HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 6220
City of Palo Alto (ID # 6220)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 1/11/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: 1050 Page Mill Road - Review of Final EIR and Project
Title: PUBLIC HEARING: Approval of the Final Environmental Impact Report
(FEIR) and Record of Land Use Action to Allow Demolition of Four Existing
Structures Totaling 265,895 sf and For Construction of Four Two-Story Office
Buildings Totaling 265,895 Square Feet of Floor Area with Below and At-
Grade Parking and Other Site Improvements. Zoning District: Research Park
(RP) located at 1050 Page Mill Road. Environmental Assessment: A Final
Environmental Impact Report has been prepared
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that City Council:
1. Certify the Final Environmental Impact Report and Adopt a project specific Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachments G); and,
2. Adopt a Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A) approving the Architectural Review
application for four new office buildings at 1050 Page Mill Road.
Executive Summary
The project includes the redevelopment of the existing 13.5-acre lease parcel with four two-
story buildings with one level of below grade parking under each building. The four new office
buildings with the same total floor area as the existing structures would be placed around the
perimeter of the site, leaving a landscaped central plaza area. As noted in the Final
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), implementation of this project would result in significant
environmental impacts that can be mitigated via mitigation measures that are proposed for
inclusion as conditions of approval. All substantive comments on the Draft EIR have been
responded to in the Final EIR.
Prior to making a decision to approve the discretionary applications, the EIR must be certified.
Pursuant to the City’s local guidelines for implementing the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) and past practice, only the City Council has the authority to certify EIRs. For this
reason, the subject project is being considered by the City Council instead of the Director of
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Planning and Community Environment, which would otherwise be the typical process for
Architectural Review projects not requiring an EIR.
The Architectural Review Board (ARB) has reviewed and recommends approval of the project.
The Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed the Draft EIR and Final EIR and
recommends certification.
The record reflects public comments from individuals opposed to the project due to traffic
concerns, pedestrian and bicycle access, and objection to the replacement of the existing
building’s complete floor area.
A proposed Record of Land Use Action is included as Attachment A and includes proposed
findings and conditions to approve the project. Attachment G includes required CEQA
Findings.
Background
The proposed project includes demolition of four existing buildings and storage structure,
totaling 265,895 square feet of floor area, historically used for offices and R&D, as well as
construction of four two-story office buildings totaling 265,895 square feet with associated site
improvements on a 13.5 acre lease parcel. The four new buildings are proposed to be placed
around the edge of the site, leaving a landscaped central plaza area that would include seating
and pedestrian walkways. Plans have been provided to the Council and are available on the
City’s website:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=2642&TargetID=319.
The applicant is currently targeting Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)
Platinum status for the project with the inclusion of photovoltaics covering all roofs to generate
150,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year.
Primary access would be from Page Mill Road at Hansen Way, a signalized intersection.
Currently access is also provided to California Avenue, northwest of the site, through a
connecting parking lot at 1117 California Avenue. The proposed project would maintain this
connection; however, access between the adjoining parking lots would be limited by installation
of an arm gate at the connection point. This arm gate would be controlled by access cards that
would be issued only to employees and visitors of 1117 California Avenue. Therefore, Page Mill
Road would serve as the single point of ingress/egress to the 1050 Page Mill Road project site.
The proposed project includes 348 automobile parking spaces around the perimeter of the site,
as well as below-grade garage parking spaces in each building (539 garage spaces) for a total of
887 code compliant automobile spaces. The project would also provide 101 bicycle parking
spaces.
Site Information
City of Palo Alto Page 3
The project site, located within the Stanford Research Park, is rectangular in shape and has an
area of approximately 587,363 square feet (sf). The site fronts onto Page Mill Road and
currently has access to California Avenue via a driveway easement through 1117 California
Avenue. The property is currently occupied by four structures totaling 265,895 sf of floor area
with the front building along Page Mill Road currently occupied by Machine Zone. The existing
parking lot contains 564 automobile parking spaces; less than currently required by the
Municipal Code.
The site has a Comprehensive Plan land use designation of Research/Office Park and a zoning
designation of Research Park (RP) district. The Research/Office Park land use designation
allows office, research, and manufacturing establishments whose operations are buffered from
adjacent residential uses. The RP zoning district allows a limited group of research and
manufacturing uses that may have unusual requirements for space, light, and air.
The project site is surrounded by existing Research and Development (R&D) uses, with the
exception of the Mayfield Fire Station #2 located to the south along Hanover Street. Across
Page Mill Road to the east, the buildings contain additional research and manufacturing uses.
Building Design
The applicant’s project description (Attachment D) contains a narrative about the building
design. As shown in the project plans on sheets A2.1 thru A2.4 and A5.1, the proposed
buildings would consist of clear glass envelopes with glass vertical fins for shading. Visual
interest and additional shading would be provided by the use of aluminum ribbon type
sunshades.
The impervious footprint of the development would be reduced by approximately five (5)
percent with the inclusion of below grading parking under the four proposed structures. These
parking facilities, along with trash facilities, would be dispersed around the site to allow for
efficient circulation.
Circulation
Primary access would be from Page Mill Road at Hansen Way, a signalized intersection. As
shown on the vicinity map in the plan set, California Avenue is northwest of the site, and the
1117 California Avenue office building is located between the project site and California Avenue.
The parking lots for 1117 California Avenue and the project site are connected. Although this is
not a public right of way, this connection facilitates vehicular access between Page Mill Road
and California Avenue. The proposed project parking lot would maintain this connection;
however, access between the adjoining parking lots would be limited by installation of an arm
gate at the connection point. While details for the gate are not included in the plan set, the
applicant proposes an arm gate that would be controlled by access cards that would be issued
to the business at 1117 California Avenue. This would provide for all employees and visitors to
1117 California Avenue to have access from both California Avenue and Page Mill Road, as is
currently provided. Employees and visitors to 1050 Page Mill Road would not be given access
City of Palo Alto Page 4
cards and therefore would not have access to or from California Avenue via this connection.
Page Mill Road would serve as the single point of ingress/egress to the 1050 Page Mill Road
project site. As explained in the Draft EIR, the additional traffic expected to enter the site from
Page Mill Road would result in queuing impacts, as eastbound cars stack-up to make a left turn
into the site. This potential impact would be addressed by reconfiguring and extending the
turn lane, which would affect the configuration of the westbound turn lane serving Hansen,
necessitating improvements to the Page Mill/Hansen intersection.
Parking
Per the PAMC 18.52, an office use of 265,895 sf in size would require a minimum of one
automobile parking space per 300 gross square feet of floor area, or 886 total parking spaces.
The site is currently under parked with 564 parking spaces. This project would increase parking
supply by 323 spaces for a total of 887 spaces, bringing the site into conformance with the
City’s parking regulation. The applicant also proposes to keep an additional 86 parking spaces
in landscape reserve.
No parking spaces would be provided for the 10,745 sf of on-site employee amenity space. In
accordance with the PAMC 18.52.050, the Planning Director may allow for an adjustment to the
parking requirement that would exempt from the required parking calculation any building
space that is considered to be on-site employee amenities. The proposed amenity space is
equal to four percent of the total square footage, which is below the percentage of amenity
space provided in more recent approvals and is anticipated to reduce employee vehicle trips.
The project would also provide 101 bicycle parking spaces on the site, with a total of 24 short-
term spaces located at each building entry and 77 long-term spaces divided equally between
the four garages, twelve (12) spaces over the Code requirements.
Landscaping
The project is required to conform to the City parking design standards contained in Chapter
18.54 of the PAMC and preserve mature trees as possible. The County of Santa Clara has
jurisdiction over Page Mill Road as it is a Country expressway. The County typically does not
permit trees to be within seven feet of the roadway for safety and road maintenance concerns.
Landscaping would include significant trees, and various ground cover and low plantings as
shown on sheet L2.0. The proposed project includes the retention of 81 of the existing 225
trees, 20 of which are protected trees as defined by the PAMC. These mature trees and
additional new trees will ensure the projects conformance with the requirement to shade 50
percent of the parking spaces within 20 years. The project also includes landscaped islands in
conformance with the Code requirement of one island every 10 spaces. Where some of these
islands would normally be too small to support a mature tree, staff will worked with the
applicant to enlarge the island or add structural soil to support additional tree growth at the
Building permit stage.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Lighting/Glare Impacts
As shown on Sheets E 1.1 thru E2.2, proposed lighting would include pole lighting as well as
bollard style lights, wall wash and in-ground lighting. All pole lighting would be directed
downward to ensure minimal spillover of light across property lines. All proposed lighting
would be installed along interior driveways and walkways. The lighting would have a maximum
average ‘foot-candle’ of 29.5 along the Building 1 perimeter pathway, which would quickly
reduce to 0.1 foot-candle at any property line.
Architectural Review (ARB)
The ARB conducted a preliminary review of the conceptual project design on December 3,
2013. The five public speakers for the item expressed concerns about 1) vehicular traffic on
California Avenue, 2) construction activities/traffic from all new development in the area, 3)
incorporation of pathways for bikes and pedestrians, 4) connectivity to public transportation, 5)
allowed floor area ratio, and 6) alignment of a spine road to break up the Research Park super-
blocks.
To initiate the EIR process, the City circulated a Notice of Preparation (NOP) and Initial Study
(IS) (available online at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/48391) to
solicit agency and public comments on the scope of the environmental analysis to be included
in the EIR. The Initial Study concluded the project could have potential impacts on the
environment, and therefore further study was needed in the form of a Draft EIR. The topics
identified in the study as having potential impacts are Air Quality, Biological Resources, Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, Noise, and Transportation and Traffic. On November 20, 2014, an EIR
scoping meeting was held by the ARB to inform the public that the City was beginning
preparation of a Draft EIR for the redevelopment of the subject property.
On July 30, 2015 the ARB reviewed the formal project and the Draft EIR. A copy of the staff
report can be viewed at https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/48290
The ARB voted unanimously to recommend approval of the project with certain items to return
to the ARB subcommittee for review. Those items included additional information about bike
parking to ensure they are conveniently located, details of any perimeter fencing, railing details,
roof screen material details, ensure convenient pedestrian and bike circulation throughout the
site and onto other sites, and the addition of a TDM condition as offered by the applicant.
The ARB discussed and heard comments from concerned residents about the project’s floor
area and suggested this aspect of the project be fully vetted before any approvals are granted.
Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC)
On August 12, 2015, the PTC reviewed the Draft EIR and provided comments. Those comments
and responses are provided in the attached Final EIR. During the comment period on the DEIR
the City received a total of three (3) comment letters and multiple verbal comments during the
public hearings. The FEIR includes responses to the three comment letters and all verbal
comments made at the two public hearings. The commonly raised comments were (1) floor
City of Palo Alto Page 6
area ratio, (2) traffic baseline, and (3) pedestrian and bicycle access. The PTC reviewed the
Final EIR on November 18, and December 9, 2015, and recommended Council approval of the
Final EIR.
Overall the PTC considered the EIR adequately discussed and mitigated all impacts, including
traffic. One commissioner, however, voted against certification based on concern that the
baseline traffic conditions inappropriately credited more office space than warranted. Part of
this conclusion was supported with a reference to the zoning district’s purpose section, which
states office use should be limited and used to primarily to serve research and development
uses. The commissioner also expressed concerns regarding the thresholds of significance used
to evaluate traffic impacts. A discussion regarding the baseline conditions used in the
environmental document is provided later in this report. The PTC staff reports and the verbatim
minutes can be viewed on the City’s website at
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/ptc/default.asp.
Discussion
The applicant is proposing to redevelop a site within the Research Park with land uses
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning regulations. The project complies with all
applicable standards; however, as provided below, there is public objection to replacing the
existing square footage on site. The community also expressed an interest in a ‘Spine Road’ to
break up the large leaseholds between California Avenue and Page Mill Road and provide more
access routes to alleviate congestion on nearby streets. Access to and from the project site
from California Avenue was another concern expressed by area residents, which is addressed in
the proposal.
An EIR was prepared for this project to evaluate potential environmental impacts. The report
concludes that all impacts are less than significant with mitigation. One mitigation measure
requires left turn lane improvements to address potential queuing impacts on Page Mill Road to
access the project site. These and another issues regarding pedestrian and bicycle access
between these two streets is provided below.
The attached Record of Land Use Action (Attachment A) details the project’s compliance with
the ARB findings and Comprehensive Plan consistency.
Zoning Compliance and Existing FAR
The RP zoning district has a minimum 20 foot requirement for front, rear, side yard setbacks,
and a height limit of 35 feet. The site must also abide by a special setback of 50 feet along Page
Mill Road. The proposed buildings will be set back 50 feet from the front property line and a
minimum of 70 feet from the side and rear property lines.
The maximum allowable lot coverage is 30% and the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) in the RP
district is 0.4:1 (or 40 percent of the site area). The Stanford Research Park is one single 700
acre parcel. While the Municipal Code typically uses complete legal lots to calculate FAR and
City of Palo Alto Page 7
other development standards, for the projects in the Research Park, current practice is and has
been to evaluate a project’s development potential based on lease lines established by
Stanford. The lease line boundaries serve as the baseline to measure setbacks, floor area and
other development standards.
In the late 1950s, development of the contiguous leasehold between California Avenue and
Page Mill Road began and continued through 1980. At the time, all buildings complied with
applicable regulations based on the established practice. Around 1999, this larger leasehold
was modified creating two separate leaseholds. A new building was proposed on the resulting
smaller leasehold (near California Avenue), which met applicable standards for floor area, etc.
based on the new leasehold boundaries. However, this lease division resulted in the larger
leasehold (near Page Mill Road) having more building floor area than would have otherwise
been allowed if the practice of determining permissible floor area were followed.
Staff is unable to determine the exact reason why this was not identified as an issue and
addressed at the time the leasehold change was proposed and implemented, but it appears to
be an oversight. Since then, Stanford and the City are more engaged in conversations about
development activity in the Research Park and staff receives information about all affected
properties when new lease lines are proposed or adjusted.
When the subject application was filed, staff took the position that the existing buildings were
noncomplying facilities and as such, pursuant to the municipal code, would be permitted to be
replaced to the same noncomplying floor area, but could not expand. This position relies on a
provision in the code that is paraphrased below:
PAMC 18.70.100: ….a noncomplying facility in the RP district existing on August
1, 1989, which when built was a complying facility, shall be permitted to be
remodeled, improved or replaced in accordance with applicable site
development regulations other than floor area ratio, provided that any such
remodeling, improvement or replacement shall not result in increased floor area.
As noted above, the subject building became ‘noncomplying’ in or around 1999. The
noncomplying facility position is predicated on the ongoing application of using the lease lines
to establish building potential.
Stanford has provided a letter, which is included with this report as Attachment F. The letter is
generally consistent with staff’s position and further explains that the leasehold practice is a
desirable approach to looking at the entire 700 acre parcel as one lot for development
purposes. If development were evaluated from this perspective there would be less
predictability about how much building area could be placed on various leases throughout the
Research Park. However, while staff supports allowing the subject building to be reconstructed
at its current floor area, staff does not believe this authorizes the collective building area in the
Research Park to exceed the floor area ratio for the entire 700 acre site and that a comparable
City of Palo Alto Page 8
reduction, approximately 30,950 sf, elsewhere in the park would ultimately be needed if the
Research Park were fully built out. There remains, approximately, over three quarters of one
million square feet of building potential in the Research Park. Staff intends to include a findings
indicating that the property owner will provide a full accounting of existing square feet in the
Stanford Research Park and report any lease line changes on an annual basis.1
Mitigation for Traffic Impacts
As explained in the Draft EIR, the additional traffic expected to enter the site from Page Mill
Road would result in queuing impacts, as eastbound cars stack-up to make a left turn into the
site. This potential impact would be addressed by reconfiguring and extending the turn lane,
which would affect the configuration of the westbound turn lane serving Hansen, necessitating
improvements to the Page Mill/Hansen intersection.
Spine Road
As noted earlier, comments were raised in the ARB prelim process and the scoping process
regarding the idea of a “spine road” through the site. The spine road was an idea that
commercial traffic could be diverted from California Avenue if a road parallel to California, mid-
block, were planned for and implemented as sites within the superblock redeveloped. Though
this idea has not been advanced as part of the project (and is not required for vehicle
circulation pursuant to the environmental analysis), staff requested that the project site plan
preserve the potential for east-west pedestrian and bicycle circulation through the site. This
circulation is currently proposed via a route that jogs through the central plaza in front of
Building 3 and is a private path, such that public access could be limited by the property owner.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Access
At the ARB’s July Hearing, the public requested convenient pedestrian and bike circulation
throughout the site and onto other sites. The property owner, Stanford, is not willing to
voluntarily grant a public access easement across its property. It should also be noted that such
an easement would only be across the 1050 Page Mill leasehold which would fall short of a
connection to California Avenue, as an additional easement would be needed across the
leasehold at 1117 California Avenue. However, per the site design, physical bike and pedestrian
access will be incorporated into the project’s landscape design. The vehicular gate will also be
design to allow for bikes and pedestrians to get around it easily. However, for the public to
legally go from California Avenue to Page Mill Road, they would need to use the existing
sidewalks at Hanover Street.
Restricted Access To/From California Avenue
Primary access to the site would be from Page Mill Road at Hansen Way, a signalized
intersection. Currently access is also provided to California Avenue, northwest of the site,
through a connecting parking lot at 1117 California Avenue. The proposed project would
1 If Council is supportive of evaluating development standards on a lease line basis it may want to consider
amending the Zoning Code to clarify this longstanding practice. This would provide both a contractual and a
regulatory basis for evaluating FAR based on lease lines, rather than on the entire 700 acre parcel.
City of Palo Alto Page 9
maintain this connection; however, access between the adjoining parking lots would be limited
by installation of an arm gate at the connection point. This arm gate would be controlled by
access cards that would be issued only to employees and visitors of 1117 California Avenue.
Therefore, Page Mill Road would serve as the single point of ingress/egress for the 1050 Page
Mill Road project site.
Environmental Review
City staff has worked with our environmental consultant, Dudek, to prepare an EIR that
analyzes the project for potential environmental impacts in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Attachment G). The City began the environmental analysis
with an Initial Study which is available online. The environmental analysis determined that the
project could have a significant impact on the environment, which triggered the requirement to
prepare an EIR.
The City prepared a Draft EIR to provide the public and responsible agencies information about
potential adverse effects on the local and regional environment associated with the proposed
project. The five environmental topics covered in the Draft EIR are Air Quality, Biological
Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, and Transportation and Traffic. The Draft
EIR is provided as Attachment G for Council Members and may be viewed on the City’s website
at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/planningprojects
and/or http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=2642&TargetID=319.
The initial 45 day public comment period on the Draft EIR began on July 24, 2015 and ran
through September 8, 2015. The public was invited to comment on the Draft EIR at the PTC’s
August 12, 2015 public hearing. All substantive comments received during the comment period
were responded to in the Final EIR. At the PTC’s November 18, and December 9, 2015 hearing,
they reviewed the Final EIR and made a recommendation to the City Council regarding Final EIR
certification.
For each of the five topics, the Draft EIR describes the existing environmental and regulatory
conditions, presents the criteria used to determine whether an impact would be significant,
analyses significant impacts, identifies mitigation measures for each significant impact, and
discusses the significance of impacts after mitigation has been applied. Potential direct,
indirect, and cumulative impacts are all considered. The Draft EIR also analyzed impacts
associated with Energy Consumption; however, these impacts were found to be less-than-
significant and do not require mitigation.
The Final EIR contains the Draft EIR, the comments received during the public review period,
responses to the comments, and any revisions to the Draft EIR needed as a result of public
agency and public comments.
The following discussion briefly describes three sections of the EIR: (1) The baseline conditions;
(2) A summary of potentially significant impacts; (3) Significant and unavoidable impacts (of
which there are none).
City of Palo Alto Page 10
Baseline Conditions
According to Section 15125 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, an
EIR must include a description of the existing physical environmental condition in the vicinity of
the project as they exist at the time when the Notice of Preparation (NOP) is published.
However, the CEQA Guidelines also recognize that physical environmental conditions may vary
over a range of time, the use of environmental baselines that differ from the date of the NOP is
reasonable and appropriate in certain circumstances when doing so results in a more accurate
or informative environmental analysis.
At the time the application for the proposed project was submitted to the City of Palo Alto and
initial data collection for technical studies began, the existing buildings at the project site were
vacant. From the mid-1950s to 2009, Beckman Coulter, Inc. used the site largely for
manufacturing with office/research and development in the building that fronts on Page Mill
Road. In 2009, Facebook subleased the entire property and the use converted largely to office.
Later in November 2014, when the NOP for this Draft EIR was published, a portion of the
existing buildings on site were occupied by Google and Nest Labs Inc. However, the buildings
had been mostly vacant for at least a couple of years before the Google and Nest Labs leases
were signed in late 2013 and early 2014 respectively. These leases ended in January 2015.
From August 2014, Machine Zone Inc. has occupied Building 1 for office space. As a result, use
of the existing space has varied over time.
Based on historical usage and current square footage configurations, the following land use
conditions are used to define the baseline land use conditions at the project site: 67.4% office
space, 16.3% manufacturing space, and 16.3% research and development space. While an
alternate baseline could have been selected for the analysis, these baseline assumptions are
reasonable because they reflect historic use of the site and consideration of the fluctuations in
tenancy. Also, the technical analyses that form the basis of the Draft EIR contain sufficient
information to allow comparisons between expected conditions with the proposed project and
past site conditions.
Summary of Potentially Significant Impacts
The Draft EIR identifies potentially significant environmental effects of the project in regards to
five issues: Air Quality; Biological Resources; Hazards and Hazardous Materials; Noise; and
Transportation and Traffic. The Draft EIR also analyzed impacts associated with Energy
Consumption; however, these impacts were found to be less-than-significant and do not
require mitigation. The following is a brief overview of each issue, the existing setting, the
impacts that would result from the proposed project and the mitigation measures
recommended in the EIR to lessen the project impacts.
Air Quality
The air quality chapter analyzes violations of the City’s air quality standard, which is based on
Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) criteria, due to project construction
(including demolition). The proposed project is below the operational screening criteria size of
323,000 square feet for an office research park; as such, the project would have a less-than-
City of Palo Alto Page 11
significant impact related to air quality during operation. While the emissions are anticipated
to remain below the Bay Area Air Quality Management District thresholds, all projects are
required to implement the District’s standard construction emissions measures to minimize
pollutant emissions. The EIR includes mitigation measures to ensure compliance with emission
control measures during project construction consistent with BAAQMD’s Bay Area 2010 Clean
Air Plan. In addition to basic emissions control measures, daily use of construction equipment
would be limited to 6, rather than 8, hours per day per piece of equipment and diesel
particulate filters would be used on construction equipment. These measures would reduce the
impact to less than significant.
Biological Resources
The biological resource concerns of the project relate to migratory birds and bats that could
nest and/or forage onsite as well as the existing trees on-site and on adjacent properties. The
project includes tree planting and the preparation of a Tree Protection and Preservation Plan in
conformance with the City’s tree protection ordinances. The EIR includes mitigation measures
for pre-construction surveys be submitted to the City by a qualified biologist to determine if
there are active bird nests, bat roosts, or bat maternal colonies on the project site. If an active
nest is identified, the biologist shall consult with CDFW to determine if construction activities
would affect the nest. If construction would disturb the special-status species, construction-free
buffer zones will be established around the nest. This procedure would ensure that project
construction would not disturb the reproductive behavior of special-status species. These
measures would reduce the impact to less than significant.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The hazardous material concerns on the project include the on-site potential for release of
hazardous materials during demolition and construction (i.e., asbestos, lead, contaminated
soils). The project’s use of hazard substances and wastes during construction is also analyzed.
The effects of the contaminated ground-water plume that underlies the project site on indoor
air quality within the proposed buildings is also evaluated. The EIR includes requirements for
construction waste disposal and inspection by City staff. The mitigation requires the project
applicant to consult with the City’s Public Works Department and hazardous material
consultants to amend the Soil Management Plan to address the presence of VOCs and TPH
contamination. The mitigation also requires that an environmental specialist be retained to
analyze the existing buildings for hazardous building materials prior to demolition, construction
workers be familiarized with the Soil Management Plan, preparation of a scope of work for
asbestos abatement, and the inspections and verifications by the City and BAAQMD. Workers
involved in demolition will be required to comply with state and federal regulations related to
LCM and ACM handling and disposal. The project applicant/construction contractor will prepare
a dewatering plan and groundwater extraction design plans, which will be reviewed by the
City’s Public Works Department, to ensure proper testing and treatment of groundwater
potentially impacted by VOCs. A waterproofing/vapor barrier membrane will be included in the
building plans to prevent the migration of vapor from groundwater into the indoor air of the
basement parking garage, and the project applicant shall sample VOC concentrations to ensure
City of Palo Alto Page 12
VOC concentrations in the basement are below levels harmful to health. These measures would
reduce the impact to less than significant.
Noise
Noise impacts associated with the project include exposing people to and generating noise
levels beyond what is considered acceptable under City standards, including an increase in
noise levels above those existing without the project. The EIR includes mitigation measures that
set performance standards for the proposed buildings’ windows, walls, and rooftop mechanical
equipment that would ensure protection of employees and nearby residents from adverse
noise exposure making this a less than significant impact with mitigation.
Transportation and Traffic
The transportation impacts of the project include the addition of vehicle trips to intersections
without adequate queue lengths. The transportation section also analyzes the addition of
vehicle trips to existing intersections in the project vicinity but does not find significant
decreases in level of service or significant increases in the V/C ratio. The provision of bicycle and
vehicle parking onsite was reviewed for conformance with City policy. The transportation
section also discusses the project’s site access by vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. The
proposed project does not cause a significant impact to the level of service at any nearby
intersections. However, the project does have significant impacts related to intersection
queuing; mitigation is provided to ensure improvements are made to reduce these queues to
less-than-significant levels. During operation, the project would have adequate emergency
access; however, mitigation is provided for temporary impacts to emergency access, which
could occur during construction. Mitigation measures require the project applicant to
construct improvements and/or provide fair share allocation of funds necessary to construct
improvements to intersections with adverse queuing impacts. The project includes adequate
parking on-site for autos and bicycles. The project applicant will prepare a Construction Traffic
Management Plan to address construction traffic and staging in order to maintain safety for
roadway users and ensure emergency access to the project site. These measures would reduce
the impact to less than significant.
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
The analysis of the EIR concludes that the implementation of the proposed project would not
result in any significant unavoidable impacts. The project would have potential significant air
quality, biological resources, hazardous material, noise, and traffic impacts. However, the
project includes mitigation that would reduce these impacts to less-than-significant level.
Policy Implications
The project is subject to ARB findings, which are expanded upon in Attachment A. Additionally,
there are a number of Comprehensive Plan policies that should be considered when evaluating
this project, including the following. More policies and analysis is provided in Attachment A.
City of Palo Alto Page 13
Policy L-44: Develop the Stanford Research Park as a compact employment center
served by a variety of transportation modes.
Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative design and site planning that is compatible
with surrounding development and public spaces.
Goal B-1: A thriving business environment that is compatible with Palo Alto’s residential
character and natural environment.
While it could be argued that the project is out of keeping with other specific Comprehensive
Plan goals and policies such as those below, the project is consistent with the applicable
Comprehensive Plan land use designation and staff believes that it is on balance consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan as a whole.
Policy L-42: Encourage Employment Districts to develop in a way that encourages
transit, pedestrian and bicycle travel and reduces the number of auto trips for daily
errands.
Policy L-43: Provide sidewalks, pedestrian paths, and connections to the citywide
bikeway system within Employment Districts. Pursue opportunities to build sidewalks
and paths in renovation and expansion projects.
There are at least two larger policy issues that are likely to be of interest with regard to this
project. These involve the conversion from “research and development” to office space, which
the City Council has expressed an interest in examining in an effort to ensure the Research Park
as a whole does not lose its research and development focus. Both research and development
and office space are permitted uses on the site, and staff expects the discussion of this issue to
occur in the context of the Comprehensive Plan Update, along with a discussion of ways to
effectively address vehicle trips to/from the Research Park via effective transportation demand
management (TDM) programs, including transit (shuttle) and parking management strategies.
Public Outreach
Notice of this public hearing was provided by publication of the agenda in a local newspaper of
general circulation. In addition, property owners and utility customers within 600 feet of the
project site were mailed a notice card.
Timeline
Preliminary ARB meeting December 5, 2013
Formal Application submitted March 3, 2014
EIR scoping meeting before the ARB November 20, 2014
Release of the Draft EIR for the 45 day public comment period July 24, 2015
ARB meeting recommendation on AR July 30, 2015
PTC meeting on Draft EIR August 12, 2015
First PTC meeting on Final EIR November 18, 2015
PTC meeting on Final EIR December 9, 2015
Final EIR Certification by City Council January 11, 2015
City of Palo Alto Page 14
Final Decision on the Proposed Project by City Council January 11, 2015
Attachments:
Attachment A: Record of Land Use Action (DOCX)
Attachment B: Comprehensive Plan Table (DOCX)
Attachment C: Zoning Comparison Table (DOC)
Attachment D: Applicant's Project Description (PDF)
Attachment E: Applicant response to public comments (PDF)
Attachment F: Stanford response to public comments (PDF)
Attachment G: Environmental Impact Report (paper copies to Councilmembers only)
(PDF)
Attachment H: CEQA Statement of Findings (DOC)
Attachment I: Draft Mitigation Monitoring Program (DOCX)
Attachment J: Project Plans (hardcopies to Councilmembers and Libraries only) (DOCX)
Page 1
Attachment A
APPROVAL NO. 2015-10
RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION
FOR 1050 PAGE MILL ROAD: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
[FILE NO. 14PLN-00074]
On January 11, 2015, the City Council approved certification of the Final
Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and Approval of the Architectural Review to Allow
Demolition of Four Existing Structures Totaling 265,895 sf and Construction of Four Two-Story
Office Buildings Totaling 265,895 Square Feet of Floor Area with Below and At-Grade Parking and
Other Site Improvements Located at 1050 Page Mill Road, making the following findings,
determination and declarations:
SECTION 1. BACKGROUND. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”)
finds, determines, and declares as follows:
A. On March 3, 2014, Allison Koo (Sand Hill Properties) on behalf of Board of
Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University applied for an Architectural Review application to
allow demolition of four existing structures totaling 265,895 square feet and construction of four
two-story office buildings totaling 265,895 square feet of floor area with below and at-grade
parking and other site improvements.
B. Staff has determined that the proposed project is in compliance with the
applicable RP development standards.
C. Finding regarding monitoring of Stanford Research Park FAR to be provided
under separate cover.
D. Following staff review, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) considered and
recommended approval of the Architectural Review application on July 30, 2015.
E. Following ARB review, the Planning and Transportation Commission
(Commission) reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) on August 12, 2015 and the
Final EIR on December 9, 2015 and recommended certification.
F. On January 11, 2016, the City Council reviewed the project design and the EIR.
After hearing public testimony, the Council voted to approve the project subject to the
conditions set forth in Section 4 of this Record of Land Use Action.
SECTION 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. In conformance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report was certified by the City Council
on January 11, 2015. The 1050 Page Mill Road Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State
Clearinghouse No. 2014112015) concluded that the proposed project(s) would not have a
significant effect on the environment with mitigation as proposed. The EIR is available for
Page 2
review on the City’s web site:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=2642&TargetID=319. All mitigation
measures as stated in the approved Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) have
been incorporated into the conditions of approval.
SECTION 3. ARCHITECTURE REVIEW BOARD FINDINGS
The design and architecture of the proposed improvements, as conditioned, complies with the
Findings for Architectural Review as required in Chapter 18.76 of the PAMC.
Comprehensive Plan and Purpose of ARB:
Finding #1: The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan.
Finding #16: The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review,
which is to:
Promote orderly and harmonious development in the city;
Enhance the desirability of residence or investment in the city;
Encourage the attainment of the most desirable use of land and
improvements;
Enhance the desirability of living conditions upon the immediate site or in
adjacent areas; and
Promote visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety
and which, at the same time, are considerate of each other.
The project is consistent with Findings #1 and #16 because:
In conformance with the following Comp Plan Goals and Policies, the project will include high
quality design compatible with surrounding development.
Policy L-1: A well-designed, compact city, providing residents and visitors with
attractive neighborhoods, work places, shopping districts public facilities and open
spaces.
Policy L-44: Develop the Stanford Research Park as a compact employment center served
by a variety of transportation modes.
Policy L-48: Promote high quality, creative design and site planning that is compatible
with surrounding development and public spaces.
Goal B-1: A thriving business environment that is compatible with Palo Alto’s
residential character and natural environment.
Compatibility and Character:
Finding #2: The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site.
Finding #4: This finding of compatibility with unified or historic character is not applicable to
the project (there is no unified design or historic character along this portion of El Camino
Real).
Finding #5: The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between
different designated land uses.
Finding #6: The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site.
Page 3
The project is consistent with Findings #2, #4, #5 and #6 because:
The proposed buildings would replace existing Research & Development/Office buildings with two-
story contemporary buildings. The project design is compatible with the forward thinking
character of the Stanford Research Park in that its designed with high quality exterior finishes and
human scaled buildings to create a campus like setting. The site incorporates work related
functions with passive and active outdoor areas. The buildings are designed to integrate into the
environmental setting and include intensive landscape plantings and outdoor features as well as
pedestrian walkways to connect the larger area.
Functionality and Open Space:
Finding #3: The design is appropriate to the function of the project.
Finding #7: The planning and siting of the building on the site creates an internal sense of order
and provides a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general community.
Finding #8: The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the
function of the structures.
The project is consistent with Findings #3, #7, and #8 because:
The design is appropriate to the function of the project in that the placement of the two-story
buildings create a series of human-scaled interconnected outdoor plaza that promote a quality of
life for employees. The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design
and the function of the structures in that the intensively landscaped central plaza provides
outdoor rooms and event spaces which promotes participation and interaction with the
environment. The architectural design emphasizes the use of natural daylight and other energy
design elements that promote a healthy environment for employees.
Circulation and Traffic:
Finding #9: Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the project
and the same are compatible with the project’s design concept.
Finding #10: Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for
pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles.
The project is consistent with Findings #9 and #10 because:
The project’s design concept provides adequate automobile, accessible and bicycle parking located
conveniently with pedestrian access to the building entrances. Access to the property and
circulation thereon are safe and convenient for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles in that the
existing access way off Page Mill Road and the interior perimeter road will be maintained for
vehicular use. Bicycle parking is convenient and close to building entrances with long term bike
parking in below grade parking garages.
Landscaping and Plant Materials:
Finding #11: Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project.
Finding #12: The materials, textures and colors and details of construction and plant material are
an appropriate expression to the design and function and compatible with the adjacent and
Page 4
neighboring structures, landscape elements and functions.
Finding #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 on the site and the landscape concept depicts an appropriate unit with
the various buildings on the site.
Finding #14: Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly
maintained on the site, and is of a variety that would tend to be drought-resistant and to reduce
consumption of water in its installation and maintenance.
The project is consistent with Findings #11- #14 because:
Several existing mature trees will be preserved and integrated into the project’s perimeter
landscape. The building materials, textures and colors are complimentary to the environmental
setting and the landscape design utilizes drought tolerant and native plants that are
appropriate to the site. Exterior pathways connect one building to another and help complete
the connection to the entire campus. Outdoor areas also contribute to adding functioning space
that is compatible with the buildings and natural features of the site. Parking areas and
buildings are well screened with intensive tree plantings and existing landscaping.
Sustainability:
Finding #15: The design is energy efficient and incorporates renewable energy design elements
including, but not limited to:
a. Careful building orientation to optimize daylight to interiors
b. High performance, low-emissivity glazing
c. Cool roof and roof insulation beyond Code minimum
d. Solar ready roof
e. Use of energy efficient LED lighting
f. Low-flow plumbing and shower fixtures
g. Below grade parking to allow for increased landscape and stormwater treatment areas
The project is consistent with Finding #15 because:
In accordance with the City’s Green Building Regulations, the building will satisfy the
requirements for CALGreen Mandatory + Tier 2. The applicant is currently targeting
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Platinum status for the project with the
inclusion of photovoltaics covering all roofs to generate 150,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year.
SECTION 4. Conditions of Approval.
PLANNING DIVISION
1. The plans submitted for Building Permit shall be in substantial conformance with plans
received and date stamped July 20, 2015, except as modified to incorporate these
conditions of approval.
Page 5
2. The ARB approval letter including all Department conditions of approval for the project shall
be printed on the plans submitted for building permit.
3. Any exterior changes to the building such as size, location, materials or signage are subject
to ARB review and approval prior to occupancy/installation.
4. Controlled Access: The project shall include a secure arm gate that restricts access between
the subject site and 1117 California Avenue. This gate and associated access cards shall be
maintained by the leaseholder and/or property owner. Access cards will only be issued to
employees and visitors of 1117 California Avenue. Therefore, Page Mill Road would serve
as the single point of ingress/egress for employees and visitors to the 1050 Page Mill Road
site.
The associated ingress/egress agreement shall be submitted to the City prior to the final
Planning inspection, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning.
5. Noise: In accordance with PAMC Section 9.10.040 no person shall produce, suffer or allow to
be produced by any machine or device, or any combination of same, on commercial or
industrial property, a noise level more than eight dB above the local ambient at any point
outside of the property plane.
6. Amenity Space: The project shall include a minimum of 10,745 sf of amenity space.
7. Indemnity: To the extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless
the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from
and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified
parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby
for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City 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.
8. Development Impact Fees. The proposed building will replace existing square footage,
therefore no additional impact fees are due.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. A Planning Division Final inspection will be required to determine substantial compliance with
the approved plans prior to the scheduling of a Building Division final. Any revisions during the
building process must be approved by Planning, including but not limited to; materials,
landscaping and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner, Jodie Gerhardt at
Jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org to schedule this inspection.
Page 6
The applicant has included the following items in their project description, which are included below
as conditions of approval.
12. Rooftop Photovoltaic Panels. Provided that the Feed In Tariff program for Palo Alto remains in
effect at the rates as currently offered, the project will install Photovoltaic Panels on the roofs
of the four proposed new buildings. Estimated that these panels will generate 400 Kw.
13. All Electric Building – No Natural Gas. Consistent with the City’s 2015 goal to reduce carbon
emissions, the project will be powered entirely with electricity. Natural gas will not be used.
14. Energy Management Planning and LEED Certification. The Applicant will participate in the
Department of Utilities net Zero Energy Design Review making use of groups such as Base
Energy Community Group. The purpose is for the project to use the City’s High End Energy
Modeling Services to provide design and engineering input to optimize the building’s
performance for sustainable design and reduced energy use. In conjunction with these energy
modeling services, the project, following its completion, will obtain LEED Platinum certification,
to further its serving as a role model for Sustainable Design practices
15. EV Charging Stations. The project will provide eight Electrical Vehicle charging stations, subject
to approval by the Director of Planning, with six in the underground structured parking
garages, and two at grade that can be used by a public guest or client of the tenants and
occupants of the site.
16. Comprehensive TDM Plan without any Parking Reduction. The proposed project will provide a
comprehensive Transportation Demand Management Plan to be implemented by the Building
Owner and made a condition, through lease covenants, with the new tenants for any tenant
with greater than 20 employees. The project will provide a comprehensive TDM Plan despite
not seeking or receiving any parking reduction as otherwise allowed under the Zoning Code.
This plan shall be submitted to the Project Planner for review and approval prior to issuance of
any Building permits. Annual updates shall be provided to the City, to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Community Environment.
17. Public Bicycle Pod. The applicant will offer the opportunity for a small bicycle pod for parking
bicycles that may be used by the public. The City Transportation Division may determine that
the site is unsuitable for a bicycle pod, but 1050 PMR will offer a location for a bicycle pod if it
is useful.
18. Zip Car Locations. The applicant will offer locations for six Zip Cars. Zip Cars are installed based
on economic analysis of usefulness by the provider of the vehicles. Applicant will cooperate
with any Zip Car agency and the City Transportation Division to provide successful use of Zip
Cars or similar by occupants of site.
Page 7
19. Bicycle Paths. The project provides extensive bicycle paths on its site, and to other site, to
encourage use of bicycles rather than single occupant vehicles.
PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING
PRIOR TO AN EXCAVATION AND GRADING PERMIT SUBMITTAL
20. GRADING PERMIT: An Excavation and Grading Permit is required for grading activities on
private property that fill, excavate, store or dispose of 100 cubic yards or more based on PAMC
Section 16.28.060. Applicant shall prepare and submit an excavation and grading permit to
Public Works separately from the building permit set. The permit application and instructions
are available at the Development Center and on our website.
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/forms_and_permits.asp
21. ROUGH GRADING: provide a Rough Grading Plan for the work proposed as part of the Grading
and Excavation Permit application. The Rough Grading Plans shall including the following: pad
elevation, basement elevation, elevator pit elevation, ground monitoring wells, shoring for the
proposed basement and utilities to remain, limits of over excavation, stockpile area of material,
overall earthwork volumes (cut and fill), temporary shoring for any existing facilities, ramps for
the basement access, crane locations (if any), parking for construction workers, etc. Plans
submitted for the Grading and Excavation Permit, shall be stand-alone, and therefore the plans
shall include any conditions from other divisions that pertain to items encountered during
rough grading for example if contaminated groundwater is encountered and dewatering is
expected, provide notes on the plans based Water Quality’s conditions of approval. Provide a
note on the plans to direct the contractor to the approve City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map,
which is available on the City’s website.
22. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: Shall clearly identify the highest projected groundwater level to be
encountered in the area of the proposed basement in the future will be feet below
existing grade.
23. NOTICE OF INTENT: If the proposed development disturbs 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 Best Management Practices (BMP) for storm water quality protection. The
applicant is required to submit two copies of the NOI and the draft SWPPP to Public Works
Engineering for review and approval prior to issuance of the building permit.
24. LOGISTICS PLAN: The applicant and contractor shall submit a construction logistics plan to the
Public Works Department that addresses all impacts to the public right-of-way, including, but
not limited to: pedestrian control, traffic control, truck routes, material deliveries, contractor’s
parking, on-site staging and storage areas, concrete pours, crane lifts, work hours, noise
Page 8
control, dust control, storm water pollution prevention, contractor’s contact. The plan shall be
prepared and submitted along the Rough Grading and Excavation Permit. It shall include notes
as indicated on the approved Truck Route Map for construction traffic to and from the site.
Permits from County or conditions for Page Mill associated with the off-haul.
25. DEWATERING: Basement excavation may require dewatering during construction. Public Works
only allows groundwater drawdown well dewatering. Open pit groundwater dewatering is not
allowed. 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. We recommend that a piezometer be installed in the soil
boring. The contractor shall determine the depth to groundwater immediately prior to
excavation by using a piezometer or by drilling and exploratory hole. Based on the determined
groundwater depth and season the contractor may be required to dewater the site or stop all
grading and excavation work. In addition Public Works may require that all groundwater 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 contaminants Public Works specifies and submit the results to Public Works.
26. WATER FILLING STATION: Due to the California drought, applicant shall install a water station
for the non-potable reuse of the dewatering water. This water station shall be constructed
within private property, next to the right-of-way, (typically, behind the sidewalk). The station
shall be accessible 24 hours a day for the filling of water carrying vehicles (i.e. street sweepers,
etc.). The water station may also be used for onsite dust control. Before a discharge permit can
be issued, the water supply station shall be installed, ready for operational and inspected by
Public Works. The groundwater will also need to be tested for contaminants and chemical
properties for the non-potable use. The discharge permit cannot be issued until the test results
are received. Additional information regarding the station will be made available on the City’s
website under Public Works.
27. TRANSFORMER AND ELECTRIC UTILITIES: As brought up by Public Works Utilities during DRC,
the electric utilities services located through the project site will need to be relocated prior to
issuance of a building permit. Applicant shall coordinate with utilities the proposed electrical
utility relocation and provide confirmation to Public Works Engineering that the phasing of
electric relocation is resolved. Note that electric utility relocation may need to be completed in
the field prior to issuance a grading and excavation permit.
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT
28. PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT: Based on the plans provided it is difficult to determine the portions
of Public Utility Easements (PUE) that will need to be abandoned and where the proposed PUE
will be located. Plan shall clearly show the location and width of the proposed public utility
easements for reviewed and approved by the City prior to recordation. Note that no structures
shall be located within an easement.
Page 9
29. SHARED PARKING AND ACCESS AGREEMENT: Clarify who benefits for the shared parking
agreement document 142259356 as shown on Sheet C1.0. Will the occupants of 142-20-090
continue to have access to park on 142-20-91? Will the proposed development of 142-20-091,
continue to provide the min and max number of stalls as described in the agreement?
30. PAGE MILL ROAD: Is a County maintained Road. Applicant shall contact the County to obtain
the necessary approvals and for any work proposed on Page Mill Road right-of-way. Applicant
shall submit a copy of permit from County to the City.
31. GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Provide a separate Grading and Drainage Plan prepared by a
qualified licensed engineer, surveyor or architect. Plan shall be wet-stamped and signed by the
same. Plan shall include the following: existing and proposed spot elevations, earthwork
volumes (cut and fill in CY), pad, finished floor, garage elevation, base flood elevation (if
applicable) grades along the project conforms, property lines, or back of walk. See PAMC
Section 16.28.110 for additional items. Projects that front directly into the public sidewalk,
shall include grades at the doors or building entrances. Provide drainage flow arrows to
demonstrate positive drainage away from building foundations at minimum of 2% or 5% for
10-feet per 2013 CBC Section 1804.3. Label the downspouts, splashblocks (2-feet long min) and
any site drainage features such as swales, area drains, bubbler locations. Include grate
elevations, low points, high points and grade breaks. In no case shall drainage across property
lines exceed that which existed prior to grading per 2013 CBC Section J109.4.
Provide the following note on the Final Grading Plans.
“In my professional judgement, the highest projected groundwater level to be encountered in
the area of the proposed basement in the future will be feet below existing grade. As a
result, the proposed drainage system for the basement retaining wall will not encounter and
pump groundwater during the life of this wall.”
32. The site drainage system that collects runoff from downspouts and landscape area shall be a
separated from the pump system that discharges runoff from light wells. Plot and clearly label
the two separate systems and including the separate outfalls for each system.
33. ACCESSIBILITY: The path of travel does not connect buildings 2, 3 and 4 with building 1. Provide
an accessible path of travel.
34. STORM WATER HYDRAULICS AND HYDROLOGY: Provide an analysis that compares the existing
and proposed runoff calculations from the site for the 10 year storm event, 6 hour duration.
The IDF tables and Precipitation Map for Palo Alto is available County of Santa Clara County
Drainage Manual dated October 2007. The proposed project shall not increase runoff to the
public storm drain system.
35. STAIRWELLS AND LIGHTWELLS: Due to high groundwater throughout much of the City and
Public Works prohibiting the pumping and discharging of groundwater, perforated pipe
drainage systems at the exterior of the basement walls or under the slab are not allowed for
Page 10
this site. A drainage system is, however, required for all exterior basement-level spaces, such as
lightwells, patios or stairwells. This system consists of a sump, a sump pump, a backflow
preventer, and a closed pipe from the pump to a dissipation device onsite at least 10 feet from
the property line, such as a bubbler box in a landscaped area, so that water can percolate into
the soil and/or sheet flow across the site. The device must not allow stagnant water that could
become mosquito habitat. Additionally, the plans must show that exterior basement-level
spaces are at least 7-3/4” below any adjacent windowsills or doorsills to minimize the potential
for flooding the basement. Public Works recommends a waterproofing consultant be retained
to design and inspect the vapor barrier and waterproofing systems for the basement.
36. BIORETENTION SWALES shall be designed to use the full swale length for treatment, place the
bubbler (outlet) and catch basin (inlet) at the ends of the swale.
37. UTILITES AND BIORETENTION AREAS: Due to maintenance and inspection requirements
associated with treatment areas, utilities that are not associated with the bio-retention design,
shall not be installed within the bio-retention areas.
38. STORM WATER TREATMENT: This project shall comply with the storm water regulations
contained in provision C.3 of the NPDES municipal storm water discharge permit 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 permanent impacts of the project on storm 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 storm water quality, subject to the approval of the
Public Works Department. The applicant shall identify, size, design and incorporate permanent
storm water pollution prevention measures (preferably landscape-based treatment controls
such as bioswales, filter strips, and permeable pavement rather than mechanical devices that
require long-term maintenance) to treat the runoff from a “water quality storm” specified in
PAMC Chapter 16.11 prior to discharge to the municipal storm drain system. Effective February
10, 2011, regulated projects, must contract with a qualified third-party reviewer during the
building permit review process to certify that the proposed permanent storm water pollution
prevention measures comply with the requirements of Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter
16.11. The certification form, 2 copies of approved storm water treatment plan, and a
description of Maintenance Task and Schedule must be received by the City from the third-
party reviewer prior to approval of the building permit by the Public Works department. 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.
39. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA: The project will be creating or replacing 500 square feet or more
of impervious surface. Accordingly, the applicant shall provide calculations of the existing and
proposed impervious surface areas with the building permit application. The Impervious Area
Page 11
Worksheet for Land Developments form and instructions are available at the Development
Center or on our website.
PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT FINAL
40. STORMWATER MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: 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 to guarantee the ongoing maintenance of the permanent C.3 storm
water discharge compliance measures. The maintenance agreement shall be executed prior to
the first building occupancy sign-off. The City will inspect the treatment measures yearly and
charge an inspection fee. There is currently a $381 (FY 2015) C.3 plan check fee that will be
collected upon submittal for a grading or building permit.
PUBLIC WORKS URBAN FORESTRY SECTION
PRIOR TO DEMOLITION, BUILDING OR GRADING PERMIT ISSUANCE
40. BUILDING PERMIT SUBMITTAL- PROJECT ARBORIST CERTIFICATION LETTER. Prior to submittal for
staff review, attach a Project Arborist Certification Letter that he/she has; (a) reviewed the entire
building permit plan set submittal and, (b)* verified all his/her updated TPR mitigation measures
and changes are incorporated in the plan set, (c) affirm that ongoing Contractor/Project Arborist
site monitoring inspections and reporting have been arranged with the contractor or owner (see
Sheet T-1) and, (d) understands that design revisions (site or plan changes) within a TPZ will be
routed to Project Arborist/Contractor for review prior to approval from City.
* (b above) Other information. The Building Permit submittal set shall be accompanied by the
project site arborist’s typed certification letter that the plans have incorporated said design
changes for consistency with City Standards, Regulations and information:
a. Applicant/project arborist’s final revised Tree Protection Report (TPR) with said design
changes and corresponding mitigation measures. (e.g.: if Pier/grade beam=soils report w/
specs required by Bldg. Div.; if Standard foundation= mitigation for linear 24” cut to all
roots in proximity)
b. Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual Construction Standards, Section 2.00 and PAMC 8.10.080.
c. Specialty items. Itemized list of any activity impact--quantified and mitigated, in the Tree
Protection Zone (TPZ) for each tree.
d. Oaks, if present. That landscape and irrigation plans are consistent with CPA Tree Technical
Manual, Section 5.45 and Appendix L, Landscaping under Native Oaks and PAMC
18.40.130.
41. BUILDING PERMIT CORRECTIONS/REVISIONS--COVER LETTER. During plan check review, provide a
separate cover letter with Correction List along with the revised drawings when resubmitting. State
where the significant tree impacts notes occur (bubble) and indicate the sheet number
and/or detail where the correction has been made. Provide: 1) corresponding revision number and
2) bubble or highlights for easy reference. Responses such as “see plans or report” or “plans
comply” are not acceptable. Your response should be clear and complete to assist the re-check
and approval process for your project.
Page 12
42. TREE APPRAISAL & SECURITY DEPOSIT AGREEMENT. (Reference: CPA Tree Technical Manual,
Section 6.25). Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit, the applicant shall prepare and
secure a tree appraisal and security deposit agreement stipulating the duration and monitoring
program. The appraisal of the condition and replacement value of all trees to remain shall
recognize the location of each tree in the proposed development. Listed separately, the appraisal
may be part of the Tree Survey Report. For the purposes of a security deposit agreement, the
monetary market or replacement value shall be determined using the most recent version of the
“Guide for Plan Appraisal”, in conjunction with the Species and Classification Guide for Northern
California. The appraisal shall be performed at the applicant’s expense, and the appraiser shall be
subject to the Director’s approval.
a. SECURITY DEPOSIT AGREEMENT. Prior to grading or building permit issuance, as a condition of
development approval, the applicant shall post a security deposit for the 150% of the
appraised replacement value of the following 23 Designated Trees: (ID numbers to be
determined), to be retained and protected.. The total amount for this project is: $ To Be
Determined with Urban Forestry staff. The security may be a cash deposit, letter of credit, or
surety bond and shall be filed with the Revenue Collections/Finance Department or in a form
satisfactory to the City Attorney.
b. SECURITY DEPOSIT & MONITORING PROGRAM. The project sponsor shall provide to the City of
Palo Alto an annual tree evaluation report prepared by the project arborist or other qualified
certified arborist, assessing the condition and recommendations to correct potential tree
decline for trees remain and trees planted as part of the mitigation program. The monitoring
program shall end two years from date of final occupancy, unless extended due to tree
mortality and replacement, in which case a new two year monitoring program and annual
evaluation report for the replacement tree shall begin. Prior to occupancy, a final report and
assessment shall be submitted for City review and approval. The final report shall summarize
the Tree Resources program, documenting tree or site changes to the approved plans, update
status of tree health and recommend specific tree care maintenance practices for the property
owner(s). The owner or project sponsor shall call for a final inspection by the Planning Division
Arborist.
c. SECURITY DEPOSIT DURATION. The security deposit duration period shall be two years (or five
years if determined by the Director) from the date of final occupancy. Return of the
security guarantee shall be subject to City approval of the final monitoring report. A tree shall
be considered dead when the main leader has died back, 25% of the crown is dead or if major
trunk or root damage is evident. A new tree of equal or greater appraised value shall be
planted in the same area by the property owner. Landscape area and irrigation shall be
readapted to provide optimum growing conditions for the replacement tree. The replacement
tree that is planted shall be subject to a new two-year establishment and monitoring
program. The project sponsor shall provide an annual tree evaluation report as originally
required.
43. PLAN SET REQUIREMENTS. The final Plans submitted for building permit shall include
Page 13
a. SHEET T-1, BUILDING PERMIT. The building permit plan set will include the City’s full-sized,
Sheet T-1 (Tree Protection-it's Part of the Plan!), available on the Development Center
website at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/31783. The Applicant
shall complete and sign the Tree Disclosure Statement and recognize the Project Arborist
Tree Activity Inspection Schedule. Monthly reporting to Urban Forestry/Contractor is
mandatory. (Insp. #1: applies to all projects; with tree preservation report: Insp. #2-6 applies;
with landscape plan: Insp. #7 applies.)
b. The Tree Preservation Report (TPR). All sheets of the Applicant’s TPR approved by the City
for full implementation by Contractor, ArborResources, Inc., shall be printed on numbered
Sheet T-1 (T-2, T-3, etc) and added to the sheet index.
44. PLANS--SHOW PROTECTIVE TREE FENCING. The Plan Set (esp. site, demolition, grading & drainage,
foundation, irrigation, tree disposition, utility sheets, etc.) must delineate/show Type I or Type II
fencing around each Regulated Trees, using a bold dashed line enclosing the Tree Protection Zone
as shown on Standard Dwg. #605, Sheet T-1, and the City Tree Technical Manual, Section 6.35-Site
Plans; or using the Project Arborist’s unique diagram for each Tree Protection Zone enclosure.
45. SITE PLAN REQUIREMENTS: Plans with Public Trees shall show (a) Type II street tree fencing
enclosing the entire parkway strip or, (b) Type I protection to the outer branch dripline (for rolled
curb & sidewalk or no-sidewalk situations.)
a. Add Site Plan Notes.)
i. Note #1. Apply to the site plan stating, "All tree protection and inspection schedule
measures, design recommendations, watering and construction scheduling shall be
implemented in full by owner and contractor, as stated on Sheet T-1, in the Tree
Protection Report and the approved plans”.
ii. Note #2. All civil plans, grading plans, irrigation plans, site plans and utility plans and
relevant sheets shall add a note applying to the trees to be protected,
including neighboring trees stating: "Regulated Tree--before working in this area
contact the Project Site Arborist at 650-654-3351 ";
iii. Note #3. Utility (sanitary sewer/gas/water/backflow/electric/storm drain) plan
sheets shall include the following note: “Utility trenching shall not occur within the
TPZ of the protected tree. Contractor shall be responsible for ensuring that no
trenching occurs within the TPZ of the protected tree by contractors, City crews or
final landscape workers. See sheet T-1 for instructions.”
iv. Note #4. “Basement or foundation plan. Soils Report and Excavation for basement
construction within the TPZ of a protected tree shall specify a vertical cut (stitch piers
may be necessary) in order to avoid over-excavating into the tree root zone. Any
variance from this procedure requires Urban Forestry approval, please call (650) 496-
5953.”
v. Note #5. “Pruning Restrictions. No pruning or clearance cutting of branches is
permitted on City trees. Contractor shall obtain a Public Tree Permit from Urban
Forestry (650-496-5953) for any work on Public Trees”
Page 14
46. TREE REMOVAL—PROTECTED & RIGHT-OF-WAY TREES. Existing trees (Publicly-owned or
Protected) to be removed, as shown accurately located on all site plans, require approval by the
Urban Forestry Tree Care Permit prior to issuance of any building, demolition or grading permit.
Must also be referenced in the required Street Work Permit from Public Works Engineering.
a. Add plan note for each tree to be removed, “Tree Removal. Contractor shall obtain a
completed Urban Forestry Tree Care Permit # (contractor to complete)
separate from the Building or Street Work Permit. Permit notice hanger and conditions
apply. Contact (650-496-5953).”
b. Copy the approval. The completed Tree Care Permit shall be printed on Sheet T-2, or
specific approval communication from staff clearly copied directly on the relevant plan
sheet. The same Form is used for public or private Protected tree removal requests
available from the Urban Forestry webpage:
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pwd/trees/default.asp
47. Provide a Tree Relocation Plan. Please include the project arborist’s Tree Disposition and TRP
information for the relocated trees. Include a comprehensive plan for each tree: Appraisal for
security guarantee purpose, detailed instructions for implementation, tree condition, photo status
of foliage and structure. Identify the primary contractor, project site arborist and professional tree
locating company overseeing the effort, timing of phased boxing and relocation, watering
schedule, moisture meter readings at three levels, storage locations, watering schedule, locations
of final planting and soil modification (mechanical tilling, etc.) details for area abutting the
relocated tree. The TRP shall be provided digitally to City.
48. Engineered Soil Mix shall be shown in the relevant civil sheets and landscape sheets to be located
on both sides of each parking lot finger island and other areas for tree rooting soil. The ESM shall
be displayed with cross-hatched areas at each installation location. The ESM Specifications (PW
Section 30 & Detail #603a) shall be printed in the plan set or located in the site spec book. Pervious
surface area and the cubic footage designated for ESM use shall be shown as well (ie dimensions of
ESM area with minimum of 2’ depth). The pdf is attached to the email to the applicant.
49. A Security Bond shall be collected and Memorandum of Understanding signed and processed for
the trees to be relocated and interior Protected Trees to be preserved. Contact Dave Dockter and
Elise Willis for a draft MoU and to schedule an appointment to take in payment and paperwork.
The MOU and Bond can be planned once we have tree value appraisals from the arborist and TRP
addressed in #4. The TRP shall be and attachment to the MoU.
50. The plan set (site, demolition, grading & drainage, irrigation, tree disposition, utility sheets, etc.)
must show Type I or modified Type III fencing around each Regulated Trees, using a bold dashed
line enclosing the Tree Protection Zone as shown on Standard Dwg. #605 or using the Project
Page 15
Arborist’s unique diagram for each Tree Protection Zone enclosure. The pdf is attached to the
email to the applicant.
51. Please add the project arborist to the Project Directory on the cover sheet.
52. Please add the following notes to the site plan:
a. “All tree protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations,
watering and construction scheduling shall be implemented in full by owner and
contractor, as stated on Sheet T-1, in the Tree Protection Report and the approved
plans.”
b. “Utility trenching shall not occur within the TPZ of the protected tree. Contractor shall
be responsible for ensuring that no trenching occurs within the TPZ of the protected
tree by contractors, City crews or final landscape workers. See sheet T-1 for
instructions.”
c. “Basement or foundation plan. Soils Report and Excavation for basement construction
within the TPZ of a protected tree shall specify a vertical cut (stitch piers may be
necessary) in order to avoid over-excavating into the tree root zone. Any variance from
this procedure requires Urban Forestry approval.”
d. “Pruning Restrictions. No pruning or clearance cutting of branches is permitted on City
trees. Contractor shall obtain a Public Tree Permit from Urban Forestry (650-496-5953)
for any work on Public Trees.”
53. Please add the following note to the site, demo, grading & drainage, irrigation, landscape, and
utility plans applying to the trees to be protected, including neighboring trees stating: "Regulated
Tree--before working in this area contact the Project Site Arborist."
54. Please add note to the planting plan for each protected tree to be removed: “Tree Removal.
Contractor shall obtain a completed Urban Forestry Tree Care Permit (contractor to complete)
separate from the Building or Street Work Permit. Permit notice hanger and conditions apply.
Contact (650-496-5953).”
55. Plans shall show the application of root buffer around the protected trees to be maintained by
Contractor and inspection of Project Arborist. Area within the dripline (10X the diameter) that is not
fenced should have a 6-12 inch layer of wood chips topped with ¾” plywood to remain until final
grading. Indicate areas of root buffer on the site plan.
Page 16
56. NEW RIGHT-OF-WAY TREES--PLAN REQUIREMENTS. New trees shall be shown with a 10’ clear radius
zone from any (new or existing) underground utility or curb cut, in coordination with all relevant plans
(site, utility, irrigation, landscape, etc.)
a. Add note on the Planting Plan that states, “Tree Planting. Prior to in-ground installation,
Urban Forestry inspection/approval required for tree stock, planting conditions and
irrigation adequacy. Contact (650-496-5953).”
b. Landscape Plans shall state the Urban Forestry approved species, size and include relevant
Standard Planting Dwg. #603, #603a or #604 (reference which), and shall note the tree pit
dug at least twice the diameter of the root ball.
c. Landscape plan shall include planting preparation details for trees specifying digging the
soil to at least 30-inches deep, backfilled with a quality topsoil and dressing with 2-inches of
wood or bark mulch on top of the root ball keeping clear of the trunk by 1-inch.
d. Add note on the Planting & Irrigation Plan that states, “Irrigation and tree planting in the
right-of-way requires a street work permit per CPA Public Works standards.”
e. Automatic irrigation shall be provided for each tree. Standard Dwg. #513 shall be included
on the irrigation plans and show two bubbler heads mounted on flexible tubing placed at
the edge of the root ball. Bubblers mounted inside an aeration tube are prohibited. The
tree irrigation system shall be connected to a separate valve from other shrubbery and
ground cover, pursuant to the City's Landscape Water Efficiency Standards.
57. NEW TREES—SOIL VOLUME. Unless otherwise approved, plans shall indicate new right-of-way
trees provided with 800 cubic feet of rootable soil area, utilizing Standard Dwg. #604/513.
Rootable soil shall mean compaction less than 90% over the area, not including sidewalk base
areas except when mitigated. Sidewalk or asphalt base underlayment [in lieu of compacted base
rock] shall use an Alternative Base Material method such as structural grid (Silva Cell) or
engineered soil mix (ESM). Design and manufacturer details shall be added to relevant civil and
landscape sheets. Each parking lot tree in small islands and all public trees shall be provided
adequate rootable soil commensurate to mature tree size. Note: this expectation requires
coordination with the engineer, arborist and landscape architect.
a. Minimum soil volume for tree size growth performance (in cubic feet): Large: 1,200 cu.ft.
Medium: 800 cu.ft. Small: 400 cu.ft.
b. Landscape Plan. When qualifying for parking area shade ordinance compliance (PAMC
18.40.130) trees shall be labeled (as S, M or L).
c. Engineered Soil Mix (ESM). When approved, Engineered Soil Mix base material shall be
utilized in specified areas, such as a sidewalk base or channeling to a landscape area, to
achieve expected shade tree rooting potential and maximum service life of the sidewalk,
curb, parking surfaces and compacted areas. Plans and Civil Drawings shall use CPA Public
Works Engineering ESM Specifications, Section 30 and Standard Dwg. #603a. Designated
Page 17
areas will be identified by cross-hatch or other symbol, and specify a minimum of 24" depth.
The technology may be counted toward any credits awarded for LEED or Sustainable Sites
certification ratings.
58. LANDSCAPE PLANS
a. Include all changes recommended from civil engineer, architect and staff, including planting
specifications if called for by the project arborist,
b. Provide a detailed landscape and irrigation plan encompassing on-and off-site plantable
areas out to the curb as approved by the Architectural Review Board. A Landscape Water
Use statement, water use calculations and a statement of design intent shall be submitted
for the project. A licensed landscape architect and qualified irrigation consultant will
prepare these plans, to include:
i. All existing trees identified both to be retained and removed including street trees.
ii. Complete plant list indicating tree and plant species, quantity, size, and locations.
iii. Irrigation schedule and plan.
iv. Fence locations.
v. Lighting plan with photometric data.
vi. Landscape Plan shall ensure the backflow device is adequately obscured with the
appropriate screening to minimize visibility (planted shrubbery is preferred, painted
dark green, decorative boulder covering acceptable; wire cages are discouraged).
vii. All new trees planted within the public right-of-way shall be installed per Public
Works (PW) Standard Planting Diagram #603 or 604 (include on plans), and shall
have a tree pit dug at least twice the diameter of the root ball.
viii. Landscape plan shall include planting preparation details for trees specifying digging
the soil to at least 30-inches deep, backfilled with a quality topsoil and dressing with
2-inches of wood or bark mulch on top of the root ball keeping clear of the trunk by
1-inch.
ix. Automatic irrigation shall be provided to all trees. For trees, Standard Dwg. #513
shall be included on the irrigation plans and show two bubbler heads mounted on
flexible tubing placed at the edge of the root ball. Bubblers shall not be mounted
inside an aeration tube. The tree irrigation system shall be connected to a separate
valve from other shrubbery and ground cover, pursuant to the City's Landscape
Water Efficiency Standards. Irrigation in the right-of-way requires a street work
permit per CPA Public Works standards.
c. Add Planting notes to include the following mandatory criteria:
i. Prior to any planting, all plantable areas shall be tilled to 12” depth, and all
construction rubble and stones over 1” or larger shall be removed from the site.
ii. A turf-free zone around trees 36” diameter (18” radius) required for best tree
performance.
d. Add note: “Mandatory Landscape Architect (LA) Inspections and Verification to the City. The
LA shall verify the performance measurements are achieved with a letter of verification to
City Planning staff, in addition to owner’s representative for the following:
i. All the above landscape plan and tree requirements are in the Building Permit set of
plans.
Page 18
ii. Percolation & drainage checks have been performed and are acceptable.
iii. Fine grading inspection of all plantable areas has been personally inspected for tilling
depth, rubble removal, soil test amendments are mixed and irrigation trenching will
not cut through any tree roots.
iv. Tree and Shrub Planting Specifications, including delivered stock, meets Standards in
the CPA Tree Technical Manual, Section 3.30-3.50. Girdling roots and previously
topped trees are subject to rejection.
59. TREE PROTECTION VERIFICATION. Prior to demolition, grading or building permit issuance, a
written verification from the contractor that the required protective fencing is in place shall be
submitted to the Building Inspections Division. The fencing shall contain required warning sign and
remain in place until final inspection of the project.
DURING CONSTRUCTION
60. EXCAVATION RESTRICTIONS APPLY (TTM, Sec. 2.20 C & D). Any approved grading, digging or
trenching beneath a tree canopy shall be performed using ‘air-spade’ method as a preference,
with manual hand shovel as a backup. For utility trenching, including sewer line, roots exposed
with diameter of 1.5 inches and greater shall remain intact and not be damaged. If directional
boring method is used to tunnel beneath roots, then Table 2-1, Trenching and Tunneling Distance,
shall be printed on the final plans to be implemented by Contractor.
61. PLAN CHANGES. Revisions and/or changes to plans before or during construction shall be reviewed
and responded to by the (a) project site arborist, ArborResources, (650-496-5953, or (b) landscape
architect with written letter of acceptance before submitting the revision to the Building
Department for review by Planning, PW or Urban Forestry.
62. CONDITIONS. All Planning Department conditions of approval for the project shall be printed on
the plans submitted for building permit.
63. TREE PROTECTION COMPLIANCE. The owner and contractor shall implement all protection and
inspection schedule measures, design recommendations and construction scheduling as stated in
the TPR & Sheet T-1, and is subject to code compliance action pursuant to PAMC 8.10.080. The
required protective fencing shall remain in place until final landscaping and inspection of the
project. Project arborist approval must be obtained and documented in the monthly activity report
sent to the City. The mandatory Contractor and Arborist Monthly Tree Activity Report shall be
sent monthly to the City (pwps@cityofpaloalto.org) beginning with the initial verification approval,
using the template in the Tree Technical Manual, Addendum 11.
64. TREE DAMAGE. Tree Damage, Injury Mitigation and Inspections apply to Contractor. Reporting,
injury mitigation measures and arborist inspection schedule (1-5) apply pursuant to TTM, Section
2.20-2.30. Contractor shall be responsible for the repair or replacement of any publicly owned or
protected trees that are damaged during the course of construction, pursuant to Title 8 of the Palo
Alto Municipal Code, and city Tree Technical Manual, Section 2.25.
Page 19
65. GENERAL. The following general tree preservation measures apply to all trees to be retained: No
storage of material, topsoil, vehicles or equipment shall be permitted within the tree enclosure
area. The ground under and around the tree canopy area shall not be altered. Trees to be retained
shall be irrigated, aerated and maintained as necessary to ensure survival.
PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY
66. URBAN FORESTRY DIGITAL FILE & INSPECTION. The applicant or architect shall provide a digital file
of the landscape plan, including new off-site trees in the publicly owned right-of-way. A USB Flash
Drive, with CAD or other files that show species, size and exact scaled location of each tree on
public property, shall be delivered to Urban Forestry at a tree and landscape inspection scheduled
by Urban Forestry (650-496-5953).
67. LANDSCAPE CERTIFICATION LETTER. The Planning Department shall be in receipt of a verification
letter that the Landscape Architect has inspected all trees, shrubs, planting and irrigation and that
they are installed and functioning as specified in the approved plans.
68. PROJECT ARBORIST CERTIFICATION LETTER. Prior to written request for temporary or final
occupancy, the contractor shall provide to the Planning Department and property owner a final
inspection letter by the Project Arborist. The inspection shall evaluate the success or needs of
Regulated tree protection, including new landscape trees, as indicated on the approved plans. The
written acceptance of successful tree preservation shall include a photograph record and/or
recommendations for the health, welfare, mitigation remedies for injuries (if any). The final report
may be used to navigate any outstanding issues, concerns or security guarantee return process,
when applicable.
69. PLANNING INSPECTION. Prior to final sign off, contractor or owner shall contact the city planner
(650-329-2441) to inspect and verify Special Conditions relating to the conditions for structures,
fixtures, colors and site plan accessories.
POST CONSTRUCTION
70. MAINTENANCE. All landscape and trees shall be maintained, watered, fertilized, and pruned
according to Best Management Practices-Pruning (ANSI A300-2008 or current version) and the City
Tree Technical Manual, Section 5.00. Any vegetation that dies shall be replaced or failed automatic
irrigation repaired by the current property owner within 30 days of discovery.
UTILITILES - WATER,GAS,WASTEWATER
PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF DEMOLITION PERMIT
71. 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.
Page 20
72. 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.
PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL FOR BUILDING PERMIT
73. The applicant shall submit a completed water-gas-wastewater service connection application -
load sheet 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).
74. 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.
75. 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).
76. 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.
77. 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.
78. 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
Page 21
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.
79. Water, gas, and sewer utilities are connected from Page Mill Rd. to the front of the property
accept for the gas meter/s (above ground). The water meter and City’s sewer clean out in the
public right of way and the gas meter to be on private property all required to be approved by the
utility inspector.
80. 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.
81. 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.
82. All backflow preventer devices shall be approved by the WGW engineering division. Inspection by
the city building inspector is required for the supply pipe between the meter and the assembly.
83. Existing wastewater laterals that are not plastic (ABS, PVC, or PE) shall be replaced at the
applicant’s expense.
84. Existing water services that are not a currently standard material shall be replaced at the
applicant’s expense.
85. 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.
86. Each unit or place of business shall have its own water and gas meter shown on the plans. Each
parcel shall have its own water service, gas service and sewer lateral connection shown on the
plans. Existing utilities meeting current WGW utilities standards can be reused with CPAU
engineering approval.
Page 22
87. 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.
88. A new water service line installation for domestic usage is required. For service connections of 4-
inch through 8-inch sizes, the applicant's contractor must provide and install a concrete vault with
meter reading lid covers for water meter and other required control equipment in accordance with
the utilities standard detail. Show the location of the new water service and meter on the plans.
89. A new water service line installation for irrigation usage is required. Show the location of the new
water service and meter on the plans.
90. A new water service line installation for fire system usage is required. Show the location of the
new water service on the plans. The applicant shall provide to the engineering department a copy
of the plans for fire system including all fire department's requirements.
91. A new gas service line installation is required. Show the new gas meter location on the plans. The
gas meter location must conform to utilities standard details.
92. A new sewer lateral installation per lot is required. Show the location of the new sewer lateral on
the plans
93. 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 of the public utilities easement across the adjacent parcels
as is necessary to serve the development.
94. Where public mains are installed in private streets/PUEs for condominium and town home projects
the CC&Rs and final map shall include the statement: “Public Utility Easements: If the City’s
reasonable use of the Public Utility Easements, which are shown as P.U.E on the Map, results in any
damage to the Common Area, then it shall be the responsibility of the Association, and not of the
City, to Restore the affected portion(s) of the Common Area. This Section may not be amended
without the prior written consent of the City”.
95. Where there is more than one gas meter installed, a P.U.E is required for the gas service from the
gas meters to the gas main.
96. All existing water and wastewater services that will not be reused shall be abandoned at the main
per WGW utilties procedures.
97. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures can not 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
Page 23
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.
98. To install new gas service by directional boring, the applicant is required to have a sewer cleanout
at the front of 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. T
99. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Santa Clara county department of
transportation for all utility work in the county road right-of-way. The applicant must provide a
copy of the permit to the WGW engineering section.
100. The applicant may require a construction permit from Santa Clara county valley water district if
necessary for the utility service line to be installed by the City of Palo Alto Utilities.
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 WGW engineering section of the Utilities Department as-built drawings at the
completion of construction of the installation of water and wastewater utilities to be owned and
maintained by the City in accordance with:
1. Two sets of as-built drawings (hard copies).
2. As-built drawings in 2008 or 2010 AutoCAD format.
3. As-built drawings in .tiff format.
4. 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.
Survey data to be collected (what's applicable):
I. Collect horizontal and vertical data for:
1. Sanitary sewer manholes (rim and invert elevations and depth)
2. Storm drain manholes and catch basins (rim and invert elevations and depth)
3. Water valves (cover and stem elevations)
II. Collect horizontal data only for:
1. Service or lateral connection points at the main
2. Fire hydrants
3. Water meters
Page 24
4. Sanitary sewer cleanout boxes
Use CPAU WGW 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 Best or 93.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
103. Fire sprinklers and fire alarm systems required in accordance with NFPA 13, NFPA 24, NFPA 72
and State and local standards. Sprinkler, fire alarm and underground fire supply installations
require separate submittal to the Fire Prevention Bureau.
104. Sprinkler main drain must be coordinated with plumbing design so that the 200 gpm can be
flowed for annual main drain testing for 90 seconds without overflowing the collection sump, and
the Utilities Department approved ejector pumps will be the maximum flow rate to sanitary sewer.
An acceptable alternative would be to direct sprinkler main drain to an approved landscape
location.
105. Applicant shall work with Utilities Department to provide acceptable backflow prevention
configuration.
106. All floor levels in multi-story buildings must be served by an elevator capable of
accommodating a 24 x 84 inch gurney without lifting or manipulating the gurney.
107. Low-E glass and underground parking areas can interfere with portable radios used by
emergency responders. Please provide an RF Engineering analysis to determine if additional
devices or equipment will be needed to maintain operability of emergency responder portable
radios throughout 97% of the building in accordance with the Fire Code Appendix J as adopted by
the City of Palo Alto. A written report to the Fire Marshal shall be provided prior to final
inspection.
PUBLIC WORKS – WATERSHED PROTECTION GROUP
We have reviewed the site floor plans for this project. Please note the following issues must be
addressed in building plans prior to final approval by this department:
108. PAMC 16.09.170, 16.09.040 Discharge of Groundwater
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:
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
Page 25
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.
109. PAMC 16.09.055 Unpolluted Water
Unpolluted water shall not be discharged through direct or indirect connection to the sanitary
sewer system (e.g. any uncovered ramps to the parking garage should be directed to the storm
drain system).
110. 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
111. 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.
112. 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.
113. 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
Page 26
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.
114. PAMC 16.09.180(b)(5) Condensate from HVAC
Condensate lines shall not be connected or allowed to drain to the storm drain system.
115. 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.
The above limits shall apply to any of the above-listed substances prior to dilution with the
cooling system, pool, spa or fountain water.
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.
116. 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 materials are not practical. The plans must
specify that copper piping will not be used for wastewater plumbing.
117. 16.09.180(12) Mercury Switches
Mercury switches shall not be installed in sewer or storm drain sumps.
118. 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.
119. 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:
Page 27
120. 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
Sewer Use Ordinance requirements must be met.
If a Cafeteria is planned for the site, the Food Service Establishment requirements must be met.
BUILDING DIVISION
Include in plans submitted for a building permit:
121. Separate submittals and permits are required for the following systems and components if
utilized: E.V., P.V., and Solar Hot Water systems.
122. Deferred submittals shall be limited to as few items as possible.
123. Recycling areas (if applicable) are required to be accessible and require warning devices prior
to entering parking and driveway areas.
124. All building exits shall include an accessible path to the public way.
125. Plans shall show accessible routes for both interior and exterior areas.
126. Please explain how the existing utility easements will be dealt with that are in areas where
proposed new structures will be constructed upon them.
GREEN BUILDING
For design and construction of non-residential projects, the City requires compliance with the
mandatory measures of Chapter 5, in addition to use of the Voluntary Tiers.
(Ord. 5220 § 1 (part), 2013)
NOTE: Please be advised that the Palo Alto City Council will be considering a new energy and green
building ordinance in the second quarter of 2015. The following requirements are subject to change if
the project submits for a building permit after the new requirements are adopted. To follow the
ordinance changes, you may visit the Green Building Advisory Group webpage to view the agendas and
meeting minutes.
The following are required for Building Approval:
127. The project is a new nonresidential construction project greater than 1,000 square feet and
therefore must comply with California Green Building Standards Code Mandatory plus Tier 2
requirements, as applicable to the scope of work. PAMC 6.14.180 (Ord. 5220 § 1 (part), 2013).
The requirements are indicated on CS 0.2 of the formal ARB submittal. The project applicant shall
Page 28
indicate the requirements on the Permit Plans. The submittal requirements are outlined here:
www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/ds/green_building/default.asp.
128. The project is a new building over 10,000 square feet and therefore must meet the
commissioning requirements outlined in the California Building Code section 5.410.2 for Planning
Approval. The project team shall submit the Owner’s Project Requirements (OPR) in accordance
with section 5.410.2.1 with Basis of Design (BOD) in accordance with 5.410.2.2 that reflects the
design elements finalized between Planning Approval and Permit Submittal. The project shall also
submit a Commissioning (Cx) Plan in accordance with 5.410.2.3 and shall show the Cx plan on the
Permit Plans.
129. The project is a nonresidential project exceeding $100,000 valuation and therefore must
acquire an Energy STAR Portfolio Manager Rating and submit the rating to the City of Palo Alto
once the project has been occupied after 12 months. PAMC 16.14.250 (Ord. 5220 § 1 (part),
2013). The Energy Star Project Profile shall be submitted to the Building Department prior to
permit issuance. Submittal info can be found at:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/utl/business/benchmarking_your_building.asp.
130. The project is greater than 100,000 square feet and is not within the boundaries of a recycled
water project area and therefore must install dual plumbing for use of recycled water for toilet
and urinal flushing. PAMC 6.14.190 (Ord. 5220 § 1 (part), 2013). The project applicant shall
indicate the requirements on the Permit Plans.
131. The project is a new construction project with a landscape of any size included in the project
scope and therefore must comply with Potable water reduction Tier 2. Documentation is required
to demonstrate that the Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) falls within a Maximum Applied Water
Allowance (MAWA) using the appropriate evapotranspiration adjustment factor (ETAF) designated
by the prescribed potable water reduction tier. PAMC 16.14.220 (Ord. 5220 § 1 (part), 2013). The
project applicant shall indicate the requirements on the Permit Plans in coordination with the
planting plan shown on L2.0 of the ARB submittal. The submittal requirements are outlined on the
following site: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/utl/residents/resrebate/landscape.asp.
132. The project includes a new or altered irrigation system and therefore must be designed and
installed to prevent water waste due to overspray, low head drainage, or other conditions where
water flows onto adjacent property, non-irrigated areas, walks, roadways, parking lots, or
structures. PA 16.14.300 (Ord. 5220 § 1 (part), 2013).
133. The project includes a new or altered irrigation system and therefore the irrigation must be
scheduled between 8:00 p.m. and 10:00 a.m. unless weather conditions prevent it. Operation of
the irrigation system outside the normal watering window is allowed for auditing and system
maintenance. Total annual applied water shall be less than or equal to maximum applied water
allowance (MAWA) as calculated per the potable water use reduction tier. PAMC 16.14.310 (Ord.
5220 § 1 (part), 2013). ). The project applicant shall indicate the requirements on the Permit Plans.
Page 29
134. The project is outside the boundaries of the recycled water project area and is greater then
1,000 square feet and therefore must install recycled water infrastructure for irrigation systems.
PAMC 16.14.230 (Ord. 5220 § 1 (part), 2013). The project applicant shall indicate the requirements
on the Permit Plans.
135. The project is a nonresidential new construction or renovation project and has a value
exceeding $25,000 and therefore must meet Enhanced Construction Waste Reduction Tier 2.
PAMC 16.14.240 (Ord. 5220 § 1 (part), 2013). The project shall use the Green Halo System to
document the requirements.
136. The project includes non-residential demolition and therefore must meet the Enhanced
Construction Waste Reduction - Tier 2. PAMC 16.14.270 (Ord. 5220 § 1 (part), 2013). The project
shall use the Green Halo System to document the requirements.
137. The project is a new non-residential structure and therefore must comply with the City of Palo
Alto Electric Vehicle Charging Ordinance 5263. The project shall provide Conduit Only, EVSE-Ready
Outlet, or EVSE Installed for at least 25% of parking spaces, among which at least 5% (and no fewer
than one) shall be EVSE Installed. The requirements shall be applied separately to accessible
parking spaces. See Ordinance 5263 for EVSE definitions, minimum circuit capacity, and design
detail requirements. PAMC 16.14.380 (Ord. 5263 § 1 (part), 2013) See
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/43818 for additional details. EVSE
parking analysis must be shown on the Permit Plans.
The following are required at Post-Construction after 12 months of occupancy.
138. The project is a nonresidential projects exceeding $100,000 valuation and therefore must
acquire an Energy STAR Portfolio Manager Rating and submit the rating to the City of Palo Alto
once the project has been occupied after 12 months. PAMC 16.14.250 (Ord. 5220 § 1 (part),
2013). Submittal info can be found at:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/utl/business/benchmarking_your_building.asp.
The following are optional to the project team:
Optional Zero Net Energy Design Review:
139. OPTIONAL: The project is a new construction or remodel of a commercial project and
therefore may elect to engage the City of Palo Alto consultant, BASE Energy Inc, free of charge.
BASE will assist the project in targeting Zero Net Energy and exceeding the Title 24 Energy Code.
Rebates may be available via working with Base. For more information, visit
cityofpaloalto.org/commercial program or call 650.329.2241. The applicant may also contact
Ricardo Sfeir at BASE Energy at rsfeir@baseco.com to schedule a project kick-off.
Utilities Incentives & Rebates
140. OPTIONAL: The project may be eligible for several rebates offered through the City of Palo Alto
Utilities Department. These rebates are most successfully obtained when planned into the project
early in design. For the incentives available for the project, please see the information provided on
Page 30
the Utilities website: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/utl/business/rebates/default.asp
Bird-Friendly Building Design
141. OPTIONAL: The project contains a glazed façade that covers a large area. The project should
consider bird-safe glazing treatment that typically includes fritting, netting, permanent stencils,
frosted glass, exterior screens, and physical grids placed on the exterior of glazing or UV patterns
visible to birds. In some cases, bird-friendly treatment is invisible to humans. Vertical elements of
the window patterns should be at least 1/4 inch wide at a minimum spacing of 4 inches, or have
horizontal elements at least 1/8 inch wide at a maximum spacing of 2 inches. The applicant should
reference the San Francisco Guidelines for Bird-Safe Buildings:
a. http://www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=2506.
SECTION 5. Term of Approval.
Architectural Review Approval. The project approval shall be valid for a period of one year
from the original date of approval. In the event a building permit(s), if applicable, is not secured for
the project within the time limit specified above, the ARB approval shall expire and be of no further
force or effect. Application for extension of this entitlement may be made prior to the one year
expiration.
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
City Clerk Director of Planning and
Community Environment
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Senior Assistant City Attorney
1050 Page Mill Road Page 1
__________________________________________________________________________________
ATTACHMENT B
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE
1050 Page Mill Road / File No. 14PLN-00074
__________________________________________________________________________________
It has been determined that on balance the project is in conformance with the following policies of the 2010
Comprehensive Plan:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY CONSISTENCY REVIEW
POLICY B-1: Use a variety of planning and
regulatory tools, including growth limits, to
ensure that business change is compatible with the
needs of Palo Alto neighborhoods.
The proposed project will no longer have direct access to
California Avenue making it compatible with the nearby
neighborhood.
POLICY B-4: Nurture and support established
businesses as well as new businesses.
POLICY B-29: Facilitate Stanford’s ability to
respond to changing market conditions that
support the long-term viability of the Research
Park.
GOAL L-5: High Quality Employment Districts,
Each With Their Own Distinctive Character and
Each Contributing to the Character of the City as
a Whole.
The proposed buildings will be more open and energy
efficient attracting world class and forward thinking
companies that keep the Stanford Research Park vibrant.
POLICY L-5: Maintain the scale and character of
the City. Avoid land uses that are overwhelming
and unacceptable due to their size and scale.
The proposed buildings are in keeping with height and
massing of surrounding Research Park buildings. The
proposed two-story project provides a more inviting
presence on Page Mill Road and is well-articulated in
keeping with the size and scale of surrounding structures.
POLICY L-42: Encourage Employment Districts
to develop in a way that encourages transit,
pedestrian and bicycle travel and reduces the
number of auto trips for daily errands.
PROGRAM L-43: Modify existing zoning
regulations and create incentives for employers to
provide employee services in their existing
buildings—for example, office support services,
restaurants, convenience stores, public gathering
places, and child care facilities—to reduce the
need for employees to drive to these services.
The The project includes a minimum of 10,745 sf of amenity
space, such as cafeterias and/or gyms that will be used by
on-site employee and will facilitate the reduction of
vehicle use.
POLICY T-19: Improve and add attractive,
secure bicycle parking at both public and private
facilities.
This project is consistent in that both adequate secured
and public bicycle parking facilities, for a total of 101
spaces, would be provided at the project site.
GOAL L-6: Well-designed Buildings that Create
Coherent Development Patterns and Enhance City
Streets and Public Spaces.
POLICY L-48: Promote high quality, creative
design and site planning that is compatible with
surrounding development and public spaces.
To help achieve quality design, the Architectural Review
Board reviews buildings and site design for commercial
and multi-family residential projects. The proposed
building incorporates a unique ribbon sunshade and high
quality materials which will be compatible with the
various styles of the Research Park.
1050 Page Mill Road Page 2
POLICY L-43: Provide sidewalks, pedestrian
paths, and connections to the citywide bikeway
system within Employment Districts. Pursue
opportunities to build sidewalks and paths in
renovation and expansion projects.
PROGRAM L-44: Design the paths and sidewalks
to be attractive and comfortable and consistent
with the character of the area where they are
located.
POLICY T-1: Make land use decisions that
encourage walking, bicycling, and public transit
use.
POLICY T-23: Encourage pedestrian friendly
design features such as sidewalks, street trees, on
street parking, public spaces, gardens, outdoor
furniture, art and interesting architectural details
While the project does not provide legal access
easements between properties, significant pedestrian
pathways are provided throughout the project and along
Page Mill Road that can be used to gain access to other
parts of the Research Park. The proposal provides
replacement office space in close proximity to transit
facilities and the California Avenue commercial district.
Bicycle usage is encouraged with ample bike parking.
The project includes a large central plaza that creates
outdoor rooms and opportunities for pedestrian activities.
The unique design of the buildings, mature landscaping,
and on site art work also encourage exploration of the
site by pedestrians.
POLICY L-44: Develop the Stanford Research
Park as a compact employment center served by a
variety of transportation modes.
The Research Park has developed over time into a
sprawling campus like setting. However, new projects
now make accommodations for pedestrians, bicycles and
shuttle buses to better transport employees to transit
centers.
POLICY L-70: Enhance the appearance of
streets and other public spaces by expanding and
maintaining Palo Alto’s street tree system.
Page Mill Road is an Expressway maintained by the
County and requires all trees be set back 7 feet. While
this setback is not ideal, the City balances the need for
safety with large canopy trees that will grow to shade the
sidewalk.
POLICY L-73: Consider public art and cultural
facilities as a public benefit in connection with
new development projects. Consider incentives
for including public art in large development
projects.
The project will include public art as a component of the
design, as part of the City’s art program.
POLICY L-75: Minimize the negative physical
impacts of parking lots. Locate parking behind
buildings or underground wherever possible.
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.
The project is consistent with this policy as a significant
portion of the parking would be situated in below grade
garages. Surface parking would be situated around the
perimeter of the site with only small portions viewed by
the public from Page Mill Road.
POLICY L-76: Require trees and other
landscaping within parking lots.
The proposal includes retention of mature perimeter trees
along with a number of new trees in and around the
parking lot. The addition of the new landscaping provides
50% shading.
Note: This list is not exhaustive. Additional policies/programs may be added to this table for subsequent review
and comment by the ARB and the public.
ATTACHMENT C
ZONING COMPARISON TABLE
1050 Page Mill Road
14PLN-00074
Table 1: COMPARISON WITH CHAPTER 18.20 (RP DISTRICT)
Regulation Required in Research
Park (RP) zone
Existing Proposed
Minimum Site Area 1 acre 13.48 acres
13.48 acres
Minimum Front
Setback
50 feet special setback
along Page Mill Road
57.7 feet 50 feet +
Interior Side Setback
20 feet 70 feet +/- 77 feet +
Rear Setback
20 feet 29.4 feet 77 feet +
Min. yard for site
lines abutting or
opposite residential
districts
20 feet n/a n/a
Max. Total Floor
Area Ratio
40% (234,945 sf) 45.27% (265,895 sf) 45.27% (265,895 sf +
10,745 sf amenity
space)
Max. Site Coverage 30% (176.209 sf)
30.65% (180,045 sf) 25.52% (149,911 sf)
Max. Building Height 35 ft (with additional 15
feet for mechanical) or
25 ft when located
within 40 ft of
residentially zoned
property (4,5)
34 feet +/-
(with additional
mech. screen)
35 feet (mechanical
screen will be 7 ft+/-)
(4) See subsection 18.20.040(e) below for exceptions to height and floor area limitations in the ROLM and RP zoning districts.
(5) Residential zones include R-1, R-2, RE, RMD, RM-15, RM-30, RM-40 and residential Planned Community (PC) zones.
Table 1: CONFORMANCE WITH CHAPTER 18.52 (Off-Street Parking and Loading)
Type of Parking Required Existing Proposed
Auto Parking
Bike Parking
Loading Spaces
947 parking spaces
(1/300 sf of gross floor area)
564 spaces
951 spaces, with 49
additional spaces in
landscape reserve
89 spaces
(1/3,000 sf - 80% long term
and 20% short term bike
parking)
unknown 101 spaces (77 long
term, 24 short term)
3 loading spaces for
200,000 sf or greater
6 loading docks 8 loading areas
* On-site employee amenity space is exempted from the parking requirements
1 0 5 0 P a g e M i l l R o a d, P a l o A l t o
Project Narrative - Formal ARB Review
April 2, 2015
To: City of Palo Alto Planning Division
Architectural Review Board Members
From: 1050 Page Mill Road Property, LLC - Applicant
Robert Giannini, Architect
Subject: 1050 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto
Preliminary Architectural Review Board Review
We have benefited from our Preliminary hearing before the ARB on this project and are
pleased to submit this application for your approval. We have listened to your valuable
comments, worked with staff and our neighbors, and have refined the design and
architecture in response. We are excited to take this meaningful step and have
intentionally stayed within the City’s guidelines (Zoning and Design Guidelines) for
development of this property so as to respect the community.
1050 Page Mill Road Property, LLC is the sponsor of this application for a new +/-
265,895 square foot, four building energy efficient Class-A office project to replace
existing, obsolete buildings on the project site. The site, on the north side of Page Mill
Road at Hansen Way, has a magnificent and expansive frontage. The site is +/- 13.48
acres and is zoned Research Park (RP). It currently contains two buildings; the front
building facing Page Mill is a 2-story office building, and the rear building, internal to the
site is primarily high bay one-story with a two-story portion at its south end.
Building Area - Replacement Square Footage:
The proposed new buildings will contain the same total floor area as the two existing
buildings together, as reviewed and refined in our discussions with staff. In addition we
are providing 10,745 sf of amenity space allocation bringing the total area of the project
to 265,895 square feet. Because the amenity space does not count toward FAR, the
proposed area of the new project represents replacement square footage.
Parking:
The site is currently 100% surface parked, and is, in fact, under-parked by current zoning
standards. This proposal would bring the site to current parking standards.
The proposed project also has surface parking, however In order to maximize the open
area over half the parking will be below grade. Parking will be provided on the site at a
ratio of 1/300sf, for a total of +/- 887 spaces. This ratio is the Palo Alto minimum
requirement. We have provided space for an additional 86 spaces that the Owner may
add in the future if needed by tenants, and to help ensure that project parking does not
need to expand to the surrounding neighborhood streets. This has been shown on the
site plan as “landscape reserve.” The total potential parking on site is therefore 973
spaces.
Form4 Architecture, Inc.
Attachment D
1 0 5 0 P A G E M I L L R O A D - Project Narrative - Formal ARB 2
Palo Alto, California
April 2, 2015
Please refer to the following table for a summary of the project’s data. We look forward to
feedback from the Architectural Review Board and the City of Palo Alto on this proposed
redevelopment project.
Form4 Architecture, Inc. 126 Post Street, 3rd floor, San Francisco, CA 94108 415 775-8748 fax 415 775-8752
1 0 5 0 P A G E M I L L R O A D - Project Narrative - Formal ARB 3
Palo Alto, California
March 3, 2014
Architectural Design Narrative
It is a pleasure to provide this design application for 1050 Page Mill Road.
Several elements of the design were identified for further refinement and study as follows:
SITE
a)Conceal surface parking with more landscape.
b)Create smaller landscape “rooms” for more intimate sized spaces in large site.
c)Study the visitor experience and entry sequence.
d)Study how to conceal cars as they queue after entering the site from Page Mill Road.
SITE & ARCHITECTURE
e)Explore ways to be even bolder with the curving aluminum ribbons and extend into the
landscape.
ARCHITECTURE
f)Address issues of sustainability, and also the potential sight of interior office clutter, in
buildings that with predominantly glass skins.
g)Study ways to differentiate the buildings.
Form4 Architecture, Inc. 126 Post Street, 3rd floor, San Francisco, CA 94108 415 775-8748 fax 415 775-8752
1 0 5 0 P A G E M I L L R O A D - Project Narrative - Formal ARB 4
Palo Alto, California
April 2, 2015
S I T E I S S U E S: !
a)Conceal surface parking with more landscape.
Our initial proposal located about half the parking on the surface, and half below grade. We have now parked a higher ratio of cars in the below grade structure: 539 to 348 with space for an additional 86 surface spaces land banked.
Circulation around the perimeter was also reworked in collaboration with the City arborist to avoid existing trees - especially at the secondary right in / right out driveway on Page Mill.
The end result is there is less surface parking, and what remains is better screened. !
Form4 Architecture, Inc. 126 Post Street, 3rd floor, San Francisco, CA 94108 415 775-8748 fax 415 775-8752
1 0 5 0 P A G E M I L L R O A D - Project Narrative - Formal ARB 5
Palo Alto, California
March 3, 2014
!
b)Create smaller landscape “rooms” for more intimate sized spaces in large site; and
c)Study the visitor experience and entry sequence.
The diagram above shows the programming for the central open space:
•Bicyclists entering the site from City streets will use the loop road to arrive at the main entry of each building where parking is provided for them. Secure parking is also provided for bikes in the garage of each building. Bicyclists are not encouraged to use the paths through the central open space as a courtesy to pedestrians circulating between buildings. See sheets A1.1 and A1.2 for bike parking locations.
•Cars also use the loop road to quickly access surface and below grade parking. People that surface park enter the building through the auto side of the through lobbies. People who park in the garages enter the lobbies through the main elevator of each building.
•The major pedestrian paths through the central open space are two broad diagonal promenades. One starts at the Page Mill main entry (near a city bus stop - see Site Circulation Diagram Sheet MP-2.4), and cuts all the way through the site. It starts at the street and moves through a series of wedge shaped land forms that are a stylized California native landscape. Diagonal paths are defined by the land forms and pass on bridges over bio-swales, past existing oak trees that are being saved, and walks that offer “short cuts” between buildings. The paths are dotted with spots to pull off, talk, meet, work outdoors, or just sit.
•The promenade continues deeper into the site past a large Campus Green which can accommodate large numbers of people in “all hands meetings.”
•The wedge of outdoor space ends in Town Square - a decomposed granite area with benches under a bosque of canopy trees. The edge along the far building (Building 3) is made up of broad steps that create a perch that looks back over the entire central space.
•From that apex one may walk back along the second diagonal promenade that leads you back through the site with the front building (Building 1) as its terminus.
Form4 Architecture, Inc. 126 Post Street, 3rd floor, San Francisco, CA 94108 415 775-8748 fax 415 775-8752
1 0 5 0 P A G E M I L L R O A D - Project Narrative - Formal ARB 6
Palo Alto, California
April 2, 2015
•A visitor entering the site by car experiences the long view through the central space
before they turn right or left onto the loop road and make their way to each buildings
main entry or garage ramp. The buildings all have through lobbies so once again as
you enter a building you experience the open space on the other side of the lobby.
•Pedestrians with business at the site may walk back through the diagonal promenades
and the central green and enter the building through their garden entry sides.
d)Study how to conceal cars as they queue after entering the site from Page Mill Road.
!
The loop road has been redesigned to better move cars quickly through the site. Originally
we split the road creating a decision point as you enter with a double row of parking. Our
traffic consultant suggested that the traffic moves more quickly with no decision point, and
less parking.
This has the added benefit of more landscaping at this key point as well, and making for a
safer pedestrian crossing from the central open space.
e)Explore ways to be even bolder with the curving aluminum ribbons and extend into
the landscape.
There had been a suggestion that perhaps the aluminum ribbons on the building facades
might break away and become more whimsical. We explored this, however became
concerned that the character of the design changed from the goal of clean simplicity. The
notion of pulling the building architecture into the landscaping was strong, however. Now it
is the diagonal paths that slice through the site that become the landscape expression of the
building’s ribbons. Changing from our original curvilinear gardenesque landscape to this
more stylized version of the California hills seem to keep the building and landscape in the
same family.
Form4 Architecture, Inc. 126 Post Street, 3rd floor, San Francisco, CA 94108 415 775-8748 fax 415 775-8752
1 0 5 0 P A G E M I L L R O A D - Project Narrative - Formal ARB 7
Palo Alto, California
March 3, 2014
!
In addition we are proposing ponds along the promenades to reflect the ribbons into the
water at their most dynamic inflection points. This will provide an ever changing impression
of the ribbons leaping off the buildings perhaps than a literal material move.
Of course water is a precious commodity in California - especially in drought years, and
these ponds utilize a very small amount of water - as shallow as only a few inches. Besides
providing that magical quality of water, these ponds, as well as the vertical glass fins, act as
buffers between the pedestrian walkways and the interior offices.
f)Address issues of sustainability, and also the potential sight of interior office clutter,
in buildings that with predominantly glass skins.
Core goals of the project are to bring the outdoors in, and to be highly sustainable. This has
become even more challenging with the adoption of more stringent T-24 guidelines. We
remain on track with both goals, however. Following are some of the strategies:
•Careful daylighting studies, and the existence of even better LED lighting mean we can
hold down the wattage necessary to light the building. Following is one of the hundreds
of daylighting diagrams we have studied:
!
Form4 Architecture, Inc. 126 Post Street, 3rd floor, San Francisco, CA 94108 415 775-8748 fax 415 775-8752
1 0 5 0 P A G E M I L L R O A D - Project Narrative - Formal ARB 8
Palo Alto, California
April 2, 2015
•We are providing complete PV arrays for the building roofs. !
•Sun shading has become more refined and complete. !
•One element addresses both sustainability, and addressing seeing visual clutter through
clear glass. We will specified fritted glass for the lowest 30” of both floors. This is a
tried and true approach for us to control the clutter of desks and boxes on the floors,
and also allows us to insulate that zone where needed.
g)Study ways to differentiate the buildings.
The above image also shows one of the strongest ways we have chosen to differentiate the
buildings. The glass fins below the ribbon on the first floor, and to one side of the lobby, will
be a transparent color; a different one for each building. It will occur on both the auto side
and the courtyard side to assist in wayfinding.
Thanks very much for your review of the various design aspects of this project!
Form4 Architecture, Inc. 126 Post Street, 3rd floor, San Francisco, CA 94108 415 775-8748 fax 415 775-8752
ATTACHMENT E
Attachment F
Attachment G
Environmental Impact Report
(Hardcopies for P&TC, libraries and staff)
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=2642&TargetID-319
Attachment H
1050 Page Mill Road Project
Statement of Findings
SCH # 2014042050
December 2015
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Finding i December 2015
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................ i
I. Overview and Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1
II. Procedural History .................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
III. Statutory Requirements for Findings ......................................................................................... 2
Legal Effects of Findings ............................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.
IV. Definitions ...................................................................................................................................... 3
V. Project Background ....................................................................................................................... 4
VI. Project Objectives and Description ............................................................................................. 4
Project Objectives ............................................................................................................. 4
Project Description ........................................................................................................... 4
VII. Record of Proceedings .................................................................................................................. 5
VIII. General Findings ........................................................................................................................... 6
Impacts Determined to be Less Than Significant .... Error! Bookmark not defined.
Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant
With Implementation of Mitigation Measures ............................................................ 6
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ......................................................................... 12
IX. Project Alternatives Findings .................................................................................................... 12
Feasibility of Project Alternatives ................................................................................ 12
X. Growth Inducement Findings ................................................................................................... 14
XI. Cumulative Impacts Findings ................................................................................................... 15
XII. Statement of Overriding Considerations ................................................................................. 18
Balancing Competing Goals ....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.
XIII. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 18
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Finding i December 2015
I. OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION
This Statement of Findings is made with respect to approval of a Major Architectural Review for
the 1050 Page Mill Road project and states the findings of the City Council of the City of Palo
Alto (“City Council”) relating to the potentially significant environmental effects of the project.
This Statement of Findings addresses the environmental effects associated with the proposed
1050 Page Mill Road project, located in the City of Palo Alto on APN 142-20-091.
The 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 1050 Page Mill Road
Project Final Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse No. 2014112015) (the “Final
EIR”), which includes the Draft Environmental Impact Report (“Draft EIR”). The Final EIR
addresses the environmental impacts associated with implementation of the 1050 Page Mill
Road Project (the “Project”, as further defined in Section 2(b) below) and is incorporated herein
by reference. The project requests that the City take the following actions:
1. Certify an Environmental Impact Report and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Plan.
2. Approve a Major Architectural Review.
3. Approve an Environmental Compliance Review.
Approval of the Major Architectural Review and other requested entitlements constitutes the
project for purposes of CEQA and these determinations of the City Council. These findings are
based upon the entire record of proceedings for the Project. The City Council finds as follows:
1. The record of proceedings in Section VII of these findings are correct and accurate.
2. The Final EIR has been prepared in accordance with all requirements of CEQA, the
CEQA Guidelines, and the City’s Environmental Impact Ordinance, codified in Title 11
of the City’s Municipal Code.
3. The Draft EIR was presented to and reviewed by the Architectural Review Board and
the Final EIR was presented to the Planning and Transportation Commission and the
City Council. Both the Architectural Review Board and the Planning and Transportation
Commission provided a recommendation to the City Council regarding certification of
the Final EIR.
4. The Final EIR was prepared under the supervision of the City and reflects the
independent judgment of the City. The City Council has reviewed the Final EIR, and
bases the findings stated below on such review and other substantial evidence in the
record.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 2 September 2015
5. The City finds that the Final EIR considers a reasonable range of potentially feasible
alternatives, sufficient to foster informed decision making, public participation and a
reasoned choice, in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
6. The City Council hereby certifies the Final EIR as complete, adequate and in full
compliance with CEQA and as providing an adequate basis for considering and acting
upon the 1050 Page Mill Road project and makes the following specific findings with
respect thereto. 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
herein, the City Council certifies that it has complied with Public Resources Code
sections 21081, 21081.5, and 21082.2.
7. The City Council agrees with the characterization of the Final EIR with respect to all
impacts initially identified as “less than significant” and finds that those impacts have
been described accurately and are less than significant as so described in the Final EIR.
This finding does not apply to impacts identified as significant or potentially significant
that are reduced to a less than significant level by mitigation measures included in the
Final EIR. The disposition of each of those impacts and the mitigation measures
adopted to reduce them are addressed specifically in the findings below.
8. All mitigation measures in the Final EIR are adopted and incorporated into the 1050
Page Mill Road project.
9. The Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) includes all mitigation measures adopted
with respect to the project and explains how and by whom they will be implemented
and enforced.
10. The mitigation measures and the MMP have been incorporated into the Conditions of
Approval for the Major Architectural Review and Environmental Compliance Review
and have thus become part of and limitations upon the entitlements conferred by the
Major Architectural Review, Environmental Compliance Review and other project
approvals.
11. The descriptions of the impacts in these findings are summary statements. Reference
should be made to the Final EIR for a more complete description.
12. The Planning and Community Environment Department is directed to file a Notice of
Determination with the County Clerk within five (5) working days in accordance with
CEQA §21152(a) and CEQA Guidelines §15094.
III. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS FOR FINDINGS
Significant effects of the 1050 Page Mill Road project were identified in the Draft EIR. CEQA
§21081 and CEQA Guidelines §15091 require that the Lead Agency prepare written findings for
identified significant impacts, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each
finding. Less than significant effects (without mitigation) of the project were also identified in
the Draft EIR and Initial Study. CEQA does not require that the Lead Agency prepare written
findings for less than significant effects.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 3 September 2015
CEQA requires that the Lead Agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible,
to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts that would otherwise occur with
implementation of the project. Project mitigation or alternatives are not required, however,
where substantial evidence in the record demonstrates that they are infeasible or where the
responsibility for modifying the project lies with another agency. Specifically, CEQA
Guidelines §15091 states:
(a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified
which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the
public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects,
accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible
findings are:
(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the
final EIR.
(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been
adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR.
The “changes or alterations” referred to in §15091(a)(1) above, that are required in, or
incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental effects of
the project, may include a wide variety of measures or actions as set forth in Guidelines §15370,
including avoiding, minimizing, rectifying, or reducing the impact over time, or compensating
for the impact by replacing or providing substitute resources.
IV. DEFINITIONS
The following definitions apply where the subject words or acronyms are used in these
findings:
“ARB” means the City of Palo Alto Architectural Review Board.
“ACM” means asbestos-containing material.
“BAAQMD” means the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
“City Council” means the City of Palo Alto City Council.
“CEQA” means the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Resources Code §21000
et seq.).
“Comprehensive Plan” means the City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, as adopted in
2007 with subsequent amendments.
“Condition” means a Condition of Approval adopted by the City in connection with
approval of the project.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 4 September 2015
“City” means the City of Palo Alto.
“Draft EIR” means the Draft Environmental Impact Report dated July 2015 for the
proposed 1050 Page Mill Road project.
“DTSC” means the California Department of Toxic Substances Control.
“EIR” means environmental impact report.
“Environmental Impact Ordinance” means the City of Palo Alto Environmental Impact
Ordinance, as codified in Title 11 of the City of Palo Alto Municipal Code.
“EPA” means the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
“Final EIR” means the Final EIR as prepared for the project (which includes the NOP
and Initial Study dated November 5, 2014, the Draft EIR dated July 2015, the Final
EIR dated October 2015).
“LCM” means lead-containing material.
“MMP” means the Mitigation Monitoring Program for the project.
“NOP” means Notice of Preparation of an EIR.
“P&TC” means the City of Palo Alto Planning and Transportation Commission.
“PCE” means the City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment Department.
“Project” means the proposed 1050 Page Mill Road project.
“Zoning Ordinance” means the City of Palo Alto Zoning Ordinance, including all
amendments thereto.
V. PROJECT BACKGROUND
The project would demolish the existing 265,895 square feet of office, research and
development, and warehouse space at 1050 Page Mill Road and construct four new office
buildings totaling 265,895 square feet, and 10,745 square feet of amenity space. The existing and
proposed office use is consistent with the Research and Development land use and zoning
designations for the site.
VI. PROJECT OBJECTIVES AND DESCRIPTION
Project Objectives
The Project Objectives of the project applicant are set forth in Section 2.3 of the Draft EIR, which
is incorporated herein by reference.
Project Description
The proposed project would involve the demolition of 265,895 square feet of office, research and
development, and warehouse space and 564 surface parking spaces, and the construction of a
four two-story office buildings totaling 276,640 square feet (with 265,895 square feet for office
space and 10,745 square feet of amenity space). A conceptual site plan of the proposed project is
shown in Draft EIR Figure 2.4, and conceptual renderings are shown in Draft EIR Figure 2.5.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 5 September 2015
A complete description of the project as proposed by the project applicant is provided in Section
2.4 of the Draft EIR.
VII. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
In accordance with CEQA §21167.6(e), the record of proceedings for the City’s decision on the
1050 Page Mill Road project includes, without limitation, the following documents:
The NOP and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the
project;
All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the comment
period on the NOP (provided in Appendix A of the Draft EIR);
The Draft EIR (July 2015) for the project;
All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the comment
period on the Draft EIR;
All comments and correspondence submitted to the City with respect to the Project, in
addition to timely comments on the Draft EIR;
The Final EIR (October 2015) for the project, including comments received on the
Draft EIR and responses to those comments;
Documents cited or referenced in the Draft and Final EIRs;
The project MMP;
All findings and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with the project and all
documents cited or referred to therein;
All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents
relating to the project prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or responsible or
trustee agencies with respect to the City’s compliance with the requirements of CEQA
and with respect to the City’s action on the project;
All documents submitted to the City (including the P&TC and City Council) by other
public agencies or members of the public in connection with the project;
Any minutes and/or verbatim transcripts of all information sessions, public meetings,
and public hearings held by the City in connection with the project;
Any documentary or other evidence submitted to the City at such information
sessions, public meetings and public hearings;
The City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and all environmental documents prepared in
connection with the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan;
The City of Palo Alto Environmental Impact Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance (City
of Palo Alto Municipal Code, Title 11 and Title 18), and all other City Code provisions
cited in materials prepared by or submitted to the City;
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 6 September 2015
Any and all resolutions and/or ordinances adopted by the City regarding the project,
and all staff reports, analyses, and summaries related to the adoption of those
resolutions;
Matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to federal, state,
and local laws and regulations;
Any documents cited in these findings, in addition to those cited above; and
Any other materials required for the record of proceedings by CEQA §21167.6(e).
The City Council has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decision on the
project, even if not every document was formally presented to the City Council, P&TC or City
Staff as part of the City files generated in connection with the project. Without exception, any
documents set forth above not found in the project files fall into one of two categories. Many of
them reflect prior planning or legislative decisions of which the City Council was aware in
approving the 1050 Page Mill Road project. (See City of Santa Cruz v. Local Agency Formation
Commission (1978) 76 Cal.App.3d 381, 391-392; Dominey v. Department of Personnel Administration
(1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 729, 738, fn. 6.) Other documents influenced the expert advice provided
to City staff or consultants, who then provided advice to the City Council. For that reason, such
documents form part of the underlying factual basis for the City Council’s decisions relating to
approval of the 1050 Page Mill Road project. (See Public Resources Code §21167.6(e)(10);
Browning-Ferris Industries c. City Council of City of San Jose (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 852, 866;
Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 144, 153, 155.)
The official custodian of the record is the Planning and Community Environment Director, 285
Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301.
VIII. GENERAL FINDINGS
Significant and Potentially Significant Impacts Reduced to Less Than Significant
With Implementation of Mitigation Measures
The City Council agrees with the characterization in the Final EIR with respect to all impacts
initially identified as “significant” or “potentially significant” that are reduced to less than
significant levels with implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR. In
accordance with CEQA Guidelines §15091(a), a specific finding is made for each impact and its
associated mitigation measures in the discussions below. Mitigation measures are summarized
below and are presented in full in the EIR and the MMP, which is incorporated herein by
reference.
Air Quality
Impact 3.1-1: Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to direct and/or
indirect emissions of criteria air pollutants by emitting more than 54 pounds per day
and/or 10 tons per year of nitrogen oxides (NOx), reactive organic gases (ROG), and fine
particulate matter (PM2.5), or by emitting more than 82 pounds per day and/or 15 tons
per year of coarse particulate matter (PM10).
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 7 September 2015
Air pollution emissions modeling for the project indicated that emissions would remain
below these thresholds as long as the construction control measures included in Mitigation
Measure AIR-1 are implemented. These include the standard construction emission control
measures required by the BAAQMD as well as limitations on the maximum hours per day
that each piece of equipment may operate and requirements for use of Tier 2 and Tier 3
engines with Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filters.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AIR-1 will ensure that the
potential for the project to adversely impact air quality would be reduced to a less-
than-significant level.
Explanation: This mitigation measure will ensure construction emissions remain below the
BAAQMD thresholds for criteria pollutants. This measure would provide the
maximum feasible reduction in project construction air pollution emissions and
reduce the potential for exceeding non-attainment standards to a less-than-
significant level.
Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
Biological Resources
Impact 3.2-1:Adversely affect special status species directly or through habitat modification,
interfere substantially with wildlife movement, or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites.
The project could affect nesting birds and/or roosting bats. Mitigation Measure BIO-1
requires completion of a nesting bird survey prior to and throughout construction and
proscribes protection/avoidance measures to be implemented if nesting birds are identified.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2 requires completion of a bat survey prior to construction and
proscribes protection/avoidance measures to be implemented if roosting bats are identified.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified above and included
in the MMP will ensure that the potential for the project to adversely affect special
status species, directly or indirectly, would be reduced to a less-than-significant
level.
Explanation: These mitigation measures will ensure nesting birds, roosting bats and other
special status species are identified and that proper protocol is followed prior to
beginning or resuming construction. This will reduce disturbances to active nesting
areas and roosts, and disruption of reproductive behavior for special status species
found on construction sites.
Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 8 September 2015
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impact 3.3-1: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.
Hazardous materials used routinely for construction as well as hazardous materials present
in the onsite soils and buildings could be released to the environment during demolition
and construction. Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-6 identify Best Management
Practices and applicable California Department of Industrial Relations-Division of
Occupational Safety and Health standards, require implementation of a Soil Management
Plan and asbestos-removal plan, require inspection and a disposal plan for any
polychlorinated biphenyls identified onsite, and require preparation and implementation of
a dewatering plan and detailed groundwater extraction design. These measures would
ensure that hazardous materials are not released to the environment.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified above and included
in the MMP will ensure that the potential for the project to result in hazardous
material exposure during construction would be reduced to a less-than-significant
level.
Explanation: These mitigation measures will ensure that hazardous materials are controlled
and disposed of properly during construction. These mitigation measures will
reduce the potential for people or the environment to be exposed to hazardous
construction materials on- or offsite to less-than-significant levels.
Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
Impact 3.3-2: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment.
Hazardous materials used routinely for construction as well as hazardous materials present
in the onsite soils and buildings could be released to the environment during demolition
and construction. Mitigation Measure HAZ-6 requires preparation and implementation of a
dewatering plan and detailed groundwater extraction design and Mitigation Measure HAZ-
7 identifies construction standards to ensure that the proposed buildings are waterproof and
appropriately ventilated such that individuals are not exposed to unacceptable
concentrations of hazardous materials.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measure identified above and included
in the MMP will ensure that the impacts related to contaminated soils and
groundwater would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 9 September 2015
Explanation: These mitigation measures will ensure that contaminated soils and
groundwater are removed from the project site and disposed of in an appropriate
treatment facility, and prevent vapors from migrating from groundwater into the
indoor air of the basement parking garage.
Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
Impact 3.3-3: Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would
create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
The project site is located in an area with a known contaminated groundwater plume.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-7 identifies construction standards to ensure that the proposed
buildings are waterproof and appropriately ventilated such that individuals are not exposed
to unacceptable concentrations of hazardous materials.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measure identified above and included
in the MMP will ensure that the impacts related to groundwater vapors would be
reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Explanation: This mitigation measure will ensure vapors cannot migrate from the
groundwater into the indoor air of the basement parking garage, and identify
minimum requirements for garage ventilation.
Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
Impact 3.3-4: Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment from existing
hazardous materials contamination by exposing future occupants or users of the site
to contamination in excess of soil and groundwater cleanup goals developed for the
site.
The project site is located in an area with a known contaminated groundwater plume.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-7 identifies construction standards to ensure that the proposed
buildings are waterproof and appropriately ventilated such that individuals are not exposed
to unacceptable concentrations of hazardous materials.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified above and included
in the MMP will ensure that the impacts related to groundwater vapors would be
reduced to a less-than-significant level.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 10 September 2015
Explanation: This mitigation measure will ensure vapors cannot migrate from the
groundwater into the indoor air of the basement parking garage, and identify
minimum requirements for garage ventilation.
Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
Noise
Impact 3.4-1: Expose people to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
Individuals within the proposed buildings at the project site could experience interior noise
levels that exceed the City’s standards. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 identifies minimum
Sound Transmission Class (STC) ratings for windows and construction standards for
exterior wall construction that will ensure the interior noise levels meet the California Green
Building Standards Code requirement of Leq-1-hour 50 dBA or less.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified above and included
in the MMP will ensure that the impacts related to generated noise level would be
reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Explanation: This mitigation measure will ensure that performance standard is met by final
building design to reduce amount of exposure to, and noise levels generated that
exceed the standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance.
Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
Impact 3.4-4: Noise generated during operation of the proposed project could cause a
substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project.
Rooftop mechanical equipment could generate an increase in noise levels at the nearest
residential property that exceed 8 decibels. Mitigation Measure NOI-2 establishes the
maximum allowable noise level for roof-top equipment to ensure that the project does not
result in a significant permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measure identified above and included
in the MMP will ensure that the impacts related to noise generated during
construction would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Explanation: This mitigation measure will ensure that rooftop mechanical equipment falls
under the maximum noise level requirement reducing the risk of generating noise
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 11 September 2015
that will cause a permanent substantial increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity.
Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
Transportation and Traffic
Impact 3.5-3: Result in inadequate emergency access.
During construction, emergency access could be impaired. Mitigation Measure TRAF-1
requires preparation and implementation of a Construction Traffic Management Plan to
demonstrate that access along Page Mill Road would not be impaired during construction.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measure identified above and included
in the MMP will ensure that the impacts related to traffic and inadequate emergency
access during construction would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.
Explanation: This mitigation measure will ensure that a Construction Traffic Management
Plan is in place to address possible traffic issues and reduce the potential for
inadequate emergency access to a less than significant level.
Significance After Mitigation: Less Than Significant.
Impact 3.5-9: Cause queuing that exceeds queue storage capacity and interferes with traffic
operations.
The project could increase the number of vehicles needing to make left turns at the project
access intersection. Mitigation Measure TRAF-2 requires the project applicant to construct
the improvements necessary to accommodate the increased turn-lane traffic volumes while
Mitigation Measure TRAF-3 requires the project applicant to contribute a fair share amount
towards modification of the signal phasing for the Page Mill Road and Hanover Street
intersection.
Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified
in the EIR. Implementation of the mitigation measure identified above and included
in the MMP will ensure that the impacts related to queuing and interference with
traffic operations during construction would be reduced to a less-than-significant
level.
Explanation: These mitigation measures will ensure that funds are allocated, and necessary
road improvements are made to prevent queuing that interferes with traffic
operations during construction.
Significance After Mitigation: Less than Significant.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 12 September 2015
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
The City Council agrees with the characterization in the Final EIR that there are no significant
and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project.
IX. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES FINDINGS
Feasibility of Project Alternatives
Public Resources Code section 21002 provides that “public agencies should not approve projects
as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which
would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such project[s].” 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. As stated in Section VIII above, there are no significant and
unavoidable impacts associated with the proposed project. However, an alternatives analysis
was completed and included in the Final EIR.
Although an EIR must evaluate a range of potentially feasible alternatives, an agency decision-
making body may ultimately conclude that a potentially feasible alternative is actually
infeasible. (California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 957, 1001-
1002.) CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(f)(1) provides that among the factors that may be taken into
account when addressing the feasibility of alternatives are “site suitability, economic viability,
availability of infrastructure, general plan consistency, other plans or regulatory limitations,
jurisdictional boundaries, and whether the proponent can reasonably acquire, control or
otherwise have access to the alternative site.”
Grounds for a conclusion of infeasibility might be the failure of an alternative to fully satisfy
project objectives deemed to be important by decision-makers, or the fact that an alternative
fails to promote policy objectives of concern to such decision-makers. (Id. at pp. 992, 1000-1003.)
It is well established under CEQA that an agency may reject alternatives based on economic
infeasibility. (Foundation for San Francisco’s Architectural Heritage v. City and County of San
Francisco (1980) 106 Cal.App.3d 893, 913-914; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v.
City and County of San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656, 774; Association of Irritated Residents
v. County of Madera (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 1383, 1399-1400; Sierra Club v. County of Napa (2004)
121 Cal.App.4th 1490, 1510.) In addition, the definition of feasibility encompasses “desirability”
to the extent that an agency’s determination of infeasibility represents a reasonable balancing of
competing economic, environmental, social, and technological factors supported by substantial
evidence. (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410; 417.) Thus, even if a
project alternative will avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant environmental effects
of a proposed project as mitigated, the decision-makers may reject the alternative for such
reasons.
CEQA Guidelines §15126.6(f) states that the range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed
by a “rule of reason” that requires the EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to
permit a reasoned choice. Further, CEQA Guidelines §15126(a) requires that an EIR describe a
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 13 September 2015
reasonable range of alternatives that would “feasibly obtain most of the basic project objectives”
but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant environmental effects of the
project and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives. Thus, the project objectives
presented in the EIR provided the framework for defining the possible alternatives. Based upon
guidance contained in the CEQA Guidelines and applicable case law as well as the project
objectives, the Draft EIR considered one project alternative to the 1050 Page Mill Road project:
the Reduced Project Alternative. The Draft EIR also considered the no project alternative as
required by CEQA.
The City Council finds that that a good-faith effort was made to evaluate a reasonable range of
potentially feasible alternatives in the EIR that are reasonable alternatives to the project and
could feasibly obtain most of the basic objectives of the project, even when the alternatives
might impede the attainment of the project’s objectives and might be more costly.
No Project Alternative
The No Project Alternative assumes that the proposed 1050 Page Mill Road project would not
be constructed and that the existing four buildings that total 265,895 square feet of general office
and research and development space and surface parking for 564 cars would remain. No
demolition would occur, and there would be no change in use or increase in office space. The
EIR concluded that this alternative would have reduced impacts on air quality, biological
resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and transportation and traffic. The No Project
Alternative would not meet any of the proposed project objectives, and the existing buildings
would not meet current standards for design, accessibility, hazardous materials, or seismic
safety.
Feasibility of the No Project Alternative: The City Council finds that this alternative is
infeasible in that it meets none of the project objectives. Specifically, it does not support the
project objectives of creating a modern, LEED-certified and efficient campus that will
support research, development and innovation in Stanford Research Park, using
architecture to create a varied and interesting Page Mill Road streetscape, or meeting
current building standards. For all of the foregoing reasons, and for any of them
individually, the City Council determines that the No Project Alternative is infeasible and is
hereby rejected.
Reduced Project Alternative
The Reduced Project Alternative assumes that the project site will be redeveloped similar to the
proposed project. However, the new building space on site would be limited to 225,000 square
feet rather than the proposed 276,640 square feet. Parking would be slightly reduced,
consistent with the City of Palo Alto Municipal Code parking requirements. This alternative
would most likely result in a greater amount of landscaped area within in the project site.
This alternative was considered and analyzed as an alternative that would meet the stated
objectives of current standards for design, accessibility, hazardous materials, and seismic
safety, and including outdoor gathering space.
The EIR concluded that the Reduced Project Alternative meets most of the project objectives by
redeveloping the site with a smaller square foot building that meets current standards and
increasing the outdoor gathering spaces and connections between the interior and exterior
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 14 September 2015
spaces. This alternative would also meet the objectives related to creating a modern, LEED-
certified, efficient campus that would support research, development and innovation at
Stanford Research Park and using architecture to create a varied and interesting Page Mill Road
streetscape.
Under the Reduced Project Alternative, the impacts to biological resources, hazards and
hazardous materials and noise would be generally the same as under the proposed project.
Impacts to air quality, and transportation and traffic would generally be reduced compared to
the proposed project.
Feasibility of the Reduced Project Alternative: While the alternative may be feasible and
capable of meeting most of the basic project objectives, this alternative does not substantially
reduce impacts compared to the proposed project. The Reduced Project Alternative would
require the same mitigation measures for air quality, biological resources, hazards and
hazardous materials, and noise as would be required under the proposed project. Further
the proposed project would result in no significant and unavoidable impacts Therefore,
under CEQA, the City Council is not required to adopt the Reduced Project Alternative.
X. GROWTH INDUCEMENT FINDINGS
Growth can be induced in a number of ways, such as through the elimination of obstacles to
growth, through the stimulation of economic activity within the region, or through the
establishment of policies or other precedents that directly or indirectly encourage additional
growth. Induced growth would be considered a significant impact if it can be demonstrated
that the potential growth would directly or indirectly have a significant effect on the
environment.
Residential development can induce growth by increasing the local population, which may lead
to increased commercial activity, which may increase the local supply of jobs. Extension of
public infrastructure or services can accommodate growth by removing constraints to
development. A growth-inducing project directly or indirectly:
Fosters economic or population growth or additional housing;
Removes obstacles to growth;
Taxes community services or facilities to such an extent that new services or facilities
would be necessary; or
Encourages or facilitates other activities that cause significant environmental effects.
The 1050 Page Mill Road project would provide additional office space in the City by increasing
the usable office space by approximately 99,120 square feet. This increase in office space would
accommodate additional employees and could indirectly induce a small amount of growth
because some employees would seek housing and purchase foods and services in the area.
Finding: The 1050 Page Mill Road project would not induce substantial growth in the
project area or region.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 15 September 2015
Explanation: The potential for growth inducement due to the increase in office space is
not considered substantial. The increase in employment opportunities the project
would provide would be insufficient to trigger noticeable changes in the housing
market or demand for local goods and services. In addition, construction of the
proposed project would be temporary and these short-term construction jobs are
anticipated to be filled by workers who, for the most part, reside in the surrounding
areas.
XI. CUMULATIVE IMPACTS FINDINGS
The City Council finds that the methodology used in the EIR to determine cumulative impacts
complies with CEQA in that it assumed growth in accordance with the City of Palo Alto
Comprehensive Plan as well as considering other known development projects in the region, and
it provides an analysis of potential for the 1050 Page Mill Road project to contribute to
cumulative impacts in the project area.
Finding: The City Council finds that the project would result in a less than considerable
contribution to significant cumulative impacts in the project area.
Air Quality: Cumulative impacts to air quality may result in increases in pollutants
for which the San Francisco Area Air Basin is designated as nonattainment for the
California Ambient Air Quality Standards and National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. The San Francisco Bay Area Basin is currently designated as a
nonattainment area for State and national ozone standards and State particulate
matter standards. The proposed project is consistent with the Bay Area 2010 Clean Air
Plan, and land use and zoning designations for the project site. The proposed project
would demolish existing office, research and development, and warehouse space
and construct an equivalent amount of office space. The proposed project would
generate an increase of 663 daily vehicle trips compared to baseline conditions.
Further, the proposed project would replace old buildings with new, energy-efficient
buildings and would provide for on-site solar power generation through roof-top
photovoltaic panels. The proposed project would reduce regional air pollution
associated with energy consumption. The operation of the proposed project would
not result in emissions that violate any applicable air quality standards or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Due to the limited
scope of new air pollutant emissions resulting from the proposed redevelopment
project, the proposed project would result in a less-than-significant contribution to
cumulative air quality impacts in the region.
Biological Resources: Cumulative impacts to biological resources would occur if
development in the region would result in a substantial loss of habitat for special-
status species and sensitive vegetation communities. The project site is located
within a highly developed area where the primary biological resource is the urban
forest. The urban forest functions as an extension of the natural habitats near the San
Francisco Bay and in the western foothills by providing coverage, forage, and
nesting habitat for common and special-status wildlife species. The proposed project
would result in potentially significant impacts to nesting birds, including raptors,
and roosting bats. Under the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance (Palo Alto
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 16 September 2015
Municipal Code, Section 8.10; City of Palo Alto 2015), the City has established
procedures and standards to encourage tree preservation. Project applicants are
required to prepare a Tree Protection and Preservation Plan, to implement tree
protection measures during construction, and to replace or compensate for any
protected trees that are removed. Compliance with the Tree Preservation Ordinance
ensures that the habitat value of the urban forest will be maintained in the
cumulative conditions, and that cumulative impacts to special-status species and
sensitive vegetation communities related to development within the urban forest
will remain less than significant.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials: Cumulative impacts related to hazards and
hazardous materials would result from projects that combine to increase exposure to
hazards and hazardous materials. The proposed project would result in significant
impacts related to the potential for disposal and accidental release of hazardous
materials during construction. In addition, the proposed project could result in a
significant impact during operation due to the potential for vapor intrusion into the
underground parking garages from contaminated groundwater below the site. With
implementation of Mitigation Measures HAZ-1 through HAZ-7, impacts would be
reduced to below a level of significance.
Many of the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the vicinity of the
proposed project include demolition of existing buildings and/or constructing of
underground parking within or near the contaminated groundwater plume that
underlies the project site. These projects have the potential to result in similar
impacts as the proposed project due to the presence of contaminated groundwater
and hazardous materials in existing buildings that could be released during
demolition or remodeling, and the potential for an accidental release of hazardous
materials. However, these projects would also be required to comply with the
applicable state and federal regulations pertaining to hazardous materials and
would be required to implement mitigation measures to ensure impacts remain
below a level of significance. Impacts related to the presence of contaminated
groundwater are generally site-specific in that there is potential for individuals to be
exposed to trichloroethylene (TCE) or polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) through
migration of vapor from the groundwater into a building. Any TCE released to the
outside air would disperse quickly. Therefore, building construction in the
cumulative scenario would not contribute to a local or regional increase in health
hazards associated with exposure to TCE. Similarly, exposure to hazardous building
materials during demolition or remodeling is a site-specific issue, where individuals
within or adjacent to the project site could be exposed to air contaminants released
through the demolition activities, but these activities would not contribute to
ongoing localized or regional increases in concentrations or airborne hazardous
materials. Finally, based on existing general plan and zoning designations, the
project location is not designated by the City as land uses that use or transport
substantial amounts of hazards material and would not increase exposure to
hazardous materials in the project vicinity. Therefore, there is no known existing
cumulative impact related to hazardous materials in the project area, and the
proposed project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to a
cumulative impact.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 17 September 2015
Noise: Cumulative noise impacts are based on the anticipated cumulative traffic
conditions. The cumulative traffic analysis identifies projected traffic volume data in
the project vicinity with and without the proposed project for the 2025 cumulative
scenario. The analysis assumes that the existing buildings at the project site would be
reoccupied if the proposed project is not constructed. The relatively high traffic
volumes on the surrounding roads are the primary sources of noise in the area. The
Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Hexagon Transportation Consultants indicates
that the traffic volume associated with the proposed project is not expected to
increase substantially over cumulative conditions without the proposed project.
Therefore, the proposed project would not constitute a substantial portion of future
cumulative traffic volume, and therefore noise levels, at noise sensitive receptors in
the vicinity. The proposed project’s contribution to cumulative noise levels would be
less than cumulatively considerable.
Transportation and Traffic: The proposed project would result in a significant
impact related to increased vehicle queue lengths, and this impact would be
mitigated to a less-than-significant level. When combined with other past, present, or
reasonably foreseeable projects, there is a potential for a substantial increase in traffic
in the vicinity of the proposed project, which could cause a significant impact to
traffic operations. Because the increases in delay at each intersection due to the
proposed project would be less than the City’s thresholds in terms of seconds of
delay and V/C ratio, the proposed project’s contribution to traffic at these
intersections would be less than cumulatively considerable. Under cumulative
conditions, both the eastbound lane of the project driveway and Page Mill Road
intersection and the westbound lane of the Hanover Street and Page Mill Road
intersection would exceed their storage capacity during the weekday AM peak-
hours. As a result of the improvements required under Mitigation Measure TRAF-2,
under cumulative plus project conditions, there would be sufficient storage capacity
in the eastbound lane of the project driveway and Page Mill Road intersection to
accommodate the 95th percentile queue in both the weekday AM and PM peak-
hours. However, the 95th percentile queue in the westbound lane of the Hanover
Street and Page Mill Road intersection would exceed the lane’s capacity under
cumulative and cumulative plus project conditions. This would be a significant
cumulative impact. However, traffic associated with the proposed project would not
increase the queue length at the intersection of Hanover Street and Page Mill Road.
Therefore, the proposed project would not contribute to this cumulative impact, and
therefore the proposed project would have no cumulative impacts related to vehicle
queueing.
Explanation: The potential impacts of project activities are limited to site specific
conditions and would not result in any cumulatively considerable contributions to
cumulative impacts in the project vicinity or region.
Significance After Mitigation: Less than Significant.
1050 Page Mill Road
Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations 18 September 2015
XII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The 1050 Page Mill Road EIR concluded that there are no significant and unavoidable impacts
of the proposed project.
XIII. CONCLUSION
The mitigation measures listed in conjunction with each of the findings set forth above, as
implemented through the MMP, will eliminate or reduce to a less than significant level all
adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project.
Taken together, the Final EIR, the mitigation measures, and the MMP provide an adequate basis
for approval of the 1050 Page Mill Road project.
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Introduction
Section 15097 of the Guidelines for the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires
that, whenever a public agency approves a project based on a Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) or an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), the public agency shall establish a mitigation
monitoring or reporting program to ensure that all adopted mitigation measures are implemented.
This Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) is intended to satisfy this requirement of the CEQA
Guidelines as it relates to the 1050 Page Mill Road Project (proposed project). This MMP will be
used by City of Palo Alto (City) staff and mitigation monitoring personnel to ensure compliance
with mitigation measures during project implementation. Mitigation measures identified in this
MMP were developed in the EIR prepared for the proposed project.
As noted above, the intent of the MMP is to ensure the effective implementation and
enforcement of all adopted mitigation measures. The MMP will provide for monitoring of
construction activities, as necessary, and in the field identification and resolution of
environmental concerns.
Mitigation Monitoring Program Description
The City will coordinate monitoring activities and document the implementation of mitigation
measures for each project component. The site-specific MMPs in Table 1 identify the project’s
mitigation measures and the associated implementation, monitoring, timing and performance
requirements. The table includes:
1. the full text of each applicable mitigation measure;
2. the party or parties responsible for implementation and monitoring of each measure;
3. the timing of implementation of each mitigation measure including any ongoing
monitoring requirements; and
4. performance criteria by which to ensure mitigation requirements have been met.
Following completion of the monitoring and reporting process, the final monitoring results will
be recorded and incorporated into the project file maintained by the City’s Department of
Planning and Community Environment.
It is noted that mitigation measure numbering reflects the numbering used in the EIR prepared
for the 1050 Page Mill Road project (Dudek 2015).
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
No mitigation measures are required for the following resources:
Aesthetics
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Cultural Resources
Geology/Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hydrology/Water Quality
Land Use/Planning
Mineral Resources
Population/Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Utilities/Service Systems
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
AIR QUALITY
Mitigation Measure AIR-1: The following emission control measures
shall be implemented during project construction. The City of Palo Alto
(City) shall verify compliance with Items 1 and 9 prior to issuance of
demolition, grading, and/or building permits. Items 2 through 8
(inclusive) shall be included as notes on construction plans and subject
to verification through field inspections:
1. An inventory of construction equipment and schedule for
equipment use shall be submitted to the City’s Public
Works Department before issuance of demolition and/or
grading permits. The inventory shall demonstrate that the
off-road vehicle fleet used for project construction meets
the following requirements:
a. Through construction phasing and equipment
scheduling, the project contractor shall limit
equipment operation to a maximum of 6 hours per
Applicant City of Palo Alto Items 1 and 9 prior to
issuance of
demolition, grading or
building permits.
For phone calls
regarding dust,
response and
corrective action shall
take place within 48
hours.
Items 2-8 (inclusive)
included on
construction plans,
field inspections for
verification may occur
Submission of
construction
equipment inventory
and schedule to the
City’s Public Works
Department.
Publically visible sign
posted at the project
site.
Field inspections
conducted to verify
adherence to
conditions.
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
day for each piece of active equipment.
b. All rubber-tired dozers, tractors, loaders, and
backhoes used at the site shall be Tier 3 engineers
and shall have Level 3 Diesel Particulate Filters.
c. All excavators and concrete/industrial saws used at
the site shall be Tier 2 engines and shall have Level 3
Diesel Particulate Filters.
2. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas,
soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall
be watered two times per day.
3. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose
material off site shall be covered.
4. 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.
5. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to
15 miles per hour.
6. 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.
7. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting
equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum
idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California
airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485, of
the California Code of Regulations). Clear signage shall
be provided for construction workers at all access points.
8. All construction equipment shall be maintained and
properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s
at random.
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a
certified mechanic and determined to be running in
proper condition before operation.
9. The construction contractor shall post a publicly visible
sign at the project site with the telephone number and
person to contact at the City of Palo Alto regarding dust
complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective
action within 48 hours. The Bay Area Air Quality
Management District’s phone number shall also be visible
to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: If feasible, vegetation on the project site
shall be removed outside of the bird-nesting season. If the start of site
clearing, tree removal, or building demolition occurs between
February 1 and August 31, a pre-construction survey for nesting birds
protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist to identify the location of nests in active use that
were established prior to the start of project implementation activities.
The pre-construction survey shall take place no more than 7 days
prior to initiation of construction. All trees and shrubs on the site shall
be surveyed, with particular attention to any trees or shrubs that would
be removed or directly disturbed. Further, the project applicant shall
retain a qualified biologist to perform additional nesting bird surveys at
least every 2 weeks during all phases of construction that occur during
the nesting season. If an active nest of a protected bird is found on
site at any time, the biologist shall, in consultation with the California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), determine whether
construction work would affect the active nest or disrupt reproductive
behavior. Criteria used for this evaluation shall include presence of
visual screening between the nest and construction activities, and
behavior of adult raptors in response to the surveyors or other
ambient human activity. If construction could affect the nest or disrupt
Applicant City of Palo Alto Within 7 days of
construction initiation if
construction occurs
between February 1
and August 31.
Verification of surveys
prior to issuance of
demolition permits.
Additional surveys
performed every 2
weeks during
construction that
occurs during the
nesting season.
Immediate
consultation with
California Department
of Fish and Wildlife if
active nests are found.
Pre-construction
surveys and
verification of surveys
by the City of Palo
Alto.
Additional surveys
conducted every 2
weeks.
No construction
within 300 feet of
nests determined to
be active.
Verification of
consultation with
CDFW if necessary.
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
reproductive behavior, the biologist shall, in consultation with CDFW,
determine an appropriate construction-free buffer zone around the
nest to remain in place until the young have fledged or other
appropriate protective measures are taken to ensure no take of
protected species occurs.
If it is determined that construction will affect an active raptor nest or
disrupt reproductive behavior, then avoidance is the only mitigation
available. Construction shall not be permitted within 300 feet of such a
nest until a qualified biologist determines that the subject nests are no
longer active.
Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, the City of Palo Alto (City)
shall verify that pre-construction surveys have been conducted within
7 days of the proposed start of demolition. If active bird nests are
present, the City shall verify that CDFW has been consulted and
either determined that construction will not affect an active bird nest or
that appropriate construction-free buffer zones have been established
or other appropriate protective measures have been taken.
Mitigation Measure BIO-2: No earlier than 30 days prior to initiation
of construction activities, a pre-construction survey shall be conducted
by a qualified biologist (i.e., a biologist holding a California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) collection permit and a
Memorandum of Understanding with CDFW allowing the biologist to
handle bats) to determine if active bat roosts or maternal colonies are
present on or within 300 feet of the construction area. Surveys shall
include the structures proposed for demolition.
Should an active maternity roost be identified, the roost shall not be
disturbed and construction within 300 feet of the maternity roost shall
be postponed or halted until the juveniles have fledged and the roost
is vacated, as determined by a qualified biologist. Consultation with
CDFW shall also be initiated. Under no circumstance shall an active
roost be directly disturbed.
If nonbreeding bat hibernacula are found on the project site, the
Applicant City of Palo Alto Within 30 days of
initiation of
construction activities.
Verification of pre-
construction surveys
prior to issuance of
demolition permits.
Pre-construction
surveys and
verification of
surveys by the City
of Palo Alto.
No construction
within 300 feet of
nests determined to
be active.
Verification of
consultation with
CDFW if necessary.
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
individuals shall be safely evicted under the direction of a qualified bat
biologist and with consultation with CDFW. These actions shall allow
bats to leave during nighttime hours, thus increasing their chance of
finding new roosts with a minimum of potential predation during
daylight.
If it is determined that construction will not affect roosting behavior or
disrupt a maternal colony, construction may proceed without any
restriction or mitigation measure.
If it is determined that construction will affect an active bat roost or
disrupt reproductive behavior, then avoidance is the only mitigation
available. Under no circumstance shall an active roost be directly
disturbed. Construction within 300 feet shall be postponed or halted
until the roost is naturally vacated as determined by a qualified
biologist.
Prior to issuance of a demolition permit, the City of Palo Alto (City)
shall verify that pre-construction surveys have been conducted within
30 days of the proposed start of demolition. If bats are present, the
City shall verify that CDFW has been consulted and either determined
that construction will not affect an active bat roost or disrupt a
maternal colony, or that individuals in a nonbreeding bat hibernacula
have been safely evicted.
Due to regulations from the California Health Department, direct
contact by construction workers with any bat is not allowed.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Mitigation Measure CUL-1: In the event that subsurface cultural
resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work in
the immediate vicinity shall be stopped and the City of Palo Alto
contacted. A qualified archaeologist, as defined by the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines and the City of Palo
Alto, shall be retained to evaluate the archaeological discovery for its
eligibility for local and State listing. The discovery or disturbance of
Applicant City of Palo Alto During ground
disturbing activities
Cultural resource
report shall be
submitted to the City
of Palo Alto and the
Native American
Heritage
Commission when
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
any identified cultural resource shall be reported as appropriate to the
City of Palo Alto and the Native American Heritage Commission.
Identified cultural resources shall be recorded on California
Department of Parks and Recreation form 523 (archaeological sites).
Measures prescribed by these groups and required by the City shall
be undertaken before construction activities are resumed. If
disturbance of a project area cultural resource cannot be avoided, a
mitigation program, including measures set forth in the City of Palo
Alto’s Cultural Resources Management Program and in compliance
with Sections 15064.5 and 15126.4 of the CEQA Guidelines, shall be
implemented.
appropriate.
Completion of
California
Department of Parks
and Recreation form
523 when
appropriate.
HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Hazardous materials shall not be
disposed of or released onto the ground, the underlying groundwater,
or any surface water. During construction, the project applicant’s
contractor shall provide totally enclosed containment areas for all on-
site trash containers during project construction. All construction
waste, including trash and litter, garbage, other solid waste, petroleum
products, and other potentially hazardous materials, shall be removed
and relocated to a waste facility permitted to treat, store, or dispose of
such materials. The City of Palo Alto shall periodically inspect the site
throughout construction to ensure trash is properly contained.
Applicant City of Palo Alto During project
construction Applicant provides
enclosed
containment areas
for all on-site trash
containers, and all
construction wastes
disposed of at a
waste facility
approved to accept
such materials.
Periodic field
inspections
conducted to verify
compliance.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-2: The project applicant, in consultation
with the City of Palo Alto’s (City’s) Public Works Department, shall
coordinate with Hargis + Associates Inc. and Beckman Coulter Inc. to
amend the Soil Management Plan to address the presence of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) and total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH )
contamination in the soils once these areas become accessible. The
project applicant/construction contractor shall demonstrate to the
Applicant City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Department
San Francisco
Regional Water
Quality Control
Board (RWQCB)
During construction
activities, as soil areas
become accessible.
Demonstrate
adequate soil
remediation to City
of Palo Alto’s Public
Works Department
and the RWQCB.
Applicant maintains
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
satisfaction of the City’s Public Works Department and the Regional
Water Quality Control Board that the soils have been adequately
remediated.
Copies of the Soil Management Plan shall be maintained on site
during demolition and excavation. All construction workers on the
project site shall be familiarized with these documents.
copies of the Soil
Management Plan
on-site during
demolition and
excavation.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-3: A scope of work for asbestos abatement
and guidelines for proper asbestos removal shall be prepared
following local, state, and federal regulations for any necessary
removal of asbestos in accordance with the Professional Services
Industries survey (2009). The City of Palo Alto’s (City’s) Public Works
Department and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District shall
review and approve the scope of work to remove asbestos. The Bay
Area Air Quality Management District shall be notified at least 10
working days prior to any asbestos removal. The City of Palo Alto
shall periodically inspect the site throughout asbestos removal
operations to ensure regulatory compliance. The removal of asbestos-
containing material shall be carried out by a contractor trained and
qualified to conduct this work. Following asbestos abatement and
removal, a final visual inspection and clearance air monitoring shall be
performed to certify that industry clearance standards are met.
Verification that all asbestos has been successfully remediated shall
be provided to the City’s Public Works Department and the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District.
Applicant City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Department
BAAQMD
Asbestos abatement
scope of work
prepared prior to
building demolition.
City of Palo Alto to
conduct field
inspections during
construction.
Air monitoring
conducted throughout
and upon completion
of construction.
BAAQMD notified at
least 10 working
days prior to any
asbestos removal.
Air monitoring during
abatement and at
time of final
inspection show
regulatory limits on
asbestos dust are
met.
Final visual
inspection confirms
work meets industry
clearance standards.
Verification by City’s
Public Works
Department and the
BAAQMD that all
asbestos has been
successfully
remediated.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-4: The project applicant shall include a
provision in any contract with a construction contractor that every
contractor/employer who performs demolition work at the project site
shall comply with the California Division of Occupational Safety and
Applicant City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Department
Demolition plans and
contract specifications
shall include
appropriate measures
Demolition
plans/contracts
include all required
abatement
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
Health worker protection rules, California Department of Public Health
certification requirements, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) standards, and state and federal disposal requirements. Any
demolition activities likely to disturb lead-based paint/coatings or lead-
containing materials (LCMs) shall be carried out by a contractor
trained and qualified to conduct lead-related construction work.
Asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) must be disposed of in
accordance with the EPA’s Asbestos National Emissions Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants, and LCMs must be handled in
accordance with the California Division of Occupational Safety and
Health Construction Lead Standard (8 CCR 1532.1) and disposed of
in accordance with California Department of Toxic Substances Control
and EPA requirements for hazardous waste. Demolition plans and
contract specifications shall incorporate any necessary abatement
measures required under these guidelines and regulations. The
project applicant/construction contractor shall demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the City’s Public Works Department that the abatement
measures and all disposal requirements have been met.
prior to issuance of
demolition permits.
Control measures
implemented during
demolition.
measures.
Demolition activities
are performed by
qualified and trained
personnel.
LCMs and ACMs
disposed of in
accordance with the
EPA’s Asbestos
National Emissions
Standards for
Hazardous Air
Pollutants, the
California Division of
Occupational Safety
and Health
Construction Lead
Standard (8 CCR
1532.1), the
California
Department of Toxic
Substances Control
and EPA
requirements for
hazardous waste.
Approval from Public
Works Department
that abatement
measures and
disposal
requirements have
been met.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-5: The project applicant/construction
contractor shall retain a qualified environmental specialist to inspect
the site buildings for the presence of polychlorinated biphenyls
Applicant City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Department
Building inspection
prior to demolition.
Demolition plans
Building inspection
completed.
Demolition plans and
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
(PCBs), mercury, and other hazardous building materials prior to
demolition. If found, these materials shall be managed in accordance
with the Metallic Discards Act of 1991 and other state and federal
guidelines and regulations. Demolition plans and contract
specifications shall incorporate any necessary abatement measures in
compliance with the Metallic Discards Act (California Public Resource,
Section 42160 et seq.), particularly Section 42175, Materials
Requiring Special Handling, for the removal of mercury switches,
PCB-containing ballasts, and refrigerants. The project
applicant/construction contractor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction
of the City’s Public Works Department that the abatement measures
and all disposal requirements have been met.
include appropriate
measures prior to
issuance of demolition
permits.
Control measures
implemented during
demolition.
contract
specifications shall
incorporate all
required abatement
measures in
compliance with the
Metallic Discards Act
(California Public
Resource, Section
42160 et seq.).
Approval from Public
Works Department
that the abatement
measures and all
disposal
requirements have
been met.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-6: The project applicant/construction
contractor shall prepare a dewatering plan and detailed groundwater
extraction design plans to the satisfaction of the City of Palo Alto’s
(City’s) Public Works Department. The dewatering plan shall outline
procedures designed to lower groundwater levels during excavation,
and specify the number of groundwater dewatering wells with
dedicated pumps that shall be installed around the site perimeter
throughout project duration. The project applicant/contractor shall test
the groundwater pumped during dewatering for volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) using U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) Methods 601/602. If VOC concentrations are lower than the
State Maximum Contamination Level of 5 micrograms per liter, the
water may be discharged as described in the following text. If
concentrations exceed 5 micrograms per liter, the water shall be
treated with carbon to remove the trace levels of trichloroethylene
prior to discharge. Any discharge shall occur in accordance with
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No.
CAG912002, Order No. R2-2012-0012.
Applicant City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Department
Dewatering plan
prepared prior to site
clearing/grading.
Dewatering plan
implemented
throughout
construction.
A dewatering plan
prepared and
submitted to the City.
Plans shall include
procedures to lower
groundwater levels
during excavation
and specifies the
number of
groundwater
dewatering wells
with dedicated
pumps that will be
installed around the
site perimeter.
Groundwater
pumped shall be
tested for volatile
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
If volatile organic compound concentrations are lower than the State
Maximum Contamination Level, extracted groundwater shall go to a
publically owned treatment work or to the storm drain network in
accordance with the NPDES permit. A plan for groundwater discharge
pretreatment shall be developed and kept on hand should
implementation be necessary. The detailed groundwater extraction
design shall outline chemical testing and thresholds as required by the
publically owned treatment work or NPDES permit. It shall also
provide the dewatering systems layout and well construction
information, including depths, screened intervals, and pump settings.
The City’s Public Works Department shall periodically inspect the site
to ensure dewatering activities comply with the dewatering plan and
no contaminated water is disposed of in the City’s storm drain system.
organic compounds
using EPA methods
601/602.
Any discharge shall
be in compliance
with NPDES Permit
No. CAG912002,
Order No. R2-2012-
0012.
Excavated
groundwater shall be
pre-treated as
necessary and
disposed of via the
City’s storm drain
network or publically
owned treatment
works.
Groundwater
pretreatment plan
developed and kept
on hand.
Inspections by the
Public Works
Department to
ensure compliance
with dewatering plan.
Mitigation Measure HAZ-7: The project applicant shall include in
building plans the installation of a Cetco Coreflex or similar
waterproofing/vapor barrier membrane to prevent the migration of
vapor from groundwater into the indoor air of the basement parking
garage. Specifically, the building plans shall provide for the following
1. Installation of a vapor barrier and waterproofing
membrane below the building foundation
Applicant City of Palo Alto
Public Works
Department
Building plans include
required measures
prior to issuance of
building permit.
Compliance with
building plans verified
and air monitoring
conducted prior to
Vapor barrier and
waterproofing
membrane included
on building plans
and installed.
Geotextile fabric on
the backfill included
on building plans
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
2. Placement of a geotextile fabric on the backfill to protect
the barriers from backfill puncture
3. Sealing of slab penetrations with a water-tight sealant
4. Testing of the installation of the barriers in the field
5. Submitting of post-construction, as-built drawings of the
vapor barrier with the following:
a. A stamp and a signature of a professional engineer
b. A written professional engineer statement that
assures the barrier was properly installed
The building plans shall also demonstrate that garage ventilation
equipment is sufficient to meet the National Fire Protection
Association’s (NFPA’s) 2011 Standard for Parking Structures (NFPA
88A) to continuously provide a minimum of two air changes per hour.
The project applicant shall demonstrate to the City of Palo Alto’s
(City’s) Public Works Department that indoor air quality in the
basement garage effectively maintains indoor air volatile organic
compound (VOC) concentrations at levels not harmful to health (i.e.,
below appropriate environmental screen levels). An initial round of
sampling shall be conducted upon construction completion and
quarterly for the first year of operation. For each sampling event, a
minimum of two 24-hour integrated indoor air samples shall be
collected from the basement garage along with one 24-hour integrated
air sample from an exterior location representative of
issuance of certificate
of occupancy.
Air monitoring
conducted quarterly for
one year following
construction.
and installed.
Slab penetrations
sealed with water-
tight sealant included
on building plans
and completed.
Field barrier testing
included on building
plans and
completed.
Post-construction as
built drawings of the
vapor barrier
submitted to the City.
Garage ventilation
sufficient to
continuously provide
a minimum of two air
charges per hour
included on building
plans and installed.
Air quality from
basement garage
sampled quarterly for
the first year after
construction.
Sampling shall
include a minimum
of two 24-hour
integrated samples
from basement
garage along with
one 24-hour
integrated sample
from an exterior
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
ambient/background conditions. Sampling and analytical procedures
shall be conducted in accordance with the Department of Toxic
Substance Control’s Vapor Intrusion Guidance (DTSC 2011). Results
from the indoor air sampling shall be compared to established
regulatory indoor air thresholds for residential and commercial use.
The data shall be provided to the City’s Public Works Department and
evaluated following the 1-year monitoring period.
location
representative of
background
conditions and be
conducted according
to the Department of
Toxic Substance
Control’s Vapor
Intrusion Guidelines.
Data from sampling
shall be provided to
the Public Works
Department and
evaluated following
the one year
monitoring period.
NOISE
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: The project shall be designed to meet
the following performance standards:
The window Sound Transmission Class (STC) ratings and the exterior
wall construction shall be designed to ensure that noise levels meet
the California Green Building Standards Code requirement of Leq-1-
hour 50 dBA or less, and documentation that project design meets this
requirement shall be provided to the City of Palo Alto (City). STC
ratings for selected assemblies shall be based on laboratory testing
performed in accordance with American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) E-90 and comprise the entire window or door
assembly, including the frame. If non-tested assemblies are to be
used, an acoustical consultant shall review the glazing and frame
submittals, and the STC rating of the glass may need to be increased.
Applicant City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of
building permit.
Approved building
plans shall include
window sound
transmission class
ratings and exterior
wall construction that
meet the California
Green Building
Standard Code
requirements.
Documentation
provided to the City
showing that the
project design meets
requirements of the
California Green
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
Building Code.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2: Rooftop mechanical equipment shall
generate a maximum noise level of 88 dBA measured at a distance of
5 feet from the equipment. Alternatively, the project applicant may
retain an acoustical consultant to review mechanical noise as building
design is refined to demonstrate that the noise generated by the
selected rooftop mechanical equipment does not exceed 55 dBA at
the property line. This acoustical analysis would be reviewed and
approved by the City of Palo Alto (City) prior to issuance of any
building permits.
Applicant City of Palo Alto Prior to issuance of
building permits.
Noise generated by
rooftop mechanical
equipment shall not
exceed requirements
when measured.
Acoustical consultant
shall demonstrate
that rooftop
mechanical
equipment does not
exceed
requirements.
Review and approval
of the acoustical
analysis by the City.
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Mitigation Measure TRAF-1: Prior to issuance of demolition,
grading, or building permits for the proposed project, the project
developer shall prepare a Construction Traffic Management Plan that
shall be subject to approval by the City of Palo Alto’s (City’s)
Transportation Division. The goal of the Construction Traffic
Management Plan will be to minimize traffic impacts to public streets
and maintain a high level of safety for all roadway users. The plan will
include the number and size of trucks per day, expected
arrival/departure times, truck circulation patterns, location of truck
staging areas, employee parking, and the proposed use of traffic
control/partial street closures on public streets. The Construction
Traffic Management Plan shall provide for attainment of the following
performance standards, and the City’s Transportation Division staff
shall conduct periodic monitoring during construction to ensure that
these standards are met throughout project construction:
Applicant City of Palo Alto
Transportation
Division
Prior to issuance of
demolition, grading or
building permits.
Control measures
implemented
throughout
construction.
Construction Traffic
Management Plan
submitted to the City.
Plan shall include
number and size of
trucks per day,
expected
arrival/departure
times, circulation
patterns, location of
truck staging areas,
proposed use of
traffic control/partial
street closures on
public streets, and
demonstrate how
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
Delivery trucks do not idle/stage within the public right-of-
way.
All delivery trucks shall use Page Mill Road to access the
site.
Any lane closures on southbound Page Mill Road are limited
to a single lane during off-peak hours (8:30 a.m. to 3:30
p.m.).
All construction employees shall park on site.
Roadways, sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle facilities shall
be maintained clear of debris (such as rocks) that could
otherwise impede travel and impact public safety.
performance
standards will be
attained.
Periodic field
inspections to verify
compliance.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-2: The project applicant shall construct
the improvements necessary to reconfigure the back-to-back left-turn
pockets on Page Mill Road at Hansen Way and Hanover Street so
that the westbound left-turn pocket at Hanover Street has
approximately 550 feet of storage space with the option to add a
second left-turn lane in the future, and the eastbound left-turn pocket
at the project driveway/Hansen Way has approximately 225 feet of
storage space. This change can be accomplished by reducing lane
widths and modifying the center median such that the left-turn pockets
are next to each other for a portion of their length rather than back-to-
back. This may require minor modification to the traffic signal
equipment within the median island at both Hansen Way and Hanover
Street.
Applicant City of Palo Alto Prior to _____ Improvements to the
back-to-back left turn
pockets on Page Mill
Road at Hansen
Way and Hanover
Street shall be
completed leaving
the westbound
Hanover Street turn
pocket with
approximately 550
feet of storage space
and the Hansen Way
turn pocket with
approximately 225
feet of storage
space.
Mitigation Measure TRAF-3: The project applicant shall provide a
fair share allocation of funds necessary for the City of Palo Alto (City) Applicant City of Palo Alto Prior to ______ A fair share allocation
Attachment I
Mitigation Monitoring Program
1050 Page Mill Road Project MMP 8548
October 2015 1
Mitigation Measure
Implementation
Responsibility
Monitoring
Responsibility Timing
Performance
Evaluation Criteria
to change the intersection phasing for the Page Mill Road and
Hanover Street intersection to an to eight-phase signal operation that
would allow pedestrians to use both crosswalks across Page Mill
Road simultaneously. The intersection shall be reconfigured to
provide separate left-turn lanes in each direction on Hanover Street.
of funds shall be
provided to the City
to change the
intersection phasing
for Page Mill Road
and Hanover Street
intersection to an
eight phase signal
operation.
ATTACHMENT J
PROJECT PLANS
(Hardcopies submitted to Councilmembers and Libraries only)
These plans can be reviewed at the following link:
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=2642&TargetID=319