadow. The team considered other options and has revised the proposal to a lighter brown with a more open grain pattern, Not only is the palette lightened but the grain adds visual texture. The second floor steel beam of the central stair tower has also been m'oved inside the glass to revise the proportions of the lowest 2 levels of the stair tower. The revisions have been incorporated into the project design. Please refer to supplemental sketches ARB-ll and ARB-12 for a comparison of the August 1" and August 29th designs. Thank you for your assistance with this application. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. We look forward to reviewing these items with the Board on August 29th• Sincerely, Fergus Garber Young Architects Heather Young cc: John Tarlton, Tarlton Properties Inc. Page 5 of 5 i Tarlton Properties Silva Parking Study 6/13/2013 Site Vehicle Parking Location Tenant Gross Office Storage Parking VAN ADA Stan TOTAL VAN ADA Stan Mach TOTAL VAN ADA Stan VAN ADA Stan Mach VAN ADA Stan 411A Acacia Avenue General Motors1 4,966 4,966 1 19 20 1 19 20 1 19 411B Acacia Avenue General Motors1 1,021 1,021 11 11 1 429A Acacia Avenue General Motors1 4,952 4,952 1 19 20 1 19 20 1 19 429B Acacia Avenue General Motors1 1,035 1,035 11 11 1 435 & 473 Acacia Avenue Equinox2 24,650 - -1 2 106 109 1 2 106 109 1 2 106 435 Portage Avenue mSpot 19,367 9,548 9,819 1 1 36 38 1 1 36 38 1 1 36 455 Portage Avenue - A mSpot3 5,681 - - 1 22 23 1 22 23 22 1 455 Portage Avenue - B AME Cloud3 6,025 5,312 713 1 21 22 1 21 22 21 1 3159 ECR - existing Equinox - -1 32 33 1 32 33 1 32 3159 ECR - new Commercial Rec 11 11 11 11 11 Restaurant 1 53 54 1 53 54 28 1 25 Retail 55 5 5 5 Office 1 1 62 64 1 1 62 64 1 1 62 Residential 1 48 49 1 48 49 1 48 6 8 436 450 6 8 243 193 450 3 4 182 1 2 25 193 2 2 36 TOTALS TOTAL PROVIDED PARKING 450 Available Vehicle Parking Portage Ave Garage - Grade 2181 Portage Ave Garage - Lower 1 3 104 435/555 Portage 2236 3159 ECR - Grade 114 3159 ECR - Lower 1 1 11 196 3 4 185 1 2 25 196 2 2 36 15 September 2005 Staff Report: Proposed project to provide 202 spaces 192 224 40 15 March 2007 Garage: Provides 199 spaces TOTAL AVAILABLE PARKING 456 Note: For the purpose of this study all existing parking spots, whether standard or compact, are counted as a Standard parking space. They should be able to remain as existing until an improvement or redevelopment project necessitates reconfiguration to meet current standards. 1 CoPA Sept 15 2005 Staff Report includes a total of 41 for Wilson Sonsini revised to total of 45 for new tenants TrickPlay and GM in 2007, now all GM; Assumes parking at rate 1/250 sf for office and 1/500 sf for storage 2 CoPA Sept 15 2005 Staff Report; Assumes existing Equinox parking at rate 1/200sf gross usable 3 CoPA Sept 15 2005 Staff Report includes a total of 33 for Klutz revised to total of 42 for new tenants in 2007; Assumes parking at rate 1/250 sf for office and 1/500 sf for storage 4 Three upper level and 5 lower level parking spaces were reconfigured and relocated from the Portage Garage to 3159 ECR as part of the Mixed-Use project; 3159 ECR provides 183 net new spaces Provided Parking Locations Portage total 4 435/455 total 3159 ECR 3159 ECR total Square Footage Required Parking Provided Parking Portage Garage 435/455 Portage FGY Architects Silva Parking with 3159 ECR project Attachment G CITY OF City of Palo Alto (10 # 3919) PALO ALTO Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report Report Type: Meeting Date: 7/10/2013 Summary Title: 31S9 EI Camino Real Title: Request by Heather Young on behalf of Portage Avenue Portfolio, LLC, for Site and Design Review of a five story, 55 foot tall, 75,042 s.f. building, replacing an existing 900 s.f. commercial building to establish 48 residential apartment units, and commercial and retail uses on a 1.6 acre site. The proposal includes retention of 6,661 s.f. of floor area (3127 EI Camino Real) and the existing parking structure at 440 Portage Avenue. Parking spaces provided for 223 vehicles would include mechanical parking lifts. Environmental Assessment: An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared. Zone District: Service Commercial (CS). From: Russ Reich, Senior Planner Lead Department: Planning & Transportation Commission Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) recommend City Council approval of the draft Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A) approving: (1) A Mitigated Negative Declaration, prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); (2) The Site and Design Review application for a new 67,506 s.f. mixed-use building (added to an existing 6,616 s.f. building) on a 1.6 acre site (resulting in a total 74,122 s.f. of floor area on a 69,503 s.f. site, and FAR of 1.06:1) to provide 48 apartment units, including five below market rate units, and office and retail uses, with structured parking facilities (at surface and underground) providing 216 parking spaces (including 11 puzzle lifts for 196 cars), (3) Density Bonus concession permitting Increased FAR for both residential and commercial components of the project in the total amount of 4, 619 square feet; and (4) A Conditional Use Permit (to allow 16,118 sq. ft. of office space on one parcel where the limit is 5,000 s.f.). City of Palo Alto Page 1 ( Background Site Location The project site, located south of Page Mill Road on State Route 82 (EI Camino Real), is bounded by Portage Avenue to the southeast and Acacia Avenue to the northwest, and the developed site at 435 Acacia Avenue (Equinox Gym building). The site includes the 6,616 s.f. Equinox Gym annex at 3127 EI Camino Real, the 900 s.f. "We Fix Macs" building at 3159 EI Camino Real, the parking structure at 440 Portage and two surface parking lots. The lot located at the northwest corner of the site has 11 parking spaces, and the parking lot at the southwest corner of the site (near the EI Camino Real and Portage Avenue intersection) has 44 parking spaces (on two separate parcels). The site has five curb cuts onto public rights of way: two curb cuts on Portage Avenue, one.curb cut on the EI Camino Real, and two curb cuts on Acacia Avenue. To the north of Acacia Street is surface parking lot, across EI Camino Real to the west are restaurants (McDo.nalds and Fish Market), across Portage Street to the south is a retail use (Footlocker) and office buildings, and across the alley to the east is a retail use (Fry's Electronics). The 1.6 acre project site (69,503 square feet) consists of four parcels to be merged under a separate application (preliminary parcel map process). The parcel Is. zoned CS (Service Commercial) and is regulated by requirements of Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 18.16. Mixed-use is a permitted land use in the CS zone district. The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is also Service Commercial, which allows for facilities providing citYWide and regional services and relies on customers arriving by car. Residential and mixed use projects may be appropriate in this land use category. Project Description The proposed project Is 67,506 s.f. mixed use building which, when combined with the existing 6,616 s.f. Equinox gym annex located on the site, would result floor area to a total of 74,122 s.f. The maximum height would be 55 feet above grade to allow for loft space in the fourth floor residential units, as well as to screen mecha(lical equipment. At the ground floor level, retail/restaurant/commercial recreation space is proposed, and the building setback on EI Camino Real would allow an effective 12 foot sidewalk width. A total of 48 residential apartment units would be provided on four of the floors (second, third, fourth, and partial fifth floors). The proposed loft spaces, accessible internally from fourth floor residential units would have floors below the ceiling level of the fourth floor units. Office space would be provided on portions of the first, second, and third floors. Third and fourth floors are proposed above a portion of the existing Equinox building at 3127 EI Camino Real. The first and second floors would be separated across the site by the existing Equinox building walls and by a courtyard proposed between the gym and the new restaurant/retail space. The third and fourth floors across the site are mostly physically separated (using expansion joints) except for limited hallway access, but would be visually connected. City of Palo Alto Page 2 The project includes surface and one level of underground parking facilities (13 feet below grade) for 216 parking spaces, including 11 puzzle parking lifts. The building would be constructed to displace one surface parking lot and reduce the size and cover another sUrface parking lot on the site. The subterranean garage would connect to the existing below grade garage on Portage Avenue (that serves tenants of 411-43.5 Acacia Avenue) at the south east corner of the site. The main, finished garage floor level would be located below the existing site grades, and three level car stackers would be installed in the garage. The lifts would extend approximately six to seven feet below the main garage floor. Vehicular access to the site would be provided exclusively on Portage Avenue via two curb cuts; all other existing curb cuts (on EI Camino Real and Acacia Avenue) would be removed. The parking spaces would be provided in both the existing two- level garages on Portage Avenue, and in the new underground garage that would be accessed from a below grade connection to the existing Portage Avenue garage. Fifteen (15) surface- level visitor parking spaces are proposed beneath the residential wing of the proposed building. Site improvements such as landscaping, walkways and an outdoor dining terrace are also included in the proposed project. Plans also reflect a new concrete pad projecting at the level of the EI Camino Real sidewalk into EI Camino Real right of way to provide a corral for 18 bike parking spaces. Other project aspects include a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEEs), Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Concession, and parking reduction incentives. A CUP is requested to permit the proposed office floor area to exceed the 5,000 square feet per parcel limit (by 11,118 s.f.). Two DEEs are requested and would be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board. One DEE is a request for the height of the residential loft spaceS to exceed the 50 foot height limit by five additional feet. The second DEE requests a relaxation from the build-to requirement along the Portage Avenue frontage, resulting in a greater setback of seven feet six Inches rather than a five foot setback. The proposal also includes five below market rate residential apartment units (10% of the total units), allowing a concession for greater floor area than the maximum allowable area, as well as fewer parking spaces than would otherwise be required. Summary of Land Use Action Commission Purview The Commission reviews and recommends the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Site and Design Review, density bonus concession and Use Permit applications. The recommendations will be forwarded to Council following hearing and recommendation by the ARB on the Site and Design Review and Design Enhancement Exception requests. The ARB hearing will be another public City of Palo Alto Page 3 comment opportunity on the environmental document and project as a whole, but the ARB focus is on the ARB findings to ensure good site design, landscaping and building design, and the sustainability of the project. The Commission's focus is on the environmental document , land use and Site and Design Review findings. The Council will receive both recommendations and minutes of the public hearings in the staff report and presentation to Council. Summary of Key Issues Concessions for FAR Five of the proposed 48 rental apartment units will be provided as below market rate units. This is 10% of the total number of units. The floor area allowance in the CS zone district is 1:1 or 69,503 square feet for this site. The maximum' nonresidential floor area is 0.4:1 of the site or 27,801 sq.ft., where the proposed nonresidential floor area is 31,262 sq.ft. (3,460 sq.ft. over the 0.4:1 nonresidential FAR). Of the nonresidential floor area, .15:1 FAR or 10,425 sqJt. of floor area must be ground floor commercial area; the project includes 17,073 sJ. of ground floor commercial area, meeting the, minimum standard. The maximum residential floor area is 0.6:1 or 41,701 sq.ft. where 42,860 sq.ft. is proposed (1,158 sq.ft. over the 0.6:1 residential FAR). To assist in providing the proposed BMR units, the applicant has proposed to exceed the allowable 1:1 FAR (69,503 sq.ft. of floor area) by 4,619 square feet for a total floor area of 74,122 square feet. State density bonus law allows for concessions when at least 10% of the housing units proposed are affordable units. The requested concession is an FAR of .06:1 over the maximum allowable 1:1 FAR. The housing component of this project is a good example of the type of housing develoP91ent envisioned by the new Housing Element. The sites were located on the City's inventory. The project combines smaller sized parcels to maximize density. The small units are designed to appeal to an urban commuter and they are located close to transit. The requested concession is also consistent with the Density Bonus recently recommended by the Commission. Parking Reductions The total number of parking spaces that would generally be required for the project based on the city's zoning requirements is 247 parking spaces. State density bonus law (Government code Section 65915, also formerly known as SB, 1818) provides the ability to use a lower number of parking spaces when a project provides a minimum of 10% BMR units in a project. The differences between the City's residential parking requirements and the residential parking requirements under the State law are provided in the table below. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Parking Table Residential City Standard Number State Incentives Number unit type (# of units X spaces of Spaces (# of units x spaces of spaces per unit required) per PAMC per unit required) per.5tate . Studio 33 x 1.25 41.25 33 x 1 33 1 bedroom 14 x 1.5 21 14x1 14 2 bedroom . 1x2 2 1x2 2 Guest Parking 33% 16 0% 0 Total Parking 80 49 Spaces The State law allows for a 31 space reduction in the number of parking spaces required in the project. While the project would provide 31 spaces fewer than the City's parking code requires, with the state incentives for parking reductions, the project will be otherwise zoning compliant for required parking. A breakdown of the parking regulations is provided in the zoning compliance table attachment C. DEE for Height The height limit for the CS zone is 50 feet. The applicant has proposed a DEE to exceed the 50 foot height limit by 5 feet, for a total height of 55 feet. This is requested so the height of the mechanical roof screens and the loft roofs could be integrated into one single cohesive roof element, rather than multiple roof screens randomly scattered across the top of the building. The DEE findings are provided in the draft Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A). DEE for Build to Line The CS zone district requires that 33% of the building be built up to the setback on the side streets (Acacia and Portage Avenues), and that 50% of the main building frontage (EI Camino Real) be at the setback line of zero to ten feet to create a 12 foot effective sidewalk with (curb to building face). On the 150 foot long Acacia Avenue frontage, 39% or 59' ofthe building wall - is proposed to .be placed at the five foot setback, therefore the requirement is met. On the 458 foot long Portage Avenue frontage, the length of the-building wall is approximately 149 feet long. To meet the 33% build to setback requirement, at least 49 linear feet of the building Wall would need to be built up to the five foot required setback. To accommodate the extension of the residential balconies and the accessible ramp up to the elevated plaza, the building Would be built with a minimum seven foot'slx inch setback, rather than up to the required five foot setback. This would be two and one half feet further back from the street than is required by City of Palo Alto Page 5 the code for 33% of the wall length. This would result in a greater setback than the bUild to requirement allows, necessitating a DEE request. While the building wall is further from the setback than n!quirep, the residential balconies at the second, third, and ·fourth floors would extend out forward 11 inches beyond the property line. Site and Design Review The Site and Design Review combining district is intended to provide a process for review and approval of development in environmentally and ecologically sensitive areas, including established community areas which may be sensitive to negative aesthetic factors, excessive noise, increased traffic, or other disruptions, in order to assure that use and development will be harmonious with other uses in the general vicinity, will be compatible with environmental and ecological objectives, and will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The property is not located within an ecologically sensitive area or within a Site and Design combining district. The code, however, does require that mixed use projects providing more than four residential dwelling units are subject to Site and Design Review. Because the application includes 48 residential units, it is therefore subject to Site and Design Review which requires review by the Commission, the ARB and the City Council. The Commission and ARB will forward their recommendation to City Council for final approval of the proposed mixed use project. Since the CUP and the DEE's are part of the project proposal the final Council action will include these project elements as well. The Site and Design review findings are provided within the RLUA (Attachment A). Conditional Use Permit The CS zoning limits office uses to no more than 5,000 square feet per parcel. The zoning also contains a provision that allows the. parcel to exceed the 5,000 s.f. office limit with a Conditional Use Permit. The limit is ultimately established by the Director. Since the four parcels will be combined into one parcel a Conditional Use permit to exceed the 5,000 s.f. limit of office space per parcel is included as part of the application. The total amount of office space proposed within the project is 16,118 square feet. This is only 21.7% of the total floor area within the project. The amount of office square footage is similar to the amount of retail floor area, providing a balance between the two uses while being considerably less than the proposed residential floor area proposed within the project. The CUP findings are provided within the RLUA (Attachment A). Bike Parking The plans provided in this packet Includes a bulb out area at the EI Camino Real frontage to provide additional bike parking spaces. EI Camino Real is a State Highway and the California City of Palo Alto Page 6 Department of Transportation (Cal Trans) has ultimate authority over modifications to the EI Camino Real public right-of-way. Transportation staff does not believe that Cal Trans will be supportive of the bulb out element into the roadway and has directed the applicant to find alternative locations for the bike parking. The applicant has stated that the plans will be reVised to eliminate the bulb out element and also provide the required bike parking at grade and in . secured bike cages in the below grade garage. EI Camino Real Development Three guidelines are applicable to this site: (1) EI Camino Real Design Guidelines (ECR Guidelines), (2) South EI Camino Real Guidelines, recommended by ARB in 2002 (South ECR Guidelines), and (3) EI Camino Real Master Schematic Design Plan, 2003 Draft (Design Plan). South EeR Guidelines: The project site is located within the Cal Ventura Area, a corridor area, as defined by the South EI Camino Real Design Guidelines (Guidelines). The Guidelines indicate new buildings should front EI Camino Real with prominent facades and entries should face EI Camino Realor clearly visible and easily accessible to pedestrians. • Guideline 3.1.2 states "the design of the sidewalk setback should create an urban character"; the buildings would be set back from EI Camino Real to provide a 12 foot wide effective sidewalk width (curb face to building, required by Zoning Code Section 18.16.060). A raised outdoor dining terrace is proposed, facing EI Camino Real at the corner of Portage Avenue. • Guideline 3.1.8 notes "new buildings should relate to and compliment surrounding buildings and street frontages" and "projects should relate to adjacent buildings with complimentary building orientations and compatible landscaping." No landscape plans have been submitted to date, but will be .required for the Architectural Review Board hearing of the project. The proposed design would.meet Guideline 4.1.6, which states, "buildings faCing EI Camino Real should be oriented parallel to the ECR right of way to create a cohesive well-defined street." Two entries would be facing EI Camino Real. The proposed project would cover an entire EI Camino Real frontage block. Contextual streetscape views beyond the block were provided to allow for comparison of the project height and scale with development along the same side of EI Camino Real, mostly one-story buildings. The ARB would also evaluate the project pursuant to Guidelines 4.3.6, 4.5.4 and 4.5.5, which are: • Guideline 4.3.6: "All exposed sides of a building should be designed with the same level City of Polo Alto Page 7 of care and integrity" and "Buildings should be attractive and visually engaging from all sides, unless in a zero lot-line condition." • Guideline 4.5.4 and 4.5.5: "rooflines and roof shapes should be consistent with the design and structure of the building itself as well as with roof lines of adjacent buildings" and "roof forms should reflect the fa~ade articulation and building massing, as oppOsed to' a single-mass roof over an articulated fa~ade." feR Guidelines: The 1979 ECR guidelines are somewhat helpful with respect to street trees, signage, architecture and building colors. • Trees: ECR guidelines cali for street tree spacing every 25 feet (page 2, top) or 30 feet (page 2, bottom); whereas the Design Plan calls for london Plane street trees in this segment of EI Camino Real, planted every 22 to 33 feet on center in 4' x 6' tree .wells, and prunes to provide 14 feet of clearance below to allow for truck and bus traffic. The five existing london Plane trees on EI Camino Real are shown as to be retained; three new street trees are proposed along Acacia, and one street tree is proposed on Portage to supplement the existing Ash street tree. The Landscape Plan to be prepared for ARB review would provide further detail as to plantings and proposed tree species. • Signage: There are a few relevant statements, such as -"Signs on ECR are limited to Y, to 2/3 the maximum size permitted by the sign ordinance"; "Wall signs should appear as though the building and the sign were designed together. The sign should not appear as if it were attached as an afterthought"; "A place for a sign should be designed into the elevation (If a sign is needed)"; and "Three signs, one on each elevation, are usually not approved." The project plans indicate one location for signage, at the intersection of EI Camino Real and Portage, a low wall sign. Further detail would be required for the staff and ARB review of signage placement. • Architecture: "In neighborhood commercial zones, the design should be pedestrian oriented; signs and details should not be primarily auto-oriented." Also, "when possible buildings should be set back from the front property line, with landscaping or a people- oriented plaza in. front." The project provides for planter landscaping, new street trees where none currently exist, and some pedestrian oriented sign age. An outdoor dining terrace, facing EI Camino Real, with trelliage, is also proposed to activate the EI Camino Real elevation. • Colors: "More than three colors on a structure will make it incompatible with the City of Paid Alto Page 8 surroundings. Using bright colors, such as reds, yellows, purples and greens as the predominant color on a structure may make it incompatible with the surroundings. The ARB usually feels these colors are used to attract attention." Colors and materials board would be provided for the ARB review. Policy Implications Many of the City's policies are reflected in the project's design. The South EI Camino Real Guidelines, the Context-Based Design Criteria, and Comprehensive Plan policies are Implemented by this proposal. The project has pieced together smaller parcels to form a large enough parcel that is able to realize the elements of the various City Guidelines. The building provides a strong street edge along EI Camino Real while providing a wide 12 foot Sidewalk, at minimum, and various other pedestrian amenties. The building would have four floors but the uper floors would be set back to reduce the apparent height and mass of the building on the street. The" building would have an elevated corner plaza at the intersection of Portage Avenue and EI Camino Real for outdoor seating, storefront entries that face the street, an arcade providing pedestrian weather protection, and residential balconies that relate to the street. The building fa~ade is well articulated with ample fenestration and a multitude of deSign elements including a corner glass element with sunshades, balconies at the residential floors, a wide opening to an interior courtyard and stair tower, and multiple transitions in building materials with numerous colors and textures. The project would replace surface parking lots, visible from EI Camino Real, with underground parking and surface parking that is at grade behind and beneath the new building. All curb cuts along EI Camino Real would be removed, resulting in improved pedestrian safety. Many of the project elements work together to improve pedestrian access and serve to implement the vision of a more pedestrian-oriented EI Camino Real. In addition to the physical elements, the proposed uses within the project also serve to reduce auto usage and encourage pedestrian activity. This is a true mixed use prOject with a high number of small rental residential units not typically seen in mixed use projects of the recent past. This is a housing project that is not commonly built in Palo Alto and would be a welcome addition to the City's rental housing stock. The housing development is consistent with the City's recently adopted Housing Element and also consistent with the pending Density Bonus ordinance (scheduled for Council review in August). In adition to the residential uses, the proposal also includes a reasonable balance of office and retail spaces. Timeline Application submittal: Mitigated Negative Declaration available for Public comment: Planning and Transportation Commission Review: Architectural Review Board Review: City of Palo Alto January 29, 2013 May 31, 2013 July 10, 2013 TBD Page 9 City Council Review: TSD Environmental Review An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Deciaratio.n have been prepared for the project and the ~O day public review and comment period began on May 31, 2013. The environmental analysis notes there are a few potentially sign"ificant impacts that would require mitigation measures to reduce. them to a less than significant level. These include mitigations for dust constrol during excavation, protection for nesting birds, building design for earthquake resistance, basement shoring, a Health and Safety Plan for construction workers, a Remedial Risk Management Plan, collection of additional soil samples, installation of a vapor barrier, vapor collection, and venting system, third party inspection of vapor barrier and venting system, a Groundwater Mitigation Plan, development of a Groundwater Extraction design, technical documents uploaded to the appropriate agencies, and the addition of a southbound West Charleston Road right ~urn overlap signal phase. Courtesy Copies Fergus Garber Young Architects Portage Avenue Portfolio, llC Attachments: • Attachment A: Draft Record of land Use Action (PDF) • Attachment S: Site location map (PDF) • Attachment C: Zoning Compliance Table (PDF) • Attachment D: Comprehensive Plan Compliance Table (PDF) • Attachment E: Applicant letter (PDF) • Attachment F: Initial Studay and Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (PDF) • Attachment G: Project Plans (P& TC and libraries only) (PDF) • Attachment H: letter of Support (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 10 / 1 Planning and Transportation Commission 1 Verbatim Minutes 2 July 10, 2013 3 4 EXCERPT 5 6 Public Hearing: 7 8 1. 3159 El Camino Real [13PLN-00040]: Request by Heather Young on behalf of Portage Avenue Portfolio, 9 LLC, for Site and Design Review and request for concessions under Density Bonus law of a five story, 55 foot 10 tall, 75,042 s.f. building, replacing an existing 900 s.f. commercial building to establish 48 residential 11 apartment units, and commercial and retail uses on a 1.6 acre site. The proposal includes retention of 6,661 12 s.f. of floor area (3127 El Camino Real) and the existing parking structure at 440 Portage Avenue. Parking 13 spaces provided for 223 vehicles would include mechanical parking lifts. Environmental Assessment: An Initial 14 Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared. Zone District: Service Commercial 15 (CS). *Quasi-Judicial (Continued from June 26, 2013) 16 17 Chair Martinez: And that’s consideration of an application for Site and Design Review and environmental 18 review and recommendation on the record of land use action on 3159 El Camino. Staff? 19 20 Aaron Aknin, Interim Director – Planning: Thank you and good evening Honorable Chair and Planning 21 Commission. Aaron Aknin, Interim Planning Director. Staff is here to give, Russ Reich our Senior Planner 22 will be giving a short presentation, but we also have Transportation staff here to answer any questions 23 you may have as well as our traffic transportation consultant who prepared the transportation portion of 24 the environmental review. I’ll turn it over to Russ at this time. 25 26 Russ Reich, Senior Planner: Thank you. Good evening Chair Martinez and Commissioners. The proposed 27 project is a 67,506 square foot mixed-use building which combined with the existing 6,616 square foot 28 Equinox Gym Annex located on the same site would result in a floor area of 74,122 square feet. The 29 proposed height of the building would be 55 feet above grade. At the ground level retail, restaurant, and 30 commercial recreation spaces are proposed. The building setback on El Camino would allow for an 31 effective 12 foot sidewalk. A total of 48 residential apartment units would be provided on the second, 32 third, and fourth floors of the building. 33 34 The project includes surface and one level of below grade parking facilities for 216 parking spaces 35 including 11 puzzle parking lifts. The subterranean garage would connect to the existing below grade 36 garage on Portage Avenue at the southeast corner of the site. Three level car stackers or puzzle lifts 37 would be installed in the garage. The applicant will provide a short video that demonstrates how these 38 work. Vehicular access to the site would be provided exclusively on Portage Avenue via two curb cuts. 39 All other existing curb cuts on El Camino and Acacia would be removed. The parking spaces would be 40 provided in both the existing two level garage on Portage Avenue and in the new underground garage 41 that would be accessed from a below grade connection to the existing Portage Garage. Fifteen surface 42 level visitor parking spaces are proposed beneath the residential wing of the building. Site improvements 43 such as landscaping, walkways, and other outdoor, and an outdoor dining terrace are also included in the 44 proposed project. 45 46 I’d like to touch on some of the key issues that are detailed within the staff report. Because the project 47 will provide ten percent or 5 of the 48 residential units as Below Market Rate (BMR) units also known as 48 BMR’s the applicant is entitled to request one concession to the City’s zoning requirements. The 49 concession the applicant has requested is for floor area. They’ve requested a total of 4,619 square feet. 50 This amount is consistent with the draft Density Bonus Ordinance that is likely to move forward to the 51 City Council next month. When providing BMR units projects are entitled by right to use the State’s 52 calculation for required parking for the residential units. This is not a concession. The State’s formula 53 results in 31 fewer spaces than the City’s formula. A breakdown of the City’s parking ratio versus the 54 State’s is provided in the parking table at the top of Page 5 of the staff report. 55 56 2 The applicant has requested two Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEE). One is for five feet in additional 1 height to allow for the height of the proposed loft spaces to be at the same height as the mechanical roof 2 screens to integrate them into one single rooftop element. The second Design Enhancement Exception 3 would allow the building to be setback two and a half feet further from the required setback on Portage 4 Avenue resulting in a seven and a half foot setback rather than a five foot setback. 5 6 Upon further analysis of the traffic study the applicant has modified the traffic report. At places you have 7 revised language of the proposed traffic mitigation and the traffic consultant’s letter explaining the 8 change. Also at places are questions from Commissioner Keller and staff responses along with a table 9 indicating the parking distribution of the various properties associated with the new project and the 10 existing parking structure at 440 Portage Avenue. 11 12 Staff has recommended that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) recommend approval of 13 the proposed project. Staff and the applicant are here to answer any questions that you may have. 14 Thank you. 15 16 Chair Martinez: Thank you. Before we go forward the Vice-Chair has reminded me that this is quasi-17 judicial item and therefore Members of the Commission are asked to disclose any ex-parte 18 communications with the public or the applicant. Anyone? I see none. Ok. Is there additional members 19 of the staff that care to speak? City Attorney? 20 21 Mr. Aknin: No. If there’s any questions we’re available. 22 23 Chair Martinez: And the applicant is not going to? 24 25 Mr. Aknin: The applicant is here. 26 27 Mr. Reich: The applicant is here and prepared to make a presentation. 28 29 Chair Martinez; Ok. So if you’re ready to go forward with that. Before you do that we are going to open 30 the public hearing and if there are members of the public that care to speak to this, I don’t think that we 31 have any speaker cards yet. One comment. Ok. We invite more than one. And you’ll have 10 minutes. 32 Is that right? Fifteen minutes. Thank you. 33 34 Heather Young, Fergus Garber Young Architects: Good evening Commissioners, my name is Heather 35 Young and I’m with Fergus Garber Young Architects. We’re representing the project team. The project 36 we are bringing before you tonight is a mixed-use project. And it’s unusual in Palo Alto because it is a, 37 what I call a true mixed-use project. It doesn’t have a little bit of retail, a lot of commercial office, and a 38 little bit of residential. It’s very balanced in its distribution of nonresidential commercial office and 39 residential. As you can see from the perspective it is a multi-story structure. 40 41 The zoning for the project as you know is the CS, Commercial Service Zone, which has a 1.0 Floor Area 42 Ratio (FAR). That FAR is divided 0.6 for residential and 0.4 for nonresidential. We believe that the 43 project is supporting the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the El Camino Real design guidelines and 44 we’d like to walk you through some of the ways that we believe it does that. Just to orient you, here’s El 45 Camino, Oregon, and Alma. We’re at 3159. You can see the property outlined here in the red dashed 46 line. There currently is Equinox’s extension on El Camino in this area, a surface parking lot with a small 47 structure to support a used car dealership that has not been in operation for several years, there’s some 48 additional surface parking to support Equinox, and surface parking and a small structure for We Fix Macs, 49 a retail establishment. The remainder of the site is an existing parking garage with surface parking and 50 below grade parking. The below grade parking is accessed off of Portage and goes under an elevated 51 pool structure that supports the Equinox gym. 52 53 Some other things in the neighborhood you’ll be familiar with: Fry’s store is further down Portage, there’s 54 a McDonald’s and the Fish Market, a local restaurant, an empty surface parking lot, Mike’s Bikes, Foot 55 Locker in a surface parking lot situation, and then as you go down Portage some older industrial style 56 3 buildings that have some been recently converted. And these are just some images of those structures: 1 the Fish Market, nearby is Palo Alto Square, We Fix Macs, Showcase Luxury Cars, Equinox in these three 2 images. And this building at 435 Portage are actually buildings that we’ve recently provided design 3 services for and those are the only buildings that have been modified in the recent past. 4 5 The existing site again you’ve got the expansion for Equinox that fronts El Camino Real, the parking lots, 6 We Fix Macs, and the other surface parking lots. This is the main component of Equinox’s gym and these 7 are General Motors (GM) offices. From the traffic you can see a number of curb cuts going in and out of 8 the site from Portage, El Camino, and Acacia. This again is the entrance to the below grade lot and the 9 surface lot. There are some primary entries and exits along this sidewalk. Only exits onto Acacia and 10 exits here. We Fix Macs is a tiny little entrance, nothing of significance. All of the structures have 11 rooftop mechanical equipment and obviously El Camino is a source of noise generation. 12 13 The proposed project would complete the block from Acacia to Portage. Part of the goals of the 14 Comprehensive Plan it would maintain the existing structure at Equinox and add a new structure at the 15 corner of El Camino and Acacia and another structure at Portage. There would be a small surface 16 parking lot here to complement the existing parking and a pedestrian portal connecting El Camino and 17 the courtyard. The curb cuts on Acacia and El Camino would be removed. One of the curb cuts along 18 Portage would be removed. These orange areas here indicate locations for bicycle parking and a 19 proposed bike share location for the project that’s being rolled out now in San Francisco and along the 20 Peninsula. We would propose to have primary entrances into the building off of El Camino and also off of 21 the pedestrian portal and another primary entrance to the restaurant space off of the surface parking in 22 this area. There would also be a grade connection between this internal courtyard and the existing 23 parking. 24 25 This is just going to walk very quickly how the different uses of the site are composed. So this view from 26 Portage and El Camino you can see the existing Equinox structure and We Fix Macs. Excuse me, once 27 that’s removed the first addition would be a double height retail space, a double height restaurant space, 28 another double height space that’s either retail or commercial recreation, a little bit of commercial office 29 on the ground here, and some support spaces. The second floor some support spaces and residential 30 units, a small area of office. On the third floor along El Camino, commercial office space, more 31 residential on the two side streets, and then the fourth floor all residential, and then the roof screens and 32 lofts and the vertical circulation areas. 33 34 What you can see highlighted in this slide is the development of the urban plaza on the corner of Portage 35 and El Camino and a strengthening of the pedestrian experience along El Camino between Acacia and 36 Portage. As you probably know, we’re required to build up to 12 feet from the curb to create a maximum 37 12 foot sidewalk effective width for at least fifty percent of the frontage on El Camino. We have no 38 choice. However, we’re very sympathetic to some of the conversations that have been between City 39 Council and the community recently about the desire to have a greater sidewalk width. And so we’ve 40 gone intentionally to create this urban plaza in this area and also are developing this frontage as a 41 pedestrian arcade, a dining arcade to support the restaurant behind it and developing the pedestrian 42 portal to allow again for the pedestrian connection between El Camino and the interior courtyard. And 43 here you can see it built out with additional balconies, terraces, other opportunities for pedestrian and 44 occupant engagement with the street. 45 46 If we look at it from the Acacia corner again this is the existing structure to be removed and the double 47 height commercial recreation or retail space, office, the double height restaurant, the double height retail, 48 and some support with that small parking area. The second floor commercial office and residential. The 49 third floor across El Camino with commercial office, residential on the two flanking corners and then 50 again residential along the fourth floor. We’ve worked very hard to maintain this existing structure so 51 that it’s an infill project that goes adjacent to, above, and under that existing structure. We’ve also 52 worked aggressively to provide for that safety and welfare of the occupants of that structure during 53 construction such that the design for the seismic improvements that we’re executed last year on this 54 building allow for the shoring to occur, it’s already in place, the shoring for the building is already in place 55 and will have safe exits for any of the occupants in the building. There’s also a small pet friendly park in 56 4 this area I should just mention. And here you can see again that built out with additional terraces, 1 balconies, the fourth floor has been setback considerably from the street to have a lower mass developed 2 along El Camino so that we’re able to reinforce the pedestrian experience, but then set back for a more 3 private residential experience. 4 5 You can see we’ve highlighted some of the programs and policies from the Comprehensive Plan that we 6 believe the project is supporting and one of them is to consider a variety of strategies to address housing 7 density. And what we’ve done to address housing density in addition to maxing out this with 48 8 residential units, which is the most that we’re allowed. The units are studios, one bedrooms, and I 9 believe there’s 1 two bedroom unit. So it’s a dense housing opportunity. They are for rental only; they 10 are not condominiums at all. And we realized early on in the project that there would be a roof screen 11 that would be required for the mechanical equipment and that there was potentially an opportunity to 12 maximize the usable square footage within the same mass that would occur because of the roof screen. 13 And that’s the little lofts that you’ve seen referenced in the discussion and also in your package, the little 14 sectional drawings. So it’s just a small little bonus room for some of those residential units to make them 15 more usable. 16 17 And parking I’m sure is a very, a very sensitive topic. As you saw in the report there have been 18 calculations for all of the parking requirements for the different uses: the retail, the commercial 19 recreation, the restaurant, the office, and the residential. And all of those are being met with the parking 20 that’s being provided. We have 15 additional sites, parking spots here at grade and then when you go 21 below grade again through the ramp to go down to the lower level these gray toned areas are the puzzle 22 lifts that Russ referred to a moment ago. They are car stacking machines and those would be dedicated 23 reserved spaces for the residents and the commercial office users, not just in this building, but in the 24 other structures that are served by the Portage garage, this existing garage. So by reassigning for 25 instance GM office people a reserved spot in the puzzle lifts, the spot that their car may have taken all 26 day now becomes available for intermittent users who are visitors to the site either to the retail or to the 27 restaurant or to Equinox. You won’t have a condition where office workers for instance or residents are 28 parking in the surface spaces all day long. Those will be high turnover spaces. 29 30 And if you come to look at this you will see this is an example of how the puzzle lifts work. When a 31 vehicle approaches it the occupant gets out. They use a fob that recognizes their car and the platform 32 that is reserved for their car moves into position. They get out of the car, hit the fob again and the gate 33 closes. Their car is relocated to its designated spot. If you go to retrieve your car it’s a similar activity. 34 You use the fob to call your car. The puzzle lifts move the car to the correct location, the gate opens, 35 you’re able to retrieve your car and then you close the gate again. 36 37 These photos off to the left are of a trip that was taken to an installation of this type of car stacking 38 machine here in Oakland. And we were very fortunate Amy French, Rafael Ruiz, and Jaime Rodriguez 39 from City staff were able to go and see the lifts in operation for themselves. And it is an unusual thing, 40 but I think for all of us seeing how they worked and how easily they worked gave us a great deal of 41 confidence to move forward with this proposal. Also you should know that the operators of this system 42 have installations throughout the Bay Area. Not all of them as large as the installation we’re proposing, 43 but I believe it’s 200 different locations throughout the Bay Area that they are utilizing products 44 manufactured by this company. 45 46 And we have some additional images of the project they’re probably better viewed on your screen. 47 Sorry, I’ll just close up. As you go through here you just see the different elevations and I hope you’ll 48 see the attention to detail that we’re bringing to the project with the change in scale between the 49 commercial and retail spaces versus the residential spaces with the private balconies. We’ve been 50 working to develop an interior courtyard space that would connect the upper and lower surface parking 51 lots that would provide a great deal of bicycle parking and open views between the site to help to 52 integrate it and take what had previously been a number of individual parcels, again some of them 53 parking or underuse parcels to turn it into one coherent project. And if you have any questions we’d be 54 more than happy to try and address them. Thank you very much for your time. 55 56 5 Chair Martinez: Thank you very much. Aaron, what’s next? Are there other members of the applicant’s 1 team to speak on this or they just here questions? 2 3 Mr. Aknin: I believe that was just it so we’re here to answer questions or the applicant can answer 4 questions as well. 5 6 Chair Martinez: Ok, then we’re going to open the public hearing. Members of the public we have three 7 members of the public who wish to speak on this. Each will be given three minutes to speak. 8 9 Vice-Chair Michael: So, excuse me, the first speaker will be Arthur Liberman to be followed by Bob Moss. 10 11 Arthur Liberman: Good evening Commissioners. Again I live on Chimalus in Barron Park. We are a 12 neighborhood in Barron Park of over 1,500 residences just across and down a few blocks from 3159 El 13 Camino. I wanted to say that I’m pleased that I met the representative of the proponents of the 14 representative of this project. Their application I understand was submitted in January. I wish that we 15 had the opportunity to discuss the scope and impact of the project with members of our community 16 beforehand. The first that I heard about it was in the agenda packet for this meeting. And I would like 17 to suggest to the Planning Department and Commissioners that you really use your persuasive legal 18 powers, whatever you can do to encourage developers to meet with neighborhood association groups at 19 an early stage of the project formulation, not just before it comes before a commission for a hearing. 20 21 So we are some of the folks in Barron Park who might be walking down the street to dine at one of the 22 restaurants in your project. We also are some of the folks who will be affected by the traffic generated 23 by the project. And as was said in Oral Communications by Mr. Buchanan traffic is a common issue that 24 a number of the associations and parking is another issue a number of the associations are focusing on 25 because it’s a common issue. At a PAN meeting when Mayor Scharff came he asked each of the 26 members of the association of this representative what’s the principle issue that you’re concerned with? 27 Traffic, parking, parking, traffic, traffic and parking, parking, traffic. So you get the picture. This is kind 28 of the common issue that many of us are hearing from our members of our associations. 29 30 So I would just like to, you mentioned traffic does extend beyond the nearby streets. One of the 31 mitigated issues for that was mentioned in the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), can’t 32 remember all the words, was a significant impact on Arastradero and West Charleston. That’s a mile and 33 a half away from this. So traffic does really go and extend beyond just the local area. and I wanted to 34 urge the Commission to try to focus on getting a comprehensive traffic study for the California Avenue 35 that actually I think had been begun, but it’s been parked into the Comprehensive Plan and it’s been 36 pushed down and down and at one, at some point it’s going to become irrelevant because all these 37 developments will happen before the plan is actually developed. 38 39 You really need to have a plan in place to know what the capacities are of the traffic infrastructure. The 40 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) for example has a LOS methodology where they rate 41 the intersections. A lot of the intersections are already F. You can’t get below the F. That’s the bottom 42 line. How bad are we going to go? Without traffic study, a comprehensive traffic study to say what 43 really we can accept in our neighborhoods before people start using neighborhood streets and cause that 44 kind of problem you really need to have a comprehensive study. So that’s my suggestion for the 45 Commission. Thank you very much. 46 47 Chair Martinez: Thank you. Before the next speaker staff can you comment on neighborhood outreach 48 for this? What’s been happening? 49 50 Mr. Aknin: Yeah we typically encourage developers to do broader neighborhood outreach. In this case 51 the developer you could speak to, but in this case the only outreach that staff did was the standard 52 noticing of the 600 foot notice legal requirement. But I do agree with the speaker in common practice it 53 is good to have greater neighborhood outreach than less neighborhood outreach. 54 55 Chair Martinez: And the applicant? Can you speak to neighborhood outreach on this? 56 6 1 Ms. Young: Actually we did a good bit of outreach with the immediate adjacent neighbors, but did not 2 contact Barron Park folks. 3 4 Chair Martinez: Ok. Thank you. 5 6 Vice-Chair Michael: So the next speaker is Bob Moss to be followed by Mark Sabin. 7 8 Robert Moss: Thank you Chairman Martinez and Commissioners. To follow up on the outreach issue and 9 the problem a project of this scope definitely should have talked to the neighborhood associations, made 10 sure Barron Park, Charleston Meadows because this is going to have a horrendous impact on traffic. If 11 you’re familiar with that area if you’re driving north on El Camino between eight and ten o’ clock in the 12 morning traffic backs up bumper to bumper from Cambridge past Portage, sometimes several blocks past 13 Portage. In the evening rush hour it’s basically bumper to bumper from Page Mill all the way down past 14 Charleston and Arastradero. This project is not going to help that. It’s going to make it much worse. 15 And as Art said we’re going to have a risk of people ducking off El Camino and going through the 16 neighborhood. We’ve already had a significant increase in traffic on some of the neighborhood streets 17 because of the narrowing of Arastradero and blocking El Camino with more traffic isn’t going to make it 18 any better it’s going to make it worse. 19 20 There are a couple of other problems with this project. The first one is I think it looks much too massive 21 along El Camino. As you may recall the City Council wanted to have buildings setback and scale down 22 along El Camino so they didn’t just present a wall basically at the sidewalk. And that’s essentially what 23 this does. Having a little niche in the corner, let’s call it a semi architectural benefit doesn’t do it because 24 when you go down El Camino you just still see the wall. And if you want to see a really disastrous 25 mistake which emulates this, drive to Alma Plaza where the former Miki’s store was, I can’t tell you how 26 many people have told me how disgusted they are at that type of architecture and that lack of setback. 27 28 The second problem is I don’t see any reason why the 50 foot height limit should be exceeded. You have 29 a 50 foot height limit. If they can’t build as much interior space within 50 feet, cut it back. It’ll also help 30 the traffic. But we don’t want to have massive buildings creating major problems for traffic and 31 pedestrians and potential cut through traffic in neighborhoods just because somebody says, “Well I can 32 get away with it.” That’s not a good way of doing things and the traffic and the scale of the building I 33 think are going to be excessive. 34 35 Chair Martinez: Thank you. 36 37 Vice-Chair Michael: Next speaker is Mark Sabin to be followed by and I may have problems with your last 38 name, Richard Tevempler. 39 40 Mark Sabin: Good evening. A few weeks ago I was looking at Palo Alto Online and there was one piece 41 of information there. It said that the average house in Palo Alto was built in 1958. What I assume by 42 that is half the housing was built on or before 1958 and half was built after 1958. If that’s the case than 43 I don’t think anybody thinks that half the housing in Palo Alto should be demolished because it’s 50 years 44 old. I bring that up because anything that’s built now we should expect it to last more than 50 years. 45 And in less than 40 years we come up against maybe thirty-two mandates where carbon dioxide 46 production has to be 80 percent below what they were in 1990. So anything that gets built now is going 47 to factor in whether we’re going to meet that mandate gracefully or we have to do something drastically 48 be able to do it. 49 50 That’s why I think it’s important for developments like this to move forward because with more density 51 that’s closer to transit and also closer to commercial and services and all that sort of thing like this is you 52 have a development that I believe is more energy appropriate to what the realities are going to be in the 53 future. And so I think we’re going to be needing to look creatively at things like this more now and in the 54 future than we are in simply looking at traffic impacts and that sort of thing. Down the road traffic 55 impacts may be the least of our problems. While they are important, it’s really important I think to be 56 7 creative and give projects like this a serious look because we can either start planning for that or start 1 getting done for it if we’re not being aggressive about meeting those mandates that are becoming down 2 the road. Thank you. 3 4 Chair Martinez: Thank you. 5 6 Vice-Chair Michael: Next speaker is Richard Tevempler. 7 8 Richard Tevempler: Good evening and thank you for your time. I’m Richard Tevempler and I’m the 9 Director of Development for the Sobrato Organization and we are owners of 311 El Camino and 200 10 through 370 Portage Avenue. And we’re here tonight or I’m here tonight to support the project that’s 11 before you. I think it’s a good design and a good project along the El Camino. Thank you. 12 13 Chair Martinez: Thank you very much. That was our last speaker. We’re going to keep the public 14 hearing open for a time. Before we, it comes to the Commission City Attorney do you have something 15 you want to add? 16 17 Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney: Yes, you may want to offer the applicant some rebuttal time. 18 It’s customary in a quasi-judicial application to allow for that. 19 20 Chair Martinez: I will, but first I thought we might want to hear comments from the traffic consultants 21 that might be here because there were some significant issues raised about traffic impacts. 22 23 Mr. Aknin: He’s on his way up. 24 25 Jim Daiso, Traffic Engineer, Kimley-Horn and Associates: Good evening Commissioners, I’m Jim Daiso 26 with Kimley-Horn and Associates. I don’t have a formal presentation on the traffic study, but if you have 27 any questions I’d be happy to answer those. If not I can walk you through what we did in general, but I 28 think there might be some questions you would like answered. 29 30 Chair Martinez: Well members of the public raised some issues about the level of service along El Camino 31 and I thought you might want to address that in terms of the additional impacts if any of the proposed 32 project. 33 34 Mr. Daiso: Well the level of service element of the traffic study follows the Santa Clara VTA congestion 35 management program methodologies. Just about any project in Santa Clara County follows those 36 guidelines that are put out by Santa Clara VTA. And what it states is if it’s on the CMP network, the 37 Congestion Management Network or network of streets, highways, and intersections then there are 38 standards for level of service established for those. And the level of service established for most of those 39 intersections, if not all of them, is level of service E, which is in traffic engineering denoted by amount of 40 delays that an average driver would experience during the peak hour at a particular intersection. So to 41 determine impacts of a project on an intersection you measure how much additional delay that the 42 project would add to the intersection plus you look at how it might change the volume to capacity ratio, 43 which is another fancy term for how much of the capacity does the project take away from the general 44 motoring public. So you look at these two terms, these two calculations essentially. 45 46 We studied three fairly large or major intersections on either side of the project. And because it, the 47 project did not in our estimates of its traffic generation did not generate more than 100 trips in any given 48 period, which is the VTA’s CMP threshold for doing a major traffic study we looked at these three 49 intersections that were fairly major and potentially impacted so that the criteria we go by once we 50 generate, we estimate the traffic, we assign it to the roadways and based on existing patterns of travel 51 and then we look at, we use software and we calculate the delay and we look at the volume to capacity 52 ratio. Criteria states that if the project adds four seconds of delay or more plus and this is an and takes 53 away one percent of the intersection’s capacity for other people to use then it’s considered a significant 54 impact and requires mitigation. 55 56 8 So we found that of the three intersections we were studying the one I think is in most question is 1 Charleston and El Camino Real that it was operating at a level of service F, which is not meeting CMP 2 standards today. And we add a few seconds of delay to it over four and we in essence we did trigger an 3 impact so we were required to mitigate that impact. We barely went over the criteria requirements, but 4 it was easily mitigated by looking at the signal timing and optimizing the signal timing, which is clearly 5 stated in the VTA guidelines as a legitimate mitigation measure. So while we looked at the study we’re 6 doing a Mitigated Negative Declaration by definition we needed to mitigate the impacts. We had that one 7 impact; we mitigated it and brought it down to just slightly below where it was before without the 8 project. The issue is this impact occurs in the year 2025. So it doesn’t occur today, it doesn’t occur in 9 2015. It occurs in 2025. So implementation of the mitigation measure really doesn’t need to happen for 10 a long time and I think we’ll work with staff on how that gest implemented. I think it’s more likely 11 contribute to a fund or something for a future signal system upgrade of the El Camino Real corridor. In 12 general not aside from the comments we heard that’s in essence the summary of the project and its 13 impacts and mitigation. 14 15 Chair Martinez: Great, thank you. That was helpful. Commissioners any questions before he 16 (interrupted) 17 18 Mr. Aknin: Chair? 19 20 Chair Martinez: Yes. 21 22 Mr. Aknin: Just to reiterate one thing that the Traffic Engineer just touched on. The level of service at 23 Charleston and El Camino right now operates at a level D. It does not operate at a level F right now. 24 That’s projecting out to (interrupted) 25 26 Mr. Daiso: I’m sorry, that’s the future level of service. 27 28 Mr. Aknin: Future, not the current. 29 30 Chair Martinez: Ok. So things will get worse not better. Great feature. Ok. Commissioners, questions 31 or comments? Commissioner Panelli. Please. 32 33 Commissioner Panelli: Thank you Mr. Chair. I’m going to ask staff some questions. Senior Planner Reich, 34 I want to, what I’m trying to understand is what in this project is absolutely by right versus what is being 35 asked for above and beyond by right? From what I understand and correct me if I’m wrong the density 36 bonus concession is a right, but we have discretion as to whether that’s the concession they get or can 37 you just give us a little more color and clarity there? 38 39 Mr. Reich: I’ll defer, thank you Commissioner Panelli, I’ll defer to the City Attorney to explain the 40 Commission’s purview over the concession. 41 42 Ms. Silver: Thank you. Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney. We’re in a bit of a limbo situation here 43 because we have not yet passed our Density Bonus Ordinance. So as you know the Planning Commission 44 has made a recommendation on the Density Bonus Ordinance and it will be going to the Council in 45 probably August for approval. But right now it has not been passed and so we must rely on the State 46 Density Bonus Law. So under State Density Bonus Law they are required or entitled to one concession 47 given the affordability restrictions of this particular project and that is by right in light of that fact that the 48 City does not have its own ordinance in place at this point. 49 50 Mr. Reich: And I just wanted to point out that the proposed concession of the 4,619 square feet that is 51 consistent with the proposed Density Bonus Ordinance that we’re proposing. So in the menu of items 52 that one can request for a concession in our proposed ordinance it specifies that an applicant can request 53 up to 50 percent additional FAR beyond what’s allowed in the code or up to the square footage of the 54 size of the additional restricted units. And so if you look at five units plus the associated area that is 55 needed in order to access them like the stairwells and the hallways and things like that it basically comes 56 9 up to that amount. So the request that they made would be consistent with what we’re considering 1 adopting in our ordinance. 2 3 Chair Martinez: Can I ask a follow up on that Russ? But aren’t they applying it to the commercial spaces? 4 5 Mr. Reich: The, our ordinance that’s in draft doesn’t specify how the square footage is allocated. It just 6 says, it just specifies what the potential limits that the City is looking at placing on them. Yes they are 7 diversifying the square footage; a portion of that for the residential and a portion for commercial. The 8 benefit though of using some of the square footage commercial though is that they have to fully park the 9 commercial where as if in the residential units under the State Density Bonus allowances they actually, 10 it’s a different parking calculation which results in fewer parking spaces. 11 12 Commissioner Panelli: Alright so let me just, just so it’s absolutely clear to me, the rest of my fellow 13 Commissioners, and all the public, members of the public the only way this would be not by right is if we 14 had a Density Bonus policy that was something different than what we’re proposing that would be more 15 restrictive than what we’re proposing? Would that be a fair way to characterize it? 16 17 Ms. Silver: Well first of all you’re of course only talking about the residential concession portion of this 18 project and the way our Density Bonus Ordinance is structured is that there are certain concessions on 19 the menu of concessions that are prioritized and an applicant is directed to those in the ordinance. If the 20 applicant wants to select a concession that’s not on the preferred menu they need to under the proposed 21 ordinance show economic justification for that. So they still theoretically could be entitled to additional 22 concessions, but there would be more scrutiny and it would come to this body and the Council for 23 approval. 24 25 Commissioner Panelli: Thank you for the clarification. Ok, so now that my understanding has been 26 validated and clarified further I’d like to understand this 5,000 square foot per parcel limit on office floor 27 area. And specifically I’m trying to understand why it’s a fixed number limit rather than a percentage of 28 FAR or percentage of… it sort of doesn’t make sense to me because as I understand it the applicant is in 29 the process of actually merging four lots. So theoretically by right for four smaller lots they could have 30 more office square footage than one larger lot of the exact same aggregate square footage. This makes 31 no sense to me and I really want staff to take a closer look at this and come up with a policy that’s more 32 sensible. Otherwise you could see some really weird behavior like trying to… first of all as I understand it 33 for this project they don’t need to merge these lots. They could just leave these as separate APN’s in 34 perpetuity, right? 35 36 Mr. Reich: They wouldn’t be able to build the project though because you can’t construct buildings over 37 property lines. So it really would hinder what you can do with the properties if they’re left individual. 38 39 Commissioner Panelli: You could make, well, ok. Fair enough. I’m thinking you can make them zero lot 40 lines buildings, but I understand. The point I’m trying to say is you could effectively build a similar 41 project. It might be a little goofy, but it’s, I just really wish that we could take a closer look at this and 42 come up with something that was more sensible. I’ve taken up enough time. I’m going to let my fellow 43 Commissioners chat and hopefully we’ll have another round. Thanks. 44 45 Chair Martinez: Thank you Commissioner. Commissioner King. 46 47 Commissioner King: Thank you. So just to go back to confirm on the existing entitlements. So restating 48 this, so as things sit right now before the City Density Bonus the things that are not within existing 49 entitlements are the FAR, now at 1.06 when the standard FAR would be 1.0. Is that accurate? 50 51 Mr. Aknin: Correct. 52 53 Commissioner King: And please explain on that 50 foot height limit so where are we, I know there’s been 54 precedent I know I think the JCC, Lytton Gardens there were exceptions for either mechanical or other 55 reasons beyond the 50 foot limit. So I’m unclear on who gets to, if it is a breach of our ordinance who 56 10 gets to decide that we go over 50 feet and what is commonly done in the case of particularly mechanical 1 equipment? 2 3 Amy French, Chief Planning Official: I’ll answer that. Amy French, Chief Planning Official. The 4 Architectural Review Board (ARB) is the, designated in our code is the board to consider exceptions to 5 height above the maximum height limit in any district. And so there’s a menu of things that they have 6 that are in the code for criteria for consideration of a Design Enhancement Exception for being over 50 7 feet. Now there is provisions in the code that allow mechanical screens to go 15 feet above the height 8 limit. So you could have without an exception just by right. So they can have their mechanical screen go 9 15 feet above the height limit. They’re doing 5 feet above the height limit for the mechanical screen and 10 that’s allowed. It’s the areas between those (interrupted) 11 12 Commissioner King: The loft areas (interrupted) 13 14 Ms. French: Yes. 15 16 Commissioner King: That are outside of the existing entitlement (interrupted) 17 18 Ms. French: Yes. 19 20 Commissioner King: Without any exception. Ok. 21 22 Ms. French: Yes. 23 24 Commissioner King: Yeah. 25 26 Chair Martinez: As a follow-up on that? Ms. City Attorney, is that entirely correct that it is the 27 Architectural Review Board that has purview over deciding height when it’s something expressed in our 28 Comprehensive Plan? I find that odd. 29 30 Ms. Silver; The Architectural Review Board has purview over the Design Enhancement Exception. And 31 typically we have implemented height variances through a Design Enhancement Exception administered 32 by the ARB. There’s also certainly a policy discussion in our Comprehensive Plan about the 50 foot height 33 limit, but the code does envision that there will be some modifications administered by the ARB. 34 35 Ms. French: I might add that in the case of a Site and Design Review, which is ultimately it’s not the 36 Director’s approval as would be a standard ARB decision. So in this case for this project the Design 37 Enhancement Exception is a Council decision. 38 39 Chair Martinez: Thank you for that. Sorry. 40 41 Commissioner King: Thank you. And so the next, my question is regarding the traffic impacts. So at 42 what point do traffic impacts impede then the users or owners’ rights to the existing entitlements? In 43 which case there would be some reason for us to deny them building out existing entitlements. 44 45 Mr. Aknin: I think if you were in the situation where there was an impact that could not be mitigated and 46 you, so then an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would have to be considered and there would 47 potentially have to be something called a Statement of Overriding Considerations that the Planning 48 Commission and Council would have to adopt. And a Statement of Overriding Considerations would say 49 some, you know, could range a thing but it would basically say there’s benefits that outweigh this impact 50 that cannot be mitigated and in that case you might say that that hey, it doesn’t outweigh it. I don’t 51 think we should approve this project. But in this case there is a mitigation measure that could mitigate 52 the impact. 53 54 The other thing I’d like to add and we touched on this somewhat in the previous hearing on the golf 55 course and this is kind of a Planning 101 thing is that even though these are all categorized as net new 56 11 trips I think the idea of putting this type of housing near employment that is in reality they are potentially 1 not all net new trips; that you’re actually bringing the workforce closer to the jobs. So in many cases you 2 have people commuting far away, commuting in impacting intersections at a greater radius, but I think 3 the overall goal of cities up and down the El Camino Real is to put housing on El Camino so that you are 4 closer to jobs so that people could walk to work or commute shorter distances to work. 5 6 Commissioner King: Ok, thank you. And by the way so it sounds like through technology that mitigation 7 is sort of getting something for nothing through a change to a timing of the light. Do we believe that 8 that’s inarguable, that by doing that those, that is mitigated? 9 10 Mr. Aknin: Yeah I think for this potential project, yes. I think as we go on as a City and we take a 11 comprehensive look at things I think there could be greater things that we do both to intersections and to 12 reducing our overall workforce and the amount of people that commute by car. So I think it’s going to be 13 a more comprehensive approach and there’s other things we could do. But for this particular impact 14 doing better, synchronizing the intersection better will mitigate that potential impact. 15 16 Commissioner King: Ok. Thank you. And then my other concern, my next question is really regarding 17 parking. So let’s see, where to start. So one question is regarding that puzzle lifts I guess my questions 18 are, are the other locations in which those are apparently successfully implemented are those in a similar 19 location where there is overflow parking? And maybe staff could address where overflow parking might 20 go here, which I believe would probably be along El Camino Real, along the surface streets. So I guess 21 my concern is if those were in downtown San Francisco or downtown Oakland where there really is no 22 other parking nearby I would expect that the users of those lifts would be quite happy to use them 23 because there is no other parking. Here there’s parking quite nearby and so my concern is how long do 24 those things take? Are people going to say, “Well I’m going to be there for four hours instead of using 25 the lifts I’m going to park on the street.” 26 27 And the following to that is particularly with the State parking requirements, which are one parking space 28 for a one bedroom apartment there’s just no way there aren’t going to be two people with two cars. It’s 29 very unlikely that there aren’t going to be some people. So in my mind we’re building in some level of 30 under parking and so my concern is where does that overflow parking go? 31 32 And then lastly regarding the lifts how much energy do they use? Are we looking at that? And does that 33 impact, is that factored into the Silver Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED) designation? 34 Do they look at the fact that there’s some amount of energy being used every time someone parks a car? 35 Thank you. 36 37 Mr. Aknin: I will pass most of those technical questions about the amount of wait time and electrical 38 usage to the applicant. Perhaps they can answer that because they know more details about that. In 39 terms of LEED designation yes it does take a look at overall energy use. So that would be calculated into 40 that. 41 42 Ms. Young: Thank you. Yes, the project is anticipated as a LEED Silver project. 43 44 Chair Martinez: Excuse me Ms. Young. Identify yourself please. 45 46 Ms. Young: Heather Young. 47 48 Chair Martinez: Thank you. 49 50 Ms. Young: The project is anticipated as a LEED Silver project and as you know LEED projects are not all 51 or nothing. There’s a balance of means that you use to achieve that level of sustainability. We have 52 been working with our Electrical Engineer on the electrical requirements and a base level is going to 53 require us to beat California Title 24, which is already higher than the national standard for a base 54 electrical usage. We are actually hoping, we’re planning that seven of the parking spaces in the puzzle 55 12 lift system will be electric vehicle charging stations. So we’re excited that we actually have that 1 opportunity sort of built in to using them. 2 3 Regarding the time that it takes to actually access your vehicle, for the largest of the machines and the 4 machines can handle anywhere between 5 and 29 cars depending on how they’re configured. For the 5 largest machine it takes a minute or less to put your car in or retrieve your car. And we think that 6 contrasted with circling around and looking for a parking space knowing I have a spot I can get in and 7 out that there won’t be a temptation to put your car in a non, in another spot as opposed to using your 8 designated spot. 9 10 Commissioner King: And can you address, do you know how much energy each time that cycle occurs 11 how much energy that uses? 12 13 Ms. Young: I don’t. I know that each machine has a 30 amp dedicated circuit for it. So it’s not as much 14 as you’d think. It’s a fairly standard geared system. So it’s more of a machine than you might think. We 15 can get that answer for you at a later date if you don’t mind. 16 17 Commissioner King: Well I would be curious; I mean I think it’s important (interrupted) 18 19 Ms. Young: Sure. 20 21 Commissioner King: If we’re saying because that’s, I think that’s about somewhere around 2,500 watts or 22 something. So it would be like burning a 2,500 watt light bulbs obviously for a very short period of time. 23 24 Ms. Young: Short period of time. 25 26 Commissioner King: 30 amps is not insignificant. So ok, thank you. And then I guess I could address 27 this one to you while we’re, on the bike parking. So I note references to bike parking and I hope that to 28 staff that we start looking at bike parking requirements for new residences as well. I believe that’s 29 important particularly when they’re small residences, studios, one bedrooms where there often isn’t a lot 30 of space. I see references to adequate bicycle parking and ample bicycle parking, but no actual metrics 31 unless I missed them in here. 32 33 Ms. Young: We actually did put them in our drawing package. I don’t know if you received that. 34 35 Commissioner King: Oh yeah, this one? 36 37 Ms. Young: Yes, thank you. It should be right (interrupted) 38 39 Commissioner King: So if they’re in here, that’s fine. I’ll address them (interrupted) 40 41 Ms. Young: And it includes both short term and long term bicycle parking. And as to your comment 42 about bicycle parking for the residences, many of the residences have a designated bike parking spot in 43 the unit. And we did that specifically because so many of the residents might have a more expensive 44 bicycle that they would not be excited about leaving out of their responsible control. And that’s part of 45 the unit design is to have a long term bike parking for them. 46 47 Commissioner King: Great, thank you. And then just to finish back to the other part of the question on 48 have we studied where if people do not park, if the building is under parked as I mentioned based on the 49 State requirements I can’t see how it won’t be at least somewhat under parked, the residences, where 50 people will park? 51 52 Mr. Aknin: No we haven’t taken a look at specifically where they would park, but I think there’s two 53 answers to that. I think the first is that I don’t believe, I don’t think it’s necessarily true that it’s under 54 parked. I think you have a lot of smaller units there and you have people who are in close proximity to 55 major employment centers. So there’s not as much of a drive for every single person to own a car. And 56 13 then the second thing I would say is that there is commercial parking there, that surface parking that’s 1 probably not going to be used during the peak time that’s necessary for residential. So I could see a 2 situation where if there is to someone or a guest or someone that needs to park is visiting the residence 3 that they could use that commercial parking, that surface lot, because it’s not going to be in use as much 4 during the peak residential parking crunch. 5 6 Commissioner King: Ok, thanks. And then lastly in the numbers for parking it shows we would be 80.25 7 spots would be the City’s parking requirement. And this is somewhat trivial, but I think it’s important to 8 understand. And so then we rounded down when we say there’s a 31 based on the State requirements, 9 that’s 31 less than our requirements, but really it’s 32 if we were to be at 81. So do we round down? Is 10 that what we do if it’s, if the parking requirement is 80.25 we round to 80? 11 12 Mr. Aknin: It’s 0.5 we round up, 0.49 we round down. 13 14 Commissioner King: Ok, thank you. Thank you. 15 16 Chair Martinez: Commissioner Tanaka. 17 18 Commissioner Tanaka: Yes. I actually had some questions around parking as well. So I think this 19 project’s kind of unique because it has, it’s truly mixed-use right? It has all types of uses on this 20 property. And because of that I think sometimes for instance the office may be parked during the day 21 and residential may not be parked because the person that lives there is driving somewhere else. Has 22 there been, is there any guidance on, because you don’t see too many projects like this where they have 23 truly a lot of different uses where I think, I guess what I’m trying to get at is that there is like non-24 overlapping periods of parking in terms of, not all the office people are going to be there when the 25 residential people are going to be there, right? And vice-versa. And I guess is there anything that 26 factors that into this project? All of the parking mandates are kind of assuming it’s all one type of 27 property, right? And so everyone’s going to be parking at the same time. Like all during the day or all at 28 night. 29 30 Mr. Reich: There’s actually reductions that an applicant can request from the City when they’re doing 31 mixed-used because there is the understanding that there will be that potential overlap in parking. Office 32 use might be more intensive during the day and residential less and vice-a-versa, but this applicant’s not 33 asking for any reduction related to the mixed-use. So there’s a benefit of that interaction will definitely 34 take place in a project like this where the parking would be reciprocal in that nature, but they’re not 35 asking for a reduction for it. 36 37 Commissioner Tanaka: I see, ok. And then the other thing is so if the office is 250 square feet for each 38 space, right? And then for the residential so I guess it’s depending on what size unit it is, but I guess 39 what I’m interested in knowing is for the residential studio units how much, how big are each unit? Do 40 you know? I’m just trying to figure out which is more parking. The studio? I mean if it was actually 41 used for office. 42 43 Mr. Reich: The square footage of the units vary. I could defer to the applicant to specify the actual 44 square footage, but the parking requirement is, changes depending on the number of bedrooms. So for 45 a studio it’s one parking space required. For a one bedroom it’s 1 space, but when you have a two 46 bedroom unit it actually moves up to 2 parking spaces per unit. 47 48 Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. 49 50 Mr. Reich: But there’s only one 2 bedroom unit within the development. 51 52 Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. And then right now some of the properties aren’t being used right now where 53 the project is not used or not fully used. Was the traffic study done in such a way that it’s anticipating 54 that those are in full use? I guess what I’m trying to figure out is there’s the current condition today, 55 which is kind of maybe below normal because some of the properties are vacant, are simply not being 56 14 used. And so I guess I’m trying to understand the delta like from if the traffic study was done now or is 1 projected forward after this project’s built and it’s fully used compared to a project which a lot of the 2 property is vacant. So I’m trying to see the delta between like not just what it is today, but what it would 3 have been today had it been fully used versus what it will be when this project’s built and being fully 4 used. 5 6 Mr. Aknin: Correct, so and the Traffic Engineers could correct me if I’m wrong, but there was an existing, 7 they basically used three different measures: existing, a background analysis, as well as a cumulative 8 analysis. So they take a look at how are the current intersections working under existing conditions with 9 current counts; then they build on this project that you’re adding this many more people to the site and 10 then they’re also projecting growth out through the year 2025 doing two major things, taking into 11 consideration major projects. For instance, if the 395 Page Mill project is built plus putting in a 1.1 12 percent growth factor overall with the City and having that compound over the years up until the year 13 2025. 14 15 Commissioner Tanaka: I see. Ok. And then the loft on the top floor is that part of the residential Floor 16 Area Ratio or is that excluded? 17 18 Mr. Reich: It’s included in the square footage. 19 20 Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. And then in terms of our purview for tonight’s meeting this is not a Planned 21 Community (PC) so we can’t just make arbitrary recommendation I would assume, but maybe, I don’t 22 know, maybe we could hear a little bit about what kind of recommendations can we make and what is, 23 kind of what is our scope and purview given this type of project? 24 25 Mr. Aknin: There would have to be some nexus requirement, but I mean if there’s something that you 26 want to consider I mean that’s always said you have something specific that you would like to consider 27 related to the project I mean we could help think through that and whether or not there’s a nexus of that 28 condition. 29 30 Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. 31 32 Ms. French: Amy French. I might just add we certainly have provided the Site and Design Review 33 findings and Conditional Use Permit (CUP) findings. Those are both in your area to look at those findings 34 and consider how you’re looking at those. 35 36 Commissioner Tanaka: Ok. Thank you. 37 38 Chair Martinez: Vice-Chair Michael. 39 40 Vice-Chair Michael: So I want to thank my colleagues for asking the easy questions about the height limit 41 and traffic and parking. So all that’s left is the easy stuff. So I recall when I applied for a vacancy on the 42 Planning Commission and interviewed by Council at one point I was asked what I thought would be an 43 important issue for the City. And I think my answer was mixed-use and California Avenue area and I’m 44 not sure why I said that, but this project seems to fit that expectation. And Council Member Burt said 45 just wait till you see the California Avenue Concept Plan, and I think we’re still waiting for that, but… 46 47 So I’ve got a number of questions in the order of importance. You’ve got bike parking and maybe this is 48 a question for the City staff. I’ve ridden my bike sort of along there and it’s kind of scary. Is there sort 49 of a bike lane under consideration or some short of a share the road? I mean I had to go from Mike’s 50 Bikes to the California Avenue area to make a purchase and I was taking my life in my hands. So what’s 51 up with that? 52 53 Mr. Aknin: Are you speaking on El Camino or? 54 55 Vice-Chair Michael: Yeah. 56 15 1 Mr. Aknin: Yeah, Rafael Rius is coming up from our Transportation Division. I think I’d give a general 2 question about El Camino. It is a scary place to ride a bike. I think that’s all the way from South San 3 Francisco to San Jose and Palo Alto is one of nineteen different jurisdictions that’s working on grand 4 boulevard improvements now through the next 20 years, 30 years and I think making the El Camino 5 pedestrian as well as safe for bicycles is one of the key goals, but it’s something that’s going to happen 6 incrementally. And I agree with you right now it’s not a safe place to ride a bike. 7 8 Rafael Rius, Traffic Engineer – Transportation: Hi, Rafael Rius, a Traffic Engineer with the City staff. 9 Aaron’s correct, there’s incremental studies. There’s not currently a proposal for bike lanes on El Camino 10 at the moment. We are trying to make efforts to improve the bike boulevard along Park and access to 11 and from Park Boulevard. That’s currently the City’s busiest bike route and we do want to do emphasis 12 on and improvements along that route, which is not too far from this project site. 13 14 Vice-Chair Michael: Ok. So my next question and this is all pretty random, so we have a Housing 15 Element and it’s gone, it’s been approved by the Council it’s not yet been certified by the State. We’ve 16 got a target to add some number of housing units to the City. This project would add some housing 17 units. Can you bring up to date on how this contributes to the City’s targets? 18 19 Ms. French: Well the Housing Element looked at this site as, with all three sites together as 32 units; a 20 reasonable number. Of course with the Density Bonus it goes above that and the smaller units so looking 21 at the minimum number of units was 32. And then is that true for or does that add to is? So it was 30 22 units for three of the addresses. The fourth address I guess has another 8. It wasn’t included in the 23 Housing Element. So I guess that would bring it to 40 units under the current Housing Element that’s 24 been approved by the City. 25 26 Vice-Chair Michael: And it’s 40 out of how many? What’s our total that we? 27 28 Ms. French: The total for this project is 48. 29 30 Vice-Chair Michael: But for the City? What’s the City’s total? 31 32 Ms. French: About 2,800 for the entire. 2,860. 33 34 Vice-Chair Michael: Ok. We had a project at Lytton Gateway that was going to have some Below Market 35 Rate units and then it wasn’t going to have Below Market Rate units and this is going to have BMR units 36 and that looks to be a new thing, but in the prior discussion there was a lot of questions about what were 37 the details? I mean is this forever or maybe the applicant can explain how’s the Below Market program 38 work? How many units are these studio units, one bedroom units? What’s the allocation and is this 39 forever and ever or is it for 10 years or what’s, any details that are relevant? 40 41 Mr. Aknin: The applicant could give an explanation of which units are there. It’s a minimum, we’ll take a 42 look, but it’s a minimum of 30 years for the affordability. But why doesn’t the applicant explain more of 43 the details of how the units will be dispersed around the development? 44 45 Ms. Young: As you saw in the massing diagrams we’ve got residential on the second, third, and fourth 46 floors on Portage, Acacia, and El Camino. There are studio, one bedroom, and then the single two 47 bedroom unit. Our goal is to have a diversity of unit types and locations that are the five designated 48 units. And we’ll be working with the City staff to make sure it’s a good representation. The units have 49 slightly different sizes and qualities and our goal is to have the five units be a reasonable representation 50 of the overall project. 51 52 Vice-Chair Michael: Ok, that’s good. Thank you. And the next question relates to the sidewalk and in our 53 packet that we got in the staff report there was a discussion of the build to setback requirement, which 54 basically I believe means you have to make sort of a narrow sidewalk in order to build to the setback, yet 55 16 we have a civic kind of objective of widening the sidewalks. Can you explain to me exactly how we strike 1 the balance here between the build to setback requirement and the sidewalk width? 2 3 Ms. French: Amy French. I’ll add to that or start with that. That is what you’re seeing here is a request 4 to not be at the build to line. The build to line is for, is to say put 75 percent of your building wall at the 5 build to line along El Camino. I believe it’s 75 percent. Is it 50? Ok. Because we don’t want to see 6 parking lots basically. The old model of El Camino was to have parking lots in the front and the buildings 7 push way back. So the El Camino guidelines, the context base guidelines, and the zoning code now are 8 geared up towards having buildings forward on the street towards the sidewalk and having more building 9 up at that level rather than pushed back. Now striking the balance is providing the terraces that they’re 10 providing, looking for landscaping. We are going to be coming back to the Planning and Transportation 11 Commission as well as the ARB in a joint meeting at the end of this month to talk about some possibilities 12 for going forward with some different standards. But currently the standard is 12 foot effective sidewalk 13 from curb face to building and then what our current regulations and guidelines say is to bring most of 14 the building forward. We’re trying to see that loosened up with pedestrian amenities like the terrace for 15 dining along the pedestrian right of way there. 16 17 Vice-Chair Michael: Ok. And then I guess maybe unlike Alma Plaza there’s a little bit of fenestration here. 18 I mean the building mass is a little bit more attractive than… ok. That wasn’t a question. On the 19 commercial occupancy and the traffic impact is there going to be a Traffic Demand Management (TDM) 20 aspect to this? Caltrain passes or some sort of encouragement for people who work in the commercial 21 space to utilize transit? 22 23 Mr. Reich: Because the project is complaint with parking for all intents and purposes and there was no 24 significant impacts that need to be mitigated other than the one there was no proposal for TDM program 25 for the project. 26 27 Vice-Chair Michael: Is that something that could be done voluntarily because it’s a good thing to do? 28 29 Mr. Reich: Certainly. 30 31 Vice-Chair Michael: Ok. That’s it. 32 33 Chair Martinez: Rather than voluntarily can we make that as a recommendation that has a little bit of 34 strength to it? Someone? 35 36 Ms. Silver: Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney. You might want to discuss certain refinements to 37 the project that would encourage TDM measures. I know that there’s currently some bike parking, which 38 is certainly an aspect of TDM. So we’d have to see what you have in mind and we can work with you 39 and I’m sure the applicant will also work with the Commission to come up with some TDM programs. 40 41 Chair Martinez: Well there is a recommendation in our Comprehensive Plan. I don’t know whether it’s in 42 the amended one yet to be adopted that there be TDM as sort of general policy throughout downtown 43 and El Camino. So it’s not sort of out of our realm of desiring this to be something that goes forth with 44 every project. So this is a good place to start. 45 46 Speaking of which I’m going to be Chair for at least another 30 days and I am going to declare a 47 moratorium on saying “The El Camino Real,” Interim Planning Director, ok? I’m from Los Angeles (LA) so 48 we say things like “The 101” and “The 405,” but we don’t say “The El Camino.” 49 50 Ms. City Attorney, do we have to accept BMR’s. I know that’s kind of nutty to ask that, but do we have 51 to accept it when an applicant says they want to do this? 52 53 Ms. Silver: Was the question do we have to accept BMR’s? 54 55 Chair Martinez: Yes. 56 17 1 Ms. Silver: Yes under the State Density Bonus Law it is a requirement. 2 3 Chair Martinez: So if any applicant comes forward and they want to build one or ten or whatever the 4 number that works in their development we’re required to say yes? But what, I’m sorry, I didn’t give you 5 a chance there. 6 7 Ms. Silver: Yes, that’s correct. You do have some discretion in certain instances on the overall density. If 8 they’re seeking more density than is allowed under the zoning code of course that’s where discretion 9 comes into play. But if the density complies with the existing zoning code and they want to dedicate a 10 certain number of those units as BMR’s in order to take advantage of the State Density Bonus law they 11 are entitled to do that by right. 12 13 Chair Martinez: Well that’s good to know. And what is our BMR benefit that we’re receiving? I mean 14 what is the difference between a Market Rate (MR) studio rent and a BMR studio rent? Do we know for 15 this project? Any speculation or? 16 17 Ms. Silver: I don’t know and I don’t know that we have landed on the mixture of units. It might be some 18 low, very low, and moderate income dispersed in this project. There certainly is a considerable difference 19 in Market Rate between Market Rate housing and BMR housing in this area and in the Peninsula in 20 general. 21 22 Chair Martinez: Well Below Market in this area can be much higher than other areas. So I’m just 23 wondering whether there really is a substantial benefit that we’re receiving for the impacts we’re also 24 receiving. Do we know? 25 26 Mr. Aknin: I don’t know, we don’t know the exact rents, but that’s something we could report back to the 27 Commission on. 28 29 Chair Martinez: Ok. 30 31 Mr. Aknin: Overall obviously and the Commission knows this but the public may not, it’s tied to the 32 median income. So you take the median income. It has to be affordable depending on what type of 33 moderate income unit has to be affordable to someone who earns 80 percent of the median income. A 34 low has to be affordable to someone who earns 60 percent of the median income. I believe an extremely 35 low is 30 or 40 percent of the median income. So it depends on what rate of affordability as well as what 36 the median income is at the time. But given where rents are right now from what I’ve seen there is a 37 pretty big discrepancy between Market Rate and affordable units. 38 39 Chair Martinez: Alright, that’s good to know. So we may get some very low in this offering by the 40 applicant. Is that true or we don’t know? Yes, please. 41 42 Mr. Aknin: You could ask the applicant. 43 44 Ms. Young: We’ve had preliminary discussions with the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) and our 45 initial discussions with them indicated that the project would be for low income housing. That there are 46 substantial waiting lists for all levels of housing and that with the quantity that we have and the overall 47 project that low income housing is a good approach. 48 49 Chair Martinez: Yeah, that sounds good but that means it’s their discretion to decide if it’s very low. 50 51 Ms. Young: I don’t think it’s wholly at their discretion. I think it’s, we work with them to identify the units 52 and to set that, but our understanding is that they would be looking to this project for low income units. 53 54 Chair Martinez: Ok. Since you’re there Ms. Young I’m going to switch gears. In the reduced parking 55 that’s allotted I read in the chart in the staff report that 16 spaces are being eliminated for guest parking. 56 18 Does that, and zero guest parking spaces are required. Does that mean there’s not going to be any 1 guest parking available for housing units? 2 3 Ms. Young: It means that guest parking is not required for the housing units as per the government 4 code. The parking facility as I mentioned before has a mix of the puzzle lifts as well as the surface 5 spaces and there are, I’m going to get the number wrong… over 200, sorry? 6 7 Mr. Reich: Well in the Portage garage there’s 192 spaces. 8 9 Ms. Young: Correct. And then the new project has additional non puzzle spaces which are available for 10 parking. And I think it was also pointed out earlier that with the mixed-use occupancy of the site there is 11 a much larger likelihood that in the evening hours when the 48 residential units are occupied that the 12 office and the commercial recreation and the retail functions would not be occupied so there should be 13 ample parking for guests at that time. 14 15 Chair Martinez: But so there will be guest parking but you still are receiving a reduced parking, which 16 means that those added or available guest parking spaces will be counted by taking away from 17 residential parking or from the office parking? 18 19 Ms. Young: No I’m just saying that because it’s a mixed-use project that the time that the parking spaces 20 are utilized is truly a 24 hour cycle, not focused on a 10 hour workday. And (interrupted) 21 22 Chair Martinez; But not the lift parking, that (interrupted) 23 24 Ms. Young: The lift parking is 24 hour reserved spots. Those are your spot is your spot is your spot. 25 26 Chair Martinez: Right, yeah. I can’t see how that could be used for you know if it’s available somebody 27 could use it. 28 29 Ms. Young: Correct and it’s the non-lift spots, which are more than 50 percent of the overall spots in the 30 Portage and the El Camino garage that are used by first come first served. 31 32 Chair Martinez: Ok. As long as you’re still here the lofts (interrupted) 33 34 Ms. Young: Yes. 35 36 Chair Martinez: That takes you up to 55 feet. Can you do it without asking for, maybe this is a staff 37 question, but I think you’re familiar with architectural review. Can you do it without asking for a DEE? 38 39 Ms. Young: Our understanding is that you do need a DEE, a Design Enhancement Exception, to allow for 40 the occupied use in that additional five feet. The five feet as you know is a required roof screen element 41 because we have rooftop mechanical equipment. We’re required to put a roof screen on all sides of the 42 building to screen it visually. And our concept was that the mass of that roof screen was already part of 43 the project and that this was an opportunity as I pointed out to find a creative way to improve and 44 enhance the housing stock by adding just that little bit, that five feet allow us to tuck in an extra little bit 45 of housing. I hope that answered the question. 46 47 Chair Martinez: Well no I get it, but I’m still not that happy with it. I think it works architecturally 48 because you’re stepping back from the street. It’s not entirely, it’s visible if you’re walking in front of the 49 building. You’ll never see it. El Camino Real, the El Camino Real is really wide so it’s in scale to 50 everything and it’s not very much. It’s just five feet. 51 52 Ms. Young: So you love it? 53 54 Chair Martinez: I love it a lot, but not as a DEE. It just seems that the design enhancements were meant 55 for architectural elements that weren’t part of your FAR. 56 19 1 Ms. Young: So let me try it this way. The roof screen could have been an inexpensive corrugated clotting 2 material, but because we are utilizing it for the lofts we’re actually improving the quality of that exterior 3 wall material and we’re unifying the look of the roof screen across the top of the building. So we actually 4 do feel that we are achieving those nice things that you said as well as aesthetically improving what 5 would have been a rational roof screen. 6 7 Chair Martinez: But you’re adding building height and you’re adding FAR. So why don’t we (interrupted) 8 9 Ms. Young: We are entitled, yes. We are. 10 11 Chair Martinez: So I’m just looking at zoning and just trying to make it work and not… well, and respect 12 zoning as you would want to as well. I just staff… anyone? Commissioners? Commissioner Panelli any 13 ideas on this? 14 15 Commissioner Panelli: Well, maybe this is another way to tackle it. I’d like to ask our staff if we didn’t 16 allow that extra five feet for the loft space would not the applicant have the right to instead of have a 17 fourth floor that’s stepped back build right up so that we have a monolith, four story monolith kind of like 18 what we ended up with on Charleston and San Antonio? 19 20 Ms. French: Yeah. The displaced loft area could be placed elsewhere in the massing including forward of 21 the fourth floor building mass, including in the interior of the site for a more blockish appearance. 22 23 Commissioner Panelli: So I would propose, I would suggest that what the applicant has proposed here is 24 even though it violates the 50 foot height limit it’s actually better than what they would be allowed to do 25 by right. 26 27 Chair Martinez: Well that doesn’t help. I’ve already agreed with that. What I’m trying to do is respect 28 zoning and not call it something that it isn’t because it in creating this form it surpasses what zoning 29 allows without these exceptions in two areas that are important to the City and especially the height limit. 30 So staff is there any kind of ideas about how this can be achieved without calling it a Design 31 Enhancement that makes it a little more acceptable to us? To me. 32 33 Mr. Aknin: So the City Attorney and I were just discussing you could potentially ask for another Density 34 Bonus Concession to allow to the height. It would get you to the same place as doing a Design 35 Enhancement Exception so we just, it would be just going a different route with the same outcome. 36 37 Chair Martinez: And that’s permitted under the State law or are we kind of stretching that too? 38 39 Ms. Silver: An enhancement in excess of 50 feet would be allowed under State Density Bonus law. Again, 40 it would not however be consistent with the pending Ordinance, which does state that the menu of 41 concessions shall not include height increases above 50 feet. It may be possible for them to receive that 42 type of enhancement though upon a showing of economic need under the City’s proposed ordinance. 43 44 Chair Martinez: Vice-Chair Michael, help me out. 45 46 Vice-Chair Michael: So I’m very sympathetic to Chair Martinez wrestling with the implications of 47 respecting the zoning ordinance, but let me just kind of put out a personal and maybe somewhat 48 contrary opinion and that is that I’ve often wondered not as an architect, not as a Planning Commissioner 49 the mechanical structures on top of roofs with the screening always seemed to me to be pretty 50 unattractive. I mean I think they’re eyesores. Every time I’ve seen that I’ve had a very visceral negative 51 reaction to is this necessary? Is there any other way? So I think that the approach here to do something 52 functional and also kind of improve the visual aspect of what would otherwise be allowed in terms of the 53 screening of the mechanical elements I think is interesting. It may be something that’s actually properly 54 in front of the ARB in one way or another rather than a land use question for the Planning Commission, 55 but I think that the height limit itself is obviously a big issue in Palo Alto and the opinions differ on that. 56 20 But I think this is a pretty practical and aesthetic attempt to do, to combine what you’re allowed to do 1 with something which would actually be beneficial for this particular project. 2 3 Chair Martinez: You still want to add something Commissioner Panelli? 4 5 Commissioner Panelli: Well I hate to follow up something so beautiful and eloquent as Commissioner 6 Michael or Vice-Chair Michael just suggested, but getting back to tactics and simply trying to assuage 7 your conscious I’m going to try one more time to convince you it can be a DEE. If there’s going to be a 8 five foot mechanical screen without that FAR for those lofts at least in this case that screen is effectively 9 broken up by a series of windows or skylights, right? Which to me breaks up that monotony of a five 10 foot screen that would be effectively what is that? Two hundred and something, two hundred feet 11 maybe? So I’ll see if that one passes your muster. 12 13 Chair Martinez: Well we’re all arguing that it’s attractive, but I think you’re both missing the point. The 14 point is if we establish this precedent of a DEE being allowed for livable building height then the next 15 project we get will have the same thing. And I think it’s fine if the City Council decides to change the 16 building, it’s their decision to raise the building height because there’s some practicalities. As an architect 17 I know that building a four story building to 50 feet is really hard and it’s kind of a press of space. So I 18 understand why there should be some flexibility, but unless it’s addressed directly that it can be 19 permitted calling it a DEE is really an aberration of zoning. So I’ll just leave it at that. You can all decide 20 for yourselves how you want to proceed on that. 21 22 Couple other questions. On this rendering you have from Portage what is that dark space on the corner 23 again? 24 25 Ms. Young: This area is a double height retail space and on the third floor is part of the office space that 26 extends along the El Camino frontage. Is this what you’re referring to? 27 28 Chair Martinez: Right. 29 30 Ms. Young: I apologize. It is a technical glitch in our model. It’s actually something that’s happening 31 interior. It won’t be a part of the exterior façade. I apologize. 32 33 Chair Martinez: Ok, good. Ok, I’m going to just say a couple of things. I think as an example of good 34 urban design this is a great project. I think what’s happening on the streetscape is wonderful. The small 35 but important corner that we’re looking at now I think we should find a way to incorporate more ideas 36 like that. If you look at some of the old urban design in Palo Alto and other good downtowns there’s a 37 lot of these corners that are open like that. And I think it’s a very attractive building. 38 39 I’m not excited about the traffic. Parking I think we really need to find a way that every major project 40 that comes before us parks itself without concessions. I know that’s difficult given the mandate of the 41 State, but I think there’s some overriding considerations. We’ve heard it from the neighbors. We hear it 42 every time. We see it in every project including the next one we’re going to hear that it’s parking, 43 parking, parking. I want to thank you Ms. Young. I think you and your firm did a great job and I’ll bring 44 it back to the Commissioner for a Motion and further discussion and questions. Yes, Commissioner King. 45 46 Commissioner King: Yeah so this is for Senior Assistant Attorney. Regarding the BMR and the 30 year 47 period I think in my mind it’s insane or criminal that the entitlements, the upgraded entitlements go for 48 perpetuity and the BMR lasts a very finite period of time. But my recollection is when we had this 49 discussion before regarding the 30 years before it reverts to market is that we really can’t do anything 50 about that. Correct? That it’s the… yes, that’s my question. 51 52 Ms. Silver: Yes, Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney. That’s correct the State Density Bonus Law 53 does specify that the applicant only needs to deed restrict the affordable units for 30 years in certain 54 situations and I believe it’s 50 years for moderate income units. And the City you’re correct cannot do 55 anything about that. 56 21 1 Commissioner King: And that would include there’s no legal way that we could do any sort of additional 2 benefits so we would say well if you agree to this in perpetuity we’ll give you some additional benefits? 3 4 Ms. Silver: That would be perhaps applicable to a Planned Community zone or a development agreement. 5 6 Commissioner King: Thank you. And then lastly regarding timing so my sense is and my observation is 7 that we get these projects and it’s natural for a developer to want to max things out and sometimes 8 they’ll come in a bit over. You rarely get one coming in a bit under their maximum entitlements. And so 9 in this case we’re talking about the 1.06 FAR, which and in general I like the project I think it’s positive, 10 but I don’t like when things are over. But now we’re saying however under the, if the City Council passes 11 the new Density Bonus, the City Density Bonus that that would be within those future, that future 12 Ordinance. My concern is now we’re being asked to approve it; in my mind if that didn’t pass then I 13 would not want to support this. So my question is we’re being asked to support this based on what 14 might happen or that’s part of the equation. Do you have any advice on that? 15 16 Ms. Silver: The applicant is permitted a concession by right under State Law regardless of whether the 17 City has an ordinance in place or not. The City’s Ordinance once it is adopted simply specifies which 18 options will be given priority so that they can be approved essentially administratively without further 19 approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. And if the applicant chooses from those preferred 20 menu of options they, there’s no further review. If the applicant wants additional concessions they do 21 need to show some type, some economic finding in front of this Commission and the City Council. 22 23 Commissioner King: So I’m, I may be missing this. So you’re saying that as the project sits now by State 24 law it’s within, this is within the entitlements regardless of what the City law is currently, this is within… 25 the State entitlements override ours? 26 27 Ms. Silver: Yes, that’s correct. The State Density Bonus Law in the area of requested concessions for 28 developing housing that is deed restricted by affordability provides that the applicant is entitled legally to 29 at least one concession as requested by the applicant if they deed restrict at least 10 percent of the units. 30 31 Commissioner King: Ok and that 1.06 FAR is the one item? 32 33 Ms. Silver: Yes, that’s the one item that the applicant has requested and therefore they are entitled to 34 that under State law. 35 36 Commissioner King: Ok, thank you. 37 38 Chair Martinez: Anyone else? Commissioner Tanaka. 39 40 Commissioner Tanaka: This is kind of going back to the purview question I was asking earlier. I wanted 41 to know if as part of our recommendation we can suggest whether a certain portion of units be office 42 versus residential? Is that within our purview at all? 43 44 Mr. Aknin: Clarify a little bit? 45 46 Commissioner Tanaka: Let’s say we thought that certain units shouldn’t be maybe, should be have office 47 use instead of residential or maybe have, could be either use. Is that within our purview to make a 48 recommendation towards? 49 50 Mr. Aknin: So in this case you would be recommending that something that’s residential right now 51 become office? 52 53 Commissioner Tanaka: Or perhaps be (interrupted) 54 55 Mr. Aknin: Swapped? 56 22 1 Commissioner Tanaka: Either use perhaps. 2 3 Mr. Aknin: Yeah, I mean that would be, I haven’t heard that one before. That would be a little bit 4 unusual. I don’t know if the nexus would be there or not. I would think you would probably have to 5 explain what about this project necessitates for that switch to happen. I mean it could always be 6 something that you recommend and something for the applicant to consider. I haven’t seen that applied 7 as a condition of approval before requesting the specific uses be something else. 8 9 Mr. Reich: It would also, Russ Reich, Senior Planner. It would also impact the parking calculation and so 10 it wouldn’t be very easy to switch from residential to office because the parking requirement would be 11 higher and the parking spaces wouldn’t be there. 12 13 Commissioner Tanaka: Yeah, where this is coming from is I think while I understand the aesthetics and 14 the mechanics of the DEE and I fully respect that issue I think to me the biggest issue with this project is 15 really the parking and traffic considerations. But I think what’s really neat about this project is it’s truly 16 mixed-use and because it’s mixed-use you, it’s kind of like one my first earlier comments is that because 17 it’s mixed-use you don’t have the same kind of intensity. Maybe overall it’s the same intensity, but 18 because the uses are non-overlapping the traffic’s not as bad, the parking’s not as bad even though as a 19 whole maybe it looks from the straight addition but because there’s this kind of non-overlapping use 20 that’s kind of a neat aspect of it. But where I was just thinking of was on the second floor. Right now on 21 Acacia they have office on the other side. And on the Portage side, which is actually a much busier street 22 and it’s actually a lot busier traffic. I think one thing that would make this project perhaps more, would 23 perhaps lessen the traffic and parking impact in terms of this non-overlapping use of the structure would 24 be if let’s say the units facing Portage, which is actually a very busy street. It’s only second level. For 25 residential having a lot of traffic on there is not usually a good thing, but for office it actually is a good 26 thing would be perhaps somewhere all of those units on that second floor facing Portage be office. Or 27 perhaps be allowed to be residential or office. 28 29 Mr. Reich: You’re suggesting that they potentially switch the office with the residential in the current 30 design? 31 32 Commissioner Tanaka: Yeah, exactly. 33 34 Mr. Reich: To make it more sensitive to the residential to be off the busy street. 35 36 Commissioner Tanaka: Not just that, but if there was perhaps more office use on the second level 37 instead of residential on the Portage side that also would I think contribute to a, more of the non-38 overlapping use of the parking and traffic that would be impacting the area. The other thing I was 39 thinking about it during our Cal Ave Concept Plan discussions we thought about having some sort of 40 incubator space in that area. If it could swing either way where it’s residential or office use on that 41 second floor perhaps that’s a way to make that happen. And even if, so let’s say I think there’s five units 42 right now facing Portage, which is a much busier street than Acacia on the other side, if that was let’s say 43 that switched to office or is mixed-use that would still, the project would still be over the allocation in the 44 Housing Element originally that we set before. 45 46 Chair Martinez: Commissioner I think I’m going to give Ms. Young her rebuttal time right now. Go ahead. 47 48 Ms. Young: Thank you. No rebuttal, but I may have something to help you. As you know, Palo Alto 49 allows for home office use. So anyone who lives in Palo Alto is entitled to have their home office there, 50 to work out of their home, them and their immediate spouse. So it’s a maximum of two person. And I 51 don’t know of any reason why the units that you’re proposing could not be used as a home office use, 52 again with that limit of the tenant and their spouse or partner. Does that help you in (interrupted) 53 54 Commissioner Tanaka: It does, I was just thinking about ways to lessen the impact of traffic and parking. 55 Because you, I think by the design of this project itself it’s actually kind of clever because it does 56 23 minimize it already because of the fact you don’t have, it’s not all residential, it’s not all office, it’s not all 1 one thing so you don’t have anyone colliding for parking or colliding for traffic, right? So already it’s kind 2 of neat. I was just thinking in this one area because I notice you put office on the other side on Acacia, 3 which is not that busy actually, but Portage is maybe two, three times the volume, I would imagine of 4 traffic you put residential against that. If I was the designer of this project, which I’m not and we’re not 5 here to design it, I would have had that office. But that’s certainly in your prerogative to do whatever 6 you feel is correct. That was just my recommendation. 7 8 Ms. Young: Thank you. 9 10 Chair Martinez: Ms. Young you are allowed your time for rebuttal if you choose to take it or to make your 11 final statement. 12 13 Ms. Young: Just thank you for your time and your consideration and if you do have follow up questions 14 please feel free to forward them to us or to staff and then they can forward them to us. Thank you. 15 16 Chair Martinez: Wait, there’s one question for you. Go ahead Commissioner King. 17 18 Commissioner King: One of the things I think is attractive about this or desirable is we’re looking at 19 studios and one bedrooms predominantly with the goal of minimizing, one of the benefits of minimizing 20 impacts on our schools. The loft units, those look like, how, and this may be regardless of whether in loft 21 format or square footage on the same floor it may have the same end result. But how likely are those to 22 be used as a second bedroom and therefore potentially impact, have kids that might impact the schools? 23 24 Ms. Young: Pretty minimal. Many of those units on the fourth floor that have lofts are true studio spaces 25 in the main space and so the little loft area is right at the size of an allowable room, which is 70 square 26 feet. And some of them are a little bit larger at 90 or 100 square feet, but the number of studios, one 27 bedrooms, and then the two bedroom is accurate from the list that you have. I don’t see we’re going to 28 get families of four or five moving into these units. It’s… 29 30 Commissioner King: Yeah, it may not be families; even just one kid. I think the ideal is we’re trying to 31 meet our housing requirements and get not add any more ideally zero net growth to the schools. 32 33 Ms. Young: Well to the point they’re designed for urban professionals. There is a very small pet friendly 34 park. There’s no playground. There’s no lawn, green space for, to support a childhood activity. The 35 ground floor with Equinox, the gym is intended to be symbiotic with that urban professional life as is the 36 intended restaurant. We’re actually hoping for parking and traffic that a lot of traffic trips are reduced or 37 eliminated because you’re able to walk downstairs or walk to the gym or walk to Mollie Stone’s or one of 38 the other local restaurants. So we’re actually hoping that the design of the project and the integration 39 with the local existing infrastructure will reduce traffic and increase pedestrian activity in many locations. 40 41 Commissioner King: Thank you. 42 43 Chair Martinez: Great, thanks. Ok. Let’s close the public hearing and Commissioners we need some 44 movement on a Motion. Anyone? Ok, Commissioner King. 45 46 MOTION 47 48 Commissioner King: There we go. I recommend that City Council approve the draft record of land use 49 action approving Items 1, 2, 3, and 4 per the agenda. 50 51 Chair Martinez: Is that sufficient Ms. City Attorney or do you want it to be more explicit as a Motion? 52 53 Ms. Silver: I assume that that incorporates the language in the recommendation on Page 1 of the staff 54 report. 55 56 24 Commissioner King: Correct. 1 2 SECOND 3 4 Chair Martinez: Ok. We have a legitimate Motion. Do I have a second? Motion by Commissioner King 5 and second by Commissioner Tanaka. Discussion? Really? Ok. Yes, Vice-Chair Michael. 6 7 Vice-Chair Michael: So when I saw the staff report on this project I was very intrigued about the true 8 mixed-use character. I also was interested that it is a project that seems to be very sensitive to the 9 Comprehensive Plan and important details to the what will be emerging in the California Avenue Concept 10 Plan, the El Camino Grand Boulevard, and perhaps that’s fitting for an architectural firm that includes 11 partners that have chaired the Architectural Review Board and the Planning Commission in the past and 12 have a deep understanding of the City’s objectives and ideals in this regard. So I’m also impressed that 13 the real mixed-used characteristic of the project seems to be excellent. The whole notion of having 14 commercial, retail, residential, a gym, a restaurant, proximity to transit, proximity to a vibrant California 15 Avenue, proximity to jobs all of this seems to be something that is important to the City as it goes 16 forward and I think that the concerns about traffic and parking are appropriate and inevitable. I think 17 that’s going to be a struggle on every single project that we see and I hope the community continues to 18 express their concerns which are legitimate and important. And with that I think this is the kind of 19 project that will enhance this block and El Camino and the California Avenue area and I think it’s an 20 excellent proposal. 21 22 Chair Martinez: Thank you. I asked staff to look at our newly adopted Housing Element and provide us 23 some excerpts from that that support this project. I’d like that to go into the record if you would please. 24 25 Mr. Aknin: We will and we will incorporate that into the reports as they go on to the Council. 26 27 Chair Martinez: No I think for if you haven’t had time to do that now I understand, but I wanted the 28 public to understand the sort of how the Housing Element is being supported through projects like that. 29 So if you’ve done it, please; if not I understand because this was a last minute request. 30 31 Mr. Aknin: Yeah we don’t have the policies in front of us know, but that’s something that we can put 32 together both post on our website and include in the report to Council. 33 34 Chair Martinez: Ok, I appreciate that. I also just want to add to what the Vice-Chair Michael has said. I 35 think we’re starting to get this right in terms of higher density housing along El Camino and in terms of 36 the kinds of mixed-uses and the kind of downtown and urban living that supports our workforce. So 37 along with other Commissioners I completely support the project. 38 39 So let’s call for the vote. All those in favor of the Motion signal, say aye (Aye). The Motion passes 40 unanimously with Commissioner Alcheck and Commissioner Keller absent. Thank you very much. We’re 41 going to take a 10 minute break. 42 43 MOTION PASSED (5-0-2, Commissioners Keller and Alcheck absent) 44 45 Commission Action: Commission approved staff recommendation for Site and Design Review and request 46 for concessions under Density Bonus law. Motion by Commissioner King, second by Commissioner Tanaka (5-47 0-2, Commissioner Keller and Commissioner Alcheck absent) 48 49 CITY OF PALO ALTO Agenda Date: To: From: Subject: August 1, 2013 Architectural Review Board Russ Reich, Senior Planner Attachmenl :z:. Architectural Review Board Staff Report Department: Planning and Community Environment 3159 EI Camino Real [13PLN-00040): Request by Heather Young of Fergus Garber Young Architects on behalf of Portage Avenue Portfolio, LLC for Site and Design Review of the proposal for the construction of a new four story, 55 feet tall, approximately 74,122 square foot mixed Use building on a 1.6 acre site, with commercial and office uses and 48 residential apartment units. The project also includes Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEEs) for height and build to lines and a Conditional Use Pennit. Zone District: Service Commercial (CS). Environmental Assessment: A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project in accordance with CEQA. RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning and· Transportation Commission recommend that the Architectural Review Board recommend that the City Council approve the draft Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A) approving: (1) A Mitigated Negative Declaration, prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); (2) The Site and Design Review application for a new 67,506 s.f. mixed-use building (added to an existing 6,616 s.f. building) on a 1.6 acre site (resulting in a total 74,122 s.f. of floor area on a 69,503 s.f. site, and FAR of 1.06: 1) to provide 48 apartment units, including five Below Market Rate (BMR) units, and office and retail uses, with structured parking facilities (at surface and underground) providing 216 parking spaces (including 11 puzzle lifts for 196 cars), (3) Density Bonus concession pennitting increased FAR for both residential and commercial components of the project in the total amonnt of 4,619 square feet; and (4) A Conditional Use Pennit (to allow 16,118 sq: ft. of office space on one parcel where the limit isS,OOO s.f.) (Reviewed by the Planning and Transportation Commission on July 10,2013). (5) DEEs for five feet of additional height and alleviation of the build to line by two and a half feet. File Number 13PLN-0004Q Page 1 of8 // BACKGROUND Process Historv On July 10, 2013 the project was heard by the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) for formal review and recommendation to the City Council. There were four public speakers. Two speakers voiced concerns over traffic and parking while the other two speakers spoke in favor of the project noting the benefits of higher density housing. The Commission voted 5-0-2-0 to approve the project and discussed the following items: • Parking lifts; • Parking requirements; • DEE for height; • State density bonus law. The Commission was supportive of the project and commented that it was real mixed use and good urban design. The Commission agreed that the project implements the policies of the Comprehensive plan. There were questions about the parking lifts. They asked ifthey are able to charge electric vehicles, how much power the lifts used to operate, and if people would opt to use the other open parking spaces rather than their own dedicated space within the parking lift. The Commission expressed the desire for projects to be fully parked per the City's parking .code despite the reductions permitted by the State when providing BMR units in a project. Much of the discussion was related to the requested DEE for height. Many agreed that the additional five feet in height, associated with the loft spaces, was an appropriate use of the DEE resulting in a more unified roof element that was no taller than the roof screens alone would have been. Due to the fact that habitable space would result within the loft spaces, one Commissioner believed that the DEE process was not the appropriate process for the height exception. The State Density Bonus Law was also discussed. The Commission asked if the City was compelled to accept the BMR units and the associated concessions that go along with them or if the City could refuse the BMRs and eliminate the concessions. Site Location . The project site, located south of Page Mill Road on State Route 82 (EI Camino Real), is bounded by Portage Avenue to the southeast and Acacia A venue. to the northwest, and the developed site at 435 Acacia Avenue (Equinox Gym building). The. site includes the 6,616 s.f. Equinox Gym annex at 3127 EI Camino Real, the 900 s.f. "We Fix Macs" building at 3159 EI Camino Real, the parking structure at 440 Portage and two surface parking lots. The lot located at the northwest comer of the site has II parking spaces, and the parking lot at the southwest comer of the site (near the EI Camino Real and Portage Avenue intersection) has 44 parking spaces (on two separate parcels). The site has five curb cuts onto public rights of way: two curb cuts on Portage Avenue, one curb cut on the EI Camino Real, and two curb cuts on Acacia Avenue. To the north of Acacia Street is surface parking lot, across El Camino Real to the west are restaurants (McDonalds and Fish Market), across Portage Street to the south is a retail use (Footlocker) and office buildings, and across the alley to the east is a retail use (Fry's Electronics). The 1.6 acre project site (69,503 square feet) consists of four parcels to be merged under a separate application (preliminary parcel map process). The parcel is zoned CS (Service File Number \3PLN·00040 Page 2 of8 i I· ,) (j , I , Commercial) and is regulated by requirements of Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 18.16. Mixed-use is a permitted land use in the CS zone district. The Comprehensive Plan designation for this site is also Service Commercial, which allows for facilities providing cltywide and regional services and relies on customers arriving by car. Residential and mixed use projects may be appropriate in this land use category. Project Description The proposed project is 67,506 s.f. mixed use building which, when combined with the existing 6,616 s.f. Equinox gym annex located on the site, would result floor area to a total of 74,122 s.f .. The maximum height would be 55 feet above grade to allow for loft space in the fourth floor residential units, as well as to screen mechanical. equipment. At the ground floor level, retail/restaurant/commercial recreation space is proposed, and the building setback on El Camino Real would allow an effective 12 foot sidewalk width. A total of 48 residential apartment units would be provided on four of the floors (second, third, fourth, and partial fifth floors). The proposed loft spaces, accessible internally from fourth floor residenti!\1 units, would have floors below the ceiling level ofthe fourth floor units. Office space would be provided on portions of the first, second, and third floors. Third and fourth floors are proposed above a portion of the existing Equinox building at 3127 El Camino Real. The first and second floors would be separated across the site by the existing Equinox building walls and by a courtyard proposed between the gym and the new restaurant/retail space. The third and fourth floors across the site are mostly physically separated (using expansion joints) except for limited hallway access, but would be visually connected. The building is proposed to have a wide variety of colors, finish materials, and textures. These . include board formed concrete, zinc shingles, precast concrete panels, stucco plaster, cement composite panels, wood composite panels, mate terra cotta rain screen panels, and grooved terra cotta rain screen panels. In addition there are metal sunscreens, terra cotta sunscreens, steel and aluminum windows, and painted steel guardrails. The project includes surface and one level of underground parking facilities (13 feet below grade) for 216 parking spaces, including II puzzle parking lifts. The building would be constructed to displace one surface parking lot and reduce the size and cover another surface parking lot on the site. The subterranean garage would connect to the existing below grade garage on Portage Avenue (that serves tenants of 411-435 Acacia Avenue) at the south east comer of the site. The main, finished garage floor level would be located below the existing site grades, and three level car stackers would be installed in the garage. The lifts would extend approximately six to seven feet below the main garage floor. Vehicular access to the site would be provided exclusively on Portage Avenue via two curb cuts; all other existing curb cuts (on EI Camino Real and Acacia Avenue) would be removed. The parking spaces would be provided in both the existing tWo-level garage on Portage A venue, and in the new underground garage that would be accessed from a below grade connection to the existing Portage Avenue garage. Fifteen (15) surface-level visitor parking spaces are proposed beneath the residential wing ofthe proposed building. Site improvements such as landscaping, walkways, courtyards, and an outdoor dining terrace are also included in the proposed project. The portico feature at the center of the project on EI File Number 13PLN·00040 Page 3 of8 Camino Real leads into a large courtyard area located in the center of the project, allowing pedestrian movement through the project and through to the Equinox main entrance behind the project and access to the surface level parking area at Portage Avenue. The courtyard area also provides access to the elevator and stair core that provides access to the offices and residential . units above. The courtyard has a series of triangular shaped planters with Japanese maples and accent stones in gravel mulch. Some of the planters have cantilevered benches for seating and decorative screen walls that would be up lit at night. There is also a water feature with three bubbling fountains. A specimen ginkgo tree would be placed at the end of the courtyard close to the main equinox entry. Due to the. fact that the entire project would sit above a parking Structure, landscape opportunities are somewhat limited. In addition to the courtyard plantings the proposal does include some cast in place concrete planters as well as potted plants in various locations around the site. There would also be three new street trees on Acacia A venue and one new street tree on Portage Avenue. The existing street trees around the perimeter of the project would remain. The proposal also includes five below market rate residential apartment units (10% of the total units), allowing a concession for greater floor area than the maximum allowable area, as well as fewer parking spaces than would otherwise be required. Two DEEs are requested which are within the purview of the ARB. One DEE is a request for the height of the residential loft spaces to exceed the 50 foot height limit by five additional feet. The second DEE requests a relaxation from the build-to requirement along the Portage Avenue frontage, resulting in a greater setback of seven feet six inches rather than a five foot setback. The DEEs are discussed in greater detail in the discussion section below. DISCUSSION Concessions for FAR Five of the proposed 48 rental apartment units will be provided as below market rate units. This is 10% of the total number of units. The floor area allowance in the CS zone district is 1: 1 or 69,503 square feet for this site. The maximum nonresidential floor area is 0.4:1 of the site or 27,801 sq.ft., where the proposed nonresidential floor area is 31,262 sq. ft. (3,460 sq.ft. over the 0.4:1 nonresidential FAR). Of the nonresidential floor area, .15:1 FAR or 10,425 sq. ft. of floor area must be ground floor commercial area; the project includes 17,073 s.f. of ground floor commercial area, meeting the minimum standard. The maximum residential floor area is 0.6: 1 or 41,701 sq. ft. where 42,860 sq.ft. is proposed (1,158 sq.ft. over the 0.6:1 residential FAR). To assist in providing the proposed BMR units, the applicant has proposed to exceed the allowable 1:1 FAR (69,503 sq.ft. of floor area) by 4,619 squarefeet for a total floor area of74,122 square feet. State density bonus law allows for concessions when at least 10% of the housing units proposed are affordable units. The requested concession is an FAR of .06: lover the maximum allowable 1: 1 FAR. The housing component of this project is a good example of the type of housing development envisioned by the new Housing Element. The sites were located on the City's inventory. The project combines smaller sized parcels to maximize density. The small units are designed to appeal to an urban commuter and they are located close to transit. The File Number I3PLN-00040 Page 4 of8 requested concession is also consistent with the Density Bonus recently recommended by the Commission. Parking Reductions The total number of parking spaces that would generally be required for the project based on the city's zoning requirements is 247 parking spaces. State density bonus law (Government code Section 65915, also formerly known as SB 1818) provides the ability to use a lower number of parking spaces when a project provides a minimum of! 0% BMR units in a project. The State law allows for a 31 space reduction in the number of parking spaces required in the project. While the project would provide 31 spaces fewer than the City's parking code requires, with the state incentives for parking reductions, the project will be otherwise zoning compliant for required parking. A breakdown of the parking regulations is provided in the zoning compliance table attachment C. DEE for Height The height limit for the CS zone is 50 feet. The applicant has proposed a DEE to exceed the 50 foot height limit by 5 feet, for a total height of 55 feet. This is requested so the height of the mechanical roof screens and the loft roofs could be integrated into one single cohesive roof element, rather than multiple roof screens randomly scattered across the top of the building. The draft DEE findings are provided in the draft Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A). DEE for Build to Line The CS zone district requires that 33% of the building be built up to the-setback on the side streets (Acacia and Portage Avenues), and that 50% of the main building frontage (El Camino Real) be at the setback line of zero to ten feet to create a 12 foot effective sidewalk with (curb to building face). On the 150 foot long Acacia Avenue frontage, 39% or 59' of the building wall is proposed to be placed at the five foot setback, therefore the requirement is met. On the 458 foot long Portage Avenue frontage, the length of the building wall is approximately 149 feet long. To meet the 33% build to setback requirement, at least 49 linear feet of the building wall would need to be built up to the five foot required setback. To accommodate the extension of the residential balconies and the accessible ramp up to the elevated plaza, the building would be built with a minimum seven foot six inch setback, rather than up to the required five foot setback. This would be two and one half feet further back form the street than is required by the code for 33% of the wall length. This would result in a greater setback than the build to requirement allows, necessitating a DEE request. While the building wall is further from the setback than required, the residential balconies at the second, third, and fourth floors would extend out forward 11 inches beyond the property line. Site and Design Review The Site and Design Review combining district is intended to provide a process for review and approval of development . in environmentally and ecologically sensitive areas, including established community areas which may be sensitive to negative aesthetic factors, excessive noise, increased traffic, or other disruptions, in order to assure that use and development will be harmonious with other uses in the general vicinity, will be compatible with environmental and ecological objectives, and will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The property File Number 13PLN-00040 Page 5 of8 is not located within an ecologically sensitive area or within a Site and Design combining district. The code, however, does require that mixed use projects providing more than four residential dwelling units are subject to Site and Design Review. Because the application includes 48 resid~ntial units, it is therefore subject to Site and Design Review which requires review by the Commission, the ARB and the City Council. The Commission and ARB will forward their recommendation to City Council for final approval of the proposed mixed use project. Since the CUP and the DEE's are part of the project proposal the final Council action will include these project elements as well. The Site and Design review findings are provided within the RLUA (Attachment A). Conditional Use Permit The CS zoning limits office uses to no more than 5,000 square feet per parcel. The zoning also contains a provision that allows the parcel to exceed the 5,000 sJ. office limit with a Conditional Use Permit. The limit is ultimately established by the Director. Since the four parcels will be combined into one parcel a Conditional Use permit to exceed the 5,000 s.f. limit of office space per parcel is included as part of the application. The total amount of office space proposed within the project is 16,118 square feet. This is only 21.7% of the total floor area within the project. The amount of office square footage is similar to the amount of retail floor area, providing a balance between the two uses while being considerably less than the proposed residential floor area proposed within the project. The CUP findings are provided within the RLUA (Attachment A). Bike Parking The plans provided in this packet include a bulb out area at the El Camino Real frontage to provide additional bike parking spaces. El Camino Real is a State Highway and the California Department of Transportation (Cal Trans) has ultimate authority over modifications to the El Camino Real public right-of-way. Transportation staff does not believe that Cal Trans will be supportive of the bulb out element into the roadway and has directed the applicant to find alternative locations for the bike parking. The applicant has stated that the plans will be revised to eliminate the bulb out element and also provide the required bike parking at grade and in secured bike cages in the below grade garage. El Camino Real Development Three guidelines are applicable to this site: (1) El Camino Real Design Guidelines (ECR Guidelines), (2) South EI Camino Real Guidelines, recommended by ARB in 2002 (South ECR Guidelines), and (3) El Camino RealMaster Schematic Design Plan, 2003 Draft (Design Plan). South ECR Guidelines: The project site is located within the Cal Ventura Area, a corridor area, as defined by the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines (Guidelines). The Guidelines indicate new buildings should front El Camino Real with prominent facades and entries should face EI Camino Real or clearly visible and easily accessible to pedestrians. • Guideline 3.1.2 states "the design of the sidewalk setback should create an urban character'" , the buildings would be set back fromEi Camino Real to provide a 12 foot wide effective sidewalk width (curb face to building, required by Zoning Code Section 18.16.060). A raised outdoor dining terrace is proposed, beginning at the 12 foot setback, facing El Camino Real at the corner File Number 13PLN-00040 Page 6 of8 of Portage Avenue. The building would be setback an additional 24 feet from the 12 foot setback creating an open plaza at the comer. • Guideline 3.1.8 notes "new buildings should relate to and compliment surrounding buildings and street frontages" and. "projects should relate to adjacent buildings with complimentary building orientations and compatible landscaping." No landscape plans have been submitted to date, but will be required for the Architectural Review Board hearing of the project. The proposed design would meet Guideline 4.1.6, which states, "buildings facing EI Camino Real should be oriented parallel to the ECR right of way to create a cohesive well~defined street." Two entries would be facing EI Camino Real. The proposed project would cover an entire EI Camino Real frontage block. Contextual streetscape views beyond the block were provided to allow for comparison of the project height and scale with development along the same side of EI Camino Real, mostly one-story buildings. The ARB would also evaluate the project pursuant to Guidelines 4.3.6, 4.5.4 and 4.5.5, which are: • Guideline 4.3.6: "All exposed sides of a building should be designed with the same level of care and integrity" and "Buildings should be attractive and visually engaging from all sides, unless in a zero lot-line condition." • Guideline 4.5.4 and 4.5.5: "rooflines and roof shapes should be consistent with the design and structure of the building itself as well as with roof lines 'of adjacent buildings" and "roof forms should reflect the fayade articulation and building massing, as opposed to a single-mass roof over an articulated fayade." ECR Guidelines: The 1979 ECR guidelines are somewhat helpful with respect to street trees . , signage, architecture and building colors, • Trees: ECR guidelines call for street tree spacing every 25 feet (page 2, top) or 30 feet (page 2, bottom); whereas the Design Plan calls for London Plane street trees in this segment ofEI Camino Real, plantM every 22 to 33 feet on center in 4' x 6' tree wells, and prunes to provide 14 feet of clearance below to allow for truck and bus traffic, The five existing London Plane trees on EI Camino Real are shown as to be retained; three new street trees are proposed along Acacia, and one street tree is proposed on Portage to supplement the existing Ash street tree, The Landscape Plan to be prepared for ARB review would provide further detail as to plantings and proposed tree species, • Signage: There are a few relevant statements, such as -"Signs on ECR are limited to Y, to 2/3 the maximum size permitted by the sign ordinance"; "Wall signs should appear as though the building and the sign were designed together, The sign should not appear as if it were attached as an afterthought"; "A place for a sign should be designed into the elevation (if a sign is needed)"; . and "Three signs, one on each elevation, are usually not approved," The project plans indicate one location for signage, at the intersection of EI Camino Real and Portage, a low wall sign, Further detail would be required for the staff and ARB review of signage placement. File Number 13PLN-00040 • Architecture: "In neighborhood commercial zones, the design should be pedestrian oriented; signs and details should not be primarily auto-oriented." Also, "when possible buildings should be set back from the front property line, with landscaping or a people-oriented plaza in front." The project provides for planter landscaping, new street trees where none currently exist, and some pedestrian oriented signage. An outdoor dining terrace, facingEI Camino Real, with trelliage, is also proposed to activate the EI Camino Real elevation. • Colors: "More than three colors on a structure will make it incompatible with the surroundings. U sing bright colors, such as reds, yellows, purples and greens as the predominant color on a structure may make it incompatible with the surroundings. The ARB usually feels these colors are used to attract attention." Colors and materials board would be provided for the ARB review. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared for the project and the 30 day public review and comment period began on May 31,2013 and ended on July 1,2013. The enviromnental analysis notes there are a few potentially significant impacts that would require mitigation measures to reduce them to a less than significant level. These include mitigations for dust control during excavation, protection for nesting birds, building design for earthquake resistance, basement shoring, a Health and Safety Plan for construction workers, a Remedial Risk Management Plan, collection of additional soil samples, installation of a vapor barrier, vapor collection, and venting system, third party inspection of vapor barrier and venting system, a Groundwater Mitigation Plan, development of a Groundwater Extraction design, technical documents uploaded to the appropriate agencies, and the evaluation and implementation of signal cycle length optimization and reallocation of the green time. ATTACHMENTS A. Draft Record of Land Use Action B. Site Location Map C. Zoning Compliance Table D. Comprehensive Compliance Plan Table E. 'Applicant's Project Description Letter* F. Previous Staff Report, Planning and Transportation Commission, July 20, 2013 O. Planning and Transportation Commission minutes, July 10,2013, H. Public Correspondence I. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study J. Plans (ARB Members only)* * Prepared by Applicant; all other attachments prepared by Staff COURTESY COPIES Heather Young, applicant Portage A venue Portfolio, owner Prepared By: Russ Reich, Senior Planner ~ g;;:r' Manager Review: Amy French, Chief Planning Officialw File Number 13PLN·00040 Page 8 ofS (,' . City of Palo Alto Page 1 1 =================MEETINGS ARE CABLECAST LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 26====================== 2 Thursday, August 1, 2013 3 REGULAR MEETING - 8:30 AM 4 City Council Chambers, Civic Center, 1st Floor 5 250 Hamilton Avenue 6 Palo Alto, CA 94301 7 ROLL CALL: 8 Board members: Staff Liaison: 9 Clare Malone Prichard (Chair) Russ Reich, Senior Planner 10 Lee Lippert (Vice Chair) 11 Alexander Lew Staff: 12 Randy Popp Diana Tamale, Administrative Associate 13 Naseem Alizadeh Amy French, Chief Planning Official 14 Clare Campbell, Planner 15 Jason Nortz, Senior Planner 16 Elena Lee, Senior Planner 17 18 19 PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 20 Please be advised the normal order of public hearings of agenda items is as follows: 21  Announce agenda item 22  Open public hearing 23  Staff recommendation 24  Applicant presentation – Ten (10) minutes limitation or at the discretion of the Board. 25  Public comment – Five (5) minutes limitation per speaker or limitation to three (3) 26 minutes depending on large number of speakers per item. 27  Architectural Review Board questions of the applicant/staff, and comments 28  Applicant closing comments - Three (3) minutes 29  Close public hearing 30  Motions/recommendations by the Board 31  Final vote 32 33 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. Members of the public may speak to any item not on the 34 agenda with a limitation of three (3) minutes per speaker. Those who desire to speak must 35 complete a speaker request card available from the secretary of the Board. The Architectural 36 Review Board reserves the right to limit the oral communications period to 15 minutes. 37 38 APPROVAL OF MINUTES. 39 None. 40 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA City of Palo Alto Page 2 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS. The agenda may have additional 1 items added to it up until 72 hours prior to meeting time. 2 3 CONSENT CALENDAR. 4 5 1. 211 Quarry Road [12PLN-00350]: Request by Rachel de Guzman, on behalf of the 6 Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University, for Architectural Review, with Sign 7 Exceptions, of two directional signs, one monument sign and one projecting wall sign 8 for the Hoover Pavilion medical building at the Stanford Medical Center. Zone District: 9 Hospital District (HD). Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of 10 CEQA, 15301 (Existing Facilities) upon the determination that the project complies with 11 the Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation. 12 13 2. 215 Quarry Road [13PLN-00202]: Request by Rachel de Guzman, on behalf of the 14 Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University, for Architectural Review, with Sign 15 Exceptions, for two projecting wall signs for a parking garage at the Stanford Medical 16 Center. Zone District: Hospital District (HD). Environmental Assessment: Exempt 17 from the provisions of CEQA, 15301 (Existing Facilities). 18 19 CONTINUED BUSINESS. 20 21 Major Reviews: 22 23 3. 405 Curtner Avenue [13PLN-00098]: Request by Salvatore Caruso on behalf of Zhen Zhen Li 24 for Architectural Review of a new 7,425 sq. ft., three-story building with six residential 25 condominium units on a vacant, 12,375 sq. ft. site. Zone District: Residential Multiple-Family 26 (RM-30). Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of the California 27 Environmental quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15303. 28 29 4. 711 El Camino Real [13PLN-00017]: Request by HKS on behalf of Pacific Hotel 30 Management LLC for Architectural Review of the demolition of a 3,200 31 sq.ft. commercial building and construction of a new 4-story, 22,957 sq.ft. hotel with 32 23 guest units, including one level partially submerged parking facility, on a 0.26 acre site. 33 Zone District: Service Commercial (CS). Environmental Assessment: A draft Initial Study and 34 Negative Declaration have been prepared and the public comment period is April 26, 2013 to 35 May 26, 2013. 36 37 NEW BUSINESS. 38 39 Major Reviews: 40 41 5. 611 Cowper Street [13PLN-00259]: Request by Ken Hayes of The Hayes Group for 42 Architectural Review to allow the demolition of two buildings (2,208 sq.ft. plus 6,053 sq.ft.) 43 and construction of a new 34,703 sq.ft., four-story, mixed used building (three floors 44 commercial and one floor residential) with below grade parking facilities on a 13,992 sq.ft. site. 45 Zone District: Downtown Commercial Community with Pedestrian Combining District (CD-46 C(P)). Environmental Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of the California 47 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per CEQA Guidelines Section 15332. 48 City of Palo Alto Page 3 1 6. 3159 El Camino Real [13PLN-00040]: Request by FGY Architects on behalf of Portage 2 Avenue Portfolio, LLC for Site and Design Review of the demolition of x sq.ft. a new 74,122 3 square foot four-story mixed use project with 48 residential units. The proposal also includes 4 Design Enhancement Exceptions for height, and build to lines as well as a Conditional Use 5 Permit for the parcel to exceed the 5,000 square foot limit for office space. Environmental 6 Assessment: A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the 7 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Zone district: Service Commercial (CS). 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: 3159 El Camino Real, request by Heather Young of Fergus Garber Young (FGY) 10 Architects on behalf of Portage Avenue Portfolio, LLC for site and design review of the proposed for 11 construction of a new four story 55 feet tall approximately 74,122 square foot mixed-use building on a 12 1.6 acre site with commercial and office uses and 48 residential apartment units. The project also 13 includes Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEE) for height and building to lines and a Conditional Use 14 Permit (CUP). The zone district Service Commercial (CS). Environmental assessment: a Mitigated 15 Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared for the project in accordance with the California 16 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Would, Russ would you like to introduce the project? 17 18 Russ Reich, Senior Planner: Sure, good morning. Thank you Vice-Chair Lippert and Board Members. 19 The application before you this morning is a site and design review application with multiple 20 components including two Design Enhancement Exceptions and a Conditional Use Permit. The 21 proposal includes the combination of four parcels into a single parcel for the construction of a new 22 mixed-use project that would be four stories and 55 feet tall. It would have a total of approximately 23 74,122 square feet of floor area and would provide 118 new parking spaces in a new below grade 24 parking structure with 196 of those spaces contained within parking machines. The proposed uses 25 include retail, restaurant, and commercial recreation at the first floor. The first floor across the El 26 Camino frontage has a two story head height. Office space would be provided to the third floor and 48 27 rental residential units would be located on the second, third, and fourth floors of the building. 28 City of Palo Alto Page 4 1 The new project would span the block along El Camino Real between Portage and Acacia Avenues. 2 The We Fix Macs store would be removed and the existing Equinox annex at El Camino would be 3 retained. The new project would be built over and under the existing building. The large parking 4 structure at Portage Avenue would be incorporated into the project with access for the new below grade 5 parking coming through that existing parking structure below grade. All existing curb cuts would be 6 eliminated along El Camino and Acacia with surface parking access coming from Portage Avenue. 7 The elimination of these curb cuts would improve pedestrian safety along El Camino. 8 9 The project implements the City’s goals and policies related to encouraging pedestrian friendly mixed-10 use in this area. The project provides wide sidewalks, a raised dining terrace, and large portico with 11 access to an open courtyard at the interior of the project. This courtyard provides access through the 12 project and provides landscape and pedestrian amenities including trees, seating and lighting, and a 13 water feature. 14 15 The proposal was heard by the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) on July 10th. They 16 discussed a few different things concentrating on parking lifts in the project, parking requirements as a 17 result of State Density Bonus law allowing for reductions in parking. They discussed the process the 18 use of the DEE for the height exception and the State Density Bonus law in terms of whether or not the 19 City had to accept the concessions that are proposed as a result of doing Below Market Rate (BMR) 20 units. There were four public speakers at the hearing. Two of the speakers concentrated their concerns 21 over parking and traffic. The other two speakers spoke in favor of the project citing the project looked 22 good and mixed-use in that area was supported. The Planning Commission recommended a unanimous 23 City of Palo Alto Page 5 approval of the project. The DEE included one for a five foot in additional height and the others for 1 alleviation of the build to lines on Portage Avenue by 2.5 feet. 2 3 The DEE for height is requested because in the code you can go 15 feet above the 50 foot height limit 4 for mechanical screens and like an elevator enclosure. And so the thinking behind this height exception 5 was that there’s all this mechanical equipment on the roof that would have various different mechanical 6 screens and with the ability to get the exception for height for these popped up loft spaces it gives them 7 the opportunity to kind of unify that screen and these loft spaces into one single design element. 8 Instead of having some kind of metal roof screen or something it actually has a nice unified surface 9 without these multiple pop ups on the roof so that’s kind of the thinking behind the Design 10 Enhancement Exception for that. And then on the build to lines there’s been a lot of discussion about 11 actually moving buildings back further from the sidewalk and in this case to incorporate a ramp that 12 goes up to the elevated dining terrace the building is moved back two and a half feet further than the 13 five foot required build to line resulting in seven and a half feet back rather than five feet back so it’s 14 pretty minor. 15 16 At places you’ve been provided with some new images to show an alternative material for the two stair 17 towers on the Portage side and the Acacia side. In the original package it shows a zinc shingle and then 18 the at places items I believe it shows an alternative for a zinc panel and it compares the look of the two 19 different materials. Also at places I believe there was a letter of support for the project that came in 20 after the packet, so that’s there for you as well. So the applicant’s here to make a brief presentation and 21 staff and the applicant are here to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 6 Acting Chair Lippert: Thank you Russ. And before we get started here are there any disclosures that 1 Board Members need to make? 2 3 Board Member Lew: I will disclose that I met with the applicant on Monday for an hour to review the 4 drawings. 5 6 Board Member Popp: The same. 7 8 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok, with that Ms. Young you have 10 minutes. 9 10 Heather Young, FGY Architects: Good morning, good morning Board Members. I’m Heather Young 11 from Fergus Garber Young Architects here to represent the project team. We also have Guzzardo 12 Partners Landscape Architects to answer questions. I think Russ did a great job with an overview of 13 the project scope. It is a mixed-use project on a fairly complicated site. And if you look at it, I’m sure 14 you’re all familiar with the Fry’s site between El Camino and Alma south of Oregon. This is our site, 15 which is bounded by El Camino, Portage, and Acacia. As Russ indicated, four parcels are being joined 16 to create this larger L shaped site and the proposal is to take the existing surface and below grade 17 parking lot, the existing one story concrete tilt up structure and incorporate those in a new design that 18 has a below grade garage connecting to the existing garage and new above grade construction between 19 the existing structure and Portage, the existing structure and Acacia, and across the top. 20 21 And you can see here the site conditions. North is approximately in this orientation; El Camino, a 22 primary traffic source. We’ve removed two curb cuts along Acacia, two curb cuts along El Camino, 23 and one curb cut along Portage. There’s a small surface parking lot under the building here. The 24 City of Palo Alto Page 7 primary surface parking lot existing and the primary entrance to the below grade garage will be 1 maintained. You’re also seeing a new pedestrian connection between El Camino, a new central 2 courtyard, and a lower Equinox parking lot. 3 4 There’s a great deal of pedestrian activity on this site. With the existing concrete structure of the 5 Equinox expansion here we felt that squaring off the corner at Acacia and holding that edge made a 6 great deal of sense, but opening up a pedestrian connection mid-block, creating a pedestrian dining 7 arcade, and a pedestrian dining terrace to emphasize the Portage corner and provide some additional 8 pedestrian activity along the street made a good deal of sense. Primary building entrances are off of El 9 Camino, off of the dining arcade, off of the dining terrace. There’s also a pedestrian entrance to the 10 restaurant off of the rear parking lot. 11 12 If you look quickly at the existing site to get a sense of how the mixed-use massing is developed 13 ground floor has retail, restaurant, retail or commercial recreation, office, and building support on the 14 ground floor or double height space. This is second floor residential, second floor commercial office, 15 building mechanical. Third floor has commercial office space focused along the El Camino frontage 16 with residential along Acacia and Portage. Fourth floor is all residential with large setback terraces 17 along El Camino and you’re also seeing the mass of the mechanical roof screen in which some of the 18 lofts would be included. And here you can see that same view with the image beneath. You’re seeing 19 exterior residential terraces; these smaller squares are the pop up lofts that are part of the residential 20 units and again the three primary stair towers. 21 22 If we look at it from the Acacia corner again the We Fix Macs and the Showcase Luxury Car structures 23 that will be removed, the double height commercial recreation or retail, the single height office, the 24 City of Palo Alto Page 8 double height restaurant, the double height retail, the second floor office, the second floor residential, 1 the third floor commercial office, and again you’re seeing more setbacks to create a small exterior 2 terrace onto El Camino, the residential units, and then again the fourth floor residential units. And 3 you’re seeing the composed roof screen. 4 5 We would like to mention that one of the Comprehensive Plan directives is to find ways to bring more 6 residential units in creative manners to our projects. And we think that this directly supports that 7 Comprehensive Plan directive because the mass of the roof screen is there and you can see also that the 8 loft units along El Camino are setback I think it’s something like 38 feet from the frontage. They’re 9 hardly perceptible. And again you’re seeing the development of the exterior terraces along El Camino 10 to help invigorate the life and the pedestrian activity and you’re also seeing the terraces and balconies 11 that are part of the residential units. 12 13 There’s a lot going on here on the project. There is no back door and we’ve taken a lot of pain to 14 develop all of the façades with a great deal of care. And we have a short video that’s a fly through that 15 I just have to push the little button, oops. Excuse me. Ok. I think it missed a little bit of it, but you can 16 see going through the courtyard pulling back to see the main central stair tower in the courtyard, the 17 balconies in the residential units, the rear stair tower, the balconies in the residential units along 18 Portage, the corner double height retail space with the commercial space above, the double height 19 restaurant space with its dining arcade and commercial office above, the existing Equinox, the new 20 commercial recreation retail space, again residential and the small commercial office space at the end. 21 22 So materials, we have a lot of surface area for 74,000 square feet, but we’ve tried to have three wall 23 types: either cast concrete, steel and glass glazing or a rain screen wall system. The rain screen wall 24 City of Palo Alto Page 9 system, excuse me, is what’s primarily used in the residential areas and the commercial office areas. 1 The ground floor is predominantly the cast concrete, cast in place concrete, board form, and a large 2 quantity of glass window wall that’s a custom steel and glass window wall system. The materials for 3 the rain screen wall systems are the wood composite panels, which are on the board. It’s a terra cotta 4 panel rain screen or, excuse me, or a cement fiberboard, but it’s all a rain screen system. We tried to 5 work with the coolness of the concrete as a very natural color and to bring the warmth in the wood 6 panels of the residential units and also the warmth of the terra cotta panels, but maintaining some of the 7 coolness with the gray tones of the fiber cement panels and the terra cotta panels. The zinc panels as 8 you can see on the color board, it’s not shiny at all. It’s more of a dull, warm metal and we really loved 9 the way that light fell across it and was sort of eaten by the metal panels. 10 11 So if you take a look at this image we have some renderings that this is coming out extremely yellow 12 and I apologize. The colors as you see in my hand and on the renderings on the wall I think are a much 13 better representation, but you can see the natural palate with the concrete, the steel and glass, and then 14 we bring the terra cotta in the warmer tones on the third floor and a cooler tone on the fourth floor. 15 And the idea with the fourth floor is that its darker, it’s receding both in setback and in color to help 16 break the mass down. The interesting thing I think you’ll notice about the terra cotta on this façade is 17 it’s actually one color with two different textures, a matte texture and a ribbed texture. And by doing 18 the same color, oh, sorry… can I? I’ll be very quick. By using the same color with two different 19 textures there’ll be a life to that material during the day whether it’s in full sun with the angle of the 20 sun, whether it’s in shade so that you’ll get a relief from a large blank wall and have some lovely 21 textural differentiation. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 10 The remaining images are it’s a similar thing where you’re just taking the interior of the courtyard and 1 showing how that would look with the wood panels on the residential units and the stair tower and the 2 steel and glass. The Portage façade, which actually was a request that we got during our meeting on 3 Monday to show more of what the Portage elevation was looking like, so you’re seeing the wood 4 panels on the second and third floor, the fiber cement panels on the fourth floor, and the zinc panels on 5 the stair tower. These elements at the edge is a precast concrete element, which is another concrete 6 natural to tie this together. And then again on Acacia with the poured in place concrete, the gray and 7 the brown terra cotta, the wood panels, and the tower. And we have some additional information on the 8 loft and some additional perspectives if that would be helpful. And again Guzzardo is here to talk 9 about landscape design. Thank you very much. 10 11 Acting Chair Lippert: And I’ll give Guzzardo three minutes to talk about the landscape plan. 12 13 Gary Lehman, The Guzzardo Partnership, Inc.: Thank you, great to be here with you today. One of the 14 things that we find really exciting about this project is the spaces that we’re allowed to have developed 15 into more pedestrian oriented activities here particularly on the El Camino frontage. We’re very 16 excited about both this patio area that we have at the corner, which we’ll be able to furnish with tables 17 and chairs and it’ll be a nice warm corner. It’ll be elevated slightly relative to the El Camino 18 streetscape level, so it’ll provide a nice social relationship there between people using the dining area 19 and people walking on El Camino. Likewise along this area here we have sort of a bar arrangement 20 here where people can go into the restaurant, come out and dine here and again sort of participate in 21 that streetscape. It’s a very urban kind of experience. Obviously El Camino is a very active street, but 22 we’re looking to sort of introduce more and more population to that street and help in the whole 23 transitions happening along this portion of El Camino to make it a more pedestrian oriented friendly 24 City of Palo Alto Page 11 environment and we think both the use of plantings as well as furnishing there will really help to make 1 that nice. 2 3 The other space that’s really significant is in the interior the courtyard space here sort of draws you in 4 from El Camino into this space here. You can see the building overhang is kind of shaded in this 5 environment here so you can get a sense where the building edge relative to the open sky area is. So 6 this is sort of the sunny spot here and that’s where we’ve located the water feature. We have seating 7 elements all through this area, new planters which will be cast in place concrete also the board form 8 concrete material that Heather was talking about for the building. We’ll bring that into these built in 9 place planters, which will serve as storm water treatment areas, but we’ve also incorporated the warm 10 epay wood treatment for benches, which will be mounted onto those planter walls and I’ll show you the 11 detail for that in a moment. 12 13 We’ve taken this pavement pattern and kind of laid it as a carpet underneath the entire development, so 14 just as this development is very complicated in all of its layering and everything we kind of saw the 15 ground plane as an opportunity to create a carpet and have the building sort of set onto it. And we took 16 this angled approach because we wanted to create a little bit of energy with that albeit we wanted it to 17 be kind of soft so we’ve used paving materials which are fairly neutral in coloration. This is the 18 interlocking paving stone that would be on the plaza level itself with the banding and the field paving. 19 We think that will be complimentary to the building keeping the colors kind of light because there is a 20 lot of shade here and we wanted to keep that light and warm and activated. 21 22 Acting Chair Lippert: Can you wrap it up? 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 12 Mr. Lehman: I can wrap up, thank you. So on the symmetry board this gives you a sense of the 1 planters, excuse me, wood benches that we’re using with the board form concrete. We think that will 2 be kind of a fun element picking up with the diagonal paving textures. We’ve introduced some metal 3 screens to create some partitions and some spatial interest within the spaces and a nice array of plant 4 materials within the planters themselves. We’ve also incorporated some vertical stone elements, which 5 occur both underneath the building overhang and out in the landscape area to give some anchoring to it, 6 some structural qualities to all the spanning that’s occurring and that’s part of our integration of some 7 feng shui concepts into the development of the site. So thank you very much. 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: Thank you. I’m sure we’ll have lots of questions for you. Now’s the time for 10 members of the public to speak to this item; I will open the public hearing. I have one speaker card, 11 Robert Moss, and if there’s anyone else who wishes to speak to this item this is the time to hand in a 12 speaker card. You’ll have three minutes Mr. Moss. 13 14 Robert Moss: Thank you. I have several problems with the design of the building. As you know the 15 City Council has raised concerns about buildings which have gone up along El Camino and Alma, 16 which are right up against the sidewalk or the street, tall buildings that look massive. And this project 17 fits in that pattern, especially the section of the building which is where, which would go where We Fix 18 Macs currently is. I think it would be helpful if the entire building was moved back 4 or 5 feet along 19 that wall and if the third floor was moved back the same distance as the fourth floor is so you don’t 20 have three floors right up along the street, you only have two. 21 22 Also looking at the design I’m kind of struck at the difference in appearance between the section along 23 Portage and the section along El Camino. Portage is a lot less, Portage frontage is a lot less oppressive 24 City of Palo Alto Page 13 looking and it’s also setback farther. And if you had some way of putting more of that appearance on 1 the El Camino side I think it would soften the building some. 2 3 Of course a major problem you’re going to have is traffic and I think the traffic engineer’s estimate that 4 you’re not going to see an impact for 10 years is unrealistic. That doesn’t take into account the four 5 projects that are being built on El Camino right now: two hotels, a mixed-use building in the 4100 6 block of El Camino and the senior housing on the 4100 block of El Camino Way. So there’s a lot of 7 development going on and that’s all going to cause traffic. On the way down here I wanted to stop at 8 Fry’s so I drove down El Camino. And at 9:40 in the morning traffic was backed up to Fernando. 9 Traffic along El Camino now is horrible. The people who work and live in this building will not be 10 able to get out onto El Camino even when the traffic light turns red because the traffic is going to be 11 totally blocked up from Portage all the way down to Page Mill. So what they’re going to do in order to 12 escape that site is they are going to drive through the Fry’s parking lot and go down Park. Fry’s is 13 going to love it. 14 15 So I think you should work on making the building less oppressive along El Camino, setting it back 16 more, reducing the scale as much as possible. As for the traffic, I don’t think there’s any cure. I think 17 whatever we put in here is going to be awful, but this is going to make things even worse. 18 19 Acting Chair Lippert: Thank you Mr. Moss. Ok we’ll return to the Board for comments and questions. 20 We’ll begin with Board Member Alizadeh. 21 22 Board Member Alizadeh: Thank you. Maybe I would suggest that the people who move into this 23 building invest in bicycles as the way forward. In terms of the issue of the setback from El Camino, it’s 24 City of Palo Alto Page 14 something we discussed last night at the PTC meeting and so I, if that’s something that comes up then 1 obviously I will join in, but I won’t open that for discussion. I’d like to thank you for not using beige. 2 So I like the color palette a lot and the material palette a lot. I think that’s the way forward. 3 4 I have a couple questions specifically just because I’m looking at, I’m trying to be sensitive to these 5 issues of the street front frontage and whatnot. I guess in the restaurant zone where you have that 6 arcade there are two, I don’t know if they’re benches or if they’re bar level elements. Just what are 7 those exactly? 8 9 Ms. Young: That’s it exactly and you can see a little bit in this inspiration image that Guzzardo 10 provided there would be between the primary concrete columns there would be a horizontal bar seating 11 and the dining arcade I think was 11 feet wide? Twelve feet wide. So it’s a generous space and there’s 12 plenty of room for bar seating and actually some tables along the glazing wall. And that’s envisioned 13 in two of the three bays. It’s hard to see in this image, but this bay and this bay would have the bar 14 seating and then this bay would be open to allow for cross traffic between the entrance into the 15 restaurant and the sidewalk. 16 17 Board Member Alizadeh: I wonder just as in that image that you showed the kind of collage they also 18 incorporated some type of low seating in the front. I wonder if that, you’re kind of showing something 19 here I don’t know if that’s exactly what you’re doing (interrupted) 20 21 Ms. Young: This one? 22 23 Board Member Alizadeh: No, no, the same bar. You see how they have that (interrupted) 24 City of Palo Alto Page 15 1 Ms. Young: Oh, to have a seat bench on El Camino? 2 3 Board Member Alizadeh: Something. I don’t know. 4 5 Ms. Young: I wondered about that. I think that could be really interesting. We should look at that 6 more. 7 8 Board Member Alizadeh: Ok. The other question I have before I kind of move to other things; on 9 Portage there’s I guess it’s a garage metal door and I’m not quite sure what that’s going to. Is that a, it 10 doesn’t seem like it’s going to a garage. 11 12 Ms. Young: There is a service entrance which you can see, just let me get to the site plan, it’s right 13 here. There’s a service entrance into the restaurant. There’s a man door then there’s also a roll up door 14 into the trash and recycling area for the restaurant. 15 16 Board Member Alizadeh: Ok. 17 18 Ms. Young: There’s a separate trash and recycling area for the residential here and yet another trash 19 and recycling area for the residential on the Acacia side. 20 21 Board Member Alizadeh: Ok. Alright. Obviously it’s unfortunate with the location, but I’m assuming 22 you probably tried a million ways of figuring that out. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 16 Ms. Young: There’s no back door. 1 2 Board Member Alizadeh: Yeah. 3 4 Ms. Young: And we really wanted to have the man door and the service door to the restaurant not on El 5 Camino and the parking as you can imagine is very critical for the success of a retail establishment. So 6 this is sort of our one little back door spot. 7 8 Board Member Alizadeh: Right. Yeah, other than that and just I think being sensitive to all the issues 9 about El Camino I think it’s a lovely project. It is very, there’s a lot of stuff going on here. I go to 10 Equinox so I’m familiar with the site and it’s complicated so yeah, I think it’s a successful project. 11 12 Where I think that I have problems is with the landscaping. So I don’t agree with this landscaping idea 13 at all. The triangles just don’t seem to work for me, the kind of slanted everything, the kind of… I 14 think there’s just nothing about it that I’m really enjoying. The details of what those raised planters are 15 like and how they’re also canted and then that screen thing, I’m not, it doesn’t jive with the building 16 because the building seems quite busy. There’s a lot of stuff going on. So for the, for me the landscape 17 is conflicting with that. Sorry. It’s really at odds with that with these triangular shapes. So building 18 yes, landscape no. I’ll just leave it at that. 19 20 Ms. Young: Thank you. 21 22 Acting Chair Lippert: Board Member Lew. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 17 Board Member Lew: So, ok. So on the, I just want to say overall I do want to thank the applicant for 1 designing rental units and a variety of what do you call it? A type of unit that we haven’t seen before in 2 Palo Alto or at least not at this scale. We don’t, they’re not 6,000 square foot penthouses like we’re, 3 we’ve been seeing. I think that it’s a missing segment on the market that has, a segment of the market 4 that’s been ignored in Palo Alto. I think that that segment of the market from what I’ve seen in my 5 neighborhood, which is not near here though, is the type of person who would actually take a Google 6 bus or some sort of unmarked thing. In my particular neighborhood there’s a large apartment building 7 and the unmarked corporate buses stop by the front door and the people take the bus to work, the 8 private bus to work and I would, could envision something similar possibly happening here. 9 10 The, I like the, so I like the units, the mix of units. I like the efficient use of the parking lifts. I do like 11 the, your courtyard as a way of sort of creating a central spine organizing the project. And I definitely 12 like the other, the uses on the site like the restaurant and retail and office. 13 14 The concerns I have about the site planning are one is all of the traffic is going out onto Portage and as 15 it is now just because I think because of all the traffic at Fry’s and the long lights, the stoplight at El 16 Camino and Portage has a long queue because the El Camino lights are synchronized. I [been 17 concerned] that it’s going to be very difficult to get in and out of your, possibly of your project. 18 Maybe, maybe not or maybe it’s at certain times of day. I’m concerned about deliveries; like how do 19 delivery people navigate around the site? You know moving trucks, even just like United Parcel 20 Service (UPS) deliveries. If there’s a restaurant they have deliveries usually every day with trucks and 21 beverage delivery trucks. And it seems like El Camino, Portage, and Acacia are all fairly constrained. 22 I mean there are a lot of things happening on all of those streets so I’m concerned about that and how 23 that works. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 18 1 I’m concerned about the, your general [parte] of the building. I think because you’re working around 2 the existing Equinox building you have like some of the corridors are separated where you have to go 3 outside like if you’re in a hallway then you go through like fire doors and outside to connect to the rest 4 of the hallway. It seems a little complicated to me. You’ve also separated the main elevator from the 5 stairs which I think I understand why you’ve done it to sort of promote the use of the staircase over the 6 elevator and I actually do support that, but it seems complicated to me. Like if I’m a visitor and I see 7 your glass, I do like your glass staircase or your glass cube with the staircase, but I would be very 8 confused. Like if I see this it looks like the entrance, I’m there and then I need to take the elevator I 9 would be very confused to figure out how, that I have to go outside and walk all the way around like 10 that is total counterintuitive to me. And then also if I need to get to the, if I need to take the elevator 11 but if I need to go to the… I don’t know what you call it, Acacia wing of your building and I was in the 12 main courtyard I would be very confused that I need to go all the way around El Camino and Acacia to 13 go in and go up a ramp to use that elevator. It seems like really complicated to me and I wish there 14 were a way of simplifying it. It seems hard because you’re constrained because the Equinox site. It 15 seems to me that some sort of way finding in paving or landscaping, but somehow there has to be a 16 better way of sort of navigating around your site. 17 18 The massing of the building I think I generally like. I think there’s a lot of criticism of the El Camino 19 walls, but I think having an arcade does wonders for a building and it really gives you depth and light 20 and shadow and I think that that is significant and I also think that having your glass corner is 21 significant. I think we’ve seen that on a couple projects; one is under construction now down the street. 22 It’s a Ken Hayes project, but the glass corners are actually really very nice. And so I like that and I like 23 that it’s sort of like a vestige or a memory of the Banana Records building. And I like the modulation 24 City of Palo Alto Page 19 and changes of materials on your El Camino frontage and I would say also too that I think you achieved 1 really high level of concrete quality on some of your other projects on Portage and I hope you get that 2 same quality on this project. I think that it’s, it looks really good. 3 4 On the landscaping I think I [unintelligible] in agreement with Board Member Alizadeh. It just struck 5 me as being completely different than the building. And so and I think it’s possible for landscape to be 6 different from the architecture. I’m thinking of like in like Sau Paulo or like Macao they have like 7 these colonial arcaded buildings and then they have the wavy black and white paving. So it can be very 8 different, but somehow it works together. And I don’t really quite get that or the idea is lost to me. I 9 just don’t quite get the diagonal orientation. 10 11 Ms. Young: Can I jump in? 12 13 Board Member Lew: Mmm hmm. 14 15 Ms. Young: One thing I didn’t mention is that we’re trying to incorporate a number of feng shui 16 principles into the project and our feng shui consultant had been concerned about our long continuous 17 stretches of circulation and if you got into the floor plans you’d see we actually had intentionally 18 broken up some of our linear circulation and that was actually one of the thoughts here as well is to 19 create more of a meandering path as opposed to a straight shot. I also had some reservations about 20 rotating the paving, but the concept of having the carpet underneath the structure and then that 21 patterning supporting that meandering path to slow you down and to have you have a better sense of the 22 space I grew to appreciate over time. So and I’ll let them obviously bring some additional comments to 23 those points. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 20 1 Board Member Lew: Great. And then maybe it’s worthwhile looking at that, the paving, in three 2 dimensions in the space so maybe it would give me a better idea. I’m just reacting to the site plan and 3 just the contrast in the site plan. 4 5 Also in a related manner just on speaking about paving and on pathways is it seems like a little 6 confusing to me is how to get to the existing Equinox entrance. That to me seems to have gotten lost a 7 little bit in this project and it seems to me that could be stronger. 8 9 Ms. Young: Actually it’s unchanged. The existing Equinox entrance is identical to the current 10 proposed Equinox entrance. What they, to get into Equinox they have a security checkpoint off of this 11 parking area and the points of access of this expansion are all egress only. So you still enter into 12 Equinox the same what that you had before. 13 14 Board Member Lew: Yeah I was actually just talking about paving. Like so like if [unintelligible] 15 L2.2, maybe I’m, if I’m understanding your (interrupted) 16 17 Ms. Young: Yep, I’ll get there. We’ve tried to improve the interior courtyard connection. There’s a 18 new ramp and stair that connect. So the entrance is right here to Equinox and the, there’s a new stair 19 and ramp that go around this central ginkgo tree and we were actually hoping that the same way that the 20 pedestrian arcade and the entrance into the stair tower and the courtyard and the ginkgo tree that those 21 were spots along the connection path between the entrance to Equinox and the entrance to El Camino. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 21 Board Member Lew: And then what about the, there’s the, you’re showing a gray concrete path going 1 out to Portage (interrupted) 2 3 Ms. Young: Yes. That’s under the building and it’s between the underbuilding at grade parking and 4 some service areas. They’re bike showers, long term bike storage, an accessible toilet room, MPOE, 5 trash, and all that good stuff. This path we actually debated as to whether or not it wanted to continue 6 that material. Are you proposing that the pattern of the courtyard continue along that pattern? Or that 7 pathway? 8 9 Board Member Lew: Well not necessarily. I was just thinking that there should be some connectivity 10 somehow. 11 12 Ms. Young: Ok. 13 14 Board Member Lew: I mean because your, if I go down that walkway right I mean it’s terminating at 15 your (interrupted) 16 17 Ms. Young: At the [unintelligible] (interrupted) 18 19 Board Member Lew: Connector piece. 20 21 Ms. Young: Station. 22 23 Board Member Lew: Yeah, your little (interrupted) 24 City of Palo Alto Page 22 1 Ms. Young: Oh, well the bike share station is at one end. 2 3 Board Member Lew: Right, and then you have the doors. 4 5 Ms. Young: And the egress from Equinox, the breezeway connection between the two pieces is at the 6 other end. And then obviously the fountain is there as well. 7 8 Board Member Lew: Ok. I just think that it’s a little confusing, I don’t think you have to have, it 9 doesn’t, I don’t know what the solution is, but it seems like there’s a between connecting all of these 10 different access points I think that there’s a, I think there’s just room for some sort of improvement in 11 there. And I don’t think you have to have like a direct path, it doesn’t have to be a direct path. I can 12 understand from a feng shui point of view if you want to have something more meandering and I think 13 that that’s all fine. It just seems like a little chaotic to me. I don’t see the, all of these different pieces. 14 I don’t see that as greater than the sum of the parts, right? They seem a little separate to me. So 15 anyway that’s just a small point. 16 17 On the building [parte] or just the building organization I mentioned that I was a little concerned about 18 just the [hull], just the corridors on the upper floors that you’re going in and out. Some of those 19 outdoor corridors it seems to me like are intruding on the privacy of the private of the balconies on 20 some of the units. It’s not quite so ideal to me. I don’t quite understand the dividers that you have 21 between residential balconies. It seems like, yeah just you don’t quite get the idea. I do like that you 22 have substantial size balconies on the units. I think that’s really important especially when you have 23 like a small studio that you have a large outdoor space to make it, everything seem more open. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 23 1 I don’t quite understand the window patterns that you’re proposing for the units. I know you’re trying 2 to get some highlighting up at the, with the [clearer] stories. It seems very different than a normal 3 typical unit. So maybe if you would walk us through a typical, maybe like one typical unit on how 4 you’re coming up with that pattern of windows because it’s very different than like a typical residential 5 unit. 6 7 Ms. Young: They are actually. We, the design team knew from the beginning, sorry, how important 8 parking is to the success of a project and I have to acknowledge parking drives a great deal of the 9 structural grid of the project which in turn drives a great deal of the fundamental sizing of the 10 residential units. The residential units as you saw are a mix of studios and one bedroom apartments and 11 then there’s 1 two bedroom apartment. That’s it. 12 13 The idea with the residential units and let me see if, I appreciate it’s really hard to see here, but the idea 14 of the residential units is that they are organized off of a double loaded corridor. When you came into 15 the residential unit there was a small hall off of a closet and a sort of a little mudroom type area and 16 then you went through that to get to the toilet room space. When you came into the main space there is 17 a kitchen area and usually a large studio area. In the one bedrooms there’s a one bedroom off to the 18 side and/or a small bonus room that could easily be used as an office. But the concept is that the core 19 elements of the residential units are kept away from, excuse me, adjacent to the central corridor and that 20 gave you the greatest amount of flexibility for using the space of the studio or the one bedroom. 21 22 And as you mentioned, yes, the balconies are very generous. I think there are three units of the 48 that 23 don’t have a private balcony and of those that do four are 4 foot balconies and the rest are 8 feet deep or 24 City of Palo Alto Page 24 deeper. There are some of the units on El Camino the three here in particular that the terrace that they 1 have, it’s not even a balcony, it’s a terrace it’s approaching 700 square feet. I mean these are real 2 attractive outdoor living spaces. 3 4 What you mentioned about the clear story glazing is a consistent theme throughout the residential units 5 for Portage and Acacia that the top band in the rain screen wall system is a clear glass unit. The doors 6 have a large amount of glazing and then there are additional windows either in the bedrooms or in the 7 main space. Our thought was that being on Portage and Acacia you are in a more urban environment 8 and we wanted to have views to the sky and direct sunlight coming in, but allow for some interior wall 9 surface so that you could put the TV where it needed to be and have some sense of security and safety 10 in your home. The balconies also provide a level of separation between you and the public, but we 11 didn’t want to over glaze the Portage and Acacia areas. 12 13 When you go to El Camino, sorry, and you can see here this is actually a good shot of that. You’re 14 seeing the clear story glazing up above. You’re seeing the door that’s fairly glazed, but not completely 15 and then sidelights. When you get to El Camino it’s a slightly different approach where the strips of 16 glazing go from basically ground to the top of the concrete spandrel element. And the transition that 17 you’re seeing in color here is that transition I talked about between a matte finish terra cotta and a 18 grooved finish terra cotta that occurs at the junction between the door and the top element or the, 19 there’s a horizontal mullion there. 20 21 Board Member Lew: And the dividers between the? 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 25 Ms. Young: Thank you. This is a actually a good shot of the dividers. We didn’t want the dividers to 1 be full height full width of the terrace, especially because the terraces are so deep, but we wanted to 2 give residents a sense of security in two ways. One, by providing a panel immediately adjacent to the 3 wall roughly three feet deep that would be a series of slats like this in a steel channel system that went 4 floor to ceiling so that you had a sense of a barrier but there was also some visual and light 5 transparency. Last thing we wanted to do was block the light since we worked so hard to get it into the 6 units. And then beyond that is a planter that’s a physical barrier; again that’s 42 inches high, 18 to 2 7 feet deep. We’re still working with the size of the pots that would be a physical barrier, but also 8 provide an opportunity for some small planting and I like having herbs and things near my kitchen. So 9 there’s two types of barriers again to keep it open and light but also give residents a sense of physical 10 security. 11 12 Board Member Lew: And then on the residential balconies and terraces normally, [unintelligible] 13 normally. I mean oftentimes they’re opaque or semi-opaque just because the management doesn’t want 14 to police the tenants on what’s being stored there. I know that you have storage shown in the drawings, 15 which is unusual, like inside the building, which is appreciated. 16 17 Ms. Young: Correct. 18 19 Board Member Lew: And it’s not usually required so I do like that. 20 21 Ms. Young: If I can? 22 23 Board Member Lew: Yeah. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 26 1 Ms. Young: Head where you’re headed. Two big items that are typically stored on balconies are 2 bicycles and furniture and we definitely want to encourage furnishings out there because we want the 3 street life and the activity, but bicycles we actually have and I’m going to get the number wrong, but 4 about 75 percent of our long term bike storage is actually in the residential units. I believe it was you 5 Lee who said you want to encourage bicycling for this project. We’re doing everything we can to 6 encourage bicycling for this project. There are long term, there are dedicated bike storage spaces in the 7 majority of the units. There are, there’s a bike share station at grade. There are more than ample short 8 term bike storage locations front and center at prominent locations throughout the site and there’s 9 additional long term bike storage in the below grade parking facility. 10 11 There’s also additional, not only is there storage within the units, not just for bikes but for other 12 elements, but there are personal storage rooms on the floor for each unit that I think vary between 17 13 and 19 square feet roughly. And that’s sizeable enough that you don’t have to worry about people 14 taking their things and putting them on the balcony. Also the project is going to be managed very 15 aggressively in that the tenants will be required to sign leases that are very clear about elements that are 16 and are not allowed out on the terraces. 17 18 Board Member Lew: Thank you. And I have a couple questions for staff or Russ. 19 20 Mr. Reich: Sorry. 21 22 Board Member Lew: I had a question about the DEE for height. So the zoning ordinance is pretty 23 specific in saying the DEE’s aren’t supposed to use to, for additional, to get additional floor area. And 24 City of Palo Alto Page 27 so I was wondering how you factored how you guys have been thinking about this. Because I know 1 that because it’s an affordable project they have other ways of getting additional floor area. So how do 2 you, what was the thinking of this? 3 4 Mr. Reich: The DEE is specifically for height. It is not for floor area. While the loft areas do comprise 5 floor area they’re not using the DEE to get floor area. 6 7 Board Member Lew: Ok. 8 9 Mr. Reich: They are doing 10 percent of the units as BMR’s and one of the, the one concession they’re 10 requesting is for square footage. It is not specifically for the loft area square footage, but it is for square 11 footage of the project. 12 13 Board Member Lew: Ok, got it. Great. Thank you for that. And I [was going to say] on the lofts I 14 mean I’ve seen other projects like in San Francisco that had that kind of pop up space and it’s really 15 nice I mean those are really seems to me highly desirable and it’s in a place where you’re not really 16 adding a lot of mass to the street because it’s located in the center of the building. So I think I can 17 generally support that and I think I can also support the DEE on Portage. That seems to me kind of like 18 a no brainer. I think Board Member Alizadeh mentioned, she was talking about that trash garage door 19 on Portage and I’m not quite so happy with that whole vertical section of the building. I mean I think 20 that could be stronger. You’ve got like a trash room, mechanical room, and office space (interrupted) 21 22 Ms. Young: Back here? 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 28 Board Member Lew: Yeah. I mean I think that that piece it’s a very tricky piece between the 1 residential and the restaurant/office cube on the corner. I think that could be stronger. I don’t know 2 how to do it, but I mean I think you could. It seems to be between like a roll up door and louvers and 3 windows and stuff. I think something could be done though just to make it a stronger transition 4 element. Because it’s a little, I don’t know, it seems a little awkward to me at this point. And if it were 5 on the back of the building I’d say who cares, but this is like right on the main, to me this is like your, 6 this is what everybody’s going to see because everybody’s headed northbound on El Camino. This is 7 your main view. So I’m a little concerned about that. I do understand you have a lot of constraints on 8 the site because of the, just the general [parte] of the building. 9 10 And then on the, I think what I’d like to see also come back [to us] on the site walls that you have here 11 like just information and details on that. Is that also all of the perimeter walls are those all board form 12 concrete or are those, what are they and the colors and stuff? Because this, they are sort of rendered a 13 little differently. I mean the board form concrete and then yeah. 14 15 Ms. Young: I apologize. The, I should have labeled them. They are cast in place or board form 16 concrete. There may be some that are smooth as opposed to the board form, but it’s intended to be cast 17 in place. 18 19 Board Member Lew: Ok. 20 21 Ms. Young: And there are a number of planters around. We obviously have to treat our storm water all 22 on site and so there are several planters on the perimeter of the building. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 29 Board Member Lew: And then I had one last question for you. So on the third floor so you have like an 1 office and apartments sharing the same corridor. And I was wondering if you had thought about how 2 that actually… 3 4 Ms. Young: You mean right here? This is (interrupted) 5 6 Board Member Lew: There’s that and then also the what goes inside, which isn’t really our purview, 7 but I was just wondering have you thought about the or what have you, how have you been thinking 8 about that? Because it’s kind of unusual for those uses to be shared and I don’t know I mean it’s a little 9 unusual. I’ve worked in a building that had something like this and it worked, but it was like a really 10 small building. It was nothing at this scale. But it was a little strange; I mean it was a little weird I 11 have to say. 12 13 Ms. Young: I understand your concerns. The, our impression is the office users are primarily going to 14 be using the central stair and that the objective is to have a single tenant on the third floor, however, it’s 15 easily foreseeable that there would be two or three tenants on the third floor. In any event their 16 entrances would likely be, excuse me, would likely be focused either right at this point or just off the 17 stair tower on the interior. So those connecting corridors that you’re referring to that are deeper in the 18 third floor residential space are actually egress, safety secondary corridors. I don’t envision them being 19 used unless there happens to be a tenant in the residential who is working in the office space. 20 21 Board Member Lew: Ok, thank you. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 30 Acting Chair Lippert: Before Board Member Popp goes I’m just going to ask if there’s anybody else 1 from the public that wishes to speak to this item? Ok, if not I’m going to close the public hearing at 2 this point. And the Chair speaks last so I’ll wait for Board Member Popp to return. 3 4 Board Member Lew: I have a question for staff. A general question since we have time. Can you 5 explain what’s happening in the Fry’s site? And then also I think I’ve seen some master planning in the 6 around like Pepper Street, like that area. I think I’ve, I forgot which plan that was or which study it 7 was, but it seems like there was some discussion about connecting Ash between Fry’s and like Pepper 8 [unintelligible]. 9 10 Mr. Reich: There are discussions. I haven’t been involved in those discussions so I couldn’t really 11 speak to them. I mean if you do have specific questions I can get you that information in terms of the 12 current thinking, but there’s nothing in place at this time relative to that, but I know there’s a Cal Ave. 13 plan. I’ve spoken to Elena Lee who’s the Planner working on that project and she said there wasn’t 14 anything about this project that’s inconsistent with that plan, but I don’t know the details of the plan. 15 16 Board Member Lew: Thank you. 17 18 Acting Chair Lippert: Board Member Popp you weren’t here so we gave away your time. Please go 19 ahead. 20 21 Board Member Popp: I have nothing to say anyway. So first let me say I will come out in support of 22 both of the DEE’s. I think they both make sense here and I’m in favor of them. Bunch of things I 23 really like about this project. The material palette is just great. I really love the colors. I’ll echo 24 City of Palo Alto Page 31 comments others have made about that. I think it’s such a complex project, so many pieces and things 1 and your clever reuse of the building that Equinox is in at El Camino and what you’ve done building 2 over and under that is really an accomplishment. I think people need to pay attention to how clever that 3 is and look for opportunities like that. 4 5 I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I agree with Mr. Moss in some ways about how this building is 6 pressing on El Camino. And I think that while I don’t agree with him at all about the fact that you 7 should move the whole building back, I think that would be completely the wrong thing to do I do think 8 that there are elements of this building that could go in and out just a bit more. And I think from my 9 perspective the area I would ask you to take a look at is at the corner of Acacia and El Camino. You’ve 10 done a very nice job I think at the corner of Portage and El Camino, but the Acacia corner particularly 11 with this long heavy element before you get to any of the window openings feels awfully dominant to 12 me. And I think there might be another way to address that corner that would lighten that up a little bit 13 and maybe pull that corner in a little bit. I’m not sure what the answer is Heather, but I think that 14 there’s this nice corner at the Portage side. You’ve got the screen that comes down. I do love that it 15 sort of reflects the character of the old Banana Records building. I think that’s fun. I very much like 16 the covered arcade and the, this long bench and, I’m sorry, long table and options for seating along 17 there. I think that in and out in that area it gives the building a very nice character even though it is 18 quite close to the street, but as we get further down that elevation at the Acacia corner I’m just 19 wondering if there isn’t an opportunity to give a little more relief there and ask you to study that just a 20 little bit. 21 22 Let’s see, I think, I do have a question for you about how you’re going to prevent the public from 23 accessing the private garage. How is that controlled? 24 City of Palo Alto Page 32 1 Ms. Young: We’re not. You have to realize that because it’s a mixed-use project it’s open and 2 accessible 24 hours a day. It is right now. Anyone can drive down into the lower part of the garage if 3 they choose to. There is onsite security who patrols during the day and I’m imagining that there will be 4 some modification to the existing security once the full project is continued. The parking machine 5 spaces you have to have a fob and you have a space. No one else can park in your space. So that 6 shouldn’t be (interrupted) 7 8 Board Member Popp: They’re just not accessible at all? 9 10 Ms. Young: If you have one of the assigned puzzle lift spaces it’s your space and no one else is in, it’s 11 like the little tray that your car is on… 12 13 Board Member Popp: Right. 14 15 Ms. Young: Is programed to recognize the weight of your car, the width of your car, the height of your 16 car, all that good stuff. 17 18 Board Member Popp: Ok. So there’s no opportunity for someone to park in one of those trays? 19 20 Ms. Young: No. 21 22 Board Member Popp: By accident? 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 33 Ms. Young: No. 1 2 Board Member Popp: Great. I’m still learning about these puzzle lifts, but they, they’re a great 3 solution. 4 5 Ms. Young: I’ve got a little video if you want to see it. 6 7 Board Member Popp: You know I’ve seen it, I just didn’t understand how the access control works. 8 9 Ms. Young: Sure. 10 11 Board Member Popp: Thank you. I’ll echo a couple of comments that Board Member Lew has made 12 about a little further refinement of material placement and in particular this, in this small piece of 13 Portage where the trash is and the doors are and I think that if there was a little area that seems a bit less 14 developed to me it’s that spot and I don’t know if it’s just painting the doors so that they disappear or 15 what has to happen there, but I’m not yeah let’s get there. 16 17 Ms. Young: Yeah, this is the area and just (interrupted) 18 19 Board Member Popp: And primarily at the ground plane, not up above for me. I know that’s tough. 20 21 Ms. Young: If you like to work with Recology and diminishing their requirements for recycling I 22 would be right there with you. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 34 Board Member Popp: No, no I’m happy for them to have significant requirements for recycling. That’s 1 good. It’s just a question of is there something to be done with those doors to make it blend in better, 2 fit better, some patterning that might be done on it. I don’t want to start suggesting solutions for you. I 3 just think that that’s an area that might be studied a little bit further. And if that’s the best it can be, so 4 be it, but (interrupted) 5 6 Ms. Young: And clearly these are exhaust louvers. 7 8 Board Member Popp: Right. 9 10 Ms. Young: And clearly if we have the ability to reduce the size of those we definitely will. 11 12 Board Member Popp: I’m thinking back to a review we had of the Bloomingdale store and there were 13 these very significant garage doors in that building and we spent a lot of time going back and forth with 14 them about how to articulate the surface of those doors and do things to help them blend in. And after a 15 couple of rounds we got something that was much better. And so I’m just suggesting that there might 16 be, do a little bit of design exercise right at that one piece and maybe come up with something different. 17 Maybe not, but study it if you would please. 18 19 Ms. Young: Ok. 20 21 Board Member Popp: I think that we talked a little bit when we met about stair number one and the 22 glazing system and whether that would be finer than the elevations show and in this rendering that 23 City of Palo Alto Page 35 you’re showing here I’m much happier with how that looks and is that really a more accurate 1 representation of what we’re likely to get there? 2 3 Ms. Young: Absolutely. 4 5 Board Member Popp: That’s great. 6 7 Ms. Young: And the images that we shared with you at the [pen weight] was not (interrupted) 8 9 Board Member Popp: That’s just fine. That’s just fine and again the materials that you’re showing I 10 think are very nice. I love the wood grain and those pieces. We got this little packet at our tables. 11 12 Ms. Young: Yes, yes. 13 14 Board Member Popp: Just briefly as we’re sitting here and I had a little bit of time to look through it 15 and I would say if you want me to pick options on these for the Acacia stair I really prefer Option B. 16 17 Ms. Young: Great. 18 19 Board Member Popp: That has the more linear zinc panels. And I think for the Portage stair I am more 20 in favor of the shingles, but I don’t have a really strong feeling either way. I sort of like the idea that 21 they would be different, but I’ll leave that to you. I appreciate that you gave us options, but I’ll just say 22 that I don’t have a really strong feeling for the Portage, but I do like the linear design for the Acacia 23 better. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 36 1 Ms. Young: We did too and as the last applicant mentioned a lot of times materials and samples arrive 2 after deadlines and whatnot. 3 4 Board Member Popp: Sure. 5 6 Ms. Young: In fact we got a gray that was slightly different than the gray that we had put on the board 7 that we liked better and I suspect that as the project evolves there will be other instances where this 8 material may not be installed for a year and there may be another colors that comes out that’s an even 9 better fit for the project, so... 10 11 Board Member Popp: Right. I know you’re well aware of this, but I think if colors change and if things 12 are not available it’s something that you have an obligation to come back with. 13 14 Ms. Young: Absolutely. 15 16 Board Member Popp: Thank you very much. I am in complete agreement with Board Member 17 Alizadeh. I think that the landscape plan is in complete conflict with the building here and I just, I 18 can’t find anything about it that I’m really connected to. I think (interrupted) 19 20 Ms. Young: Would this be good opportunity for them to (interrupted) 21 22 Board Member Popp: Yeah maybe Gary you want to come up and I mean if you want to address this a 23 little bit I’m happy to have your voice in the conversation. I think that there are places where the 24 City of Palo Alto Page 37 contrast is great and when you have some [very] organic landscape design in contrast to some very 1 traditional architecture I think those things work well together and they can be fun and playful and 2 interesting, but I’m really having a hard time with this particular design because it just it’s, it is sort of 3 rectilinear. And I’m not suggesting that you should go all organic on this thing, but I think that the fact 4 that it really doesn’t relate to the architecture at all is very challenging for me. And I think that I would 5 because there are so many pieces and parts and things going on and moving in and out and doing all 6 kinds of stuff here I’m sort of looking for the ground plane to knit everything together and to give it a 7 logic and I think that Board Member Lew has talked a little bit about way finding. I think that the 8 design of the ground plane could really assist in that in a great way and what’s happening now is it’s 9 really not informing that way finding in the way that I hope it might potentially. So is there something 10 that you want to add to the conversation or? 11 12 Mr. Lehman: Well maybe just some kind of what I’m hearing through that so that I get my orientation 13 along the lines of what you’re saying. It sounds like that there’s because the project is very complex 14 altogether in every aspect and the landscape is a complex landscape so it sounds like what I’m hearing 15 is that there’s a desire to make the landscape sort of quieter, less complex, more unifying as opposed to 16 adding another voice to the conversation. In terms of creating maybe a finer texture might be a way of 17 doing that, looking at ways to make it softer, maybe a more unifying type of element. 18 19 I am curious just off the cuff I’m not quite sure how to amplify the way finding and not make it too 20 linear in terms of, because we’re really not trying to make it linear. So I appreciate that you want to be 21 able to find your way through the space and you want to have some visual clues as to how to do that, 22 but to actually translate it into something that’s overtly linear might not quite be the way that we would 23 want to do that so I don’t have, that’s a little fuzzy for me [unintelligible—talking over each other] 24 City of Palo Alto Page 38 1 Board Member Popp: So I certainly don’t have the hours into this that I’m sure you do, right? But I 2 think that just at a quick glance there’s a lot of intersecting pathways and there’s probably a hierarchy 3 that might be described. And I’m hesitant to reinforce the language about softening. I think that’s not 4 what I’m trying to suggest. Others might have a different opinion, but I think what I’m trying to get at 5 is a relationship between the architecture and the landscape that I’m not seeing right now. And I don’t 6 mind if there’s a hierarchy of intensity. I don’t mind if there is, I mean if you have to walk along a 7 straight path, it’s a straight path. It’s going to go from A to B and you’re going to walk it whether the 8 paving pattern underneath your feet is kittywhompus or not, so I think the logic is always more 9 comfortable for me and I think looking at places where pathways intersect and you might have a choice 10 about turning this way or going straight and how that might inform different elements might be helpful 11 here. 12 13 I think, again I agree with Alex’s comment about the stair and the elevator not being right near each 14 other and actually being, I very much like the idea that you’re encouraging the use of the stair. Right? 15 Let’s support that, but at the same time I think it becomes confusing and challenging to find the 16 elevator in some ways because you tend to expect those things to be near each other and to have some 17 adjacency and in this particular design they intentionally don’t. But again I think the landscape might 18 help to inform that a little bit or help you to get where you need to be and so just bring your skill to bear 19 here and come at it again for us and I think probably be more excited about what else you come up 20 with. 21 22 Mr. Lehman: Ok, yeah. Anything else that you’d like to add to that or? 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 39 Board Member Alizadeh: Sure, yeah I guess it’s for me not a literal ok so you want to do the way 1 finding, ok, but it doesn’t have to be literally that things are at an angle. And that I think that the 2 triangles I remember one of my professors said “Triangles breed like rabbits,” so once you have one 3 triangle that’s all you have. And so that’s all I see is just these strange triangles. So if you want people 4 to have to go around I think there’s different ways that whole frontage can bump out a bit, things can 5 have I think less angular edges and then on top they don’t line up with the paving pattern so I’m, it’s 6 too chaotic for me. So I think if there are those ideas of imagining somebody walking through this but 7 it doesn’t have to be so angular I think is, and I don’t mean softening. It can still be large and bold, but 8 maybe something which corresponds more to the architectural language if that helps. 9 10 Mr. Lehman: No that is helpful. Thank you. 11 12 Board Member Popp: [Unintelligible—talking over each other] I got a couple of other things 13 [unintelligible]. 14 15 Board Member Lew: This is really just landscape as well. So like my, for these urban projects that 16 have these kind of courtyard spaces my two favorite landscape kind of spaces are Frank Gehry’s 17 Edgemar project in Santa Monica and also his I think it’s the Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. And 18 in really confined spaces what he does is, I don’t know if [he did the] landscape maybe for this I don’t 19 know if it was Pete Walker or somebody. They do have like angular elements that you have. It’s three 20 dimensional. It’s raised planters and fountains and I think you have that in the plan and I think that 21 those can be tweaked and worked, and work really well. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 40 And then I think if I recall is that the paving kind of disappears. Like you’re really looking at you’re in 1 a very urban space and you see this thing, right? And then the paving is just all back, it’s like all 2 background because you’re really just it’s such an urban space that you’re creating some sort of three 3 dimensional element or you’ve got your specimen ginkgo tree and a planter around it and that’s what 4 you look at. And then I think what happens is here is with the gird and the paving it just makes it too, 5 like too busy. And I think that the paving here that’s shown in our plans might be more contrast than I 6 think the samples that we saw so there may be some disparity between the renderings and the actual 7 concrete. Thank you. 8 9 Board Member Popp: So last comment I guess for Heather is while I think you’ve done a great job of 10 putting together all these really intricate pieces it’s a little challenging to me that there are three units 11 that have no balconies and I’m just (interrupted) 12 13 Ms. Young: Do you want me to walk through them with you? 14 15 Board Member Popp: No, I know where they are. I found them. I found them all. I’m just wondering, 16 I’ve done a bit of this kind of work and sometimes there are opportunities to suck a unit back into the 17 building some way and create a recessed balcony instead of one that projects out and you can get 18 around, what I’m anticipating as causing some of this is fire separation and some of these other 19 building code regulations that drive the inability to have exterior balcony space. And as an example I 20 think the one that’s sort of centered in the middle of the building (interrupted) 21 22 Ms. Young: Yes. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 41 Board Member Popp: That’s over the walkway. If you had an opportunity to suck that unit back into 1 the building and create a recessed balcony rather than a projecting balcony there might be an 2 opportunity to interpret the code in a different way there and it just means migrating the hallway around 3 the back of it in a different way. It projects farther before it turns, something like that and so I’m not 4 quite satisfied that all of these have to lose their balconies. So I think study it a little farther. You’ve 5 got a lot more hours into this than I do. I’ll say the same thing again (interrupted) 6 7 Ms. Young: It’s a definitely a fair observation. We (interrupted) 8 9 Board Member Popp: Three is a lot to lose. I mean those are, having a unit that has no open space is, 10 it’s a tough thing to promote. And so while I’m really thrilled with a rental project like this and I think 11 that this definitely meets a tremendous pent up demand I think that people that use these are cooped up 12 inside offices and programming on computers and working all day long inside a building. And to have 13 a little bit of open space and certainly once you get up high in these buildings the view of the foothills 14 from this is going to be excellent and so not having a balcony out front there, what a shame. So just 15 work at it a little bit if you can and see if you can’t devise some clever approach to get that back. 16 17 Ms. Young: Thank you. 18 19 Board Member Popp: Thank you. Very nice project. 20 21 Acting Chair Lippert: Well I’d like to begin by saying I’m very pleased with what I see here. This 22 project really has the opportunity to drive the whole Fry’s site as far as what’s possible. And so the 23 importance of this project is that in reviewing it it’s important that we get it right. We make sure that 24 City of Palo Alto Page 42 it’s done in a way that addresses all the issues because the next step ultimately will be what happens at 1 Fry’s. The fact that it’s a mixed-use building you described it as a complex building. This is a very 2 sophisticated building and by that what I mean is you’ve maximized the Floor Area Ratio (FAR). 3 You’ve added to that additional density. I understand what you’re doing here in terms of the BMR 4 units. What you’ve done here is because they’re smaller rental units there is no BMR requirement, but 5 by adding the BMR element to it you’re allowed to go in for the concessions and the concessions are 6 put in the right place, which is really density. So you’ve done an incredible job here with putting 7 together what I consider to be the driving force, could be the driving force behind future mixed use 8 development projects on El Camino Real and it does it in a meaningful way. It’s very easy to 9 understand. 10 11 I like the fact that you’ve preserved the Equinox or the former Pet Food Depot space, but I question in 12 some ways whether from a cost benefit analysis whether it’s worth preserving that building. It’s a 13 simple tilt up concrete building and in fact to tunnel under it and to build over it, why not just simply 14 demolish it and incorporate something that’s very similar to what you’ve got there? 15 16 Ms. Young: Actually it goes back to rent to tell you the truth. Equinox in its original location signed a 17 20 year lease with a option to expand El Camino and they took advantage of the option and were very 18 clear that they wanted to encourage as much as possible continuous operation, not just from the 19 expansion, but during construction and after. And so the design of the expansion to Equinox and the 20 renovation from Pet Food Depot to Equinox included the shoring for the building. So there is existing 21 shoring under that structure that will enable us to dig under and provide for the life safety requirements 22 of the occupants in the building so while you’re there working out and they’re working under and over 23 and adjacent to you, you should have no life safety issues. And that was a major driver that came from 24 City of Palo Alto Page 43 the development team. And in fact the whole push for the mixed-use, the diversity of uses within this, 1 the project the density, it’s all coming from the development team. 2 3 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah, you know I’m mindful of that. I think that there are trades that can be 4 made. I mean you see it all the time where somebody’s building is getting demolished and landlord 5 says “Hey, I got another space. I’ll move you here temporarily.” I mean you could for all practical 6 purposes I think build the proposed restaurant/retail space, use that temporarily for the cycling studio 7 and whatever is there and then while you demolish and renovate that part of the building… I mean 8 there are ways of dealing with the issue. I just question the validity of saving such a, I hate to use the 9 word, morsel, for a very sophisticated solution. 10 11 Ms. Young: Again, thank you. We actually designed the morsel knowing that these other elements 12 were coming. So I’d like to think that we were trying to think ahead. I don’t, do you have some 13 suggestions for how that portion of the façade should be modified to better incorporate or? 14 15 Acting Chair Lippert: No, but let me just put it this way that element that you’ve designed for the front 16 of Equinox is so strong that it really is a driving element of the architecture. So what you’ve done is 17 you’ve actually taken that piece of architecture and in some ways replicated it for the restaurant in 18 terms of the arcade that’s there. Now if that building wasn’t there is there another approach that you 19 would have taken? That’s my feeling about it. And the only reason why I say this is that I think the 20 piece that falls short is the El Camino portal. So what’s happened is the most important feature of the 21 building, which is the main entrance becomes subservient to the two side elements. It’s sort of, now 22 there’s nothing wrong about that I mean you could look at for instance the arcade Vittorio Emanuele in 23 Italy. That’s very much the same way in which they have an arcade on both sides and then you’ve got 24 City of Palo Alto Page 44 this interior mall, but I don’t feel that in this building. And that brings me to the next point, which is El 1 Camino Real. We had a meeting last night, I think I saw you in the audience sitting in and watching a 2 little bit of it where we were taking about sidewalk widths. 3 4 Ms. Young: Yes. 5 6 Acting Chair Lippert: And as you know that’s become a very important issue with regard to City 7 Council. And so I think that there’s an opportunity here actually by taking the dining off of El Camino 8 Real or actually creating a wider sidewalk where the dining spills onto the sidewalk, widening the 9 sidewalk there, making it feel a lot more generous and maybe taking some of that dining around to the 10 portal of the building, around to the other side of the restaurant so that it becomes covered dining on, in 11 the portal or the El Camino Real portal or entrance to the building. 12 13 Ms. Young: That’s an interesting observation. As you all know we had a requirement to do the 50 14 percent build to on El Camino at twelve feet. 15 16 Acting Chair Lippert: Right. 17 18 Ms. Young: And so that was met with the frontage at the dining arcade, the existing Equinox, and then 19 the retail/commercial expansion, but we’re obviously very much aware of the discussions going on 20 between PTC, Architectural Review Board (ARB), and the City Council and obviously the community 21 about a possibility of expanding the sidewalks on El Camino. And that’s actually one of the reasons 22 why we intentionally created the dining arcade on El Camino to allow for greater pedestrian interaction 23 and still meet the build to requirement and then pushed back that retail double height space to create the 24 City of Palo Alto Page 45 open to the sky dining terrace. We also have a grade change in that area. So we thought that again 1 trying to find ways to make the people feel safe that close to El Camino and by raising the dining 2 terrace just that little bit and having the low wall along the street would encourage them to feel safe and 3 comfortable in that outdoor environment. And then again the pedestrian arcade to give those direct 4 physical links to the interior courtyard. How the City and the Council ultimately resolve the sidewalk 5 widths is a big challenge for us as a community. 6 7 Acting Chair Lippert: Right. Well we can’t make you conform to a requirement that isn’t there. And 8 what I’m simply suggesting is that there is opportunity here to go to greater sidewalk width, to begin to 9 play with it and if it’s a concern with regard to the dining in some ways there’s a way to handle that by 10 simply moving it around the corner to the El Camino portal, yeah. 11 12 Ms. Young: Pedestrian arcade, yeah. 13 14 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah. 15 16 Ms. Young: And that may happen naturally. 17 18 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah, ok. The importance I think of that corner retail/restaurant space is that 19 because of this being Equinox nearby, because of the residential component, because of the office 20 component it’s very desirable to have some sort of restaurant in that building. I think that that’s going 21 to add a lot of activity to that corner and make it seem very exciting. So I think that that’s a very 22 successful part of the design here. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 46 The around the corner however on the Acacia side of the building I think it’s a little, just a little dead. 1 It doesn’t have that excitement and I wish there was a way to bring that around to that side of the 2 building. Again because I think that this is such an important project as to how it begins to drive other 3 mixed-use projects on El Camino Real and ultimately the Fry’s site how we treat these secondary 4 streets is particularly important. So how do we begin to generate activity and interest there? 5 6 Ms. Young: Thank you. And I neglected to mention a couple of pedestrian opportunities on Acacia. 7 One of them is that the double height, sorry, the ground floor commercial office space here is setback 8 from the required sidewalk width and there’s a small outdoor seating area along there which we’re 9 envisioning as spill out space for the office occupants. There’s also a small pet friendly, oops, there it 10 is, a small pet friendly park right here. It can’t be a dog park. We don’t have the ability to have fences 11 and let dogs run free, but there may be a residential occupant or an office occupant who has a dog that 12 they bring to work and we wanted to make sure that that, that their needs were also addressed. Again 13 the design of the stair in this location is very much about engaging the pedestrian and we really took an 14 opportunity to create this stair as a very sculptural element the sort of thing where I’d like to think 15 people would take it just because it’s fun and they can have a chance to experience that vertical 16 movement in a different way than a traditional enclosed stair or even our courtyard stair, which does 17 have great views and I think is well located. 18 19 So I think we have tried to bring some more of the pedestrian life and scale to the Acacia elevation. 20 The hope with the design of the corner double height space is that the retail or commercial recreation 21 tenant, it could be a bank for instance, it could be another studio space from Equinox, if it were either 22 of those the interior space would be a very lively space. And the large fenestration that opens onto both 23 Acacia and to El Camino I think would be a great visual way of engaging the vehicular traffic as well 24 City of Palo Alto Page 47 as the pedestrian traffic. It’s a small secondary street and at this point in time its primary use is 1 basically parking. The street itself only goes to the end of this block. It doesn’t extend any further 2 along so we were a little hesitant in over promoting it. We’re not privileged to the Fry’s site plans and 3 so we were trying to kind of allow for a future use that was more pedestrian or less pedestrian. We 4 didn’t want to tip it one way or the other too far. 5 6 Acting Chair Lippert: Right. Well let me just tell you what I’m thinking ok? You’ve got the El 7 Camino Real portal and what’s really missing here is the connectivity between Acacia and the main 8 part of the site. What happens is that the Equinox gym and cycling space actually bifurcates it and 9 actually breaks the building into two elements. So with that you can’t, you don’t have that 10 connectivity. So what I’m thinking of off the top of my head is just simply taking the proposed office 11 space and that little dog park and the staircase and just flipping them so that the staircase, the park, all 12 of that happens in between the retail space and the office space so it acts as a plaza for that part of the 13 building. So it creates a new entrance for that Acacia face. It’s secondary, but at least it gets you into 14 the office building, it creates an identity for the office building, it allows for vertical circulation up to 15 the second floor where actually the third floor and up and over Equinox. So it creates some sort of 16 secondary entrance or portal. I’m not going to feel as though I can’t get through. I might have to go up 17 and over to get through, but at least I have the sense or feeling that there’s some sort of an entry there 18 rather than three disjointed pieces. 19 20 Ms. Young: Very interesting observation. I know you’ve been to the site and you’re probably aware of 21 the pedestrian walk, oops, the pedestrian walk here. We were actually trying to maintain that visual 22 sight line where the two buildings break and hadn’t occurred to consider that other option. We were 23 actually trying to support that existing visual connection and glass connection (interrupted) 24 City of Palo Alto Page 48 1 Acting Chair Lippert: Right, but unless you’re going to allow people to go through it it’s artificial. 2 3 Ms. Young: The current tenant is not interested in pursuing that, but there could easily be a future 4 tenant who would support that very much. 5 6 Acting Chair Lippert: Right, right. Ok. And then there are just two more elements that I want to talk 7 about and then I think I’ll, I think we can wrap this up. One is your balconies. You’ve done a really 8 beautiful job with regard to the residential balconies and the, I guess what you’re proposing there is a 9 cable system? 10 11 Ms. Young: No. It’s a steel, a painted steel rail system. 12 13 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. I think it introduces another element into the building that maybe it may not 14 be necessary. In some ways you’ve introduced this element of the louvers and maybe there’s a way of 15 creating railings out of the same wood louver element that would then tie the upper floors and what’s 16 going on on some of the other floors. I just find that the upper floors are much more disjointed than 17 what you’ve got the base of the building is very solid and this is, this goes back to I guess the last 18 presentation with what Ken Hayes had proposed on his Cowper project. He had a very strong base to 19 that building and I don’t see that with the upper floors there. In some ways I don’t feel as though 20 they’ve really articulated or identified themselves well enough. I love the material that you’re 21 proposing for the walls. I’m not so crazy about the railings though. Any thoughts on that? 22 23 Ms. Young: You take me by surprise. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 49 1 Acting Chair Lippert: I know. 2 3 Ms. Young: I actually feel like the steel, painted steel railings are very much in keeping with the 4 palette. The ground floor window wall system is a painted steel and glass system and all of the steel is 5 going to be from dimensional steel, structural steel members. And the railing system obviously scaled 6 down considerably, but our thought was that it was very much in keeping with the steel and glass 7 fenestration system for the lower floors and also in keeping with the, I didn’t mention this, the 8 residential units on Portage and Acacia have it’s a metal finish aluminum window system and door 9 system, but the terra cotta pieces on El Camino that’s all a painted steel window system. And I 10 apologize; I didn’t mention that because in my head we’re repeating that use of the painted steel in a 11 number of locations. 12 13 I hadn’t really thought about the transparency or the materiality of the railings as being outside of our 14 palette. It’s an interesting thought to try and make it perhaps less transparent. Don’t know if going to 15 the, a wood system is the first thing that comes to mind. It’s an interesting thought. Huh. 16 17 Acting Chair Lippert: I guess what I’m looking at there is that you’ve got these terraces, which are 18 planes ok? And in some ways what I think I would like, what I prefer to see is horizontal bands. So in 19 other words those terraces and the railings work together and almost become one element that maybe 20 and I’m just thinking about this, which is you have a horizontal, you have horizontal bands which are 21 the railings and then they obscure the horizontal decks and then maybe drop down a little bit more and 22 become a horizontal sunscreen and then you’ve got an open space and then it repeats itself again. So 23 that that becomes a much more stronger longitudinal element. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 50 1 Ms. Young: That’s a lovely sectional concept. I don’t know if you had a chance to explore the large 2 scale wall sections that we had at the back of the drawing set. We had a slightly different take and part 3 of it is, and I think you can see it here, the terraces and balconies, excuse me, the balconies taper up and 4 we were, we played with having a sunscreen drop from that perimeter edge, but it seemed almost to 5 weigh down that lifting expression and you can see it even more here. Because we really are 6 cantilevering. 7 8 Acting Chair Lippert: Right. 9 10 Ms. Young: This is a very definite (interrupted) 11 12 Acting Chair Lippert: I got that. 13 14 Ms. Young: And we also again after having worked so hard to get the clear story lighting at the top to 15 come back with a dropped sunscreen seemed contradictory. But again the thought of finding a way to 16 promote a higher integration between the railing design and the architecture, which I think is your 17 primary point. 18 19 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah I don’t want to tell you how to do it. I’m just, I’m telling you what I’m 20 thinking. 21 22 Ms. Young: Sure. That’s something we should look at. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 51 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. And then the last thing is we got this at our places. 1 2 Ms. Young: Oh yes. Yes. 3 4 Acting Chair Lippert: And the Acacia Tower and you know I think it’s a lovely material. I think it 5 introduces one more element into the complex and maybe it’s not necessary. Maybe there’s one, 6 another material that you can use that you’ve already expressed. You know I really like your terra cotta 7 material. I know it’s expensive. 8 9 Ms. Young: It’s a rain screen wall and here’s the point, the rain screen wall is really for the living 10 spaces and this is more of a traditional wall. And the concept of the zinc shingle was just a very thin, 11 svelte, it’s just shedding water and that’s it. I think if we were to move away from zinc we would 12 probably move to one of the fiber cement panels; again to keep it neutral. The thing we just loved 13 about the zinc was the way it held the light and noted the stair towers as special elements. 14 15 Acting Chair Lippert: Right. The concern I have is that it’s such a monolithic strong element. 16 Normally you look at a tower and it contains the staircase. In this case the stair tower goes to the side 17 of it. If in some ways the stair tower wrapped that wall I would feel differently about it. 18 19 Ms. Young: Huh. 20 21 Acting Chair Lippert: You know what I mean by that? 22 23 Ms. Young: I do. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 52 1 Acting Chair Lippert: So if you had a wall and basically the stair tower is on both sides (interrupted) 2 3 Ms. Young: We actually looked at that and that was part of our early design and at some point during 4 the project we actually realized that we had an opportunity to again echo the design of the breezeway 5 where the new, sorry, where the concrete wall of the expansion was used as a means to cantilever the 6 glass ceiling. And so we were actually excited at the chance to be able to bring that expression back to 7 the new building with this stair tower with this expression of the cantilever helping to decrease the 8 deflection of the new stair tower. 9 10 Acting Chair Lippert: Right and I think that the opportunity here is by actually looking at that wall as 11 an element. You could actually then punctuate it at landings or along the way where people could 12 actually look through. 13 14 Ms. Young: There’s an elevator vestibule just inside that landing. 15 16 Acting Chair Lippert: Right. 17 18 Ms. Young: And we are looking at ways to, oh actually we do have a connection. There is, it’s not 19 properly documented in your set, but there is a third floor connection between, through this vestibule on 20 the third floor to get to the terrace and then the main stair on the other side. And we are continuing to 21 look for those opportunities. Thank you for reminding me about that. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 53 Acting Chair Lippert: Well this is a very exciting project and it has some very strong elements. I think 1 there’s other elements that need to be worked on. I think my colleagues here had said the landscape 2 plan really needs to be looked at and refined. 3 4 Ms. Young: Thank you. 5 6 Acting Chair Lippert: So with that any further comments? Randy? 7 8 Board Member Popp: I’m looking at A6.3. Sorry. I looked down and you sat down. On A6.3 this 9 entry wall section that you have where you’re showing the tapered deck, the edge of the balcony that is 10 looks like it’s a precast piece. 11 12 Ms. Young: Oops, not in here. Sorry. Yes. 13 14 Board Member Popp: And then the railing above it. And the precast piece and the railing above it are 15 let’s just say almost equal in terms of height. They’re almost equal in terms of height to the balcony 16 railing itself and yet when I look at your elevations what I see is a very thin edge to the cantilever deck 17 and then the railing is significant above that. And I’m just wondering is there an inconsistency in the 18 detailing or is this a specific location on the building that this is describing? 19 20 Ms. Young: It is a specific location. We are trying very hard to make the balcony projections the same 21 detail everywhere, but this particular location the structural engineer right now is telling us that we 22 need a heavier deeper beam at the perimeter. We’re obviously working with him to find ways to make 23 that more consistent. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 54 1 Board Member Popp: Is this all, so this is not all around the building? 2 3 Ms. Young: No. It’s just that one. In fact if you look at the 6.1 it should be a narrower, huh. 4 5 Board Member Popp: It looks like it’s virtually the same. 6 7 Ms. Young: It looks like it’s virtually the same. 8 9 Board Member Popp: When I look at 6.13 the rain screen wall section and I look at the proportion of 10 that edge to the balcony it’s more consistent with what I’m seeing on the elevations but still a little bit 11 heavier. 12 13 Ms. Young: Yeah. 14 15 Board Member Popp: I’m just thinking that somewhere between the elevation and the detailing there’s 16 a little bit of a disconnect here. 17 18 Ms. Young: Thank you. 19 20 Board Member Popp: Well, I’m not trying to pick on you. 21 22 Ms. Young: No, I mean honestly there’s a lot of coordination (interrupted) 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 55 Board Member Popp: I’m just trying to understand it. I think my feeling about this is that I very much 1 like this very thin deck edge and a very transparent railing. I think you’ve got enough materials going 2 on and being able to see through that to the building to me is nice and to have some material that covers 3 that if it was one material going all over the place would, wouldn’t reinforce that in the same way. And 4 I don’t believe you want to, was your thought that perhaps if I can summarize right if it’s a wood 5 railing that you’re suggesting be horizontal around the building would that go everywhere or would you 6 have a recommendation for different materials and different places to reflect the elevation that it’s in 7 front of? 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: You know the issue on my mind is that I look at this and there are elements that 10 define specific areas of the building. When I say that there are themes; Equinox, the studio space is one 11 of the most dominate elements, the restaurant is the secondary dominant element. There is no 12 dominance to the portal or the entrance to the building. And then I look up above and I sort of look at it 13 and it’s all pretty much the same. And so what I’m looking for here is some way to define the upper 14 part of the building a little bit more. I don’t want the building to sort of fade away. I want something 15 that’s as strong as in Ken Hayes’ last project he had that C [sea? Not sure] element and there was sort 16 of like that missing story on the second, on the third floor. And this doesn’t have that strength on the 17 upper floors. And so for a mixed-use building of this kind I want to read the building. I want to say to 18 myself “Hmmm, this is retail. This is commercial. This is residential,” and I want to see that expressed 19 on the outside of the building in some way. And I don’t, I just I haven’t arrived at that point yet. 20 21 The other thing what I’m concerned about is the railing there. What’s going to be out there? Well, 22 people’s furniture, they’re going to put their little barbeque or hibachi, they might hang their laundry 23 City of Palo Alto Page 56 out there temporarily. You don’t know what’s going to go on out there. And so I want to be very 1 guarded about what you can see beyond that railing. That’s all. 2 3 Amy French, Chief Planning Official: Can I, I’d like to add something through the Chair. Just there is 4 a requirement, I mean our Comprehensive Plan does acknowledge that there’s a lot of noise on El 5 Camino at 70 decibels (dB) and we try, we have a standard that we say try to get it down to 60 dB, try 6 to get it as close as possible for outdoor amenity space for multifamily. So I mean when we have a 7 clear, an open railing like that typically people need to come in and put plastic afterwards or whatever 8 that thick plastic to keep the noise down. So that should be considered as part of the (interrupted) 9 10 Ms. Young: Actually I think we’re required to meet the dB rating with the façade materials as opposed 11 to at the railing. And also one of the reasons that we’re choosing this is to, because it has acoustic 12 properties in breaking up the sound. 13 14 Board Member Popp: Amy? I’m sorry can I just ask Amy to clarify for me? So when you described 15 that requirement it sounded like you were specific about exterior open space having a certain level of 16 noise. 17 18 Ms. French: Yes. Yeah so it’s where the City determines that providing an LDN of 60 dB or lower 19 outdoors is not feasible, the noise level in the outdoor areas intended for recreational use shall be 20 reduced to as close to the standard as feasible through project design. 21 22 Board Member Popp: I think there are two standards, one for the interior of the building… 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 57 Ms. French: Yes. 1 2 Board Member Popp: And one for the exterior open space. Ok. 3 4 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok, so any other comments? 5 6 Board Member Popp: I can craft a Motion. 7 8 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok, who would like to craft the Motion? 9 10 Board Member Popp: I can. 11 12 Acting Chair Lippert: [You can go for it.] Please. 13 14 Board Member Popp: Alright. Let me just ask the applicant briefly, you don’t have to get back up. I’m 15 going to recommend that we continue this to a next date. Do you have a date certain that you would 16 want to target or? Please. 17 18 Ms. French: I wonder if we should take this opportunity to talk about that 29th meeting. I don’t think 19 that happened, right? 20 21 Board Member Popp: We can do that quickly. 22 23 Ms. French: Possibly. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 58 1 Board Member Popp: Clare’s not here. 2 3 Ms. Young: We would very much like to come back on February 15th, two weeks, sorry, August 15th is 4 two weeks from today. 5 6 Board Member Popp: Ok. 7 8 Acting Chair Lippert: Do I have a second on that? 9 10 Ms. French: We would have the same concern as for the last project where we continued it to this date. 11 It’s very difficult, challenging to get everything in by Monday kind of thing, but we’ll see. 12 13 Board Member Popp: Then we’ll have a light meeting on that day. We’ll see. 14 15 Ms. Young: Consent calendar? 16 17 Acting Chair Lippert: I don’t think so. 18 19 Board Member Popp: I don’t think so. 20 21 Acting Chair Lippert: Sorry, thank you though. 22 23 MOTION 24 City of Palo Alto Page 59 1 Board Member Popp: Ok, so let me make a Motion that we continue this item to the August 15th 2 meeting consistent with the recommendations and findings that we’re presented with and in 3 consideration of the following nine items: 1) that the landscape plan be reviewed both for overall 4 design and way finding; 2) that the traffic ingress/egress points be evaluated carefully and understood 5 in relationships to deliveries, move in/outs, and visits; 3) that the open space for units be try to achieved 6 at all the units if possible; 4) that the balcony privacy walls and railings be reviewed and further 7 developed; 5) that within the conditions we include a requirement that the balconies have restricted 8 storage use; 6) that the Portage façade adjacent to where the trash wall area is be reviewed; 7) that 9 specifics for material placement be identified clearly on the drawings; 8) that the Acacia corner be 10 reviewed for design and potentially consider reorganizing the plan in that area; and 9) that the sidewalk 11 widths be reconsidered and evaluated consistent with some of the ongoing discussions and in particular 12 the current Council memo that is circulated. 13 14 Acting Chair Lippert: Do I have a second on that? 15 16 SECOND 17 18 Board Member Alizadeh: I’ll second that. 19 20 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. I just want to say Ms. Young that this is a really wonderful project and that I 21 think that Board Member Popp’s comments and the items that he’s addressed are appropriate. This is 22 such an important project in Palo Alto that as I said it’s important that we get it right. I think it has the 23 ability to be the driving force of other mixed-use projects in this and I would really like to be able to at 24 City of Palo Alto Page 60 some point be able to cite this project and use it when we’re reviewing other projects in El Camino 1 Real as well as the Fry’s site. I think it’s really a wonderful project and so our, my criticisms here at 2 least are just in making sure that we get the best possible project. So thank you. 3 4 Ok, all those in favor say aye (Aye). Opposed? Ok, thank you very much. 5 6 MOTION PASSED (4-0, Chair Malone Prichard absent) 7 8 STUDY SESSION. 9 10 7. 250 Hamilton Avenue: Palo Alto City Hall: Request by Phil Ciralsky of the City of 11 Palo Alto Public Works Engineering for study session review of new exterior signage 12 for City Hall located at 250 Hamilton Avenue. Zone District: PF 13 14 BOARD MEMBER BUSINESS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. 15 16 REPORTS FROM OFFICIALS. 17 18 Subcommittee Members: Naseem Alizadeh and Randy Popp 19 SUBCOMMITTEE: 20 21 8. Site Visit to see Cooper LED lights – Two different types of fixtures are located at Gilman 22 Street and Forest Avenue. 23 24 STAFF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: 25 26 Project Description: Installation of one non-illuminated blade sign for San Mateo Credit Union 27 Applicant: Paul Maynes 28 Address: 616 Ramona Street (13PLN-00264] 29 Approval Date: 7/22/13 30 Request for hearing deadline: 8/5/13 31 32 Project Description: Replacement of glass façade, including sunshades, of an existing solarium on the 33 4th floor 34 Applicant: Ellis A. Schoichet, AIA 35 Address: 101 University Avenue [13PLN-00226] 36 Approval Date: 7/23/13 37 Request for hearing deadline: 8/5/13 38 39 Project Description: Installation of one halo illuminated wall sign 40 City of Palo Alto Page 61 Applicant: Melody Wuest 1 Address: 180 El Camino Real [13PLN-00224] 2 Approval Date: 7/23/13 3 Request for hearing deadline: 8/5/13 4 5 6 7 ADA. The City of Palo Alto does not discriminate against individuals with disabilities. To request accommodations to 8 access City facilities, services or programs, to participate at public meetings, or to learn more about the City’s compliance 9 with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), please contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at 650.329.2550 (voice) 10 or by e-mailing ada@cityofpaloalto.org. 11 12 Posting of agenda. This agenda is posted in accordance with government code section 54954.2(a) or section 13 54956.Recordings. A videotape of the proceedings can be obtained/reviewed by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 14 329-2571. 15 16 Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Architectural Review Board after 17 distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Planning and Community 18 Environment Department at 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor, Palo Alto, CA. 94301 during normal 19 business hours. 20 21 22 , CITY OF Agenda Date: To: From: Subject,: . August 29, 2013 Architectural Review Board Russ Reich, Senior Planner Architectural Review Board Staff Report Department: Planning and Community Environment 3159 EI Camino Real [13PLN-00040]: Request by Heather Young of Fergus Garber Young Architects on behalf ofPOliage Avenue Portfolio, LLC for Site and Design Review of the proposal for the constlUction of a new four story, 55 feet tall, approximately 74,122 square foot mixed use building on a 1,6 acre site, with commercial and office uses and 48 residential apartment units, The project also includes Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEEs) for height and build to lines and a Conditional Use Permit. Zone District: Service Commercial (CS). Enviromuental Assessment: A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project in accordance with CEQA. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Architectural Review Board recommend City Council approval of the project. The Draft Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A) will allow Council to approve the , project, including the Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEE). (I) A Mitigated Negative Declaration, prepared in accordance with the California Enviromuental Quality Act (CEQA); (2) The Site and Design Review application for a new 67,506 s.f. mixed-use building (added to an existing 6,616 s.f. building) on a 1.6 acre site (resulting in a total 74,122 s.f. of floor area on a 69,503 s.f. site, and FAR of 1.06: I) to provide 48 apartment units, including five Below Market Rate (BMR) units, and office and retail uses, with structured parking facilities (at surface and underground) providing 216 parking spaces (including I I puzzle lifts for 196 cars), (3) Density Bonus concession permitting increased FAR for both residential and commercial components of the project in the total amount of 4,619 square feet; and (4) A Conditional Use Permit (to allow 16,118 sq. ft. of office space on one parcel where the limit is 5,000 s.f.) recommended by the Planning and Transpoliation Commission on July 10,2013. (5) DEEs for five feet of additional height, and alleviation of the build to line by two and a half feet along POliage Avenue, resulting in a greater setback than minimum required. File Number 13PLN-00040 Page 1 of6 BACKGROUND Process Histoty Following the Planning and Transportation Commission's (Commission) review and recommendation of approval on July 10,2013, the ARB heard the item on August 1, 2013. The ARB recommended that the item be continued to a date certain of August 15, 2013 and requested that the applicant consider the following items: 1. Review of the landscape plan for overall design and way finding; 2. ClarifY the traffic ingress and egress points and evaluate the locations carefully in relation to deliveries, move ins and outs, and visitors. 3. Look at providing private open spaces (balconies) at all of the residential units; 4. Review the privacy walls and railings at the balconies and develop them further; 5. Include in the Conditions of Approval restrictions on the storage of items on the balconies; 6. Review the wall at the trash enclosure on the Portage Avenue side of the project; 7. Provide specifics for material placement, and clearly identifY these on the drawings; 8. Review the Acacia Avenue corner for design; consider reorganizing the plan; 9. Consider the sidewalk width along El Camino Real, relative to recent Council direction. The August 15,2013 hearing deadline did not provide enough time for the applicant to prepare the requested changes so the item was moved to August 29, 2013. Each of the nine items, requested by the ARB, are covered in the discussion section below. Project Description The proposed project is 67,506 s.f. mixed use building which, when combined with the existing 6,616 s.f. Equinox gym annex located on the site, would result floor area to a total of 74,122 s.f.. The maximum height would be 55 feet above grade to allow for loft space in the fourth floor residential units, as well as to screen mechanical equipment. At the ground floor level, retail/restaurant/commercial recreation space is proposed, and the building setback on El Camino Real would allow an effective 12 foot sidewalk width. A total of 48 residential apartment units would be provided on four of the floors (second, third, fourth, and partial fifth floors). The proposed loft spaces, accessible internally from fourth floor residential units, would have floors below the ceiling level of the fourth floor units. Office space would be provided on portions of the first, second, and third floors. Third and fourth floors are proposed above a portion of the existing Equinox building at 3127 El Camino Real. The first and second floors would be separated across the site by the existing Equinox building walls and by a courtyard proposed between the gym and the new restaurant/retail space. The third and fourth floors across the site are mostly physically separated (using expansion joints) except for limited hallway access, but would be visually connected. The building is proposed to have a wide variety of colors, finish materials, and textures. These include board formed concrete, precast concrete panels, stucco plaster, cement composite panels, wood composite panels, mate terra cotta rain screen panels, and grooved terra cotta rain screen panels. In addition there are metal sunscreens, terra cotta sunscreens, steel and aluminum windows, and painted steel guardrails. File Number 13PLN-00040 Page 2 of6 The project includes surface parking facilities and one level of underground parking facilities (13 feet below grade) for a total of 216 parking spaces, including 11 puzzle parking lifts. The building would be constructed to displace one surface parking lot and reduce the size and cover another surface parking lot on the site. The subterranean garage would counect to the existing below grade garage on Portage Avenue (that serves tenants of 411-435 Acacia Avenue) at the south east corner of the site. The main, finished garage floor level would be located below the existing site grades, and three level car stackers would be installed in the garage. The lifts would extend approximately six to seven feet below the main garage floor. Vehicular access to the site would be provided exclusively on Portage Avenue via two curb cuts; all other existing curb cuts (on El Camino Real and Acacia Avenue) would be removed. The parking spaces would be provided in both the existing two-level garage on Portage Avenue, and in the new underground garage that would be accessed from a below grade counection to the existing Portage Avenue garage. Fifteen (15) surface-level visitor parking spaces are proposed beneath the residential wing of the proposed building. Site improvements such as landscaping, walkways, courtyards, and an outdoor dining terrace are also included in the proposed project. The portico feature at the center of the project on El Camino Real leads into a large courtyard area located in the center of the project, allowing pedestrian movement through the project and through to the Equinox main entrance behind the project and access to the surface level parking area at Portage Avenue. The courtyard area also provides access to the elevator and stair core that provides access to the offices and residential units above. The courtyard has a series of planters with Japanese maples and accent stones in gravel mulch. Some of the planters have cantilevered benches for seating. There is also a water feature at the end of the courtyard. A specimen ginkgo tree would be placed at the end of the conrtyard close to the main equinox entry. Due to the fact that the entire project would sit above a parking structure, landscape opportunities are somewhat limited. In addition to the courtyard plantings the proposal does include some cast in place concrete planters as well as potted plants in various locations around the site. There would also be three new street trees on Acacia Avenue and one new street tree on Portage Avenue. The existing street trees around the perimeter of the project would remain. The proposal also includes five below market rate residential apartment units (10% of the total units), allowing a concession under State Density Bonus Law for greater floor area than the maximum allowable area, as well as fewer parking spaces than would otherwise be required. Two DEEs are requested which are within the purview of the ARB. One DEE is a request for the height of the residential loft spaces to exceed the 50 foot height limit by five additional feet. The second DEE requests a relaxation from the build-to requirement along the Portage Avenue frontage, resulting in a greater setback of seven feet six inches from the property line, rather than a five foot setback. The DEEs are discussed in greater detail in the discussion section below. DISCUSSION As listed earlier in this report, the ARB had requested the applicant review the nine items and continued the hearing to allow the applicant to address the comments. This discussion section will cover the changes the applicant has made to respond each of the nine comments. File Number 13PLN-00040 Page 3 of6 Landscape Plan The ARB did not feel that the proposed triangular planters and the proposed diagonal paving pattern were consistent with the architectural design of the building. The applicant has modified the landscape plan to eliminate the triangular planters and has replaced them with a series of rectangular planters and a paving pattern that relates better to the architecture ofthe building. The paving pattern has been modified to me more consistent throughout the project to improve the way-finding. The new landscape plan is provided on sheets L-2.1 and L-2.2 of the plan set. Site Access The applicant believed that the issue for item #2 was vehicle queuing at the Portage Avenue entries to the project and has provided a response in their letter related to that issue. Staff believed that the ARB has requested clarification about how delivery vehicles, moving vans, and visitors would access the site. The applicant will be providing a supplemental response to address staff s perceived version of the question. Private Balconies The ARB requested that the applicant look at a way to provide a private open space to all the residential units. Three of the 48 units did not have a private balcony. The applicant has reconfigured the plan to add a private balcony space for unit 420 but was not able to find a way to provide units 201 and 414 with a private balcony. A private balcony for unit 201 would block out too much daylight at the restaurant entry facing the at-grade parking and placing a balcony in front of unit 414 was not found to be architecturally desirable. The new floor plan layout with the balcony for unit 420 is shown on supplemental sheet ARB-I. Balcony Partitions and Railings The applicant was asked to review the partitions and railings at the residential balconies. The plan has been revised to include new privacy screens on the balconies between the units. Two different systems have been developed, a frame and slat system for the balconies facing EI Camino Real and a solid and translucent panel system for the Portage and Acacia balconies. The railings have not been modified. The revised partitions are shown on supplemental sheet ARB-2. Restrictions on Balcony Storage The proposed balcony railings are very light and open, exposing them to view. The ARB expressed concerns about the possible storage of items on the balconies that could result in an undesirable visual impact. The applicant has proposed language that would be incorporated into the apartment leases to prevent the storage of unsightly items on the private balconies. Portage Wall at Trash Area The ARB expressed concern about the Portage Avenue elevation where the retail space transitions into the residential portion of the building. The applicant has revised this area. The trash and recycling rooms have been separated into two separate rooms. This has allowed for a narrower roll-up door facing the street for the recycling room, and the trash room opening has been rotated to face the parking lot, no longer impacting the street view. The landscape planter has been widened to provide additional landscape area on the building'S Portage Avenue frontage. The applicant has also coordinated the size of the louvered vent at the second floor with the window at the third floor such that they better relate to each other. These changes are indicated on supplemental sheet ARB-3. File Number 13PLN·00040 Page 4 0[6 Material Clarification on Elevations The material notes have been coordinated and updated. See sheets A3.l, A3.2 and A3.3 of the plan set. Acacia Corner The ARB requested that the applicant review and possibly reconfigure the Acacia Avenue/EI Camino Real corner. The applicant has revised the corner by setting the commercial/retail space back to open an additional pedestrian arcade to match the one at the restaurant. This opens up the corner and creates greater unity of design across the project frontage with the repetition of this pedestrian friendly feature. At the corner of EI Camino Real and Acacia, the building now "wraps around" with additional glazed openings and a triple layer of sunscreens, to further engage the street and provide visual interest. Some ofthe office space has shifted from the ground floor to the second floor and a new 2nd floor balcony has been added on the Acacia elevation providing for additional tenant and pedestrian connectivity to enliven the street. See supplemental sheet ARB-4 Sidewalk Width The ARB had asked the applicant to consider increasing the width of the El Camino Real sidewalk, in light ofthe recent City Council memo that calls for increased sidewalk widths for EI Camino Real and other major arterials. The revised plan does.not show an increase in the width of the sidewalk. However, there are changes in the revised plan that support and enhance the pedestrian experience at the EI Camino frontage. The Acacia corner has been opened up with an arcade, the stair to the open dining plaza has been moved £i'om Portage A venue to El Camino Real, an additional seat bench facing EI Camino has been added, and a new pedestrian entry to the restaurant has been added at the entry portal/courtyard area. These changes are shown on supplemental sheets ARB -5 and ARB-6. Additional Plan Changes The applicant has made additional modifications to the plan in response to the ARB discussion at the August I, 2013 hearing as outlined below: • A doorway from the restaurant space has been added to the courtyard elevation to allow access to the courtyard for dining tables that would help to enliven the space; • The entry to the central elevator tower has been reoriented to be located adjacent to the entry to the stair tower( see supplemental sheet ARB-?); • The zinc panels, previously proposed for the Portage and Acacia stair towers, have been replaced with cement composite panels from within the existing material palette (see sheets ARB-8 and ARB-9); • The openings into the Acacia stair tower landings have been enlarged and the landings at the 3' and 4th floor landings are also now open on the courtyard side and the 3,d floor terrace now connects directly to the Acacia stair tower (see sheet ARB-9); • The Portage Avenue elevation ofthe residential units has been further developed to be more consistent in the use of doors, windows, and sidelights (see sheet ARB-l 0); • Following review ofthe overall color palette, the applicant has decided to change the stronger red/brown color from the third floor to the fourth floor, which is setback further from the street, to place the more neutral grey color on the third floor (see sheet ARB-II); • The wood panel color for the central stair tower has been lightened up with a more open grain pattern (see sheet ARB-l2). File Numbe, 13PLN·00040 Page50f6 In the drawing packet there are supplemental images that compare the August I st version of the plan, previously provided to the ARB, with the revised version noted as August 29th. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration were prepared for the project and the 30 day public review and comment period began on May 31, 2013 and ended on July 1, 2013. The environmental analysis notes there are a few potentially significant impacts that would require mitigation measures to reduce them to a less than significant level. These include mitigations for dust control during excavation, protection for nesting birds, building design for earthquake resistance, basement shoring, a Health and Safety Plan for construction workers, a Remedial Risk Management Plan, collection of additional soil samples, installation of a vapor barrier, vapor collection, and venting system, third party inspection of vapor barrier and venting system, a Groundwater Mitigation Plan, development of a Groundwater Extraction design, technical documents uploaded to the appropriate agencies, and the evaluation and implementation of signal cycle length optimization and reallocation of the green time. ATTACHMENTS A. Draft Record of Land Use Action B. Site Location Map C. Zoning Compliance Table D. Comprehensive Compliance Plan Table E. Applicant's summary ofproject revisions* F. Previous Staff Report, Planning and Transportation Commission, July 20, 2013 G. Previous ARB staff report, August 1,2013 H. Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study I. Plans/supplemental sketches (ARB Members only)* * Prepared by Applicant; all other attachments prepared by Staff COURTESY COPIES Heather Young, applicant Portage Avenue Portfolio, owner Prepared By: Russ Reich, Senior Planner f1il Manager Review: Amy French, ChiefPlarming Official (]() File Number 13PLN-00040 Page 6 of6 City of Palo Alto Page 1 1 =================MEETINGS ARE CABLECAST LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 26====================== 2 Thursday, August 29, 2013 3 SPECIAL MEETING - 8:30 AM 4 City Council Chambers, Civic Center, 1st Floor 5 250 Hamilton Avenue 6 Palo Alto, CA 94301 7 ROLL CALL: 8 Board members: Staff Liaison: 9 Clare Malone Prichard (Chair) Russ Reich, Senior Planner 10 Lee Lippert (Vice Chair) 11 Alexander Lew Staff: 12 Randy Popp Diana Tamale, Administrative Associate 13 Amy French, Chief Planning Official 14 Aaron Aknin, Interim Planning Director 15 16 17 18 PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 19 Please be advised the normal order of public hearings of agenda items is as follows: 20  Announce agenda item 21  Open public hearing 22  Staff recommendation 23  Applicant presentation – Ten (10) minutes limitation or at the discretion of the Board. 24  Public comment – Five (5) minutes limitation per speaker or limitation to three (3) 25 minutes depending on large number of speakers per item. 26  Architectural Review Board questions of the applicant/staff, and comments 27  Applicant closing comments - Three (3) minutes 28  Close public hearing 29  Motions/recommendations by the Board 30  Final vote 31 32 ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. Members of the public may speak to any item not on the 33 agenda with a limitation of three (3) minutes per speaker. Those who desire to speak must 34 complete a speaker request card available from the secretary of the Board. The Architectural 35 Review Board reserves the right to limit the oral communications period to 15 minutes. 36 37 APPROVAL OF MINUTES. 38 None. 39 40 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD AGENDA City of Palo Alto Page 2 AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS. The agenda may have additional 1 items added to it up until 72 hours prior to meeting time. 2 3 POSTPONED ITEMS: 4 5 405 Curtner Avenue [13PLN-00098]: Request by Salvatore Caruso on behalf of Zhen Zhen Li for 6 Architectural Review of a new 7,425 sq. ft., three-story building with six residential condominium units 7 on a vacant, 12,375 sq. ft. site. Zone District: Residential Multiple-Family (RM-30). Environmental 8 Assessment: Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental quality Act (CEQA) per 9 CEQA Guidelines Section 15303. This item is postponed and will be re-advertised for the meeting 10 of September 19, 2013. 11 12 STUDY SESSIONS: 13 14 1. Downtown Context Discussion: Interim Planning Director will describe staff’s efforts 15 toward review of the downtown cap and parking issues. 16 17 2. Recap of ARB-Council Joint Meeting: Discussion regarding (1) Council’s August 19, 18 2013 directive to develop specific recommendations to address concerns regarding 19 sidewalk widths, and (2) modifications to the El Camino Real guidelines. 20 21 CONTINUED BUSINESS: 22 23 Major Reviews: 24 25 3. 3159 El Camino Real [13PLN-00040]: Request by FGY Architects on behalf of Portage 26 Avenue Portfolio, LLC for Site and Design Review of the demolition of x sq.ft. a new 74,122 27 square foot four-story mixed use project with 48 residential units. The proposal also includes 28 Design Enhancement Exceptions for height, and build to lines as well as a Conditional Use 29 Permit for the parcel to exceed the 5,000 square foot limit for office space. Environmental 30 Assessment: A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with the 31 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Zone district: Service Commercial (CS). 32 33 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. So with that we will move on to continued business, major reviews: 3159 El 34 Camino Real. Request by FYG, FGY Architects on behalf of Portage Avenue Portfolio, LLC for site 35 and design review of demolition of a X square foot, a new 70. What’s X square foot? You’re supposed 36 to put a number in there? 37 38 Russ Reich, Senior Planner: I think it was the We Fix Macs store. Off the top of my head I’m not sure 39 what the number is. I think it was a few (interrupted) 40 City of Palo Alto Page 3 1 Amy French, Chief Planning Official: It’s in the staff report. 2 3 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. A new 74,122 square foot four story mixed-use project with 48 residential 4 units. The proposal also includes Design Enhancement Exceptions (DEE) for height, and build to lines 5 as well as a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the parcel to exceed 5,000 square foot limit for office 6 space. Environmental Assessment: A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared in 7 accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The zone district: Service 8 Commercial (CS). And with that would staff like to introduce the project? 9 10 Mr. Reich: Yes, thank you. Good morning Vice-Chair Lippert and Board Members. The Board has 11 seen this project in its first formal review previously on August 1st. The Board had a number of items 12 that they wanted the applicant to come back with. They continued the item to August 15th, but it wasn’t 13 enough time to prepare so here we are on the 29th to review those items. I’m going to go ahead and list 14 the items that the Board had requested the applicant to come take a look at and come back with and 15 then just briefly describe how the applicant responded and then the applicant will go into much greater 16 detail about all the changes they’ve made since you last saw it. 17 18 So the Board had requested that the applicant review the landscape plan for overall design and way 19 finding. They asked that the applicant clarify the traffic ingress and egress points and evaluate the 20 locations carefully in relation to deliveries, move ins, move outs, and visitors. Asked that the applicant 21 look at providing private open spaces, balconies at all of the residential units; if you remember there are 22 48 units and 3 of them in their prior application did not have a private balcony. Review the privacy 23 walls and railings at the balconies and develop them further. Include in the conditions of approval 24 City of Palo Alto Page 4 restrictions on the storage of items on the balconies. Review the wall at the trash enclosure on Portage 1 Avenue side of the project. Provide specifics for material placement and clearly identify these on the 2 drawings. Review the Acacia Avenue corner for design and consider reorganizing the plan. Consider 3 sidewalk width along El Camino Real relative to the recent Council direction. 4 5 So the applicant has come back with a number of changes to the plan. They have redesigned the 6 landscape plan to better fit in with the architectural design. The triangles have been removed and we 7 have more of a grid pattern relating to the rectangular architecture of the building. Site access, they 8 talked about there was some confusion about what your comment meant. It could be on staff’s part, 9 could be on the applicant’s part, but in their response they talked about queuing at the Portage entries 10 and I believe they were going to go back and look at the questions about how deliveries and move ins 11 and things are handled. So they should cover that in their presentation. 12 13 The private balconies, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) had requested that the applicant look at a 14 way to provide those additional balconies for those three units. So they’ve taken a look at that and 15 we’ve got one, a new balcony at one of the units, but there’s still two units that don’t have a private 16 balcony primarily for architectural reasons in how it would impact the design of the project. They have 17 gone back and taken another look at the partitions between the private spaces on the balconies and have 18 redesigned the partitions that separate those. There will be a condition of approval related to what can 19 be stored on the balconies to prevent bikes and other things from being stored out there and creating 20 kind of a visual concern. 21 22 They have redesigned the wall on Portage where the trash enclosure used to be it used to be a very large 23 wide roll out metal door and they reoriented and kind of separated the trash such that the door is now 24 City of Palo Alto Page 5 facing, not facing the street and faces the surface parking area underneath the building so it’s less 1 visually intrusive and moved some of the recycling over so that there’s a very small roll up door 2 hopefully improving the elevation to your liking. They have clarified materials and coordinated those 3 items on the drawings. They’ve completely modified the Acacia corner. They have pushed back the 4 retail/commercial recreation space and created another arcade that echoes the original arcade on the 5 front of the building creating some additional depth and pedestrian interest at that corner. 6 7 The sidewalk width related to the Council memo. The applicant hasn’t adjusted the location of the 8 building relative to the sidewalk. It currently meets the zoning standard and there’s so many elements 9 in this project that speak to moving the building away so that you don’t have that large single façade on 10 El Camino that it wasn’t really necessary just to shove the building back because there’s so many ways 11 that the building actually does flow across the frontage where we have these two arcades where the 12 building is actually setback quite a bit further then from the curb. And there’s the raised plaza, there’s 13 the entry portico, and the upper floors are also setback so they didn’t feel the need to just shove the 14 building back. Hopefully they feel that with all the different design elements kind of creating a more 15 open and pedestrian friendly frontage that the project will meet with Council’s approval relative to their 16 concerns about sidewalk width. 17 18 There was a number of additional plan changes that were bulleted in the staff report beyond the items 19 that the ARB had asked the applicant to come back with relating to some of the discussion items the 20 ARB had talked about. There’s a new doorway in the restaurant space that actually opens up onto the 21 courtyard so that opportunities for dining and things to happen within that portico courtyard, not just in 22 the front of the project, but also continuing around to the courtyard side. The entry to the central 23 elevator tower has been reoriented and located adjacent to the stair tower. There was concern before 24 City of Palo Alto Page 6 that the entry to the stair and the entry to the elevator were so separate that people might be a little 1 confused so they tried to centralize that to help with way finding. 2 3 The zinc panels that had previously been proposed for the Portage and Acacia stair towers have been 4 eliminated. They are no longer going to propose that material and they’re going with the cement 5 composite panels that was already part of the existing material palette for the project. The openings 6 into the Acacia stair tower landings have been enlarged and the landings at the third and fourth floor are 7 also now open to the courtyard side and the third floor terrace now connects directly to the Acacia stair 8 tower. So at the previous hearing there was discussion about wanting to have some kind of visibility 9 through that element and so they’ve opened that up. The Portage Avenue elevation other residential 10 units have been further developed to be more consistent in the use of doors, windows, and sidelights. 11 12 The overall color palette the applicant team has decided to change the stronger red/brown color from 13 the third floor to the fourth floor, which is setback further from the street so it kind of reduces that 14 stronger color’s impression. Placed the more neutral gray color on the third floor, which actually helps 15 in response to the gray color of the cement that’s used on the first and second floor. The wood panel 16 color for the central stair tower has been lightened up with a more open grain pattern. So those are the 17 changes that the applicant has made and they’re here to kind of walk you through those and thank you 18 very much. 19 20 Acting Chair Lippert: Thank you very much Russ. Does the architect wish to make a presentation? I 21 think Russ has covered almost all your bases. 22 23 Heather Young, FGY Architects: Actually he has done a very thorough job of reviewing that. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 7 1 Acting Chair Lippert: You have 10 minutes ok. 2 3 Ms. Young: Thank you. Thank you very much. I’m Heather Young from Fergus Garber Young (FGY) 4 Architects. As Russ indicated we took the comments very seriously and have been able to make some I 5 think very positive changes to the project as a result of the observations and comments that you 6 provided. I am going to try and focus our discussion on those elements, but if there are other items that 7 you’d like to talk about we can always go back to that. And I would like to say that Gary Lehman from 8 Guzzardo, excuse me, Guzzardo Landscape is here and has also some information to share if you’d like 9 more in depth information there. 10 11 So, the first one was the landscape review. There had been comments about the potential for a stronger 12 connectivity between the landscape design and the building design and as a result Guzzardo has gone 13 back and revised the landscape design. Triangles are no longer a part of it and it is a more orthogonal 14 and rectangular approach, which again, I think he would be in an excellent position to discuss further. 15 16 There also were questions about traffic access to the site. And I do want to make sure that the e-mail 17 that we sent made it to you guys. Ok, great. Because again there was a misunderstanding as to what 18 the questions were. There are locations for daily deliveries from FedEx, United Parcel Service (UPS). 19 There are mail locations already established in the central tower and in the Acacia tower for United 20 States Postal Service (USPS) deliveries. Sorry. The issue of moving in and out there is an at grade 21 accessible ramp to an elevator off of Acacia and that serves all four floors. It’s, most of the residential 22 units are very small. We don’t anticipate large moving vehicles to bring people in or out of the 23 building. It’s possible to reserve spaces with a parking pass through the City here if there’s a larger 24 City of Palo Alto Page 8 delivery. There’s also an elevator connection in the below grade and there are some non-machine 1 parking spaces in that vicinity that could be used for ingress and egress through that central stair tower. 2 3 And the other question was about visitor parking and as I mentioned and I think we included also some 4 transcript notes, I hope we included some transcript notes from the Planning and Transportation 5 Commission (PTC) meeting. There’d been a lot of discussion about visitor parking and the 6 requirement for visitor parking is not part of this project because we do fall under the State regulation 7 for the parking assessment of the residential units, but because this is such a diverse community of 8 people and because there are already surface parking spaces for the commercial recreation, the retail, 9 the restaurant spaces, those actually serve as visitor spaces, especially during the evening and weekend 10 hours when those uses, commercial office, restaurant, and retail have a different time schedule. So we 11 think there’s adequate visitor parking. 12 13 The next question that you had regarded the balconies for all 48 units. As you know 45 of the 48 units 14 were provided with balconies, some of them quite luxurious balconies. We went back and looked at 15 the three units that did not have balconies and one of them had a building code issue regarding fire 16 separation and our attempts to provide that one with a balcony were not, they didn’t have the magnitude 17 that you needed for that location to make an impact. One of them on the second floor actually 18 would’ve blocked light and air into the restaurant entry off of the courtyard and we felt very strongly 19 that we needed to open that up as much as possible. And you’ll see in the fly through I think what we 20 were talking about. But thank you very much; we were able to reorganize these three units on the 21 fourth floor to this configuration. And so we were able to provide a balcony for one of the three units. 22 And we didn’t change the unit mix, it didn’t change the square footages, it was a really great win-win. 23 And you can also see from the plan it helped to make it more uniform. It cleaned up our corridor. As 24 City of Palo Alto Page 9 you know you’re moving along and things happen for reasons you’re not planning. So this was a great 1 chance for us to turn that into a really good opportunity. 2 3 Another option, issue that you asked us to look at was the residential balcony design. And it’s hard to 4 tell in some of the images, but you can see here there is a, this is from August 1st. There was a small, 5 solid panel design adjacent to the areas. We’ve been able to go in and open that up so that the top 6 portion that’s adjacent to the residences is going to be a semitransparent glass so you’ll have privacy, 7 but you’ll also not cut down on the light in the area. And I think I mentioned in the response that the 8 fire department is requiring some balcony to balcony access. So we do have lower panels at the 9 perimeter. Security is not really an issue. Anybody could climb around the railings if we want, if they 10 chose to. We’re really trying to integrate the partition design more with the wall design and to increase 11 privacy but not to inhibit light into the units. And there’s further examples of this on the El Camino 12 façade that you can see as we move through. I’m going to have to get bifocals soon. The balconies to 13 have restrictive storage; I think there’s a verbiage component in here which I hope will satisfy your 14 concerns there. 15 16 The next issue was the Portage service elevation, which you can see here. El Camino, Portage it’s 17 between the residential units, the entrance to the surface parking, and the double height retail and office 18 corner. At that time we had a wider, excuse me, a more vertically oriented window on the third floor, a 19 more horizontally and larger louver on the second floor for the mechanical, a pair of double doors for 20 the restaurant service, and then a very wide roll up door for the recycling and trash, and a small planter. 21 By working with the GreenWaste and Recology groups we were able to split that large trash recycling 22 room into two spaces and orient the trash off of the parking plaza so that the doorway is moved off of 23 the Portage elevation and we changed the double doors for service into a single door. That also 24 City of Palo Alto Page 10 allowed for a much wider landscape planter at grade. The louvers have been reduced in size and we’ve 1 reoriented the third floor windows to a more horizontal proportion that is in stronger agreement with 2 the design of the wall adjacent. They’re not fundamentally changing the design, but I think these minor 3 improvements do help the overall elevation in that area. 4 5 Acting Chair Lippert: You have one minute. 6 7 Ms. Young: Oh, ok. Material notes you can see the Acacia corner was rather a big issue. We were able 8 to setback the ground floor as Russ mentioned and create a double height arcade. Added more 9 sunscreens on the side. You can see the new perspective view with the setback here. You can also see 10 the color change from the red/brown on the third floor to the red/brown on the fourth floor and now the 11 gray on the third floor. You can also see we were able to add an additional balcony on the second floor 12 here increasing pedestrian and building relationships. There’s new openings on the third floor that 13 allow visual and on the third floor physical connection. Sorry, you can see that here with the new 14 rendering and the new balcony. 15 16 We’ve talked quite a bit about the improvements to the pedestrian access. It just goes on and on. I can, 17 we both just go on and on. I think the really important things are just to look very briefly at some of the 18 renderings and so you’re seeing the rendering for the dining terrace and the dining arcade. We 19 relocated the stair from Acacia over to Portage here. There’s now a seat bench in this area. Oh, sorry, 20 that’s a good one. You can see the landscape’s more orthogonal in its design. The new doors from the 21 restaurant to the arcade, the entrance into the lobby and elevator has been moved from here off of, to 22 the entry portal. Another perspective showing more of the life and activity there. The change of 23 materials on the stair towers. This is the previous courtyard elevation and the change here that you’ll 24 City of Palo Alto Page 11 see again on the terrace design with the screens, the lighter wood with a more open grain, which we 1 have a sample of here for you (interrupted) 2 3 Acting Chair Lippert: Why don’t you wrap it up? Do the fly through and wrap it up. 4 5 Ms. Young: Ok, here’s the fly through. More activity in the ECR portal. Stair tower slight redesign 6 there to have a better proportion for the double height ground floor space. You can see the screens on 7 the terraces as you roll around. The increase of the planter width and there’s a new little fence screen 8 along the dining portal there. You can see the roof screens on the terrace and as you come by you’ll see 9 the arcade, the new arcade on Acacia and the new balcony on the second floor. And there you are. 10 11 Acting Chair Lippert: Thank you very much for your presentation. With that what we’ll do is we’ll 12 open the public hearing. If there are members of the public that wish to speak to this item you may do 13 so at this time. Seeing none we will close the public hearing and we will begin with Board Member 14 Popp. 15 16 Board Member Popp: Terrific. Alright, well thank you very much. Appreciate all the time you put into 17 addressing the comments and the very detailed response makes it so easy to understand the process that 18 you went through and how you got to where you are and that’s very helpful for me. I’d like to see, if 19 you don’t mind I’d like to ask Mr. Lehman to come up and is there anything additional that you’d like 20 to share about the landscape plan that would be beneficial for us to understand. Give you a moment to 21 explain anything in there that you’d like to share with us because I think that was one of the focal 22 points of our discussion last time. It’s something I was concerned with so I’d love to hear what you’ve 23 got. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 12 1 Gary Lehman, The Guzzardo Partnership, Inc.: Thank you. I’d like to bring some materials up 2 (interrupted) 3 4 Board Member Popp: Please. 5 6 Mr. Lehman: That you may want to pass around a bit. 7 8 Board Member Popp: Alright. 9 10 Mr. Lehman: I think at its most basic high level is that we were looking for a stronger integration of the 11 landscape with the building, sort of working with the building geometry and looking particularly at the 12 building elevations and seeing how the planters, how the paving work in composition with the 13 windows. And looking for opportunities to be able to increase the inside/outside sort of relationship. 14 There was a central plaza space which, with the stair tower element, which is really quite beautiful and 15 we wanted to sort of use that as an inspiration for what we’re seeing actually on the ground plane and 16 within the fountain and the planter areas. So you’ll see that within the paving patterns there’s 17 connections that are made literally between the building elevation out into the landscape. 18 19 One of the key features, let’s see if I can navigate here… I can use this image here. One of the things 20 we found really interesting is that in the stair tower there’s a very strong column element that occurs 21 here that breaks up the window [at the side], creates a nice vertical accent piece and we sort of took that 22 as a band which went through the plaza through the redesigned fountain element here and actually we 23 were able to connect that all the way across to here. So it was a really nice unifying element that kind 24 City of Palo Alto Page 13 of drew that strong architectural piece and created a way of being able to help organize the landscape 1 design. 2 3 As Heather mentioned we’ve looked really carefully at how all these outdoor spaces are populated and 4 kind of again let the function of how these buildings will be used, how people will spill out and use 5 these spaces, and then kind of undulated the plantings through that, again taking our cues from the 6 existing building elevation or the new building elevation elements to be able to create a very simple but 7 organized and elegant treatment for the landscape design. The planters also serve as the primary storm 8 water treatment component so there was some good integration with how the civil engineer and the 9 architect are bringing the water down into the plaza so those planters were coordinated with those 10 efforts to make it quite successful. 11 12 You’ll see that we have the sort of patterns of paving here. The neutral colors, the pebble color, which 13 is sort of the beige color there, we have accent pavers they go through this area here so we’re picturing, 14 we’re not showing furniture right here. We know that that would be coming, but we see that as kind of 15 the primary sunny spot and that was kind of populated with these paving accent pieces to help kind of 16 create the community space and help define at along with the building volume that wraps around there. 17 18 The water feature itself is, has a water source here, which will animate and help provide some sound 19 within that space. The balance of the water wall will actually just cascade over that edge and will 20 create a focal point that you’ll see as you come through the building arcade and then it’ll also be an 21 element which you, helps to enhance the existing building entry experience here as well as being 22 something you see as you move around on the upper levels of the building here. So we kind of see that 23 City of Palo Alto Page 14 as a nice jewel within the center of the courtyard. Those are the primary things. I’d be happy to 1 discuss any questions you have. 2 3 Board Member Popp: That’s very helpful. Thank you very much. I think that there are projects that 4 come before us that are really challenging and there’s a lot of comment and discussion about them and I 5 think this is a really elegantly crafted and really well done building and the refinements that you’ve 6 added, these subtleties that have been adjusted here are something I’m comfortable with and I really 7 don’t have a lot of comment today other than to say that I appreciate the quality and the character that 8 you brought forward and I’m prepared to move this project forward today. So thank you. 9 10 Acting Chair Lippert: Board Member Lew. 11 12 Board Member Lew: So I did want to thank the applicant for making the changes. I think they are all 13 headed in the right direction. I think that the general [parte] of the building is good. It seems like it’s 14 compromised because of the existing Equinox building, but that’s where you are and very much 15 looking forward to seeing this whole new building being excavated around the existing Equinox 16 building. I think that’s going to be quite a sight. 17 18 I think generally the massing of the building is very good. I think there’s been a lot of criticism of 19 some of the recent buildings and this one I think is, you’ve done a couple of things that are good. You 20 have like the portal through the building, through the middle of the site. You also have the arcade and 21 then also your upper floors are stepping back and then also you’ve distinguished the residential from 22 the commercial. So you’re sort of making it look like, you’re breaking up the materials and the 23 massing so it looks like smaller chunks. It’s not quite so massive and blocky. And then I think the 24 City of Palo Alto Page 15 other important thing is all sunshades and your like railings and the balcony dividers also help give 1 articulation and definition. It also gives like shade and shadow on the building, which are really very 2 important. 3 4 I like the overall concept of your aesthetics. I think that the, that whole section, that part of town has 5 always been kind of a more industrial area because it used to be all like railroad sheds and the railroad 6 spur and everything. And it has kind of a different character than the rest of the town and I think that 7 you’ve picked up on that element, but you’ve also added like the wood panels and stuff to give it some 8 richness and to give it a little bit more character. And I think this is all really good. The, I think that’s, 9 yeah, it’s like a really nice balance between there and the palette looks great. 10 11 I did have a question for you, you do have stucco soffits and stuff like that. And I don’t, I didn’t look 12 really carefully, I don’t think I saw it there or maybe there’s a color chip or something but I was just 13 curious about all of those. Also all the undersides of the arcades and the underside of the portal, you 14 have the underside of the balconies I think is all stucco? 15 16 Ms. Young: That’s correct and there’s a color on there for the precast concrete and the thought is that it 17 would be a very similar value to that. So yeah, the one, that’s correct. 18 19 Board Member Lew: [Unintelligible] neutral. 20 21 Ms. Young: So you’ve got the precast concrete spandrels for instance at the perimeter of the balcony 22 and the soffit underneath it would be, it’s just from a construction standpoint we had to make that 23 transition. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 16 1 Board Member Lew: Right. So you’re not trying to make it different, you’re just trying to have it blend 2 in as best as it can? 3 4 Ms. Young: No, correct. Correct. 5 6 Board Member Lew: Thank you. Ok, so I have some, I have a whole bunch of detail questions though. 7 So for staff I did have a question about the acoustics. And so I know on other projects there’s been 8 issues on El Camino with residential private open space and sort of mitigating the noise of the street on 9 the private open space. And this, these guys have a mixture of like open balconies and then some are 10 like solid railings and so I was wondering what, what study was done there because I didn’t see 11 anything in the environmental analysis. 12 13 Mr. Reich: So it wouldn’t be part of the environmental because it’s not subject to CEQA, but in terms 14 of meeting the Comp Plan policy of trying to mitigate noise the applicant has, and they can probably 15 speak to it more eloquently than I can, but looking at the orientation of the balconies and the solid 16 nature of the flooring and how deep they are there may be if you’re standing right at the railing there 17 may be some noise issue, but obviously no matter how solid those were if you’re standing in front of 18 the railing the railing’s not going to block the noise. But as you move further back in these deep 19 balconies the noise levels coming from the street going up is hitting the underside and basically the 20 balconies themselves block the noise that comes up towards them. So because they’re so deep there are 21 spaces on the outdoor balconies that you do get that respite from the louder noise. I don’t know if 22 Heather wants to kind of go into any greater detail, but just looking at these it doesn’t seem like they’re 23 City of Palo Alto Page 17 going to be incredibly impacted by noise because of how deep they are. There will be areas on those 1 balconies that they’ll have kind of that quieter space. 2 3 Board Member Lew: Ok, great. Thank you. And then Heather was there any other thing, any other 4 thoughts about the open space? Great, excellent. Great. Thank you. 5 6 The I think the plan set at the moment really doesn’t have any even though you’re showing lots of 7 detail in the drawings we don’t have details. We don’t have window details. We don’t have any of the 8 sunshade details and I think you’ve got a number of them like on the corner of Portage and El Camino 9 you have sunshades in the arcade. And I’d be concerned about how those are coordinated with the 10 street trees and stuff, you’re looking, they’re projecting out. And I think it’s important to [project out], 11 but I’d be concerned about that with the trees. Also on the upper floors you have sunshade, various 12 sunshades and cornices. So we don’t have any details for those. Normally we look at, have some 13 details, we ask for details where there are big material changes or whatnot. And so also we don’t have 14 any lighting photometrics or cut sheets. And let’s see, and I think that’s all. 15 16 Oh, and then I think too, I think on some, like on important things like the portal, your main archway, I 17 mean on some other projects that have come through usually sometimes I’ve asked for like a reflected 18 ceiling plan where it’s really important like that’s the main entranceway and I just want to make sure 19 that all the that the underside of the building gets designed well too. And so we don’t have, I don’t 20 think we have anything. I think we just, it’s showing just [in section]. So maybe like a reflecting 21 ceiling plan there. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 18 On the landscape Gary I think I like the changes, all the changes that you’ve made. I think the paving 1 and the planting is all looking good. I would encourage you to maybe add one more layer of plants or 2 just a little bit more variety in some of the raised planters if you can. I don’t object to anything that 3 you’re showing, but like I’d just say like for example I think you’re showing like lavender in the 4 arcades in the planter there. To me like lavender is, looks great for a couple months, a few months of 5 the year and then the rest of the year the English lavender it’s not much to look at and that’s like right 6 on the sidewalk. I mean that’s probably the most public space where people are, the restaurant users 7 and the public are going to see it. So I would encourage you to either like balance it with other plants 8 that are similar to it or I’m not opposed to something that’s more high maintenance and high water use 9 plants there as either, either way. 10 11 But I think that the, like that particular location I think could be better and I think some of the other 12 ones I think like in the courtyard I think you’re showing like a Japanese maples and asparagus ferns and 13 I really like the choices that you made there. It’s like bright green contrasting against the gray palette I 14 think is really beautiful. I think you have like even more accent plants too. I don’t’ know if they would 15 do well with like the building drainage in there, but I’m looking at places like, I don’t know, what is it 16 800 High Street has, you know, near the Whole Foods, it has like very beautiful planters there [or if you 17 Carmel] you go there like just really very beautiful planting palettes. And I’m thinking of like along 18 that lines. It’s more high maintenance, I don’t know if the building owners are willing to maintain that 19 kind of level [of thing]. But I think I’m interested in seeing that because I think most of the trees that 20 you’re showing on the street trees are all deciduous I think. And so there’s a certain [unintelligible] 21 time of year where I really, all of those planters that’s going to be the only green around the building so 22 I think that they have to look great. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 19 Also Gary on your previous scheme you had shown some vines, I think there’s like bougainvillea and 1 something else and then they’re not in this set of drawings. And I was wondering where were you 2 originally thinking about vines and where did they go? If it was an important, was there important 3 location? And I ask because the existing Equinox has vines growing along the Acacia side. They’re all 4 gone? And that’s a huge maintenance issue. Got it, ok. 5 6 Mr. Lehman: Yeah, I think we simplified and basically pulled the vine approach out because we’ve got 7 more detail within the planters themselves and as well as within the architecture. So we didn’t really 8 see a need to sort of hide or soften so much because there were some nice expressions going on in the 9 elevation so we were kind of good with that. 10 11 Board Member Lew: Ok. And then Gary like in your landscape images you’re showing a lot of things, 12 [a lot of] nice looking things that I’m not sure I saw them in the plans. But like light, you have like a 13 plaza light pole. And I was, is this like for the, were you thinking about like for the courtyard or is that 14 somewhere? 15 16 Mr. Lehman: That was for the courtyard. That’s right. We were looking at having a single light fixture 17 here that would be able to broadcast light into this plaza area as well as illuminate the fountain and 18 actually do a little bit of a wash on the building. Wherever we have planters we have the opportunity to 19 be able to do some subtle built in lights that would kind of give a flush of light at the base of the planter 20 walls, but in this area here that’s more open we… there we go. We’re thinking we could have a down 21 light sort of effect with sort of a recessed fixture that would both be non-glare that would also create 22 sort of theatrical feel within that plaza area. And as you mentioned that’s something that we could look 23 at photometrically and give you some more feedback on that. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 20 1 Board Member Lew: Yeah, I think my, I mean I think the idea is great and I think my concern is that is 2 just yeah, the photometrics. Because it seems like the courtyard’s fairly small or it’s long and linear 3 and I would just be concerned just that if you have, with how that light works with the residence. 4 5 Mr. Lehman: Exactly. Yeah, we don’t want to have, we want to have a hidden light source 6 [unintelligible] the plaza just sort of glows without having glare. And the difficultly of showing any 7 sort of pole light is you’re saying “Oh, there’s this object” and looking at it critically it’s like well again 8 the intent really is for that to disappear and just to have the light come down. And so we’re looking to 9 have that down to the building metal colors and have it placed in a way that’s really appropriate relative 10 to elevation so that it becomes sort of non-element and the light just happens and it’s a beautiful, 11 beautiful space to be in because of how it’s lit. 12 13 Board Member Lew: Ok. Good. And then you have another detail, which has like a countertop, which 14 I think you’re showing is in the arcade, yeah. And I think you had a different version in your last set. 15 16 Mr. Lehman: That’s right. 17 18 Board Member Lew: Facing El Camino and I was wondering what, how does that work? And then my 19 question would also be is that, like I can see that being a nice thing [unintelligible] I mean depending 20 on the location and then I think about all the noise on El Camino then I think, I’m thinking are people 21 actually going to use it that way in that location? And then also I think you’re showing metal and then 22 I think some of the plans are calling out for wood and so I was wondering what your thoughts were 23 City of Palo Alto Page 21 about that and how it, how you integrate the planter with this counter in the arcade and how that all gets 1 (interrupted) 2 3 Mr. Lehman: Right, so this, in our previous submittal we had a different photograph, which generated 4 some conversation too, which caused us to think about well how would this actually be used and going 5 back to your lavender comment as well was that we wanted to have sort of short time duration bar that 6 would occur in the arcade facing El Camino. What we’ve done is we actually pulled that back a little 7 bit, set it back a little bit so it’s kind of inboard of the colonnade and then we’ve put the lavender 8 planter in the foreground of that maintain the full width of the sidewalk there because we didn’t want to 9 [capitalize] it with the sidewalk. 10 11 We, you’ll actually see it there’s a grading that occurs below the counter there. We’re thinking again 12 that was kind of a way to be able to sit at the counter and not actually have your legs in the lavender. 13 There is a grade differential that happens at that, in those locations and many of those spots. So there’s, 14 what we’ve done is we’ve sort of elevated that seating so that when you’re sitting down at that bar 15 height you’re more on an eye to eye level with the people who are walking by on El Camino, which we 16 think is a more comfortable relationship rather than sitting down below and having people look down 17 on you as you walk by. So we like that sort of elevated countertop kind of experience and then, and 18 you’re right, some people may not want to have that experience and that’s why we have the additional 19 seating that’s kind of off El Camino back against the building façade so we have the café seating there 20 and people can kind of choose which kind of experience if they want to have more of a people 21 watching, more of an engaged kind of experience they can be out there on the counter. If they want to 22 have a little bit more privacy or setback they can be against the building. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 22 Board Member Lew: And is there a particular restaurant operator in mind for the location? Like I guess 1 is the bar counter really, you’re proposing this to be a permanent part of the building. 2 3 Ms. Lehman: Yes. 4 5 Board Member Lew: And then does that, is that working with the tenants? 6 7 Mr. Lehman: With the building program, that’s right. There’s intended to be food uses there. So that’s 8 what we were thinking. In terms of the materiality we were thinking about the countertop itself if it 9 would be wood or metal or some sort of composite material. We did want to have something that was 10 going to be pretty durable because we think that that will be a pretty high use area and we considered 11 doing wood, but we felt like that might be more of a maintenance issue and not quite so good from a 12 food service standpoint. So thinking either a metal or a composite type material that related more to the 13 concrete elements of the architecture would be most appropriate. 14 15 Board Member Lew: Ok. Yeah, I think wood is just too high maintenance for that location. And then 16 metal you have the issue, I mean it’s in the sun. So it’s an interesting, it’s an interesting issue. 17 18 Ok, and then maybe could you remind me of the grade change difference there at the arcade? I know 19 that the slight (interrupted) 20 21 Mr. Lehman: Sure. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 23 Board Member Lew: I understand the general way the [slate is looping], but how much is there between 1 the arcade and the sidewalk? 2 3 Mr. Lehman: It varies. So it’s essentially what happens is is that the arcade area that turns in here 4 we’re level and then El Camino drops (interrupted) 5 6 Board Member Lew: Right. 7 8 Mr. Lehman: Comes down here and then so Portage down here is low. And so we have a stair that 9 occurs right here at the interface of the arcade and the dining terrace. And so there is a grade change 10 that occurs along this edge here. So rather than having kind of a lip there, that was another, having the 11 bar there was kind of a nice way of keeping that from becoming a tripping hazard. So we sort of dealt 12 with the grade either having it directly level coming in on the arcade or stepping up at the stairs down 13 here where there’s enough vertical to create a real stair that’s appropriate for that grade change. 14 15 Board Member Lew: Ok. So at the corner then it’s maybe what, like three steps? Or like two? 16 [Unintelligible] like about four steps? Like four, so it’s about 2 feet around, I mean just roughly. Less? 17 Ok. That’s fine. [Unintelligible] anything more than that, but I think that’s fine. 18 19 Mr. Lehman: And then we were able to incorporate a seat wall into this portion of this area here. We 20 were sort of looking for opportunities to be able to help activate El Camino without decreasing the 21 actual sidewalk width. So we were able to work the seat wall into that face and then there’s a sort of a 22 wood railing element that happens back at the dining patios so that there’s a nice separation there. So 23 City of Palo Alto Page 24 again if you’re sitting at that seat wall you’re not feeling like people are looking over your shoulder. 1 Just trying to make that as comfortable as it can be. 2 3 Board Member Lew: Great, thank you Gary. 4 5 Mr. Lehman: Sure. 6 7 Board Member Lew: and then Heather I just, one last question on or two, two questions for you. One is 8 I think we mentioned this last time, which was your typical balcony railing. Like it looks great in the 3-9 D drawings and I mean the detail is kind of, has a very heavy profile. Like it’s not, you’re trying a 10 tapering and I know it’s not quite as tapered because you have structure. I was wondering if you, I 11 realize that I mean you have to do what’s structurally necessary, but it seems like your that concrete, 12 the precast concrete piece could have more detail or something or shape or whatnot. And I was 13 wondering if you maybe if we, like you have to come back to us with like a lot of details and I was 14 wondering if you could show us that. So like I like the profile of that, but that’s, the detail was just 15 showing something much… 16 17 Ms. Young: A little deeper, yeah. 18 19 Board Member Lew: Much. It looks a lot deeper to me and I was just wondering if you could come up 20 with options for us for that. If you can’t get that, I mean that shape looks great to me, but it seems like 21 if you can’t get that with the detail, structural detail, which I’m seeing in here maybe there’s some other 22 options. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 25 Ms. Young: We are challenging our structural engineer. You can see that there is a reveal in this larger 1 concrete band, and that reveal is a natural wrap that turns into a curb as you go onto the balcony. We’re 2 probably going to have, we definitely are going to have a construction joint at the bottom here where 3 the precast turns into a soffit material. I’m not entirely sure what you mean by options here, but we are 4 going to continue to try and refine it and coordinate with structure and obviously we’re trying very hard 5 to create this “Look Ma, no hands” cantilevered balcony effect. I mean there are no columns holding 6 these up. And as I said we’re pushing our structural engineer as much as we can. 7 8 Board Member Lew: Ok. No, I think that’s the right approach. 9 10 Ms. Young: Ok. 11 12 Board Member Lew: I would say if you, ok say worst case scenario if you’re actually have to build 13 what’s in your, what’s actually shown in the detail then I would want it just I think you should come 14 back to us with an accurate rendering because it’s a very big part of the aesthetic of the building. And I 15 think, I mean I think you should try to get as thin as possible, but if it’s I just want to say if it’s this 16 detailed then I want to see the renderings or at least one of the renderings updated to be accurate. 17 18 Ms. Young: I think that’s completely reasonable. I mean clearly there’s some other items that you’ll 19 want us to come back as with as conditions of approval and we welcome that opportunity to check in 20 and confirm that we’re still headed in the right direction. 21 22 Board Member Lew: Ok, and then I have two other things. Two last things. One is the colors and I 23 was wondering if you can put colored, like colored elevations in the set. Because I think that you’re 24 City of Palo Alto Page 26 showing us things here that aren’t in the set and I haven’t fully considered all the colors, I don’t object 1 to anything on the color board. I think it’s all handsome. 2 3 Ms. Young: Do most drawing sets include colors? 4 5 Board Member Lew: I think just like the overall color layout of where you’re putting all the colors on 6 the building. 7 8 Ms. Young: Like a block diagram? 9 10 Board Member Lew: Not necessarily a painting diagram, but I mean like as I look at it here you, we 11 don’t even really have the, you just have I think you’re just conceptually describing things and there’s, 12 but there’s no actual drawing that says this is generally the color scheme of the building. And that’s, I 13 mean that’s unusual. We usually have some colored rendering. Maybe not of every single façade, but 14 (interrupted) 15 16 Ms. Young: Ok. 17 18 Board Member Lew: Some sort of layout. I mean I don’t have, I think it’s kind of unusual for us. 19 20 Ms. Young: Ok. We actually one of the reasons that we focused so much on the perspective renderings 21 is because this is not a orthogonal, straight box and it’s very difficult to understand the relationships of 22 the material palette unless you see it in a more holistic manner. We’re happy to put together drawings 23 like that. I think these are actually much more helpful in (interrupted) 24 City of Palo Alto Page 27 1 Board Member Lew: Well I do, I know, but it’s just we didn’t get any of this in our set. The image that 2 you’re showing right now I’ve never, this is the first time I’ve ever seen it. 3 4 Ms. Young: Oh, oh. I see. I understand. 5 6 Board Member Lew: Yeah. So that’s the reason why. 7 8 Ms. Young: Ok. 9 10 Board Member Lew: I mean you can take all of these images and just include it as part of the packet. 11 12 Ms. Young: Oh. 13 14 Board Member Lew: I think would be fine. If you don’t, that way you don’t have to produce anything 15 new. And I think all of these images are great. It’s just that I haven’t seen them before so I haven’t 16 really given them a lot of thought. Ah, they’re here. Where were they? They’re in the packet. 17 18 Ms. Young: Some of them were in that ARB supplemental package that addressed the nine issues point 19 by point. 20 21 Board Member Lew: Ah. 22 23 Ms. Young: Yes. Yeah. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 28 1 Board Member Lew: I did see those. 2 3 Ms. Young: And there was, I actually included an apology because the colors for there were 4 screenshots and they’re not as accurate as these are. 5 6 Board Member Lew: Yeah, because they came out so dark that I wasn’t really sure what I was looking 7 at. 8 9 Ms. Young: Yeah. We weren’t as happy with those either and actually that’s one of the reasons if you 10 look at the images that are on the wall those are not printed on the large format paper, they’re printed 11 on 11 by 17 and then attached to that. As you know the image the issue of reproduction is just, ugh. 12 13 Board Member Lew: No. Yeah, yeah. I know. I understand. I understand. Especially when you go 14 dark, you don’t get any subtly of that. 15 16 Ms. Young: No, or from one computer to the next. 17 18 Board Member Lew: Ok. Ok and then my last comment is signage. It looks like you’re trying to put 19 signage on the corner on the planters. 20 21 Ms. Young: We are I think very clearly noting those as not included in this permit. 22 23 City of Palo Alto Page 29 Board Member Lew: I understand and I think the, I think on El Camino I think most tenants are going 1 to want to put something on the building. 2 3 Ms. Young: Depending on the tenant, but any tenant who requests signage is going to be informed that 4 it has to comply with the City of Palo Alto signing ordinance and that they have to work with the owner 5 as part of a holistic signage package. 6 7 Board Member Lew: I think that’s fine. And then I think my main point, I think I just want to make 8 one point is that the your corner, the glass corner on Portage and El Camino I think we have like lots of 9 Ken Hayes projects where it’s really hard for the tenants to put signs on the buildings. And I think that 10 this is a similar situation. 11 12 Ms. Young: Ok. 13 14 Board Member Lew: Where you have everything as glass and sunshade and then there isn’t really 15 anyplace for like a wall sign or anything. So I would just keep that in mind (interrupted) 16 17 Ms. Young: Ok. 18 19 Board Member Lew: When you’re doing that. So thank you for this. 20 21 Acting Chair Lippert: First of all I want to thank you for coming back, for taking our comments and 22 addressing them. I think you’ve done a really wonderful job here in terms of listening to what we had 23 to say and being flexible enough to incorporate those in. This is really a much tighter proposal that 24 City of Palo Alto Page 30 you’ve put together here. Some of the elements that I previously saw that appeared a little disjointed I 1 think some of my colleagues also saw that have been refined and address our concerns and based on 2 what I see here today it’s going to be very easy for me to go along with Board Member Popp in 3 approving this. So I just want you to know that I really appreciate what you’ve done and that because 4 of what you’ve done here it’s easy to approve this project. 5 6 There are a couple of issues that I wanted to bring up. First I did have some concerns regarding the 7 balconies and the slenderness of them and I think rethinking those in terms of them you’ve done a 8 really great job. I’ll tell you exactly where my concern was coming from. It took me a long time to 9 identify it. I drove around the Cal Ave. north of Page Mill Road area there and looked at balconies 10 with those apartments there because in some ways the configurations are very similar when you get up 11 above the first level. And a lot of those are really heavy balconies and I really like those. Where I was 12 reacting or coming from was at the building that Caffe Riace is in and that’s a very difficult building to 13 embrace. And so the slenderness of the balconies I don’t think is particularly successful with that 14 building and so that’s where that was coming from. It wasn’t just sort of taken from just thin air. I 15 think you’ve done a really great job with the balconies and I think that the railings and the way you’ve 16 expressed them it works particularly well. 17 18 I do have one minor concern and maybe it can be addressed and that’s the corner of Acacia and it, when 19 you get up to the second level there, yes, right there. That view there. You’ve got that knife edge 20 balcony to the, well you’ve got the two knife edges and they both go in different direction there. yet at 21 the top of the building you’ve taken a knife edge and you’ve sort of with the cornice have wrapped that 22 around the building there and then you have the sort of the lattice or trellis element that continues on 23 over the second floor of the Acacia units as you get further down the block. And what I see is that 24 City of Palo Alto Page 31 maybe there’s a way to take that trellis or lattice element and carry that between the second and the 1 third story there in terms of the bringing it around the corner and sort of finishing that element there. 2 And my concern really is more not just aesthetic, but it’s also from a functional point of view. You 3 know how are we shielding that because that’s the northwest sort of direction, the west direction and 4 it’s going to get maximum sunlight. You have any thoughts on that? 5 6 Ms. Young: Very interesting observation. We and it’s hard to really see in this image because it’s 7 cutting all of this off. We had really seen the transition from the more solid cornice element to an open 8 trellis as a transition from commercial office to residential. It’s one of our signifiers. This is a 9 particularly challenging corner because this is residential. And I, we’ve been playing a lot with this 10 transition from the beam to the cantilever and the beam to the cantilever and you’re absolutely right 11 there’s some not quite followed through logic happening in this intersection that we should look at and 12 think a little more about. There’s a lot of conditions on the building and so I agree. I think this could 13 bear with a little more thought and integration. 14 15 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah. I think that that’s, if it wasn’t such a prominent corner (interrupted) 16 17 Ms. Young: Yeah. 18 19 Acting Chair Lippert: You know it probably wouldn’t bother me as much. But it is one of the main 20 elements as to how you see the building as you proceed down El Camino Real in a southerly direction. 21 22 Ms. Young: Well and as you know I mean you’re all practicing architects. You know how this works. 23 You work on a design, you have multiple sources of contribution to the project that have impacts on the 24 City of Palo Alto Page 32 project and every time you go back to a certain area you have an opportunity to look at it afresh and dig 1 in a little bit more and see if there are more opportunities for refinement. And again that’s why we 2 were particularly pleased with the outcome from our last meeting is gave us a chance to go back and do 3 some little tweaks. And I think that’s part of the life of a project. Obviously what we’re really looking 4 for from you is the approval to move it on to that next step so that we can continue through our 5 entitlements process, not forgetting that this is imperfect and we’re constantly struggling towards a 6 higher refinement and a higher level of completion. But that’s a good point. We’ll continue to 7 [unintelligible]. 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: The, I think continuing the overhang, the deck that you have around the corner of 10 the building is a little too much. 11 12 Ms. Young: Yeah. 13 14 Acting Chair Lippert: it would definitely be too much. The trellis element I think is about right, but 15 there are other solutions that you could probably come up with that would resolve that and it’s just 16 again if it wasn’t on such a prominent corner I probably would just sort of let it go at that. So that’s just 17 something to think about. 18 19 Ms. Young: Yeah, thanks for pointing it out. 20 21 Acting Chair Lippert: On the Acacia face by the way as you go further down I like the way you’ve 22 dealt with the transition there. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 33 Ms. Young: Yeah. 1 2 Acting Chair Lippert: Rethinking that and the only thing that again bothers me a little bit is the 3 connectivity. How do you transition and go through the existing former Pet Food Depot to get to the 4 courtyard? I really want to go there from Acacia. It’s not possible. 5 6 Ms. Young: It is, but it’s not at grade. So for instance when you are at grade here you can see through 7 the glass breezeway and over the building. You could go up to the third floor and go right through that 8 portal and you would be on the courtyard side. So the building exists. You can go over it. You can see 9 through it and you can go in front of it. Actually you can go under it too, but that’s not going to 10 address your concern about being on Acacia. 11 12 Acting Chair Lippert: I have one last thought with regard to that because I know that I’m not going to 13 win on this, ok? And it’s relatively unimportant whether you actually go through that building, but 14 maybe to create and strengthen a back or side entrance to that building that comes off of Acacia. 15 Whether it’s used or not, not terribly important. It might even be used as an exit only, but the idea is to 16 create that visibility and to be able to create maybe between the Equinox building and the big Equinox 17 building and the smaller Pet Food Depot, former Pet Food Depot building, a side entrance there that 18 maybe might be as much as a pair of glass doors or something that allows you to see through. 19 20 Ms. Young: You currently can. They currently are glass doors that you see all the way through. Sorry, 21 it’s a glass, floor to ceiling glass area. You completely see through that, but your comment about 22 having more of a (interrupted) 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 34 Acting Chair Lippert: Connection. 1 2 Ms. Young: sense of entry, because this is an entrance, having more of a sense of entry again is a good 3 point. And we should think a little bit more about that as a message. There is a low wall here that is 4 intended as a signage opportunity. It’s low, it’s discrete, it’s at street level, but there could be a more 5 significant clue to it being an entrance in that area. You’re absolutely right. 6 7 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah. I guess where I’m going is I can’t have the actual connectivity, but I’d 8 like to have the visual connectivity though if that’s at all possible. It’s just where I’m going. 9 10 Board Member Lew: Lee could you clarify, are you actually saying there’s the existing glass 11 connection between the old Pet Food Depot and the big Equinox building or are you actually saying the 12 back of the Pet Food Depot building like a new, like within Equinox, within Pet Food Depot shell are 13 you actually saying you want something through? 14 15 Ms. Young: There is a 10 foot gap between Equinox, old Equinox and the Equinox on El Camino. 16 17 Acting Chair Lippert: Correct. 18 19 Ms. Young: The glass covered connection. 20 21 Acting Chair Lippert: Right. 22 23 Ms. Young: Completely glass. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 35 1 Acting Chair Lippert: Correct. 2 3 Ms. Young: Ok. 4 5 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah, I want more. 6 7 Ms. Young: More? 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: More visual connection through that. 10 11 Ms. Young: Ok. 12 13 Acting Chair Lippert: In other words it’s blocked at the street. There’s no sense of entry there. 14 15 Ms. Young: That’s correct. There are plants proposed for that area. It’s proposed as a green zone. 16 17 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah I guess what I’m looking at is you have to sort of like zigzag through. 18 19 Ms. Young: Yes. We were challenged with the need for a transformer, which you can see here and the 20 desire to provide a pet friendly zone here and we were also challenged with some grade issues. The 21 floor of Equinox back here is approximately three feet higher than our grade conditions here. And we 22 tried to turn that into an opportunity to provide that pet friendly area and more grade landscape actual 23 landscape. I can appreciate that our solution doesn’t address all of your goals. I can appreciate that. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 36 1 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. Ok, going around to the Portage side of the building I, oh, I’m sorry, let’s go 2 back to the El Camino Real. I like what you’ve done at the portal, above the portal how you’ve 3 reorganized the windows there. 4 5 Ms. Young: Which corner? The Portage corner or Acacia? 6 7 Acting Chair Lippert: I’m sorry, El Camino Real. 8 9 Ms. Young: Oh, sorry. 10 11 Acting Chair Lippert: I forgot that. 12 13 Ms. Young: I’ve got to get to the right spot. There. 14 15 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah. 16 17 Ms. Young: Ok. 18 19 Acting Chair Lippert: Right there. 20 21 Ms. Young: Yeah, we were very excited about bringing that terra cotta down and making it a two story 22 zone. 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 37 Acting Chair Lippert: Can you talk just talk a little bit about what’s going on above there? 1 2 Ms. Young: Well this again is that fire separation joint between the two buildings and so you’ve got a 3 third floor office and a fourth floor residential. There’s matte terra cotta, ribbed terra cotta, and matte 4 terra cotta again and you’ve got the concrete, precast concrete panel at the top and the bottom and then 5 you transition to the board form concrete and then the matte and ribbed gray terra cotta and then the 6 precast balcony and the terrace here for the offices and then the balconies and then the fourth floor 7 terraces for the residential. 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: And how is that, how is the portal being lit? Can you go through that? 10 11 Ms. Young: There will be a number of down lights in the soffit. There will also be fire sprinklers. The 12 planters as Gary mentioned are great opportunities for some up lighting and one of the elements that I 13 think he described in the landscape plan was these darker elements are actually cubic seat stones. And 14 we’re looking at a detail where the bottom of the seat stone is also a glowing, a glow source for 15 lighting. 16 17 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah I’m not a really big proponent on down lights particularly in outside uses. 18 Is there a way to provide more up light either by, well let’s go back to the elevation you have. 19 20 Ms. Young: Sure. 21 22 Acting Chair Lippert: All the excitement on the face, on the El Camino Real face of the building 23 happens really out almost at the street façade. Out of the street area. Everything is proud. Remember 24 City of Palo Alto Page 38 we talked about this last time? And we were talking about this is an arcade very similar to and I think I 1 used the example of Vittorio Emanuele. Where this element I think falls short is that I want this to be 2 an exciting element to pull you through the building complex. And so with the down lights what 3 happens often times is you’ve got the recessed down lights and of course as you know the ceiling goes 4 dark. I think the opportunity here is to have some sort of element either floating in there that up lights 5 or to begin to get something on the walls that focuses up so that you get a more of an even illumination 6 as you transition through that space. The reason I’m saying this is that we’re looking at this as being an 7 accessory space for the dining and for people to congregate and hang out. At nighttime the sky is dark, 8 this pulls you in at night and then when you get on the other side there because it’s an open courtyard 9 again that would be dark sky. So I’m looking at some other element in here that’s going to just like just 10 pull you right in off of El Camino Real. 11 12 Ms. Young: Those are good observations. We’ve been focusing on three elements: the succulent wall 13 at the very end, the epay tower here, and then the glass stair circulation tower there and your far 14 distance to bring you all the way into the courtyard. But I think what you’re addressing, which is very 15 interesting is a more short term focal point and having an element in this area that provided an 16 opportunity to create evening illumination and also to provide that short term attraction before you 17 reached these goals that are in the courtyard I think that’s a good observation. 18 19 Acting Chair Lippert: I’m going to ask my colleagues here, we have a short board here, which requires 20 that we all be present during the public hearing. I have a family emergency. If we could take a five 21 minute recess I would really appreciate it. 22 23 BOARD TOOK A BREAK 24 City of Palo Alto Page 39 1 Acting Chair Lippert: [starts in progress] information on that, that element. Let’s go around to the 2 Portage side. I think what you’ve done with regard to the roll up doors there and the ramp there I think 3 is really great. It really cleans up that area. It was a little disjointed. I like what you’ve done on the 4 second floor there in terms of the louvers and bringing them down to the same opening as what’s up 5 above. It bothers me a little bit that the roll up doors offset and the other door is offset but not as much 6 as what you had previously. So I think that this is a big, big improvement. 7 8 Mr. Lehman could you just talk a little bit about your fountain? Fountains are I think very interesting 9 elements. 10 11 Mr. Lehman: I’d love to. If I could bring a couple more images up to be passed around? So what we 12 see is the fountain is sort of this linear bar that has this one focal point in it where the water would be 13 elevated and we would have a change of material, actually I’m going to step up to the dais. Thank you. 14 So we’re thinking that the majority of the fountain is done in this smooth polished material and that the 15 water source, the cube that is shown on [axis] with that paving band would be this brushed material so 16 that that vertical face would trace and come up and down picking up with the movement of the band 17 and that we’re looking, we’re exploring the possibility of actually incorporating this type of material 18 into that band. Right now we have it shown as an interlocking paving stone with a dark charcoal color. 19 In a perfect world we’d love to be able to afford to do this and take this material all the way across so 20 we’re sort of exploring that. So the idea is that the, so that the bar is wet continuously across the top. It 21 has some very subtle water jets that water the entire length of the bar and then there’s one point where 22 the cube occurs where the water is raised up and that’s where you get the animated sound and that’s 23 where the material change occurs. So I think it’s a really fun piece. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 40 1 Acting Chair Lippert: So to get the idea it’s only a water surface, it’s not a, there’s no depth to the 2 water? 3 4 Mr. Lehman: The pool is very shallow, yeah. No more than an inch except for at the place where the 5 more activated water surface is and then it would be set down a little bit to contain the water. So 6 there’s a little bit of a repeal that happens at the more activated water source, but the rest of it is more a 7 reflecting pool that then sheets down the vertical face. 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: And where does it, does it sheet down all the way around? 10 11 Mr. Lehman: All the way around. That’s right. 12 13 Acting Chair Lippert: All the way around. So it’s going to appear as a water cube? 14 15 Mr. Lehman: It will (interrupted) 16 17 Acting Chair Lippert: Or a water rectangle? 18 19 Mr. Lehman: It’ll be more like this except for rather than having this [cosseted] façade here it would be 20 smooth with the polished surface going down the vertical face. So it’s a very quiet kind of piece here 21 and then the simple activated water at that one cube. 22 23 Acting Chair Lippert: Very exciting piece, and then the water would disappear at the [unintelligible] 24 City of Palo Alto Page 41 1 Mr. Lehman: Drop down into the cobble and then it’s recirculated underneath. Yeah. 2 3 Acting Chair Lippert: So there’ll be pebbles at the base just like you’ve got here? 4 5 Mr. Lehman: Yeah. So you’ll have a, this shows a very narrow cobble, that cobble will be wider, will 6 pick up on what’s happening in the planters as well. 7 8 Acting Chair Lippert: Great. Very, very exciting. I think it’s going to be a very successful piece. And 9 I think this is great. I’m going to support the project. Do we have a, you have some additional 10 comments here? Ok, one more comment Board Member Popp. 11 12 Board Member Popp: So Gary thank you very much for sharing the extra images of the fountain. 13 Based on the image that was in the package I was satisfied, but now that I’ve seen that I have a 14 comment for you about that and that is that the grout lines that I’m seeing between the joints of the 15 panels that are on the top are very distracting and what’s beautiful about this is this very smooth surface 16 of water with just the ripples and it’s black on black and it’s very elegant and sleek. And the version of 17 it that you showed us is not so much. And I think if you’re going to do that the grout should really 18 match the material rather than contrast. 19 20 Mr. Lehman: It’s a good comment. I think that’s what we’ll do. 21 22 MOTION 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 42 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok, so with that I need two things. I need to have a Motion to make a 1 recommendation and then also we have to act on the DEE. So do I have a maker of the Motion? 2 3 Ok. I will give this a try. I will move to approve recommendation of the project as proposed and my 4 elements that I think should return to subcommittee are simply on the Acacia side the continuation of 5 the shall we say trellis or… well, it’s not really cornice. It happens midlevel so it’s a how to continue 6 the, the element around the building. The projecting element around the corner on Acacia. 7 8 Board Member Lew: Could you clarify that’s the second one? It’s actually the third floor? 9 10 Acting Chair Lippert: It is the third floor, but it’s the second floor of the elevation there because it’s a 11 commercial project. It’s a two story commercial building or is it a one story? 12 13 Ms. Young: At the corner it’s a double height space. 14 15 Acting Chair Lippert: Right, that’s what I thought. 16 17 Ms. Young: But when you go further down it’s four floors. 18 19 Acting Chair Lippert: Right. And what I’m talking about is it’s above the double, the double height 20 space. Between the double height space and what we would consider to be the third floor. How do we 21 continue (interrupted) 22 23 Ms. Young: Continue? 24 City of Palo Alto Page 43 1 Acting Chair Lippert: Go to the other view from El Camino. 2 3 Ms. Young: Oh the El Camino side. 4 5 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah. Right there. 6 7 Ms. Young: Right here? 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: No, the next. 10 11 Ms. Young: Right there. 12 13 Acting Chair Lippert: Yeah. 14 15 Ms. Young: That. 16 17 Acting Chair Lippert: It would be between the third and fourth floor? 18 19 Ms. Young: It’s the fourth floor, articulation of the fourth floor slab as it hits the perimeter wall. 20 21 Acting Chair Lippert: Well, we’ll capture it. Thank you very much. 22 23 Ms. Young: Ok. 24 City of Palo Alto Page 44 1 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. So that needs to be looked at. The second element is at the El Camino Real 2 portal the lighting in that area. And then those were my only comments. I think that you’ve done a 3 great job. I need a second on that. 4 5 SECOND 6 7 Board Member Popp: I’ll second it. 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. Any other comments or concerns? 10 11 Ms. French: Would you mind referring to the record of land use action that’s attached? 12 13 Acting Chair Lippert: Oh, I’m sorry. 14 15 Ms. French: And the findings therein for the DEE. 16 17 Acting Chair Lippert: Well, that’s, do you want us to do that separately? 18 19 Mr. Reich: I think in your Motion you just need to recognize that the Motion includes the two DEE’s. 20 You don’t need to do the DEE’s as a separate approval. 21 22 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. So included in my (interrupted) 23 24 City of Palo Alto Page 45 Mr. Reich: [Unintelligible – talking over]. 1 2 AMENDED MOTION 3 4 Acting Chair Lippert: Motion includes the record of land use as well as the Design Enhancement 5 Exception. Is that ok with you Mr. Popp? Please say yes. 6 7 Board Member Popp: Yes it is. 8 9 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok. Any discussion? Ok with that we will vote on this. All those in favor say 10 aye (Aye). Opposed? 11 12 Board Member Lew: Me. 13 14 Acting Chair Lippert: Ok, so that goes down its 2-1 and one abstention and one absent. Thank you 15 very much. 16 17 MOTION PASSED (2-1-1-1, Board Member ______ absent, Board Member _____ abstained) 18 19 Ms. Young: Thank you very much. 20 21 BOARD MEMBER BUSINESS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. 22 23 REPORTS FROM OFFICIALS. 24 25 Subcommittee Members: Lee Lippert and Randy Popp 26 27 City of Palo Alto Page 46 SUBCOMMITTEE: 1 2 4. 537 Hamilton Ave [13PLN-00087]: Request by Korth Sunseri Hagey Architects, on behalf of 3 Smith Equities III LLC, for review of minor changes related to the sun shades and wall opening 4 adjacent to driveway, for a previously approved commercial project in the CD-C(P) zone 5 district. STAFF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW: 6 7 Project Description: An existing utility pole mounted AT&T cross connect box to a ground mounted 8 location within the public sidewalk 9 Applicant: Nestor Mauricio 10 Address: 2287 El Camino Real [13PLN-00330] 11 Approval Date: 8/21/13 12 Request for hearing deadline: 9/3/13 13 14 Project Description: Landscape modifications which include removal and replacement of 19 15 Designated trees 16 Applicant: JC Miller 17 Address: 1101 Embarcadero Road [13PLN-00276] 18 Approval Date: 8/22/13 19 Request for hearing deadline: 9/4/13 20 21 Project Description: Removal & replacement of one tree to allow for a new pedestrian accessibility 22 path connecting city sidewalk to the building 23 Applicant: Scott Hutter 24 Address: 3172 Porter Drive [13PLN-00318] 25 Approval Date: 8/22/13 26 Request for hearing deadline: 9/4/13 27 28 ADA. The City of Palo Alto does not discriminate against individuals with disabilities. To request accommodations to 29 access City facilities, services or programs, to participate at public meetings, or to learn more about the City’s compliance 30 with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), please contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at 650.329.2550 (voice) 31 or by e-mailing ada@cityofpaloalto.org. 32 33 Posting of agenda. This agenda is posted in accordance with government code section 54954.2(a) or section 34 54956.Recordings. A videotape of the proceedings can be obtained/reviewed by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 35 329-2571. 36 37 Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the Architectural Review Board after 38 distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the Planning and Community 39 Environment Department at 250 Hamilton Avenue, 5th floor, Palo Alto, CA. 94301 during normal 40 business hours. 41 42 43 Attachment M ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and COJpmunity Environment PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for Site and Design Review of the demolition of two existing commercial buildings (at 3111 and 3159 El Camino Real, comprising 6,616 s.f.) and the construction of a 69,503 s.f. building (net gain of 62,887 square feet of new floor area) to establish a 49-6" foot tall, 4- story, 46-unit apartment building, with commercial, office and retail uses with underground parking providing 223 parking spaces including parking lifts on a 1.6 acre site located at 3159 El Camino Real. Zone District: Service Commercial (CS). 1. PROJECT TITLE 3159 El Camino Real Palo Alto, California 94306 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS City of Palo Alto Department of Planning and Community Environment 250 Hamilton Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94303 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER Margaret Netto Contract Planner, City of Palo Alto 650-617-3137 4. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS Heather Young 81 Encina Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94402 5. APPLICATION NUMBER 13-PLN-00040 6. PROJECT LOCATION 3111-3159 El Camino Real Palo Alto Parcel Numbers: 132-38-32, 35, 65 and 66 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 1 Mitigated Negative Declaration The project site is located in the northern section of the City of Palo Alto, in the northern part of Santa Clara County, west of U.S. Highway 101 and east of Interstate 280. The project site has frontage on State Route 82 (El Camino Real), Portage A venue to the southeast, Acacia Avenue to the northwest and a developed commercial property to the northeast. To the north of the site is surface parking, across EI Camino Real to the east are restaurants (McDonalds and Fish Market), across Portage StreeUo the south is a retail (Footlocker) and office building, and across the alley to the east is retail (Fry's Electronics). 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 2 Mitigated Negative Declaration ( 7. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: The General Plan designation for this site is Service Commercial, per the Pal\> Alto 1998 -2010 Comprehensive Plan. The Service Commercial land use designation allows for facilities providing citywide and regional services and relies on customers arriving by car. Typical uses encouraged in this district include auto services and dealerships, motels, appliance stores and restaurants. Within some locations, residential and mixed use projects may be appropriate in this land use category. The proposed mixed-use development within this section of the City is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goal to provide residential and mixed-use. 8. ZONING The project site consists of four parcels having approximately 1.6 acres (69,696 square feet) which will be merged under a separate application. The parcd is zoned CS (Service Commercial) and is regulated by the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMe) Chapter 18.16. Commercial development on the project site is subject to the development standards, review process, and context based design criteria established for mixed use developments within P AMC Chapter 18.16. The specific regulations of this chapter and the additional regulations and procedures established by other relevant chapters of the Zoning Code apply. Mixed-use is a permitted land use in the service commercial (CS) district. 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project at 3159 EI Camino Real is the demolition of two existing commercial buildings (at 3111 and 3159 EI Camino Real), totaling 6,616s.f., and the construction of a 49-6" foot tall, 4-story, 46-unit apartment building, with commercial, office and retail uses totaling 62,887 square feet of new floor area. The project includes underground parking facilities (13 feet below grade) providing 223 parking spaces including parking lifts. The four story building would be constructed over a portion of the below grade garage footprint in the southwest comer of the site, near E1 Camino Real and Portage Avenue intersection. Third and foUrth story additions are also proposed above the central portion .of the existing building (3127 E1 Camino Real-Equinox Fitness Gym) at the site. A second four-story building would be constructed over the below-grade garage in the northwest comer of the site. The upper two floors of the three buildings would be connected. The building would be occupied by residential apartments on the second through fourth floors, office space on the third, and recreational, restaurant, retail spaces on the ground level. A single level of below-grade parking garage would be constructed beneath the majority of the site. The subterranean garage would connect to the existing below grade garage on Portage A venue at the south east comer of the site. The main finished garage floor elevation would be below the existing site grades, and car lifts would be installed on the southeastern half of the garage, which would extend approximately 6 to 7 feet below the main garage floor. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 3 Mitigated Negative Declaration Primary access to the site would be provided from Portage A venue with secondary access from Acacia Avenue. Vehicular parking is provided in the existing two-level garage on Portage A venue, to be supplemented by a new underground garage that would be accessed from the below-grade portion of the existing garage. Surface visitor parking is proposed beneath the residential wings of the building accessed from Portage Avenue and Acacia Avenue. Site improvements related to the mixed use project, such as site landscaping, driveways, at-grade parking spaces, and walkways, would be constructed as part of the proposed project. 10. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING The project site is located on the south frontage of El Camino Real, one block south of the El Camino Real and Acacia A venue intersection and one block north of the El Camino Real and Lambert Avenue intersection. The property is located across El Camino Real from two restaurants (McDonalds and Fish Market). To the north, across Acacia Avenue is surface parking, to the south across Portage Avenue is retail (Footlocker) and office use and east is retail (Fry's Electronics). 11. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES California Department of Transportation, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and the Office of the County Clerk-Recorder. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST AND DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS EV ALUA TION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. [A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e. g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. (e. g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).] 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site , cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) Once the lead agency has detennined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with . mitigation, or less than significant. Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the detennination is made, an EIR is required. /:, t , \ . 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 4 Mitigated Negative Declaration 4) "(Mitigated) Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an' effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063 (C)(3) (D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following: a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 6) Lead ll:gencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g. general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The explanation of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. DISCUSSION OF IMPACTS The following Environmental Checklist was used to identify environmental impacts, which could occur if the proposed project is implemented. The left-hand column in the checklist lists the source(s) for the answer to each question. The sources cited are identified at the end of the checklist. Discussions of the basis for each answer and a discussion of mitigation measures that are proposed to reduce potential significant impacts are included. A AESTHETICS . . Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Resources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Would the project: Mitigation Incorporated a) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1,2,6 x 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 5 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Resources Significant Significant Significant Impact Issues Unless Impact Wonld the project: Mitigation Incorporated b) Have a substantial adverse effect on a public view or view corridor? 1,2,3,5,6 x c) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within 1,2- a state scenic highway? MapL4;6 x d) Violate existing Comprehensive Plan 1,2,6 . x policies regarding visual resources? e) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or 1,5,6, X nighttime views in the area? f) Substantially shadow public open space (other than public streets and adjacent 1,5, x sidewalks) between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. from September 21 to March 21? DISCUSSION: The project site is not located within a major view shed. The project would not substantially damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway and does not violate any existing Comprehensive Plan policies regarding visual resoUrces. The project is subject to review by the Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC), Architectural Review Board (ARB) and City Council approval; the Site and Design Review approval findings and ARB approval criteria and findings are designed to ensure an appropriate site layout and architectural design, including landscaping that is aesthetically pleasing and compatible with its surroundings. The mixed-use project is designed to meet development standards (PAMC 18.\6.060), Context Based Design Criteria (PAMC 18.\6.090), and observe the concepts set forth in the EI Camino Real Design Guidelines. The guidelines and context based design criteria in the zoning code are currently under Council consideration as to whether the building setbacks and sidewalk widths specified in the zoning code and guidelines are desirable going forward, given the Grand Boulevard Initiative document advising 18 feet of sidewalk width along EI Camino Real. The height of the development is 49-6" feet, measured to the top of the parapet meeting the 50-foot maximum allowable height limit for theCS zone district. The proposed rooftop light monitors and mechanical roof screen would exceed the 50-foot height limit, none would be taller than 63'-5" these projections above 50~feet are monitors that would provide lighting to the interior of the fourth floor residential units. Inserting the light monitors between the required roof screens provides a consistent horizontal element at the roof top where an assortment of mechanical screens would be located, resulting in a streamlined profile. Section 18.40.090 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code permits this type of height exception so long as it does not extend IS-feet above the 50-foot maximum height limit. However these . , are considered habitable floor areas and would require a Design Enhancement Exception (DEE). The roof screens and light monitors enhance the overall aesthetics of the building. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 6 Mitigated Negative Declaration The mixed-use design incorporates an articulated building base, body and roof. The exterior finish materials would be simple forms of concrete and steel to evocate the industrial character of the neighborhood. The color scheme employs medium neutral tones as a base, with deeply saturated accent colors to highlight certain areas. . The redevelopment of the site may result in a negligible increase in light and glare generated frolll the additional lighting of the site and glazing on the building. With the City's standard conditions of approval, the light and glare impacts of the project would not be significant. The conditions of approval would require the shielding of lighting such that the light does not extend beyond the site, is directional, and that the source of light is not directly visible. With the required site and design review process, which includes the architectural review process, and proj ect compliance with the applicable zoning standards, context based criteria and design guidelines, the proposed project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site or its surroundings, therefore no mitigation is required. Mitigation Measure: None B AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No a) b) c) Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and 1,2,3,5 Monitoring Program of the California X Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural 1,2-Map L- use, or a Williamson Act contract? 9,3,5 X Involve other changes in the. existing environment which, due to their location or 1,2-MapL- nature, could result in conversion of 9,3,6 X Farmland, to non-agricultural use? DISCUSSION: The site is not located in a "Prime Farmland", "Unique Farmland", or "Farmland of Statewide Importance" area, as shown on the maps prepared for the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. The site is not zoned for agricultural use, and is not regulated by the Williamson Act. Consequently, the proposed project would have no impact on agricultural resources. Mitigation Measures: 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 7 Mitigated Negative Declaration ( None C . AIR QUALITY . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact . Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation IncorDorated a) Conflict with or obstruct with implementation X of the applicable air quality plan (1982 Bay 1,2,5,6 Area Air Quality Plan & 2000 Clean Ak Plan)? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute X substantially to an existing or projected ak 1,2,5,6 quality violation indicated by the following: i. Direct and/or indirect operational 1,2,5,6 X emissions that exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) criteria air pollutants of 80 pounds per day and/or 15 tous per year for nitrogen oxides (NO), reactive organic gases (ROG), and fine particulate matter ofless than 10 microns in diameter (PM lO); ii. Contribute to carbon monoxide (CO) 1,2,5,6 X concentrations exceeding the State Ambient Air Quality Standard of nine parts per million (ppm) averaged over eight hours or 20 ppm for one hour (as demonstrated by CALINE4 modeling, which would be performed when a) project CO emissions exceed 550 pounds per day or 100 tons per year; or b) project traffic would impact intersections or roadway links operating at Level of Service (LOS) D, E or F or would cause LOS to decline to D, E or F; or c) project would increase traffic volumes on nearby roadways by 10% or more)? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net 1,2,5,6 X increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial levels I oftoxic air contaminants? X i. Probability of contracting cancer for the I Maximally Exposed Individual (MEl) X exceeds lOin one million ii. Ground-level concentrations ofnon-I carcinogenic TACs would result in a hazard index greater than one (1) for the (i I () (; 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 8 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No e) g) Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated MEl . Create objectionable odors affecting a I X substantial number of neon Ie? Not implement all applicable construction I emission control measures recommended in the X Bay Area Air Qualify Management District CEQA Guidelines? DISCUSSION: The project is not expected to result in a significant impact on air quality. The project may result in temporary dust emissions due to construction activity. The City of Palo Alto uses the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) thresholds of significance for air quality impacts, as follows: Long Tenn Impacts: Long-term project emissions primarily stem from motor vehicles associated with the proposed project. As discussed inthe Transportation/Traffic section of this Initial Study, the project would generate additional vehicle trips and one intersection would be impacted but can be mitigated to less than significant. However, the change of land use will not have an impact on the surrounding area because of the anticipated increase in the volume of traffic that is expected within the project area regardless of the project being built or not. The mixed-use development is a pennitted use for the site and will not affect a substantial number of people which would be limited to other commercial uses and pedestrians in· the immediate vicinity. Long-term air-quality impacts are expected to be less than significant. Sensitive receptors are defined as children, elderly, or ill people who can be more adversely affected by air quality problems. The proposed project will be located in a mixed area consisting of retail , residential, and commercial uses. Although sensitive receptors are in the immediate vicinity of the project, the construction impacts would be addressed as standard approval conditions, resulting h~ a less than significant impact to sensitive receptors. On-site Impacts As described in the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section, a Phase I and Phase II was prepared which indicates that the project site is in an area where there is known contamination of the soil and groundwater with volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Because of this contamination, the proposed project, which includes residential uses, would be at potential risk for vapor intrusion to the building. VOCs can disperse easily into small air spaces in soil and underneath structures, such as through foundation cracks, holes in concrete floors, and small gaps around pipes and utility lines. Some vapors, such as VOCs, may enter structures aflow contamination levels, and building ventilation systems are used to prevent hannful vapor buildup. VOCs mayor may not have a noticeable odor and may be present at levels posing acute or chronic health risks. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 9 Mitigated Negative Declaration c·, ,,{ Of According to the EPA, steps can be taken before site redevelopment to prevent vapor intrusion. I Some examples of prevention include ensuring that VOc. contamination is removed from the site (and sent to a proper treatment and disposal facility); preventing upward contaminant migration with an impermeable barrier such as a clay cap; and venting soil gas to outdoor ai,r before it can reach indoor spaces. At sites where the source of contamination cannot be completely eliminated through removal, other solutions to vapor intrusion problems can be implemented. Building techniques that serve to provide a vapor barrier between interior spaces and soil (or groundwater) can be combined with structures that provide an escape route for soil vapor to vent to the atmosphere rather than into indoor air. Some ventilation systems operate effectively without the use of energy (passive systems), while others may need cormection to a power supply (active systems). It should be noted for indoor air quality monitoring that the presence ofVOCs in indoor air may not necessarily be a result of vapor intrusion because there often is a background or pre-existing level ofVOC contamination present from chemical use in the building or from ambient air. As such, it is often difficult to distinguish between contamination attributable to vapor intrusion and contamination from background levels. As noted in Section VII, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this Initial Study, the proposed project would implement Mitigation Measure H-5, which would require the inclusion of a full vapor barrier and the installation of an active vapor collection and venting system underneath the building to mitigate potential soil vapor intrusion, and a monitoring plan to verify positive air flow and monitor for VOCs. Implementation 0fMitigation Measure H-5 would reduce the potential for on-site impacts from VOCs to on-site residential and commercial uses to less than significant. The project would be subject to the following City's standard conditions of approval: The following controls shall be implemented for the duration of project construction to minimize dust related construction impacts: • All active construction areas shall be watered at least twice daily. • All trucks hauling soil, sand, and loose materials shall be covered or shall retain at least two feet of freeboard. • All paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at the construction site shall be swept and watered daily. • Submit a plan for the recovery/recycling of demolition waste and debris before the issuance of a demolition permit. • Sweep streets daily if visible soil,material is carried onto adjacent public streets. Mitigation Measures C-I: The effects of construction activities would be increased dustfall and locally elevated levels of particulate matter downwind of construction activity. Construction dust has the potential for creating a nuisance at nearby properties. This impact is considered potentially significant but normally mitigable by implementing the following control measures: During demolition of existing structures: Environmental Protection Agency "Design Solutions for Vapor Intrusion and Indoor Air Quality," on~line at http://www.epa.gov/ swerospsfbfJfacts/vapor _intrusion,pdf (accessed December 12, 2008) 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 10 Mitigated Negative Declaration • Water active demolition areas to control dust generation during demolition and pavement break- up. • Cover all trucks hauling demolition debris from the site. • Use dust-proof chutes to load debris into ttucks whenever feasible. • During all construction phases: o Pave, apply water 3x1daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites. o Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more). o Enclose, cover, water 2x1daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). o Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hour. o Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. o Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. The above measures include feasible measures for construction emissions identified by the BAAQMD for large sites. According to the District threshold of significance for construction impacts, implementation of the measures would reduce construction impacts of the project to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measures: See H-5 under Section VII, Hazards and Hazardous Materials D BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional 1,2-x plans, policies, or regulations, or by the MapNI,5 California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? . b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, 1,2- policies, regulations, including federally MapNI,5 x protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? c) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or 1,2-x migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use MapNl,5 of native wildlife nursery sites? 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 11 Mitigated Negative Declaration I / Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No d) e) Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or as defined by the City of 1,2,3,5, x Palo Alto's Tree preservation Ordinance (Municioal Code Section 8.10)1 7,8 Conflict with any applicable Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, 1,2,3,6, x re"ional, or state habitat conservation DIan? 7,8, DISCUSSION: The project site is located in an established urban area with no riparian or tree habitat fot the candidate, sensitive, or special status species in the area. No endangered, threatened, or rare animals, insects and plant species have been identified at this site. The project site is located in an established commercial urban setting. The Comprehensive Plan includes policies, programs and implementing actions to ensure the preservation of biological tree resources. The following policies and programs are relevant to the proposed Project: • Policy N-14: Protect, revitalize, and expand Palo. Alto's urban forest. • Policy N-15: Require new commercial, multi-unit, and single family housing projects to provide street trees and related irrigation systems. • Program N-16: Require replacement of trees, including street trees lost to new development. • Program N-17: Develop and implement a plan for maintenance, irrigation, and replacement of trees. Palo Alto's Regulated Trees The City of Palo Alto Municipal Code regulates specific types of trees on public and private property for the purpose of avoiding their removal or disfigurement without first being reviewed and pennitted by the City's Planning or Public Works Departments. Three categories within the status of regulated trees include protected trees (PAMC 8.1 0), public trees (PAMC 8.04.020) and designated trees (PAMC 18.76, when so provisioned to be saved and protected by a discretionary approval.) Palo Alto Municipal Code Tree Preservation Ordinance Chapter 8.10 of the Municipal Code (the Tree Preservation Ordinance) protects a category of Regulated Trees, on public or private property from removal or disfigurement. The Regulated Tree category includes: 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 12 Mitigated Negative Declaration • Protected Trees. Includes all coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) and valley oak trees 11.5 inches or greater in diameter, coast redwood trees IS inches or greater in diameter, and heritage trees' designated by the City Council according to any of the following provisions: it is an outstanding specimen of a desirable species; it is one of the largest or oldest trees in Palo Alto; or it possesses distinctive form, size, age, location, andlor historical significance. • Street Trees. Also protected are City-owned street trees (all trees growing within the street right- of-way, outside of private property) • Designated Trees. Designated trees are established by the City when a project is subject to discretionary design review process by the Architecture Review Board that under Municipal Code Chapter IS.76.020(d)(1l) includes as part of the findings of review, "whether natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project." Outstanding tree specimens contributing to the existing site, neighborhood or community, and that have a rating of "High" Suitability for Preservation as reflected in Table 3.6-1 would constitute a typical designated tree. Palo Alto Tree Preservation Guidelines For all development projects within the City of Palo Alto, discretionary or ministerial, a Tree Disclosure Statement (TDS) is part of the submittal checklist to establish and verifY trees that exist on the site, trees that overhang the site originating on an adjacent property, and trees that are growing in a City easement, parkway, or publicly owned land. The TDS stipulates that a Tree Survey is required (for multiple trees), when a Tree Preservation Report is required (development within the dripline of a Regulated Tree), and who may prepare these documents. The City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual2 (Tree Technical Manual) describes acceptable procedures and standards to preserve Regulated Trees, including: • The protection oftrees during construction; • If allowed to be removed, the acceptable replacement strategy; • Maintenance of protected trees (such as pruning guidelines); • Format and procedures for tree reports; and • Criteria for determining whether a tree is a hazard. There are six street trees that would be impacted by the proposed underground parking. Some of the trees will likely need to be cut for the underground parking to be installed. The arborist report identifies protection measures to be incorporated in the plans to reduce the potential impact on public trees. These include root removal during the winter, protective fencing, mulching, irrigation, and guidelines for tree protection zone setback clearances for buildings and grading, above ground measures for walkways, structures, landscaping and flatwork. 2 City of Palo Alto, City of Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual, June 2001. Provided on line at http://www.cityofpaioalto.org/environment/urban canopy. asp 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 13 Mitigated Negative Declaration Nonetheless, the proposed project could result in disturbances to nesting birds in these trees. Nesting birds, their nests, and eggs are fully protected by the State Fish and Game Code (Sections 3503, 3503.5) and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA). Destruction of a nest woulll be a violation of these regulations, and would be a significant impact. The magnitude of impact would depend on the species affected. Mitigation Measures B-1: The applicant shall abide by all provisions of Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the State Fish and Game Code and Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) as published in the Federal Register (Vol. 70, No. 49; March 15,2005). Although there is no vegetation on the project site that may contain nesting birds, there may be nesting birds in existing vegetation abutting the proposed project site. To protect any nesting birds, the proposed . project may avoid construction during the nesting period. Alternatively, a qualified wildlife biologist (to be hired by the applicant) shall conduct a survey for nesting birds that are covered by the MBTA andlor Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the State Fish and Game Code in the vicinity of the project site. This survey shall cover all areas that would be disturbed as a result of construction.related activities during the nesting period, and shall include a "buffer zone" (an area of potential sensitivity, beyond the bounds of the proposed project construction area) which shall be determined by the biologist based on his or her professional judgment and experience. This buffer zone may include off-site habitat. This biological survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior' to the commencement of construction activities. The wildlife biologist shall provide a report to the City promptly detailing the findings of the survey. No construction shall be conducted until this report has been provided to the City and the City has authorized in writing ·the commencement of construction activities in accord with the biologist's findings. E CULTURAL RESOURCES . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Directly or indirectly destroy a local cultural 1,2- resource that is recognized by City Council resolution? MapL-7 x b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource 1,2-x pursuant to 15064.5? MapLS c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique 1,2-X 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 14 Mitigated Negative Declaration (" . , I .', I 'l , . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No d) e) f) Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated geologic feature? MapLS Disturb any human remains, including those 1,2-. interred outside of formal cemeteries? MapLS X Adversely affect a historic resource listed or eligible for listing on the National andior X California Register, or listed on the City's 1,2- Historic Inventory? MapL7 Eliminate important examples of major periods 1 of California history or prehistory? X DISCUSSION: The Comprehensive Plan indicates that the site is in a moderate archaeological resource sensitivity zone. Most of the City area east of Interstate 280 is designated in this zone. Although existing and historic development has altered the native landscape, the potential exists that now-buried Native American sites could be uncovered in future planning area construction. The project would entail excavation of one level of parking to a depth of 15 to 22 feet below grade. The project site is to be developed with underground parking. If archaeological materials are discovered the applicant would be required to perform additional testing and produce an Archaeological Monitoring and Data recovery Plan (AMDRP) to be approved prior to the start of construction. The City's standard conditions of approval will address this potentiality. Mitig!ltion Measures: None F. GEOLOGY, SOILS AND SEISMICITY Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Expose people or s!mctures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of See below loss, il1iury, or death involving: . i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-X Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area 2-MapN- or based on other substantial evidence of a 5,5 known fault? Refer to Division ofMines and Geology Special Publication 42. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 15 Mitigated Negative Declaration b) c) d) e) f) g) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 2-MapN- 10,5,9 X iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? 2-MapN-X 5,5,9 iv) Landslides? 2-MapN- 5,5,9 X Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 1,2,5,9 X Result in substantial siltation? 1,2,5,9 X Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unStable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, 2-MapN-X subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? 5,5,9 Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-I-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or 2-MapN-X property? 5,5,9 Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not 1',5,9 available for the disposal of waste water? X Expose people or property to m,yor geologic hazards that carmot be mitigated through the 1,4,5,9 X use of standard engineering design and seismic safety techniques? DISCUSSION: The entire state of California is in a seismically active area. According to the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan the project site is not in an area that is subject to very strong ground shaking in the event of an earthquake or in an area subject to expansive soils, surface rupture, liquefaction, or earthquake induced landslides. Based on the engineering analysis in the Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Murray Engineers Inc, the site is not located in an area considered susceptible to earthquake liquefaction. There are no active or potentially active faults across the property, therefore no fault rupture would occur on- site. Since the subsurface condition is not susceptible to liquefaction because the soil is not silty sand saturated by groundwater. The site would not be subject to lateral spreading and or seismic settlement if the recommendations provided by the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation prepared by Murray Engineers Inc. are followed. Development of the proposed project would be required to confonn to all requirements in the Uniform Building Code, which includes provisions to ensure that the design and construction of all buildings includes provisions to resist damage from earthquakes to the extent feasible and acceptable. The primary geotechnical constraints to the development are the presence of moderately shallow groundwater (relative to the planned basement excavation depths), the highly expansive nature of the near-surface soils, the site's seismic setting, and the City'S guidelines eliminating the use of subsurface drainage in relation to all basement construction. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 16 Mitigated Negative Declaration The excavation for the 13 to 20-foot deep (to floor elevation) below grade garage would likely extend to depths on the order of 15 to 22-feet below existing site grades, in some cases near or immediately adj acent to existing buildings and street sidewalks. Therefore, to mitigate the issue of differential settlement and potential impacts on these structures, the basement excavation would need a well- designed shoring system to be designed. The groundwater level is expected to be typically in order of 17 to I8-feet below existing grades. Therefore, because at least portions of the basement excavation would extend below the estimated ground level, dewatering by the contractor will likely be necessary to control groundwater during construction. Based on Murray Engineers Inc. investigation, the site appears to be blanketed by stiff to hard and medium dense to very dense alluvial soils to the depth explores at 46.5 feet. The alluvial soils should provide adequate support for the new foundation proposed. Substantial or permanent changes to the site topography are not expected. Standard conditions of approval require submittal of a final grading and drainage plan for the project for approval by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. The application of standard grading, drainage, and erosion control measures as a part of the approved grading and drainage plan is expected to avoid any grading-related impacts. All earthwork and site drainage, including foundation and basement excavations, retaining wall backfill, preparation of the sub grade beneath hardscape, placement and compaction of engineered fill, and surface drainage should be performed in accordance with the Geotechnical Report prepared by Murray Engineers, Inc., dated March 12, 2013. Mitigation Measures F -1: The design of all buildings shall be designed in accordance with current earthquake resistant standards, including the 2007 CBC guidelines and design recommendatiOlis regarding the potential for localized liquefaction presented in the Geotechnical Investigation provided by Murray Engineers. Mitigation Measure F -2: Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall submit a well-designed shoring system for the basement excavation to be designed by a licensed engineer subject to review and approval by Public Works Department. G HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incornorated a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routing transport, use, X or disposal of hazardous materials? 1,5,16 b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the X release of hazardous materials into the 1,5,16 environment? 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 17 Mitigated Negative .Declaration ( c) d) d) e) f) g) I h) i) Emit hazardous emissions o~ handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or X waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or 1,5,16 pronosed sChool? Construct a school on a property that is subject X to hazards from hazardous materials 1,5,16 contamination, emissions or accidental release? Be located on a site which is includee! on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant X to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a 1,2- result, would it create a significant hazard to MapN-9, the public or the environment? 5 For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or X public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in 1,2 the nroiect area? . For a project within the vicinity ofa private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working the 1,2 X proiect area? Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response . 1,2-X plan or emergencv evacuation nlan? MapN-7 Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland I fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to X urbanized areas or where residences are 2-MapN-7 intermixed with wildlands? Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment from existing hazardous materials 1,5,11,16 X contamination by exposing future occupants or users of the site to contamination in excess of soil and ground water cleanup goals developed for the site? DISCUSSION: The proposed project would not involve the handling, transportation, use, disposal, or emission of hazardous materials. The project is not expected to pose airport-related safety hazards. The proposed project would not interfere with either emergency response or evacuation. The project site is not located in a designated fire hazard area. The new construction and site design shall be required to comply with the City'S building permit approval standards and fire equipment and fire protection coverage standards as conditions of project approval prior to the issuance ofa building permit. The property is not currently listed on any commercially available database, or on the Santa Clara Valley Water District or Water Board databases, as having a release of hazardous materials or documented contaminants. Several vicinity properties are listed as having reported releases of hazardous materials or documented environmental contamination. Based on the location, it is likely that a groundwater plume underlays the property. The site is documented to be contaminated by VOCs, primarily trichloroethene (TCE). The groundwater contamination is referred to the Califomia-Olive_ 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 18 Mitigated Negative Declaration rl , f Emerson plume (COE) based on the city streets that bound it. The COE Study Area has a long (since 1981) of investigation and remediation by the responsible parties (HP and Varian). Both HP and Varian agreed to accept financial responsibility to investigate and remediate the plume, and the Water Board is providing regulatory oversight of the monitoring and cleanup action. Stellar Enviroumental Solutions, Inc. conducted a Phase 1 of the subject site. During the course of this assessment, Stellar Enviroumental identified several potential environmental concerns with the development of the site: 1) Ensuring that the excavated soils are appropriately disposed of based on soil sampling and profiling; 2) Evaluating the impact of dewatering during the deeper car lift machine excavation areas that will require construction phase discharge of groundwater; and 3) Assessing the potential for soil-vapor intrusion through the collection of site specific soil gas data collected at the base of the area [above groundwater] of the excavation. Soil samples results show minimal concentrations of any environmental concern and those that were reported appear to be naturally occurring or de-minimus. No VOCs were detracted in any of the 12 soil composite samples collected. Diesel and oil range petroleum hydrocarbons detected in soil composite samples collected for this investigation are at non-hazardous concentrations, with only chromium and lead (Pb) in one sample .that showed concentrations above the 50 mg/kg requiring a Waste Extraction Test (WET). The WET analysis showed no soluble concentration of concern, confirining the non- hazardous nature. Stellar Environmental concludes the soil shows no contamination of environmental concern and can be disposed of offsite as non-hazardous to a regulated landfill placed on the dirt reuse market if an infill area accepts the analytical profiling completed to date. The detected VOC contamination in the groundwater shows TCE concentrations at the de-minimus levels consistent with the distal area of the HP plume. The soil-gas is the one media showing significant concentration variations in the four samples with one of the four samples showing a concentration of TCE and PCE above regulatory guidance. The elevated TCE and PCE soil-gas can be mitigated during the excavation phase because the base excavation depth is below the clay-rich cap that traps the soil-gas. Mitigation Measures H-l: A project specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) and a Site Mitigation Plan (SMP), would be implemented, and adhered to during construction and excavation activities. All workers on site should be read and understand the. HASP and SMP, and copies should be maintained on site during construction and excavation at all times. Mitigation Measures H-2: A Remedial Risk Management Plan (RRMP) should be developed and followed by current and future owners, tenants, and operators. The plan will include the implementation of the described remedies and engineering design. Mitigation Measures H-3: Additional collection of four soil samples at the site should be completed after the base excavation to 14 feet bgs is achieved. This soil-gas collection will verify if the removal of the clay cap has resulted in a reduction of residual soil gas below the residential ESLs. Current PCE and TCE concentrations in soil-gas are one or two orders of magnitude greater that what would be expected to accumulate based on current groundwater concentrations of PCE and TCE, and would not be likely to reach the current concentrations in the future if the reduction of groundwater contaminants continues as it is expected to. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 19 Mitigated Negative Declaration Mitigation Measures H-4: If soil-gas concentrations collected following the initial base excavation , phase have not resulted in significant decrease, a sub slab passive vapor collection and passive vapor collection and passive venting system designed full vapor barrier would be implemented to mitigate against the identified VOC soil-vapor intrusion (see Mitigation Measure H-5 for vapor intrusion mitigation system). Mitigation Measure H-5: Prior to issuance of the occupancy permit the applicant shall file documentation from im independent' consultant specializing in vapor mitigation system design and installation for final approval by a third party inspection service reporting to the City financed by the applicant confirming that each component (collection pipes, transmission pipes, inlets, risers, vents, etc.) of the vapor intrusion mitigation system (VIMS) has been installed in accordance with recommendations of the Vapor Mitigation System and Monitoring Plan, and includes the installation of a full vapor barrier, which shall be a 60-mil thick, spray applied membrane below elevator shafts, stairWells, pipe chases, and entire floor slab, as part of the active vapor collection and venting system (i.e., driven by electric fans at the effluent end of the VMS riser pipes enhanced by outside air entering through inlet vents) to be installed in the building to mitigate potential soil vapor intrusion. Mitigation Measure H-6: A Groundwater Mitigation Plan shall be provided for lowering ground water levels during the excavation phase that may reach depths to 22-feet bgs which is about 4-feet below the expected level of first encountered groundwater. The mitigation plan shall specify the number of groundwater dewatering wells with dedicated pumps to be installed around the site perimeter throughout the project duration. This plan shall be prepared and submitted for final approval by the City's Public Works Department prior to issuance of City permits. Mitigation Measure H-7: A detailed groundwater extraction design shall be developed including a staging plans for dewatering system, including all required chemical testing, dewatering systems layout, well depths, well screen lengths, dewatering pump locations, pipe sizes and capacities, grades, filter , sand gradations, surface water disposal method, permitting and location. This design shall be prepared and submitted for final approval by the City'S Public Works Department prior to issuance of City permits ' Mitigation Measure H-8: This and future technical reports should be uploaded (as required) to the appropriate regulatory agencies-including uploads to the SCCDEH's ftp system and the State Geo Tracker system. H. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? 1,2,5 X b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 20 Mitigated Negative Declaration I" i . \ "-, ," , in aquifer volume or a lowering ofthe local groundwater table level (e.g., the production 2-MapN2 rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have X been Rranted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the . alteration of the course ofa stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial X erosion or siltation on-or off-site? 1,2,5 d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern ofthe site or area, including through the alteration of the course ofa stream or river, or , substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result 1,2,5 X iu flooding on-or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or plarmed stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted . 1,2,5 X runoff? f) Otherwise substantiaiiV dwade wateraualltV? 1,2 X g) Place housing within a IOO-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? 1,2-Map X N-6,5 h) Place within a IOO-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect 2-MapN6 X flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involve flooding, X including flooding as a result of the failure of a 2-MapN6 levee or darn or being located within a IOO-year N8 flood hazard area? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 2-MapN6, X . N8 k) Result in stream bank instability? 1,2-X MaoN6,9 DISCUSSION: Construction of the proposed building and related site improvements would not result in an increase in the amount of'impervious surface area on the site. The site is entirely paved with asphalt. Stormwater runoff is currently conveyed from the site via curb street gutters to the paved parking areas, where it runs to the street and ultimately discharges into the San Francisco Bay. As previously referred to in the Geology, Soils and Seismicity section of this study layers of moderately to highly plastic fine-grained alluvium and medium dense to very dense coarse-grained alluvium. The project site is not located in an area of groundwater recharge and will.not deplete the groundwater supplies. The project site is located outside of the I DO-year flood hazard area and would not impede or redirect flood flows. The project site is not in an area that is subject to seiche, tsunami or mudflow. With the City's required conditions of approval the water impacts of the project will not be significant. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 21 Mitigated Negative Declaration Water quality standards and waste discharge requirements that are applicable to the proposed project are established in the Water Quality Control Plan for San Francisco Bay (Basin Plan) prepared by the RWQCB in compliance with the federal CWA and the State Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act , and the NPDES permits issued by the RWQCB in accordance with the Clean Water Act, which incorporates Basin Plan objectives. All point and non-point discharges (including urban runoff) must comply with the identified water quality objectives and the concentrations of contaminants in the discharges must be controlled, either through NPDES permits or waste discharge requirements. Two components of the proposed project are subject to separate NPDES requirements: construction and operation. Although the RWQCB is ultimately responsible for ensuring discharges from development in the City comply with conditions in the permits, which are summarized below, the City of Palo Alto is required by the terms of its NPDES Municipal Permit to review and regulate stomiwater discharges from development sites. During demolition, grading and construction, storm water pollution could result. Standard conditions of architectural review approval would require the incorporation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) for storm water pollution prevention in all construction operations, in conformance with the Santa Clara Valley Non-Point Source Pollution Control Program, and submittal of a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) in conjunction with building permit plans to address potential water quality impacts. The City requires the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) required by the NPDES Construction General Permit be reviewed by the Public Works Department prior to issuance of a grading permit. Overseeing conformance to the SWPPP is the responsibility of the Public Works Department, or a third party hired by the Public. works Department, at the owner's expense, that specializes in the monitoring of activities related to water quality and water discharge requirements. If contaminated soils were found, the soils would be managed appropriately by segregating them into separate piles in a designated area onsite and covering the piles with plastic sheeting until additional testing was completed. The stockpiles would be managed in accordance with the SWPPP and the SMP. This would reduce the potential for soils (regardless of whether contaminants are present or not) to be washed into storm drains and enter the creek. To prevent cross-contamination', construction equipment . and transportation vehicles that contact exposed native soils would be decontaminated prior to leaving the site. Wash water from decontamination would be collected and managed in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and monitored by trained personnel. The stored water would be sampled for chemicals, the results of which would determine how the water should be disposed. The water used for on-site dust control would have to meet NPDES permit requirements for such use and for any subsequent discharge to the storm drain. If the water were found not to meet the permit requirements it . , would either be treated on-site or removed. In either case, no discharges to the storm drain exceeding adopted standards would be permitted. This measure would reduce the potential for contaminants to be transported off-site and possibly enter runoff from roadways, and would ensure proper disposal. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 22 Mitigated Negative Declaration Implementation of the required NPDES SWPP as monitored and enforced during construction would be compliance with storm water quality standards. City development standards and standard conditions of project approval would reduce potential negative impacts of the project to less than significant. Mitigation Measure: None I LAND USE AND PLANNING . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Poteutially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact- Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Physically divide an established community? 1,2 X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local X coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an 1,2,3,6,II environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community 1,2 X conservation plan? d) Substantially adversely change the type or 1,2,6,11 intensity of existing or planned land use in the -X area? e) Be incompatible with adjacent land uses or with 1,2,3,6,II the general character of the surrounding area, X iucluding density and building he~ht? f) Conflict with established residential, 1,2,6,1 I recreational, educational, religious, or scientific X uses of an area? g) Convert prime farmland, unique farmland, or 1,2,6 farmland of statewide importance (farmland) to X non-agricultural use? DISCUSSION: The proposed project at 3159 EI Camino Real is the demolition of the two existing commercial buildings (at 3111 and 3159 EI Camino Real) for the construction of 62,887 square feet of new floor area to establish a 49-6" foot tall, 4-story, 46-unit apartment building, with commercial, office and retail uses with underground parking facilities (13 feet below grade) providing 223 automobile spaces including parking lifts. The project is subject to review by the Plarming and Transportation Commission (P&TC), Architectural Review Board (ARB) and City Council approval; the Site and Design Review approval findings and ARB approval criteria and findings are designed to ensure an appropriate site layout and architectural design, including landscaping that is aesthetically pleasing and compatible with its surroundings. The site development complies with the land -use designation as described below. Compliance with parking regulations is addressed in Section 0 below. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 23 Mitigated Negative Declaration The Service Commercial land use designation allows for facilities providing citywide and regional services and relies on customers arriving by car. Typical uses encouraged in this district include auto services and dealerships, motels, appliance stores and restaurants. The proposed hotel development within this section of the City is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan goal to provide citywide and regional services. The proposed mixed use is an allowed use within the CS Zone District. The project complies with the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) allowed under the CS zone district. The CS Zone allows for an FAR of 1.0:1 for a total mixed use floor area ratio. The total building area is 69,503 square feet (I :0: I FAR). Three DEEs are requested as part of this application. The first DEE is to exceed the maximum height limit in the CS zone district. The height of the development is 49-6" feet, measured to the top of the parapet meeting the 50-foot maximum allowable height limit for the CS zone district. The proposed rooftop light monitors and mechanical roof screen w<;mld exceed the 50-foot height limit; none would be taller than 63' -5" -these projections above 50-feet are monitors that would provide lighting to the interior of the fourth floor residential units. The monitors would provide lighting to the interior of the fourth floor residential units. Inserting the light monitors between the required roof screens provides a consistent horizontal element at the roof top where an assortment of mechanical screens would be located, resulting in a streamlined profile. The second DEE request is for a'reduction in the required setback from 5-feet to 2-feet along Acacia A venue. The proj ect is unique in that it encompasses an entire block face of EI Camino Real and serves to anchor the entire frontage with a strong building mass that reinforces the street edge. The area available for ground floor retail/recreation space at the comer of EI Camino Real and Acacia Avenue is constrained in width by the existing structures that will remain at 3127 EI Camino Real. The reduced setback aIlows a better proportional building element at the intersection of El Camino Real and Acacia A venue, with a strong comer presence at the street level that steps back at the upper level as it transitions to the residential element along Acacia A venue. The third requested DEE is to allow for an increase of the "build to" line requirement along Portage Avenue to aIlow a 7-foot setback in lieu of a 5-foot setback. The proposed ground floor levels have been set to allow accessibility across the site as weIl as at the El Camino Real entry points. This results in an elevated plaza area at the comer of El Camino Real and Portage Avenue, which serves both to mark the corner and to provide a distinct Sense of destination for plaza visitors. Access to the elevated plaza would be provided via a stairway at the comer and a ramp along Portage A venue at the face of the building. A 7-foot setback at this location would allow access space for the ramp in addition to a landscape buffer strip, The two-foot exception would afford enhanced aesthetics while providing easy site accessibility. The commercial area would be set back from EI Camino Real to provide a 12-foot wide effective sidewalk width (curb face to building, required by Zoning Code SectionI8.16.060). The front setback is 4-feet from the back of sidewalk The rear setback is 10-feet at the residential portion which is consistent with the CS zone. The project site is located within the Cal-Ventura Mixed Use Area, identified in the Comprehensive Plan, a mixed use area adjacent to the California A venue business district It is also served by the California Avenue Multi-model Transit Station. Cal-Ventura offers opportunities for new transit- 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 24 Mitigated Negative Declaration oriented development, as it includes several underutilized properties likely to redevelop in the near future. New housing in this area could provide the momentum for neW pedestrian amenities and shuttle bus connections to nearby Stanford Research Park. The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The project site is located within the Cal-Ventura corridor area, as defined by the South El Camino Real Design Guidelines (Guidelines). It is not considered a strategic site within theCal-Ventura Area. The area is characterized by mixed-use as well as auto-oriented retail commercial uses. Although presently pedestrian activity is light, the Guidelines look toward accommodating such activity. With that in mind the Guidelines indicate new buildings should front El Camino Real with entries fronting the street or clearly visible from the street providing. recognizable and easily accessible entries for both pedestrians and vehicular arrivals. The project proposal complies with many of the specific Guidelines for the mixed-use area relative to site planning and design. The Guidelines indicate that all buildings should have entries facing El Camino Real. The proposed commercial entry faces on El Camino Real adjacent to the Portage Avenue comer. The project is requesting three DEEs that would provide for enhanced aesthetics and stronger pedestrian oriented entry on El Camino Real. Consequently, the project would have a less than significant impact with respect to land use and zoning designation. The site is not located in a "Prime Farmland", "Unique Farmland", or "Farmlancj of Statewide Importance" area, as shown on the maps. prepared for the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency. The site is not zoned for agricultural use; and is not regulated by the Williamson Act. Mitigation Measures: None. J MINERAL RESOURCES . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? 1,2 X b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan 1,2 X or other land use plan? DISCUSSION: The City of Palo Alto has been classified by the California Department of Conservation (DOC), Division of Mines and Geology (DMG) as a Mineral Resource Zone 1 (MRZ-l). This designation signifies that there are no aggregate resources in the area. The DMG has not classified the City for other 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 25 Mitigated Negative Declaration resources. There is no indication in the 20 1 0 Comprehensive Plan that there are locally or regionally valuable mineral resources within the City of Palo Alto. Mitigation Measures: None. K NOISE . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially I. Less Than No Significallt Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise X levels in excess of standards established in the , local general plan or noise ordinance, or 1,2,13 applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibrations or ground 1,2,13 X borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient X noise levels in the project vicinity above level~ 1,2,13 existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in X ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? 1,2,13 e) For a project located within an airport land use X plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to 1,2 e.xcessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity ofa private X airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to 1,2 excessive noise levels? . g) Cause the average 24 hour noise level (Ldn) to 1,2;13 increase by 5.0 decibels (dB) or more in an X existing residential area, even ifthe Ldn would remain below 60 dB? h) Cause the Ldn to increase by 3.0 dB or more in 1,2,13 an existing residential area, thereby causing the X Ldn in the area to exceed 60 dB? i) Cause an increase of3.0 dB or more in an 1,2,13 existing residential area where the Ldn X currently exceeds 60 dB? j) Result in indoor noise levels for residential 1,2,13 X development to exceed an Ldn of 45 dB? k) Result in instantaneous noise levels of greater 1,2,13 X X than 50 dB in bedrooms or 55 dB in other rooms in areas with an exterior Ldn of 60 dB or greater? I) Generate construction noise exceeding the 1,2,5,13 X 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 26 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Wonld the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation . Incoroorated daytime background Leq at sensitive receptors bv 10 dBA or more? DISCUSSION: The project site is located in an area with an existing noise level ranging between 67-74 Ldn • Vehicular traffic along EI Camino Real provides the dominate source of "steady-state" environmental noise at the site. The typical events include cars and trucks as well as regularly scheduled buses. This noise level is typical for commercial districts. Grading and construction activities will result in temporary increases in local ambient noise levels. Typical noise sources would include mechanical equipment associated with excavation, grading and construction, which will be short term in duration. Standard approval conditions would require the project to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance (PAMC Chapter 9.10), which restricts the timing and overall noise levels associated with construction activity. Short-term construction that complies with the Noise Ordinance would result in impacts that are expected to be less than significant. Based on acoustical measurements performed by Charles Salter and Associates, the future noise levels at the proposed setback of the apartment units would range from DNL 74dB to 67dB. Facades facing El Camino Real receive the highest noise levels, DNL 74dB. Facades along Acacia Avenue and Portage Avenue receive noise levels to 67dB. Project noise levels exceed 65dB threshold for CalGreen. Therefore, the commercial and retail spaces require acoustical treatment. All· of these measured noise levels would be considered "normal to conditionally acceptable" for commercial space and "conditionally acceptable" for residential per the City's noise goals. Therefore, noise reducing measures would be required to comply with City'S noise standards. Where the DNL exceeds 65dBA, the project must incorporate mitigation measures into the building design to reduce interior noise levels from exterior sources to DNL 45dBA or less. To meet the indoor noise level criteria, sound-rated exterior facades will be necessary for some units. Recommendations for sound rated construction will depend on the size and type of rooms, window and exterior facades, and must be detennined during the design phase. In addition to the background noise affecting the project, the project will generate noise that would increase the ambient noise levels. Equipment such as roof top air conditioning and exhaust fans as well as emergency engine generators crates noise that must comply with the City of Palo Alto Noise Ordinance. The ordinance requires that mechanical equipment noise not exceed 6dB above the local ambient at residential property lines or 8 dB at commercial property lines with a maximum daytime exception of 70 dB when measures at 25 feet. To mitigate the potential noise impacts of the mechanical equipment it is recommended that the project incorporate mitigations measures as outlined in the Palo Alto Noise Ordinance which include equipment selection, equipment location, and equipment enclosures. The underground parking will require an exhaust system. Any noise from this system will be attenuated. 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 27 Miligated Negative Declaration . The City's standard conditions of approval will be applied to the project to ensure the construction noise and rooftop mechanical equipment noise impacts will be reduced to a level of insignificance. The project site is not located within an airport land use plan or within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Mitigation Measures: None L POPULATION AND HOUSING . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No a) b) c) d) e) Significant Significant Significant Impact Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing X new homes and businesses) or in<;lirectly (for 1,2,5,6 example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of X replacement housing elsewhere? 1,5,6 Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement X housing elsewhere? 1,5,6 Create a substantial imbalance between 1,2,6 X employed residents and jobs? Cumulatively exceed regional or local 1,2,6, population projections? -X DISCUSSION: The project is the redevelopment of a 1.6 acre site to construct 62,887 square feet of new floor area to establish a 49-6" foot tall, 4-story, 46-unit apartment building, with commercial, office and retail uses. This mixed-use project will not impact the City's jobs-housing (im) balance. Population in Palo Alto's sphere of influence in 1996, according to Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan was 58,000 people. This is projected by the City's Comprehensive Plan to increase to 62,880 by 2010. By adding 46 units to the housing stock, the proposed project would contribute to population growth in the area. With an average household size of 2.24 persons the proposed project would generate a population increase of approximately 103 people; however, the project is included as Housing Opportunity site in the Housing Element, and the population increase has been anticipated. This incremental increase in population generated by the proposed project would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures: None. M. PUBLIC SERVICES 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 28 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact a) Significant Significant Significant Wonld the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: 1,2 X Fire protection? 1,2 X Police protection? 1,2 X Schools? 1,2 X Parks? X 1,2 Other public facilities? DISCUSSION: Fire The site is presently served by the Palo Alto Fire Department. The proposed changes will not impact present Fire District service to the site or area. The project would, as a condition of approval, be required to comply with all Fire Department requirements for fire safety. Police The site is located within the jurisdiction of the Palo Alto Police Department. The proposed changes will not result in the need for additional police officers, equipment or facilities. Schools The Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) serves the City of Palo Alto and portions of the City of Los Altos Hills. PAUSD includes 12 elementary schools (kindergarten through grade five), 3 intermediate schools (grades six through eight), and 2 high schools (grades nine through twelve). Other schools and programs in the PAUSD include a pre-school program, a self-supporting adult school , a school for the hearing impaired, the Children's Hospital School at the Lucille Packard Children'S Hospital, and a summer schoo!.3 In 2006, PAUSD employed approximately 646 teachers, providing a ratio of one teacher for every 17.5 students.4 Palo Alto Unified School District, http://pausd,orglparents/schoo!s_sites/index,shtml, accessed I?ecember 12, 2008 The staffing ratio is calculated based on 2006 student 'enrollment of 11,329 as reported by the Palo Alto Unified School District Agenda. Regular Meeting, September 23, 2008 ' 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 29 Mitigated Negative Declaration Enrollment in the PAUSD is approaching capacity. According to the City of Palo Alto's Board of Education, in the 2008-2009 school year, elementary schools have room for an additional 123 students, middle schools have room for 95 students, and high schools have room for 239 students. Therefore, PAUSD schools' classroom capacity can accommodate approximately 457 additional students. Based on the PAUSD student generation rates (Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc. (Lapkoff Forecast page 20), an apartment unit yields 0.15 student, a stacked condominium yields 0.25 student, and a BMR multifamily residential unit yields 0.7 student. With 46 apartments at a 0.15 yield factor, a total of 6.6 students are estimated to be generated from the development. Student enrollment associated with the proposed project would be within existing capacity. Consequently, the impact of the proposed project on schools would be less than significant. Parks The City of Palo Alto follows the National Recreation and Park Association (NRP A) Standards as guidelines for determining parkland needs. These standards recommend that a city of the size and density of Palo Alto should provide 2 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents. The proposed project would generate 103 additional residents at the project site and would generate additional workers at the project site. Based on the NRP A Standards, the addition of 103 residents to the project site would generate a demand for 0.10 acres of parkland. Impact fees to address impacts on parks were adopted by the Palo Alto City Council in March of 2002. As a condition of approval and prior to receiving a building permit, the project applicant will be required to pay a one-time development impact fee for parks. The City's park-in-lieu fee and park facility fee will be used to offset impacts on park facilities as a result of this project. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact. Other Public Facilities Impact fees to address impacts on community centers and libraries were adopted by the Palo Alto City Council in March of 2002. Prior to receiving a building permit, the project applicant will be required to pay a one time development impact fee for community centers and libraries. The fee will be used to offset impacts on community centers and library facilities as a result of this project. Therefore, the project would result in a less than significant impact. Mitigation Measures: None N RECREATION Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or X other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the 1,5,6 facility would occur or be accelerated? 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 30 Mitigated Negative Declaration Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Wonld the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated b) Does the project illclude recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which X might have an adverse physical effect on the 1,5,6 environment? DISCUSSION: This project is subject to payment of impact fees for parks, libraries and community facilities. The project would not have any significant impact on existing parks, nor include or require construction of recreational facilities. No mitigation is required. . There would not be a significant change to the demand of recreation services as a result of the proposed project. Mitigation Measures: None o TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC . Issues and Supportiug Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic X load and capacity of the street system (i.e., 1,5,14,20 result in a substantial increase ill either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the X county congestion management agency for 1,5,14, designated roads or highways? c) Result in change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels X or a change in location that results in 1 substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or X dangerous intersections) or incompatible 1,6,14 uses (e.g., farm equipment)? 3159 El Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 31 Mitigated Negative Declaration . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 1,2,5 ·X f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 1,2,5,14, X g) Conflict with adopied policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative X transportation (e.g., pedestrian, transit & 1,2,5,6,14 bicycle facilities)? h) Cause a local (City of Palo Alto) intersection 1,2,5,14 to deteriorate below Level of Service (LOS) X D and cause an increase in the average stopped delay for the critical movements by four seconds or more and the critical volume/capacity ratio (V /C) value to increase by 0.01 or more? i) Cause a local intersection already operating at 1,2,5,14 . LOS E or F to deteriorate in the average X stopped delay for the critical movements by four seconds or more? j) Cause a regional intersection to deteriorate 1,2,5,14 from an LOS E or better to LOS F or cause X critical movement delay at such an intersection already operating at LOS F to increase by four seconds or more and the critical V /e value to increase by 0.01 or more? k) Cause a freeway segment to operate at LOS F 1,2,5,14 or contribute traffic in excess of I % of X segment capacity to a freeway segment already operating at LOS F? 1) Cause any change in traffic that would 1,2,5,14,20 X increase the Traffic Infusion on Residential Environment (TIRE) index by 0.1 or more? m) Cause queuing impacts based on a 1,2,5,14 comparative analysis between the design X queue length and the available queue storage capacity? Queuing impacts include, but are not limited to, spillback queues at project access locations; queues at tum lanes at intersections that block through traffic; queues at lane drops; queues at one intersection that extend back to impact other intersections, and spillback queues on ramps. n) Impede the development or function of 1,2,5,14 X planned pedestrian or bicycle facilities? 0) Impede the operation of a transit system as a 1,2,5,14 X result of congestion? p) Create an operational safety hazard? 1,5,14 X DISCUSSION: 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 32 Mitigated Negative Declaration A Transportation Impact Analysis & Neighborhood Traffic Study provided by Kimley-Hom analyzed the potential impacts to the transportation system as a result of the redevelopment of the project site. The existing facilities at the project site include the operation health/fitness club (Equinox) and operational retail building (We Fix Macs). The existing operational specialty building would be displaced and its square footage incorpo~ated into the proposed. Significant findings of the study concluded: • The proposed project is estimated to generate 893 total new daily trips, 89 trips occurring during the AM peak-hours, 58 new trips occurring during the PMpeak-hour. • As defined by Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), the addition of the proposed project to the Cumulative (2035) scenario significantly worsen operating conditions at the EI Camino intersection with West Charleston Road/Arastradero Road. This impact can be mitigated to less than significant. • The addition of the proposed project adds nominal additional queuing to several of the study locations. Specifically, the project contributes at least one car length (25-feet) to the eastbound EI Camino Realleftcturn queen at the Portage Avenue/Hansen Way intersection. The significant impact at the EI Camino West Charleston Road/ Arastradero Road intersection can be mitigated with the addition ofa southbound West Charleston Road right-turn overlap signal phase. Access/Circulation Primary access to the site will be provided from Portage Avenue with secondary access from Acacia A venue. Pedestrian and bicycle access to the site will also be provided via EI Camino Real and Portage Avenue. Parking Spaces Vehicular parking is provided in the existing two-level garage on Portage A venue, supplemented by a new underground garage that will be accessed from the below-grade portion of the existing garage. In addition, on-grade visitor parking is tucked beneath the residential wings of the building accessed from Portage A venue and Acacia Avenue. According to the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Section 18.52.040, the project is required to provide 235 parking spaces. The project proposes 223 parking spaces, 5% (12 parking spaces). The parking provided is a joint facility serving a variety of uses, the applicant will request a reduction in accordance with P AMC Section 18.52.050 Table (4). PAMC 18.52.050 allows for Director adjustments for, for joint use parking facilities where at least 10 spaces are otherwise required where the Director can require a TDM program to be submitted and approved (up to 20% reduction). The applicant is requesting a 5% reduction in the required number of stalls. Car lifts for tenants will be employed in the new Portion of the underground garage, while conventional spaces are provided for customers and visitors. Transit Service Impacts Existing bus service is provided on El Camino Real. The project is estimated to have a less than significant impactto transit service. Pedestrian and Bicycle Impacts 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 33 Mitigated Negative Declaration The project includes adequate bicycle parking as well as pedestrian access to and from the site. The project is estimated to have a less than significant impact to bicycle and pedestrian impacts. The project has been reviewed by the City Fire Department and Transportation Division and does not contain design features that will substantially increase hazards or result in inadequate emergency access. The project will not result in a change to air traffic patterns. Impact Fees The property is subject to citywide traffic impact fees. Mitigation Measures T-l: The applicant shall conduct an evaluation and implementation of signal cycle length optimization and reallocation of the green time at the intersection of El Camino Real and West Charleston Road. P UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 1.2 X b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the X construction of which could cause significant 1,2 environmental effects? c) Require orresult in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of X which could cause significant environmental 1,2 effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded 1,2 X entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate X capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing 1 commitments? ~ t) Be served by a landfill with sufficient pennitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? 1 X g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes . and regulations related to solid waste? 1 X h) Result in a substantial physical deterioration I 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 34 Mitigated Negative Declaration . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated of a public facility due to increased use as a result of the project? X DISCUSSION: The proposed project would not significantly increase the demand on existing utilities and serviCe systems, or use resources in a wasteful or inefficient manner. Standard conditions of approval require the applicant to submit calculations by a registered civil engineer to show that the on-site and off site water, sewer and fire systems are capable of serving the needs of the development and adjacent properties during peak flow demands. Trash and recycling facilities are proposed in the project to accommodate the expected waste and recycling streams that would be generated by the expected uses within the building. The project is subject to all conditions of approval provided by all applicable city departments. Mitigation Measures: None Q MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE . Issues and Supporting Information Resources Sources Potentially Potentially Less Than No Impact Significant Significant Significant Would the project: Issues Unless Impact Mitigation .. Incorporated a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, X substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining 1,2-Map levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal LA,S cormnunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively X considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects ·of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, 1,2,5 the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects X on human beings, either directly or 1,5,9,10,13, indirectly? 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 35 Mitigated Negative Declaration , , i i DISCUSSION: The project would not have an impact on fish or wildlife habitat, nor would it impact cultural or historic resources. The uses are appropriate for the site and the development would not result in an adverse visual impact. There is nothing in the nature of the proposed development and property improvements that would have a substantial adverse effect on human beings, or other life or environmental impacts once mitigation is implemented to reduce potential impacts to the users of the new mixed use project in the area of biological resources, noise, seismicity and air quality. Global Climate Change Impacts Global climate change is the alteration of the Earth's weather including its temperature, precipitation, and wind patterns. Global temperatures are affected by naturally occurring and anthropogenic generated atmospheric gases, such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. These gases allow sunlight into the Earth's atmosphere, but prevent radiative heat from escaping into outer space, which is known as the "greenhouse" effect. The world's leading climate scientists have reached . consensus that global climate change is underway and is very likely caused by humans. Twenty agencies at the international, national . , state, and local levels are considering strategies to control emissions of gases that contribute to global warming. There is no comprehensive strategy that is being implemented on a global scale that addresses climate change; however, in California a multiagency "Climate Action Team", has identified a range of strategies and the Air Resources Board, under Assembly Bill (AB) 32, has been designated to adopt the main plan for reducing California's GHG emissions by January 1, 2009, and regulations and other initiatives for reducing GHG emissions by January 1,2011. AB 32 requires achievement by 2020 of a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to 1990 emissions, and the adoption of rules and regulations to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective greenhouse gas emissions reductions. By 2050, the state plans to reduce emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. While the state of California has established programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there are no established standards for gauging the significance of greenhouse gas emissions. Neither CEQA nor the CEQA Guidelines provide any methodology for analysis of greenhouse gases. Given the "global" scope of global climate change, the challenge under CEQA is for a Lead Agency to translate the issue down to the level of a CEQA document for a specific project in a way that is meaningful to the decision making process. Under CEQA, the essential questions are whether a project creates or contributes to an environmental impact or is subject to impacts from the environment in which it would occur, and what mitigation measures are available to avoid or reduce impacts. The project would generate greenhouse gases primarily through electricity generation/use and generation of vehicle trips. Efforts to reduce the project's greenhouse gas emissions by reducing electricity demand and reducing vehicle trips and miles, therefore, should be implemented. The land use is changing from general business service and to a larger mixed use development. consisting of retail, commercial and residential. The proposed project would confonn to the City's Comprehensive Plan and other policies to reduce vehicle trips and miles traveled, and encourage automobile-alternative modes of transportation (e.g., public transit, walking, and bicycling), as described in detail in Section 0 Transportation of this Initial Study. ' 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 36 Mitigated Negative Declaration Given the overwhelming scope of global climate change, it is not anticipated that a single development project would have an individually discernable effect on global climate change (e.g., that any increase in global temperature or rise in sea level could be attributed to the emissions resulting from one single development project). Rather, it is more appropriate to conclude that the greenhouse gas emissions generated by the proposed project would combine with emissions across the state, nation, and globe to cumulatively contribute to global climate change. Declaring an impact significant or not implies some knowledge of incremental effects that is several' years away, at best. To detennine whether the proposed project would have a significant impact on global climate change is speculative, particularly giv~n the fact that there are no existing numerical' thresholds to detennine an impact. However, in an effort to make a good faith effort at disclosing enviromnental impacts and to conform with the CEQA Guidelines [§16064(b)], it is the City's position that, based on the nature and size of this project, its location within an established urban area served by existing infrastructure (rather than a greenfield site) and the project's location in an area served by local and regional shuttle and transit systems, the proposed project would not impede the state's ability to reach the emission reduction limits/standards set forth by the State of California by Executive Order S- 3-05 and AB 32. For these reasons, this project would not make a cumulatively considerable contribution to global climate change associated with greenhouse gas emissions. The measures to reduce energy use have not been specifically identified. Final measures to reduce energy use and emissions would be prepared during the building pennit process. The project includes components that will offset the project's potential minor incremental contribution to global climate change. These include: • Cal Green Tier 2 compliance • Incorporate low-and zero-VOC products • Interior design will incorporate sustainability harvested, recyclable and renewable materials • Location in proximity of existing public transportation network • Incorporating materials and finishes to protect indoor air quality • Indoor water reduction • Energy Star equipment and appliances SOURCE REFERENCES 1. Project Planner's knowledge ofthe site and the proposed project 2. Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, 1998-2010 (list specific policy and map references) 3. Palo Alto Municipal Code, Title 18 .:... Zoning Ordinance 4. Required compliance with the Unifonn Building Code (UBC) Standards for Seismic Safety and Windload 5. Project Plans, Architectural Dimensions, received May 22, 2013 6. Project Description, Architectural Dimensions, received March 4,2013 and April 5, 2013 7. Arboris! Report, Urban Tree Management, received March 4, 2013 8. Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual, Municipal Code Chapter 8.10.030, June 2001 9. Geotechnical Engineering Investigation, Murray Engineers, Inc., March 2013 10. City of Palo Alto South EI Camino Real Design Guidelines, June 2002 \ , I 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 37 Mitigated Negative Declaration II. Phase I and Phase II Enviromnental Site Assessment, Steller Enviromnental Solutions, April 2013 . . , March 2013 12. Transportation Analysis, Kimley-Hom and Associates, February 21,2013 13. Enviromnental Noise Assessment, Charles M. Salter, February 27,2013 DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required . . I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards; and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Project Planner Director of Planning and Community Environment Date Date x 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 38 Mitigated Negative Declaration 3159 EI Camino Real 13PLN-00040 Page 39 Mitigated Negative Declaration I " , P t tl 1 located at 3159 E1 Camino Real could have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of that study, the City makes the following determination: x The proposed project COULD NOT have it significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted. Although the project, as proposed, could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect on the environment in this case because mitigation measures have been added to the project and, therefore, a MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION is hereby adopted. The initial study prepared for this project described above incorporates all relevant information regarding the potential environmental effects of the project and confirms the determinati~n that an EIR is not required for the project. In addition, the following Mitigations have been incorporated into the project: Mitigation Measures C-l: The effects of construction activities would be increased dustfall and locally elevated levels of particulate matter downwind of construction activity. Construction dust has the potential for creating a nuisance at nearby properties. This impact is considered potentially significant but normally mitigateable by implementing the following control measures: During demolition of existing structures: o Water active demolition areas to control dust generation during demolition and pavement break- up. o Cover all trucks hauling demolition debris from the site. o Use dust-proof chutes to load debris into trucks whenever feasible. o Dudng all construction phases: o Pave, apply water 3x1daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas at construction sites .. o Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (previously graded areas inactive for ten days or more). o Enclose, cover, water 2x1daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). o Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 miles per hOUf. o Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. o Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. The above measures include feasible measures for construction emissions identified by the BAAQMD for large sites. According to the District threshold of significance for construction impacts, implementation of the measures would reduce construction impacts of the proJect to a less than significant level. ®$Wl:iJl,~'>l'!cli!!rI~tJlt~\w)*-WI:re#($!tY-."!i!u.ru!;{".wI<a!l'l]:j(fjffl~m#ilmMZ~JJ~M1OUmrn:~"i'bli%1!MW!Sj?ml'ltX~mID.!IljllUUN;Y$l.l7lllWiMw.l¥At\SitM1ilUmjl':W;m!Yi'\\\I£~!f1Wl:1oI Mitigation Measures B-1: The applicant shall abide by all provisions of Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the State Fish and Game Code and Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA) as published in the Federal Register (Vol. 70, No. 49; March 15,2005). Although there is no vegetation on the project site that may contain nesting birds, there may be nesting birds in existing vegetation abutting the proposed project site. To protect any nesting birds, the proposed project may avoid construction during the nesting period. Alternatively, aqualified wildlife biologist (to be hired by the applicant) shall conduct a survey for nesting birds that are covered by the MBTA andlor Sections 3503 and 3503.5 of the State Fish and Game Code in the 1'idnily of the project site: This survey shall cover all areas that would be disturbed as a result of construction-related activities during the nesting period, and shall include a "buffer zone" (an area of potential sensitivity, beyond the bounds of the propose,d project construction area) which shall be determined by the biologist based on his or her professional judgment and experience. This buffer zone may include off-site habitat. This biological survey shall be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the commencement of construction activities. The Wildlife biologist shall provide a report to the City promptly detailing the findings of tJie survey. No construction shall be conducted until this report has been provided to the City and the City has authorized in writing the commencement of construction activities in accord with the biologist's findings. Mitigation Measures F-J: The design of all buildings shall be designed in accordance with current earthquake resistant standards, including the 2007 CBC guidelines and design recommendations regarding the potential for localized liquefaction presented in the Geotechnical Investigation provided by Murray Engineers. Mitigation Measure F-2: Prior to building permit approval, the applicant shall submit a well-designed shoring system for the basement excavation to be designed by a licensed engineer subject to review and approval by Public Works Department. Mitigation Measures H-I: A project specific Health and Safety Plan (HASP) and a Site Mitigation Plan (SMP), would be implemented, and adhered to during construction and excavation activities. All workers on site should be read and understand the HASP and SMP, and copies should be maintained on site during construction and excavation at all times. Mitigation M~asures H-2: A Remedial Risk Management Plan (RRMP) should be developed and followed by current and future owners, tenants, and operators. The plan will include the implementation of the described remedies and engineering design. Mitigation Measures H-3: Additional collection of four soil samples at the site should be completed after the base excavation to 14 feet bgs is achieved. This soil-gas collection will verifY if the removal of the clay cap has resulted in a reduction of residual soil gas below the residential ESLs. CurrentPCE and TCE concentrations in soil-gas are one or two orders of magnitude greater that what would be expected to accumulate based on current groundwater concentrations of PCE and TCE, and would not be likely to reach the current concentrations in the future if the reduction of groundwater contaminants continues as it is expected to. Mitigation Measures H-4: If soil-gas concentrations collected following the initial base excavation phase have not resulted in significant decrease; a sub slab passive vapor collection and passive vapor collection and passive venting system designed full vapor barrier would be implemented to mitigate against the identified VOC soil-vapor intrusion (see Mitigation Measure H-5 for vapor intrusion mitigation system). 9201 Council Members Only Page 1 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4172) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Applying Edgewood Public Benefit Penalty Title: Public Hearing: Request For Council’s Direction On Whether to Apply The Edgewood Plaza PC $94,200 Public Benefit Payment to the Construction of a Sidewalk along West Bayshore Road or a Historic Restoration Fund for a Public Building. From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council direct staff to apply the penalty paid for the Edgewood Plaza PC Amendment for the design of a sidewalk project along West Bayshore Road, historic preservation of a public building, or another Council directed purpose. Executive Summary The City Council certified a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR) and approved a Planned Community (PC) Zoning Amendment for the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center mixed use project on October 7, 2013. The project was an amendment to the original PC Zoning approved on March 19, 2012, allowing redevelopment of the historic, three-building shopping center, including the relocation and rehabilitation of a historic building, ten new single family homes and a new 0.20 acre park. The two historically significant retail buildings were to be preserved as a primary PC public benefit: Building #2 was to be rehabilitated in place, while Building #1 was to be disassembled, relocated on site and rehabilitated. However, the applicant demolished Building #1 without notifying or receiving approval from the City. The FSEIR and PC Zoning Amendment were approved by City Council to allow reconstruction of the demolished Building #1 with all new materials. All other aspects of the project remained the same. As part of the new public benefits for the PC Zoning Amendment, the applicant was required to provide a penalty payment of $94,200. Council directed staff to return to the City Council within 90 days to determine whether the penalty should be allocated to design and construction of a sidewalk along W. Bayshore Road (near the project), towards a future restoration of a historic public building or towards another Council directed purpose. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Background At its October 7, 2013 hearing, the City Council certified a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Final SEIR) and approved a request by Sand Hill Property Company, for an amendment to the Edgewood Plaza Mixed Use Project Planned Community Zoning to allow one of two historically significant retail buildings of the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center to be reconstructed with all new materials. The amendment was requested following the issuance of a stop work order in September 2012, because the historic Building #1, which was to be disassembled and reconstructed onsite, was illegally demolished. A Planned Community (PC) zoning was originally approved by the City Council on March 19, 2012 to allow the redevelopment of an existing vacant and historic shopping center. The redevelopment proposal comprised of renovation of three retail buildings, including the relocation of one of the buildings, the addition of ten homes and construction of a new 9,000 square foot park. The two existing commercial buildings (Buildings #1 and #2) were deemed historic resources and approved for rehabilitation. Building #3, the former Lucky market building, currently occupied by Fresh Market, is not considered a historic resource. Building #1 was to be disassembled, relocated on the site and rehabilitated. Building #2 was to be rehabilitated in place. As stated above, Building #1 was demolished contrary to the requirements of the site’s PC Zoning designation. The primary public benefits for the Edgewood Plaza project consisted of 1) the preservation of historic resources, 2) the construction and operation of the grocery store, 3) the creation of a 0.20 acre park containing a display highlighting Joseph Eichler’s achievements, and 4) the installation of three electric vehicle chargers. Discussion The PC Zoning Amendment that allowed the reconstruction of Building #1 with all new materials was approved with the requirement of two additional public benefits. One of the public benefits was the requirement to install custom made windows that replicate the original storefront window system, bringing the appearance of Buildings #1 and #2 to a design significantly closer to their original appearance. The original wood window frames of both Eichler buildings were a more complex design that included narrow full-height projecting moldings on either side of the glass, which gave the windows a streamlined, modern look. Because the storefront glass system was a large part of the original design, this requirement provides a significant historic benefit to the project. This addition, in some ways, will result in a building that is more similar to the original design, for both buildings, even though Building #1 would be constructed of all new materials. City of Palo Alto Page 3 The second public benefit required for the PC Amendment was the payment of $94,200 as a penalty for illegally demolishing Building #1. Staff had proposed that the penalty payment could be used (1) for the restoration and rehabilitation of a publicly owned historic resource in Palo Alto or (2) construction of a sidewalk from the north of the project side, Channing Avenue, to the border between Palo Alto and the city of East Palo Alto. The Council may also wish to use the funds for another purpose. Historic Rehabilitation Contribution If the historic rehabilitation or restoration option is chosen, the funds could be set aside and made available for use toward a specific project when directed by the Council. Staff would identify a potential project and would return to the Council for final authorization. This public benefit is appropriate because the proceeds would be for historic rehabilitation in exchange for the loss of a historic resource. The funds if dedicated to historic rehabilitation could be applied to a variety of projects. Such projects could include (but would not be limited to) the following: 1. The University Avenue Multi-modal Transit Depot. The downtown station is the second busiest for the Caltrain system and a significant structure for the City. The Streamline Modern style station is designated as a Category 1 resource on the City’s historic inventory and is also on the National Registry of Historic Places. The money could be used to repaint the building, which has not been updated for a few years. 2. The Lucie Stern Community Center located at 1305 Middlefield Road. The community center was designed noted Palo Alto architect Birge Clark and is designated as a Category 1 resource on the City’s historic inventory. There are two potential projects that could benefit from this funding. The two projects consist of restoration and rehabilitation of the existing brick pavers located onsite and/or upgrading of the existing single-pane glass with custom fabricated double-insulated panes. The paver project would consist of repairing of about 1,000 lineal feet of the original pathways. The bricks would be moved temporary to allow leveling of the sub-base with gravel and removal of protruding tree roots and rocks. Broken or unsafe bricks would be replaced with new matching bricks. The window project would allow better sound control and insulation for the facility while allowing the appearance of the historic building to be retained. . 3. Roth Building, located at 300 Homer Street. The one and two story Spanish Eclectic style, U-shaped concrete building was also designed by Birge Clark and is designated on the City’s historic inventory as a Category 2 building. It is being remodeled to be the new home for the Palo Alto Art League. The fund could be used for general City of Palo Alto Page 4 maintenance and clean up following the completion of the remodel. 4. Palo Alto Post Office, located at 380 Hamilton Avenue. Designed in 1932 by Birge Clark, the building was one of the first single purpose post office facilities in the nation. Recognized for keeping with the local Mediterranean architectural theme of arcades and tile roofs, the building has been placed on the National Registry of Historic Places. The structure is iconic both in its public function and influencing the architectural character of the downtown area. If the City acquires the post office, the monies could be used towards the rehabilitation of the building for future use. (Note that the City has submitted a bid to acquire the Post Office but any prospective sale will not be completed by the time this matter is heard.) West Bayshore Road Sidewalk The second option for Council’s consideration is funding the design phase of a new sidewalk on the west side of West Bayshore Road between Channing Avenue and San Francisquito Creek (East Palo Alto Border). During the initial approval of the Edgewood Plaza project residents requested that the design and construction of the sidewalk be considered as an element of the project. In response to the requests the City incorporated the project as a sidewalk gap closure element within the Bike & Pedestrian Transportation Plan (adopted July 2012). The money would be applied to a future Capital Improvement Program (CIP) project. Staff has received correspondence and a petition expressing support by area residents for the sidewalk construction during the October 7th council hearing. Prior to the hearing the Planning and Transportation Commission had recommended that a survey be taken of residents of properties located between Edgewood Drive and West Bayshore Road of whether they support the sidewalk because they would be the most impacted. A survey has been mailed out to the approximately 20 residents soliciting their input. The survey results will not be available in time for the distribution of this staff report, therefore an update will be provided at the public hearing. Staff has consulted both with Transportation and Public Works staff regarding the feasibility of the construction of the sidewalk. The cost estimate for design and construction of sidewalk on one side of West Bayshore from Channing Avenue to San Francisquito Creek, length of approximately 1,600 feet, is $473,000. The design estimate, for which the penalty may be applied, is $62,000, while the construction cost estimate is$411,000. West Bayshore Road has no formal parking restrictions today but the roadway is too narrow to allow parking. Due to the lack of parking restrictions West Bayshore Road does have up to 20 vehicles regularly parked on the street within unpaved shoulder areas. The construction of City of Palo Alto Page 5 sidewalks in this area will include the formalization of parking restrictions; therefore the 20 cars would likely be displaced. The project also includes drainage improvements to protect adjacent residences and trees. The construction of the sidewalk would directly implement a goal of the Bike & Pedestrian Transportation Plan. Policy Implications The requirement to use the funds for the two potential projects is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Bike and Pedestrian Transportation Plan. Applying the funds towards historic rehabilitation would directly support Goal L-7: Conservation and Preservation of Palo Alto’s Historic Buildings, Sites and Districts. It would also support Policy L-51, which supports public and private upkeep and preservation of historic resources and Policy L-52, which encourages the preservation of significant historic resources owned by the City of Palo Alto. Applying the funds towards the construction of the sidewalk would directly address an identified sidewalk gap, as recognized in the City’s Bike and Pedestrian Transportation Plan. It also supports Goal T-3: Facilities, Services and Programs that Encourage and Promote Walking and Bicycling. Policy T-16 specifically supports the creation of connecting paths for pedestrians and bicycles. Although there is not a dead end street, the lack of a sidewalk effectively impedes access. Resource Impact Once the City Council decides the use of the funds, staff will bring forward a recommendation to appropriate the funds towards that use as part of the Mid-Year Budget adjustments or the annual budget process. Environmental Review Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the two options would be categorically exempt as follows: 1. Construction of sidewalk would be categorically exempt per CEQA section 15304 (Class 4). Minor Alterations to Land Class 4 consists of minor public or private alterations in the condition of land, water, and/or vegetation which do not involve removal of healthy, mature, scenic trees except for forestry or agricultural purposes. 2. Rehabilitation of historic buildings would be categorically exempt per CEQA sections 15301(Class 1) and 15303 (Class 3) CEQA because they would be considered minor alterations to the exterior of an existing facility or other minor modifications upon determination that the project complies with the Secretary’s Standards for Rehabilitation. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Attachments:  Attachment A: Public Comment (PDF) Spotwood, Alicia From: Sent: To: Subject: Elena, Yonke/ Martin Wednesday/ November 13/ 2013 8:34 AM Lee/ Elena Edgewood Plaza fine should be used for historic restoration Sorry I won't be able to make your meeting on 11/18. Here is the comment I would have made. As an active participant in reaching the agreement between the developer and the CC&R holders for Ed~ewood Plaza that was used as the basis for the PC zoning, I would to comment the following comment: the Public Benefit of the PC Zoning for Edgewood Plaza was for the historic rehabilitation of the two Eichler building. The fine for demolishing one of the two buildings should be applied to historic restoration to be in keeping with the spirit of the PC Zoning. To use the monies for another use would further cast doubt the commitment to the Public Benefit of PC Zoning, in general, and of the Edgewood Plaza historic rehabilitation, in particular. Sidewalks, no matter how worthwhile, are not reflected in the original Public Benefit-they could have been, but were not. Let's not rewrite the spirit or essence of the Public Benefit by redirecting the monies to other than Historic Restoration. Thanks, Martin Yonke 1954 Edgewood Dr. 1 Spotwood. Alicia From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Mulvey, Trish Wednesday, November 13, 2013 11:50 AM Council,City Lee, Elena Edgewood Plaza Public Benefit Payment -11/18 City Council Public Hearing Dear Mayor Scharff and City Council Members: In considering community needs and public benefit, instead of a sidewalk- only option, please look at a more inclusive improvement for West ~ayshore Frontage Road that includes bicycles, pedestrians, and evening + 'Itlighttime parking and be of value to our adjacent East Palo Alto neighbors ~ (My thought is an asphalt surface with "no parking from here to the corner" signage at the bend in the road approaching Channing. FYI, asphalt is less expensive than concrete. To my knowledge, East Palo Alto staff have not yet been included in consideration of options.) As I write this message, the staff report is not yet available for this item; so I don't know what information you have about the needs for the "Historic Restoration Fund for a Public Building." I hope you will o90nsider deferring your decision about this item until you have given the Uistoric Resources Board an opportunity for review and comment. Since ~lhis public benefit payment resulted from demolition of an historic resource, it would be nice to give priority to a project that is related to that loss. Thanl(s for considering these comments. 'Irish Mulvey tnulvey@ix.netcom.com 1 City of Palo Alto (ID # 4257) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 11/18/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Colleague's Memo Title: Colleague's Memo from Mayor Scharff, Vice Mayor Shepherd, Council Member Holman and Council Member Price, Regarding Expanding Smoking Ban in Downtown and California Avenue Business Districts From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation The City Council direct staff to: 1. Proceed to the Policy & Services Committee for policy discussion and recommendation to the full Council to expand the City’s outdoor smoking ban in the Downtown and California Avenue Business Districts. 2. Conduct outreach to downtown and California Avenue residents, businesses and property owners for input on expanding the City’s current ban on outdoor smoking in certain areas, including California Ave and University Ave and possibly other streets in the downtown cores. 3. Benchmark other jurisdictions’ outdoor smoking ban ordinances in downtown cores. Background In August 2013 the City Council approved a ban on smoking in all public parks and open space nature preserves, including the City golf course, and increased the no-smoking buffer zone near public building entrances from 20 to 25 feet. The smoking ban went into effect on October 9, 2013. Attached are two GIS area maps of University Avenue and California Avenue with 25 foot radiuses or “buffer zones” drawn around each structure on lots fronting University Ave and City of Palo Alto Page 2 California Avenue. The maps are designed to give a sense of the extent to which the City's current smoking ban applies on these streets but are not an exact applications as the ban applies only to 25 feet of doorways and entrances of enclosed public spaces. There are slight variations between the buffer zones of the current ban and the GIS maps that leave pockets between entrances, on street corners, walkways and plazas where smoking is not prohibited and difficult to enforce. Studies have confirmed that exposure to second-hand smoke can cause serious health impacts. Banning smoking in the public right away prevents smoking in front of or near businesses. Smokers tend to congregate in front of entrances, causing ingress and egress issues. Smoke filters into buildings; and cigarette butts litter the sidewalks, planters and other visible public areas. Business owners with outdoor dining areas are also affected as secondhand smoke drifts to outdoor eating areas, negatively affecting their customers’ dining experience and potentially creating negative health impacts. We propose that the City Council consider restricting further the City’s current smoking ban in the Downtown and California Avenue Business Districts, to both University Avenue and California Avenue and possibly other streets in the downtown cores to provide clarity on the City’s current ban and make enforcement simpler. When looking at the attached Maps it is clear that except for certain small pockets smoking is prohibited on most of California Avenue and University Avenue. Expanding the City’s current ban will also further enhance these areas as community gathering places, improve commerce in the Districts and foster a healthy quality of life for downtown residents and visitors. Discussion There are a variety of options to further restrict smoking in the Downtown and California Avenue Business districts. In preparation for a policy discussion we recommend that staff:  Research other jurisdictions’ approaches to banning smoking in downtown corridors including but not limited to evaluating ordinances, geographic scope, exemptions, signage, enforcement approaches, and lessons learned.  Outreach to residents, businesses and property owners, including the Downtown Business and Professional Association, the California Avenue Area Business Association and surrounding resident associations for input on expanding the City’s outdoor smoking ban. We further recommend that staff conduct the benchmarking of other jurisdictions and the community outreach, and to bring the findings and staff recommendations to the Policy & Services Committee for a policy discussion and recommendation to the full Council. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Staff Impact Staff reports that the staff impact to benchmark other jurisdictions and to conduct community outreach is minimal. Staff estimates the data collection and outreach can be completed and the findings and recommendations brought to the Policy & Services Committee in early 2014. Attachments:  Attachment A. University Avenue 25 ft Buffer (PDF)  Attachment B. California Avenue 25 ft Buffer (PDF)  Attachment C: August 12, 2013 CCM EXCERPT Item 4 Smoking (DOC) 120-27-011 120-31-009 120-14-016 120-26-095 120-26-099 120-16-099 University Avenue Train Station Lytton Station FireStation # 1 TowerWell LyttonSquare Senior Center LanningChateau Do w n t o w n L i b r a r y C ity H all Williams Property St TAquin All SaintsEpiscopal Church Chase Bank DowningHouse Calif State Auto Assn Waverley SurgeryCenter Select Physical Therapy Post Office94301 Cedar TerracCondominiu CowperInn Rose Lane Apts. Professsion Dental Center Everett Manor 7-1 1 EverettHouse First UnitedMethodist Church Lytton Gardens Healthcare Ctr. Webster House Alain Pinel Realtor Lytton Gardens CPADev. Ctr Lytton Gardens Senior Residence Casa Olga Old Pro HamiltonBuildingNola The North Face AT&T Gym Lot RParking GarageCity of Palo Alto Private Bank of the Peninsula Comerica BankCornish & Carey Pizza My Heart PeninsulaCreamery Ma c ' s S m o k e s h o p Wasson Building Garden CourtHotel Prolific Oven Palo Alto Sport Shop EMERSON STREET HA W T H O R N E A V E N U E RAMONA STREET EMERSON STREET HA W T H O R N E A V E N U E HIGH STREET EVERETT AVENUE EVERETT AVENUE HIGH STREET ALMA STREET ALMA STREET LYTTON AVENUE ALMA STREET EMERSON STREET RAMONA STREET LYTTON AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUE RAMONA STREET BRYANT STREET HIGH STREET EMERSON STREET ALMA STREET EMERSON STREET HIGH STREET HIGH STREET HAMILTON AVENUE HAMILTON AVENUE EMERSON STREET HAMILTON AVENUE GILMAN STREET WAVERLEY STREET BRYANT STREET FOREST AVENUE FOREST AVENUE BRYANT STREET RAMONA STREET RAMONA STREET BRYANT STREET FLORENCE STREET KIPLING STREET LYTTON AVENUE WAVERLEY STREETWAVERLEY STREET EVERETT AVENUE EVERETT AVENUE BRYANT STREET WAVERLEY STREET HAWTHORNE AVENUE RAMONA STREET BRYANT STREET LYTTON AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUE COWPER STREET KIPLING STREET UNIVERSITY AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUE COWPER STREET WAVERLEY STREET HAMILTON AVENUE HAWTHORNE AVENUE COWPER STREET HAWTHORNE AVENUE HAWTHORNE AVENUE KIPLING STREET EVERETT AVENUE COWPER STREET WEBSTER STREET BYRON STREET EV MIDDLEFIELD ROAD MIDDLEFIELD ROAD EVERETT AVENUE WEBSTER STREET WEBSTER STREET LYTTON AVENUE BYRON STREET TASSO STREET HAMILTON AVENUE COWPER STREET FOREST AVENUE FOREST AVENUE WAVERLEY STREET WEBSTER STREET WEBSTER STREET COWPER STREET LYTTON AVENUE UNIVERSITY AVENUE BYRON STREET MIDDLEFIELD ROADMIDDLEFIELD ROAD LYTTON AVENUE WEBSTER STREET MIDDLEFIELD ROAD HAMIL HAMILTON AVENUE FOREST AVENUE FOREST AV MIDDLEFIELD ROAD E R S I T Y C I EVERETT COU RT LANE 39 LANE 7 EASTLANE 5 EAST LANE 6 EAST LANE 20 EAST LAN E 30 LANE 20 WEST LANE 21 LANE 15 EAST BRYANT COURT PAULSEN LANE LANE 12 WEST LANE 11 WEST CENTENNIAL WALK DOWNING LANE PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARDD HIGH STREET ALMA STREET ALMA STREET FOREST AVENUE URBAN LANE LANE 7 WEST Lot A Lot D Lot G Lot H Lot F Lot O Lot P Lot Q Lot T L ot C Lot K Lot WC C o g s w ell Pla z a Lot B Lot K Lot E Johnson Park LyttonPlaza C ivic C e nte r Pla z a Bryant / Lytton Parking Garage Parking PKG PKG W h ole F M W illia m s P a rk PAMF CLARK BUILDING CVS Pharmacy Union Bank Miyake E-Trade Stanford Books Lot S Lot CC Lot N Lot R City of Palo Alto GIS This map is a product of the This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend City Parking City Parks/Plazas (Non-Smoking Area) 25 ft buffer around Building Roof Outlines (Non-Smoking Area*) abc Building Roof Outline Curb Lip Sidewalk Edge Pavement Edge Transportation Stations 0' 120'240' Smoking Ban on University Avenue Area Map CITY O F PALO A L T O I N C O R P O R A T E D C ALIFO R N I A P a l o A l t o T h e C i t y o f A P R IL 1 6 1 8 94 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2013 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2013-09-12 14:35:59, Smoking Ban 25ft UniversityAve 02 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) 1 24-3 3-06 4 F Molly Stone's Market C o u n ty C o u rth o u s e a n d J a il North County Me ntal Health Center Bldg 5Bldg 3 Bldg 4 Bldg 6 Lot C-5 Parking Lot Bank of the West Bldg 2 Bldg 1 Bldg 8 Bldg 7 California Station Country Sun K J H G E BDC A GE AV E N UE RIDGE AVENUE AV E N UE GRAN T AV E N UE EL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL SHERMAN AVENUE SHERMAN AVENUE JACARANDA LANE ASH STREET NEW MAYFIELD LANE NEW MAYFIELD LANE EL CAMINO REAL EL CAMINO REAL CAL IFORNIA AV E N UE CALIFORNIA AVENUE PERAL LANE MIMOSA LANE SEDRO LANE CAMBRIDGE AVENUE COLLEG E AV E N UE BIRCH STREET NEW MAYFIELD LANE CAMBRIDGE A VENUE BIRCH STREET COLLEGE AVENUE COLLEGE AVENUE PARK BOULEVARD CALIFORNIA AVENUE PARK BOULEVARD SHERMAN AVENUE JAC AR AN DA LAN E PARK BOUL OULEVARD O R E G O N E X P GRANT AVENUE SHERMAN AVENUE ASH S BIRCH STREET BIRCH STR GRAN T AV E N UE NOGAL LANE JACARANDA LANE CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD EL CAMINO REAL Wallis Park Lot C -6 Lot C-7 Lo t C - 8 Lot C-9 Train Station, California Avenue S C C o u n t y C o u rt h o u s e a n d J a il Lot C-2 Lot C-1 Lot C-3 Parking Garage Lot C-4 Lot C-5 Garage P ar k in g City of Palo Alto GIS This map is a product of the This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend City Parking City Parks/Plazas (Non-Smoking Area) 25 ft buffer around Building Roof Outlines (Non-Smoking Area*) abc Building Roof Outline Curb Lip Sidewalk Edge Pavement Edge Transportation Stations 0' 70'140' Smoking Ban on California Avenue Area Map CITY O F PALO A L T O I N C O R P O R A T E D C ALIFO R N I A P a l o A l t o T h e C i t y o f A P R IL 1 6 1 8 94 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2013 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2013-09-12 14:47:13, Smoking Ban 25ft CaliforniaAve 02 (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL EXCERPT Page 1 of 3 Special Meeting August 12, 2013 4. Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 9.14 (Smoking Regulations) of the Municipal Code to Either Ban Smoking in all City Parks, or Ban Smoking in City Parks Except the Municipal Golf Course and a Designated Area at Mitchell, Greer and Rinconada parks; Increase No-Smoking Buffer Zones; and Make Findings Gregory Betts, Director of Community Services, reported merchants of Downtown requested Staff consider a smoking ban in Downtown Plaza, Cogswell Plaza, and a small park off California Avenue. Staff presented the matter to the Policy and Services Committee on March 19, 2013. The Policy and Services Committee requested Staff present the Council with a draft Ordinance for parks under 5 acres. Upon presentation to the Council, Council Members supported a smoking ban for all parks and open space areas in Palo Alto. Vice Mayor Shepherd moved that the Parks and Recreation Commission (PARC) consider exemptions for larger City parks. On May 28, 2013, PARC recommended that the Ordinance apply to all open space areas, and future non-smoking areas could be designated in high- traffic areas of the Golf Course. PARC also recommended that smoking areas in Rinconada, Greer, and Mitchell parks be considered. Staff provided two options, both of which banned smoking in open-space areas and increased no-smoking zones around buildings from 20 feet to 25 feet. Alternative A banned smoking at all parks and open space areas. Joel R. Betts supported Alternative B. The opposing interests of smokers and non-smokers should be studied further. Banning smoking in open space areas was sensible, because of the fire hazard. MOTION: Vice Mayor Shepherd moved, seconded by Council Member Price to: 1) amend Chapter 9.14 (Smoking and Tobacco Regulations) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, by adding Section 9.14.005 (Purpose), 2) approve a new Section 9.14.035 (Smoking Prohibited – Public Parks) (Attachment A), and 3) amend Section 9.14.010 (Definitions) to increase the no-smoking buffer zone near public building entrances from 20 to 25 feet for consistency with LEED standards. EXCERPT Page 2 of 3 City Council Meeting EXCERPT: August 12, 2013 Vice Mayor Shepherd originally moved for smoking zones in open space areas; however, smoking zones in open space areas would not be wise. Smoking did not appear to be a problem in City parks. The policy should be consistent; therefore, she preferred smoking be banned in all parks. Council Member Price felt smoking should be prohibited in order to protect public health, welfare, and safety in public parks. Banning smoking would reduce litter and fire hazards. Council Member Kniss felt designated smoking areas would be worse than at-large smoking in City parks. The Council's responsibility was to protect the public. Council Member Schmid requested Ms. Hetterley provide PARC comments regarding the Golf Course. Jennifer Hetterley, Park and Recreation Commission Chair, reported PARC felt the Golf Course was a different setting in that people on the Golf Course were spread out over a large area, children were not playing nearby, and for many golfers a cigar was part of the golf experience. PARC did not want to risk turning away clientele when the City was attempting to build a clientele for the redesigned Golf Course. Once the Golf Course reopened, the issue could be reconsidered. AMENDMENT: Council Member Schmid moved, seconded by Council Member Berman to except smoking on the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course. Council Member Schmid noted PARC held a long discussion and excepted the Golf Course. Because of the City's investment in the redesigned Golf Course, it should be an exception to the smoking ban. Council Member Berman would not want smoking allowed in areas at the Golf Course where people congregated. Health concerns were less for smoking on the Golf Course because people were spread over the course. Council Member Burt agreed with restricting smoking in parks to the extent it impacted park users. There was a delicate balance between legislating behavior and restricting impact on others. PARC's recommendation, Attachment B, was more appropriate. He had a reservation about prohibiting smokers from using parks because they were smokers. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Council Member XXX to approve Attachment B; 1) “to Establish New Smoking EXCERPT Page 3 of 3 City Council Meeting EXCERPT: August 12, 2013 Restrictions for All Parks, with Exceptions for the Municipal Golf Course and Designated Smoking Zones at Greer, Rinconada and Mitchell Parks, 2) Increase No-Smoking Buffer Zones from 20 to 25 feet for Consistency with LEED Standards and, 3) Make Findings Regarding the Purpose of No- Smoking Regulations” per the majority recommendation from the Parks and Recreation Commission. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND Council Member Klein did not support the Amendment. Golfers encouraged young people to play golf to continue the sport, and he did not want to encourage young people to smoke while playing golf. Council Member Holman did not believe smoking should be allowed on the Golf Course. The City should be consistent in supporting good health practices. If golfers did not play the course because of the ban, then the Council could reconsider the issue. AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-6 Berman, Burt, Schmid yes MOTION PASSED: 8-1 Burt no