HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-03-25 City Council (4)City of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
DATE:March 25, 2002 CMR:189:02
SUBJECT:¯RECOMMENDED INCREASE TO COMMERCIAL HOUSING IN-
LIEU FEE; ELIMINATION OF EXEMPTIONS AND OTHER
ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES; AND . INCREASE TO
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FOR STANFORD RESEARCH
PARK/EL CAMINO REAL SERVICE COMMERCIAL ZONE
RECOMMENDATION
The Finance Committee recommends that City Council:
1)Approve the recommended increased fee levels, administrative changes, and
implementation milestone; and
2)Adopt the attached ordinance to amend Chapter 16.47 of the Municipal Code to
increase the Commercial Housing In-Lieu Fee from its current level of $4.21 per
square foot to an initial base fee of $15.00 per square foot, with annual revisions to
account for inflation, eliminate existing square footage exemptions, and other
administrative changes; and
3)Adopt the attached ordinance to amend Chapter 16.45 of the Municipal Code to
increase the Transportation Impact Fee from its current level of $3.03 per square foot
to an initial base fee of $8.20 per square foot, with annual revisions to account for
inflation.
BACKGROUND
On February 20, 2002 staff presented the Finance Committee with a report concerning
increasing development impact fees for the existing commercial in-lieu housing fee and
the existing transportation impact fee for the Stanford Research Park/El Camino Real
Service Commercial Zone (CMR:150:02, attached). The February report contained the
results of a community forum regarding impact fees, and made recommendations for new
community services fees. A report concerning potential development impact fees for
CMR: 189:02 Page 1 of 4
parks, community centers and libraries (CMR:146:02) was presented at the same
meeting.
Discussions at the February 20, 2002 Finance Committee meeting included community
reaction, evaluation of fee levels, and policy issues related to exemptions and
implementation. This report forwards to the City Council recommendations made by the
Finance Committee at that meeting.
COMMITTEE REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Commercial Housing In-Lieu Fee
The Finance Committee voted 4-0 to increase the commercial housing in-lieu fee to $15
per square foot. The updated nexus study demonstrates an average cost of $57.81 per.
square foot to provide affordable housing as a result of commercial development. Some
community members addressed the Committee; suggesting that the impact fee should be
closer to the average cost.
The Committee discussed exemptions in the cun’ent ordinance, and confirmed that
existing exemptions for religious organizations, child-care and public facilities should be
preserved. Staff was directed to return to Council with information related to removing
other land use exemptions, including colleges and universities, commercial recreation,
hospitals, private education, private clubs, lodges, and fraternal organizations. If Council
supports eliminating specific land use exemptions, the housing nexus costs will need to
be determined based on the relative employment per square foot and associated low to
moderate-income workers for each land use category.
Administrative Changes
The Committee directed staff to bring other administrative changes to the commercial
housing in-lieu fee ordinance directly to Council, including removing the 20,000 square
foot exemption, 2,500 square foot project threshold, and 2-step payment provision of the
ordinance. These changes are included in the attached ordinance amendment. Staff
recommends initiating a second phase of the Keyser Marston study to review and
possibly revise other administrative aspects of the current ordinance and exemptions, as
described in CMR:383:01. However, the recommended fee increase can be adopted now,
prior to the second phase of the study.
Transportation Impact Fee
The Finance Committee voted 4-0 to increase the transportation impact fee for Stanford
Research Park/El Camino Real Service Commercial Zone to $8.20 per square foot.
Two members of the community expressed concern about the limited use of fees
collected for intersection improvements. The Committee also expressed a desire to
utilize the impact fee fund beyond the scope of the current ordinance. Staff was directed
CMR: 189:02 Page 2 of 4
to return with a citywide transportation impact fee to address alternative transportation
solutions, such as traffic calming and supporting non-vehicular modes of transit. ’
Implementation
The ¯Finance Committee recommends final approval as the implementation milestone. If
approved by Council, all projects with final approval after the effective date of the
ordinance amendments will be required to pay the higher fees. All projects with final
approval prior to the effective date of the ordinance amendments will be required to pay
the cun’ent (lower) fees.
The Finance Committee considered and rejected using building permit issuance as the
implementation milestone, which would have imposed the higher fee on all projects in
the review or building permit process. The Finance Committee also considered and
rejected complete application as the implementation milestone, which would have
¯ allowed projects without final approval as of the effective date of the ordinance to pay the
current (lower) fees.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Precise revenue projections are difficult, as the amount of development in any single year
varies greatly. Staff has created a revenue scenario based on development in Palo Alto
over the last 4 years. The annual revenue scenario presented below differs from that
presented to the Finance Committee, as the Committee recommended higher fee levels
than proposed by staff.
Exhibit 3 - Revenue Scenario
Current Fee Recommended
Levels Fee Levels
Housing 421,000 1,500,000
Traffic 151,500 410,000
Total $ 572,500 $1,910,000.
Actual fee collection will be a function of the year in .which development occurs, and any
future adjustments to fees for inflation.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The housing fee ordinance is .based on the long-standing City policy that commercial
developers should contribute to the cost of meeting the affordable housing needs of their
work force.. The recommended housing fee increase is intended to ensure that a
significant portion of the affordable housing impacts of such projects are mitigated but, at
the same time, commercial development remains viable in Palo Alto.
CMR: 189:02 Page 3 of 4
The transportation fee ordinance was an outcome of the Citywide Land Use and
Transportation Study. The purpose of the fee was to ensure that new development
collectively bears responsibility for capital expenditures needed to provide capacity
improvements necessitated by the development, as defined in the ordinance. The list of
capacity improvements and associated costs has been updated, and supports the
recolrmaended fee increase.
ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATION
Council has alternatives to adoPtion of the recommended ordinance
specified, in the attached report to the Finance Committee (CMR: 150:02).
amendments as
TIMELINE
New fees can be instituted
previously-assumed 60 days)i
30 days following ordinance adoption (rather than the
ATTACH1VIENTS
A. CMR: 150:02 Recommended Increase To Commercial Housing In-Lieu Fee And
Transportation Impact Fee For Stanford Research Park/El Camino Real Service
Commercial Zone (presented to the Finance Committee on February 20, 2002)
Ordinance to amend Chapter 16.47 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code
Ordinance to amend Chapter 1.6.45 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code
PREPARED BY:
Heather Shupe, AdministratOr
DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW:
Lisa Grote
Chief Planning Official
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ~~. ~_~~
Emils~--~arrisdn
Assistant City Manager
CMR:189:02 Page 4 of 4
Attachment A
City of Palo Alto
City Manager’s Report
TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
ATTN:FINANCE COMMITTEE
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
FEBRUARY 20, 2002 CMR:IS0:02
RECOMMENDED INCREASE TO COMMERCIAL HOUSING IN-
LIEU FEE AND TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FOR
STANFORD RESEARCH PARK/EL CAMINO REAL SERVICE
COMMERCIAL ZONE
REPORT IN BRIEF
In 1984, the City of Palo Alto adopted an ordinance requiring developers of commercial
and industrial projects to develop beiow market rate housing or pay a housing fee as
mitigation for the impacts-on housing attributable to jobs created by commercial
development. Neither the provisions of the ordinance nor the fee formula have been
altered since minor amendments were made in 1985. Thecurrent fee rate is $4.21 per net -
new square foot. A recent economic nexus study (CMR 383:01) demonstrates that the
cost of providing housing affordable to the low and moderate-inc0me households
attributable to new commercial development has increased significantly since the last
study conducted in 1993. An increase in the housing fee base rate to $12.00 per square
foot is recommended by staff to ensure that commercial projects mitigate a significant
portion of the affordable housing impacts.
In 1989, the City of Palo Alto adopted an ordinance implementing a fee on new
nonresidential development to offset capital costs associated with capacity improvements
at eight intersections near the Stanford Research Park / E1 Camin0 Real Service
Commercial (CS) Zone. The fee is based on cost estimates, for intersection
improvements, and has not been updated since adoption. A recent analysis indicates that
the cost of these intersection improvements has increased significantly since 1989. The
current fee rate is $3.03 per net new square foot. An increase in the trar~sportation impact
fee to $8.20.per square foot is recommended by staff to ensure that development projects
bear the full capital costs to provide capacity improvements.
Page 1 of 6
RECOMMENDATION i:’ ~: .,:, ~i!
Staffrecommends that the Finance Committee:
1)
2)
Recommend to the City Council that Chapter 16.47 of the Municipal Code be
amended to increase the Commercial Housing In-Lieu Fee from its current level of
$4.21 per square feet to an initial base fee of $12.00 per square foot, with annual
revisions to account for inflation;
Recommend to the City Council that Chapter 16.45 of the Municipal Code be
amended to increase the Transportation Impact Fee from its current level of $3.03 per
square feet to an initial base fee of $8.20 per square, foot, with annual revisions to
account for inflation;
Recommend to the City Council that fee increases apply only to development projects
currently in the "pipeline" where a complete application for discretionary approval,
including a complete preliminary Architectural Review Board application, has not
been submitted as of the effective date of the ordinance. Projects submitted or
applications completed after the effective date of the ordinance will be subject to the
increased fee.
BACKGROUND
In July 2001, staff contracted with Keyser Marston to update its 1993 housing nexus
study, to develop a revised total linkage cost and assist staff in recommending an increase
to the base fee rate. Results of the study and staff recommendations were presented to
the Finance Committee on October 16, 2001. That report (CMR:383:01) included a
complete background on the commercial housing in-lieu fee in Palo Alto, an analysis of
the updated nexus study, a comparison, of housing fees in other cities, and staff
recommendations for possible new fee levels for Palo Alto. A report concerning new
impact fees for parks, community centers and libraries (CMR:381:01) was presented at~
the same meeting. The report also included an estimated increase to the transportation
impact fee level. ~
The Finance Com~mittee directed staff to hold an outreach session with the community,
and return to the Committee with recommendations once community sentiment was
evaluated: The Finance Committee also directed staff to present proposed changes to
housing and transportation impact fees at the same time, along with any new fees, in
order to consider all of the fees together.
DISCUSSION
Public Outreach
A public forum to discuss development impact fees was held December 19, 2001.
Twenty members of the ~ommunity, including three members of City Council, attended
CMR: 150:02 Page 2 of 6
the forum. While most of the discussion at the meeting related to proposed new fees, the
group was also supportive of an increase in the existing housing impact fee level.
At the end of the public outreach meeting, staff distributed a.survey to each participant to
collect additional input. Ninety-three percent of survey responses support an increase in
the housing impact fee. In terms of fee level, 23 percent of responses support the fee level
as proposed, while 77 percent of responses support a fee greater than $12 per square foot.
The December 19 survey also queried participants on a potential citywide traffic impact
fee. Ninety-two percent of responses supported an evaluation of such a fee. The survey
did not include a question regarding the-fee levels of existing transportation impact fees.
Transportation Impact Fee
The Stanford Research Park/El Camino Real transportation impact fee ordinance was
adopted in 1989 as an outcome of the Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study. It is
one of two traffic impact fee ordinances (San Antonio/East Bayshore is the other). The
fee is determined by the cost of improvements at eight intersections, estimated in 1989 at
$4.285 million. Neither the intersection projects nor their costs have been updated since
the ordinance was adopted in 1989.
The fee is adjusted each year for increases in the cost of construction based on the San
Francisco Bay Area Construction Cost Index. In 1989 the fee was $2.39 per new square
foot of development in the Stanford Research Park/E1 Camino Real CS Zone. Annual
cost index adjustments have resulted in a fee of $3.03 in 2001, a 27 percent increase since
1989.
The list of intersection projects in the current ordinance is out of date. Some have been
finished and others have been revised by the new Comprehensive Plan. The current
intersection projects listed in the Comprehensive Plan tha~ can be funded by this fee are:
¯Page Mill/Hanover;
¯Middle field Road/Oregon Expressway;
¯Foothill/Arastradero/Miranda; and¯Page Mill Expressway/El Camino Real.
In 2001 Korve Engineering performed a study to re-evaluate cost estimates for capacity
improvements at these intersections (see Attachments A and B). Korve Engineering
estimates total $14.7 million, and include right-of-way or easements at a cost of $125 per
square foot, as well as design, construction, and management costs. Also included is a
contingency for each project.
The original estimated costs in 1989 have increased to those projected in 2001 by 343
percent (see Attachment B). Staff recommends increasing the original 1989 base impact
fee by the same percentage. This will result in an impact fee of $ 8.20 per square foot
CMR:150:02 Page 3 of 6
($2.39 x 343 percent).
percent increase.
Compared to the current fee of $3.03, this represents a 270
Staff had not completed its analysis on an updated fee level for intersection
improvements prior to the December 19tu public forum. The estimated fee level projected
at that time was $6.10 per square foot, rather than $8.20. Staff recommends the higher
fee level in order to recover intersection improvement costs as estimated by Korve
Engineering, based on the revised proj ect list.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Precise revenue projections for future housing fees if the proposed increase to $12 per
square foot is adopted are not possible. Most commercial projects presently in
development review, such as Hyatt Rickey’s and 800 High Street, provide a significant
number of housing units within the project and therefore, under the provisions of the
current ordinance, will not be required to pay a commercial housing fee. Thus, it will
probably not be until the economy is well into recovery that the results of the proposed
fee increase will be seen in the Commercial Housing In,Lieu’ Fund. However, if the $12
fee rate had applied to the commercial projects paying housing fees during the last fiscal
year (2000-01), about $4.2 million would have been deposited to the Commercial
Housing In-Lieu Fund versus the $1.4 million received with the current $4.21 fee. An
acre to an acre and one-half of residential land could have been purchased at current
values with $4 million in funds.
Projections for future traffic impact fees are also difficult, as the amount of development
in any single year varies greatly. However, a comparison of fee levels using remaining
development potential may be useful. The Comprehensive Plan identifies approximately
one million square feet of development potential in the Stanford Research Park/El
Camino Real CS Zone, including the Mayfield site (290,000 square feet). Since adoption
of the Comprehensive Plan in 1998, approximately 561,000 new square feet have been
constructed or approved in the impact area, including 2475 Hanover. The remaining
development potential is 529,000 square feet. If the existing fee were applied it would
yield $1.6 million ($3.03 x 529;000). The proposed fee would yield $4.3 million ($8.20 x
529,000). Actual fee collection will be a function of the year in which development
occurs, and any future adjustments to the fee for inflation or updates to the project list.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The housing fee ordinance is based on the long-standing City policy that commercial
developers should contribute to the cost of meeting the affordable housing needs of their
work force. The housing fee ’increase recommended by staff is intended to ensure that a
significant portion of the affordable housing impacts of such projects are mitigated but, at
the same time, commercial development remains viable in Palo Alto. A $12 housing fee
would be comparable to the housing fee rate in San Francisco ($14) Seattle ($12) and
Menlo Park ($10).
CMR: 150:02 Page 4 of 6
The transportation fee ordinance was an outcome of the .Citywide Land Use and
Transportation Study. The purpose of the fee was to ensure that new development
collectively bears responsibility for capital expenditures needed to provide capacity
improvements as defined in the ordinance. The transportation fee increase recommended
by staff is intended to support this goal by updating the list of capacity improvements and
associated costs.
ALTERNATIVES TO STAFF RECOMMENDATION
The following are possible alternatives to staff’s recommended adoption of proposed
impact fee increases:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Decide not to increase fee levels at this time, leaving the current fees intact;
Decide to postpone, or phase-in, recommended fee increases;
Set the housing fee at a higher (or lower) level than .the $12 per square foot
recommended by staff. Seventy-seven percent of survey respondents supported a fee
level higher than that proposed by staff. The nexus study update justifies a housing
impact fee rate of up to $57.81 per square foot, which would, on average, cover 100
percent of the affordable housing costs generated by a prototype commercial project.
Council could choose to set the housing fee at any amount from the current $4.21 up
to the $57.81 maximum supported by the consultant’s study. Other cities have
housing fee levels ranging from $0 to $14 per square foot;
Set the transportation fee at a higher (or lower) level than the $8.20 per square foot
recommended by staff. Preliminary estimates presented to the public in October and
December 2001 for this fee were $6.10 per square foot. Conversely, spreading the
current estimated cost of proposed intersection improvements over the remaining
development potential results in a fee level of $27.79 per square foot ($14.7 million/
529,000 square feet), a nine-fold increase in the current fee. Other Cities have
transportation fee levels ranging from $0 to $12.73 per square foot.
TIMELINE
Oncethe Finance Committee recommends specific fee levels to staff, staff will prepare
ordinance amendments for Council adoption to enact the new housing and transportation
fees. New fees can be instituted 60 days following ordinance adoption.
Staff plans to initiate a second phase of the review and evaluation of the housing fee after
adoption of the fee increase. A draft work program extending the current contract with
Keyser Marston has been prepared, but staff has not executed the contract amendment
pending Council input and direction on policy issues that affect the work program. After
completion of the second phase~ staff will return to Council with a revised ordinance for
review and adoption.
CMR:150:02 Page 5 of 6
Staff also plans to begin an evaluation of a citywide transportation impact fee, once the
transportation division’s traffic model is complete. A nexus study will be required, per
AB 1600 legislative requirements. This project will begin next fiscal year, and will
require both staff and contract expertise. If necessary, resources will be requested during
the 2002-03 Fiscal Year budget process for the project.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and
does not require CEQA review.
ATTACHMENTS
A.Estimated Cost of Capacity Improvements
B.Comparison of Estimated Cost of Capacity Improvements
PREPARED BY:
~ther Shupe, Admi~nistrator
REVIEWED BY:
S!@e"E~’mslie,of Planning and Community Erivironment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
Emily Harrison, Assi~a~t City Manager
CMR: 150:02 Page 6 of 6
Attachment A
ESTIMATED COST OF CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS
FOR STANFORD RESEARCH PARIUEL CAMINO REAL
SERVICE COMMERCIAL (CS) ZONE
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate /Intersection Modifications ~ ,~
Page Mill Road / Hanover Street (Westbound Page Mill) ’~"
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
,14
15
Description
Remove Existing Detail 8 Stripe
Remove Existing 6" Traffic Stripe
Remove Existing Pavement Markings
Remove Asphalt Concrete
Remove Median
Install Detail 8 Traffic Stripe
Install 6" Traffic Stripe
Install Crosswalk Stripe
Install Pavement Markings
Install Asphalt Concrete
Install Median
Sinage
Utilities
Traffic Signal Modifications
Traffic Control
Quantity ,.I UnitsI
1,200 LF
.1,610 LF
192 LF
3,000 SF
2,280 LF
1,650 LF
!;610 LF
10 LF
320 SF
3,420 SF
1,710 LF
1 LS
!LS
1 LS
1’LS
Subtotal
Unit Cost
$1
$3
$4
$4
$1o
$1
$3
$6.50
$6.50
$8
.$3o
$2,00o
$2O,OOO
$25,000
$15,ooo
Contingency (40%)
Design / Construction (25%)
Construction Management (15%)
Mobilization
City Process
TOTAL
Total Cost
$1,200
$4,830
$768
$12,000
-$22,800
$1,650
$4,830
$65
$2,o8o
$27,360
$51,300
$2,ooo
$2o,ooo
$25,000
$15,000
$190,883
$76,353
$66,809
$40,085
$2O,OOO
$2o,ooo
$414,131
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications
Page Mill Read / Hanover Street (Hanover)
I Item I " Description
1 Remove Existing Detail 8 Stripe
2 Remove Existing 4" Traffic Stripe
3 Remove Existing Detail 1 Stripe
4 Remove Existing Double Yellow Traffic Stripe
5 Remove Asphalt Concrete
6 Remove Curb & Gutter
7 ~,em ove Sidewalk
8 Install Detail 8 Traffic Stripe
9 Install 4" Traffic Stripe
10.Ins{all Detail 1 Stripe
11 Install Double Yellow Traffic Stripe
12 Install Pavement Markings
13 Install Asphalt Concrete
14 Install Curb & Gutter
15 Install Sidewalk
16 Sinage
17 Drainage
18 Utilities
19 Traffic Control
Quantity
1,800
130
2OO
95O
1,265
1,265
6,115
1,775
2,400
2OO
95O
130
2,530
1,265
6,115
1
1
1
1
Subtotal
Units
LF
LF
LF
LF
SF
LF
SF
LF
LF
LF
LF
SF
SF
LF
SF
LS
LS
LS
LS
unit Cost
$1
$2
$1
$4
$4
$6
$1
$1
$2
$1
$4
$6.50
$8
$20!
$5.501
$2,ooo
$20,000
$20,000
$5,000
Contingency (40%)
Design / Construction (25%)
Construction Management (15%)
ROW (1,200 sf)
ROW Contingency (100%)
Mobilization
City. Process
Total Cost
$1,800
$26C
$200
$3,800
$5,0601
$7,590
$6,115
$1,775
$4,800
$200
$3,800
$845
$20~240
$25,300
$33,633
$2,000
$2O,00O
$20,000
$5,o00
$162,418
$64,967
$56,846
$34,108
$150,000
$150,000
$20,000
$20,000
TOTAL $658,338
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications
Oregon Expressway / Middlefleld Road
’ ItemI Description
1 Remove Existing Detail 8 Stripe
2 Remove Existing 4" Traffic Stripe
3 Remove.Existing 6" Traffic Stripe
4 Remove Existing Double Yellow Traffic Stripe
5 Remove Existing Crosswalk Stripe
6 Remove Pavement Markings
7 Remove Asphalt Concrete
8 Remove Median
9 Remove Curb & Gutter
10 Remove Sidewalk
11 Remove Landscaping
12 Install Detail 8 Traffic Stripe
13 Install 4" Traffic Stripe
14 Install 6" Traffic Stripe
15 Install Double Yellow Traffic Stripe
16 Install Crosswalk Stripe
17 Install Pavement Markings
18 Install Asphalt Concrete ,
i9 Install Median
20 Install Curb & Gutter
21 Install Curb Ramp
22 Install Sidewalk
23 Tree Removal Mitigation
24 Sinage
25 Drainage
26 Utilities
27 Replace Traffic Signal
28 Traffic Control
Quantity
2,475
39O
49O
710
665
120
4,090
4,250
1,800
7,960
1
2,725
38O
975
940~
700’
270’
11,600
800
1,755
6
8,O5O
1
1
1
1
1
1
Subtotal
Units
LF
LF
LF
LF
LF
SF
SF
SF
LF
SF
LS
LF
LF
LF
LF
LF
SF
SF
SF
LF
EA
SF
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
Unit Cost
$1
$2
$3
$4
$4
$~
$4
$1o
$6
$20,000i
$1~
$2
$3
$4
$6.50
$6.50
$8
$30
$20
$220
$5.50
$5o,ooo
$2,ooo
$40,000
$6o,ooo
$150,000
$20,000
Contingency (40%)
Design / Construction (20%)
Construction Management (10%)
Mobilization
City Process
Total Cost
$2,475
$780
$1,470
$2,840
$2,660
$480
$16,360
$42,500
$10,800
$7,960
$2O,OOO
$2,725
$760
$2,925
$3,760
$4,55o
$1,755
$92,800
$24,000
$35,100
$1,320
$44,275
$50,000
$2,000
$40,000
$60,000
$150,000
$20,ooo
$644,295
$257,718
$180,403
$90,201
$20,000
$20,000
TOTAL $1,212,617
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications
Foothill Expressway / Arasadero Road
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Remove
Description
Existing Detail 8 Stripe
Existing 4" Traffic Stripe
Existing 6" Traffic Stripe
Existing Double Yellow Traffi~ Stripe
Existing Crosswalk Stripe
Pavement Markings
Asphalt Concrete
Median
Curb & Gutter
Sidewalk
Quantity
2,010!
50
425i
375i
73O
69O
4,200
1,660
1,885
18,520
Units
LF
LF
L.F
LF
LF
SF
SF
SF
LF
SF
Unit Cost
$1
$2
$3
$4
$4
$4
$4
$10
$6
$1
Remove Landscaping LS $10,000
Install Detail 8 Traffic Stripe LF $1
Install 4" Traffic Stripe LF $2
Install 6" Traffic Stripe LF $3
Install Double Yellow Traffic Stripe LF $4
. Install Crosswalk Stripe LF $6.50
~lnstall Pavement Markings SF $6.50
Install Asphalt Concrete SF $8
Install Median SF $30
Install Curb & Gutter . LF $20
I Install Curb Ramp EA $220
l lnstall Sidewalk SF $5.50
I Replace Landscaping LS $25,000
ISinage LS $4,000
Drainage LS $40,000
Utilities LS $40,000
:Traffic Signal Modification LS $50,000
iT~affic Control LS $20,000
1
2,840
1,450
1,270
90
865
920
20,000
4,975
1,465
6
15,140
1
1
1
1
2
1
Subtotal
Contingency (40%)
Design / Cons~.ruction (20%)
Construction Management (10%)
ROW (12,720 sf)
ROW Contingency (100%)
Mobilization
City Process
TOTAL
Total Cost
$2,010
$100
$1,275
$1 500
$2,92O
$2,760
$16,8oo
$16,600
$11,310
$18,520
$10,000
$2,840
$2,900
$3,810
$360
$5,623
$5,98o
$160,000
$149,250
_ $29,300
$1,320
$83,270
.$25,ooo
$4,000
$40,000
$40,000
$100,000
$2o,ooo
$757,448
$302,979
$212,085
$106,043
$1,590,000
.$1,590,000
$20,000
$20,000
$4,598,554
City Of Paio Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications "-
El Camino Real/Page Mill Road (Northbound El Camino Real)C-~ ~ "::"" )
Item I Description ¯ Units Unit Cost
1 Remove Asphalt Concrete SF $4
2 Remove Curb & Gutter LF $6
3 Remove Sidewalk SF $1
4 Remove Landscaping LS $5,000
5 Install 6" Traffic Stripe LF $3
6 Install Crosswalk Stripe LF $6.50
7 Install Pavement Markings SF $6.50
8 Install Asphalt Concrete SF $8
9 Install Curb & Gutter LF $20
10 Install Curb Ramp EA.$220
11 Install Sidewalk SF $5.50
12 Tree Removal Mitigation LS $10,000
13 Sinage LS $2,000
14 Traffic Signal LS $30,000
15 Drainage LS $20,000
- 16 Utilities LS $10,000
17 Traffic Control LS $10,000
Quantity
32O
32O
2,000
1
’ 270
25
3O
645
315
2
1,910
1
1
1
1
1
1
Subtotal
Contingency (40%)
Design / Construction (25%)
Construction Management (15%)
ROW (20,400 sf)
Business Relocation (2 Businesses)
ROW Contingency (100%)
Mobilization
City Process
Caltrans Process
Total Cost
$1,280
.$1,920
$2,000
$5,000
$810
$163
$195
$5,160
$6,300
$440
$10,505
$10,000
$2,0OO
$30,000.
$20,00O
$10,000;
$10,0001
$115,773i
$46,30£
$40,520
$24,312
$2,550,000
$1,000,000
$3,550,000
$20,000
$20,00O
$20,000
I-OTAL $7,386,914
City Of Palo Alto Intersection. Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications
El Camino Real/Page Mill Road (Westbound Page. Milli
!Item I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
Description Quantity Units Unit Cost
LF
LF
SF
LF
SF
LS
LF
LF
LF
SF
SF
LF
EA
SF
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
$1
$3
$4
$6
$1
$5,000
$1
$3
$6.50
$6.50
$8
$2O
$220
$5.5o
$15,00o
$2,000
$20,000!
$20,000
$2o,ooo
$15,ooo
Remove Existing Detail 8 Stripe
Remove Existing 6" Traffic Stripe
Remove Asphalt Concrete
Remove Curb & Gutter
Remove Sidewalk
Remove Landscaping
InstalIDetail 8 Traffic Stripe
Install 6" Traffic Stripe
In~tall Crosswalk Stripe
Install Pavement Markings
Install Asphalt Concrete
Install Curb & Gutter
Install Curb Ramp
nstall Sidewalk
Tree Removal Mitigation
Sinage
Traffic. Signal
Drainage
Utilities
Traffic Control
520
46O
52O
52O
5,75O
1
9OO
76O
10
160
4,450
520
1
4,260
!
1
1
1
1
1
Total Cost
$520
$1,380
$2,080
$3,120
$5,750
$5,000
$900
$2,280
$65
$1,040
$35,60O
$10,400
$220
$23,43O
$15,000
$2,ooo
$20,000
$2O,0OO
$2o,ooo
$15,000
Subtotal
Contingency (40%).
Design / Construction Support (25%)
Construction Management (15%)
Mobilization
City Process
caltrans Process
TOTAL
$183,785
.$73,514
$64,325
$38,595
$2O,OOO
$20,000
$20,000
$420,219
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications ~_. ~.,
Page Mill Road / Hanover Street (Westbound Page Mill)
Item I Description
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
IRemove Existing Detail 8 Stripe
!Remove Existing 6" Traffic Stripe
Remove E.xisting Pavement Markings
Remove Asphalt Concrete
Remove Median
nstall Detail 8 Traffic Stripe
Install 6" Traffic Stripe
Install Crosswalk Stripe "
Install Pavement Markings
Install Asphalt Concrete
Install Median
Sinage
Utilities
Traffic Signal Modifications
Traffic Control
Quantity
1,200
1,610
!92
3,000
2,280
1,650
1,610
10
32O
3,420
1,710
1
1
1
1
Subtotal
Units
LF
LF
.LF
SF
LF
LF
LF
LF
SF
¯ SF
LF
LS
LS
LS
LS
Unit Cost
$1
$3
$4
$4
$1o
$1
$3
$6.50
$6.5o
$8
$30
$2,ooo
$20,000
$25,000
$15,000
Contingency (40%)
Design / Construction (25%)
Construction Management (15%)
Mobilization
City Process
Total Cost
$1,200
$4,830
$768
$12,000
$22,800
$1,650
$4,830
$65
$2,080
$27,360!
$51,3001
$2,000i
$2O,OO0’
$25,OOO
$15,000
$190,883
$76,353
$66,809
$4o,o85
$20,000
$2o,ooo
TOTAL $414,131
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications ~
Page Mill Road / Hanover Street (Hanover) ~ ....
I Item Description Quantity Units Unit CostI
1 P~emove Existing Detail 8 Stripe 1,800 LF $1
2 Remove Existing 4" Traffic Stripe 130 LF $2
3.Remove Existing Detail 1 Stripe ,200 LF $1
4 Remove Existing Double Yellow Traffic Stripe 950 LF $4
5 Remove Asphalt Concrete 1,265 SF $4
6 Remove Curb & Gutter 1,265 LF $6
7 Remove Sidewalk 6,115 SF $1
8 Install Detail 8 Traffic Stripe t ,775 LF $1
9 Install 4" Traffic Stripe 2,400 LF $2
!0 Install Detail 1 Stripe 200 LF $1
11 Install Double Yellow Traffic Stripe 950 LF $4
12 Install Pavement Markings 130 SF $6.50
13 Install Asphalt Concrete 2,530 SF $8
14 Install Curb & Gutter 1,265 LF " $20~
15 ,Install Sidewalk 6,115 SF $5.50:
16 !Sinage 1 LS $2,000
17 Drainage 1 LS $20,000
18 Utilities 1 LS $20,000
19 Traffic Control ’1 LS $5,000
Subtotal
,Contingency (40%)
iDesign / Construction (25%)
iConstruction Management (15%)
ROW (1,200 sf)
ROW Contingency (100%)
Mobilization
City Process
Total Cost
$1,800
$260
$20o
$3,8OO
$5,o6o
$7,590
$6,115
$1,775
$4,800
$200
$3,800
$845
$20,24O
$25,300
$33,633
$2,ooo
$20,000
$20,000
$5,000
$162,418
$64,967
$56,846
$34,108
$15o,ooo
$150,000
$2o,ooo
$2o,ooo
TOTAL $658,338
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications
Oregon Expressway / Middlefield Road
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
!2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Description
Remove Existing Detail 8 Stripe
Remove Existing 4" Traffic Stripe
Remove Existing 6" Traffic Stripe
Remove Existing Double Yellow Traffic Stripe
Remove Existing Crosswalk Stripe
Remove Pavement Markings
Remove Asphalt Concrete
Remove Median
Remove Curb & Gutter
Remove Sidewalk
Remove Landscaping
Install Detail 8 Traffic Stripe
Install 4" Traffic Stripe
Install 6" Traffic Stripe
Install Double.Yellow Traffic Stripe
Install Crosswalk Stripe
Install Pavement Markings
Install Asphalt Concrete
Install Median
Install Curb & Gutter
Install Curb Ramp
Install Sidewalk
Tree Removal Mitigation
Sinage
Drainage
Utilities
Replace Traffic Signal
Traffic Control
Quantity Units
2,475 LF
390 LF
490 LF
710 LF
665 LF
120 SF
4,090 SF
4,250 SF
1,800 LF
7,960 SF
1 LS
2,725 LF
380 LF
975 LF
940 LF
700 LF
270 SF
11,600 SF
800 SF
1,755 LF
6 EA
8,050 SF
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
1 ’LS
1 LS
1 LS
Subtotal
Contingency (40%)
Unit Cost
$1
$2
$3
$4
$4
$4
$4
$10
$6
$1
$2o,ooo
$1
$2
$3
$4
$6.50
$6.5O
$8
$30
$2O
$220
$5.5O
$5o,ooo
$2,ooo
$40,000
$60,000
$150,000
$20,000
Design / Construction (20%)
Construction Management (10%)
Mobilization
~City Process
Total Cost
$2,475
$780
$1,470
$2;840
$2,6#0
$480
$16,360
$42,50O
$10,800~
$7,960
$20,000
$2,725
$760
$2,925
$3,760
$4,550
$1,755
$92,800
$24,000
$35,100
$1,320
$44,275
$50,ooo
$2,ooo
$4O,OOO
$60,000
$150,000
$20,000
$644,295
$257,718
$180,403
$90,201
$20,000
$20,000
]’OTAL $1,212,617
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications
Foothill Expressway / Arasadero Road
Item I Description
1 Remove Existing Detail 8 Stripe
2 Remove Existing 4" Traffic Stripe
3 Remove Existing 6" Traffic Stripe
4 Remove Existing Double Yellow Traffic Stripe
5 Remove Existing Crosswalk Stripe
6 Remove Pavement Markings
7 Remove Asphalt Concrete
8 Remove Median
9 Remove Curb & Gutter
!0 Remove Sidewalk
Quantity Units Unit Cost
2,010
50
425
375
730
69O
4,200
1,66O
1,885
18,520i
LF
LF
LF
LF
LF
SF
SF
¯ SF
LF
SF.
$1
$2
$3
$4
$4
$4
$4
$10
$6
$1
Total Cost
$2,010
$1oo
$1,275
$1,500
.$2,920
$2,760
$16,8OO
$16,600
$11,310
$18,520
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18.
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Remove Landscaping
Install Detail 8 Traffic Stripe
Install 4" Traffic Stripe
Install 6" Traffic Stripe
Install Double Yellow Traffic Stripe
Install Crosswalk Stripe
Install Pavement Markings
2,840
1,450
1,270
90
865
92O
LS $10,000
LF
LF
LF
LF
LF
SF
$1
$2
$3
$4
$6.50
$6.50
$10,000
$2,84O
$2,900
$3,810
$360
$5,623
$5,980
Install Asphalt Concrete
Install Median
Install Curb & Gutter
Install Curb Ramp
Install Sidewalk
Replace Landscaping
Sinage
Drainage
Utilities
Traffic Signal Modification
Traffic Control
20,000
4,975
1,465
6
15,140
1
1
1
1
2
1
Subtotal
SF
SF
LF
EA
SF
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
Contingency (40%)
Design / Construction (20%)
$8
$30
$20
$220
$5.50
$25,000
$4,000
$40,000
$40,000
$5o,ooo
$2o,ooo
Construction Management (10%)
$160,000
$149,250
$29,300
$1,320
$83,270
$25,ooo
$4,ooo
$40,000
$40,O0O
$100,000
$20,000
$757,448
$302,979
$212,085
$106,043
ROW (12,720 sf)
ROW Contingency (100%)
Mobilization
=City Process
$1,590,000
$1,590,000
$20,000
$2o,ooo
TOTAL $4,598,554
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection .Modifications
El Camino Real/Page Mil! Road (Northbound El Camino Real)
Item I Description
1 Remove Asphalt Concrete
2 Remove Curb & Gutter
3 Remove Sidewalk
4 Remove Landscaping
5 Install 6" Traffic Stripe
6 Install Crosswalk Stripe
7 Install Pavement Markings
8 Install Asphalt Concrete
9 Install Curb & Gutter
10 Install Curb Ramp
11 Install Sidewalk
12 Tree Removal Mitigation
13 Sinage
14 Traffic Signal
15 Drainage
16 Utilities
17 Traffic Control
Quantity
320
32O
2,000
1
27O
25
3O
645
315
2
1,910
1
1
1
1
1
1
Subtotal
Units
SF
LF
SF
LS
LF
LF
SF
SF
LF
EA
SF
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
LS
Unit Cost
$4
$6
$1
$5,00O
$3
$6.50
$6,5o
$8
$2O
$220
$5.50
$1o,000
$2,ooo
$30,000
$20,000!
$10,000~
$1o,000;
Contingency (40%)
Design / Construction (25%)
Construction Management (15%)
ROW (20,400 sf)
Business Relocation (2 Businesses)
ROW Contingency (1.00%)
Mobilization
City Process
Caltrans Process
TOTAL
Total Cost
$1,280
$!,920
$2,000
$5,000
$81o
$163
$195
$5,160
$6,300
$440
$1o,5o5
$10,000
$2,ooo
$30,000
$20,000
$10,000
$10,000
$115,773
$46,309
$40;520
$24,312
$2,55O,O0O
$!,000,000
$3,550,000
$20,000
$20,000
$20,000
$7,386,914
City Of Palo Alto Intersection Improvement Project
Cost Estimate
Intersection Modifications
El Camino Real/Page Mill Road (Westbound Page Mill)
Item Description Unit Cost
1 Remove Existing Detail 8 Stripe $1
2 Remove Existing 6" Traffic Stripe,$3
3 ~,emove Asphalt Concrete $4
4 Remove Curb & Gutter $6
5 Remove Sidewalk $1
6 Remove Landscaping $5,000
7 Install Detail 8 Traffic Stripe $1
8 Install 6" Traffic Stripe ¯$3
9 Install Crosswalk Stripe $6:50
10 Install Pavement Markings $6.50
11 Install Asphalt Concrete $8
12 Install Curb & Gutter ’ $20
13 Install Curb Ramp $220
14 Install Sidewalk $5.50
15 Tree Removal Mitigation $15,000
16 Sinage $2,000
17 Traffic.Signal $20,Q00
18 Drainage $20,000
19 Utilities $20,000
20 Traffic Control $15,000
Quantity Units
520 LF
460 LF
520 SF
520 LF
5,750 SF
1 LS
900 LF
760 LF-
10 LF
160 SF
4,450 SF
520 LF
¯1 EA
4,260 SF
11 LS
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
1 LS
Subtotal
Contingency (40%)
Design / Construction.Support (25%)
Construction Management (15%)
Mobilization
City Process
Caltrans Process
Total Cost
$520
$1,380
$2,080
$3,120
$5,750
$5,000
$9oo
$2,280
$65
$1,040
$35,600
$10,400
$220
$23,430
$15,oo0
$2,000
$2o,ooo
$20,000
$2o,ooo
$15,000
$183,785
$73,514
$64,325
$38,595
$20,000
$20,00o
$20,000
TOTAL $420,2191
Attachment B
z <
w .___E~E
xwXw .=_ E
w
0
0
m m o 6 6 6
Attachment B~
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALe ALTO
AMENDING SECTIONS 16.47.020 AND 16.47.040 OF
CHAPTER 16.47 (APPROVAL OF ’PROJECTS WITH IMPACTS.
ON HOUSING)TO INCREASE THE COMMERCIAL HOUSING
IN-LIEU FEE AND RELATED CHANGES
The Council of the City of Pale Alto does hereby ORDAIN as
follows:
SECTION i. Section 16.47.020 of Chapter 16.47 (Approval of
Projects with Impacts on Housing) of Title 16 (Building
Regulations) Of the Pale Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended
to read as follows:
16.47.020 Applicability. This chapter shall apply to the
following developments, except those exempt under Section
16.47 030:
a) Any new gross square footage of two ~ ......~ ~:~
....... footage of nonexempt uses on a site has ....~-~ ~ .....~’"
t~-+~ Any .~, ~- squarc ~"^~~ ~ .....~ ~........ ~ ....age in a deTc~ ......., ~
gross square footage that is converted from an exempt use to a
nonexempt use, if such development removes from the city’s
housing stock two or more legal dwelling units that have last
been used for housing;
~4-~_~ New gross square footage that replaces nonexempt
uses shall not be considered gross square footage for the
purposes of the ordinance codified in this chapter~ "Replaces"
means that the new gross square footage receives design approval
pursuant to Chapter 16.48 within one year of the previous
nonexempt uses being demolished;
~-e-~__~ New gross square footage in a development used
for il) an on-site cafeteria, recreational facility, and/or day
care facility, to be provided for employees and/or their
020320 sm 0032530 i
children and not Open to the general public, or (2) a hazardous
materials storage facility shall be exempted from. the
requirements of this chapter. If any square footage. ~xempted
under this subsection (e) is converted to a nonexempt use, the
entire amount of gross square footage converted must meet the
requirements of this chapter, regardless .of the number of.square
feet converted.
SECTION 2. Section 16.47.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal
Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
16.47.040 Housing requirement.
(a) Developments must provide the number of low-income and
moderate-income housing u~its determined by the formula set
forth below or provide an in-lieu fee as set forth in Section
16.47.040(d) below:
Gross Square Feet/350 x .017 = Number of units required
(b) This formula is based on the reasonable approximation
of the amount of housing necessary to satisfy ten percent of the
demand for low to moderate-income housing based on the average
number of low to moderate-income employees generated per average
household by the average commercial and industrial development.
(c) Housing units may be sold or rented to low-income and
moderate-income buyers pursuant to the city’s below market rate
(BMR) program and may be provided either On the site of the
proposed deve!opment or off-site. If the Unit is provided on
site, .its design and location shall be part of the architectural
review application of the entire proposed deve!opment. If the
unit is off-site, the director of planning and community
environment must approve the size, condition and location of the
units.
(I) A housing unit if sold, shall be sold to the city, or
city’s designee, at the cost of construction and financing,
excluding land costs and profi[; provided, that the cost shal!
not be ,greater than that affordable to buyers under the current
income limits for the Palo Alto below market rate. program,
publ±shed yearly by the department of planning and community
environment and on file with the city cle[k.
(2) A housing unit, if rented, shall be rented for a
minimum of fifty-nine years subject to Palo Alto’s below market
020320 sm 0032530 2
rate rental program, or for a lesser period; provided, that it
is s.old in accordance with subdivislon (i) of this section..
(3) A below market rate agreement shall be entered into
between the city and the developer at the time of design
approval of the development pursuant to Chapter 16.48.
(d) If housing units are not to be provided, .the developer
shall make an in-lieu payment to the city’s housing fund of
fifty ~ .......~ ~ ............................... ~ rcquired unit as
~........................of constructing an avoragc ~low
~’~ ~ ~ ~ ....s’~ ~ .....c~u cnt of two fifteen
dollars ~ ~"-*~ .............. ~ ............per square foot of proposed
development. The ~;~;~" ~~ dollars pcr unitfifteen dollars
per square foot shall be adjusted annually from the date of
approval of the ordinance codified herein by the percentage
changes in the Consumer Price Index, all urban consumers index,
for the San Francisco-Oakland area ~ ............
conts r
(e) Half of T%he in-lieu payment must be paid__prior to
issuance of "-’~ ~ ....~~ ~ ....~ ~ ....~ ....."~
rccclvl~m the first grading or building permit for a project or
the permit.Any__permit issued prior to payment shall be null
and occupa cy .... ~ ~ ~ .... ~
For a phased project; payments may be made for each portion of a
phased project ""~- ~ ....~-~ ~ ............................ ~ of --prior to issuance of
the first grading or building permit for that phase and as the
~ occupancy for that pha~ ~ .... ~ ;~
(f) If the formula as applied to a proposed development
results in a fraction of a unit, the developer shall provide for
the fraction of a unit either a whole unit or a proratcdan in-
lieu payment, based on the abovc formula entire applicable
square footage.
(g) At the time of a developer’s application for
architectural review pursuant to Chapter i6.48, or, if no
ar6hitectural review is necessary, at the time of an application "
for a ccrtificatc of use and occupancybuildin~ permit, the
developer, must notify the director of planning and community
environment whether units or an inrlieu payment will be provided
to the city. The housing requirement shall then beplaced as a
condition on the director’s approval of the project pursuant to
Chapter 16.48 or as a condition on the issuance of a usc and
020320 sm 0032530 3
occupansybuildinq permit by the
services.
division of inspectional
(h) Exceptio~ for Mixed Use Developments. In a. mixed
housing and commercial or industrial development~, the
developer’s housing requirement pursuanz to this chapter ~and the
developer’s below market rate housing requirement pursuant to
pro@ram i0 of the housing element of the Comprehensive Plan
both should be calculated. The developer shall be required to
meet only the larger of the two requirements.
SECTION 3. This is not a pro3ect for purposes of the
California Environmental Quality Ac~ (CEQA). However,
individual improvement projects to be funded by the fees hereby
established and individual development projects upon which the
fees will be imposed shall be subject to appropriate
environmental revlew under CEQA.
//
_!]_..
//
020320 sm 0032530 4
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective 30. days
after the date of its adoption; provided, that when effective,
the provisions of Sections 16.47.020 and 16.47.040 .hereby
amended shall be Imposed on all applicable development receiving
discretionary approval from and after the effective date hereof.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENt:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mayor
APPROVED:
Senior Asst. City Attorney City Manager
Director of Planning and
Community .Environment
Director of Administrative
Services
020320 sm 0032530 5
Attachment C
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO
ALTO AMENDING SECTION 16.45.060 OF CHAPTER 16.45
(TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FOR NEW
NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE STANFORD
RESEARCH PARK/EL CAMINO REAL CS ZONE) OF THE
PALO ALTO MUNICIPAL CODE TO INCREASE THE FEE AND
TO REVISE THE LIST OF INTERSECTIONIMPROVEMENTS
TO BE FUNDED BY THE FEE
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as
follows:
SECTION I. Recitals.
(a) By Ordinance No. 3894 adopted August 7, 1989, the
CLty Council added Chapter 16.45 to the Palo Alto Municipal
Code, to establish a fee on new development in the Stanford
~Research Park/El Camino Real CS Zone, to pay for the cost of
certain intersection improvements described in the o~dinance.
(b)The intersection improvements described in the
ordinance had been identified in the Citywide Land Use and.
Transportation Study Environmental Impact Report (Citywide EIR)
prepared by City staff and certified by the City Counc±l on
March 6, 1989.
(c)Due to the passage of time, some of the
identified intersection improvements have been completed.
Further, the uncompleted improvements as well as possible
alternative solutions were studied in Chapter 4.3, Section 5(a)
of the Environmental Impact Report for the 1998-2010
Comprehensive Plan, which was certified by the City Council on
July 20, 1998. The intersections recognized as necessary to
mitigate the impacts of ongoing development in the Stanford
Research Park/El Camino Rea! CS zone were set forth in the 1998-
2010 Comprehensive Plan.
(d)The estimated costs of construction have
increased substantially subsequent to adoption of Ordinance No.
3894. A study by Korve Engineering dated June 2001, entitled
"Estimated Cost of Capacity Improvements for Stanford Research
Park/El Camino Real Service Commercial (CS) Zone,< a copy of
which is on file in the office of the Chief Transportation
Official, and to which copy reference is hereby made for the
full particulars thereof, has updated the estimated costs of
those improvements that staff has identified as currently
meeting the needs identified in the Citywide EIR and Ordinance
No. 3894 and as updated by the 1998-2010 Comprehensive Pla~~.
(e) This ordinance sets forth a revised l~st. of
improvements to be funded by the fee established by Ordinance
No. 3894, as well as their costs, and increases the amount of
the fee to be paid by applicable development projects. "
SECTION 2. Section 16.45.060. of Chapter 16.45, Title 16
[Building Regulations] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby
amended to read as follows:
16.45..060 Calculation of transportation impact fee.
(a)Capacity improvements at the. designated
intersections and estimated cost thereof. The following capacity
improvements were identified in the EIR (pages IV.B-50 through
85) and in Chapter 4.3L Section 5{.a) of the Environmental Impact
~P o__r~_~_~ h 9_.~.9~_~._<.~Q..~_~.9~h.9~ s ~_y_ ~ ~.~ a~_.
Intersection Number
and Name
Capacity Improvement*Est. Cost
B-5
turn ~ ~..... ; close
(
Page Mill
Expressway/Hanover
Street
Add southbound right-turn
lane; restripe northbound
approach
C-I Middlefield Road/
Oregon
Expressway
Add north- and south-bound
left turn lanes
~ Miranda;.cl~-~- ~
shared lancs
138,000
020313 sm 0032532
way/Arastradero/
Miranda
Add additional westbound
lane on Arastradero at
Miranda to provide two
left-turn lanes, two
throuqh lanes and a
riqht-turn lane at Foothill.
,D-2(a)Page Mill
Expressway/
E1 Camino Real
Add right-turn lanes all
approaches
005 ~’~Total Estimated Cost of Capacity Improvements $4,~ ,~
$14,690,773
Notes:
* Full descriptions of the capacity improvements are
contained ....... <~ o_<G .~ ..... Z O1 ~4 ~h~ ETD ~ 4~ 0~4
VI.D of thc EIR Final Addcndumin Chapter 4 3, Section 5(a) of
the EIR for the 1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan..
** The estimated cost of the capacity improvements reflect
the Comprehensive Plan EIR estimates, revised in accordance with
current rates, as set forth in a report entitled "~ .....
Concul~antc"Estima~ed Cost Of Ca.pacigi._Z__m_provements for Stanford
Ee~Agch_p~.k_!E1 Camino Real Service Coraraercial ~_[ Zone~2
Prepared bg Korne Engineering, ~une 2.001
(b) Estimated Development. Approximately one million
seven hundred ninety-four thousand gross square feet of new
development is estimated to occur under the zoning regulations
established for the area. This figure represents the realistic,
long-term, maximum development potential of the area, taking
into consideration the existing roadway network, the planned
capacity improvements and the planned transportation demand
management program.
020313 sm 0032532
(c) Calculation of Fee. In order for new
nonresidential development in the area to bear proportionately
the cost of the identified capacity improvements, suoh new
development shall pay a fee of {-we--9__i~__dollars and ~"
~i~e~~ cents per gross square foot of devel~pment,
determined by dividing the total estimated cost of four million
two hundred eighty-five thousand dollars by the tota! permitted
new development of one million seven hundred ninety-four
thousand square feet. This fee shall be adjusted annually on
July i, 19~n ~ ......i~,,~ ....~ by............... ~ ...........an amount equal to the
change in the construction cost index for the preceding year, as
determined by the Engineering News Record, the McGraw Hill
Construction Weekly.
(d)Payment. The fee shall be paid in-full to the
city building inspection division prior~ to issuance of the
building permit for the development. If no building permit is
required for a change of use, the fee shall be paid in full
prior to issuance of a certificate of use and occupancy.
ie)Special Fund. There is established a special
Stanford Research Park!El Camino Real CS Zone Fund into which
all fees, and any interest thereon, collected pursuant to this
chapter, shall be deposited in a separate capital facilities
account in a manner to avoid any commingling of the fees with
other revenues and funds, of the city. Upon receipt and entry to
the accounting records for the fund, such moneys, shall be
considered committed to the designated improvements or
alternative improvements in accordance with subsections (f)and
(g) hereof.
(f) Use of Fund. The moneys in the fund shallbe
eligible for expenditure only for the capacity improvementsat
the designated intersections, as direct expenditures,or
reimbursements if improvements are constructed prior.to deposit
of moneys into the fund, or for alternative improvements or
alternative intersections that are determined by the chief
transportation official, subject to the approval of the city
council, to provide adequate feasible alternative mitigation of
those impacts addressed in the EIR that are proposed to be
mitigated .by the capacity ~mprovements in subsection (a) hereof.
In no event shall fund moneys be used for regular road
maintenance. The priority for spending moneys in the fund among
the eight intersections shall be determined by the chief
transportation official.
020313 sm 0032532
(g) Budget Approval. The uses .proposed for
expenditure by the moneys in the fund shall be reviewed 9nnually
by the city council along with its review of the capital
improvement program, and fund moneys shall be appropriated for
such expenditure in the manner provided for adoption ..of the
annual budget.by the charter of the city.
SECTION 3. The changes effected by this ordinance are
consistent with the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the
1998-2010 Comprehensive Plan, which was certified by the City
Council on July. 20, 1998. Individual projects which may be
required to pay the ~ee shall be subject to appropriate
environmental review.
SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be effective 30 days
after the date of its adoption.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mayor
APPROVED:
Senior Asst. City Attorney City Manager
Director of Planning &
Community Environment
Director of Administrative
Services