HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-03-02 City Council Agenda PacketCITY OF PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
MARCH 2, 2015
Special Meeting
Council Chambers
6:05 PM
Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the
Council Chambers on the Thursday preceding the meeting.
1 March 2, 2015
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public may speak to agendized items; up to three minutes per speaker, to be
determined by the presiding officer. If you wish to address the Council on any issue that is on this
agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council
Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give
your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council, but it is very helpful.
TIME ESTIMATES
Time estimates are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings.
Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is
in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order
of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after
the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the time at a meeting or
to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest
arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item is called.
HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW
Applications and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to
make their remarks and up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public
have spoken.
Call to Order
Study Session 6:05-7:05 PM
1.Study Session on Shuttle and Rideshare Program for the Future
(Continued from February 2, 2015)
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
City Manager Comments 7:05-7:15 PM
Oral Communications 7:15-7:30 PM
Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of
Oral Communications period to 30 minutes.
Minutes Approval 7:30-7:35 PM
December 1, 2014
December 2, 2014
REVISED
2 March 2, 2015
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER
DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY
CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
December 8, 2014
Consent Calendar 7:35-7:40 PM
Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members.
2.Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract C12143475 with Alta
Planning + Design to Extend the Contract Term to December 31, 2015
for the Safe Routes to School Planning Project
3.Approval and Authorization for the City Manager to Execute an Electric
Fund Construction Contract with MP Nexlevel of California, Inc., in the
Amount of $1,697,836.50, for Trenching and Installation of Utility
Substructures for Underground Utility District No. 47 (Project: EL-
11010) in the Area of Middlefield Road, Homer Avenue, Webster
Street, and Addison Avenue; and Approval and Authorization for the
City Manager to Execute Addendum No. 2 to the Agreement for Joint
Participation in the Installation of the Underground Facilities System
Between the City of Palo Alto, AT&T, and Comcast Corporation of
California IX, Inc.
4.Adoption of a Resolution Designating 300 Homer Street Known as the
Roth Building as a “Sender Site” in the Transfer of Development Rights
(TDR) Program and Direction to Staff to Advertise Request for Proposal
to Market the TDRs
5.Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council
Adopt a Resolution Approving the City of Palo Alto Utilities Legislative
Guidelines
6.Appeal of Director of Planning and Community Environment’s
Architectural and Historic Review Approval of a Rehabilitation of a
Category 3 Historic Resource located at 261 Hamilton – Request for
Continuance to April 6, 2015
7.Approval of Amendment Number 3 to Contract C08125506 with The
Planning Center ¦ DCE, now Known as Placeworks, to Increase the
Contract by $157,525 to an Amount Not to Exceed $1,894,731 and
Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) to Increase the
Fiscal Year 2015 Appropriation to the Planning and Community
Environment Department for Preparation of a Fiscal Study in
Conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan Update
3 March 2, 2015
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER
DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY
CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Action Items
Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials,
Unfinished Business and Council Matters.
7:40-7:45 PM
8.Public Hearing: On Objections to Weed Abatement and Adoption of
Resolution #9489 Ordering Weed Nuisance Abated
7:45-8:15 PM
9.Public Hearing: Adoption of a Resolution Amending Water, Gas and
Wastewater Connection and Capacity Fees and Miscellaneous Utility
Charges (Utility Rate Schedules S-5, G-5, W-5 and C-1)
8:15-11:15 PM
10.Discussion and Direction to Staff Regarding Establishment of an
Office/R&D Annual Growth Limit (Continued from February 9, 2015)
Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Members of the public may not speak to the item(s)
Adjournment
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA)
Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may
contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance.
4 March 2, 2015
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER
DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY
CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Additional Information
Standing Committee Meetings
Public Improvement Corporation 3/2/15 6:00 PM
Finance Committee Meeting 3/3/15 7:00 PM
Schedule of Meetings
Schedule of Meetings
Tentative Agenda
Tentative Agenda
Informational Report
Update and Impacts From Implementation of Palo Alto's Checkout Bag
Ordinance (Chapter 5.35 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Regarding
Retail and Food Service Establishment Checkout Bag Requirements)
Update on Palo Alto Animal Shelter and Follow up From Finance
Committee on December 2, 2014
Public Letters to Council
SET 1 SET 2
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5376)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Study Session Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Palo Alto Shuttle and Rideshare Program for the Future
Title: Study Session on Shuttle and Rideshare Program for the Future
(Continued from February 2, 2015)
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
This study session is intended as an opportunity to explore the future of the Palo Alto shuttle
and rideshare programs that could dramatically reduce the use of single occupant vehicles over
time. No action is recommended.
Executive Summary
Palo Alto has had its own shuttle system for many years, providing “last mile” connections to
and from Caltrain, and “community shuttle” routes for use by students, seniors, and other
riders interested in accessing destinations along the routes.
Palo Also shuttle service complements transit services provided by the Valley Transportation
Authority (VTA), as well as shuttle services provided by Stanford University and private
companies. Currently, the City has three shuttle routes: the Embarcadero Route (partially
funded by Caltrain), the Crosstown Route, and the East Palo Alto Route (funded by the City of
East Palo Alto). In October 2014, the City Council authorized an expansion of service to
increase frequency on the Crosstown Route, and to add a fourth route, called the West Route,
from the University Caltrain Station into the Shoreline Business District in the City of Mountain
View. The West Route will be partially funded by private entities along the route.1
When the City Council discussed the expanded service in October, they requested a number of
follow-up actions, which are addressed in this staff report, and also requested a broader
discussion regarding the future of the City’s shuttle system and emerging trends such as
1 The City’s shuttle service provider, MV Transportation is under contract until June 30, 2017, and the contract
amendments and funding agreements necessary to implement the expanded service will appear on the Council’s
consent agenda in the coming weeks.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
rideshare services that could potentially offer a more convenient “on demand” service,
potentially resulting in a greater shift away from single occupant vehicles.
These topics are also discussed in this staff report, and have come to the fore due to their
potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation sources if pursued as part of
the ongoing update to the City’s Sustainability/Climate Action Plan. Shuttle service and
rideshare concepts are also relevant to the ongoing process of forming a Transportation
Management Association (TMA), which will provide information and incentives designed to
encourage alternatives to the private automobile, and could ultimately assume responsibility
for funding and managing contracts for transit/rideshare programs.
Background
The City of Palo Alto has historically provided free shuttle service via a shuttle program that
included two shuttle routes: the Crosstown Shuttle Route and the Embarcadero Shuttle Route
(which is 75% funded by Caltrain). In 2014, the Phase One expansion of the Palo Alto Shuttle
Program introduced a new shuttle route in partnership with the City of East Palo Alto, bringing
the total number of shuttle routes in the program to three routes.
The Crosstown Shuttle provides a north-south transit connection from Charleston Road to the
University Avenue Caltrain station along Middlefield Road and several community
neighborhoods. This route serves both JLS and Jordan middle schools during the morning and
afternoon bell schedules. Crosstown Route currently operates on one-hour headway during
most of the day, except for the morning and mid-afternoon school bell schedule period when
there is additional service to support school activity. This route is funded 100% by the City’s
General Fund and operates Monday through Friday, excluding some holidays, from 7:40AM-
5:30PM.
The Embarcadero Shuttle connects the business parks on the east side of the City along
Embarcadero Road to the University Avenue Caltrain Station. The City currently contracts with
the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) for the Embarcadero Shuttle, which is a part of
the Caltrain peak hour commuter shuttle program and subsidized 75% by the JPB. The
remainder 25% is subsidized by Palo Alto (the General Fund). The shuttle operates on 15-
minute headway Monday through Friday from 6:50AM-9:50AM and 3:10PM-6:50PM, excluding
some holidays. The Embarcadero Shuttle includes a Special Run to Jordan Middle School to
supplement the Crosstown Shuttle Routes demand for transit service to the school.
The East Palo Alto Route began operation on July 1, 2014 and links the University Avenue
Caltrain Station with Woodland Avenue community in East Palo Alto. This route is fully funded
by the City of East Palo Alto but is managed by the City of Palo Alto. This route operates on 30-
minutes headways, seven days per week, excluding some holidays, from approximately 6:00AM
to 10:00AM and 4:00PM-9:00PM.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
In October 2014, the City Council adopted a motion supporting a “phase two” expansion of the
City’s Shuttle Program to include increasing frequency of service on the Crosstown Shuttle
Route from 60 minutes to 30 minutes, and establishment of a new West Shuttle Route from the
University Caltrain Station into the Shoreline Business District in Mountain View once private-
sector funding could be obtained to off-set the costs. A separate agenda item planned for later
in March will amend the contract with the City’s current service provider MV Transportation
and include other actions (funding agreements and a Budget Amendment Ordinance) so that
these increases in service can be implemented this spring. The City Manager will also be
exploring potential participation in the shuttle program with the school district.
Based on ridership information provided by the shuttle operators, staff calculated the cost per
rider metrics for the following:
Table 1. Palo Alto Shuttle Service – Estimated Cost per Rider
For Fiscal Year 2013-2014
Ridership City’s Total Cost Cost per Rider
Embarcadero 48,619 $51,716.35 $1.06
Crosstown Regular 74,089 $138,231.51 $1.87
Crosstown School 11,591 $9,725.49 $0.84
Total for Both
Routes Combined
134,299 $199,673.35 $1.49
Source: Department of Planning & Community Environment, December 2014
City of Palo Alto has successfully partnered with various online mapping websites such as
Google Maps, BING Maps and HERE Maps to include Crosstown and Embarcadero shuttle
information on their Transit Maps. With shuttle data such as stop locations, route and schedule
available on these Transit websites, Palo Alto visitors and regular shuttle users are able to plan
their trips using this technology. The trip planning websites include one-stop transfer
information for trips throughout the region since Caltrain, AC Transit, Valley Transportation
Authority, Stanford Marguerite and others are included in the Trip Planner. As a result,
potential riders do not need to consult bus and rail schedules from various transit operators.
At the Council’s request, following the October 2014 discussion, staff did an analysis of the
existing transit service available in Stanford Research Park and found that this area is connected
to San Francisco, San Jose and within Palo Alto through various operators. VTA operates line 89
between California Avenue Caltrain station and Palo Alto Veterans Hospital. It also operates
lines 101, 102, 103, 104 and 182 from various parts of San Jose to the Research Park. Line R, RP,
1050A and VA Tram line runs within Stanford and Palo Alto and is operated by Stanford
Marguerite Shuttle. AC Transit operates Dumbarton Express from East Bay to the Research
Park. Deer Creek Shuttle is a Caltrain shuttle that runs between the California Ave. Caltrain
Station and Deer Creek area office buildings during commute hours. The shuttle is funded
jointly by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Transportation Fund for Clean Air,
Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board and Hewlett-Packard.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
In addition, earlier this year, RidePal launched two bus lines (18 and 28) to Stanford Research
Park from San Francisco in partnership with VMWare. RidePal is a transportation service that
offers corporate commute bus services for companies and individuals in the San Francisco Bay
Area and works on a shared mobility or collaborative consumption model for corporate
commuters. The routes are planned based on commuter demand and geography.
Discussion
At their October 2014 discussion, the City Council requested that staff return with plans to build
a user-friendly application and “explore what kind of alternative technology exists that we can
use that would open up the taxi/van information world to single person travel from home to
destination.” The discussion below summarizes the shuttle program enhancements planned for
this year, and a list of alternative technologies that are quickly evolving to address mobility in
urban settings.
Shuttle Program: Next Steps
In addition to the service expansions described above (increased frequency on the Crosstown
Route and addition of the West Route this spring), staff is planning to enable GPS tracking of
shuttle vehicles via a mobile application this year, and undertake design improvements and
marketing of the program including schedules, stops, vehicles and the website. The goal is to
make shuttle services both more convenient and better known—two key elements in increasing
their ridership and utilization.
Live tracking of Shuttles
City’s current contract with MV Transportation includes a GPS-based tracking system called
Time Point Software that allows users to track the bus online to help schedule travel time to
designated pick-up stations. The software has been undergoing some developmental changes
over the last few months and is now nearing completion. The redesigned mobile site with new
features and modernized user interface will be released by end of this fiscal year for Crosstown
and East Palo Alto Shuttle routes.
Staff also discussed the possibility of adding Palo Alto Shuttle information on NextBus, which is
a vehicle tracking system which uses global positioning satellite information to provide real-
time passenger information and predicts when the next bus will arrive at any given bus stop.
Each vehicle is fitted with a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver, which transmits speed
and location data to a central location where a computer running proprietary software
calculates the projected arrival times for all stops in the system using this data along with
configuration information and historic travel times. These times are then converted to a 'wait
time' and made available via the NextBus website and electronic signs at bus stops as well as
cell phones, and other wireless devices via the Internet. Staff also met with representatives
from DoubleMap, which provides a solution very similar to NextBus in offering real-time
tracking solutions for the shuttle vehicles. Stanford has been using DoubleMap solutions since
2013 for routes within the Stanford Marguerite system that serve the Medical Center.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Another company, TransitScreen, is a start-up firm that develops software displaying real-time
transportation options at any given location, typically on flat screens in building lobbies.
TransitScreen is a web application featuring and can be displayed on devices such as TVs,
computers, tablets but currently this is not available as an application for smartphones.
Installing screens at places with lots of pedestrian activity such as City Hall and Mitchell Park
Library would make transportation information more accessible and viewable by commuters,
visitors, residents and employees so they can make informed transit choices.
RideScout is an example of a growing number of apps that use the General Transit Feed Spec
(GTFS) pioneered by Google to provide enhanced transit services—in this case an app that
provides point-to-point “real-time” travel options, schedules, travel times and costs.
Coordinated Design & Marketing
The City’s shuttle system is well used, but not well known. Staff plans to raise its visibility with
design changes, and will be seeking professional design services this year. The selected
consultant will be tasked with upgrading and integrating the look and feel of printed and
electronic materials, and may also recommend changes to stop locations and shuttle vehicles.
The City’s contract with MV Transportation includes provisions for updating vehicle “wraps” if
desired.
Rideshare Alternatives
There are multiple technologies that have recently expanded the traditional ridesharing
concept to facilitate a service available to broader community, and this is a fast growing area of
investment and innovation. Technologies are reinventing the way people are getting around in
their communities, providing safe, reliable and affordable choices for consumers; creating
flexible economic opportunities for drivers; and improving cities by increasing the utilization of
existing resources to make transportation more efficient. As an example, staff recently met
with representative from Lyft and will be meeting with proponents of “Mobility as a Service” in
the days just before the March 2, 2015 study session.
Lyft is a private, San Francisco–based transportation network company. The company's mobile-
phone application facilitates peer-to-peer ridesharing by connecting passengers who need a
ride to drivers who have a car. Lyft currently operates in about 65 U.S. cities, including San
Francisco. Lyft Line is one of the ways offered by Lyft that enables a person to connect with
nearby people who are headed in the same direction so they can share their commute.
Multiple people share the costs of the journey and reduce traffic and emissions in the
community. Based on pickup and drop-off locations entered by the rider, a Line ride is created
and multiple members of the community are chained together. Lyft Line prices are calculated
using a combination of distance and time and the cost to operate is on a per ride basis.
Businesses and cities can encourage this service by making discounted rides available to
patrons or residents.
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Mobility as a Service (MaaS) is a software-based, online enterprise mobility solution that is
envisioned as a seamless, door-to-door combination of transportation mode—including public
& private transit, bikeshare, rideshare, carshare, vanpool, taxi, employer commute benefits,
electric scooter/bike lease, pay-by-phone parking, future robo-taxis—designed to outcompete
private auto ownership. The “Mobility Operator” would aggregate all services into a unified
smartphone app with easy fare payment, one-stop billing, and innovative subscription pricing.
MaaS would dissolve the boundaries between different transport modes, providing a more
customer-centered experience while improving the efficiency of the entire transport system.
Staff is exploring, with Helsinki, Finland Ministry of Transport, Tekes (the Finnish Funding
Agency for Innovation) and Joint Venture Silicon Valley the potential piloting of MaaS in this
region. The program summary for MaaS is available as attachment B.
One element of the MaaS solution that could be piloted separately is the KutsuPlus system of
dynamically re-routable shuttles now being tested in Helsinki—a hybrid of taxi and bus service
that’s priced between the two, that’s “able to route-plan on the fly as requests come in and
cluster passengers going in similar directions.” A Fast Company article describing the service is
available at http://bit.ly/1oHt2C4
Staff is interested in the City Council’s thoughts about partnering with a private company or
joining a regional consortium to test or explore these issues, potentially as part of the TMA’s
initial pilot projects. The City could also compare these options to a more traditional public “on
demand” paratransit service. With “on demand” paratransit, riders call for door to door
service, and the cost per rider could be greater than with the current, fixed route service.
Timeline
Implementation of increased service on the Crosstown Shuttle and implementation of the new
West Shuttle route are expected this spring. The City’s current contract with its shuttle service
provider, MV Transportation, extends through June 30, 2017 and any significant changes or
alternatives to shuttle service should be studied between now and then to inform decision
making at that time.
Resource Impact
The City Council set aside $1 million in an earmarked reserve as part of the FY 2015 Adopted
Budget for the City’s shuttle program. This amount was set aside for expected increases to the
annual cost of shuttle services and only a portion of the reserve will be needed for the current
fiscal year. Included in the FY 2015 Midyear budget request is $8,660 for additional shuttle
expenses incurred during the fiscal year. In spring 2015, staff will request $25,000 from the
shuttle reserve to expand the frequency of the Crosstown Route, and may also request funds
for the West Shuttle, which is intended to be partially or wholly funded by private industry. For
Fiscal Year 2016, the shuttle service will include the enhanced Crosstown Route, the
Embarcadero Route, and the newly added East Palo Alto Route for a total cost of $585,773
offset with $218,983 in revenue from City of East Palo Alto.
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Policy Implications
The City Council has indicated its desire to invest in transportation demand management
strategies, parking management and parking supply initiatives as a way to address traffic and
parking demand and reduce the City’s carbon footprint. Transit services like the free Palo Alto
shuttle can provide an attractive alternative to single occupancy vehicles for work- and non-
work trips, as well as meeting the needs of those for whom driving is not an option.
Environmental Review
No decision is anticipated as part of this study session and no review is required under the
California Environmental Quality Act.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Program Summary for MaaS (PDF)
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5519)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Alta Planning + Design Contract Amendment
Title: Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract C12143475 with Alta
Planning + Design to Extend the Contract Term to December 31, 2015 for the
Safe Routes to School Planning Project
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute
Amendment No. Two to Contract C12143475 (Attachment A) with Alta Planning + Design (Alta
Planning) to extend the contract term from December 31, 2014, to December 31, 2015.
Executive Summary
The proposed action would extend the term of an existing contract and would not require any
additional resources.
Background
In October 2010, the City submitted an application for funding of non-infrastructure Safe
Routes to School (SRTS) program enhancements through the Valley Transportation Authority
(VTA) - Vehicle Emission Reductions Based at Schools (VERBS) program. The City was awarded a
$528,000 grant that, added to the City’s $132,000 local match fund, provided for a $660,000
project that has significantly expanded the City’s Safe Routes to School program. On February
21, 2012, the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute a contract with Alta Planning
for Safe Routes to School program enhancements (CMR 2489). Since execution of the original
contract, a six-month extension was approved administratively from June 30, 2014 to
December 31, 2014.
Summary of Key Issues
Walking and biking to PAUSD public schools have greatly increased in recent years, due mostly
to successful education and encouragement programs. This project builds on those past
successes and introduces new program elements. Due to unforeseen delays in the production
and review of project deliverables and the inability to identify additional qualified staff to assist
City of Palo Alto Page 2
with the unexpected high workload caused by the project’s success, the project has extended
beyond the consultant’s contract termination date. Staff requests a one-year time extension on
the contract with Alta Planning to complete the work. Funds remain in the contract, and staff is
asking for a time-only extension which will allow the City to obtain the remaining grant funds
from the VTA-VERBS grant.
City staff and Alta Planning have made significant progress on the work scope of this
agreement. Specifically, Alta Planning has:
developed two Parent/Caregiver Safe Routes to School surveys and provided the
analysis for the baseline survey
completed walk and bike safety audits at 17 Palo Alto Unified School District schools
produced Walk and Roll Maps of Suggested Routes for each campus in addition to maps
of recommended improvements for both City- and School-owned facilities
updated the City's third- and fifth-grade bicycle safety curricula, including production of
new educational videos and extensive upgrades to the third-grade bike rodeo materials.
drafted school-transportation-policy guidance for elements such as reduced speed limit
zones near schools and establishment criteria for adult crossing guards based on data
collection and industry-standard best practices
Tasks still to be completed under this agreement include:
analysis of the second Parent/Caregiver Safe Routes to School survey
completion of the Encouragement materials toolkit
initiation of the walk/bike audit for the Monroe Park neighborhood and production of
the Walk and Roll to School Suggested Routes and Recommended Improvement maps
development of bicycle safety education curricula for parents and middle school
students
development of website content
While staff and the consultant team have worked steadily to complete contract work,
additional time is needed to complete the remaining tasks. The project was delayed while staff
worked on reviewing consultant deliverables and carrying out the usual SRTS program
activities. Because the usual bike and pedestrian safety education program requires the need
to coordinate with the school calendar, some project elements had to be delayed until city staff
completed their usual work with the schools and were available to work on grant items. In
some cases, consultant work needed several rounds of review, which further delayed the
project schedule.
The project has been very successful and has raised the visibility of the Safe Routes to School
program, stretching the capacity of the City staff. As a result of the community outreach
process around Walk and Roll map development, staff has been involved in an unanticipated
amount of follow-up and engagement with our school partners. A much more active
partnership with PAUSD and PTA volunteers focused on making improvements for students is a
City of Palo Alto Page 3
positive outcome of this project. For example, in order to take advantage of time-limited Bay
Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) funds, City staff successfully acquired grants
valued at approximately $30,000 for PAUSD to improve on-campus bicycle parking at three
schools. These bike parking grants were prioritized ahead of other grant-funded activities in
order to meet funding deadlines and contributed to the delay of the VERBS project.
In 2013, the Transportation Division recruited for additional SRTS staff but was unable to
identify qualified candidates for hire. Another effort to hire additional staff is currently
underway.
Policy Implications
Extending the term of the existing contract is consistent with Council policy. This project is
consistent with key transportation goals in the City’s Comprehensive Plan, including giving
priority to facilities, services, and programs that encourage and promote walking and bicycling,
and to providing a high level of safety for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists on Palo Alto
streets. Specific policies and program include:
Policy T-14: Improve pedestrian and bicycle access to and between local destinations,
including public facilities, schools, parks, open space, employment districts, shopping
centers, and multi-modal transit stations.
Policy T-39: To the extent allowed by law, continue to make safety the first priority of
citywide transportation planning.
Policy T-40: Continue to prioritize the safety and comfort of children on school travel
routes. This includes program T-45, which calls for providing adult crossing guards at
school crossings that meet adopted criteria, and T-46, which encourages the City-
sponsored bicycle education programs in the public schools.
Resource Impact
This contract is fully budgeted. The contract time extension does not require any additional
funds to complete all necessary work.
Timeline
Remaining contract tasks will be completed by December 31, 2015.
Environmental Review
The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section
15061 and 15301.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Alta Planning & Design Contract Amendment 2 (PDF)
Attachment B: CMR 2489 dated February 21, 2012 on Alta Planning Agreement (PDF)
1 of 1 Revision April 28, 2014
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. C12143475
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND
ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN
This Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. C12143475 (“Contract”) is entered into
February 9, 2015, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal
corporation (“CITY”), and ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN, a California corporation, located at 100
Webster Street, Suite 300, Oakland, California, 94607, Telephone Number (510)540-5008
("CONSULTANT").
R E C I T A L S
A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of the
expansion of the Safe Routes to School program.
B. CITY intends to extend the term to December 31, 2015
C. The parties wish to amend the Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and
provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree:
SECTION 1. Section 2 is hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 2. TERM
The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through
December 31, 2015 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this
Agreement.”
SECTION 2. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract,
including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives
executed this Amendment on the date first above written.
CITY OF PALO ALTO
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN
DocuSign Envelope ID: 6293580A-3320-4055-A203-5A333A366E24
Principal
City of Palo Alto (ID # 2489)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/21/2012
February 21, 2012 Page 1 of 4
(ID # 2489)
Summary Title: Safe Routes to School Contract -Alta Planning
Title: Approval of a Contract Agreement with Alta Planning & Design in the
Amount of $400,000 to Develop a New Safe Routes to School Program
From:City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract
with Alta Planning + Design (Attachment A) in the total amount not to exceed $400,000 for
professional services related to the Safe Routes to School program enhancements funded by
the grant from the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) -Vehicle Emission Reductions Based
at Schools (VERBS) Program.
Background
The City’s “4 E’s” program focusing on school commute safety began in the 1990s, when
increasing vehicle congestion around public schools led to new Education and Encouragement
elements at school sites and reinforced the longstanding priorities for Engineering and
Enforcement along school commute routes. Since 2005, the City’s programs have formed the
basis for a growing Safe Routes to School partnership between the City, the Palo Alto Unified
School District and Parent –Teacher Association volunteers.
In October 2010, the City submitted an application for funding of non-infrastructure Safe
Routes to School program enhancements through the VTA-VERBS Program. The City was
awarded a $528,000 grant that, when matched with the City’s $132,000 local match fund,
provide for a $660,000 project that will significantly expand the City’s Safe Routes to School
program. Walking and biking to PAUSD public schools have greatly increased in recent years,
due mostly to successful education and encouragement programs. This project will build on
those past successes and introduce new program elements.
Discussion
This contract strengthens the Enforcement, Education, and Encouragement elements of the
current Safe Routes to School program and adds a fifth “E” for Evaluation.
Alta Planning + Design, through this project, will assist the City in expanding its Safe Routes to
School program, including:
February 21, 2012 Page 2 of 4
(ID # 2489)
a)comprehensive Walk and Roll to School maps for each of the 17 public schools in the Palo
Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) and for the south Palo Alto neighborhood served by
public schools in the City of Los Altos;
b) new school-transportation-policy guidance for elements such as reduced speed limit zones
(15-to 20 MPH) near schools and establishment criteria for adult crossing guards based on
data collection and industry-standard best practices;
c) evaluation and update of the existing bicycle safety education curriculum in PAUSD
schools, and expansion of what is offered for middle school students and parents; and
d) evaluation of the impact of the Safe Routes to School program on improving school
commute safety as well as reducing peak period congestion and related greenhouse gas
emissions.
Table 1 below provides a summary of the Request for Proposals (RFP) solicitation process used
by the City to help select Alta Planning + Design as the recommended consultant for award of
the project.
Table 1
Summary of Solicitation Process
Request for Proposals (RFP) Task Task Duration/Info
Proposed Length of Project Approximately 2 years (through June 2014)
RFP Release Date September 22, 2011
Number of Proposals Mailed 12
Total Days to Respond to RFP 41 Days
Pre-proposal Meeting Date October 6, 2011
No. of Attendees at Pre-proposal Meeting 9
Proposal Submittal Deadline October 25, 2011
Number of Proposals Received:4
Proposal Respondents Location (City, State)Selected for Oral
Interview?
Alta Planning + Design Berkeley, CA Yes
Fehr and Peers Walnut Creek, CA Yes
RBF Consulting Walnut Creek, CA No
VentanaEdu Fremont, CA No
The City received four proposals in response to the RFP. Proposals were evaluated against the
following set of criteria:
·Quality and completeness of proposal
·Quality, performance and effectiveness of the solution and/or services to be provided
by Proposer
·Proposer’s experience, including the experience of staff to be assigned to the project,
the engagements of similar scope and complexity
·Cost to the city
February 21, 2012 Page 3 of 4
(ID # 2489)
·Proposer’s financial stability
·Proposer’s ability to perform the work within the time specified
·Proposer’s prior record of performance with the city or others
·Proposer’s compliance with applicable laws, regulations, policies (including city council
policies), guidelines and orders governing prior or existing contracts performed by the
contractor
The Proposal Evaluation Committee included members from the City Department of Planning
and Community Environment staff and one representative each from the Palo Alto Police
Department, the Palo Alto Unified School District, and the Traffic Safety Committee of the Palo
Alto Council of Parent Teacher Associations (PTAs). This committee reviewed the proposals and
recommended two consultant teams for oral interviews held on November 15, 2011.
The same proposal review committee interviewed the short-list consultant teams and
recommended Alta Planning + Design for award of this project because of their extensive
background in the completion of similar projects, track record in innovation in the development
of safe route to school programs, and understanding of Palo Alto issues through their work on
the Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan.
Public Outreach
The award of this contract was coordinated with the City’s Safe Routes to School partners on
the City/School Traffic Safety Committee. After initiation of the project, a more extensive
community outreach plan for implementation will be developed that includes a minimum of
two community meetings for the development of Walk and Roll Maps for each of the 18 PAUSD
public schools. The project will also include a focused South Palo Alto Safe Routes to School
analysis of walking and biking patterns to schools in Los Altos serving Palo Alto students.
Regular project updates will be made to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee, Palo Alto
Planning & Transportation Commission, City Council, and the PAUSD Board of Education.
Timeline
The Safe Routes to School project with Alta Planning + Design will begin in March 2012 and last
approximately two years. Additional Safe Routes to School program elements will be
implemented concurrently over that period including the deployment of bicycle and pedestrian
counting stations to monitor seasonal commuting trends at schools and the development of a
web-based carpool and trip share tool. Grant requirements from the VTA –VERBS Program
require all project elements to be completed by 2014.
Resource Impact
Funding for the project is included in the Capital Improvement Program project, PL-00026, Safe
Routes to School. On February 14, 2011 (ID# 1549), Council approved the Capital Improvements
Program (CIP) to fund the Safe Routes to School Program Development and Implementation.
This project is 80% reimbursed by the VTA –VERBS grant.
Policy Implications
February 21, 2012 Page 4 of 4
(ID # 2489)
This project is consistent with key transportation goals in the City’s Comprehensive Plan,
including giving priority to facilities, services and programs that encourage and promote
walking and bicycling, and to providing a high level of safety for motorists, pedestrians and
bicyclists on Palo Alto streets. Specific policies and programs include:
·Policy T-14: Improve pedestrian and bicycle access to and between local
destinations, including public facilities, schools, parks, open space, employment districts,
shopping centers and multi-modal transit stations.
·Policy T-39: To the extent allowed by law, continue to make safety the first
priority of citywide transportation planning.
·Policy T-40: Continue to prioritize the safety and comfort of children on school travel routes.
This includes program T-45, which calls for providing adult crossing guards at school
crossings that meet adopted criteria, and T-46, which encourages the City-sponsored bicycle
education programs in the public schools.
Environmental Review
This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to
Section 15061 and 15301 .
Attachments:
·Attachment A: Agreement Between City of Palo Alto and Alta Planning & Design Services
(PDF)
Prepared By:Jaime Rodriguez, Chief Transportation Official
Department Head:Curtis Williams, Director
City Manager Approval: ____________________________________
James Keene, City Manager
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 20101
CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C12143475
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN, INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
This Agreement is entered into on this 21st day of February 2012, (“Agreement”) by
and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”),
and ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN, INC., a California corporation, located at 2560 9th Street, Suite
212, Berkeley, CA 94710 ("CONSULTANT").
RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement.
A. CITY intends to expand its Safe Routes to School program (“Project”) and desires to engage
a consultant in connection with the Project (“Services”).
B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise,
qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services.
C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the
Services as more fully described in Exhibit “A”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in
this Agreement, the parties agree:
AGREEMENT
SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in
Exhibit “A” in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The
performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY.
SECTION 2. TERM.
The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through June 30, 2014 unless
terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement.
SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B”,
attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are
not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a
reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to
the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall
not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of
CONSULTANT.
Professional Services Rev. June 2, 2010 2
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to
CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both
payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Three Hundred
Thirty Thousand Six Hundred Forty Five Dollars ($330,645). In the event Additional Services
are authorized, the total compensation for services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed
Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are
set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and
made a part of this Agreement.
Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of
Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed
without the prior written authorization of CITY.
SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly
invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an
identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and
reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT’s billing rates (set forth in Exhibit “C-1”).
If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The
information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY.
CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in
Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of
receipt.
SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be
performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents
that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required
by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services
assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted,
have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications,
insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services.
All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the
professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of
similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar
circumstances.
SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and
in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may
affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform
Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all
charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services.
SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and
all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the deliverables submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives
notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design
documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct any and all errors,
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010 4
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project.
This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement.
SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works
project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of
design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%)
of the CITY’s stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to the
CITY for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved
recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY.
SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing
the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with
CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an
independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY.
SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of
CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or
transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations
hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not
be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval
of the city manager will be void.
SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING.
Subcontracts Authorized: Notwithstanding Section 11 above, CITY agrees that subconsultants
may be used to complete the Services. The subconsultants authorized by CITY to perform work on
this Project are:
Parisi Associates
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition
Bicycle Solutions
Collectively
Rich Swent
CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any
compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning
compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a
subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of
the city manager or his designee.
SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Brett Hondorp as
the principal-in-charge to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and
execution of the Services and as the Project Manager to represent CONSULTANT during the day-
to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project
coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project
director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010 4
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
written approval of the CITY’s project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall
promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner,
are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat
to the safety of persons or property.
The City’s project manager is Jaime Rodriguez, Planning & Community Environment Department,
Transportation Division, at 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301, Telephone:650-329-2136.
The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance,
progress and execution of the Services. The CITY may designate an alternate project manager from
time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including
without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents,
other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement as instruments of
professional services, shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or
limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the
work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and
relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY.
Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any
individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee.
CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or
application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time
during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records
pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and
retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this
Agreement.
SECTION 16. INDEMNITY.
16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect,
indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents
(each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any
nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all
costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and
disbursements (“Claims”) that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or
willful misconduct of the CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this
Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party.
16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to
require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active
negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party.
16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s services and duties by CITY shall not
operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010 5
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
the expiration or early termination of this Agreement.
SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant,
term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not
be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of
any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision,
ordinance or law.
SECTION 18. INSURANCE.
18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full
force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D".
CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an
additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies.
18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers
with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to
transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT
retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect
during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional
insured (except professional liability and workers compensation) under such policies as required
above.
18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently
with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk
Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not
be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the
Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification, CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Purchasing Manager during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions
of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be
obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as
a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss
arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired.
SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES.
19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or
in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written
notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately
discontinue its performance of the Services.
19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010 6
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of
a substantial failure of performance by CITY.
19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the
City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and
other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given
to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will
become the property of CITY.
19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by
the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will
survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25.
19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will
operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement.
SECTION 20. NOTICES.
All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by
certified mail, addressed as follows:
To CITY: Office of the City Clerk
City of Palo Alto
Post Office Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
With a copy to the Purchasing Manager
To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director
at the address of CONSULTANT recited above
SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has
no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would
conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services.
21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement,
it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT
certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer
or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010 7
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California.
21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” as
that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT
shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the
Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act.
SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section
2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not
discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion,
disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status,
weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the
provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination
Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section
2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment.
SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE
REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the City’s Environmentally Preferred
Purchasing policies which are available at the City’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by
reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste
reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of the City’s Zero Waste Program. Zero
Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third,
recycling or composting waste. In particular, Consultant shall comply with the following zero waste
requirements:
All printed materials provided by Consultant to City generated from a personal
computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices,
reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a
minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved
by the City’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional
printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer material and
printed with vegetable based inks.
Goods purchased by Consultant on behalf of the City shall be purchased in
accordance with the City’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not
limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and
packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Office.
Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by the Consultant, at no additional
cost to the City, for reuse or recycling. Consultant shall provide documentation from
the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed.
SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION
24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of
Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a)
at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year,
or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of
the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010 8
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this
Agreement.
SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California.
25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action
will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of
California.
25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this
Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that
action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral.
This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties.
25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply
to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the
parties.
25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this
Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this
Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect.
25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices,
attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any
duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be
deemed to be a part of this Agreement.
25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, City shares with
CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d)
about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and
appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City
immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the
security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct
marketing purposes without City’s express written consent.
25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement.
25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized
representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written,
CITY OF PALO ALTO ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN, INC.
City Manager ~ \A =-/5? . V
Name :---='6:.:.Y",,,, -".tt"'---JHo"",-,Y\'-!.d",o",-,Y,-"p,,--_
By:
APPROVED AS TO FORM: Title:_y-'-----"-,_n-=C(:..;' P"-I""'----'t..'-_ _ _
Senior Ass!. City Attomey
Attachments:
EXH IBIT "'A":
EXH IBIT "B":
EXHIBIT "C":
EXHIB IT "C-I":
EXHIB IT "D":
SCOPE OF WORK
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
COMPENSATION
SCHEDULE OF RATES
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
9
Professional SerYice,~
Rev.June2,2010
\\('c~lcrra\shD.n:d\ASf)\J>URCH\SOJ.l('lT A TIONS\CURRENT BUYER-C'M rOLDERS\OTllERS -MEUSSA\!43475 Sale
Roules\CI2143475.FinaLK.doc
Professional Services
Rev. June 2, 2010
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
EXHIBIT “A”
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Task 1 Ongoing Task: Project Management
1.1 Project Initiation
As part of project initiation, the Alta Team (hereinafter “Consultant”) will hold two initial
project kick-off meetings – one with Palo Alto City staff and one with the City/School Traffic
Safety Committee – and conduct follow-up as necessary to:
Modify the project scope and schedule (if appropriate)
Gather and/or identify critical data and potential sources, and
Confirm the list of stakeholders
Based on the project kick-off meeting, the Consultant shall revise draft project schedule shown in Exhibit B of this Agreement, and develop a contact list of stakeholders for the project.
1.2 Project Management
Over the course of the project, the Consultant shall attend monthly progress meetings in person with City staff to ensure that the project is moving ahead on schedule. During critical phases of the project the Consultant shall meet more frequently via phone conference or in person, as needed, to complete project tasks. The Consultant shall use an Open Item Status Report (OISR) to track all ongoing project tasks and deliverables that clearly identifies the task and responsible staff person for each task item. The OISR shall be submitted every two weeks to the City to
document completed tasks, forecast schedule impacts, and highlight critical tasks. In addition to
bi-weekly submittals of the OISR, the OISR shall also be submitted to the City two working days
in advance of monthly progress meetings, community meetings, and as requested by the City.
All subconsultant work products, budgets and schedules will be managed directly by the
Consultant. Consultant will review and perform a quality assurance / quality control (QA/QC)
check on all overall program products of subconsultants before submission of work products to
the City to ensure quality and consistency throughout the project. Lines of communication will
flow from subconsultants through the Consultant to the City. As part of the project management
task, Consultant will develop and submit to City of Palo Alto a detailed project schedule
identifying all deliverables, performance measures, evaluation criteria, budgets and other
milestones prior to initiation of any task work.
Task 1 Deliverables:
Project kick-off meeting minutes
Final schedule and stakeholder contact list
Monthly in-person project meetings and ongoing correspondence with staff to coordinate scheduling, report progress, respond to client requests, and anticipate next steps
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Task 2 Walk and Roll to School Maps
Consultant will lead the development of the “Walk and Roll to School Maps” for the project
through an extensive community outreach process for each of the 17 PAUSD public schools
(minimum of two meetings per school) and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by
public schools in the City of Los Altos. The South Palo Alto Walk and Roll Map shall highlight
walking and biking routes out of the City of Palo Alto to the City of Los Altos city limits only.
2.1 Data Collection and Development of Base Maps
Consultant will work with the City to confirm the exact requirements for the Walk and Roll to
School Maps, including layout, content, method of distribution, and potential interactive
features. Map elements may include, but not be limited to the following:
Enrollment boundaries (if applicable)
Previously identified walking and biking routes
Average times for walking and biking in five-minute increments
Pedestrian walkways (e.g., sidewalks, trails)
Bicycle travelways (e.g., bicycle lanes, bicycle boulevards, trails)
Intersection control (e.g., stop signs, traffic signals, beacons)
Traffic calming (traffic circles, speed humps, speed feedback signs)
Marked crosswalks
Locations of adult crossing guards
Driver access and circulation routes in vicinity of school, including designated
drop off/pick-up zones
School and park campus internal circulation and access (as appropriate)
Major after-school activity locations
Safe practices for those who are bicycling, walking, skating, or using a scooter
Safety guidelines for drivers
SR2S program and school contact information, branding elements
Once the recommended mapping methodology has been approved by the City with input from
the City/School Traffic Safety Committee, Consultant will collect existing data regarding the
locations of schools, enrollment boundaries, crossing guard locations, traffic control devices,
pavement markings, signage, routes, aerial photos, and other relevant data. These data elements
will be consolidated into a mapping geodatabase, which will be provided to the City at the
conclusion of Task 3. As part of this task, Consultant will develop base maps for use during the
first set of community meetings. High graphical quality is essential to Walk and Roll to School
Maps. A version of the base maps will be made available online for review and comment by
those who are unable to attend the school site meeting proposed in Task 2.2.
Task 2.1 Deliverables:
Memo summarizing mapping methodology
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Development of mapping geodatabase
Base maps for 17 PAUSD public schools and for the South Palo Alto
neighborhood served by public schools in the City of Los Altos
2.2 Community Mapping Meeting #1
The school community will play a key role in developing the Walk and Roll to School Maps.
Consultant will meet with each school twice during their map development through the form of
Community Meetings. At the first community meeting, described in this task, Consultant will
lead the school community on a circulation and infrastructure assessment in the school vicinity
and a discussion of community concerns and preferences. In the second community meeting
(described in Task 2.4) Consultant will ask the school community to confirm the summary of
their concerns and provide feedback on the Walk and Roll Map. Consultant will invite parents,
teachers, school administrators, key district staff, City staff, law enforcement officers, and
middle and high school students to participate in the community meetings. Consultant will
prepare marketing materials for community meetings and City staff will be responsible for
advertising in local newspapers. Consultant will work with the City and school staff or
designated-volunteer community members to advertise meetings on school newsletters of
websites. Consultant will be responsible for preparing and procuring community meeting
materials such as PowerPoint presentations and print-outs, community meeting facilitation and
meeting notes documentation.
At Community Meeting #1, Consultant will introduce the mapping program, conduct a
circulation and infrastructure assessment of each school site during a school commute period,
identify stakeholder preferences and concerns, including existing routes, and gather feedback on
the base maps developed in Task 2.1.
In preparation for each community meeting, Consultant will conduct a site visit of each public school, including a field review of infrastructure within about a quarter mile radius of the periphery of each school to:
Confirm the base map inventory of existing school-related infrastructure, and
Observe and confirm areas of concern identified by the community during the
school site meetings.
For South Palo Alto near the border with the City of Mountain View and City of Los Altos, the
Consultant will also conduct a community meeting to document the walking and biking routes to
Los Altos schools serving residents of this South Palo Alto neighborhood.
Task 2.2 Deliverables:
Community mapping meeting #1 for each of the 17 PAUSD public schools and
for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by Los Altos public schools
Follow-up field review at each school site
Notes and recommendation maps from meetings and field review
2.3 Develop Draft Walk and Roll to School Maps
Based on community input and supplemental field work, the Consultant will develop a Draft
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Walk and Roll to School Map for each of the 17 public schools and a Walk and Roll Map for
South Palo Alto to the border with the City of Los Altos. Walk and Roll to School Maps will be
developed in GIS to take advantage of existing City and Consultant-produced data files as well
as GIS-based interactive comments and the ability to export map data to Google Maps (.KML
format). These maps shall be provided in Adobe Illustrator and Adobe InDesign for integration
of branding elements. The Consultant’s team of graphic designers will create a final map design
that is web-compatible in color format and that is legible in black and white to permit cost
savings when printing maps.
Consultant will also summarize the community concerns and field observations. Where appropriate, preliminary recommended solutions to community concerns and civil improvements in response to field observations will be prepared and formatted around the four E’s of education, encouragement, enforcement, and engineering and show consistency with the Five I’s of the Draft City of Palo Alto Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan. Consultant will develop an Administrative Draft and Public Review Draft versions of each
deliverable that responds to comments on the administrative draft maps and improvement
recommendations.
Task 2.3 Deliverables:
Administrative draft Walk and Roll to School Maps and improvement plans for 17 PAUSD schools and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by Los Altos public schools (.DOC and .PDF format)
Public review draft Walk and Roll to School Maps and improvement plans for 17
PAUSD schools and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by Los Altos
public schools (.PDF format)
2.4 Community Meeting #2
Consultant will develop marketing materials to help advertise a second community meeting at
each school and be responsible for the facilitation of each meeting. At the Community Meeting #2 participants will review and comment on the public review draft Walk and Roll to School Maps and summarized recommendations. Consultant will summarize the process for developing the maps and improvement plans at the meeting and highlight the particular elements of each. To encourage feedback, the larger school community will be provided with online draft materials online in advance of the meeting.
After the Community Meeting #2 for each school, Consultant will present the public review draft
Walk and Roll to School Map and recommendations and a summary of community comments to
the City/School Traffic Safety Committee for review and comment. Consultant may consolidate
presentations to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee to maximize efficiency time with the
group.
Task 2.4 Deliverables:
Second community mapping meeting at each of the 17 PAUSD public schools and for the South Palo Alto neighborhood served by Los Altos public schools.
Presentation to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee (estimated 4 meetings)
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
2.5 Develop Final Walk and Roll to School Maps
Consultant will refine the Walk and Roll to School Maps and improvement plans based on
feedback from the community meetings and discussion with the City/School Traffic Safety
Committee.
Consultant will present the final Walk and Roll to School Maps and improvement plans to the
City/School Traffic Safety Committee, the City Planning & Transportation Committee, and the
City Council.
Task 2.5 Deliverables:
Final draft Walk and Roll to School Maps and Improvement Plans
Presentation to City/School Traffic Safety Committee, City Planning &
Transportation Committee, and City Council (3 total meetings)
Task 3 Recommended Safe Route to School Policy Development
3.1.1 Adult Crossing Guard Criteria and Evaluation
Consultant will prepare adult crossing guard establishment criteria to both validate the
deployment locations of existing adult crossing guard locations and to help the City respond to
future requests for consideration of adult crossing guards.
Consultant will prepare recommended establishment criteria for crossing guards, based on prior
City practices, state standards and national best practices. Upon approval of the establishment
criteria by City staff, the Consultant shall evaluate each of the City’s 29 existing adult crossing
guard locations against the approved criteria and report the findings. An additional 10 locations
may be identified by the City for evaluation by the Consultant.
In developing the adult crossing guard establishment criteria, the Consultant may identify the
appropriate criteria including, but not limited to: vehicle volume, estimated school age and adult
pedestrian volumes, bicycle volume, community quality of life factors, policy factors, and safety
factors (i.e, crosswalk crossing length, number of vehicular travel lanes, presence of pedestrian
refuge island, truck percentages, sight distance, etc.).
The recommended criteria will be summarized in an Administrative Draft memo for review by
the City. The memo will take into account the sensitive nature of assigning/reassigning crossing
guards and include a suggested procedure for working with the school community during the
evaluation process, in addition to the more qualitative evaluation criteria.
After incorporating revisions to the memo Consultant will present the Public Review draft memo
to a study session of the Planning & Transportation Commission and City Council. Consultant
will develop a final memo based on comments from the study sessions.
Task 3.1.1 Deliverables:
Administrative Draft, Public Review Draft, and Final memo outlining proposed
crossing guard establishment criteria
Presentation to CSTSC, PTC, and City Council Study Sessions
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
3.1.2 Develop Data Collection Plan
Consultant will develop a data collection plan that will collect all data pertinent to the evaluation
criteria. The plan will include a list of count locations, proposed data collection schedule,
proposed outreach to schools, data collection methodology and the final data format desired by
the City. This plan will be approved by the City before data collection begins.
Specifically:
Consultant will confirm the up to 39 count locations to be evaluated (29 existing
crossing guard locations and up to 10 additional locations without crossing guards
identified by Palo Alto).
Consultant will develop a counting schedule that takes into account each school’s
drop-off and pick-up times and school calendar, including minimum days and
holidays, so that counts can be scheduled during times that students are walking or
biking to or from school. Counts will not be scheduled on Fridays or within two days
of a school holiday. No counts will be taken during inclement weather, during
construction activities, or any other incident that disrupts the normal flow of traffic.
Data will be collected in accordance with the Institute of Traffic Engineers Circular
214, the National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project, and other applicable
industry standards. A traffic data collection form will be presented to the City for
approval prior to data collection.
Task 3.1.2 Deliverables:
Draft and final data collection plan
3.1.3 Traffic Data Collection
The decision to assign an adult crossing guard relies on not only the student pedestrian volumes,
bicycle volumes, and traffic volumes, but also the operations and unique physical characteristics
of each intersection. Consultant will visit the count locations to record and document the
following information, or similar related information, via photos, graphics, and/or text:
Presence of traffic control devices in the immediate vicinity, including traffic
signs, signals and pavement markings
Sight distance at crossing(s)
Width of street and number of lanes students must cross
Distance of crossing from school grounds
Posted speed limit
Presence or absence of sidewalks and curb ramps immediately adjacent to intersection
This visit may coincide with the school assessments conducted in Task 2. Consultant will
provide the information as an appendix to the count data.
After the site check, Consultant will collect motor vehicle, bicycle, and pedestrian counts during
school commute peak periods at up to 39 locations. Consultant will work with a count firm
experienced with conducting similar counts. Consultant will provide additional overview
training to counters that explains the purpose of the counts, rules for counting pedestrians and
bicyclists when observing unusual behavior, and methodology for identifying school children.
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Count data will be provided to the City per the data collection plan finalized in a prior task.
Task 3.1.3 Deliverables:
Appendix to traffic data summary report listing field notes for each intersection
Traffic counts at up to 39 intersections
Traffic count data summary report and raw data
3.2 Reduced School Zone Speed Limits
AB 321 became effective January 2008 to allow local jurisdictions to extend the 25 mph prima
facie speed limit (up to 1,000 feet from school grounds), or to establish a 15 mph speed limit in
school zones (up to 500 feet from school grounds), under certain criteria. The reduced or
extended school zone speed limit is only applicable on local streets in a residential district that
have a maximum of two traffic lanes, and a maximum posted speed limit of 30 mph immediately
prior to and after the school zone; and must be established for both directions of travel.
Consultant will provide overall policy guidance on implementing reduced school zone speed
limits in the City of Palo Alto. This will include a thorough background review of the legal
requirements (CVC and CAMUTCD), a discussion of other California cities that have
implemented reduced speed limits, and a review of school locations in Palo Alto that may be
appropriate for reduced school speed limits in accordance with the requirements of the CVC and
CA MUTCD. Consultant will make recommendations for implementing a reduced school speed
limit policy in Palo Alto, including the appropriate speed limit (15 or 20 mph), additional traffic
engineering study that may be required prior to implementing speeds, and evaluation to analyze
the traffic safety benefits of lowered speed limits once implemented.
Task 3.2 Deliverables:
Policy recommendation summary memo for reduced school zone speed limits
3.3 Policy Recommendations Memo & Public Outreach
Recommendations for the crossing guards and reduced school zone speed limit policies will be
compiled in an Administrative Draft memo for review by the City. City comments will be
incorporated into a Public Review Draft memo. For the crossing guard analysis, Consultant will
use the traffic data and field review to rank crossing guard locations, and make recommendations
for adding, removing, or moving crossing guards. The data will also be used, if appropriate, to
suggest minor revisions to the proposed criteria.
The Public Review Draft memo will be presented at up to two citywide community workshops
(or potentially as part of the map review meetings in Task 2.4), and at meetings of the
City/School Traffic Safety Committee and the City Planning & Transportation Commission.
Members of the school community, including district staff, school administrators and teachers,
and parents will be invited to participate in the community workshops. The presentation will be
geared to a non-technical audience, as appropriate. Workshops will be scheduled at a time and
location that is easiest for these key participants to attend. Consultant will work with the City to
determine if attendance could be further increased by providing a meal, child care, or language
translation.
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Based on comments received during workshops and committee and commission meetings,
Consultant will revise the Public Review Draft memo to present a Final Draft memo to the City
Council.
Task 3.3 Deliverables:
Administrative, Public Review Draft, and Final Draft Policy Memo
Up to two preliminary policy evaluation criteria study sessions (PTC, City
Council)
Up to two public workshops
One presentation of findings each to City/School Traffic Safety Committee, the
City Planning & Transportation Commission, and City Council.
Task 4 Scheduling and Encouragement Activities
Consultant will develop a toolkit and schedule of potential activities offered by the Palo Alto Safe Routes to School Program, including the curriculum developed as part of this proposal. The tool kit will be targeted toward parents of elementary and middle school students, and be
intended to encourage a range of alternatives to solo family driving to school. Consultant will
also develop a tool kit geared toward high school students that encourages alternative modes.
Consultant shall recommend a schedule of encouragement activities for each school to help
promote ongoing Walk & Roll to School activities. The schedule will take advantage of existing
City-sponsored and neighborhood events (such as Operation Safe Passage, International Walk &
Roll to School Day, Bike to Work/School Day, Earth Week activities, Bike Palo Alto events, and
major Farmer’s Markets) and propose new events to maximize participation and engagement of
Palo Alto children and families. This schedule will be posted on the new Safe Routes to School
website and cross-promoted through social media and other approved methods. We also suggest
creating an interactive schedule that lets parents, teachers, and students add their events to the
calendar.
Consultant will also work with the City to identify appropriate rewards that can be integrated
into the encouragement events to help continue regular alternative transportation mode use to
and from school by students. Based on the potential for new encouragement events and rewards,
our proposed budget includes a reserve/contingency line item for programming elements and
funding.
Task 4 Deliverables:
Tool kit of activities
Initial and regularly updated schedule of events
Memo recommending encouragement rewards
Task 5 Evaluate and Update 3rd Grade Bicycling Life Skills Curriculum
The common goal of Safe Routes education tasks is to grow a self-sustaining culture of family
and student bicycling in which self-powered school commutes are the norm. Palo Alto has made
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
great strides toward this goal – progress on which the updated and expanded Program will build.
The current Palo Alto program draws from the League of American Bicyclists’ “Smart Cycling”
framework and the Program and Consultant shall develop a curriculum that expands on this
approach.
Consultant shall develop a curriculum that includes the formation of a Curriculum Development
Working Group (CDWG) to review and inform the curriculum, test-teaching curriculum, and
finalizing the curriculum based on feedback from the CDWG and test-teaching results.
Each of the Curriculum Development tasks (3rd Grade, Middle School, Parent) will follow the same basic subtask sequence below. Their subtasks will proceed in parallel, woven into the Curriculum Development master schedule and coordinated with the Project’s other meetings and workshops.
Gather information
o Interview persons (teachers, SVBC trainers, key volunteers and parents,
etc.) who have direct experience (institutional knowledge) of developing and delivering the existing curriculum
o Review existing curriculum materials and framework (lesson plans, learning objectives, agendas/schedules/calendars, resource and volunteer/role lists, classroom and outdoor layouts and routes, visual and audio media)
o Observe delivery of existing curriculum
o Research and summarize curricula available elsewhere
Create and test draft updated curriculum
o Create framework, learning objectives and content outlines for updating modules
o Review with CDWG and other advisors
o Develop draft updated curriculum
o Review with CDWG and other advisors
o Train trainers to test-teach draft updated curriculum
o Test-teach draft updated curriculum
o Summarize and review test-teach results with CDWG
o If necessary, develop/review/test-teach 2nd-draft module(s)
Deliver final updated curriculum
o Develop final updated curriculum
o Present to CDWG and City
5.1 Curriculum Development Working Group Consultant will convene a Curriculum Development Working Group (CDWG) to support Tasks
5, 6, and 7. The CDWG will capture teacher, parent and student issues and perspectives, review
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
draft content and materials, and serve as a sounding board. The Consultant will convene the
meetings and handle agendas and minutes. A kick-off meeting for the CDWG shall consist of:
City staff person
City/School Traffic Safety Committee (CSTSC) member who will be responsible
for reporting back to that body
3rd Grade teacher familiar with the existing classroom presentation and bike
rodeo curriculum
Proposed Middle School Physical Education teacher from each of the City’s three
middle schools
Parent PTA representative interested in curriculum, representing parent needs and
issues – ideally a parent of a middle school student who has also been through the
3rd Grade program
It is anticipated that the CDWG will meet five times and the Consultant shall attend, facilitate,
and be responsible for taking meeting minutes and report at each meeting. The scope for each of
the meetings is noted below, but the scope for each meeting may be changed depending on need:
Meeting #1: Introduction to program, purpose and role of CDWG, schedule
Meeting #2: Review Working Paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices
Meeting #3: Review Draft Curriculum prior to test-teaching
Meeting #4: Review Working Paper #2: Draft Curriculum and Results of Test-
Teaching
Meeting #5: Review Final Curriculum
Working Paper #1 and the Final Curriculum will also be presented to the City/School Traffic Safety Committee.
Task 5.1 Deliverables:
Formation of Curriculum Development Working Group and facilitation at up to
five meetings
Working paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices
Draft Curriculum
Working Paper #2: Draft Final Curriculum and Results of Test-Teaching
Final Curriculum
Presentations at City/School Traffic Safety Committee (WP #1, Final Curriculum)
5.2 Evaluate 3rd Grade Bicycling Life Skills Curriculum and Develop Draft
Curriculum
This task will build on Palo Alto’s existing comprehensive cycling education delivery to this age
group. Age 10 (3rd grade) is a critical age because most children’s reasoning capabilities are
now sufficient to learn how to safely traverse simple intersections independently.
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
All 3rd grade students in Palo Alto currently experience a classroom session with video and
teacher-led discussion, a school-wide bicycle skills rodeo, and an in-class presentation by a
firefighter. In addition to helmet fitting and a bicycle safety check, the rodeo covers the
fundamental traffic cycling skills of scanning over the shoulder, yielding when necessary,
entering the street safely, and approaching and safely traversing simple intersections while
negotiating with other road users (fellow 3rd graders on their own bikes).
Current 3rd grade student bicycling programs in Palo Alto
Classroom
session
Video and teacher-led discussion
Firefighter talk Presentation on laws and safety
Bicycle rodeo School-wide event. Helmet fitting, safety check, scanning over the shoulder, yielding when necessary, entering the street safely, approaching and safely traversing simple intersections while negotiating with other road users (fellow 3rd graders on their own bikes).
Based on input received from the CDWG and in-classroom observation, Consultant will evaluate
these existing curriculum modules (including conducting observation of existing teaching
delivery, if possible), and summarize issues and opportunities including staff and volunteer
resource requirements. Consultant will compare the existing curriculum to best-practice
curriculum modules and programs.
After receiving feedback on the Existing Curriculum and Best Practices Memo, Consultant will
develop preliminary curriculum for review by the City and the CDWG. Draft curriculum
elements will include lesson plans, web and mobile-compatible videos, website content, and
social media. Consultant will also prepare a plan for test-teaching the curriculum.
Task 5.2 Deliverables:
Working paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices
Preliminary Curriculum and Plan for Test-Teaching
5.3 Test-Teach Draft Curriculum and Develop Final Curriculum Consultant will test-teach the curriculum in a subset of Palo Alto schools. Consultant will summarize the results of the test-teaching in a memo and develop draft final curriculum in Spanish and English. The memo will include suggestions for a year-round schedule of on- and off-bike options for elementary school students and their families.
Consultant will present the memo to the CDWG and the City/School Traffic Safety Committee,
and develop final curriculum based on their feedback.
Task 5.3 Deliverables:
Working Paper #2: Draft Final Curriculum and Results of Test-Teaching
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Final Curriculum
Task 6 Middle School Bike Education Program
This task follows the same process as that outlined in Task 5: coordination with the CDWG, test-
teaching the curriculum, and developing final curriculum based on test-teaching results and input
from the CDWG and City/School Traffic Safety Committee.
The Middle School Bike Education Program will build on the comprehensive 3rd Grade
program. At the 6th Grade transition to middle school, as students enter an environment of
greater responsibility and flexibility, most are capable of handling more complex traffic
scenarios. They bike for longer distances to school and activities, and some use higher-volume
streets and intersections than they did when younger. There are currently two offerings, one
school-based and one through the City’s recreation catalog:
Current middle school oriented bicycling programs in Palo Alto
5th Grade
Lesson
Firefighter-led bike / traffic safety lesson given in spring for graduating 5th
graders. 45 minute presentation includes PowerPoint, “The Bicycle Zone”
video. Parent education materials sent home following presentation.
“Drive Your
Bike”
1-period, all-6th-grade “game show” interactive assembly featuring a Host
and an Expert (a local LCI). Students divide into teams of up to 20 and
nominate a Team Captain. Questions are displayed, with 4 possible
answers. Teams discuss among themselves, choose an answer. After a short
time the correct answer is revealed (and explained by the Expert), and points
are scored. All 6th graders attend one of these.
Middle
School Bike
Skills
A class for children age 10-14 accompanied by a parent or guardian.
Classroom-style discussion, off-street skills practice on a paved area, and a
neighborhood ride with observation and feedback. Covers traffic law basics,
bike and helmet fitting, crash types and deterrence, proper positioning, 4-
way stops and left turns, and communicating with drivers. 4.5 hours total.
Offered through Palo Alto Recreation Department’s ENJOY catalog.
There is currently no school-based on-bicycle training at the middle school level and the City
plans to work with PAUSD middle school staff to develop these options.
Following the procedures described in Task 5, our team will evaluate these existing options,
observe their delivery, and summarize issues and opportunities including resource requirements.
Consultant will review and summarize national best practices for middle school curriculum
options and promotional, many of which use LAB’s “Kids II” content as a foundation. Because
perceptions and expectations are as important to teens as formal curriculum content, Consultant
will begin by seeking to understand Palo Alto’s current middle school bicycling culture, including student cycling behavior, assumptions, issues, and opportunities.
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Working with teachers, and with input from students, Consultant will expand the current options
into a comprehensive program for the middle school age group. It will contain modules for
assemblies, lesson plans and teaching kits for classroom presentation and discussion, on-bike /
off-street practice, and on-street teaching rides. On-bike modules will be designed for delivery as
part of the school curriculum by Physical Education teachers, and developed with their input.
School-oriented materials will be complemented by age-appropriate web and video content and
supporting teacher material. Where possible we will explore options for delivery of class and
self-teaching materials in Spanish. Consultant will also explore ways to include parents in the
education of their middle school and pre-middle-school children, including the possibility of
expanding the Middle School Bike Skills parent-and-child classes. All of these options will be integrated into a year-round calendar that includes new-middle-school student orientation and bike-to-school orientation rides.
Task 6 Deliverables:
Working paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices
Draft Curriculum
Working Paper #2: Draft Final Curriculum and Results of Test-Teaching
Final Curriculum
Task 7 Creating Parent Education Curriculum and Program
This task follows the same process as that outlined in Task 5: coordination with the CDWG, test-
teaching the curriculum, and developing final curriculum based on test-teaching results and input
from the CDWG and City/School Traffic Safety Committee.
The Parent Education curriculum will create options to equip and empower parents with
knowledge and skills – a key part of creating a self-sustaining adult and student bicycling
culture. In often-cited northern European cities there is not a substantial “bicycling generation
gap” because most parents know the principles of safe bicycle operation, ride bicycles for utility
trips, understand children’s capabilities and readiness stages, teach their children, and support
further cycling education in schools. Task 7 activities will continue Palo Alto’s progress toward
closing this generation gap by developing several ways for parents and guardians to increase
their understanding of bicycle use and their children’s’ capabilities:
Current parent-oriented bicycling programs in and near Palo Alto
Parent
Orientation
Short class (no bicycle required) on understanding children’s perceptual
and cognitive differences from adult bicyclists, how to help children ride
safely (including helmet fitting), basic skills to teach, mistakes children
make, how to evaluate skills and guide development, and tips on buying
children’s bikes. Offered in Palo Alto at PTA events as “Bringing Up
Bicyclists”. Uses LAB’s “Kids I” content and “Kid’s Eye View” video
Bicycle
handling skills
Short off-street, no-traffic group practice of bicycle handling fundamentals:
safety check; safe mounting and dismounting; effective starting and precise
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
practice stopping; confident turning, and use of the bicycle’s gears. Offered through
Stanford’s Health Improvement Program as “Bicycle Handling Skills
Clinic”. Similar to LAB’s “Bicycling 123” short course.
Traffic cycling
understanding
In-class module that builds on motorist understanding of Rules of the Road,
adding bicycle law, how to deter and avoid conflicts, riding between and
through intersections. LAB Traffic Skills 101 Part 1, “Cyclist’s Eye View”
and other videos. Offered regularly (along with Part 2) in San Francisco
and the East Bay; less frequently in Palo Alto and nearby.
Traffic cycling practice On-bike module in which adult and driving-age teen bicyclists practice the techniques learned in the in-class module, [LAB Traffic Skills 101 Part 2]
Using the procedure outlined in Task 5, Consultant will evaluate the existing parent education options and delivery, survey cycling educator-accepted options available in other Bay Area cities
and beyond, and develop a new or improved parent education curriculum deliverable in English
and Spanish.
Task 7 Deliverables:
Working paper #1: Existing Curriculum and Best Practices
Draft Curriculum
Working Paper #2: Draft Final Curriculum (Spanish/English) and Results of Test-
Teaching
Final Curriculum (Spanish/English)
Task 8 Website Content
Consultant will develop text and graphics content for the City’s Safe Routes to School website. In addition to deliverables intended for public review, the content may include but not be limited to text and graphics relating to:
Blog content
Newsletters
Project descriptions
Program activities
Collection and development of charts and photographs
Downloadable educational materials including Walk and Roll to School Maps
Course curriculum
Consultant will design all public deliverables developed as part of this scope of work to match
the graphic design guidelines established by the website developer. Materials will be translated
into Spanish and Chinese-Mandarin.
Task 8 Deliverables:
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Ongoing text and graphics content for website
Task 9 Program Evaluation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Survey
Consultant will lead the evaluation component of the Palo Alto SR2S program. The GHG
evaluation is essential to complying with the terms of the grant, but is only one component of
what we envision to be a more comprehensive assessment of school travel mode choices and related issues in Palo Alto. Based on the efforts and outreach described in the above tasks, the final evaluation report will include a review of individual program elements and their contribution to the overall goals and sustainability of the Safe Routes program.
9.1 Before and After Surveys The MTC evaluation team has developed a modified version of the standard Federal SR2S parent survey and uses the existing Federal student tally forms to gather before and after data. These surveys help measure average changes in school travel modes and trip distances before and after SR2S program activities, which can then be quantified to VMT and GHG emission impacts using emission factors. Parent surveys – to be administered in coordination with each
program sponsor – should provide important qualitative feedback on specific program
components and their effectiveness.
Consultant will conduct parent surveys only at the elementary and middle schools, and working
with student leaders at the high school(s) to develop a comparable student-led travel survey to
gather high school mode share information.
Parent surveys (print and/or online) shall be conducted up to three times: in fall/winter 2011 to
establish baseline data, in fall 2012, and in fall 2013. Consultant will develop the parent survey
in English, Spanish, and Chinese-Mandarin, and work with City staff to distribute or promote to
each school according to the translation needs.
The City will continue to conduct student hand tallies using the Federal Safe Routes to School
forms, and submit data to the National Center for tabulation.
The surveys will provide an estimate of replaced auto-based trips resulting from program
activities (vehicle trips replaced by walking, bicycling, transit, or carpooling). Consultant will
tabulate all survey data, and provide the survey results to the MTC Evaluation team for the GHG
emissions calculations. Trip distances will be calculated and used to calculate VMT reductions,
which will in turn be used to calculate GHG reductions.
Task 9.1 Deliverables:
Parent surveys conducted annually at all elementary and middle schools
High school student travel survey at all high schools
9.2 Deploy Automated Bicycle and Pedestrian Count Stations To supplement hand tallies, the City plans on installing automated bicycle and pedestrian
counters near all 17 PAUSD schools. These counters will collect 24-hour data that will allow the
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
City to identify temporal travel trends, establish baseline data, and understand mode splits. Count
data can also be integrated into school curriculum and student-based program monitoring and
analysis. To assist with this task, Consultant will identify locations for automatic counters. Count
station locations should take into account school travel patterns, physical characteristics of the
count site, and the type of data to be collected.
Consultant will also develop recommendations for count technologies, taking into account ease
of data collection, ability to track bicyclists and pedestrians separately, capital cost and ongoing
maintenance cost, online data tracking features, and other factors that the City may wish to
consider in their decision. Location and technology recommendations will be consolidated into a memo.
Task 9.2 Deliverables:
Memo recommending count locations and automatic count technology options
9.3 Final Evaluation Report
At the end of the second year of the program, Consultant will write a Final Program Evaluation
Report that will include a description of the program, the results from the parent and student
surveys, the result of GHG reduction calculations (obtained from MTC’s evaluation team), and a
description of the programs that were implemented and participation levels. The primary
findings would be changes in number of walkers and bikers along with estimation of
transportation and GHG benefits. The report will also include recommendations based on the
evaluation findings. Consultant will submit an administrative draft evaluation report and a final evaluation report, and make revisions to each based on a single, consolidated, and internally-consistent set of comments from the City. The final report will include a short executive summary that is translated into Spanish and Mandarin-Chinese.
Task 9.3 Deliverables:
Final Evaluation Report (1 PDF Admin Draft, 1 PDF Final Report and 20 printed
copies)
OPTIONAL SERVICES
Optional Task A. Safe Routes to School Website
Consultant will lead the development of a new Safe Routes to School website for the City of
Palo Alto. Community members currently reference the volunteer-developed Safe Routes to
School website at www.saferoutes.paloaltopta.org. Consultant will provide comprehensive
assistance to the City in creating a new Safe Routes to School website that will ultimately
supersede much of the existing site’s content and contain robust branding, social media, and
tripsharing features. The new City website will serve as a community resource for teaching the
benefits of SR2S; allow the City to disseminate information and encourage activity participation
across a range of web-based platforms; and provide the interface for visitors to learn about and
sign up for the SchoolPool/Tripshare tool developed in Optional Task B.
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
As part of this task, the Consultant will work with City staff, PTA representatives, and others as
appropriate to develop a shared strategy for placing and packaging SR2S content on the City-
maintained website, administering and cross-promoting activities through social media (e.g.,
Facebook, Twitter, Flickr), and minimizing potential confusion or conflict associated with
multiple Safe Routes websites.
A.1 Graphic Design and Website Template Development
Consultant will hold an initial meeting with web design team and City staff to discuss the overall
vision for the website, key desired features, and review other example websites to get a sense of
potential graphical and navigation look / feel. Following this meeting, Consultant will develop
up to three (3) initial graphic design and website layout templates for review by the City. Each
template option will include basic website architecture and a sample page, along with an
associated set of graphic design guidelines for use by all Safe Routes to School public
deliverables developed as part of this scope of work. Graphic design guidelines will include specifications for fonts, colors, graphic identity guidelines such as proper use of the logo, and formatting via style sheets. To provide brand consistency, one or more of the initial design options may be based on the existing logo and website colors of the volunteer-led website. Once a preferred website design option has been selected, Consultant will design and implement the site. The website will include interactive features discussed in Task A.2, and have a web-based content management system that can be used by City staff and consultants. Consultant will
use the free, open-source content management system Drupal, which streamlines organization,
management, and publication of web content, and is highly customizable. This solution will be
low-cost to start up and maintain, and City staff can easily update, customize, and maintain the
site after the contract ends.
A.1 Deliverables:
Initial meeting with City and web design team to discuss desired website look and features
Up to 3 initial web site/graphic design concept options
Website development and supporting graphic design guidelines for the Preferred
Design Concept
Templates for publishable materials: flyers, newsletters, educational materials,
and Walk and Roll Maps
A.2 Integration of Social Media and Interactive Mapping Platforms
In Task A.2, Consultant will research and summarize recommended interactive website
elements, integrate these features into the City’s new Safe Routes to School website, and
ultimately use the web-based platforms and elements as part of the public outreach and project
delivery tasks.
An interactive SR2S website with related social media platforms will create a community of
users centered on web-based services, and provide exciting new engagement opportunities, to
help improve the efficacy and efficiency of public outreach and reinforce the Safe Routes
program ‘brand’. Creating an enjoyable, easy-to-use, and useful experience converts visitors
into ambassadors for the SR2S program, reaching a far broader audience than the City could
hope to accomplish on its own.
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Consultant will work with the City to launch a Facebook Page and Twitter Account whose
activities are integrated into the SR2S website, and vice versa. Cultivating relationships with
interested users on Facebook and Twitter will increase goodwill, raise the visibility of the Palo
Alto SR2S program online, and expand the reach and potential of public communications – for
this project and beyond. The City will be able to cross-promote upcoming events, highlight
program success, solicit feedback, and cultivate a community of users that will make SR2S a
normal part of their daily online routine. Having a section of the website dedicated to “blog”
activities will also ensure steady traffic of repeat users who are interested in progress made on
SR2S issues. This can create spillover traffic, as repeat users will occasionally utilize other, more information-heavy sections of the website during their site visits. Consultant will work with the City to provide content for such features as part of Task A.3. The website will also integrate tools for organizing, including the SchoolPool / Tripshare tool described in Optional Task B, as well as interactive mapping features described in Task 2. Mobile device compatibility is also essential, as users are likely to utilize such tools when out of
the house, especially so for youth.
Finally, the website will provide opportunities to integrate trip tracking and greenhouse gas
emissions reduction calculators. In addition to providing real-time data on the benefits of
walking, bicycling and carpooling, they provide opportunities for contests and other fun
activities that encourage and reward participation. These could be linked to existing programs
like Freiker/Boltage, to the City’s installation of automated counters (which could be
programmed to upload count data to the website at regular intervals), or to new systems
developed through web tools such as www.saveagallon.org.
A.2 Deliverables:
Issue Memo describing recommended interactive features for City SR2S website
One City and/or SR2S stakeholder meeting to confirm website/social media approach
Website and project delivery integration of preferred interactive and social media
elements
A.3 Website Maintenance
Consultant will maintain the website during the contract period. Maintenance includes
approximately 2 hours per month of regular server health monitoring, including log rotation, daily backups, and other tasks focused on maintaining server reliability such as resolving bugs and other unforeseen issues.
A.3 Deliverables:
Ongoing website maintenance
Optional Task B. SchoolPool and Tripshare Program
Consultant will develop an online SchoolPool and Tripshare tool that is integrated into the City’s
new Safe Routes to School website. The tool will be used primarily to encourage carpooling to
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
choice schools and will permit parents and students at other schools to establish carpools,
walking school buses, bicycle trains, and informal travel arrangements.
Basic functionality of the tool will include:
Easy Sign Up - Sign up through Facebook Connect or by filling out a simple form with
parent neighborhood and preferred modes of transportation (bike/walk/carpool). This
will be a simple input form (no long, overly complicated forms that ask for all their travel
details).
School and Neighborhood Groups - Each neighborhood and school in Palo Alto will
have its own group page that hosts a list of the parents signed up for that neighborhood or
school. Group members can also setup notifications for when new parents join their
neighborhood and/or school.
Quickly Search for School Pool Matches - Parents can search the list of parents in their
neighborhood by transportation mode, school and neighborhood and then click on any
parents that show up in the list to send them a message.
Build Trust Through Existing Social Connections - Parents can see which common
friends they share with other parents in their neighborhood, helping them expand their
network of trust.
Full Integration with SR2S Website - The SchoolPool tool will have the same look and
feel as the website for Palo Alto’s Safe Routes to School Program, providing a single
login and website for parents to find all the information they need to make their family’s
commuting greener and healthier.
Authentication and Profile Management - Palo Alto SchoolPool will include a user
account system for parents to log in securely and manage their profile choices (school,
neighborhoods, transportation modes and contact info).
Optional elements may include:
Facebook Integration - Speeds up signup even further by letting parents sign up using
their Facebook account to find friends that are already on the system and quickly invite
them to be your friend on School Pool.
Private Messaging and Friends Lists - Parents may contact each other through
anonymous email addresses, similar to Craigslist, allowing them to reach out to potential
school pool matches without putting their privacy at risk. Parents can invite other parents
to become their friends. When the other parent accepts, both parents get the other’s
contact info added to a list of all their friends, providing them with a quick directory for
setting up school pools, which can be viewed online or printed out.
Consultant will also develop promotional materials for the program for distribution by the City
and school district including copy for mailers, newsletter advertisements, and website promotion.
Task B Deliverables:
SchoolPool and Tripshare web based tool
Promotional materials including copy for mailers, newsletters and website
promotion
Professional Services
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
EXHIBIT “B”
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each task within the number of
hours specified below. The time to complete each task may be increased or decreased by mutual
written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is
completed within the term of the Agreement.
Tasks:
1. Project Management (Part of tasks below)
2. Walk and Roll to School Maps (1076 hours)
3. Policy Recommendations (298 hours)
4. Scheduling and Encouragement Activities (132 hours) 5. Evaluate & Update 3rd Grade Bicycling (441 hours) Life Skills Curriculum
6. Middle School Bike Education Program (316 hours)
7. Creating Parent Education Curriculum (204 hours)
& Program
8. Website Content (229 hours)
9. Program Evaluation & GHG Survey (343 hours)
Professional Services
Rev June 2, 2010 37
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
EXHIBIT “C”
COMPENSATION
The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in
accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget
schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached
as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below.
The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services
described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed
$330,645. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable
expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the
maximum compensation shall not exceed $400,000. Any work performed or expenses
incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of
compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY.
CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted
below. The CITY’s project manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts
between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic
Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $330,645 and the total
compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $69,355.
BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT
Task 1 $0
(Project Management)
Task 2 $118,510
(Walk and Roll to School Maps)
Task 3 $38,090
(Policy Recommendations)
Task 4 $13,730
(Scheduling and Encouragement Activities)
Task 5 $43,150
(Evaluate & Update 3rd Grade Bicycling Life Skills Curriculum)
Task 6 $30,740
(Middle School Bike Education Program)
Task 7 $19,030
(Creating Parent Education Curriculum & Program)
Task 8 $15,285
(Website Content)
Professional Services
Rev June 2, 2010 37
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
Task 9
(Program Evaluation & GHG Surveys) $31,860
Sub-total Basic Services $310,395
Optional Task A $27,350
(Safe Routes to School Website) Optional Task B $31,630 (Schoolpool & Tripshare Program) Other $10,375
Optional Additional Services $69,355
Reimbursable Expenses $20,250
Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $330,645
Optional Additional Services (Not-to-Exceed) $69,355
Maximum Total Compensation $400,000
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing,
photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included
within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall
reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for
which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are:
A. Expenses for vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian counts.
B. Expenses for travel and transportation in connection with the performance of Basic and/or
Additional Services.
All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup
information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $250.00 shall be approved in advance
by the CITY’s project manager.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written
authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request,
shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services,
Professional Services
Rev June 2, 2010 37
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including
reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The
additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and
agreed to in writing by the CITY’s project manager and CONSULTANT prior to
commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements
and restrictions in this Agreement
Professional Services
Rev June 2, 2010 37
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
EXHIBIT “C-1”
HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE
Alta Planning + Design
Project Manager $195
Assistant Project Manager $100
Senior Associate $110
SR25 Advisor $110
Senior Planner/Programs $ 85
Project Planner $ 80
GIS/Graphics $ 65
Admin/Production $ 65
Parisi Associates Senior Project Advisor/Project Engineer $185 Project Associate $120 Project Support $ 85 Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Programs Manager $80
Programs Coodinator $34
Assistant/Surveys $24
Bicycle Solutions
Curriculum Lead $120
Outreach Coordinator $ 90
Collectively
Website Design $125
Website Architecture $ 85
Rich Swent
Curriculum Advisor $ 75
Professional Services
Rev June 2, 2010 37
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
EXHIBIT “D”
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES
WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW:
MINIMUM LIMITS
REQUIRED TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT EACH
OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE
YES
YES
WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY
YES
GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET
CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY
BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED.
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000
YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED
BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE
BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY
DAMAGE, COMBINED
$1,000,000 $1,000,000
$1,000,000 $1,000,000
$1,000,000
$1,000,000 $1,000,000
$1,000,000 $1,000,000
$1,000,000
YES
PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING,
ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE
ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000
YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE,
SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL
INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES.
I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE:
A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND
B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY.
C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL.
II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE.
III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS”
A. PRIMARY COVERAGE
WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS
AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS.
B. CROSS LIABILITY
Professional Services
Rev June 2, 2010 37
\\Cc-terra\shared\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\OTHERS - MELISSA\143475 Safe Routes\C12143475.Final.K.doc
THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL
NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS
ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY.
C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION
1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER
THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY
AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION.
2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY
WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION.
NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO:
PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5469)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Approval of a Utilities Electric Fund Contract (UUD # 47)
Title: Approval and Authorization for the City Manager to Execute an Electric
Fund Construction Contract with MP Nexlevel of California, Inc., in the
Amount of $1,697,836.50, for Trenching and Installation of Utility
Substructures for Underground Utility District No. 47 (Project: EL-11010) in
the Area of Middlefield Road, Homer Avenue, Webster Street, and Addison
Avenue; and Approval and Authorization for the City Manager to Execute
Addendum No. 2 to the Agreement for Joint Participation in the Installation
of the Underground Facilities System Between the City of Palo Alto, AT&T,
and Comcast Corporation of California IX, Inc.
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council:
1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract
(Attachment A – Contract) with MP Nexlevel of California, Inc. (“MP Nexlevel”), in the
amount of $1,697,836.50 for the installation of the utility substructure system for
Underground Utility District No. 47 (“UUD 47”).
2. Authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more change
orders to the contract with MP Nexlevel for additional related, but unforeseen, work which
may develop during the project, the total value of which shall not exceed $170,000
(approximately 10% of the contract price).
3. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the a Specific Supplementary
Agreement for Joint Participation Installation of Underground Facilities System between the
City of Palo Alto (“City” or “CPA”), AT&T California (“AT&T”), and Comcast Corporation of
California IX, Inc. (“Comcast”) substantially in the form attached to this staff report as
Attachment E (referred to in this staff report as “Specific Agreement” or “Addendum No.
2”).
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Staff is recommending that Council approve a total authorized amount of $1,867,836 which
includes the contract amount of $1,697,836 plus a 10% contingency amount of $170,000.
Background
At its meeting on January 14, 2013, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 5180 establishing
UUD 47 (Attachment B (Staff Report Ordinance 1st Reading)). This project involves the
conversion of overhead utility (CPA, AT&T, and Comcast) facilities to underground. The new
underground system in the area of Middlefield Road, Homer Avenue, Webster Street, and
Addison Avenue, (Attachment C – Project Boundary Map) is to be installed in the public right-
of-way.
Discussion
The overall project involves the conversion of overhead utility facilities to underground in the
area. Construction is divided into four phases:
Phase I - Substructure installation by the contractor, consisting of trenching and placement
of conduits, vaults, boxes and pads in the public right-of-way and in public utility
easements to contain utility equipment.
Phase II - Installation, testing and energizing of new underground electric and
communications equipment.
Phase III - Customer service conversions – all affected property owners will be required to
connect to the new underground system.
Phase IV - Removal of all overhead lines and poles by last utility on pole, typically AT&T.
Work included in this contract with MP Nexlevel is only for Phase I of the construction process
and includes the labor, equipment, materials, and management of all field activities in
coordination with City’s Operations staff, for the installation of underground electric and
communication conduits and boxes
The following table is a summary of the bid process:
Bid Name/IFB No.
Underground District No. 47/IFB No. 156474
Proposed Length of Project
6 Months (180 Working Days)
Number of Bids Mailed to Contractors
25
Number of Bids Mailed to Builder’s Exchange
6
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Total Days to Respond Bid
6 Weeks
Pre-Bid Meeting Mandatory
Yes
Number of Company Attendees at Pre-Bid
Meeting
10
Number of Bids Received
4*
Bid Price Range
From a low of $1,697,836.50 to a high of
$2,135,523.00
*Bid summary provided in Attachment D.
Staff has reviewed all bids submitted and recommends that the bid of $1,697,836, submitted by
MP Nexlevel, be accepted and that MP Nexlevel, be declared the lowest responsible bidder.
MP Nexlevel’s bid is approximately thirteen percent (13%) higher than the engineer's original
estimate of $1,500,000, which was based on construction costs for similar work in previous
undergrounding projects. Due to improved economics and market conditions in construction
more generally, many of the local contractors chose not to participate in the bidding process for
this undergrounding project. The change order amount of $170,000, which equals 10% percent
of the total contract, is requested for related, but unforeseen work, which may develop during
the project.
Staff confirmed with the Contractor's State License Board that the selected contractor has an
active license on file. Staff checked references supplied by the contractor for previous work
performed and found no complaints.
Joint Agreement
To take advantage of the economics of shared trenching costs, the City, AT&T and Comcast
executed a Master Agreement in 2008 (originally a master agreement between City and Pacific
Bell executed in 1975, amended in 1986 and again in 1990 for participation in joint
underground construction projects. This agreement is primarily a cost sharing agreement for
undergrounding overhead lines, which is applicable to this contract.
The Master Agreement has a limit of $85,000 per project for undergrounding expenditures.
Whenever the amount involved in a project exceeds the $85,000 limit, as this one does, an
Addendum to this Master Agreement is required. The Addendum is a Specific Agreement for
work associated with the Utility Underground District and provides the terms and project
description. The City will act as the Trenching Agent, administering the contract for this project,
and invoicing AT&T and Comcast on the basis of the Supplemental Terms agreed upon in Exhibit
"A" of the Specific Agreement. In addition to recommending approval of the construction
contract (Attachment A), staff also recommends approval of the Specific Agreement for UUD 47
(Attachment E).
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Project Coordination
Since the start of this project, staff has been in frequent communication with the property
owners directly affected by this project via letters and meetings. Additional details of the
construction performed under this contract will be communicated to the neighborhoods and
other affected project stakeholders in advance of the construction, and every effort will be
made to minimize inconvenience to customers.
Resource Impact
Funds for this project are included in the UUD 47 – Middlefield, Homer Avenue, Webster Street,
and Addison Avenue project (EL-11010). Based on the low bid, the estimated costs for the City,
AT&T and Comcast are $763,096, $566,023 and $368,718 respectively.
Policy Implications
This project supports CPAU Key Strategy number 7 – Implement programs that improve the
quality of the environment and Supporting Objective number 2 – Invest in utility infrastructure
to deliver reliable service.
Environmental Review
This project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Section
15302(d) of the California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3 (conversion of overhead
electric utility facilities to underground).
Attachments:
Attachment A: Contract C15156474 UG 47 (PDF)
Attachment B: CMR ID 3232 (Adoption of Ordinance Establishing Underground Utility
District No. 47) (PDF)
Attachment C: Project Boundary Map Underground Utility District # 47 (PDF)
Attachment D: Bid Summary for Underground District N0. 47 (PDF)
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Contract No. C15156474
City of Palo Alto
Underground District 47 Project
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 1 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
ATTACHMENT A
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS. ......................................................... 5
1.1 Recitals. ................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Definitions. ............................................................................................................................................ 5
SECTION 2 THE PROJECT. .................................................................................................................... 5
SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. ......................................................................................... 5
SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY. ...................................................................................................... 6
SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. ................................................................................................................. 7
6.1 Time Is of Essence. .............................................................................................................................. 7
6.2 Commencement of Work. ................................................................................................................ 7
6.3 Contract Time. ...................................................................................................................................... 7
6.4 Liquidated Damages. .......................................................................................................................... 7
6.4.1 Other Remedies. ....................................................................................................... 7
6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. ....................................................................................................... 8
SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR. ................................................................................ 8
7.1 Contract Sum. ....................................................................................................................................... 8
7.2 Full Compensation. ............................................................................................................................. 8
SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE. ........................................................................................................ 8
SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION. ........................................................................................................... 8
9.1 Hold Harmless. ..................................................................................................................................... 8
9.2 Survival. .................................................................................................................................................. 9
SECTION 10 NONDISCRIMINATION. ................................................................................................... 9
SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS. ............................................................................................... 9
SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS............................................................................... 9
SECTION 13 NOTICES ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 10
13.1 Method of Notice ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10
13.2 Notice Recipents ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….10
13.3 Change of Address. ........................................................................................................................... 10
SECTION 14 DEFAULT. ......................................................................................................................... 11
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 2 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
14.1 Notice of Default. .............................................................................................................................. 11
14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. ........................................................................................................ 11
SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. ...................................................................................... 11
15.1 Remedies Upon Default. ................................................................................................................. 11
15.1.1 Delete Certain Services. .......................................................................................... 11
15.1.2 Perform and Withhold. ........................................................................................... 11
15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. .................................................................... 11
15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. ............................................................................. 12
15.1.6 Additional Provisions. ............................................................................................. 12
15.2 Delays by Sureties. ............................................................................................................................ 12
15.3 Damages to City. ................................................................................................................................ 12
15.3.1 For Contractor's Default. ........................................................................................ 12
15.3.2 Compensation for Losses. ...................................................................................... 12
15.4 Suspension by City ............................................................................................................................ 13
15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience. .......................................................................................... 13
15.5 Termination Without Cause. ......................................................................................................... 13
15.5.1 Compensation. ......................................................................................................... 13
15.5.2 Subcontractors. ........................................................................................................ 14
15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. ..................................................................................... 14
SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. ...................................................................... 14
16.1 Contractor’s Remedies. ................................................................................................................... 14
16.1.1 For Work Stoppage. ................................................................................................. 15
16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment. ......................................................................................... 15
16.2 Damages to Contractor. .................................................................................................................. 15
SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. ................................................................................................ 15
17.1 Financial Management and City Access. ................................................................................... 15
17.2 Compliance with City Requests. ................................................................................................... 15
SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. ................................................................................................. 15
SECTION 19 NUISANCE. ...................................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES. ................................................................................................ 16
SECTION 21 WAIVER. .......................................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE....................................................................................... 16
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 3 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. ................................................................................................ 16
SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. ............................................................................................... 16
SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES. ...................................................................................................... 16
SECTION 26 NON APPROPRIATION. ................................................................................................... 17
SECTION 27 AUTHORITY. .................................................................................................................... 17
SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS .............................................................................................................. 17
SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY. ................................................................................................................. 17
SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES . ............................................................. 17
SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION. ................................................................ 17
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 4 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on March 2, 2015 (“Execution Date”) by and between the
CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and MP Nexlevel of California,
Inc. ("Contractor"), is made with reference to the following:
R E C I T A L S:
A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of
California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the
State of California and the Charter of City.
B. Contractor is a corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of California,
Contractor’s License Number 907019. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of
Minnesota and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set
forth in this Construction Contract.
C. On November 21, 2014, City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the Underground
District 47 (“Project”). In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a Bid.
D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other
services as identified in the Contract Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth
and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows:
SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS.
1.1 Recitals.
All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference.
1.2 Definitions.
Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the
General Conditions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and
in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail.
SECTION 2 THE PROJECT.
The Project is the Underground District 47 Project, located in Palo Alto, CA. ("Project").
SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS.
3.1 List of Documents.
The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist
of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by
reference.
1) Change Orders
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 5 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
2) Field Orders
3) Contract
4) Bidding Addenda
5) Special Provisions
6) General Conditions
7) Project Plans and Drawings
8) Technical Specifications
9) Instructions to Bidders
10) Invitation for Bids
11) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Affidavit
12) Reports listed in the Contract Documents
13) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications (most current version at
time of Bid)
14) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards (most current
version at time of Bid)
15) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements
16) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations
17) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre-
Qualification Checklist (if applicable)
18) Performance and Payment Bonds
3.2 Order of Precedence.
For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the
provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the
preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City
shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best
interests of the City.
SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY.
Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work required for the Project, as specified in the Contract
Documents, all of which are fully incorporated herein. Contractor shall provide, furnish, and supply all
things necessary and incidental for the timely performance and completion of the Work, including, but not
limited to, provision of all necessary labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and utilities, unless
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 6 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
otherwise specified in the Contract Documents. Contractor also agrees to use its best efforts to complete
the Work in a professional and expeditious manner and to meet or exceed the performance standards
required by the Contract Documents.
SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM.
In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide
professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project. The Contract
requires that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other
members of the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the
Project.
SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION.
6.1 Time Is of Essence.
Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents.
6.2 Commencement of Work.
Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed.
6.3 Contract Time.
Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City’s Notice to Proceed and shall be
completed within 180 working days after the commencement date specified in City’s Notice to
Proceed.
By executing this Construction Contract, Contractor expressly waives any claim for delayed early
completion.
6.4 Liquidated Damages.
Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.85, if Contractor fails to achieve Substantial
Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time, including any approved extensions
thereto, City may assess liquidated damages on a daily basis for each day of Unexcused Delay in
achieving Substantial Completion, based on the amount of Five Hundred dollars ($500.00) per
day, or as otherwise specified in the Special Provisions. Liquidated damages may also be
separately assessed for failure to meet milestones specified elsewhere in the Contract
Documents, regardless of impact on the time for achieving Substantial Completion. The
assessment of liquidated damages is not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of
the amount of damages City will suffer by delay in completion of the Work. The City is entitled to
setoff the amount of liquidated damages assessed against any payments otherwise due to
Contractor, including, but not limited to, setoff against release of retention. If the total amount of
liquidated damages assessed exceeds the amount of unreleased retention, City is entitled to
recover the balance from Contractor or its sureties. Occupancy or use of the Project in whole or in
part prior to Substantial Completion, shall not operate as a waiver of City’s right to assess
liquidated damages.
6.4.1 Other Remedies.
City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s
Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion
of the entire Work within the Contract Time.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 7 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time.
The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and memorialized
in a Change Order approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents.
SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR.
7.1 Contract Sum.
Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the
Contract Documents the Contract Sum of One Million Six Hundred Ninety Seven Thousand Eight
Hundred Thirty Six dollars and fifty cents ($1,697,836.50).
[This amount includes the Base Bid and Additive Alternates .]
7.2 Full Compensation.
The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor
and, except as otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover all
Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen difficulties
or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by
City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to suspension or
discontinuance of the Work, except as expressly provided herein. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted
for Change Orders approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents.
SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE.
Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised
personnel. All services performed in connection with this Construction Contract shall be performed in a
manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in
providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project.
SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION.
9.1 Hold Harmless.
To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its
City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers
(hereinafter individually referred to as an “Indemnitee” and collectively referred to as
"Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and liability, loss,
damage, claims, expenses (including, without limitation, attorney fees, expert witness fees,
paralegal fees, and fees and costs of litigation or arbitration) (collectively, “Liability”) of every
nature arising out of or in connection with the acts or omissions of Contractor, its employees,
Subcontractors, representatives, or agents, in performing the Work or its failure to comply with
any of its obligations under the Contract, except such Liability caused by the active negligence,
sole negligence, or willful misconduct of an Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs
City incurs to enforce this provision. Except as provided in Section 9.2 below, nothing in the
Contract Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of
Contractor against City or any other Indemnitee.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 8 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of
any third-party claim relating to the Contract.
9.2 Survival.
The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract.
SECTION 10 NONDISCRIMINATION.
As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of
this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color,
gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status,
familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands
the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination
Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section
2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment.
SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS.
Within ten (10) business days following issuance of the Notice of Award, Contractor shall provide City with
evidence that it has obtained insurance and shall submit Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all
requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions.
SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS.
City is entering into this Construction Contract in reliance upon the stated experience and qualifications of
the Contractor and its Subcontractors set forth in Contractor’s Bid. Accordingly, Contractor shall not
assign, hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by
operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or
transfer without said consent shall be null and void, and shall be deemed a substantial breach of contract
and grounds for default in addition to any other legal or equitable remedy available to the City.
The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of
Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor
is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy shall result in changing the control of
Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than
fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity.
SECTION 13 NOTICES.
13.1 Method of Notice.
All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in
writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following:
(i) On the date delivered if delivered personally;
(ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and
addressed as hereinafter provided;
(iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission;
(iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or
(v) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 9 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
13.2 Notice Recipients.
All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Change Order Requests and
Claims) from Contractor to City shall include the Project name and the number of this
Construction Contract and shall be addressed to City at:
To City: City of Palo Alto
City Clerk
250 Hamilton Avenue
P.O. Box 10250
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Copy to: City of Palo Alto
Public Works Administration
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Attn:
OR
City of Palo Alto
Utilities Engineering
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Attn: Gopal Jagannath
In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided
to the following:
Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office
250 Hamilton Avenue
P.O. Box 10250
Palo Alto, California 94303
All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail.
All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to:
MP Nexlevel of California, Inc.
Attn: Robbi L. Pribyl
500 CO Road 37 E
Maple Lake, MN 55358
13.3 Change of Address.
In advance of any change of address, Contractor shall notify City of the change of address in
writing. Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any individuals to whom
and addresses to which notice shall be provided.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 10 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 14 DEFAULT.
14.1 Notice of Default.
In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to
perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any
provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the
manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract, with a copy to
Contractor’s performance bond surety.
14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default.
Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under
the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require)
after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such
time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as
City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to
completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after
receipt of such written notice.
SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.
15.1 Remedies Upon Default.
If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth
above in Section 14, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including,
without limitation, the following:
15.1.1 Delete Certain Services.
City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work,
reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto.
15.1.2 Perform and Withhold.
City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or
portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost
thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related
thereto.
15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract.
City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses
related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of
time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no
obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor
for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work.
15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default.
City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the
failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 14. City’s election to
terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a
written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction
Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately,
unless otherwise provided therein.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 11 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond.
City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to
Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond.
15.1.6 Additional Provisions.
All of City’s rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in
addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract
Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City’s authority to designate other
breaches as material nor limit City’s right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the
City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material. City’s determination of
whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise
by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on
all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other
rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such
termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and
Losses suffered by City.
15.2 Delays by Sureties.
Time being of the essence in the performance of the Work, if Contractor’s surety fails to arrange
for completion of the Work in accordance with the Performance Bond, within seven (7) calendar
days from the date of the notice of termination, Contractor’s surety shall be deemed to have
waived its right to complete the Work under the Contract, and City may immediately make
arrangements for the completion of the Work through use of its own forces, by hiring a
replacement contractor, or by any other means that City determines advisable under the
circumstances. Contractor and its surety shall be jointly and severally liable for any additional cost
incurred by City to complete the Work following termination. In addition, City shall have the right
to use any materials, supplies, and equipment belonging to Contractor and located at the
Worksite for the purposes of completing the remaining Work.
15.3 Damages to City.
15.3.1 For Contractor's Default.
City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contractor’s
default under the Contract Documents.
15.3.2 Compensation for Losses.
In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City
shall be entitled to deduct the cost of such Losses from monies otherwise payable to Contractor.
If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount payable, Contractor shall be liable to City for the
difference and shall promptly remit same to City.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 12 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
15.4 Suspension by City
15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience.
City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to
suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an
aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time. The order shall be specifically identified as
a Suspension Order by City. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s
expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the
Work covered by the Suspension Order. During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if
any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered
by the Suspension Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume
and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the
Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. A Suspension Order
shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work.
15.4.2 Suspension for Cause.
In addition to all other remedies available to City, if Contractor fails to perform or correct work in
accordance with the Contract Documents, City may immediately order the Work, or any portion
thereof, suspended until the cause for the suspension has been eliminated to City’s satisfaction.
Contractor shall not be entitled to an increase in Contract Time or Contract Price for a suspension
occasioned by Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents. City’s right to
suspend the Work shall not give rise to a duty to suspend the Work, and City’s failure to suspend
the Work shall not constitute a defense to Contractor’s failure to comply with the requirements of
the Contract Documents.
15.5 Termination Without Cause.
City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or
in whole upon written notice to Contractor. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall, at City’s
expense, comply with the notice and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs to close out and
demobilize. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 15.5 shall be the Contractor’s sole
and exclusive compensation for such termination and Contractor waives any claim for other
compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue,
lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind
resulting from termination without cause. Termination pursuant to this provision does not relieve
Contractor or its sureties from any of their obligations for Losses arising from or related to the
Work performed by Contractor.
15.5.1 Compensation.
Following such termination and within forty-five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from
Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 15.5.1, City shall pay the
following to Contractor as Contractor’s sole compensation for performance of the Work :
.1 For Work Performed. The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the
Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to
Contractor.
.2 For Close-out Costs. Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors:
(i) Demobilizing and
(ii) Administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without
limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a
period of no longer than thirty (30) Days after receipt of the notice of termination.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 13 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
.3 For Fabricated Items. Previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site
which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work.
.4 Profit Allowance. An allowance for profit calculated as four percent (4%) of the sum of
the above items, provided Contractor can prove a likelihood that it would have made a profit if
the Construction Contract had not been terminated.
15.5.2 Subcontractors.
Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts
permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this
Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are
afforded to Contractor against City under this Section.
15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination.
Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the
notice directs otherwise, do the following:
(i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice;
(ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities,
except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not
discontinued;
(iii) Provide to City a description in writing, no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the
notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are
outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes,
payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of
the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or
modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine
necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to
terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract;
(iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions
thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms
reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof,
that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and
(v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already
in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in
transit thereto.
Upon termination, whether for cause or for convenience, the provisions of the Contract
Documents remain in effect as to any Claim, indemnity obligation, warranties, guarantees,
submittals of as-built drawings, instructions, or manuals, or other such rights and obligations
arising prior to the termination date.
SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES.
16.1 Contractor’s Remedies.
Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the
following:
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 14 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
16.1.1 For Work Stoppage.
The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any
Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of
an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of
government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable. This
provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City’s issuance of a suspension
notice issued either for cause or for convenience.
16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment.
If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of
notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a
second notice to City of Contractor’s intention to terminate the Construction Contract.
16.2 Damages to Contractor.
In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided
for in Paragraph 15.5.1 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive
compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not
limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential,
direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind.
SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS.
17.1 Financial Management and City Access.
Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary
for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants during normal business
hours, may inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports,
ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase
orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project. Contractor shall retain these
documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) Final Payment or (ii) final resolution
of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by
law.
17.2 Compliance with City Requests.
Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 17 shall be a condition
precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City
and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. City many
enforce Contractor’s obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred
to in Section 17.1 for inspection or copying by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent
mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such
court, without the necessity of oral testimony.
SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES.
Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint ventures’
of the other party. City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or
its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth.
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 15 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
SECTION 19 NUISANCE.
Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in
connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract.
SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES.
Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall
provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government
jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work. Payment of all costs and expenses
for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation
shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non-City inspectors or conditions set
forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies.
SECTION 21 WAIVER.
A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be
deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition
contained herein, whether of the same or a different character.
SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE.
This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of
California, and venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Santa Clara, and no
other place.
SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT.
This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all
prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended
only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties.
SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT.
The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction
Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment
obligations, and City’s right to audit Contractor’s books and records, shall remain in full force and effect
after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract.
SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES.
This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. The Contractor is not required to pay prevailing wages in
the performance and implementation of the Project, because the City, pursuant to its authority as a
chartered city, has adopted Resolution No. 5981 exempting the City from prevailing wages. The City
invokes the exemption from the state prevailing wage requirement for this Project and declares that the
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 16 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
Project is funded one hundred percent (100%) by the City of Palo Alto. This Project remains subject to all
other applicable provisions of the California Labor Code and regulations promulgated thereunder.
Or
The Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the
California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has
obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work
in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this
Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations. Copies of these rates may be obtained
at the Purchasing Office of the City of Palo Alto. Contractor shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to
any staff or subcontractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a
minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Sections 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1810, and 1813 of
the Labor Code.
SECTION 26 NON APPROPRIATION.
This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto
Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the
event that the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time
within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds
for this Construction Contract are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a
conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement.
SECTION 27 AUTHORITY.
The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and
authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities.
SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS
This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties,
constitute a single binding agreement.
SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY.
In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity,
legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected.
SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES.
With respect to any amendments to any statutes or regulations referenced in these Contract Documents,
the reference is deemed to be the version in effect on the date that the Contract was awarded by City,
unless otherwise required by law.
SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION.
Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, by signing this Contract, Contractor certifies as follows: “I am aware
of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 17 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that
code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work on this
Contract.”
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed the
date and year first above written.
CITY OF PALO ALTO
____________________________
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
Senior Deputy City Attorney
MP NEXLEVEL OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
By:___________________________
Name:________________________
Title:__________________________
Date: _________________________
Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 18 Rev. January 2014
CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT
City of Palo Alto (ID # 3232)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 12/10/2012
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Public Hearing For Underground District No. 47
Title: Public Hearing: Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing Underground
Utility District No. 47 (Middlefield Road/Addison Avenue/Cowper
Street/Homer Avenue) by Amending Section 12.16.02 of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Ordinance to create Underground Utility
District No. 47 and thereby amend section 12.16.02 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
Background
At its meeting on September 10, 2012, the Council passed Resolution of Intent No. 9285 to
establish Underground Utility District No. 47 [Staff Report ID# 2947]. The Council meeting of
December 10, 2012 has been set as the date of the Public Hearing on the matter. Notices
announcing the meeting with a description of the project and a copy of the Resolution were
mailed to all property owners in the proposed district on October 12, 2012.
The Electric Utility’s undergrounding project areas are selected and recommended to AT&T and
Comcast based on the age and maintainability of the existing overhead electric system. AT&T
and Comcast determine whether the recommended area meets their criteria for
undergrounding, based on the guidelines established by the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC). The attached Exhibit “A” shows the boundaries of underground district
No. 47 that encompasses portions of avenues, roads, and streets of Homer, Cowper, Addison,
Middlefield, Channing and Webster. Underground Utility District No. 47 meets the City’s and
CPUC’s guidelines for undergrounding overhead utility lines.
Discussion
ATTACHMENT B
City of Palo Alto Page 2
This underground project will result in the removal of 34 poles and provide underground
services to 82 properties consisting of largely residential and a small percentage of commercial
property. Completion of this project will result in higher reliability, increased safety due to
elimination of poles and improved aesthetics.
If an underground district is created, the Utilities Department will prepare plans and
specifications and obtain bids for installation of the underground substructure. Underground
substructure construction consists of the installation of conduits, vaults, pads and boxes. The
Utility will then install the electric distribution cables, transformers and switches upon
completion of the substructure installation. After the new underground system (cable,
transformers, switches, etc.) has been tested and energized, the property owners will be
notified that they have 60 days to connect to the new underground system. Upon completion
of the new connections, Utility crews will remove the overhead power lines, and telephone
crews will complete the project by removing the remaining telephone and cable TV (CATV)
facilities and poles.
Timeline
Once the Public Hearing is completed and if Council decides to proceed with the project, the
following scheduled is proposed:
Serial
Number
Action Date
1. Public Hearing and first reading of Ordinance Establishing
Project Area as UUD No. 47
December 10, 2012*
2. Second Reading of Ordinance January 14, 2013*
3. Letters to property owners with approved Ordinance Chapter
12.167 of Municipal Code, and update
February 11, 2013
4. Award of construction contract and Joint Construction
Agreement with AT&T/Comcast
July 2013*
5. Substructure (conduits, vaults, etc.) installation by Contractor August 2013 through
November 2013
6. Installation of underground facilities (cable, switches, etc.) December 2013
through March 2014
7. Resolution determining properties electing to pay service
conversion cost over a period of 10 years
May 2014*
8. Service conversion work by property owners June 2014 through
City of Palo Alto Page 3
August 2014
9. Pole removal and project completion September 2014
through November
2014
*Denotes Council Action
Resource Impact
The total cost of the project is estimated at $1,800,000. An estimated $750,000 will be for the
installation of telephone and CATV conduit and boxes for which the City will be reimbursed by
AT&T and Comcast. For fiscal year 2012-2013, $150,000 has been designated for planning and
engineering of this project and is budgeted in 2012-2013 Electric Capital Improvement Program.
The cost of the required service conversions on private property is to be borne by the individual
owners in accordance with Utility Rule and Regulation No. 17. The total cost for the property
owners requiring service conversions from overhead to underground has been estimated at
$296,000. The property owners have been offered the option of financing their service
conversion costs over a period of ten years in accordance with the procedure given in Sections
12.16.090 through 12.16.096 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
Policy Implications
This recommendation is consistent with the Council approved Utilities Strategic Plan to invest in
utility infrastructure to deliver reliable service.
Environmental Review
This project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Public
Resources Code Section 15302(d) (conversion of overhead electric utility distribution system
facilities underground).
Attachments:
Attachment A: Underground District No. 47 Boundary Map (PDF)
Attachment B: Ordinance No. XXXX (PDF)
Attachment C: Resolution No. 9285 (PDF)
1
121105 dm 6051811
Ordinance No.__________
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing
Underground Utility District No. 47 (portions of Homer, Cowper,
Addison, Middlefield, Channing and Webster) by Amending Section
12.16.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code
R E C I T A L S
A. This Council, on September 10, 2012, adopted Resolution No. 9285, declaring its
intention to establish Underground Utility District No. 47 in the City by amending Section
12.16.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and by such Resolution appointed Monday,
December 10, 2012, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m., in the Council Chambers, City Hall, at 250
Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California, as the time and place of hearing protests and receiving
evidence for and against the proposed action and notice of direction; and
B. Notice was given of the time and place for the public hearing stated in the
manner provided by law, as appears from the affidavits on file in the office of the City Clerk;
and
C. Said matter came on regularly for hearing at the time fixed; and
D. All written protests and other written communications were publicly read at
said meeting and evidence duly taken and all persons desiring to be heard were fully heard.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. The public necessity, health and safety require the removal of poles
and overhead lines and associated overhead structures from that certain area described in
Resolution No. 9285.
SECTION 2. Section 12.16.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby amended
by adding Subsection (47) thereto to read as follows:
“(47) District No. 47. All of the area in the County of Santa Clara, City of Palo Alto,
encompassing the areas contiguous with portions of the following avenues, roads,
and streets: Homer, Cowper, Addison, Middlefield, Channing and Webster, all as
more particularly described on that certain map entitled "Proposed Underground
District No. 47 Homer/Cowper/Addison/Middlefield/Channing/Webster” on file in
the office of the City Clerk.”
SECTION 3. The "Underground Utility District Maps" referred to in Section 12.16.020
shall be amended to add to the areas shown on the map those referred to in Resolution No. 9285.
2
121105 dm 6051811
SECTION 4. The City Council hereby finds that the adoption of this ordinance is
categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act under Public Resources
Code Section 15302 (conversion of overhead electric distribution facilities to underground).
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall become effective upon the expiration of thirty (30)
days from its passage.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
______________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Manager
_____________________________ ______________________________
Senior Deputy City Attorney Director of Utilities
ATTACHMENT C
Bid Summary for Underground District N0. 47:
Serial
#
Contractor/Bidder’s Name Base Bid Items
Price
Optional Items
Price
Total
1. MP Nexlevel of California, Inc. $1,570,086.50 $127,750.00 $1,697,836.50
2. Casey Construction, Inc. $1,733,565.00 $263,500.00 $1,997,065.00
3. Northern Underground, Inc. $1,796,275.00 $94,260.00 $1,890,535.00
4. West Valley Construction
Company, Inc.
$2,001,633.00 $133,890.00 $2,135,523.00
Lowest Bidder: MP Nexlevel of California, Inc.
ATTACHMENT D
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5551)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Designation of the Roth Building as a “Sender Site” in the
Transfer of Develop
Title: Adoption of a Resolution Designating 300 Homer Street Known as Roth
Building as a “Sender Site” in the Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
Program and Direction to staff to Advertise Request for Proposal to Market
the TDRs.
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Administrative Services
RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests that Council approve the following recommendations:
1. Approve the attached Resolution (Attachment A) designating 300 Homer Street, known as
the Roth Building, to be eligible as a “Sender Site” in the Transfer of Development Rights
(TDR) program.
2. Approve the release of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the sale of 9,592 square feet of
Transferable Development Rights (TDR) from the Roth Building at the minimum starting
price of $200 per square foot. These TDRs shall not be subject to a parking exemption in
accordance with an earlier imposed parking exemption moratorium passed by the Council.
3. Authorize the City Manager to execute and complete the sale of the TDRs to the highest
qualified bidder(s), at a price not less than $200 per square foot.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In the past ten years, the Palo Alto History Museum (PAHM) has been utilizing various
strategies and activities including raisings funds from private and public sources to raise
sufficient capital to renovate the Roth Building and to operate a historical museum. The Palo
Alto History Museum proposes to restore, preserve, and rehabilitate the City’s Roth Building as
a museum.
TDRs are one of instruments among the possible funding sources that will contribute needed
resources toward the overall budget for this project. The purpose of the TDR program is to
encourage and support the rehabilitation of historic buildings. The program requires the City to
City of Palo Alto Page 2
use sales proceeds to rehabilitate the building subject to the TDRs or for rehabilitation of some
other historic resource. In this case, the proceeds from the sale of the TDRs are intended to be
used toward the completion of rehabilitation of the historical Roth Building. The program
provides a floor area bonus for the qualified rehabilitation of Category 1 and 2 historic buildings
and Seismic Category I, II, and III buildings which are either owned by the City of Palo Alto or
located in the Downtown commercial (CD) zoning district. For City-owned property, floor area
bonuses from eligible sender sites may be sold by the City on the open market through a public
bid process. The proceeds from the sale of the TDRs will be used toward the rehabilitation of
the historical Roth Building. As a Category 2 resource, and with the planned historic
rehabilitation of the building, the Roth Building would be eligible as a “sender site” for a 9,592
square foot floor area bonus.
On December 15, 2014, the Palo Alto City Council directed the staff to initiate the process of
designation of the Roth Building as a “Sender Site” in the transfer development right program
and to set the minimum market price of $200 per square foot for each TDR when City issues a
Request for Proposal to market the TDR units.
Generally TDRs are sold at a point in the entitlement process where the project is in the process
of being rehabilitated, though Council has the ability to approve the building as a sender site at
an earlier stage. Following the sale of the TDRs the City will place a restrictive covenant on the
property to ensure its long term historic protection.
BACKGROUND
The Roth Building has been listed on the National Register of Historic Places, joining several
other listed Palo Alto structures such as the Norris House, the University Avenue Caltrain
station and the United States Post Office on Hamilton Avenue. Background information on the
development of the Roth Building since the City’s acquisition in April 2000 is extensive. Since
2007 City staff and Museum personnel have examined a variety of proposals to fund the capital
and operating needs of the Roth Building historical museum. Additional background
information can be found by referring to CMRs 4703, 2197, 2891 and 5365. On December 15,
2014, to support the rehabilitation cost of the this project, City Council instructed the staff to
initiate the designation of the Roth Building as a “sender site” which enabled the sale of the
TDRs and approved a one-time contribution of one million ($1,000,000) toward the
rehabilitation and seismic of the Building.
DISCUSSION
A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The existing square footage of the Roth Building is 19,182 square feet. PAHM is proposing to
add 1,398 square feet comprised of: 101 square feet for the basement egress stairway, 194
square feet at the first floor level at the rear of the building for additional gallery space, 383
square feet at the second floor level rear of the building for exhibit/archive space, and 720
City of Palo Alto Page 3
square foot at the roof level consisting of an open roof area. For a detail of rehabilitation plans,
please note Report to Historical Resource Board & Architectural Review Board on February 16,
& 17, 2011.
B. Transfer of Development Rights (TDR)
The purpose of the TDR program is to encourage and support the rehabilitation of historic
buildings. The program provides a floor area bonus for the qualified rehabilitation of Category 1
and 2 historic buildings and Seismic Category I, II, and III buildings which are either owned by
the City of Palo Alto or located in the Downtown CD zone district. Funds from the sale will be
used to rehabilitate eligible City-owned historic buildings. On February 7, 2005, the Council
approved revisions to the Zoning Code to allow eligible City-owned historic properties located
in any zone district to be “sender sites” under the Transfer of Development Rights ordinance,
transferring historic or seismic rehabilitation floor area bonuses from these sites to eligible
“receiver” sites located in the Downtown CD Zone District. As a Category 2 resource, and with
the planned historic rehabilitation of the building, the Roth Building would be eligible as a
“sender site” for a 9,592 square foot floor area bonus. In addition, a change in procedure has
eliminated the need for the Council to review the Requests for Proposals for the purchase of
Transferable Development Rights. Provisions for eligible City-owned buildings to participate in
the TDR program are outlined in Chapters 18.18.080 and 18.28.060 of the Palo Alto Municipal
Code (PAMC), as shown in (Attachment B). First, the Council must designate by resolution City-
owned buildings that are Category 1 or Category 2 on the City’s historic inventory or Category I,
II or III on the City’s seismic hazards identification list as eligible to participate as a “sender site”
in the TDR program.
On March 10, 2010, the Historic Resources Board recommended inclusion of the property in the
proposed designation as a Category 2 building and meets the definition of “historic
rehabilitation” as set forth in Municipal Code Section 18.18.080, and that the proposed historic
rehabilitation plan for the building maintains the building’s identified historic character by
conforming to the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation with respect to
preservation of character-defining features and with respect to compatibility and
differentiation of the proposed new construction.
The Historic Site is located in the Public Facility Zoning District. To promote the preservation
and historic and seismic rehabilitation of historic buildings, Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter
18.18.080 permits transfer of 9,592 square feet of development rights from the Historic Site to
an eligible receiver site. As a condition of such transfer, the Historic Sender Site must be
developed and maintained in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. City’s Historic. The City has
completed the requirements of Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.28.060 and the City’s
Director of Planning (the “Director”) has determined that the Historic Sender Site is eligible as a
sender site in the Transfer of Development Rights Program site for 4,796 square feet for historic
rehabilitation, and 4,796 square feet for seismic rehabilitation. No floor area bonus will be
City of Palo Alto Page 4
utilized at the Historic Sender Site. The TDRs from the Roth Building can only be used for floor
area bonus at the future eligible receiver site(s).
PAHM has focused on moving this project forward by raising funds from private donors,
applying for grant from various sources and processing applications for appropriate permits
from the City. PAHM has also hired a new executive director to work on new strategies for the
development of the Museum, to develop plans for the programming of the Museum and to
assist with fund raising efforts to capitalize its construction budget as shown on (Attachment C)
for rehabilitation of the Building. At the present time, the projected budget needed to complete
the rehabilitation for the Roth Building is $9.1 million.
C. Option to Lease Agreement with City of Palo Alto
The Option to Lease Agreement between the City and PAHM requires that specific conditions
must be met prior to the City signing the Lease. The current Option Agreement with the City
will expire on July 1, 2015. PAHM plans to complete its fund raising process before this time in
and meet all the other remaining option conditions in order to exercise the Option and enter
into a long term lease with the City of Palo Alto.
D. Request for Proposal
In accordance with the attached Policy & Procedure (Attachment D) and Palo Alto Municipal
Code sections 18.28.060 & 18.18.080, staff intends to prepare and release an RFP sometime in
the next several months. Upon release of the RFP, and receipt of responses, staff will forward
the results of the bidding to the Council with a staff recommendation. The Council may accept
the bid, or a bid which in its opinion best serves the public interest, or reject any and all bids.
The RFP will include the date proposals are due, the minimum bid price and instructions on how
to obtain and submit the bid package. The Information Flyer will explain the TDR program,
including both limits and advantages of the development rights offered for sale. The
development rights do not have to be assigned to or used on a receiver site at the time of
purchase. They may be held for use or resale at a later date. The Proposal Package will contain
detailed information on submitting the bid and the offer and agreement to purchase. Major
terms of the RFP are:
1. Minimum bid price of $200 per 1,000 square foot lot of floor area bonus.
2. Bidders may bid on one or more lots, and the City reserves the right to accept or reject all
or part on multiple lot bids.
3. Sealed written bids, accompanied by a good faith deposit in the amount of 10 percent of
the actual bid, but not less than $20,000, will be accepted until 3:00 p.m. on ___(TBD)___,
2015. Bids will be opened on __(TBD)__, but will not be accepted or rejected at that time.
4. Within seven days following notification from the City that a bidder was the qualified high
bidder, the bidder is to pay the City the difference between the good faith deposit and 25
percent of the total bid.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
5. The City may accept multiple bids if the highest bid does not request the full amount of
available floor area bonus. Subsequent bid awards shall also be based the highest
monetary bid.
Following Council approval, the RFP will be advertised in local newspapers, on the City’s
Website and the information flyer will be sent to all persons on the Real Estate Division
“Surplus Property Mailing List,” persons owning eligible “receiver sites” in the CD District, local
developers and others likely to be interested in the offering. The current real estate market is in
a growth phase supporting the release of RFP for the sale of the TDRs. The proceeds from the
sale will be deposited in a special fund to be used toward the rehabilitation of the Roth
Building. The funds will be eligible for release in increments when PAHM has fulfilled its fund
raising goal for the construction phase of the project from other potential sources.
If the TDRs do not attract qualified bidders and are not sold at the offered price of $200 per
square foot after the initial RFP, Staff will return to the Council for directions.
TIMELINE
Staff will return to Council in the future with results of the bids received in accordance with the
release of the RFP. In the meantime, the Palo Alto Historical Museum will continue its effort for
fund raising until it is ready to exercise its option to enter into lease with City for Roth Building.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Sale of these development rights will eventually result in revenue to be allocated toward the
planned rehabilitation work of the Roth Building. The RFP is released with an expectation that
the market conditions for these instruments have improved. The minimum bid to be set for the
RFP will be set at $200 per square foot. At that price, if sold, the instruments are expected to
generate $1,918,400 toward the construction budget for the rehabilitation of the Building.
Once the cash for the sale of the instruments are received the City will segregate the funds and
accrue interest earnings consistent with the interest earnings of the City’s investment portfolio.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This recommendation is consistent with existing City policy.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Designation of the Roth Building site as an eligible TDR “sender” site is Categorically Exempt
from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review under CEQA guidelines section 15305,
Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitation. The rehabilitation project is Categorically Exempt
from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15331, Historical Resource
Restoration/Rehabilitation, as a project limited to maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation in
accordance with the secretary of interior standards for historic preservation.
Attachments:
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Attachment A: Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Designating 300 Homer
Street, known as the Roth Building, to be Eligible as a “Sender Site” in the Transfer of
Development Rights progr (DOC)
Attachment B: Palo Alto Municipal Code for TDRs (PDF)
Attachment C. PAHM Constrcution Phase Budget Roth (PDF)
Attachment C: PAHM Construction Phase Budget for the ROTH Building (PDF)
Attachment D: Procedure For Sale/Transfer Of Development Rights For City-owned
Property (PDF)
Attachment A
Page 1 of 2
Resolution No. ________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to
Designating 300 Homer Street, Known as the Roth Building, to be
Eligible as a “Sender Site in the Transfer of Development Rights
Program
R E C I T A L S
A. Chapter 18.28.060(d) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) provides for the
Council to designate one or more city-owned buildings that are Category 1 or
Category 2 on the city’s historic inventory and/or Category I, II, III on the city’s
seismic hazards identification list as eligible to participate as “sender sites” in
the Transfer of Development Rights program as provided in Chapter 18.18 of
the Zoning Code. As a Category 2 resource, and with the planned historic
rehabilitation of the building, the Roth Building would be eligible as a “sender
site” for a 9,592 square foot floor area bonus.
B. The Roth Building located at 300 Homer Street in Palo Alto, is designated as a
Category II historic building on the City of Palo Alto Historic Inventory.
C. The Palo Alto Historic Resources Board (HRB) review and recommendation on
March 10, 201 included the Property as in the proposed designation as a
category 2 building. The Roth Building meets the definition of “historic
rehabilitation” as set forth in the Municipal Code Section 18.18.080, and the
proposed historic rehabilitation of the building maintains the building’s
identified historic character by conforming to the Secretary of Interior’s
Standards for rehabilitation with respect to preservation of the character-
defining features and with respect with compatibility and differentiation of the
proposed new construction.
D. On March 21, 2011, in compliance with conditions of the Option Agreement and
the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18, development plans for the
Museum’s proposed project were conditionally approved for Architectural
Review, Minor Exceptions, and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP).
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows:
SECTION 1. The Roth Building located at 300 Homer, Street, shown on the
attached Exhibit A, is hereby designated as a “sender site” in the Transfer of Development
Rights program.
Attachment A
Page 2 of 2
SECTION 2. The Council Finds that the Roth Building rehabilitation project is
categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines section 15331 (Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation) as a project involving
maintenance, repair and rehabilitation that will be completed in accordance with the Secretary
of Interior’s Standards for Historic Preservation.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________
Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager
_____________________________
Director of Planning & Community Services
_____________________________
Director of Administrative Services
Attachment B
18.18.080 Transfer of Development Rights
(a) Purpose
The purpose of this section is to implement the Comprehensive Plan by encouraging seismic
rehabilitation of buildings in Seismic Categories I, II, and III, and encouraging historic
rehabilitation of buildings or sites in Historic Category 1 and 2, and by establishing standards
and procedures for the transfer of specified development rights from such sites to other eligible
sites. Except as provided in subsection (e)(1) and for city-owned properties as provided in
Chapter 18.28, this section is applicable only to properties located in the CD district, and is the
exclusive procedure for transfer of development rights for properties so zoned.
(b) Establishment of Forms
The city may from time to time establish application forms, submittal requirements, fees and
such other requirements and guidelines as will aid in the efficient implementation of this chapter.
(c) Eligibility for Transfer of Development Rights
Transferable development rights may be transferred to an eligible receiver site upon:
(1) Certification by the city pursuant to Section 18.18.070 of the floor area from the sender
site which is eligible for transfer; and
(2) Compliance with the transfer procedures set forth in subsection (h).
(d) Availability of Receiver Sites
The city does not guarantee that at all times in the future there will be sufficient eligible
receiver sites to receive such transferable development rights.
(e) Eligible Receiver Sites
A site is eligible to be a receiver site only if it meets all of the following criteria:
(1) It is located in the CD commercial downtown district, or is located in a planned
community (PC) district if the property was formerly located in the CD commercial downtown
district and the ordinance rezoning the property to planned community (PC) approves the use of
transferable development rights on the site.
(2) It is neither an historic site, nor a site containing a historic structure, as those terms are
defined in Section16.49.020(e) of Chapter 16.49 of this code; and
(3) The site is either:
(A) Located at least 150 feet from any property zoned for residential use, not including
property in planned community zones or in commercial zones within the downtown boundaries
where mixed use projects are.
1 of 5
Attachment B
(B) Separated from residentially zoned property by a city street with a width of at least 50
feet, and separated from residentially zoned property by an intervening property zoned CD-C,
CD-S, or CD-N, which intervening property has a width of not less than 50 feet.
(f) Limitations On Usage of Transferable Development Rights
No otherwise eligible receiver site shall be allowed to utilize transferable development rights
under this chapter to the extent such transfer would:
(1) Be outside the boundaries of the downtown parking assessment district, result in a
maximum floor area ratio of 0.5 to 1 above what exists or would otherwise be permitted for that
site under Section 18.18.060, whichever is greater, or result in total additional floor area of more
than 10,000 square feet.
(2) Be within the boundaries of the downtown parking assessment district, result in a
maximum floor area ratio of 1.0 to 1 above what exists, or would otherwise be permitted for that
site under Section 18.18.060, whichever is greater, or result in total additional floor area of more
than 10,000 square feet.
(3) Cause the development limitation or project size limitation set forth in
Section 18.18.040 to be exceeded.
(4) Cause the site to exceed 3.0 to 1 FAR in the CD-C subdistrict or 2.0 to 1 FAR in the
CD-S or CD-N subdistricts.
(g) Parking Requirements
Any square footage allowed to be transferred to a receiver site pursuant to this chapter shall be
subject to the parking regulations applicable to the district in which the receiver site is located.
(h) Transfer Procedure
Transferable development rights may be transferred from a sender site (or sites) to a receiver
site only in accordance with all of the following requirements:
(1) An application pursuant to Chapter 16.48 of this code for major ARB review of the
project proposed for the receiver site must be filed. The application shall include:
(A) A statement that the applicant intends to use transferable development rights for the
project;
(B) Identification of the sender site(s) and the amount of TDRs proposed to be transferred;
and
(C) Evidence that the applicant owns the transferable development rights or a signed
statement from any other owner(s) of the TDRs that the specified amount of floor area is
available for the proposed project and will be assigned for its use.
(2) The application shall not be deemed complete unless and until the city determines that
the TDRs proposed to be used for the project are available for that purpose.
2 of 5
Attachment B
(3) In reviewing a project proposed for a receiver site pursuant to this section, the
architectural review board shall review the project in accordance with Section 16.48.120 of this
code; however, the project may not be required to be modified for the sole purpose of reducing
square footage unless necessary in order to satisfy the criteria for approval underChapter
16.48 or any specific requirement of the municipal code.
(4) Following ARB approval of the project on the receiver site, and prior to issuance of
building permits, the director of planning and community environment or the director’s designee
shall issue written confirmation of the transfer, which identifies both the sender and receiver sites
and the amount of TDRs which have been transferred. This confirmation shall be recorded in the
office of the county recorder prior to the issuance of building permits and shall include the
written consent or assignment by the owner(s) of the TDRs where such owner(s) are other than
the applicant.
(i) Purchase or Conveyance of TDRs - Documentation
(1) Transferable development rights may be sold or otherwise conveyed by their owner(s) to
another party. However, no such sale or conveyance shall be effective unless evidenced by a
recorded document, signed by the transferor and transferee and in a form designed to run with
the land and satisfactory to the city attorney. The document shall clearly identify the sender site
and the amount of floor area transferred and shall also be filed with the department of planning
and community environment.
(2) Where transfer of TDRs is made directly to a receiver site, the recorded confirmation of
transfer described in subsection (h)(4) shall satisfy the requirements of this section.
(Ord. 5214 § 3, 2013: Ord. 4923 § 4 (part), 2006)
18.28.060 Additional PF District Design Requirements
The following additional regulations shall apply in the PF district:
(a) Recycling Storage
All new development, including approved modifications that add thirty percent or more floor
area to existing uses, shall provide adequate and accessible interior areas or exterior enclosures
for the storage of recyclable materials in appropriate containers. The design, construction and
accessibility of recycling areas and enclosures shall be subject to approval by the architectural
review board, in accordance with design guidelines adopted by that board and approved by the
city council pursuant to Section 16.48.070.*
* Editor’s Note: Chapter 16.48, Architectural Review, was repealed in its entirety by Ordinance No. 4826, § 21,
2004.
(b) Employee Shower Facilities
Employee shower facilities shall be provided for any new building constructed or for any
addition to or enlargement of any existing building as specified in Table 3.
3 of 5
Attachment B
Table 3*
Employee Showers Required
Uses Gross Floor Area of New Construction(ft2) Showers Required
All government or special district facilities
designed for employee occupancy, colleges and
universities, private educational facilities,
business and trade schools and similar uses
0-9,999 No
requirement
10,000-
19,999 1
20,000-
49,999 2
50,000
and up 4
* Editor’s Note: Ordinance 5062 § 2, 2009, added a new Table 3 to § 18.28.050, thereby duplicating the numbering
of this table. Future legislation will eliminate the redundancy when necessary.
(c) Landscaping of Yards
(1) All required interior yards (setbacks) abutting or opposite a residential district shall be
planted and maintained as a landscaped screen.
(2) For sites abutting a residential district, a solid wall or fence between 5 and 8 ft in height
shall be shall be constructed and maintained along the common site line.
(d) Transfer of Development Rights*
(1) The city council by resolution may, from time to time, designate one or more city-
owned buildings that are Category 1 or Category 2 on the city's historic inventory and/or
Category I, II, or III on the city's seismic hazards identification list as eligible to participate as
“sender sites” in the Transfer of Development Rights program as provided inChapter 18.18.
(2) Before any transferable development rights are offered for sale, the city manager shall
establish, in writing, a public process using the city's formal bidding procedures to sell bonus
floor area development rights from any sites so designated by the city council.
(3) Before formally soliciting the participation of other organizations or agencies in the
rehabilitation of a city-owned historic building, the city should have a historic structures report
prepared by a qualified expert in accordance with the standards and guidelines of the California
State Office of Historic Preservation.
(4) Before concluding a sale of transferable development rights for any city building, the
city shall comply with Section 18.18.080.
(5) The city manager shall establish and maintain a special fund into which all proceeds of
the sale of transferable rights, and any interest thereon, shall be deposited. Upon receipt and
4 of 5
Attachment B
entry into the accounting records for the fund such monies shall be considered committed to the
rehabilitation of the city-owned building from which the development rights were sold, or to the
rehabilitation of other city-owned buildings in the Historic Category 1 or 2 or Seismic Hazard
Categories I, II, or III.
(Ord. 5062 § 3, 2009: Ord. 4964 §§ 4 (part), 16, 2007)
* Editor’s Note: Subsection (d) derives from former Section 18.32.090, as adopted by of Ordinance 4862, § 2, 2005.
5 of 5
Page 1 of 2
Attachment “C”
Palo Alto History Museum Phase One Roth Building Rehabilitation
1) Roth Building Rehabilitation Total (including architecture and fees) $9.1M
2) Capital Expenditures To-Date $0.6M
3) Funding Sources
TDR (projected to sell at $200.00 Per SQF) 1.9M
Library Impact Fee (Archives) 0.3M
Gifts in Hand 0.4M
Pledges in Hand 2.5M
Total Available Funding $5.1M
Total Capital Needed $3.4 M
1 of 1
POLICY AND PROCEDURES 1-46/ASD
Effective: September 2005
PROCEDURE FOR SALE/TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS
FOR CITY-OWNED PROPERTY
POLICY STATEMENT
It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto that the disposal of City property and assets,
including the transfer of certified development rights, be accomplished through a public
bid process. To assure the highest return for sale of its assets, the process involves an
appraisal of fair market value and an open and competitive bid process. The City Council
may reject any or all bids and accept that bid which will, in its opinion, best serve the
public interest.
PROCEDURE
1. Following designation of a city-owned site as an eligible “sender site,” and
determination of a floor area bonus in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code
Chapters 18.49 and 18.87, the Real Property Manager shall appraise (or have
appraised) the value of the rights to be sold to determine a minimum bid.
2. The Real Estate Division shall prepare a Request for Proposals (RFP) to be placed
on the Council Consent Calendar for approval. The RFP shall specify whether
overbids shall be accepted.
3. Upon approval by the Council:
1) An ad shall be placed in the Real Estate section of the local newspapers.
2) Flyers advising of the offering shall be sent to all persons on the Real
Estate Division “Surplus Property Mailing List,” persons owning eligible
“receiver sites,” local developers and others likely to be interested in the
offering.
4. The bid opening shall be scheduled by the Real Property Manager and the
Purchasing Manager. At the bid opening the Purchasing Division shall:
1) Open Sealed bids
2) If specified in the RFP, accept oral bidding beginning at 5% above the
highest written bid.
5. The Real Estate Division shall forward the results of the bidding to the Council
with a staff recommendation. The Council may reject any or all bids and accept
that bid which will, in its opinion, best serve the public interest.
NOTE: Questions and/or clarifications of this policy should be directed to the
Administrative Services Department.
Page 1 of 1
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5521)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Utilities Legislative Guidelines
Title: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council
Adopt a Resolution Approving the City of Palo Alto Utilities Policy Guidelines
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
Recommendation
Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the City Council adopt the
attached resolution (Attachment A) approving the Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines.
Executive Summary
The Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines (Exhibit A in Attachment A) have been updated from
the 2014 guidelines to respond to recent legislative and regulatory trends to: 1) provide
direction to staff in evaluating and responding to legislative action involving Utilities issues, and
2) clarify approved policy and advocacy direction when active involvement of Palo Alto elected
officials is required. At its December 10, 2014 meeting, the UAC reviewed and voted
unanimously to recommend that Council approve the guidelines.
The guidelines are grouped in six sections: the first addressing legislative policy guidelines that
are common to all utilities (electric, fiber optics, gas, wastewater collection, and water), and the
following five sections addressing those guidelines that are specific to electric, fiber optics, gas,
wastewater collection, and water. This is the first year there is a section for fiber optics, largely
in response to an increasing advocacy need from the City. Each section includes a set of goals
for the utility and guidelines for Palo Alto staff and elected officials when taking action to
achieve the goals.
Background
The utility industry is a high-profile and heavily regulated industry that is subject to continuous
legislative action at both the state and federal levels. Such legislation can influence, among
other things, the reliability and security of the supply and distribution infrastructure,
commodity procurement practices, customer service and billing, program design, rate design,
and activities and costs associated with climate protection. Representatives of the City
(appointed and elected officials and staff) participate in Federal and State legislative forums to
City of Palo Alto Page 2
advocate positions on issues that facilitate the City’s current strategic objectives, as adopted in
the Utilities Strategic Plan: ensuring a reliable and safe supply of utility resources, providing
customer service excellence, managing costs, and ensuring environmental sustainability. The
City also participates in joint action efforts to advocate for goals and objectives shared by other
publicly-owned utilities.
At the state level, hundreds of bills focused on the utility industry can be introduced each year.
The number of bills introduced, the pace at which bills change and new language is negotiated,
and the often surprising speed at which bills can be placed for a vote during the legislative year
requires staff and elected officials to respond quickly if the City is to have any influence on the
resulting legislation. Often, a response to an amended bill is required in a matter of a day or
two. These timing constraints preclude a return to the UAC and Council for approval each time
a response is required. Therefore, a set of policy guidelines is developed each year that
identifies the goals and priorities for the City to be applied by staff when evaluating and
responding to legislation. While the guidelines are used by staff for evaluating legislation, any
advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the approval of
the Utilities Director or City Manager per the City’s legislative advocacy process. Although it is
impractical to return for approval each time a letter is sent in response to a bill amendment,
the issues under debate are known to the UAC and Council through their participation in
legislative committee meetings, and updates from the City Manager, the Utilities Director and
City staff. Formal letters responding to legislative bills or amendments will be distributed to the
UAC and Council.
Discussion
The proposed Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines have been updated to respond to recent
legislative and regulatory trends. Attachment B highlights the changes from the 2014
guidelines and Attachment C provides a summary of legislative action from 2014. Although
there were minimal new state regulations introduced in 2014 for publicly-owned utilities, such
as the City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU), 2015 could see renewed attempts to increase net
energy metering caps, adjust the renewable portfolio standard, change greenhouse gas
regulations, introduce more drought related changes, and modify urban water management
plan requirements. At the Federal level there may be continuing activity to increase cyber
security requirements, drought legislation, budget/tax reform, EPA emissions regulations, and
ongoing activities relating to the City’s federal hydropower allocation from the Western Area
Power Administration (Western).
Staff returns to the Council every year with an update to the guidelines, and previously has
labelled the guidelines by calendar year. Due to UAC and City Council meeting timing and the
compressed November and December schedules for legislative policy and strategy sessions
(with the Northern California Power Agency and the California Municipal Utilities Association,
staff proposes to remove the calendar year designation. This will resolve the issue when there
may be a lag between the end of the calendar year and final approval of the new guidelines,
such that staff has no officially approved guidelines in effect for a period of up to a month or
City of Palo Alto Page 3
more. Staff proposes that the guidelines, if adopted by Council, remain in effect until the next
update is adopted. Staff will continue to return to Council annually for a review of, and any
appropriate updates to, the guidelines.
In addition to non-substantive editorial changes, the major revisions to the legislative guidelines
were the addition of the following new Goals and Guidelines:
1. All Utilities
A new global guideline was added regarding notification, compliance, and reporting
requirements for services, communications, billing and payments. The purpose of this new
guideline is to ensure the City has the flexibility to balance information and reporting with cost
and other constraints.
2. Electric Utility Changes
Under Guideline #3, staff proposes a new objective supporting the establishment of equitable
rate design and tariffs with respect to local distributed generation. A new objective supporting
the consolidation of renewable standards and greenhouse gas requirements under one clean
energy standard was added to Guideline #5. Under Guideline #7, staff proposes adding a new
objective addressing the need for an equitable distribution of costs between water and power
customers of the Central Valley Project. Finally, under Guideline #10, staff proposes adding a
new objective addressing the need to critically review new transmission projects in light of
continuing transmission cost increases.
3. Fiber Optic Utility
This is the first year staff has developed formal goals and guidelines for the fiber optic utility.
Goal #1 is to preserve and enhance the local ability to develop broadband solutions that expand
consumer choice. Goal #2 is to encourage the use of public rights of way and Utilities
infrastructure, provided local authority is maintained and the City’s existing service and safety
obligations are not compromised. Goal #3 is to maintain local control over zoning related land
use for communications. Finally, Goal #4 is to support legislation that allows the use of the
City’s fiber optic asset to support City policies surrounding technology and connectivity.
4. Gas Utility Changes
Under Guideline #3, staff proposes modifying the objective to change the focus from
supporting production incentives for renewable gas supplies to supporting cost-effective
renewable gas supplies.
5. Wastewater Utility
The proposed changes to the wastewater utility goals and guidelines are primarily “clean up”
type changes and do not represent any new or major changes. Goal #3 was modified to
maintain a reliable and sustainable wastewater collection system at a fair price. Under
Guideline #2, the objective was modified to better align the guideline with local efforts to
City of Palo Alto Page 4
maintain the wastewater collection system at a fair price while recognizing the uniqueness of
each local system.
6. Water Utility Changes
For the water utility there are two substantive changes. New Guideline #13 is to support
responsible groundwater management while recognizing existing and historical groundwater
extraction practices. New Guideline #14 supports Proposition 218 reform efforts to balance
different objectives.
Commission Review and Recommendation
The Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2014 were presented to the UAC at its December
10, 2014 meeting. Due to a self-identified conflict of interest stated by Commissioner Hall, the
recommendation was split into two items to allow the Commissioner to participate in the
discussion regarding all the utilities except the water utility. Agenda Item 5 recommended
approval of the guidelines for all utilities except the water utility, and Item 6 recommended
approval of the water utility guidelines. The UAC had a few clarifying questions on the new
guidelines. Staff made two minor changes to the water guidelines to clarify that groundwater
related efforts will focus on the Palo Alto area and that support for ‘beneficiary pays’ cost
allocation for infrastructure improvements should be on the state and regional level. Item 5
was approved 6-0 with Commissioner Chang absent. Item 6 was approved 5-0 with
Commissioner Chang absent and Commissioner Hall recused. Draft minutes from the UAC
meeting are included as Attachment D.
Resource Impact
There is no direct resource impact associated with adoption of the proposed legislative policy
guidelines. However, actions taken that support the efficient use of the City’s assets and
resources will help control costs, implement the Council’s policies and goals, and protect utility
customers.
Policy Implications
The recommendation is consistent with Council policy and supports the Utilities Strategic Plan’s
objectives of: ensuring a reliable and safe supply of utility resources, providing customer service
excellence, managing costs, and ensuring environmental sustainability.
Environmental Review
Approval of a resolution adopting the Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines does not meet the
definition of a project pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), thus, no environmental review is required.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Draft Resolution Legislative Policy Guidelines with Exhibit A - 2015
Legislative Policy Guidelines (PDF)
Attachment B: Draft 2015 Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines - redline changes from
2014 (PDF)
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Attachment C: 2014 Legislative Activity Summary (PDF)
Attachment D: Excerpted Draft UAC Minutes of December 10, 2014 (PDF)
*NOT YET APPROVED*
141216 mf 6053123
Resolution No. _____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving the City
of Palo Alto Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines
R E C I T A L S
A. The City of Palo Alto Utilities Strategic Plan (“Strategic Plan”), approved by the
Palo Alto City Council on July 18, 2011, (Staff Report #1880), and amended on August 5, 2013,
(Staff Report #3950), provides a set of Strategic Objectives for the City of Palo Alto Utilities
Department (CPAU) to follow in ensuring a reliable and safe supply of utility resources,
providing customer service excellence, managing costs, and ensuring environmental
sustainability.
B. CPAU annually identifies Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines that facilitate the
Strategic Plan’s Strategic Objectives, and advocates for utility-related issues at Federal and
State legislative forums in furtherance of those objectives.
C. Action on some of these issues may require active involvement of Palo Alto
elected and appointed officials.
D. The Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines were presented to the UAC at its
December 10, 2014 meeting. Due to a self-identified conflict of interest stated by
Commissioner Hall, the recommendation was split into two items to allow the Commissioner to
participate in the discussion regarding all the utilities except the water utility. Agenda Item 5
recommended approval of the guidelines for all utilities except the water utility, and Item 6
recommended approval of the water utility guidelines. In response to clarifying questions from
the UAC, staff made two minor changes to the water guidelines to clarify that groundwater
related efforts will focus on the Palo Alto area and that support for ‘beneficiary pays’ cost
allocation for infrastructure improvements should be on the state and regional level. The UAC
voted unanimously (6-0 with Commissioner Chang absent) to recommend that the City Council
approve the Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines for all utilities except the water utility. The
UAC voted unanimously (5-0 with Commissioner Chang absent and Hall recused) to recommend
that the City Council approve the Water Utility’s Legislative Policy Guidelines.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES, as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council hereby adopts the resolution approving the Utilities
Legislative Policy Guidelines, effective January 1, 2015. All prior versions of the City of Palo Alto
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines, including the Legislative Policy Guidelines for 2014,
adopted by Council on January 12, 2014 (Resolution No. 9388) are hereby repealed and
replaced in their entirety by the Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines, attached to this
Resolution as Exhibit A.
ATTACHMENT A
*NOT YET APPROVED*
141216 mf 6053123
SECTION 2. Staff will review the Guidelines annually and any proposed changes will
be approved by City Council.
SECTION 3. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute
a project under Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA
Guidelines, and therefore, no environmental assessment is required.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Sr. Deputy City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative
Services
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 1 of 15
Exhibit A
Approved by City Council on January 10th, 2014; Resolution #---
Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines
Formal advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the
approval of the Utilities Director or City Manager as per the City’s Legislative Program Manual
ALL UTILITIES
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance local accountability in the control and oversight of matters impacting utility
programs and rates for our customers while balancing statewide climate protection goals.
2. Support efforts to maintain or improve the reliability of the supply, transmission, storage and
distribution/collection infrastructures.
3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, and recognizes early voluntary action.
4. Maintain the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) ability to provide safe, reliable, sustainable, and
competitively-priced utility services.
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in joint action
efforts.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
2. Support legislation that will
result in the most cost-effective
reduction of GHG emissions,
recognition of early action, and
inclusion of more efficient
solutions, fuel switching, and
demand control programs, in
integrated resource plans.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
3. Promote utility legislation and
regulations that have
undergone stakeholder review
and applicable cost benefit
analysis to support reasonable
reliability standards and
compliance requirements, and
effective and consistent
reporting requirements,
Federal,
State, and
Regional
Reliability
Councils
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 2 of 15
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
customer communications, and
goal-setting.
4. Oppose cost shifts from Federal
or State budgets and California
Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC) jurisdictional utilities
through active participation in
CMUA and NCPA legislative
activities.
Federal,
State, and
CPUC
5. Advocate for State and Federal
grants for local and regional
measures regarding energy
efficiency, conservation,
renewable resources, fiber, fuel
switching, wastewater
collection systems and recycled
water projects.
Federal
and State
6. Maintain right of way access
for utility infrastructure.
Federal
and State
7. Protect the value of existing
assets and contracts and local
regulatory approvals of same.
Federal
and State
8. Maintain existing low cost
municipal financing options for
infrastructure projects and
advocate for new federal and
state programs that recognize
critical infrastructure needs.
Federal
and State
9. Promote utility legislation and
regulations that support
reasonable and consistent
notification, compliance, and
reporting requirements for
services, communications,
billing and payments.
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 3 of 15
ELECTRIC
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to exercise local accountability and oversight over
matters impacting customer service, programs (such as demand side efficiency and conservation
programs), and rate structure.
2. Preserve/enhance the reliability and security of infrastructure.
3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing GHG emissions and
encourages early voluntary action.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills established by local governing bodies.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA), California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA), American Public
Power Association (APPA), Transmission
Agency of Northern California (TANC), and Bay
Area Municipal Transmission Group (BAMx)
with support from Palo Alto staff to speak with
a coordinated voice.
Federal and
State
2. Support NCPA in its continued efforts to
streamline the state regulatory reporting
responsibilities, to eliminate duplicative data
and report submittals to multiple state
regulatory agencies, including the CEC, CARB,
and the California Independent System
Operator (CAISO).
State
3. Advocate for legislation/regulations that
provide local accountability and support for:
cost-effective clean distributed generation
and cogeneration projects, and standards
and permitting requirements for
connecting such resources to the local
distribution system;
balancing state and local policy
implementation and ratepayer equity;
equitable rate design and tariffs;
cost-effective electric efficiency programs;
implementation of renewable portfolio
standards;
cost-effective storage integration;
direct access requirements;
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 4 of 15
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
smart meters and smart grid design and
implementation; and
use of public benefit funds (as allowed in
AB 1890 (1996)
4. Support cap-and-trade market designs that:
protect consumers from the exercise of
market power;
allocate allowances that help mitigate
impacts to Palo Alto customers while
providing incentives for utilities to move to
lower GHG emission portfolios;
provide flexible compliance mechanisms
such as banking and borrowing of
allowances; and
allocate funds generated from cap-and-
trade markets to GHG related activities, not
as a revenue source for state or federal
general funds.
Federal and
State
5. Support legislation for renewable portfolio
standards that:
promote the 33% goal for the state;
maintain local compliance authority;
allow utilities to pursue low cost
alternatives by utilizing the existing
transmission system to access out-of-state
resources, including use
of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs);
ensure fair application of RPS standards
that avoid punitive and/or duplicative non-
compliance penalties;
restrict extension of CEC jurisdiction over
Publicly Owned Utilities;
consolidate GHG reduction goals and
Renewable Portfolio Standards under one
clean energy standard;
allow the counting of local distributed
generation towards RPS; and
prioritize the use of the existing
transmission system over building new
transmission.
Local and
State
6. Support/encourage transmission, generation,
and demand-reduction projects and solutions
including advocating for financing or funding
Local, State,
and Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 5 of 15
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
solutions/options for projects that:
enhance/ensure reliability;
ensure equitable cost allocation following
beneficiary pays principles (including
protection against imposition of state-
owned electric contract costs on municipal
utility customers);
improve procurement flexibility (e.g.
resource adequacy rules that ensure
reliability and provide flexibility in meeting
operational requirements or flexibility in
meeting State renewable portfolio
standards);
support the continuation of federal and
state financial incentives that promote
increased renewable development;
improve market transparency (particularly
transparency of IOU’s transmission and
procurement planning and implementation
activities); and
reduce the environmental impact on the
Bay Area and the Peninsula.
7. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters impacting
costs or operations of the Western Area
Power Administration (Western) such as:
support of Congressional Field Hearings to
explore modernizing flood control
strategies, river regulation and generation
strategies at Central Valley Project (CVP)
plants to enhance generation, water
delivery, flood control and fisheries;
protection of the status of Western Power
Marketing Administration and cost-based
rates;
provisions for preference customers’ first
take at land available with economic
potential for wind farms;
balancing efforts for competing
environmental improvements in rivers and
Delta conditions with water supply and
hydropower impacts;
achieving the grid modernization goals of
Secretary Chu’s March 16, 2012 memo
Federal,
State and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 6 of 15
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
without compromising the primary mission
of Western and recognizing the
achievements already made in California
without adding duplicate costly efforts;
monitoring and evaluating impacts of Delta
conveyance proposals on Western Base
Resource allocation; and
advocating for an equitable distribution of
costs between water and power customers
of the Central Valley Project.
8. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters relating to
overly burdensome reporting and compliance
requirements established by the North
American Reliability Corporation (NERC), the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
or the Western Electricity Coordinating
Council (WECC).
Federal,
State and
Regional
9. Support fair and reasonable application of grid
reliability requirements established by NERC,
WECC, or FERC and seek Congressional
remedies (if needed) for punitive application
of fees and fines.
Federal and
Regional
10. Work with CAISO or through FERC:
to give buyers of renewable intermittent
resources relief from imbalance penalties;
to promote financial and operational
changes that result in timely and accurate
settlement and billing; and
to provide critical input on the need for
various transmission projects in light of the
escalating costs to the City to import power
using the bulk transmission system.
Federal and
State
11. Monitor cyber security issues to ensure that
CPAU, which currently does not have critical
cyber assets, retains local control over its
cyber security needs while remaining exempt
from NERC cyber security standards. Support
NCPA to protect it and its member agencies
from unnecessary cyber security regulations.
Federal and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 7 of 15
FIBER OPTIC
Goals
1. Preserve and enhance the authority of local government to develop broadband solutions that align
with community needs and expand consumer choice for competitive Internet connectivity and other
advanced services delivered over fiber-optic networks.
2. Encourage the competitive delivery of broadband services by permitting the use of public rights-of-
way and Utilities infrastructure in a responsible manner, provided that local rights of way authority
and management is preserved and the use does not compromise the City’s existing utility safety and
services obligations.
3. Support local government authority over zoning-related land use for communications infrastructure
in accordance with reasonable and non-discriminatory regulations.
4. Support the Council’s Technology and the Connected City initiative to fully leverage the City’s fiber-
optic asset.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Support
Municipal
Delivery
2. Competitive
Delivery
3. Local
Authority
over Land
Use
4. Support
Council
Initiatives
1. Advocate for these goals through the
American Public Power Association
(APPA), California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA), National
Association of Telecommunications
Officers and Advisors (NATOA),
National League of Cities (NLC), and the
Next Century Cities initiative (NCC),
with support from City staff.
Federal
and State
2. Support legislation and regulations that
preserve and enhance municipal
delivery of conventional and advanced
telecommunication services as
prescribed by the Telecommunications
Act of 1996.
Federal
and State
3. Support the goals of the National
Broadband Plan, issued in 2010 by the
Federal Communications Commission
(FCC), to improve Internet access in the
United States
Federal
and State
4. Oppose legislation and regulations that
benefit the incumbent cable TV and
telephone companies at the expense of
community-owned fiber-optic and
wireless networks.
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 8 of 15
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Support
Municipal
Delivery
2. Competitive
Delivery
3. Local
Authority
over Land
Use
4. Support
Council
Initiatives
5. Support legislation and regulations that
preserve and enhance consumer
protections when dealing with the
incumbent providers of
telecommunication services.
Federal
and State
6. Support legislation and regulations
that encourage the competitive
delivery of broadband services by
permitting the use of public right-of-
way and Utilities infrastructure:
Support legislation and regulations
that preserve local rights-of-way
authority and management;
Support legislation and regulations
that preserve local government
zoning and siting authority for
wireless and wireline
communication facilities; and
Oppose legislation and regulations
that reduce compensation received
by local governments for the use of
the public rights-of-way and other
public properties that support
communication infrastructure (e.g.,
utility poles, streetlight poles, ducts
and conduits).
Federal,
State and
Local
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 9 of 15
NATURAL GAS
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to develop their own demand side efficiency and
conservation programs, alternative gas supplies, and rate structure.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the gas supply and transmission infrastructure. This includes
retaining access to intra- and interstate gas transmission systems to reliably serve customers.
3. Support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills established by local governing bodies.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3. Environ-
ment
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate most of these goals
mainly through the American
Public Gas Association (APGA) with
minor support from Palo Alto staff.
Primarily
Federal with
minor
advocacy at
State level
2. Work with Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA) and
California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA) to the extent
that the City’s goals as a gas
distributor align with generators’
use of natural gas.
Federal and
State
3. Support cost effective renewable
gas supplies from in or out of state
sources.
Federal and
State
4. Advocate for financing or funding
for cost-effective natural gas
efficiency and solar water heating
end uses.
Federal and
State
5. Support market transparency and
efforts to eliminate market
manipulation through reasonable
oversight.
Federal
6. Support municipal utilities’ ability
to enter into pre-pay transactions
for gas supplies.
Federal
7. Support efforts to improve pipeline
safety.
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 10 of 15
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3. Environ-
ment
4. Cost
Control
8. Work with partners to discourage
extension of CPUC regulatory
authority over municipal gas
operations.
State
9. Oppose legislative proposals
resulting in unreasonable costs for
Palo Alto’s customers.
Federal and
State
10. Support cap-and-trade market
designs that:
protect consumers from the
exercise of market power;
allocate allowances that help
mitigate impacts to Palo Alto
customers while providing
incentives for natural gas
utilities to move to lower GHG
emission portfolios;
advocate for an allowance
allocation methodology that
provides flexibility for Palo Alto
to structure rates to align GHG
costs and revenues;
provide flexible compliance
mechanisms such as banking
and borrowing of allowances;
and
allocate funds generated from
cap-and-trade markets to GHG
related activities, not as a
revenue source for state or
federal general funds.
Federal and
State
11. Support legislation that aims to
protect public health and
encourages transparency regarding
the practice of hydraulic fracturing
or “fracking” for natural gas
development, but not blanket
moratoriums that aren’t supported
by science.
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 11 of 15
WASTEWATER COLLECTIO N
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the imposition of non-volumetric
customer meter or infrastructure charges for wastewater collection service.
2. Increase the reliability of the local wastewater collection systems.
3. Maintain the provision of reliable and sustainable wastewater collection service at a fair price.
4. Support equal comparisons of wastewater collection systems by regulatory agencies in order to
minimize and reduce onerous, costly and time-intensive reporting requirements and improve value
and accuracy of information reported to the public.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Maintain
service
4. Valuable
reporting
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Association of
Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
Local,
Regional
& State
2. Support future regulations of
wastewater collection systems that
recognize:
local jurisdictions’ proactive
efforts to replace and maintain
wastewater collections
systems;
the need to provide affordable
and cost based collection
service; and
the unique characteristics of
each collection system.
Local,
Regional
& State
3. Support provision of sufficient
resources for regional agencies to
enable them to advocate for:
environmentally sustainable,
reliable wastewater collection
service at a fair price; and
regional comparisons of
wastewater collection projects
for future state grant funding.
Local and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 12 of 15
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Maintain
service
4. Valuable
reporting
4. Support infrastructure security and
reliability including equitable
allocation of funds for increasing
the security of infrastructure.
Regional,
and State
5. Advocate for funding and local
regulations for wastewater
collections system projects and
requirements that reduce
overflows and improve collection
system efficiency.
Regional,
State and
Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 13 of 15
WATE R
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the ability to optimize volumetric and
fixed charges to balance the goals of revenue certainty and water use efficiency.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the regional water system owned and operated by the San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).
3. Support efficiency and recycled water programs in order to minimize the use of imported supplies.
4. Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, reliable supply of high quality water at a
fair price.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Bay Area Water Supply
and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) and
California Municipal Utilities Association
(CMUA), with support from Palo Alto staff
for BAWSCA
Local,
Regional
and State
2. Participate in California Urban Water
Conservation Council (CUWCC) Best
Management Practice (BMP) revisions and
development to ensure that aggressive
and cost-effective efficiency goals are
incorporated and operating proposals are
reasonable, achievable, and cost-effective.
State
3. Advocate to ensure that legislative actions
regarding the Hetch Hetchy Regional
Water System include the following
requirements:
timely rebuilding of the regional water
system;
maintains the quality of delivered
water;
minimizes any increase in the cost of
water;
creates no additional exposure to
more frequent or severe water
shortages;
supports the existing water system and
its operation.
Local,
Regional
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 14 of 15
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
4. Advocate for interpretations or
implementation of Water Code provisions
(such as those enacted by AB 1823 (2002),
AB 2058 (2002) and SB 1870 (2002)) that
maintain or reinforce the authorities and
protections available to the City and
BAWSCA members outside of San
Francisco.
Local,
Regional
and State
5. Support provision of sufficient resources
for BAWSCA to enable it to advocate for:
an environmentally sustainable,
reliable supply of high quality water at
a fair price;
a SFPUC rate structure that is
consistent with the Water Supply
Agreement and is based on water
usage;
a contract amendment to modify the
drought time water allocation
between the SFPUC and the BAWSCA
agencies;
preservation of Palo Alto’s existing
contractual water allocation and
transportation rights on the SFPUC
Hetch Hetchy system; and
regional planning for conservation,
recycled water, and other water supply
projects.
Local and
Regional
6. Advocate for actions that:
preserve Palo Alto’s existing
contractual rights; and
preserve local control over water use
and limit encroachment from outside
jurisdictions.
Local and
Regional
7. Support infrastructure security and
reliability including an interconnection
between the SCVWD West Pipeline with
the SFPUC’s Bay Division Pipelines 3 and 4.
Regional
and State
8. Support notification requirements that
inform residents/customers but do not
inflict undue or unobtainable requirements
on the utility.
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 15 of 15
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
9. Support local control of public benefit
funds funding levels and program design.
State
10. Support beneficiary pays methodologies to
prevent taxes or fees, in particular those
imposed on SFPUC customers, to fund
infrastructure improvements and costs of
other water sources such as the Delta.
State and
Regional
11. Advocate for financing or funding for
water conservation programs and recycled
water projects that meet end-use needs
and conserve potable water and oppose
legislation that would reduce such funding.
State,
Regional
and
Federal
12. Support infrastructure security and
reliability that includes equitable allocation
of funds for increasing the security of
infrastructure and that protects the City
from unnecessary regulations.
Local,
State and
Federal
13. Support legislation that promotes
responsible groundwater management
while recognizing Palo Alto’s existing and
historical groundwater extraction
practices.
State
14. Support Proposition 218 reform efforts to
provide ratemaking flexibility to balance
conservation, revenue sustainability, and
low income programs.
State
ATTACHMENT B
Approved by City Council on January 10th, 2014; Resolution #---
Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines
Formal advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the approval of
the Utilities Director or City Manager as per the City’s Legislative Program Manual
ALL UTILITIES
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance local accountability in the control and oversight of matters impacting utility
programs and rates for our customers while balancing statewide climate protection goals.
2. Support efforts to maintain or improve the reliability of the supply, transmission, storage and
distribution/collection infrastructures.
3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, and recognizes early voluntary action.
4. Maintain the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) ability to provide safe, reliable, sustainable, and
competitively-priced utility services.
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in joint action
efforts.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
2. Communicate the City’s record
on environmental and energy
efficiency programs with
Legislature, California Energy
Commission (CEC), California
Air Resources Board (CARB),
and Natural Resources Defense
Council (NRDC) via California
Municipal Utilities Association
(CMUA), Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA), and the
Bay Area Water Supply and
Conservation Agency
(BAWSCA).
State
3.2. Support legislation that will Federal,
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 2 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
result in the most cost-effective
reduction of GHG emissions,
recognition of early action, and
inclusion of more efficient
solutions, fuel switching, and
demand control programs, in
integrated resource plans.
State, and
Regional
4.3. Promote utility legislation and
regulations that have
undergone stakeholder review
and applicable cost benefit
analysis to support reasonable
reliability standards and
compliance requirements, and
effective and consistent
reporting requirements,
customer communications, and
goal-setting.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
Reliability
Councils
5.4. Oppose cost shifts from Federal
or State budgets and California
Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC) jurisdictional utilities
through active participation in
CMUA and NCPA legislative
activities.
Federal,
State, and
CPUC
6.5. Advocate for State and Federal
grants for local and regional
applications measures
regarding of energy efficiency,
conservation, renewable
resources, fiber, fuel switching,
wastewater collection systems
and recycled water projects.
Federal
and State
7.6. Maintain right of way access
for utility infrastructure.
Federal
and State
8.7. Protect the value of existing
assets and contracts and local
regulatory approvals of same.
Federal
and State
9.8. Maintain existing low cost Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 3 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
municipal financing options for
infrastructure projects and
advocate for new federal and
state programs that recognize
critical infrastructure needs.
and State
10.9. Promote utility legislation
and regulations that support
reasonable and consistent
notification, compliance, and
reporting requirements for
services, communications,
billing and payments.
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 4 of 17
ELECTRIC
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to exercise local accountability and oversight over
matters impacting customer service, programs (such as demand side efficiency and conservation
programs), and rate structure.
2. Preserve/enhance the reliability and security of infrastructure.
3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing GHG emissions and
encourages early voluntary action.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills established by local governing bodies.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA), California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA), American Public
Power Association (APPA), Transmission Agency
of Northern California (TANC), and Bay Area
Municipal Transmission Group (BAMx) with
support from Palo Alto staff to speak with a
coordinated voice.
Federal
and
State
2. Support NCPA in its continued efforts to
streamline the state regulatory reporting
responsibilities, to eliminate duplicative data and
report submittals to multiple state regulatory
agencies, including the CEC, CARB, and the
California Independent System Operator (CAISO).
State
3. Advocate for legislation/regulations that provide
local accountabilitycontrol and support for:
cost-effective clean distributed generation
and cogeneration projects, and standards and
permitting requirements for connecting such
resources to the local distribution system;
balancing state and local policy
implementation and ratepayer equity;
equitable rate design and tariffs;
cost-effective electric efficiency programs;
implementation of renewable portfolio
standards;
cost-effective storage integration;
direct access requirements;
smart meters and smart grid design and
Federal
and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 5 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
implementation, ; and
use of public benefit funds (as allowed in AB
1890 (1996)).
4. Support cap-and-trade market designs that:
protect consumers from the exercise of
market power;
allocate allowances that help mitigate
impacts to Palo Alto customers while
providing incentives for utilities to move to
lower GHG emission portfolios;
provide flexible compliance mechanisms such
as banking and borrowing of allowances; and
allocate funds generated from cap-and-trade
markets to GHG related activities, not as a
revenue source for state or federal general
funds.
Federal
and
State
5. Support legislation for renewable portfolio
standards that:
promote the 33% goal for the state;
maintain local compliance authority;
allow utilities to pursue low cost alternatives
by utilizing the existing transmission system to
access out-of-state resources, including use
of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs);
ensure fair application of RPS standards that
avoid punitive and/or duplicative non-
compliance penaltiesprevent double jeopardy
in the assessment
of penalties for non-compliance; and
restrict extension of CEC jurisdiction over
Publicly Owned Utilities;.
consolidate GHG reduction goals and
Renewable Portfolio Standards under one
clean energy standard;
allows the counting of local distributed
generation towards RPS; and
prioritize the use of the existing transmission
system over building new transmission.
Local
and
State
6. Support/encourage transmission, generation,
and demand-reduction projects and solutions
including advocating for financing or funding
solutions/options for projects that:
Local,
State,
and
Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 6 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
enhance/ensure reliability;
ensure equitable cost allocation following
beneficiary pays principles (including
protection against imposition of state-owned
electric contract costs on municipal utility
customers);
improve procurement flexibility (e.g. resource
adequacy rules that ensure reliability and
provide flexibility in meeting operational
requirements or flexibility in meeting State
renewable portfolio standards);
support the continuation of federal and state
financial incentives that promote increased
renewable development;
improve market transparency (particularly
transparency of IOU’s transmission and
procurement planning and implementation
activities); and
reduce the environmental impact on the Bay
Area and the Peninsula.
7. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters impacting
costs or operations of the Western Area Power
Administration (Western) such as:
support of Congressional Field Hearings to
explore modernizing flood control strategies,
river regulation and generation strategies at
Central Valley Project (CVP) plants to enhance
generation, water delivery, flood control and
fisheries;
protection of the status of Western Power
Marketing Administration and cost-based
rates;
provisions for preference customers’ first
take at land available with economic potential
for wind farms;
balancing efforts for competing environmental
improvements in rivers and Delta conditions
with water supply and hydropower impacts;
achieving the grid modernization goals of
Secretary Chu’s March 16, 2012 memo
without compromising the primary mission of
Western and recognizing the achievements
Federal,
State
and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 7 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Control
already made in California without adding
duplicate costly efforts; and
monitoring and evaluate evaluating impacts of
Delta conveyance proposals on Western Base
Resource allocation.; and
Aadvocating for an equitable distribution of
costs between water and power customers of
the Central Valley Project.
8. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters relating to
overly burdensome reporting and compliance
requirements established by the North American
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (FERC) or the Western
Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC).
Federal,
State
and
Regional
9. Support fair and reasonable application of grid
reliability requirements established by NERC,
WECC, or FERC and seek Congressional remedies
(if needed) for punitive application of fees and
fines.
Federal
and
Regional
10. Work with CAISO or through FERC:
to give buyers of renewable intermittent
resources relief from imbalance penalties; and
to promote financial and operational changes
that result in timely and accurate settlement
and billing; and.
Tto provide critical input on the need for
various transmission projects in light of the
escalating costs to the City to import power
using the bulk transmission system.
Federal
and
State
11. Monitor cyber security issues to ensure that
CPAU, which currently does not have critical
cyber assets, retains local control over its cyber
security needs while remaining exempt from
NERC cyber security standards. Support NCPA to
protect it and its member agencies from
unnecessary cyber security regulations.
Federal
and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 8 of 17
FIBER OPTIC
Goals
1. Preserve and enhance the authority of local government to develop broadband solutions that align
with community needs and expand consumer choice for competitive Internet connectivity and other
advanced services delivered over fiber-optic networks.
2. Encourage the competitive delivery of broadband services by permitting the use of public rights-of-
way and Utilities infrastructure in a responsible manner, provided that local rights of way authority
and management is preserved and the this use does not compromise the City’s existing utility safety
and services obligations.
3. Support local government authority over zoning- related land use for communications infrastructure
in accordance with reasonable and non-discriminatory regulations.
4. Support the Council’s Technology and the Connected City initiative to fully leverage the City’s fiber-
optic asset.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Support
Municipal
Delivery
2. Competitive
Delivery
3. Local
Authority
over Land
Use
4. Support
Council
Initiatives
1. Advocate for these goals through the
American Public Power Association
(APPA), California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA), National
Association of Telecommunications
Officers and Advisors (NATOA),
National League of Cities (NLC), and the
Next Century Cities initiative (NCC),
with support from City staff.
Federal
and State
2. Support legislation and regulations that
preserve and enhance municipal
delivery of conventional and advanced
telecommunication services as
prescribed by the Telecommunications
Act of 1996.
Federal
and State
3. Support the goals of the National
Broadband Plan, issued in 2010 by the
Federal Communications Commission
(FCC), to improve Internet access in the
United States
Federal
and State
4. Oppose legislation and regulations that
benefit the incumbent cable TV and
telephone companies at the expense of
community-owned fiber-optic and
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 9 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Support
Municipal
Delivery
2. Competitive
Delivery
3. Local
Authority
over Land
Use
4. Support
Council
Initiatives
wireless networks.
5. Support legislation and regulations that
preserve and enhance consumer
protections when dealing with the
incumbent providers of
telecommunication services.
Federal
and State
6. Support legislation and regulations
that encourage the competitive
delivery of broadband services by
permitting the use of public rights-of-
way and Utilities infrastructure:
Support legislation and regulations
that preserve local rights-of-way
authority and management;
Support legislation and regulations
that preserve local government
zoning and siting authority for
wireless and wireline
communication facilities; and
Oppose legislation and regulations
that reduce compensation received
by local governments for the use of
the public rights-of-way and other
public properties that support
communication infrastructure (e.g.,
utility poles, streetlight poles, ducts
and conduits).
Federal,
State and
Local
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 10 of 17
NATURAL GAS
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to develop their own demand side efficiency and
conservation programs, alternative gas supplies, and rate structure.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the gas supply and transmission infrastructure. This includes
retaining access to intra- and interstate gas transmission systems to reliably serve customers.
3. Support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills established by local governing bodies.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3. Environ-
ment
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate most of these goals
mainly through the American
Public Gas Association (APGA) with
minor support from Palo Alto staff.
Primarily
Federal with
minor
advocacy at
State level
2. Work with Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA) and
California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA) to the extent
that the City’s goals as a gas
distributor align with generators’
use of natural gas.
Federal and
State
3. Support increased cost effective
production/incentives for
renewable gas supplies from in or
out of state sources.
Federal and
State
4. Advocate for financing or funding
for cost-effective natural gas
efficiency and solar water heating
end uses.
Federal and
State
5. Support market transparency and
efforts to eliminate market
manipulation through reasonable
oversight.
Federal
6. Support municipal utilities’ ability
to enter into pre-pay transactions
for gas supplies.
Federal
7. Support efforts to improve pipeline
safety. Work with partners to
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 11 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3. Environ-
ment
4. Cost
Control
discourage extension of CPUC
regulatory authority over
municipal gas operations. Oppose
legislative proposals resulting in
unreasonable costs for Palo Alto’s
customers.
8. Work with partners to discourage
extension of CPUC regulatory
authority over municipal gas
operations.
State
9. Oppose legislative proposals
resulting in unreasonable costs for
Palo Alto’s customers.
Federal and
State
8.10. Support cap-and-trade market
designs that:
protect consumers from the
exercise of market power;
allocate allowances that help
mitigate impacts to Palo Alto
customers while providing
incentives for natural gas
utilities to move to lower GHG
emission portfolios;
advocate for an allowance
allocation methodology that
provides flexibility for Palo Alto
to structure rates to align GHG
costs and revenues;
provide flexible compliance
mechanisms such as banking
and borrowing of allowances;
and
allocate funds generated from
cap-and-trade markets to GHG
related activities, not as a
revenue source for state or
federal general funds.
Federal and
State
9.11. Support legislation that aims to
protect public health and
encourages transparency regarding
the practice of hydraulic fracturing
or “fracking” for natural gas
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 12 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3. Environ-
ment
4. Cost
Control
development, but not blanket
moratoriums that aren’t supported
by science.
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 13 of 17
WASTEWATER COLLECTIO N
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the imposition of non-volumetric
customer meter or infrastructure charges for wastewater collection service.
2. Increase the reliability of the local wastewater collection systems.
3. Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, reliable high quality and sustainable
wastewater collection service at a fair price.
4. Support equal comparisons of wastewater collection systems by regulatory agencies in order to
minimize and reduce onerous, costly and time-intensive reporting requirements and improve value
and accuracy of information reported to the public.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Maintain
service
4. Valuable
reporting
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Association of
Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
Local,
Regional
& State
2. Advocate forSupport future
regulations of wastewater
collection systems that include the
following requirements::recognize
the following:
timely rebuilding of the local
wastewater systems;local
jurisdictions’ proactive efforts
to replace and maintain
wastewater collections
systems;
maintains the quality of
delivered wastewater
collection service;
minimizes any increase in ththe
need to provide affordable and
cost basede cost of wastewater
collection service; and
the unique characteristics of
each collection system.creates
no additional exposure to more
frequent or severe wastewater
overflows; and
supports the existing
wastewater collections
Local,
Regional
& State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 14 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Maintain
service
4. Valuable
reporting
systems and their operation.
3. Support provision of sufficient
resources for regional agencies to
enable them to advocate for:
environmentally sustainable,
reliable wastewater collection
service at a fair price; and
regional comparisons of
wastewater collection projects
for future state grant funding.
Local and
Regional
4. Support infrastructure security and
reliability including equitable
allocation of funds for increasing
the security of infrastructure.
Regional,
and State
5. Advocate for funding and local
regulations for wastewater
collections system projects and
requirements that reduce
overflows and improve collection
system efficiency.
Regional,
State and
Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 15 of 17
WATER
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the ability to optimize volumetric and
fixed charges to balance the goals of revenue certainty and water use efficiency.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the regional water system owned and operated by the San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).
3. Support efficiency and recycled water programs in order to minimize the use of imported supplies.
4. Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, reliable supply of high quality water at a
fair price.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Bay Area Water Supply
and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) and
California Municipal Utilities Association
(CMUA), with support from Palo Alto staff
for BAWSCA and the San Francisco Bay
Area Regional Water System Financing
Authority (RFA).
Local,
Regional
and State
2. Participate in California Urban Water
Conservation Council (CUWCC) Best
Management Practice (BMP) revisions and
development to ensure that aggressive
and cost-effective efficiency goals are
incorporated and operating proposals are
reasonable, achievable, and cost-effective.
State
3. Advocate to ensure that legislative actions
regarding the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir and
conveyance system Regional Water System
include the following requirements:
timely rebuilding of the regional water
system;
maintains the quality of delivered
water;
minimizes any increase in the cost of
water;
creates no additional exposure to
more frequent or severe water
shortages;
supports the existing water system and
Local,
Regional
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 16 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
its operation.
4. Advocate for interpretations or
implementation of Water Code provisions
(such as those enacted by AB 1823 (2002),
AB 2058 (2002) and SB 1870 (2002)) that
maintain or reinforce the authorities and
protections available to the City and
BAWSCA members outside of San
Francisco.
Local,
Regional
and State
5. Support provision of sufficient resources
for BAWSCA to enable it to advocate for:
an environmentally sustainable,
reliable supply of high quality water at
a fair price;
a SFPUC rate structure that is
consistent with the Water Supply
Agreement and is based on water
usage;.
a contract amendment to modify the
drought time water allocation
between the SFPUC and the BAWSCA
agencies;
preservation of Palo Alto’s existing
contractual water allocation and
transportation rights on the SFPUC
Hetch Hetchy system; and
regional planning for conservation,
recycled water, and other water supply
projects.
Local and
Regional
6. Advocate for actions that:
actions that preserve Palo Alto’s
existing contractual rights; and
supporting actions that preserve local
control over water use and limit
encroachment from outside
jurisdictions.
Local and
Regional
7. Support infrastructure security and
reliability including an interconnection
between the SCVWD West Pipeline with
the SFPUC’s Bay Division Pipelines 3 and 4.
Regional
and State
8. Support notification requirements that
informaid residents/customers but do not
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines January 2015 Update
Page 17 of 17
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
inflict undue or unobtainable requirements
on the utility.
9. Support local control of public benefit
funds funding levels and program design.
State
10. Support beneficiary pays methodologies to
prevent taxes or fees, in particular those
imposed on SFPUC customers, to fund
infrastructure improvements and costs of
other water sources such as the Delta.
State and
regional
11. Advocate for financing or funding for
water conservation programs and recycled
water projects that meet end-use needs
and conserve potable water and oppose
legislation that would reduce such funding.
State,
Regional
and
Federal
12. Support infrastructure security and
reliability that includes equitable allocation
of funds for increasing the security of
infrastructure and that protects the City
from unnecessary regulations.
Local,
State and
Federal
13. Support legislation that promotes
responsible groundwater management
while recognizing Palo Alto’s existing and
historical groundwater extraction
practices.
State
14. Support Proposition 218 reform efforts to
provide ratemaking flexibility to balance
conservation, revenue sustainability, and
low income programs.
State
ATTACHMENT C
1
Review of Legislative Activities in 2014
City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU) staff participates on the legislative committees of the California
Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA) and the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA). 2014
was year two of California’s two-year 2013-2014 legislative session. September 30th, 2014 was
the final day for the Governor to sign or veto bills passed by the legislature during this session.
This was a relatively quiet year for energy and water legislation. Bills that were signed by the
Governor this year have little immediate or direct impact to CPAU as a publicly owned utility
(POU) and so CPAU did not take any formal positions on utility related bills this year. Following
is a summary of the state and federal legislative issues CPAU staff has been following this year,
along with any positions taken by NCPA and CMUA.
State Legislative Issues
Energy Related Bills
SB 699 (Hill) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 550, Statutes of 2014). This statute directs the
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to begin a new proceeding or a new phase of an
existing proceeding to consider adopting rules to address physical security risks to the
distribution systems of electrical corporations. The motivation behind this legislation was the
April 2013 sniper attack on the Metcalf substation (a major PG&E substation). While CMUA and
NCPA did not take a position, the CPUC has taken an interest of late in POU safety and reliability
matters so it is possible there may be POU focused legislation in the near future or increased
interest from the CPUC on what POUs are doing to address safety issues on their systems.
SB 1414 (Wolk) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 627, Statutes of 2014). This statute requires
Investor Owned Utility (IOU) resource adequacy plans to reflect new or existing demand
response products. The objective is to facilitate the economic dispatch and use of demand
response that can either meet or reduce an IOU’s resource adequacy requirements, as
determined by the CPUC. CMUA had a watch position due to potential for future legislation to
impose a similar requirement on POU’s. How the CPUC determines demand response resource
counting for resource adequacy purposes may also be of interest to Palo Alto in terms of
establishing DR benefits to the City.
AB 1782 (Chesbro) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 332, Statutes of 2014). This statute,
supported by NCPA and CMUA, makes it a crime for any person to unlawfully and maliciously
disconnect or cut a line of telegraph, telephone, or cable television, or any line used to conduct
electricity. It also significantly raises the criminal penalties and fines from a maximum of $500,
to a maximum of $10,000 for a felony conviction, and a maximum of $1,000 for a misdemeanor
conviction. While this is not a big issue in Palo Alto, it is important to have the tools to address
criminal actions against public infrastructure.
ATTACHMENT C
2
AB 2188 (Muratsuchi) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 521, Statutes of 2014). This statute
requires a city and/or county to adopt, by September 30, 2015, an ordinance that creates an
expedited, streamlined permitting process for small residential rooftop solar energy systems
that substantially conforms with the most current version of the California Solar Permitting
Guidebook to be adopted by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. While this is not
a utility specific statute (it applies to all cities whether or not they own an electric utility), NCPA
and CMUA have opposed it, as has the League of California Cities. NCPA’s concern is that, until
this time, the California Solar Permitting Guidebook (Guidebook) has been a voluntary initiative,
particularly since the Guidebook is currently in draft form. Palo Alto has already streamlined its
rooftop solar permitting process and so the impact of this legislation is expected to be minimal.
AB 2218 (Bradford) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 581, Statutes of 2014). This statute
encourages the governing board of each local electric POU to develop and implement a
program of rate assistance to eligible food banks. POUs were included in a last minute
amendment that was not caught by CMUA until it passed, and was delivered to the
Governor. CMUA attempted to get the Governor to veto, but was unsuccessful. The statute
encourages publicly owned utilities to offer rate assistance to food banks in their service
territory that participate in the Emergency Food Assistance Program administered by the Food
and Nutrition Service of the United States Department of Agriculture. According to the State
Department of Social Services, Santa Clara County has one such food bank, located in San Jose.
Although this bill does not apply to Palo Alto at this time, CMUA is concerned with language in
the statute that directs POUs to develop rates consistent with those developed by the CPUC for
electric corporations, as this creates a new precedent for on rate design that potentially
intrudes on a Council’s rate making authority.
AB 2363 (Dahle) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 610, Statutes of 2014). This statute requires
the CPUC to include grid integration costs as part of the procurement process for investor
owned utilities IOU’s. The statute would effectively penalize variable and intermittent energy
sources such as wind and solar with additional integration costs and would favor base load
renewable generation such as geothermal. While the statute does not apply to POU’s like
CPAU, it is possible future legislation could expand the requirement to POU’s.
Natural Gas Related Bills
AB 1937 (Gordon) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 287, Statutes of 2014). This statute
requires a gas utility to notify schools and hospitals of non-emergency work when the work is
located within 500 feet of the facility. While it does not currently apply to POUs, CPAU
routinely notifies adjacent customers when there is work on the gas delivery system.
Water Related Bills
Water Bond – Approved by Governor and approved by voters in November 2014 as Proposition
1. In mid-August the Legislature approved and the Governor signed, the "Water Quality,
Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act", a $7.54 billion bond measure. The measure
ATTACHMENT C
3
replaced the 2009 $11.1 billion bond measure. The new bond provides funding for regional
water reliability, groundwater management and cleanup, water recycling, watershed
protection, water conservation, flood management and funding to enhance local, regional and
state water quality and supply. Since the funds will be distributed through several state
agencies by a competitive process, the guidelines and timelines for grant funding are not
available at this time.
SB 1036 (Pavley) - Approved by Governor (Chapter 485, Statutes of 2014). This statute would
authorize an urban water supplier to voluntarily include within its Urban Water Management
Plan (UWMP) certain energy-related information, including, but not limited to, an estimate of
the amount of energy used to extract or divert water supplies. SB 1036 also requires the
Department of Water Resources (DWR) to develop a methodology for the estimation of the
energy intensity of urban water systems. This was introduced following a recommendation
from a February 2014 report from a DWR task force that recommended allowing suppliers to
include in their UWMP the energy intensity of water delivered to their customers. Given the
City’s low energy intensity of its water delivery system, it is undecided if this will be included in
the next UWMP.
SB 1168 (Pavley) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 346, Statutes of 2014.) This statute
requires a local agency to determine the sustainable yield of a groundwater basin in
coordination with other local agencies. The goal of the legislation is to address increasing
concern over sustainable groundwater yields in the face of increasing withdrawals, especially
during dry years. Since the Santa Clara Valley Water District manages the groundwater basin in
Santa Clara County, staff anticipates this bill will not have much impact in Santa Clara County.
SB 1345 (Committee Bill) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 489, Statutes of 2014). This statute
extends the sunset date for the Wholesale Regional Water System Security and Reliability Act
to 2022 to continue state and local oversight over the SFPUC’s Water System Improvement
Program to rebuild the Regional Water System (“Hetch Hetchy” system). The City receives
100% of its potable supplies from the SFPUC and is paying a proportional share of the upgrades
to the system. Since it is in the City’s best interest that the current oversight is maintained until
all work is complete, the City sent a letter in support of the bill.
SB 1420 (Wolk) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 490, Statutes of 2014). This statute adds
three new requirements to UWMP’s. The City updates its UWMP every five years with the next
update due in 2015. This legislation will require the City to report on water losses and water
savings estimates from adopted regulations and plans and to submit the UWMP electronically if
possible. CMUA supported the changes.
AB 1739 (Dickinson) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 347, Statutes of 2014. This Statute
requires a groundwater sustainability agency to submit a groundwater sustainability plan to the
DWR for review upon adoption. This Statute is related to SB 1168 (described above) in that it
would empower DWR to review local agency determinations on sustainable yield and
groundwater management. Since the Santa Clara Valley Water District manages the
ATTACHMENT C
4
groundwater basin in Santa Clara County, staff anticipates this bill will not have much impact in
Santa Clara County.
AB 2067 (Weber) - Approved by Governor (Chapter 463, Statutes of 2014). This statute
streamlines the discussion of water demand management measures in UWMP’s and also
extends the due date for 2015 UWMP’s to July 1st, 2016. In the 2010 UWMP, the City provided
detailed information on demand management measures and staff anticipates the new
requirements will allow for more efficient reporting of demand management measures in the
2015 UWMP cycle.
AB 2403 (Rendon) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 78, Statutes of 2014). This statute codifies
a recent court case, Griffith v. Pajaro Valley Water Management Agency, to modify the
Government Code’s definition of “water" to include any system of public improvements
intended to provide for the production, storage, supply, treatment, or distribution of
water. This means that public agencies can now use Proposition 218’s notice and public
hearing process (currently required for most water, sewer and wastewater rate increases) for
stormwater management and recycled water charges as well. CPAU is currently evaluating a
recycled water project and this will clarify how recycled water will be treated for ratemaking
purposes. CMUA supported AB 2403.
AB 2434 (Gomez) – Approved by Governor (Chapter 738, Statutes of 2014). This statute
provides a five year exclusion from gross income for any amount received as a rebate, voucher,
or other financial incentive issued by a local water agency or supplier for participation in a turf
removal water conservation program. This legislation was needed to address the lack of clarity
on potential state tax liabilities associated with customer water rebates. CMUA was supportive
of AB 2434.
Federal Legislative Issues
Following their August recess, Congress returned with a short amount of time before the
November elections and a number of priority issues to contend with. Congress passed a
Continuing Resolution funding the government at FY14 levels through Dec. 11, with the
possibility of another government shutdown on the horizon. While the Republicans regained
control of Congress, it is still unclear what that means for the post-election lame duck session
which must, at a minimum, fund the government for the remainder of fiscal year 2014. Some
are predicting the lame duck session will be uneventful, with Republicans preferring to pass a
short-term funding bill and defer most issues to next year when they will have a stronger hand.
Other actions could include extension of expiring tax provisions, including the production and
investment tax credits for renewable energy projects, and action on cybersecurity information
sharing legislation sponsored by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), S. 2588, which was approved by
the Senate Intelligence Committee in July. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell has
expressed a desire to use the lame duck session to wipe the slate clean so Republicans can
focus next year on their legislative priorities.
ATTACHMENT C
5
Other common CPAU and NCPA legislative priorities include the drought, grid reliability,
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) swaps issues and efforts with the Bureau of
Reclamation to address Central Valley Project power customers paying a disproportionately
higher assessment of the environmental Restoration Fund than intended in the Central Valley
Project Improvement Act (CVPIA).
EPA Emission Standard
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) has proposed rules intended to significantly
reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions across the nation, under section 111(d) of the
Clean Air Act. These rules apply to electric generating units as well as other sources of GHG
emissions. Preliminary analysis indicates the new rules will likely have minimal impact in
California, though the treatment of hydropower remains uncertain and questions remain how
the EPA’s proposal will be incorporated into the State’s existing GHG policies and regulations.
California’s regulatory agencies believe that the emissions reductions can be achieved through
the cap-and-trade program, the existing 33% renewable portfolio standard mandates, and the
additional measures addressed in the scoping plan update currently underway at the Air
Resources Board.
Grid Reliability
There have been recent developments at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC),
where FERC staff and Commissioners continue to question the value of North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC) Risk-based Registration Initiative, an effort being undertaken to
reduce the compliance burdens of smaller utilities by removing them from the NERC registry
provided that they do not have a material impact on the nation’s bulk electric system. Palo Alto
supports efforts to rationalize the registration process so that resources, at federal, regional
and local levels, can be focused on those issues that have a material impact on grid reliability.
Palo Alto’s distribution system, in particular, does not impact the bulk grid reliability
Drought
Another key policy objective for the California members of Congress continues to be the focus
on resolving differences between the competing drought relief bills passed by the House and
Senate in order to send a final compromise to the President for signature. With the
Republicans firmly in control of Congress, it is unclear what will happen during the lame duck
session or if drought related legislative actions will be carried over to the new session.
CFTC swap dealer definition
On September 24, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) granted the relief sought
by public power systems, and exempting utility operations-related swaps from the $25 million
“special entity” swap dealer threshold. With approval of this rule, public power systems will be
on equal footing with private utilities and should regain access to counterparties for swap
transactions.
ATTACHMENT D
EXCERPTED DRAFT MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 10, 2014
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
ITEM 5 (Original Agenda New Business Item 4 – part one, legislative guidelines related to all
utilities except water): ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission
Recommend that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Approving the Amended City of Palo Alto
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines
Senior Resource Planner Nico Procos explained that staff split this item into two parts - the first
part discussing the guidelines for everything but the water utility and the second part related to
just the water utility to allow Commissioner Hall to participate in part one and then leave the
meeting (due to a self-identified conflict related to water issues). Procos provided a summary
of the written report. He noted that the guidelines in the past were designated to calendar
years; starting this year the guidelines will not sunset at the end of the calendar year but
continue until updated. Staff still commits to an annual update of the guidelines.
Procos provided a summary of the key State issues in 2015, which could include changes to the
Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), new greenhouse gas (GHG) targets, the next generation of
net energy metering, potential carve-outs for certain resources, and issues related to low-
income and disadvantaged communities. Key Federal issues include issues related to the
Federal power marketing, cybersecurity, grid reliability, emissions standards, and budget and
tax reform. Procos walked through the proposed changes and additions to the guidelines,
which were provided as Attachment B to the written report.
Commissioner Hall enquired why the wastewater guideline #2 regarding exposure to
wastewater overflows had been removed. He mentioned that during wet weather events water
can get diverted into the sanitary sewer and cause overflows. Procos mentioned he had heard
about such incidents, but the treatment plant has excess capacity to handle increased flows so
this is not anticipated to be an issue.
Vice Chair Waldfogel asked if gas guideline #3 moved us to or away from supporting or
opposing disclosure of fracking chemicals since it would increase the cost of gas supplies.
Compliance Manager Debra Lloyd responded that this guideline was not intended to address
fracking of natural gas, rather it was intended to support equal treatment for in-state vs out-of-
state renewable gas production. Lloyd referred to Natural Gas guideline #11 that provides
direction on supporting transparency regarding fracking, but not blanket moratoriums.
ACTION:
Commissioner Cook made a motion that the UAC recommend that the City Council adopt a
resolution approving the Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines covering everything but the
Water Utility. Commissioner Eglash seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (6-0
with Commissioner Chang absent).
At this point in the meeting, Commissioner Hall left the meeting due to a self-identified conflict
of interest on water issues.
ITEM 6 (Original Agenda New Business Item 4 – part two, legislative guidelines related to the
water utility): ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission
Recommend that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Approving the Amended City of Palo Alto
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines
Senior Resource Procos continued with part two related to the water utility. Procos provided a
summary of 2014 legislation of interest that impacted the water utility and then discussed
issues staff anticipates for 2015. He noted that the key State issues for water include water
sector GHG emissions, changes to the requirements for the Urban Water Management Plan and
issues with respect to low-income/disadvantaged communities. Key Federal issues include cost
allocation for the Delta tunnels and drought. Procos described each of the changes to the
water utility guidelines, which were provided as Attachment B to the written report.
Commissioner Melton inquired about water guideline #13 and if, given that groundwater
extraction in Central Valley is being called into question, this guideline would involve the City in
the tension between urban and agricultural use of groundwater. Procos responded that the
intent of guideline #13 is to support groundwater management, but as the City has made
investments in new wells and has certain assumptions regarding the use of those wells, the City
has an interest in ensuring that no new proposals may impact those assumptions.
Commissioner Melton agreed that adding the word "Palo Alto" to the guideline would better
clarify the intent.
Vice Chair Waldfogel discussed water guideline #10 and the issue regarding State Water Project
tax collections. He suggested the venue be adjusted to make it State + regional.
ACTION:
Commissioner Eglash made a motion that the UAC recommend that the City Council adopt a
resolution approving the proposed Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines for the Water Utility,
with the two proposed changes. Commissioner Cook seconded the motion. The motion carried
unanimously (5-0 with Commissioner Hall recused from the motion and Commissioner Chang
absent).
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5572)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Continuance - Appeal of 261 Hamilton Avenue ARB/HRB
Decision
Title: Appeal of Director of Planning and Community Environment’s
Architectural and Historic Review Approval of a Rehabilitation of a Category
3 Historic Resource located at 261 Hamilton - Request for Continuance to
April 6, 2015
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that this item be continued to the April 6, 2015, City Council meeting.
Executive Summary
The standard procedure for the review of an appealed Architectural Review application is for
placement on the Council consent calendar within 30 days of the filing of an appeal. The appeal
was filed on February 3, 2015, and therefore must be placed on the Council consent agenda by
March 5, 2015.
Staff did not have sufficient time to complete their analysis and prepare responses to the
appellants’ concerns in advance of the council packet deadline. Therefore, a continuance is
requested.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5562)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Amendment #3 to The Planning Center DCE Contract and BAO
Title: Approval of Amendment Number 3 to Contract C08125506 with The
Planning Center ¦ DCE, now Known as Placeworks, to Increase the Contract
by $157,525 to an Amount Not to Exceed $1,894,731 and Adoption of a
Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) to Increase the Fiscal Year 2015
Appropriation to the Planning and Community Environment Department for
Preparation of a Fiscal Study in Conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan
Update
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute
Amendment No. 3 to Contract C08125506 with The Planning Center │DCE (now known as
Placeworks) to increase the contract limit by $157,525 to an amount not to exceed $1,894,731
to provide additional services associated with the Comprehensive Plan Update, including a
fiscal impacts study (Attachment A), and approve a Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) in the
amount of $157,525 (Attachment B) to ensure the Planning and Community Environment
Department has sufficient resources within the General Fund for the contract amendment.
Executive Summary
The 1998-2010 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) guides land use and development
decisions in Palo Alto and contains the City’s official policies on land use and community design,
transportation, housing, natural environment, business and economics, and community
services. Many sections of the plan are required by State law and the State recommends that
local jurisdictions update their plan every ten years. Palo Alto embarked on an update of its
Comprehensive Plan and contracted with the firm DCE (now known as Placeworks) in 2008. A
contract amendment is needed to assist with project management and to provide a fiscal
analysis to better inform the community and decision makers about the opportunities and
City of Palo Alto Page 2
challenges inherent in the issues that are being considered as part of the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment.
Background
The 1998-2010 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan’s policies apply to both public and private
properties and its focus is on the physical form of the City. The Plan is used by the City Council
and the Planning and Transportation Commission to evaluate land use changes and to make
funding and budgeting decisions. It is used by City staff to evaluate building and development
and to make recommendations on projects. It is used by citizens and neighborhood groups to
understand the City’s long-range plans and proposals for geographic areas. The Comprehensive
Plan provides the basis for the City’s development regulations and the foundation for its capital
improvements.
The City has been working with DCE (now known as Placeworks) to update the Comprehensive
Plan since 2008. Under the initial contract, DCE conducted a preliminary review of each existing
Comprehensive Plan element, provided suggestions for revisions to modernize and improve
elements based on current general plan/comprehensive plan standards, and recommended the
addition of sustainability policies and program concepts that would be appropriate for each
element.
Amendment Number One added work on the California Avenue Concept Plan, preparation of
the Citywide Travel Demand Forecasting Model, creation of the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment Implementation Matrix, and additional website administration.
In March 2014, Staff identified a revised approach for the Comprehensive Update process (Staff
Report 4554) that included community discussion of alternative development scenarios, along
with baseline data, potential impacts and mitigation. Contract Amendment Number Two
included preparation of “Our Plan so Far” along with initiation of the environmental review
process with a “Notice of Preparation,” scoping, alternatives development. With this
modification, the contract was intended to fund all activities through plan adoption, but a fiscal
analysis was not included.
Over the last twelve months, City Councilmembers and community members have made it clear
that a broad fiscal analysis of alternative scenarios will be critical to inform decision making
about the Comp Plan Update. The analysis must include a multi-period fiscal impact analysis of
General Fund revenues and costs, including analysis of revenues and costs attributable to City
City of Palo Alto Page 3
residents versus businesses. As indicated in the attached scope of work, the analysis will
evaluate three points in time:
1. Year 2000 - a 15-year look back at City revenues and costs by source;
2. Year 2015 - a current-year analysis; and
3. Year 2030 - a 15-year forecast that spans the designated planning horizon for the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
The fiscal impact analysis will seek to quantify fiscal trends associated with the City’s General
Fund and to project the fiscal impacts attributable to development that may occur during the
life of the updated Comprehensive Plan. The fiscal analysis will use an interactive model
designed to quantify the degree to which General Fund revenues offset the costs associated
with providing public services.
Staff is requesting an amendment to the DCE contract to include the fiscal analysis and project
management assistance to ensure that the Comprehensive Plan Update process moves forward
in a timely manner in the face of unanticipated department staffing shortages. Based on the
types of work and the consultant’s experience in these areas, DCE and their subconsultant EPS
are most suited to perform the analysis and provide project management support needed by
the department at this time. Staff requests Council’s authorization to amend the contract
accordingly.
Resource Impact
Amendment Number 3 (Attachment A) requests an addition of $157,525 to the contract titled
“Comprehensive Plan Amendment Services, Contract C08125506. The Planning and
Community Environment Department’s budget for Fiscal Year 2015 does not contain sufficient
resources to support the increased contract amount. Staff requests approval of the attached
Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) to increase the departments Fiscal Year 2015 Operating
Budget by this amount. Upon approval of the contract amendment and BAO, the Department
will encumber the funds required for the contract amendment. The total cost of the project,
including Amendment Number 3, is summarized in the following table:
Summary Breakdown Total Cost
Original Contract total w/Contingency
(CMR:193:08)
$849,981
Amendment #1 w/Contingency (Staff Report
3756) which included additional work:
Completion of the Cal Ave Concept
Area Plan
$290,019
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Preparation of the Citywide Travel
Demand Forecasting Model
Creation of the Comp Plan Amendment
Implementation Matrix
Additional website administration
Amendment #2 (Staff Report 4554)
Preparation of “Our Plan so Far” and
“Notice of Preparation”
Scoping and Alternatives Development
Alternatives Evaluation and Selection
Comp Plan Amendment and
Finalization
$597,206
Exhibit A (Amendment 3Total)
Fiscal Analysis
$157,525
Revised Contract Grand Total $1,894,731
Policy Implications
Updating the City’s Comprehensive Plan is a critical effort if Palo Alto is to remain compliant
with State law. Contract Amendment Number 3 does not represent a change to existing
policies.
Environmental Review
A fiscal analysis is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Placeworks Contract Amendment 3 (PDF)
Attachment B: Budget Amendment Ordinance (DOCX)
AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO CONTRACT NO. CO8125506
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND PLACEWORKS, INC.,
SUCCESSOR-IN-INTERST TO DESIGN COMMUNITY & ENVIRONMENT, INC.
This Amendment No. 3 (“Third Amendment”) to Contract No. C08125506 (“Contract”) is
entered into March 2, 2015 (“Amendment Effective Date”), by and between the CITY OF PALO
ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and PLACEWORKS, INC.,
located at 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100, Santa Ana, California, 92707, successor-in-interest to
DESIGN COMMUNITY & ENVIRONMENT, INC. (“CONSULTANT”) (collectively, the
“Parties”).
R E C I T A L S:
A. The Contract dated effective June 1, 2008 was entered into between the
Parties for Consultant to provide marketing services for the development of a work plan to
amend the existing comprehensive plan to a planning horizon no later than year 2020.
B. On March 3, 2014 the parties entered into Amendment No. 2 to extend the
term to June 30, 2016 and increase the compensation to $1,737,206.00 for additional services as
specified in Exhibit “A1”.
C. On June 28, 2013 the parties entered into Amendment No. 1 to extend the
term to June 30, 2014 and increase the compensation to $1,124,073.00 for additional services as
specified in Exhibit “A1”.
D. The CONSULTANT entered into the Contract as DESIGN
COMMUNITY & ENVIRONMENT, INC., a California corporation, located 1625 Shattuck
Avenue. Suite 300, Berkeley, CA. 94709 and has since changed its name to PLACEWORKS,
INC., a California corporation, located at 3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100, Santa Ana, California,
92707 (“CONSULTANT”).
E. The Parties also desire to increase the “Not to Exceed Compensation” by
$157,525.00 from $1,737,206.00 to $1,894,731.00, for additional services as specified in
Exhibit “A3” Additional Scope of Services.
F. To accomplish this purpose, the Parties wish to amend the Contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and
provisions of this Third Amendment, the Parties agree:
SECTION 1. The Agreement is amended to reflect CONSULTANT’S current
name of Placeworks, Inc. Placeworks, Inc. hereby assumes all duties and obligations under the
original contract and amendments thereto.
SECTION 2. Section 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION is hereby
amended to read as follows:
DocuSign Envelope ID: C39D5270-1D9F-4621-97C1-9587A6BAC533 ATTACHMENT A
“SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to
CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibits “A”, “A1”, “A2” & “A3”,
including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed
One Million Eight Hundred Ninety Four Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty One Dollars ($
1,894,731.00) The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-3” & “C4”,
entitled “RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement.
Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions
of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services
performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any
work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but
which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibits “A”, “A1”, “A2” &
“A3”.”
SECTION 3. The following exhibits to the Contract are hereby amended to read
as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Third Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this
reference:
a. Exhibit “A3” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”
b. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”
c. Exhibit “C4” entitled “RATE SCHEDULE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 3”
SECTION 4. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract,
including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have by their duly authorized
representatives executed this First Amendment on the Amendment Effective Date.
CITY OF PALO ALTO
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
PLACEWORKS, INC
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit “A3” “SCOPE OF SERVICES”
Exhibit “C” “COMPENSATION”
Exhibit “C4” “RATE SCHEDULE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 3”
DocuSign Envelope ID: C39D5270-1D9F-4621-97C1-9587A6BAC533
David Early
EXHIBIT A3
ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF WORK
I. ON-SITE PROJECT MANAGEMENT
CONSULTANT shall work on site in CITY offices one day per week for the remainder of 2015
in order to maximize coordination with CITY staff from all involved departments and keep the
Comprehensive Plan and EIR process moving on schedule. Work on site shall include
coordination of consultant team and CITY staff work on pre-Summit activities; Summit
planning; post-Summit activities; preparation of Summit and workgroup materials; revisions to
Goals, Policies and Programs; and EIR preparation and review.
As part of additional project management responsibilities, CONSULTANT shall assist in
planning Leadership Group meetings and shall attend Leadership Group meetings. This scope
assumes two Leadership Group meetings per month January through May 2015, and one
Leadership Group meeting per month June 2015 through May 2016.
II. FISCAL, FUNDING, AND COMPETITIVENESS ANALYSIS FOR THE
PALO ALTO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
CONSULTANT shall provide fiscal analysis, funding source evaluation, and a competitiveness
assessment to better inform the community and decision makers about the opportunities and
challenges inherent in the alternatives that are being considered as part of the Comprehensive
Plan Amendment.
Project Initiation
As a first step, CONSULTANT shall meet with CITY staff and the consultant team to review the
Scope of Work, finalize schedule, clarify key issues, and specify the format for key deliverables.
In addition, CONSULTANT shall request, collect, and review available relevant background
documents and data sources, including planning documents, CITY budgets, long-range forecast
data, detailed tax revenue data, and market data. It is expected the CITY shall provide names
and contact information for the department representatives CONSULTANT shall be coordinating
with, and if necessary shall assist with scheduling in-person meetings and conference calls.
Fiscal Analysis of the CITY’s General Fund
The CITY requests a multi-period fiscal impact analysis of General Fund revenues and costs, to
be broken down by sources and uses, including analysis of revenues and costs attributable to
CITY residents versus businesses.
This analysis shall evaluate fiscal outcomes at three points in time:
1. Year 2000 - a 15-year look back at CITY revenues and costs by source;
2. Year 2015 - a current-year analysis; and
3. Year 2030 - a 15-year forecast that spans the designated planning horizon for the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
DocuSign Envelope ID: C39D5270-1D9F-4621-97C1-9587A6BAC533
The fiscal impact analysis will seek to quantify fiscal trends associated with the CITY’s General
Fund and to project the fiscal impacts of up to four Comprehensive Plan land use Alternative
Scenarios. For each of the three points in time and Alternative Scenarios (2030 only), the
CONSULTANT analysis will evaluate General Fund revenues and costs. Based on discussions
with CITY staff, CONSULTANT will develop a methodology for apportioning revenues and
costs to residents and businesses. In some cases revenue and cost categorization may be
straightforward (e.g., property tax by land use) and in other cases it may be more challenging
(e.g., transient occupancy tax revenue). The degree of complexity will depend on how the
project team decides to frame the analysis. It is likely that the analysis will require consideration
of market conditions to determine apportionment assumptions where existing local data are
unavailable. In these cases, CONSULTANT shall seek to rely on the best data available, which
in some instances may require reliance on studies and data from similar jurisdictions or broader
geographic areas.
The fiscal analysis will use an interactive model designed to quantify the degree to which
General Fund revenues offset the costs associated with providing public services. The analysis
will identify fiscal impacts attributable to residents and businesses over time, as well as gauge
the relative fiscal impact of each of the Comprehensive Plan Alternative Scenarios under
consideration. It is anticipated that the fiscal impact forecast will rely heavily on the CITY’s
Long-Range Financial Forecast. The fiscal impact analysis will exclude analysis of special
purpose Enterprise/Utility funds (designated revenue sources). An analysis of revenue sources
for capital improvements will be provided as part of a distinct infrastructure funding analysis,
discussed under Subtask C below.
Subtask B shall include up to two days of meetings and interviews with CITY staff and will
focus on the following subtasks:
Impacts on Public Service Costs
Typically, CONSULTANT distinguishes between variable and non-variable General Fund cost
elements and applies per-capita methodologies for all or a portion of the cost of service. Per-
capita estimates of cost are commonly relied on to forecast costs for departments that provide
general government services, planning services, and communitywide services. Case study-based
analyses are commonly applied to other CITY services such as police, fire, and road
maintenance. As part of the case study analyses, CONSULTANT may incorporate calls-for-
service data from the police and fire departments and cost-per-road-mile data for road
maintenance. The appropriate methodologies in each case will depend on available CITY data
and discussions with individual CITY service providers. Expenditure categorizations (costs
attributable to residents versus business) in past and future time periods likely will be based on
current service data, unless CITY staff indicates that clear, observable trends should be reflected
in the CONSULTANT analysis, based on readily available data.
DocuSign Envelope ID: C39D5270-1D9F-4621-97C1-9587A6BAC533
Impacts on General Fund Revenues
Similar to the service cost analysis, CONSULTANT typically uses both per-capita and case
study-based methods for estimating General Fund revenues. Property tax, sales tax, and transient
occupancy tax (TOT) revenues are the most significant sources of General Fund revenue. The
analysis will devote significant effort to evaluating these revenue sources. The past and current-
year analyses will be based on existing CITY data, with additional market analysis to apportion
revenues by source, as needed. Looking forward, sales and TOT tax revenues will be projected
based on anticipated net new taxable sales generated by new land uses, while property tax
revenues will be based on property value assumptions and the CITY’s property tax allocation
factors. All assumptions will be subjected to market considerations. Other revenue estimates,
such as charges for service, utility taxes, and documentary transfer taxes will be based on the
CITY’s current revenue metrics and independent CONSULTANT research.
Net Fiscal Impact on General Fund
Based on the data obtained and analysis conducted under the prior subtasks, CONSULTANT
shall compare service costs to revenues. For the 2030 Scenario Alternatives, the analysis will
evaluate the net annual fiscal impact expected to result from each of the Comprehensive Plan
options. CONSULTANT shall prepare graphic representations of key findings that illustrate
General Fund revenues and expenses by source over the three points in time considered by the
fiscal study. Comprehensive Plan Scenario Alternatives will not be applied to the historical
(year 2000) or current year (2015) fiscal assessments.
Community Infrastructure Funding Analysis
Planning for sustainable communities requires careful consideration of potential funding sources
and financing strategies to pay for community facilities and infrastructure that improve quality of
life and accommodate growth. In Subtask C CONSULTANT shall review the proposed capital
investments envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Scenario Alternatives and
assess funding options, including the CITY’s existing financial resources, other potential sources
of funds, and financing mechanisms that may cover all or a portion of the proposed community
improvements and infrastructure. It is anticipated that this analysis will focus on the provision of
major transportation infrastructure, likely including parking facilities, expressway upgrades,
CalTrain modernization, bus-rapid transit, and roadway/streetscape improvements.
CONSULTANT shall coordinate with CITY staff to review and clarify the list of capital
investments and improvements generated by the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process.
CONSULTANT then shall identify existing funding (e.g., impact fee programs) and other
potential future funding sources. The analysis will evaluate the potential use of these sources of
funds to achieve Comprehensive Plan infrastructure goals. The objective of the funding analysis
will be to compare improvement cost estimates with funding sources and mechanisms to
quantify potential CITY revenue contributions (or shortfalls). As part of the consideration of
potential new sources of funds, CONSULTANT shall evaluate the feasibility of implementing
these new sources.
DocuSign Envelope ID: C39D5270-1D9F-4621-97C1-9587A6BAC533
Similar to the fiscal analysis described in Subtask B above, CONSULTANT shall conduct the
funding analysis in close cooperation with CITY staff and the consulting team. It is expected
that the CITY will be primarily responsible for identifying the desired capital improvements,
estimating improvement costs, and providing CITY or other agency data concerning existing
funding sources. Note that Subtask C may require involvement from specialized professional
advisors, (e.g., transportation or civil engineer consultants currently working with the CITY) to
provide reliable infrastructure cost estimates.
Competitiveness Evaluation
To assist with deliberations over growth management measures, transportation demand
management requirements, increases to development impact fees, and other CITY-driven costs
that may occur under the Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CONSULTANT proposes to
conduct a Competitiveness Evaluation. This evaluation would provide a review of development
costs including exactions and fees borne by new real estate development projects in Palo Alto, as
compared with equivalent costs in up to five carefully selected and peer cities, to be agreed upon
by CONSULTANT and the CITY. The evaluation would focus on major infrastructure and
public works costs imposed on new projects, as well as any other extraordinary costs borne by
development. The analysis would provide cost data and characterizations, including a mix of
quantitative metrics and qualitative factors. While the analysis will not identify a specific
“tipping point” at which the costs imposed on new development in Palo Alto become too great,
the information likely will be very useful to decision makers who are concerned about potential
impacts on the CITY’s business climate.
Meetings
CONSULTANT shall be available for up to three on-site engagements (including the project
initiation meeting, meetings and interviews with project staff and department representatives)
and up to three public presentations (to CITY Council, Planning & Transportation Commission,
or other groups).
Deliverable
CONSULTANT shall document data, methods, assumptions, and findings from the fiscal and
funding analysis in a clear, well-written technical memorandum. CONSULTANT shall deliver
to the CITY a Draft Memorandum. CITY staff will have approximately one week to review the
Draft Memorandum and provide one set of consolidated comments. Finalization of the
Memorandum will include CONSULTANT revisions as needed and appropriate based on CITY
staff comments, and CONSULTANT production of a final document.
Schedule
CONSULTANT is able to begin work on this study immediately and shall complete the
assignment within approximately twelve weeks of receiving notice to proceed, assuming
availability of CITY staff for meetings and timely provision of requested data.
DocuSign Envelope ID: C39D5270-1D9F-4621-97C1-9587A6BAC533
EXHIBIT “C”
COMPENSATION
The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed
in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement based on the hourly rate
schedule attached as Exhibits “C3” & “C4”.
The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services
described in Exhibits “A”, “A1”, “A2” & “A3” (“Services”) and reimbursable expenses
shall not exceed $1,894,731.00. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services,
including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. Any work performed or expenses
incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of
compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY.
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing,
photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are
included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses.
CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost.
Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are:
A. Travel (including within the San Francisco Bay Area – at actual cost
B. Report printing and reproduction – at actual cost
C. Deliveries – at actual cost
D. Data purchase – at actual cost
All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup
information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $500.00 shall be approved in
advance by the CITY’s project manager.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written
authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s
request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of
services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum
compensation, including reimbursable expenses, for such services based on the rates set
forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum
compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager
and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional
services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement.
DocuSign Envelope ID: C39D5270-1D9F-4621-97C1-9587A6BAC533
EXHIBIT “C4”
RATE SCHEDULE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 3
STAFF LEVEL HOURLY BILL RATE
Principal $190–$250
Associate Principal $175–$200
Senior Associate/Senior Scientist $145–$180
Associate/Scientist $110–$150
Project Planner/Project Scientist $90–$115
Planner/Assistant Scientist $75–$95
Graphics Specialist $60–$95
Clerical/Word Processing $40–$110
Intern $50–$70
DocuSign Envelope ID: C39D5270-1D9F-4621-97C1-9587A6BAC533
City of Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Amendment and EIR
CONTRACT MODIFICATION COST PROPOSAL
Jansen Hill EPS
Principal-in-
Charge
Project
Manager
Project
Planner GRAPHICS WP/
CLERICAL
Hourly Rate:$175 $160 $105 $80 $100
TASK I. On-Site Project Management
Weekly Presence in City Offices (4 hr/week through 2015)184 184 $29,440 0 $0 $29,440
Leadership Group Planning and Support 9 52 61 $9,895 0 $0 $9,895
Task 2. Subtotal 9 236 0 0 0 245 $39,335 $0 $0 $39,335
TASK II. Fiscal Analysis
A Project Initiation 4 8 12 $1,980 6,720 $6,720 $8,700
B Fiscal Analysis of the City’s General Fund 6 12 4 2 4 28 $3,950 37,680 $37,680 $41,630
C Community Infrastructure Funding Analysis 6 12 4 2 4 28 $3,950 37,680 $37,680 $41,630
D Competitiveness Evaluation 2 4 6 $990 11,280 $11,280 $12,270
Task 3. Subtotal 18 36 8 4 8 74 $10,870 $93,360 $93,360 $104,230
Labor Hours Total 27 272 8 4 8 319
Labor Dollars Total $4,725 $43,520 $840 $320 $800 $50,205 $0 $93,360 $143,565
EXPENSES
PlaceWorks Reimbursable Expenses $1,816
Subconsultants' Reimbursable Expenses $1,640
2% of Labor for Office Expenses (Copies, Faxes, Phone, Misc. Printing)$1,004.10
10% Subconsultant Markup $9,500
EXPENSES TOTAL $13,960
GRAND TOTAL $157,525
PLACEWORKS
Subcons.
Labor Total
Total Task
Budget
PlaceWorks
Hours
PlaceWorks
Labor Total
SUBCONSULTANTS
Fisal and Market
Analyses
EXHIBIT C4
RATE SCHEDULE FOR AMENDMENT NO. 3
DocuSign Envelope ID: C39D5270-1D9F-4621-97C1-9587A6BAC533
TH
I
S
PA
G
E
INT
E
N
T
I
O
N
A
L
L
Y
LE
F
T
BL
A
N
K
1
5562/mb Revised September 20, 2013
Ordinance No. XXXX
ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING
THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
APPROPRIATION OF $157,525 FROM THE BUDGET STABILIZATION
RESERVE TO THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
DEPARTMENT FUND TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL CONTRACT SERVICES FOR
A FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS RELATED TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
UPDATE
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and determines as follows:
A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of
Palo Alto, the Council on June 16, 2014 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2015; and
B. The 1998 – 2010 Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan guides land use and development
decisions in Palo Alto and contains the City’s official policies on land use and community
designs, transportation, housing, natural environment, business and economics, and
community services; and
C. The Planning and Community Environment Department has a contract with The
Planning Center│DCE (DCE) to update the Comprehensive Plan to modernize and improve
elements based on current general plan/comprehensive plan standards, and recommended
the addition of sustainability policies and program concepts that would be appropriate for
each element and the contract has been amended twice to provide for additional scope and
work; and
D. Amendment Number One added work on the California Avenue Concept Plan,
preparation of the Citywide Travel Demand Forecasting Model, creation of the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Implementation Matrix, and additional website
administration; and
E. Amendment Number Two included preparation of “Our Plan so Far” and “Notice
of Preparation”, scoping and alternatives development, alternatives evaluation and
selection, and Comprehensive Plan Amendment and finalization; and
F. The proposed Third Amendment will provide a fiscal analysis of alternative
scenarios that will include a multi‐period fiscal impact analysis of General Fund revenues
and expenses, including an analysis of revenues and expenses attributable to City residents
and businesses.
ATTACHMENT B
2
5562/mb Revised September 20, 2013
SECTION 2. Therefore, the sum of One Hundred Fifty Seven Thousand Five Hundred
Twenty Five Dollars ($157,525) is hereby appropriated to the Planning and Community
Environment Department and General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve is decreased by
One Hundred Fifty Seven Thousand Five Hundred Twenty Five Dollars ($157,525).
SECTION 3. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this
ordinance shall become effective upon adoption.
SECTION 4. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby finds that this is not a project
under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact
assessment is necessary.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED: Enter Date Here
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
NOT PARTICIPATING:
ATTEST:
____________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
____________________________ ____________________________
Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager
____________________________
Director of Planning &
Community Environment
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5445)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Weed Abatement Public Hearing
Title: Public Hearing: On Objections to Weed Abatement and Adoption of
Resolution #9489 Ordering Weed Nuisance Abated
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Fire
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council hold a public hearing to hear and consider any objections to the
proposed destruction and removal of weeds, and adopt the attached Resolution ordering the
abatement of weed nuisances in the City of Palo Alto.
Executive Summary
The City of Palo Alto contracts with Santa Clara County Agriculture and Resource Management
to remove and destroy weeds, as defined in Chapter 8.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This
hearing allows all those affected and listed on the County’s 2015 Weed Abatement Program
Commencement Report to be heard and have their objections and comments considered by
Council before the Council adopts a resolution ordering the abatement of weed nuisances in
the City.
Background
The Council adopted Resolution #9489 on February 2, 2015 and declared weeds to be a
nuisance and ordered the abatement of that nuisance as called for in Chapter 8.08 of the Palo
Alto Municipal Code. The Resolution provided for a public hearing date of March 2, 2015 and
required notice to interested property owners and the public.
Discussion
The Santa Clara County Department of Agriculture and Resource Management administer the
contract for abatement of weeds within the City of Palo Alto. Upon notification of the City
Council’s February 2, 2015 action declaring weeds to be a nuisance and ordering abatement
thereof, the Department of Agriculture and Resource Management took proper steps to notify
each property owner by mail of the proposed weed abatement action on respective properties
and posted, on the public notice bulletin board, a list of the properties affected. The
Department of Agriculture and Resource Management has furnished copies of the property
City of Palo Alto Page 2
listing to the City Clerk and the City Fire Marshal. The City Clerk also posted and published
notice of the hearing as required.
At this public hearing, property owners may appear and object to the proposed weed
destruction or removal. After the hearing and consideration of any objections, the council may
allow or overrule any or all objections. If objections are overruled, the Council is deemed to
have acquired jurisdiction to proceed with abatement of weed nuisances upon Council
Adoption of the attached resolution. The County will be asked to perform the abatement work
to destroy and remove any weeds.
Resource Impact
All Charges for the weed abatement services are included as a special assessment on bills for
property taxes levied against the respective lots and parcels of land, which are considered liens
on these properties.
Policy Implications
This procedure is consistent with existing City policies and Chapter 8.08 of the Municipal Code.
Environmental Review
Santa Clara County has determined the Weed Abatement Program to be Categorically Exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA guidelines Sections
15308.
Attachments:
SSC2015WeedAbateProgCommenceRep (PDF)
FY2015WeedAbate&HearingResolution#9489 (DOCX)
Resolution No. 9489
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Declaring
Weeds to be a Nuisance and Setting March 2, 2015 for a
Public Hearing for Objections to Proposed
Weed Abatement
WHEREAS, weeds, as defined in Section 8.08.010(b) of the Palo Alto Municipal
Code, are anticipated to develop during calendar year 2015 upon streets, alleys, sidewalks, and
parcels of private property within the City of Palo Alto sufficient to constitute a public nuisance
as a fire menace when dry or are otherwise combustible, or otherwise to constitute a menace to
the public health as noxious or dangerous.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby RESOLVE
as follows:
SECTION 1. Weeds, as defined in Section 8.08.010(b) of the Palo Alto Municipal
Code, which are anticipated to develop during calendar year 2015 upon streets, alleys, sidewalks,
and parcels of private property within the City of Palo Alto, are hereby found and determined to
constitute a public nuisance. Such nuisance is anticipated to exist upon some of the streets,
alleys, sidewalks, and parcels of private property within the City, which are shown, described,
and delineated on the several maps of the properties in said City which are recorded in the Office
of the County Recorder of the County of Santa Clara, reference in each instance for the
description of any particular street, alley, or parcel of private property being hereby made to the
several maps aforesaid, and, in the event of , there being several subdivision maps on which the
same lots are shown, reference is hereby made to the latest subdivision map.
SECTION 2. THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the said public nuisance be
abated in the manner provided by Chapter 8.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code:
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a public hearing shall be held on Monday, the
2nd day of March, 2015, at the hour of 6:00 pm, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, at the Council Chambers of the Civic Center of said City, at which the Council shall hear
objections to the proposed weed abatement of such weeds and give any objections due
consideration;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Fire Chief of the City of Palo Alto is
directed to give notice of the public hearing in the time, manner and form provided in Chapter
8.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code.
SECTION 3. Unless the nuisance is abated without delay by the destruction and
removal of such weeds, the work of abating such nuisance will be done by the County of Santa
Clara Department of Agriculture and Resource Management Office on behalf of the City of Palo
Alto, and the expenses thereof assessed upon the lots and lands from which, and/or in the front
and rear of which, such weeds shall have been destroyed and removed.
SECTION 4. The Santa Clara County, County Counsel has determined the Weed
Abatement Program to be categorically exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15308.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________________ ______________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________________ _______________________________
Senior Deputy City Attorney City Manager
________________________________
Director of Administrative Services
_________________________
Fire Chief
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5494)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Amend WGW Connection Fees
Title: Public Hearing: Adoption of a Resolution Amending Water, Gas and
Wastewater Connection and Capacity Fees and Miscellaneous Utility Charges
(Utility Rate Schedules S-5, G-5, W-5 and C-1)
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
RECOMMENDATION
Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the City Council adopt the
attached resolution amending the following Utility Rate Schedules: W-5 (Water Service
Connection Fees), G-5 (Gas Service Connection Fees), S-5 (Wastewater Service Connection
Fees), and C-1 (Utility Miscellaneous Charges), effective May 1, 2015.
BACKGROUND
The Utilities Department provides service connections to meet customers’ needs for new gas,
water, wastewater and electric services. Service connection fees and service call fees are
designed to recover costs that the Utilities Department incurs to provide installation,
connection, inspection and engineering of new service connections, including labor, equipment
and other associated charges. Service connection fees also cover all charges related to the
installation, relocation or abandonment of gas, water and wastewater services, which include
Utility plan review charges, meter and hydrant installations and other service installation and
inspection costs.
The proposed changes also add some new meter sizes to the existing capacity fee options for
water and wastewater service. No increases are proposed to any existing capacity fees.
The method used for recovering the costs is either: a single fee based on average conditions or
an estimated cost based on unusual field conditions. Most service connection costs are
recovered through the single fee methodology, with the single fees presented in the attached
rate schedules W-5, G-5, S-5 and C-1. Unusual field conditions and the associated costs are
determined by the Utilities Engineering Manager. The connection fees typically are a sum of
the costs of labor, materials, equipment, overhead, street paving, meter costs (where
applicable), and landfill dump charges.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
The last time a cost-of-service study of connection fees, excluding capacity fees, was performed
by staff was in 2008. The water and wastewater capacity fees study was performed by Black
and Veatch that same year. Both the connection fees and capacity fees increases were
approved by Council in 2008 following the studies, with the phase-in of only the capacity fee
increases in 2009 and 2010 to manage the impact of the increases to mainly developers of new
residential single family and multi-family dwellings, and hotel construction (CMR: 227:08, CMR
222:09, and CMR: 214:10). Staff’s recent internal cost-of-service study of connection and
service-related costs indicates that current fees do not fully recover the Utilities Department’s
direct and indirect costs; therefore, an increase is necessary.
Fees are developed to cover standard connections under basic assumptions. New items are
added to the rate schedule to cover additional scenarios and changing conditions. However,
engineering estimates are required to determine the appropriate fees for special requirements
that arise occasionally.
DISCUSSION
Besides the changes proposed and described below, staff reviewed each of the attached rate
schedules for clarity, making edits as needed to improve readability and ensure that defined
terms used in Rule 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) were properly capitalized in each rate
schedule. All changes are shown in redline and attached.
Water-Gas-Wastewater Connection Fees
The proposed increases in water, gas, and wastewater connection fees are due to a
combination of factors including higher labor rates, additional meter costs, and an increase in
work time to reflect the actual time required to complete each job. The proposed water service
connection fees increased on average 87% with a decrease on average of 14% for domestic,
irrigation and fire combined service connection charges; the proposed gas service connection
fees increased on average 94%; and the proposed wastewater service connection fees
increased on average 41%.
The largest proposed fee increases are for meter installation charges for water and gas services.
The current fees for domestic water and gas meter installations do not cover the material cost
of the meter box and the new standard electronic water meter (E-meter) which was adopted in
the 2013 Water, Gas, and Wastewater Utility Standards. They also do not cover the labor costs
for setting or inspecting new meters on new or existing services.
The proposed connection fee schedules will also recover utility plan review costs through the
proposed addition of standardized utility plan review fees, along with engineering and
inspection costs for a variety of utility work performed by outside contractors. Standardizing
these fees will shorten the permit issuing process by eliminating the labor intensive estimation
work that was done previously for water, gas and wastewater utility plan reviews and
engineering and inspection work for unusual/large projects. In addition, new fees for tapping
City of Palo Alto Page 3
water and gas mains are proposed to be added to the connection fee schedules to provide an
option to customers who prefer to use their own contractors for the service installation.
Per Palo Alto Municipal Code Titles 15 and 16 (Palo Alto Fire Code and Building Regulations),
adopted in 2008, all new construction or renovation of one- and two-family dwellings is
required to install automatic sprinkler systems. The proposed decreases in new water service
connection fees, on average 14%, are due to combining domestic water, fire, and/or irrigation
capability into one system. New customers will be charged, under the proposed fee schedule,
for installing only one pipe servicing any purpose (fire, domestic or irrigation).
Tables 1, 2, and 3 present a summary of the proposed changes to Gas, Water, and Wastewater
Service Connection Fees, respectively.
City of Palo Alto Page 4
Table 1 – Summary of Proposed Changes to Gas Service Standard Connection Fees
(Attachment B – Utility Rate Schedule G-5)
Rate Schedule Section
and Title
Reason(s) for Proposed Changes
B.1 & B.2 Plan Review
Fees
New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance. Fees are based on estimated hours for plan review.
Mainly used for commercial projects in excess of $200,000 and
new subdivisions.
B.3 Distribution System
Extension Charge
Increased labor rates and installation time
B.4. Connection Charge
for Service Installed on
Existing Main -
directionally bored
connections
Increased labor rates, material costs, and installation time
B.4 Connection Charge
for Service Installed on
Existing Main -
trenched connections
and contractor
provided trenches
Provides fee for when field conditions call for open -trench
method, instead of directionally bored (trenchless) method
Provides an option for customers who wish to have their
contractor provide the trench for service installations by City
staff
B.5 Meter Charges Increased material costs and inclusion of actual labor costs for
setting and inspection of meters
B.5 4" Bollard New standard bollard size
B.6 Additional meters
on existing and new
services
Increased material costs and inclusion of actual labor costs for
setting and inspection of meters
B.7 Service Riser
Relocation
Increased labor rates and relocation time
B.9 Tapping the gas
main for contractor
installed services
Provides an option to customers in wanting to employ their own
contractor for the service installation. City staff will perform
tapping of live gas main.
D.1 Engineering and
Inspection Service Fees
Increased labor rates.
New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
Table 2 – Summary of Proposed Changes to Water Service Standard Connection Fees
(Attachment D – Utility Rate Schedule W-5)
Rate Schedule Section
and Title
Reason(s) for Proposed Changes
B.1 Plan Review Fees New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance. Fees are based on estimated hours for plan review.
Mainly used for commercial projects in excess of $200,000 and
new subdivisions.
B.2 Distribution System
Extension Charge
New standard material and larger minimum diameter pipes for
mains
B.3 Service Connection
Charges (for Domestic,
Fire, & Irrigation)
Combining of Domestic, Fire, and Irrigation for multiple purposes
reduced required work hours and material costs for installation
B.4 Meter Charges New standard electronic (E-meter) and compound meters and
inclusion of actual labor costs for setting and inspection of
meters
B.5 Additional Meters
on Connection
New standard electronic (E-meter) and compound meters and
inclusion of actual labor costs for setting and inspection of
meters
B.7 Capacity Fees New minimum fixture units are proposed to align meter size with
customer-identified on-site current and future demand
D.1 2-Meter Manifold Increased labor rates and material costs
D.2 Service
Abandonment
Increased time for demolition due to unpredictable underground
field conditions
D.3 Meter Installation Standardized fee for engineering and inspection for large meter
purchase and installation by other parties
D.4 Hydrant Installation Increased installation time and material costs
D.5 Tapping the water
main for contractor
installed services
Provides an option to customers who want to employ their own
contractor for the service installation. City staff will perform
tapping of live water main.
D.6 Engineering and
Inspection
Increased labor rates.
New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance.
City of Palo Alto Page 6
Table 3 – Summary of Proposed Changes to Wastewater Service Standard Connection Fees
(Attachment F – Utility Rate Schedule S-5)
Rate Schedule Section
and Title
Reason(s) for Proposed Changes
B.1 Plan Review Fees New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance. Fees are based on estimated hours for plan review.
Mainly used for commercial projects in excess of $200,000 and
new subdivision.
B.2 Collection System
Extension Charge
Increased labor rates, material costs, and installation time
B.3 Connection Charges Increased labor rates and material costs
B.3 Connection Charges
- Rehab Existing Lateral
Provides option for customer with existing vitrified clay pipe and
other laterals that can be rehabilitated by trenchless
rehabilitation methods
B.5 Capacity Fees No changes
D.1 Install Manhole Increased labor rates, materials costs, and time for installation
due to traffic congestion, night time work, and difficult
underground field conditions
D.2 Abandonment and
Demolition
Increase labor rates and time for demolition due to difficult
underground field conditions
D. 3 Install New
Cleanout
New standard fee for cleanout installation
D.4 Engineering and
Inspection Fees
Increased labor rates.
New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance.
Capacity Fees
No increases are proposed to any existing capacity fees, but some new meter size options are
being added to align meter size with customer demand. A minimum number of fixture units is
proposed for 4-inch and 6-inch water meters; currently no minimum is required. The proposed
minimums offer an incentive for customers to accurately report the number of fixture units and
to request meters that will supply their stated fixture units and corresponding gallons-per-
minute of demand. The City installs water meters to match the customer’s demand as stated
on the Customer Utility application/load sheet. Customers who want a large 4-inch or 6-inch
compound meter will need to meet the proposed minimum number of fixture units on the
application/load sheet or pay the capacity fee based on this minimum number of fixture units,
with additional fixture units beyond the minimum number to be calculated at $125.00 per
fixture unit.
Utility Miscellaneous Charges (Attachment H – Utility Rate Schedule C-1)
Utility Rate Schedule C-1 covers flat rate charges for service calls related to service
disconnection and restoration for non-payment. In addition, labor rates per hour per person
City of Palo Alto Page 7
for non-standard service work have been revised and the proposed rates are increasing 13% to
reflect updated labor costs since 2002. The proposed service call flat rates are increasing 35
percent due to increases in pension and medical costs, market salary re-alignment, and
additional infrastructure expenses since 2008.
Connection Fees in Other Local Utilities
The proposed fee changes for the water utility will be more in-line with other local utilities.
Attachment K, Connection Fees Comparison 2014, shows some of the comparable water utility
connection fees with other local utilities. There were no comparable gas utility connection fees
and most local utilities do not own wastewater laterals.
The proposed fee changes were developed in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act
(California Government Code Section 66000 – 66008), which governs water and wastewater
utility connection and capacity charges. The Act sets forth notice and hearing procedures and
requires that fees not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which
the fee is imposed. Although the City’s gas connection fees and service call fees are not
covered by the Act, the City has followed its procedural and substantive requirements with
respect to these cost-based fees, for transparency and ease of administration.
Government Code 66016 requires that prior to levying a new or increased fee or service charge,
the City Council must hold at least one public meeting to listen to any oral or written
presentations on the fees. If approved, the proposed fee changes will take effect on May 1,
2015, 60 days after the City Council adopts the resolution amending the fees, in accordance
with Government Code Section 66017.
BOARD/COMMISSION REVIEW AND RECOMMENDATION
At its meeting on December 10, 2014, the Utilities Advisory Commission discussed the change
in the total cost due to the proposed change in fees for a homeowner. Staff indicated that every
service is different, but for a typical residential customer needing gas, water and sewer services,
the cost would change from $13,700 to $17,400, a 27% increase. Some commissioners asked
how long it has been since the fees have changed and how the fees compare to those for other
entities, such as PG&E for gas and other entities for sewer. Staff replied it has been at least 5 to
6 years since the fees were changed and fees for PG&E gas connection services are not
comparable because the PG&E fees are prepared by PG&E estimators on a case by case basis.
For sewer connection services, Palo Alto is different from other jurisdictions since the City owns
the lower sewer laterals. In most other agencies, the customer owns the entire sewer lateral so
the agencies don’t have comparable connection fees. Staff plans to evaluate the option of
transferring ownership of the lower sewer lateral to the customers and go through the policy
change process, after the laterals have been examined and/or repaired as a result of the cross-
bore inspection program.
Staff indicated that when fees change, as a courtesy to customers, the City sends a letter to
those with projects on file and provides a 90-day period during which the customers can pay
City of Palo Alto Page 8
the fees under the old rates. Some Commissioners were concerned that projects might not be
far enough along in the planning phase preventing fee estimates from being firmed up. Staff
explained that generally, if there is a project on file, the City has already provided an estimate
of the fees.
A motion was made and seconded to approve staff’s recommendation. The motion passed
unanimously (6-0 with Chair Foster, Vice Chair Waldfogel, Commissioners Cook, Eglash, Hall and
Melton voting yes, and with Commissioner Chang absent) to recommend that the Council
amend the following Utility Rate Schedules: W-5 (Water Service Connection Fees), G-5 (Gas
Service Connection Fees), S-5 (Wastewater Service Connection Fees), and C-1 (Utility
Miscellaneous Charges.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Based on the assumption that the fee changes will take effect in May 1, 2015, the estimated
increase in annual connection fee revenues is approximately $225,000 in the Gas Fund,
$150,000 in the Water Fund, and $75,000 in the Wastewater Fund.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
These recommendations do not represent a change in current City policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The adoption of the resolution is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Air
Quality Act; under California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15273(a), because
CEQA does not apply to the modification, restructuring, or approval of rates and charges for the
purpose of meeting operating expenses and obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to
maintain service.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Resolution to amend rate sched W-5, G-5, S-5, C-1 effective 05-01-2015
(PDF)
Attachment B: Rate Sched G-5 effective 05_01_2015 (PDF)
Attachment C: Redline Rate Sched G-5 effective 05_01_2015 (PDF)
Attachment D: Rate Sched W-5 effective 05_01_2015 (PDF)
Attachment E: Redline Rate Sched W-5 effective 05_01_2015 (PDF)
Attachment F: Rate Sched S-5 effective 05_01_2015 (PDF)
Attachment G: Redline Rate Sched S-5 effective 05_01_2015 (PDF)
Attachment H: Rate Sched C-1 effective 05_01_2015 (PDF)
Attachment I: Redline Rate Sched C-1 effective 05_01_2015 (PDF)
Attachment J: Backup Spreadsheets FY2014_2015 (PDF)
Attachment K: Connection fees comparison_2014 (PDF)
Attachment L: UAC Connection Fees Report dated December 10, 2014 without
attachments (PDF)
Attachment M: Excerpted Draft UAC Minutes of December 10, 2014 (PDF)
ATTACHMENT A
6053235
RESOLUTION NO. _____________________
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO
AMENDING WATER, GAS, AND WASTEWATER CONNECTION
AND CAPACITY FEES AND MISCELLANEOUS UTILITY
CHARGES (UTILITY RATE SCHEDULES W-5, G-5, S-5, AND C-1)
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby RESOLVE as follows:
Section 1. Pursuant to section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Schedule W-5 (Water Service Connection Fees) of the Palo Alto Utilities Rates and
Charges is hereby amended to read as attached and incorporated. The foregoing Utility
Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective May 1, 2015.
Section 2. Pursuant to section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Schedule G-5 (Gas Service Connection Fees) of the Palo Alto Utilities Rates and Charges
is hereby amended to read as attached and incorporated. The foregoing Utility Rate
Schedule, as amended, shall become effective May 1, 2015.
Section 3. Pursuant to section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Schedule S-5 (Wastewater Service Connection Fees) of the Palo Alto Utilities Rates and
Charges is hereby amended to read as attached and incorporated. The foregoing Utility
Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective May 1, 2015.
Section 4. Pursuant to section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code,
Schedule C-1 (Utility Miscellaneous Charges) of the Palo Alto Utilities Rates and
Charges is hereby amended to read as attached and incorporated. The foregoing Utility
Rate Schedule, as amended, shall become effective May 1, 2015.
Section 5. The Council finds that the fees and charges adopted by this resolution
are charges imposed for a specific government service or product provided directly to the
payor that are not provided to those not charged, and do not exceed the reasonable costs
to the City of providing the service or product.
Section 6. Council finds that the adoption of this resolution is statutorily exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), pursuant to California Code of
Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15273(a), because the fees and charges proposed
are necessary to recover the cost of providing utility service and meet operating expenses.
After reviewing the reports presented, the Council incorporates these documents herein
and finds that sufficient evidence has been presented setting forth with specificity the
basis for this claim of CEQA exemption.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ATTACHMENT A
6053235
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
____________________________ _________________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
____________________________ _________________________________
Senior Deputy City Attorney City Manager
_________________________________
Director of Utilities
_________________________________
Director of Administrative Services
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-1 dated 8-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-1
A. GENERAL:
1. TERRITORY:
This Rate Schedule applies everywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Gas Service.
B. FEES:
Plan review fees must be paid prior to permit approval by the Utilities Department. Construction or
connection fees must be paid prior to the scheduling of any construction. Depending on material
availability and scheduling constraints, Utility Service will be installed between 30 and 40 days
following receipt of full payment. Regular work hours are 8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday. Any
work the City deems necessary to be performed during non-regular work hours shall be charged 1.15
times the stated fee to recover the overtime labor cost. These conditions include but are not limited to
performing work on arterial streets, in business districts, in front of major commercial establishments,
and near schools. Any work required to be performed during non-regular work hours where the work is
scheduled at the Customer’s convenience shall be charged 1.25 times the stated fee to recover the
overtime labor cost. All invoices are valid for 90 days from date of issuance.
1. COMMERCIAL PLAN REVIEW:
New commercial building or remodeling permit valuation greater than$200,000 ............$2,316.00
New subdivision residential unit (Gas only) ................................................................. $348.00/unit
System extension 2-inch polyethylene (PE) Gas main ....................................................... $12.00/ft
2. RESIDENTIAL PLAN REVIEW:
New single-family residential (SFR) building or SFR remodeling permit valuation greater
than$100,000 .........................................................................................................................$848.00
3. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EXTENSION CHARGE:
Charge per lineal foot ....................................................................................................... $173.00 /ft
4. CONNECTION CHARGE FOR SERVICE INSTALLED ON EXISTING MAIN:
The Service connection fees include up to 40 feet of Service Line installation inside the property line.
ATTACHMENT B
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-2 dated 8-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-2
Size
1-inch directionally bored connection ................................................................................$4,343.00
2-inch directionally bored connection ................................................................................$5,250.00
Excess length fee for directionally bored connection ...................................................... $49.00 /ft*
1- or 2-inch trenched connection .......................................................................................$5,976.00
2-inch main installation in contractor provided trench ...................................................... $60.00 /ft
Above 2-inch connection ......................................................................................... Utility Estimate
*Excess Length Fee: An additional Charge ($49.00 /foot) will apply to an extension greater than
forty feet from the street property line to the Gas Meter location, measured along a line perpendicular
to the street property line.
Service Location: The Service Line will be installed along the shortest, most practical route, as
determined by the Utilities Department (from the Gas main in the adjoining street, alley, lane road, or
easement to the nearest suitable Meter location at the building or structure).
5. METER CHARGES:
250 Cubic Foot Per Hour (CFH) House Meter .....................................................................$850.00
250 CFH Curb Meter .........................................................................................................$1,805.00
400 CFH House Meter ..........................................................................................................$961.00
400 CFH Curb Meter .........................................................................................................$2,023.00
630 CFH House Meter .......................................................................................................$1,329.00
630 CFH Curb Meter .........................................................................................................$2,285.00
800 CFH Diaphragm – Commercial House Meter ............................................................$1,781.00
1000 CFH Diaphragm - Commercial House Meter ..........................................................$1,886.00
1500 CFH Rotary-Commercial House Meter ....................................................................$2,487.00
2000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................$3,417.00
3000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................$3,431.00
5000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................$3,837.00
7000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................$4,418.00
11000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ......................................................................................$11,405.00
16000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ......................................................................................$12,472.00
23000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ......................................................................................$14,760.00
Electronic Volume Corrector System ................................................................................$5,808.00
AMR Encoder Receiver Transmitter – Diaphragm Meter ....................................................$155.00
ATTACHMENT B
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-3 dated 8-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-3
AMR Encoder Receiver Transmitter – Rotary Meter ...........................................................$208.00
Vent line for Gas Regulator ..................................................................................................$305.00
2-inch bollard (to protect Gas Meter) installation fee ...........................................................$339.00
4-inch bollard (to protect Gas Meter) installation fee ...........................................................$494.00
Other Meter sizes ..................................................................................................... Utility Estimate
6. ADDITIONAL METERS ON CONNECTION:
(Applies to small Meters up to 630 CFH) Per Meter
With new connection ............................................................................................................$529.00
On existing metered connection .........................................................................................$1,193.00
Charges for Meters above 630 CFH will be based on the Utilities Department’s estimate.
7. SERVICE RELOCATION:
Service riser relocation.......................................................................................................$1,422.00
Service riser relocations will only be performed on 1-inch and larger polyethylene (PE) pipe Service
Lines that have been approved by Utilities Department. All “other material pipe” Service Lines must
be replaced from the main to the Meter at the fees listed in Section B(4) of this Rate Schedule.
Curb Meter- Riser relocation on existing 1-inch PE pipe .....................................................$796.00
Curb Meter- Riser relocation on same alignment of existing Service ...............................$1,274.00
Curb Meter- New Service from main to house ..................................................................$2,038.00
8. RELOCATION OF FACILITIES:
Approved relocation of Service and other facilities will be done at the cost of the person requesting
the relocation. Payment of estimated cost is required before relocation work begins.
9. TAPPING THE GAS MAIN FOR CONTRACTOR INSTALLED SERVICES:
Tap Gas main for 1- to 2-inch Service ...............................................................................$1,603.00
Tap Gas main for 4- to 6-inch Service ...............................................................................$2,212.00
C. OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS:
ATTACHMENT B
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-4 dated 8-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-4
1. INSTALLATION:
The City of Palo Alto installs all Gas Services unless directed otherwise and approved by the City of
Palo Alto Utilities Department.
2. SERVICE CHARGES:
(A) Additional Service connections are available with payment of additional Service connection
Charges shown in Section B.
(B) Replacement of Service connections made necessary because of ordinary wear and
deterioration will be made without Charge. However, if the need for replacement arises due
to meeting an increase in load, the new Service will be charged as a new Service under
Section B.
(C) In commercial or industrial areas where a surface Meter installation is impractical, Meters
may be placed in underground vaults. Vaults must be provided and installed by the owner in
accordance with the Gas utility's specifications. The vault lid sections shall not exceed 70
pounds. All lids shall be centered above the Gas Meter to allow visibility of the Meter face
for Meter reading purposes.
3. UNDER UNUSUAL CONDITIONS:
(A) A condition which, in the opinion of the Engineering Manager, Water-Gas- Wastewater will
result in a cost higher than the fees in Section B, will be classified as unusual. The Charge for
an unusual installation will be based on the Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater
estimate of the total costs of all materials, labor, and other costs incidental to the installation.
(B) In the event Gas Service to a premise is requested and insufficient capacity exists to provide
such Service, the Applicant shall bear the total cost for designing and enlarging the
Distribution System to accommodate serving the Applicant. The Engineering Manager,
Water-Gas-Wastewater may require the Applicant to make arrangements for the design and
construction of said expansion in accordance with City standards and specifications.
Alternatively, the Engineering Manager may elect for City forces or contractors to design and
install respectively such facilities at the Applicant's expense. Full credit to the Applicant will
be provided for any over sizing or extra facilities installed to meet Service demands above
ATTACHMENT B
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-5 dated 8-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-5
the specific capacity needs of the Applicant as defined in the Utility’s rules and Regulations.
4. MASTER METERED GAS SERVICE
For Master-Meter Services using high volumes of Gas, the Applicant must provide all required
Meters, sending units, regulators, and other necessary flow control equipment as specified by the
City and approved by the Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater.
D. OTHER SERVICE CHARGES:
1. OTHER SERVICE FEES:
The following fees will apply to utility work performed by outside contractors, which may be done
only with the prior approval of the Utilities Department:
(A) Engineering service fee ........................................................................................ $151.00/hr
(B) Inspection service fee:
i. Inspection during regular work hours (M-F 8 AM to 5 PM) ............................ $118.00/hr
ii. Inspection during non-regular work hours ....................................................... $139.00/hr
iii. Inspection during non-regular work hours for Customer’s convenience ........ $159.00/hr
{End}
ATTACHMENT B
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Effective 8-1-2008Sheet No. G-5-1
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-1-1-4 dated 7-1-20068-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-7
A. GENERAL:
1. TERRITORY:
Inside the incorporated limits ofThis Rate Schedule applies everywhere the City of Palo Alto and on
land owned or leased by the City of Palo Altoprovides Gas Service.
B. FEES:
AllPlan review fees must be paid prior to permit approval by the Utilities Department. Construction or
connection fees must be paid prior to the scheduling of any construction. Depending on material
availability and scheduling constraints, utility serviceUtility Service will be installed between 30 and 40
days following receipt of full payment. Any work required to be done outside of Regular work hours are
8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday. Any work the City deems necessary to be performed during
non-regular work hours due to traffic, existing conditions or applicants requirements shall be charged at
1.515 times the stated fee. The following fees are regularly updated, therefore all billings to recover the
overtime labor cost. These conditions include but are onlynot limited to performing work on arterial
streets, in business districts, in front of major commercial establishments, and near schools. Any work
required to be performed during non-regular work hours where the work is scheduled at the Customer’s
convenience shall be charged 1.25 times the stated fee to recover the overtime labor cost. All invoices
are valid for 90 days from date of billingissuance.
1. 1COMMERCIAL PLAN REVIEW:
New commercial building or remodeling permit valuation greater than$200,000 ............$2,316.00
New subdivision residential unit (Gas only) ................................................................. $348.00/unit
System extension 2-inch polyethylene (PE) Gas main ....................................................... $12.00/ft
2. RESIDENTIAL PLAN REVIEW:
New single-family residential (SFR) building or SFR remodeling permit valuation greater
than$100,000 .........................................................................................................................$848.00
3. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EXTENSION CHARGE:
Charge per lineal foot …………………………………………………………………. $93.00/ft.
ATTACHMENT C
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Effective 8-1-2008Sheet No. G-5-2
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-2-2-4 dated 7-1-20068-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-7
2 Charge per lineal foot
$173.00 /ft
4. CONNECTION CHARGE FOR SERVICE INSTALLED ON EXISTING MAIN:
The Service connection fees include up to 40 feet of Service Line installation inside the property line.
Size
1-inch connection ...............................................................................................................$2,766.00
2-inch connection .................................................................................................................4,156.00
1-inch directionally bored connection ................................................................................$4,343.00
2-inch directionally bored connection ................................................................................$5,250.00
Excess length fee for directionally bored connection ...................................................... $49.00 /ft*
1- or 2-inch trenched connection .......................................................................................$5,976.00
2-inch main installation in contractor provided trench ...................................................... $60.00 /ft
Above 2-inch connection ......................................................................................... Utility Estimate
*Excess Length Fee: An additional charge ($20.00/Charge ($49.00 /foot for a 1-inch connection and
$22.00/foot for a 2- inch connection) will apply to an extension greater than forty feet from the street
property line to the gas meterGas Meter location, measured along a line perpendicular to the street
property line. This fee also applies when contractor provides trenching and backfill for new 1” and
2” gas piping installed by City crews.
Service Location: The service lineService Line will be installed along the shortest, most practical
route, as determined by Thethe Utilities Department (from the gasGas main in the adjoining street,
alley, lane road, or easement to the nearest suitable meterMeter location at the building or structure).
35. METER CHARGES:
250 CFH House meter .........................................................................................................$ 347.00
250 CFH Curb meter ............................................................................................................$ 813.00
400 CFH House meter .........................................................................................................$ 468.00
400 CFH Curb meter ............................................................................................................$ 934.00
630 CFH House meter .........................................................................................................$ 697.00
630 CFH Curb meter ............................................................................................................$ 975.00
1000 CFH Diaphragm - Commercial house meter .............................................................1,665.00
1100-1500 CFH Rotary-Commercial House meter .............................................................1,735.00
ATTACHMENT C
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Effective 8-1-2008Sheet No. G-5-3
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-3-3-4 dated 7-1-20068-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-7
2000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ............................................................................................1,999.00
3000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ............................................................................................2,140.00
5000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ............................................................................................2,983.00
7000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ............................................................................................3,625.00
11000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................4,997.00
16000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................6,300.00
Electronic Volume Corrector System ..................................................................................5,808.00
AMR Encoder Receiver Transmitter – diaphragm meter................................................................. 81.00
AMR Encoder Receiver Transmitter – rotary meter ...............................................................….... 130.00
Vent line for gas regulator …..……………………………………………………………….. 108.00
Bollard (to protect gas meter) installation Fee............................................................................. 162.00
250 Cubic Foot Per Hour (CFH) House Meter .....................................................................$850.00
250 CFH Curb Meter .........................................................................................................$1,805.00
400 CFH House Meter ..........................................................................................................$961.00
400 CFH Curb Meter .........................................................................................................$2,023.00
630 CFH House Meter .......................................................................................................$1,329.00
630 CFH Curb Meter .........................................................................................................$2,285.00
800 CFH Diaphragm – Commercial House Meter ............................................................$1,781.00
1000 CFH Diaphragm - Commercial House Meter ..........................................................$1,886.00
1500 CFH Rotary-Commercial House Meter ....................................................................$2,487.00
2000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................$3,417.00
3000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................$3,431.00
5000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................$3,837.00
7000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ..........................................................................................$4,418.00
11000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ......................................................................................$11,405.00
16000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ......................................................................................$12,472.00
23000 CFH Rotary-Commercial ......................................................................................$14,760.00
Electronic Volume Corrector System ................................................................................$5,808.00
AMR Encoder Receiver Transmitter – Diaphragm Meter ....................................................$155.00
AMR Encoder Receiver Transmitter – Rotary Meter ...........................................................$208.00
Vent line for Gas Regulator ..................................................................................................$305.00
2-inch bollard (to protect Gas Meter) installation fee ...........................................................$339.00
4-inch bollard (to protect Gas Meter) installation fee ...........................................................$494.00
Other Meter Sizessizes ............................................................................................. Utility Estimate
46. ADDITIONAL METERS ON CONNECTION:
ATTACHMENT C
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Effective 8-1-2008Sheet No. G-5-4
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-4-4-4 dated 7-1-20068-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-7
(Applies to small metersMeters up to 400 SCFH630 CFH) Per Meter
With new connection ..............................................................................................................$86.00
On existing metered connection ..............................................................................................286.00
With new connection ............................................................................................................$529.00
On existing metered connection .........................................................................................$1,193.00
Charges for metersMeters above 400 SCFH,630 CFH will be based on the Utility’sUtilities
Department’s estimate.
57. SERVICE RELOCATION:
Service riser relocation..........................................................................................................$834.00
Service riser relocation.......................................................................................................$1,422.00
Service riser relocations will only be performed on one 1-inch (1”) and larger polyethylene (PE) pipe
services.Service Lines that have been approved by Utilities Department. All “other material pipe”
servicesService Lines must be replaced from the main to the meterMeter at the fees listed in Section
B (2(4) of this rate scheduleRate Schedule.
Curb Meter- Riser relocation on existing 1” pe-inch PE pipe .................................$594.00$796.00
Curb Meter- Riser relocation on same alignment of existing service ......................... 965.00Service
$1,274.00
Curb Meter- New service from main to house .....................................................................1,408.00
6Curb Meter- New Service from main to house ..........................................................$2,038.00
8. RELOCATION OF FACILITIES:
Approved relocation of serviceService and other facilities will be done at the cost of the person
requesting the re-location. Depositrelocation. Payment of estimated cost is required before
relocation work begins. After the City
completes the work, a final billing based on actual costs will be sent to the person requesting the
relocation of facilities.
9. TAPPING THE GAS MAIN FOR CONTRACTOR INSTALLED SERVICES:
ATTACHMENT C
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Effective 8-1-2008Sheet No. G-5-5
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-5-5-4 dated 7-1-20068-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-7
Tap Gas main for 1- to 2-inch Service ...............................................................................$1,603.00
Tap Gas main for 4- to 6-inch Service ...............................................................................$2,212.00
C. OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS:
1. 1.INSTALLATION:
The City of Palo Alto installs all Gas Services unless directed otherwise and approved by the City of
Palo Alto Utilities Department.
2. SERVICE CHARGES:
(A) Additional serviceService connections are available with payment of additional
serviceService connection chargesCharges shown in Section B.
(B) Replacement of serviceService connections made necessary because of ordinary wear and
deterioration will be made without chargeCharge. However, if the need for replacement
arises due to meeting an increase in load, the new serviceService will be charged as a new
serviceService under Section B.
(C) In commercial or industrial areas where a surface meterMeter installation is impractical,
metersMeters may be placed in underground vaults. Vaults must be provided and installed
by the owner in accordance with the gasGas utility's specifications. The vault lid sections
shall not exceed 70 pounds. All lids shall be centered above the gas meterGas Meter to allow
visibility of the meterMeter face for meterMeter reading purposes.
23. UNDER UNUSUAL CONDITIONS:
(A) A condition which, in the opinion of the Engineering Manager, Water-Gas- Wastewater will
result in a cost higher than the fees in Section B, will be classified as unusual. The
chargeCharge for an unusual installation will be based on the Engineering Manager, Water-
Gas-Wastewater estimate of the total costs of all materials, labor, and other costs incidental
to the installation.
(B) In the event gas serviceGas Service to a premisespremise is requested and insufficient
capacity exists to provide such serviceService, the applicantApplicant shall bear the total cost
ATTACHMENT C
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Effective 8-1-2008Sheet No. G-5-6
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-6-6-4 dated 7-1-20068-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-7
for designing and enlarging the distribution systemDistribution System to accommodate
serving the applicantApplicant. The Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater may
require the applicantApplicant to make arrangements for the design and construction of said
expansion in accordance with City standards and specifications. Alternatively, the
Engineering Manager may elect for City forces or contractors to design and install
respectively such facilities at the applicant'sApplicant's expense. Full credit to the
applicantApplicant will be provided for any over sizing or extra facilities installed to meet
serviceService demands above the specific capacity needs of the applicantApplicant as
defined in the Utility’s Rulesrules and Regulations.
34. MASTER METERED GAS SERVICE
For master meter servicesMaster-Meter Services using high volumes of gasGas, the
applicantApplicant must provide all required metersMeters, sending units, regulators, and other
necessary flow control equipment as specified by the City and approved by the Engineering Manager,
Water-Gas-Wastewater.
D. OTHER SERVICE CHARGES:
1. OTHER SERVICE FEES:
The following fees will apply to utility work performed by outside contractors, which may be done
only with the prior approval of the Utilities Department:
(A) Engineering Service Fee ...................................................................................... $132.00/hr
(A) Engineering service fee ........................................................................................ $151.00/hr
(B) Inspection Service Fee .......................................................................... $102.00/service fee:
i. Inspection during regular work hours (M-F 8 AM to 5 PM) ............................ $118.00/hr
ii. Inspection during non-regular work hours ....................................................... $139.00/hr
iii. Inspection during non-regular work hours for Customer’s convenience ........ $159.00/hr
ATTACHMENT C
GAS SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Effective 8-1-2008Sheet No. G-5-7
Supersedes Sheet No.G-5-7-7-4 dated 7-1-20068-8-2008 Sheet No. G-5-7
{End}
ATTACHMENT C
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-1 dated 7-2-2010 Sheet No. W-5-1
A. GENERAL:
1. TERRITORY:
This Rate Schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Water Service.
B. FEES:
Plan review fees must be paid prior to permit approval by the Utilities Department. Construction or
connection fees must be paid prior to the scheduling of any construction. Depending on material
availability and scheduling constraints, Utility Service will be installed between 30 and 40 days
following receipt of full payment. Regular work hours are 8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday. Any
work the City deems necessary to be performed during non-regular work hours shall be charged 1.15
times the stated fee to recover the overtime labor cost. These conditions include but are not limited to
performing work on arterial streets, in business districts, in front of major commercial establishments,
and near schools. Any work required to be performed during non-regular work hours where the work is
scheduled at the Customer’s convenience shall be charged 1.25 times the stated fee to recover the
overtime labor cost. All invoices are valid for 90 days from date of issuance.
1. PLAN REVIEW:
New commercial building or remodeling permit valuation greater than $200,000 ...........$3,072.00
New subdivision residential unit (Water only) ............................................................. $348.00/unit
System extension 8-inch high-density polyethylene (HDPE) Water main ......................... $12.00/ft
2. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EXTENSION CHARGE:
City standard 8-inch main, Charge per foot ..........................................................................$206.00
3. SERVICE CONNECTION CHARGES:
Water Service: Domestic, Irrigation, and Fire
Size Amount
2-inch connection ............................................................................................................. $4,863.00
4-inch connection ............................................................................................................. $7,156.00
6-inch connection ...............................................................................................................$8,137.00
ATTACHMENT D
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-2 dated 7-2-2010 Sheet No. W-5-2
8-inch connection................................................................................................................$9,469.00
10-inch connection............................................................................................................$10,625.00
Additional Domestic or Irrigation Services
For Service installations connecting to a pre-existing, larger Service.
2-inch connection................................................................................................................$3,122.00
4-inch connection................................................................................................................$4,449.00
6-inch connection................................................................................................................$4,842.00
Combination Domestic or Irrigation Water Service and Fire Service
For requests of combination domestic and fire Water Services, two Service connection Charges will
apply: the Charge for connection of a fire Service and the Charge for domestic or irrigation Service
installation connection to a larger Service. Approval from the Utilities Department is required for
combination water service connections.
Master Water Service
Approval by the Director of Utilities is required for a connection that serves domestic Water Service
and fire protection through a detector Meter. The Charge for master Water Service will be based on
the Engineering Manager’s, Water-Gas-Wastewater, estimate of the total costs, including: materials,
labor, metering not listed in Section B(4), and other costs incidental to the installation.
For Service connections of 4-inch through 8-inch sizes and Meter sizes of 4-inch through 6-inch, the
new owner must provide and install a concrete vault with meter reading lid covers to house Meters
and other required control equipment in accordance with the Utilities Department’s specifications.
An approved backflow prevention device with bypass assemblies must be provided by owner on all
fire Services.
4. METER CHARGES:
5/8-inch x 3/4-inch E-Meter ..................................................................................................$698.00
1-inch E-Meter ......................................................................................................................$862.00
1 ½-inch E-Meter ...............................................................................................................$1,444.00
ATTACHMENT D
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-3 dated 7-2-2010 Sheet No. W-5-3
2-inch E-Meter ...................................................................................................................$1,635.00
4-inch Compound Meter ....................................................................................................$5,740.00
6-inch Compound Meter ....................................................................................................$8,051.00
AMR Encoder Receiver Transmitter .................................................................................... $108.00
5. ADDITIONAL METERS ON CONNECTION:
With new connection .....................................................................................................$1,264.00
On existing connection .....................................................................................................$1,866.00
6. RELOCATION OF FACILITIES:
Approved relocation of Service, hydrants, or other facilities will be done at the cost of the person
requesting the re-location. Payment of estimated cost is required before relocation work begins.
7. CAPACITY FEES:
Capacity fees will be charged for new Utility Services and added demand on existing Services
Domestic:
5/8-inch x 3/4-inch E-Meter ...............................................................................................$5,000.00
1-inch E-Meter ...................................................................................................................$9,400.00
1 ½-inch E-Meter .............................................................................................................$18,850.00
2-inch E-Meter .................................................................................................................$56,250.00
4-inch Compound Meter ................................................. estimate at $125/FU; minimum 5,000 FU
(5,000 FU is mid-range operating capacity of 4-inch Meter)
6-inch Compound Meter .................................................. estimate at $125/FU minimum 7,000 FU
(7,000 FU is mid-range operating capacity of 6-inch Meter)
Added demand on an existing Water Service will be calculated at $125.00/FU
Note: FU is fixture unit (1 FU=15gpd)
Fire Service Capacity Fees:
2-inch ....................................................................................................................................$750.00
4-inch .................................................................................................................................$9,000.00
6-inch ...............................................................................................................................$22,530.00
8-inch ...............................................................................................................................$43,080.00
ATTACHMENT D
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-4 dated 7-2-2010 Sheet No. W-5-4
10-inch .............................................................................................................................$69,510.00
If a Customer is upgrading the capacity of an existing Service, then the capacity Charge will be the
difference between the new Service size and the existing Service size.
C. OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS
1. INSTALLATION:
The City of Palo Alto installs all Water Services unless directed otherwise and approved by City of
Palo Alto Utilities Department.
2. SERVICE CHARGES:
(A) Additional Service connections are available with payment of an additional Service connection
Charge as shown in Section B.
(B) Replacement of Service connection made necessary because of ordinary wear and deterioration
will be made without Charge. Replacement due to inadequacy because of additional demand or
load will be charged as a new Service connection.
3. INSTALLATION UNDER UNUSUAL CONDITIONS:
(A) Any condition which, in the opinion of the Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater will
result in a cost higher than the Charges set forth in Section B will be classified as unusual. The
Charge for an unusual installation will be based on Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-
Wastewater's estimate of the total costs of all materials, labor, and other costs incidental to the
installation.
(B) In the event Water Service to a Premise is requested and insufficient capacity exists to provide
such Service, the Applicant shall bear the total cost for enlarging the Distribution System to
accommodate serving the Applicant. The Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater may
require the Applicant to make arrangements for the design and construction of said expansion
in accordance with City standards and specifications. Alternatively, the Engineering Manager,
Water-Gas-Wastewater may elect for City forces or contractors to design and install
respectively such facilities at the Applicant’s expense.
4. EXCEPTIONS:
ATTACHMENT D
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-5 dated 7-2-2010 Sheet No. W-5-5
(A) Water Service Areas 3 & 4, connections served directly from supply main: The Distribution
System Charges (Section B) will be based on a maximum frontage of 660 feet. This exception
applies to single applications for Service and does not apply to subdivisions or tracts.
(B) The subdivision developer will furnish and install the Water system at his or her expense and in
accordance with City's specifications.
D. OTHER SERVICES:
1. 2 METER MANIFOLD:
(A) 2-inch ............................................................................................................................$724.00
2. ABANDONMENT:
(A) Small Service 2-inch and less ....................................................................................$2,653.00
(B) Large Service more than 2-inch .................................................................................$3,715.00
3. METER INSTALLATION:
Charges for large Meter installations by third parties, i.e. contractors, developers, etc.
8-inch to 12-inch Meters ....................................................................................................$3,235.00
4. FIRE HYDRANT:
(A) Install new hydrant without lateral.............................................................................$2,552.00
(B) Install new hydrant with lateral ................................................................................$12,840.00
(C) Relocation behind curb (up to 5 feet) ........................................................................$6,841.00
Relocations more than 5 feet will require a new lateral and the existing lateral will be disconnected
and abandoned at the main.
5. TAPPING THE WATER MAIN FOR CONTRACTOR INSTALLED SERVICES:
(A) Tap Water main for 2-inch Service ............................................................................$1,649.00
(B) Tap Water main for 4-inch Service ............................................................................$2,162.00
(C) Tap Water main for 6-inch Service ............................................................................$3,288.00
(D) Tap Water main for 8-inch Service ............................................................................$4,498.00
ATTACHMENT D
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-6 dated 7-2-2010 Sheet No. W-5-6
6. OTHER FEES:
The following fees will apply to utility work performed by outside contractors:
(A) Engineering fee (per hour) ............................................................................................$151.00
(B) Utility inspection fee (per hour):
i. Inspection during regular work hours (M-F 8 AM to 5 PM) .....................................$118.00
ii. Inspection during non-regular work hours................................................................$139.00
iii. Inspection during non-regular work hours for Customer’s convenience…………..$159.00
(C) Engineering and inspection for new 2-inch Service ..................................................$1,618.00
(D) Engineering and inspection for new 2-inch Service connected to larger Service ......$1,078.00
(E) Engineering and inspection for new 4-inch to 8-inch Service ...................................$2,426.00
(F) Engineering and inspection for new hydrant and Service ..........................................$2,426.00
(G) Engineering and inspection for abandonment of 2-inch and smaller Service ..............$809.00
(H) Engineering and inspection for abandonment of 3-inch and larger Service ..............$1,078.00
(I) Engineering and inspection for new 8-inch main (per linear foot) .................................$27.00
{End}
ATTACHMENT D
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-1 dated 7-6-20092-2010 Sheet No. W-5-1
A. GENERAL:
1. TERRITORY:
Inside the incorporated limits ofThis Rate Schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto and on
land owned or leased by the City of Palo Altoprovides Water Service.
B. FEES:
AllPlan review fees must be paid prior to permit approval by the Utilities Department. Construction or
connection fees must be paid prior to the scheduling of any construction. Depending on material
availability and scheduling constraints, utility serviceUtility Service will be installed between 30 and 40
days following receipt of full payment. Any work required to be done outside of Regular work hours are
8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday. Any work the City deems necessary to be performed during
non-regular work hours due to traffic, existing conditions or applicant’s requirements shall be charged at
1.515 times the stated fee. The following fees are regularly updated, therefore all billings to recover the
overtime labor cost. These conditions include but are onlynot limited to performing work on arterial
streets, in business districts, in front of major commercial establishments, and near schools. Any work
required to be performed during non-regular work hours where the work is scheduled at the Customer’s
convenience shall be charged 1.25 times the stated fee to recover the overtime labor cost. All invoices
are valid for 90 days from date of billingissuance.
1. 1PLAN REVIEW:
New commercial building or remodeling permit valuation greater than $200,000 ...........$3,072.00
New subdivision residential unit (Water only) ............................................................. $348.00/unit
System extension 8-inch high-density polyethylene (HDPE) Water main ......................... $12.00/ft
2. DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM EXTENSION CHARGE:
For City Standard 6" Main, charge per foot ................................................................ $111.00
2City standard 8-inch main, Charge per foot ........................................................................$206.00
3. SERVICE CONNECTION CHARGES:
ATTACHMENT E
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-2 dated 7-6-20092-2010 Sheet No. W-5-2
Category 1 -Water Service: Domestic Water Service, Irrigation, and Fire
Size Amount
1-inch connection ................................................................................................... $3,797.00
1-1/2 inch connection ................................................................................................... 4,535.00
2-inch connection ................................................................................................... 5,681.00
4-inch connection ................................................................................................... 8,381.00
6-inch connection ................................................................................................... 9,379.00
Category 2 - Fire Service
Size Amount
4-inch connection ................................................................................................... $7,176.00
6-inch connection ................................................................................................... 7,941.00
8-inch connection ................................................................................................... 8,564.00
Category 3 – 2-inch connection ......................................................................................... $4,863.00
4-inch connection ............................................................................................................. $7,156.00
6-inch connection ...............................................................................................................$8,137.00
8-inch connection................................................................................................................$9,469.00
10-inch connection............................................................................................................$10,625.00
Additional Domestic or Irrigation Services
For serviceService installations connecting to a pre-existing, larger serviceService.
1-inch connection ................................................................................................... $1,747.00
1-1/2 inch connection ................................................................................................... 2,095.00
2-inch connection ................................................................................................... 2,383.00
4-inch connection ................................................................................................... 5,043.00
Category 4 - 2-inch connection ...........................................................................................$3,122.00
ATTACHMENT E
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-3 dated 7-6-20092-2010 Sheet No. W-5-3
4-inch connection................................................................................................................$4,449.00
6-inch connection................................................................................................................$4,842.00
Combination Domestic or Irrigation Water Service and Fire Service
For requests of combination domestic and fire water servicesWater Services, two serviceService
connection chargesCharges will apply: the chargeCharge for connection of a fire serviceService and
the chargeCharge for domestic serviceor irrigation Service installation connection to a larger
serviceService. Approval from the Utilities Department is required for combination water service
connections.
Category 5 - Master Water Service
Approval by the Director of Utilities is required for a connection that serves domestic water
serviceWater Service and fire protection through a detector meterMeter. The chargeCharge for
master water serviceWater Service will be based on the Engineering Manager’s, Water-Gas-
Wastewater, estimate of the total costs, including: materials, labor, metering not listed in Section
B(2) or B(4), and other costs incidental to the installation.
For serviceService connections of 4-inch through 8-inch sizes and meterMeter sizes of 34-inch
through 86-inch, the new owner must provide and install a concrete vault with meter reading lid
covers to house metersMeters and other required control equipment in accordance with the Water
Utility'sUtilities Department’s specifications.
An approved backflow prevention device with bypass assemblies must be provided by owner on all
fire servicesServices.
34. METER CHARGES:
5/8 Inch x 3/4 Inch ...............................................................................................................$222.00
1 Inch ..................................................................................................................................276.00
1 ½ Inch ..................................................................................................................................492.00
2 Inch disk ..........................................................................................................................601.00
2 Inch turbine (irrigation only) ...........................................................................................724.00
3 Inch compound .............................................................................................................1,882.00
3 Inch turbine (irrigation only) ........................................................................................1,163.00
ATTACHMENT E
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-4 dated 7-6-20092-2010 Sheet No. W-5-4
4 Inch ...............................................................................................................................2,429.00
4 Inch turbine (irrigation only) ........................................................................................1,487.00
6 Inch ...............................................................................................................................4,138.00
5/8-inch x 3/4-inch E-Meter ..................................................................................................$698.00
1-inch E-Meter ......................................................................................................................$862.00
1 ½-inch E-Meter ...............................................................................................................$1,444.00
2-inch E-Meter ...................................................................................................................$1,635.00
4-inch Compound Meter ....................................................................................................$5,740.00
6-inch Compound Meter ....................................................................................................$8,051.00
AMR Encoder Receiver Transmitter ......................……………........................................…....
$108.00
45. ADDITIONAL METERS ON CONNECTION:
With new connection ........................................................................................................$321.00
On existing connection ..........................................................................................................783.00
5With new connection .....................................................................................................$1,264.00
On existing connection .....................................................................................................$1,866.00
6. RELOCATION OF FACILITIES:
Approved relocation of serviceService, hydrants, or other facilities will be done at the cost of the
person requesting the re-location. DepositPayment of estimated cost is required before relocation
work begins. After the City completes the work, a final billing based on actual costs will be sent to
the person requesting the relocation of facilities.
67. CAPACITY FEES:
Capacity fees will be charged for new Utility Services and added demand on existing Services
Domestic:
5/8 Inch-inch x 3/4 Inch-inch E-Meter .............................................................................$5,000.00
1 Inch-inch E-Meter
$9,400.00
1 ½ Inch½-inch E-Meter
$18,850.00
ATTACHMENT E
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-5 dated 7-6-20092-2010 Sheet No. W-5-5
2 Inch. By -inch E-Meter
$56,250.00
4-inch Compound Meter ................................................. estimate at $125/FU; minimum 5,000 FU
3 Inch ....................................................................................................... By estimate at $125/FU
4 Inch ....................................................................................................... By estimate at $125/FU
6 Inch By
(5,000 FU is mid-range operating capacity of 4-inch Meter)
6-inch Compound Meter .................................................. estimate at $125/FU minimum 7,000 FU
(7,000 FU is mid-range operating capacity of 6-inch Meter)
Added demand on an existing Water Service will be calculated at $125.00/FU
Note: FU is fixture unit (1 FU=15gpd)
Fire Service Capacity Fees:
2 Inch-inch ........................................................................................................................$750.00
4 Inch-inch .....................................................................................................................$9,000.00
6 Inch-inch ...................................................................................................................$22,530.00
8 Inch-inch ...................................................................................................................$43,080.00
10 Inch-inch ...................................................................................................................$69,510.00
If a customerCustomer is upgrading the capacity of an existing serviceService, then the capacity
chargeCharge will be the difference between the new serviceService size and the existing
serviceService size.
C. OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS
1. INSTALLATION:
The City of Palo Alto installs all Water Services unless directed otherwise and approved by City of
Palo Alto Utilities Department.
2. SERVICE CHARGES:
(A) Additional Service connections are available with payment of an additional serviceService
connection chargeCharge as shown in Section B.
(B) Replacement of serviceService connection made necessary because of ordinary wear and
ATTACHMENT E
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-6 dated 7-6-20092-2010 Sheet No. W-5-6
deterioration will be made without chargeCharge. Replacement due to inadequacy because of
additional demand or load will be charged as a new serviceService connection.
23. INSTALLATION UNDER UNUSUAL CONDITIONS:
(A) Any condition which, in the opinion of the Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater will
result in a cost higher than the chargesCharges set forth in Section B will be classified as
unusual. The chargeCharge for an unusual installation will be based on Engineering Manager,
Water-Gas-Wastewater's estimate of the total costs of all materials, labor, and other costs
incidental to the installation.
(B) In the event water serviceWater Service to a premisesPremise is requested and insufficient
capacity exists to provide such serviceService, the applicantApplicant shall bear the total cost
for enlarging the distribution systemDistribution System to accommodate serving the
applicantApplicant. The Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater may require the
applicantApplicant to make arrangements for the design and construction of said expansion in
accordance with City standards and specifications. Alternatively, the Engineering Manager,
Water-Gas-Wastewater may elect for City forces or contractors to design and install
respectively such facilities at the applicants’Applicant’s expense.
34. EXCEPTIONS:
(A) Water Service Areas 3 & 4, connections served directly from supply main: The distribution
system chargesDistribution System Charges (Section B) will be based on a maximum frontage
of 660 feet. This exception applies to single applications for serviceService and does not apply
to subdivisions or tracts.
(B) The subdivision developer will furnish and install the waterWater system at his or her expense
and in accordance with City's specifications.
D. OTHER SERVICES:
1. 2 METER MANIFOLD:
(A) 2 Inch ............................................................................................................................$612.00
(A) 2-inch ............................................................................................................................$724.00
2. ABANDONMENT:
(A) Small service less than 2 Inch .......................................................................................$952.00
ATTACHMENT E
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-7 dated 7-6-20092-2010 Sheet No. W-5-7
(B) Large service more than 2 Inch ....................................................................................1,383.00
(A) Small Service 2-inch and less ....................................................................................$2,653.00
(B) Large Service more than 2-inch .................................................................................$3,715.00
3. METER INSTALLATION:
Charges for meterlarge Meter installations by third parties, i.e. contractors, homeownersdevelopers,
etc.
5/8 Inch to 2 Inch ....................................................................................................................$76.00
3 Inch to 6 Inch .......................................................................................................................228.00
8-inch to 12-inch Meters ....................................................................................................$3,235.00
4. FIRE HYDRANT:
(A) Install New Hydrant without Lateral..........................................................................$2,830.00
(B) Install New Hydrant with Lateral .................................................................................9,785.00
(C) Relocation behind curb (up to 5 feet) ..........................................................................4,261.00
(A) Install new hydrant without lateral.............................................................................$2,552.00
(B) Install new hydrant with lateral ................................................................................$12,840.00
(C) Relocation behind curb (up to 5 feet) ........................................................................$6,841.00
Relocations more than 5 feet will require a New Lateralnew lateral and the existing Laterallateral
will be disconnected
and abandoned at the main.
5. TAPPING THE WATER MAIN FOR CONTRACTOR INSTALLED SERVICES:
(A) Tap Water main for 2-inch Service ............................................................................$1,649.00
(B) Tap Water main for 4-inch Service ............................................................................$2,162.00
(C) Tap Water main for 6-inch Service ............................................................................$3,288.00
(D) Tap Water main for 8-inch Service ............................................................................$4,498.00
6. OTHER FEES: Per Hour
The following fees will apply to utility work performed by outside contractors:
(A) Engineering Fee ............................................................................................................$132.00
ATTACHMENT E
WATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. W-5-8 dated 7-6-20092-2010 Sheet No. W-5-8
(A) Engineering fee (per hour) ............................................................................................$151.00
(B) Utility inspection fee (per hour):
i. Inspection Fee102.00during regular work hours (M-F 8 AM to 5 PM)
......................................................................................................................................$118.00
ii. Inspection during non-regular work hours................................................................$139.00
iii. Inspection during non-regular work hours for Customer’s convenience…………..$159.00
(C) Engineering and inspection for new 2-inch Service ..................................................$1,618.00
(D) Engineering and inspection for new 2-inch Service connected to larger Service ......$1,078.00
(E) Engineering and inspection for new 4-inch to 8-inch Service ...................................$2,426.00
(F) Engineering and inspection for new hydrant and Service ..........................................$2,426.00
(G) Engineering and inspection for abandonment of 2-inch and smaller Service ..............$809.00
(H) Engineering and inspection for abandonment of 3-inch and larger Service ..............$1,078.00
(I) Engineering and inspection for new 8-inch main (per linear foot) .................................$27.00
{End}
ATTACHMENT E
WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. S-5-1 dated 7-02-2010 Sheet No. S-5-1
A. GENERAL:
1. TERRITORY:
This Rate Schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto provides Wastewater Service.
B. FEES:
Plan review fees must be paid prior to permit approval by the Utilities Department. Construction or
connection fees must be paid prior to the scheduling of any construction. Depending on material
availability and scheduling constraints, Utility Service will be installed between 30 and 40 days
following receipt of full payment. Regular work hours are 8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday. Any
work the City deems necessary to be performed during non-regular work hours shall be charged 1.15
times the stated fee to recover the overtime labor cost. These conditions include but are not limited to
performing work on arterial streets, in business districts, in front of major commercial establishments,
and near schools. Any work required to be performed during non-regular work hours where the work is
scheduled at the Customer’s convenience shall be charged 1.25 times the stated fee to recover the
overtime labor cost. All invoices are valid for 90 days from date of issuance.
1. PLAN REVIEW:
New commercial building or remodeling permit valuation greater than $200,000 ........$2,316.00
New subdivision residential unit (Wastewater only) ................................................. $160.00/unit
System extension 8-inch HDPE Wastewater main .......................................................... $22.00/ft
2. COLLECTION SYSTEM EXTENSION CHARGE:
City standard 8-inch main ............................................................................................. $204.00/ft
3. CONNECTION CHARGES:
4-inch connection 6 feet and below ................................................................................$6,589.00
6-inch connection 6 feet and below ................................................................................$7,124.00
4-Inch lateral depth between 6 feet and 10 feet ..............................................................$8,225.00
6-inch lateral depth between 6 feet and 10 feet...............................................................$8,748.00
Rehabilitate existing lateral by pipe bursting ..................................................................$4,233.00
ATTACHMENT F
WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. S-5-2 dated 7-02-2010 Sheet No. S-5-2
Sewer laterals over 25 feet in length will be charged for the additional footage at a rate of $106/Ln.
Ft. for 4-inch connections and $110/Ln. Ft for 6-inch connections.
Special arrangements must be made to provide for the cost of a connection larger than 6-inch. The
City will estimate the cost which will serve as the basis for a Customer deposit. Upon receipt of
this deposit the City will install the connection and the Customer shall pay the actual cost net of the
deposit.
4. RELOCATION OF FACILITIES:
Approved relocation of Service, and other facilities will be done at the cost of the person
requesting the re-location. Payment of estimated cost is required before relocation work begins.
5. CAPACITY CHARGES:
4-inch connection with 5/8-inch Water Meter (WM) .....................................................$5,250.00
4-inch connection with 1-inch WM ..............................................................................$15,750.00
4- or 6-inch connection with 1-1/2-inch WM ...............................................................$31,668.00
6-inch connection with 2-inch WM ..............................................................................$94,500.00
6-inch and larger connection with 4-inch or larger WM ........................... By estimate at $210/FU
Note: FU is fixture unit (1 FU = 15 gpd).
If a Customer is upgrading the capacity of an existing Service, then the capacity Charge will be the
difference between the new Service size and the existing Service size.
C. OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS
1. INSTALLATION:
The City of Palo Alto installs all Wastewater Services unless directed otherwise and approved by
City of Palo Alto Utilities Department.
2. SERVICE CHARGES:
(A) Additional Service connections are available with payment of additional Service connection
Charge as shown in Section B3.
ATTACHMENT F
WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. S-5-3 dated 7-02-2010 Sheet No. S-5-3
(B) Replacement of Service connections made necessary because of ordinary wear and
deterioration will be made without Charge. Replacement due to inadequacy because of
increased demand or load will be charged as a new connection.
3. INSTALLATION UNDER UNUSUAL CONDITIONS:
(A) Any condition which, in the opinion of the Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater
will result in a cost higher than the Charges set forth in Section B above will be classified as
unusual. The Charge for an unusual installation will be based on the Engineering Manager's
estimate of the total costs of all materials, labor, and other costs incidental to the installation.
(B) In the event Wastewater Service to a Premise is requested and insufficient capacity exists to
provide such Service, the Applicant shall bear the total cost for flow monitoring the existing
main to determine remaining capacity, design of new sewer main and construction cost for
enlarging the collection system to accommodate serving the Applicant. The Engineering
Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater may require the Applicant to make arrangements for the
design and construction of said expansion in accordance with City standards and
specifications. Alternatively, the Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater may elect
for City forces or contractors to design and install respectively such facilities at the
Applicant’s expense.
4. PUMPING PLANTS:
Where pumping facilities are needed to drain Wastewater into the Wastewater collection system,
the capital cost of construction of the pumping plant and the on-going plant operation and
maintenance costs will be at the expense of the third parties, i.e. contractors, developers, etc.
D. OTHER SERVICE CHARGES:
1. INSTALL MANHOLE:
(A) Depth 6 feet and less ............................................................................................$10,743.00
(B) Depth more than 6 feet .........................................................................................$13,726.00
2. ABANDONMENT & DEMOLITION:
ATTACHMENT F
WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. S-5-4 dated 7-02-2010 Sheet No. S-5-4
(A) Sewer Lateral .........................................................................................................$2,753.00
3. INSTALL SEWER CLEANOUT ...................................................................................$2,109.00
4. OTHER SERVICE FEES:
The following fees will apply to Utility work performed by outside contractors:
(A) Engineering service fee (per hour) ............................................................................$151.00
(B) Inspection service fee (per hour):
i. Inspection during regular work hours (M-F 8 AM to 5 PM) .................................$118.00
ii. Inspection during non-regular work hours ............................................................$139.00
iii. Inspection during non-regular work hours for Customer’s convenience .............$159.00
(C) Engineering and inspection for new lateral ............................................................$2,157.00
(D) Engineering and inspection for new main (per lineal foot) .........................................$34.00
(E) Engineering and inspection for new manhole ........................................................$2,696.00
(F) Engineering and inspection for lateral abandonment .............................................$1,348.00
{End}
ATTACHMENT F
WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. S-5-1 dated 7-06-200902-2010 Sheet No. S-5-1
A. GENERAL:
1. TERRITORY: Inside the incorporated limits ofThis Rate Schedule applies anywhere the City of Palo Alto and
on land owned or leased by the City of Palo Altoprovides Wastewater Service.
B. FEES:
AllPlan review fees must be paid prior to permit approval by the Utilities Department. Construction or
connection fees must be paid prior to the scheduling of any construction. Depending on material
availability and scheduling constraints, utility service Utility Service will be installed between 30 and 40
days following receipt of full payment. Any work required to be done outside of Regular work hours are
8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday. Any work the City deems necessary to be performed during
non-regular work hours due to traffic, existing conditions or applicant’s requirements shall be charged at
1.515 times the stated fee. The following fees are regularly updated, therefore all billings to recover the
overtime labor cost. These conditions include but are onlynot limited to performing work on arterial
streets, in business districts, in front of major commercial establishments, and near schools. Any work
required to be performed during non-regular work hours where the work is scheduled at the Customer’s
convenience shall be charged 1.25 times the stated fee to recover the overtime labor cost. All invoices
are valid for 90 days from date of billingissuance.
1. 1. PLAN REVIEW:
New commercial building or remodeling permit valuation greater than $200,000 ........$2,316.00
New subdivision residential unit (Wastewater only) ................................................. $160.00/unit
System extension 8-inch HDPE Wastewater main .......................................................... $22.00/ft
1.2. COLLECTION SYSTEM EXTENSION CHARGE:
For City Standard 8" Main Charges Per Foot
Wastewater Service Areas 1 & 2 .......................................................................................$119.00
Wastewater Service Areas
City standard 8-inch main ............................................................................................. $204.00/ft
3 & 4 .............................................................................................................................................140.00
ATTACHMENT G
WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. S-5-2 dated 7-06-200902-2010 Sheet No. S-5-2
2. CONNECTION CHARGES:
4-inch connection ............................................................................................................$5,876.00
6-inch connection ..............................................................................................................6,388.00
4-Inch lateral depth more than 6 feet but less than 10 feet ...............................................6,476.00
6-inch lateral depth more than 6 feet but less than 10 feet ...............................................7,332.00
4-inch connection 6 feet and below ................................................................................$6,589.00
6-inch connection 6 feet and below ................................................................................$7,124.00
4-Inch lateral depth between 6 feet and 10 feet ..............................................................$8,225.00
6-inch lateral depth between 6 feet and 10 feet...............................................................$8,748.00
Rehabilitate existing lateral by pipe bursting ..................................................................$4,233.00
Sewer laterals over 25 feet in length will be charged for the additional footage at a rate of $106/Ln.
Ft. for 4-inch connections and $110/Ln. Ft for 6-inch connections.
Special arrangements must be made to provide for the cost of a connection larger than six6-inch.
The City will estimate the cost which will serve as the basis for a customerCustomer deposit.
Upon receipt of this deposit the City will install the connection and the customerCustomer shall
pay the actual cost net of the deposit.
34. RELOCATION OF FACILITIES:
Approved relocation of serviceService, and other facilities will be done at the cost of the person
requesting the re-location. DepositPayment of estimated cost is required before relocation work
begins. After the City completes the work, a final billing based on actual costs will be sent to the
person requesting the relocation of facilities.
45. CAPACITY CHARGES:
4-inch connection$10,500.00 for first 50 FU, $210 /FU additional with 5/8-inch Water Meter
(WM) $5,250.00
4-inch connection with 1-inch WM ..............................................................................$15,750.00
4- or 6-inch connectionBy estimate at $210/FU with 1-1/2-inch WM
$31,668.00
86-inch connection with 2-inch WM ............................................................................$94,500.00
6-inch and larger connection with 4-inch or larger WM ........................... By estimate at $210/FU
ATTACHMENT G
WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. S-5-3 dated 7-06-200902-2010 Sheet No. S-5-3
Note: FU is fixture unit (1 FU = 15 gpd).
If a customerCustomer is upgrading the capacity of an existing serviceService, then the capacity
chargeCharge will be the difference between the new serviceService size and the existing
serviceService size.
C. OTHER REQUIREMENTS AND CONDITIONS
1. 1INSTALLATION:
The City of Palo Alto installs all Wastewater Services unless directed otherwise and approved by
City of Palo Alto Utilities Department.
2. SERVICE CHARGES:
(A) Additional serviceService connections are available with payment of additional
serviceService connection chargeCharge as shown in Section B2B3.
(B) Replacement of serviceService connections made necessary because of ordinary wear and
deterioration will be made without chargeCharge. Replacement due to inadequacy because
of increased demand or load will be charged as a new connection.
23. INSTALLATION UNDER UNUSUAL CONDITIONS:
(A) Any condition which, in the opinion of the Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater
will result in a cost higher than the chargesCharges set forth in Section B above will be
classified as unusual. The chargeCharge for an unusual installation will be based on the
Engineering Manager's estimate of the total costs of all materials, labor, and other costs
incidental to the installation.
(B) In the event wastewater serviceWastewater Service to a premisePremise is requested and
insufficient capacity exists to provide such serviceService, the applicantApplicant shall bear
the total cost for flow monitoring the existing main to determine remaining capacity, design
of new sewer main and construction cost for enlarging the collection system to accommodate
serving the applicantApplicant. The Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater may
require the applicantApplicant to make arrangements for the design and construction of said
expansion in accordance with City standards and specifications. Alternatively, the
ATTACHMENT G
WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. S-5-4 dated 7-06-200902-2010 Sheet No. S-5-4
Engineering Manager, Water-Gas-Wastewater may elect for City forces or contractors to
design and install respectively such facilities at the applicantsApplicant’s expense.
34. PUMPING PLANTS:
Where pumping facilities are needed to drain wastewaterWastewater into the
wastewaterWastewater collection system, the capital cost of construction of the pumping plant and
the on-going plant operation and maintenance costs will be at the expense of the developer.third
parties, i.e. contractors, developers, etc.
D. OTHER SERVICE CHARGES:
1. INSTALL MANHOLE:
(A) Depth less than 6 feet .............................................................................................$6,011.00
(B) Depth more than 6 feet .............................................................................................7,889.00
(A) Depth 6 feet and less ............................................................................................$10,743.00
(B) Depth more than 6 feet .........................................................................................$13,726.00
2. ABANDONMENT & DEMOLITION:
(A) Sewer Lateral .........................................................................................................$1,270.00
3. OTHER SERVICE FEES:
(A) Sewer Lateral .........................................................................................................$2,753.00
3. INSTALL SEWER CLEANOUT ...................................................................................$2,109.00
4. OTHER SERVICE FEES:
The following fees will apply to utilityUtility work performed by outside contractors:
(A) Engineering Service Fee (Per Hour) .........................................................................$132.00
(A) Engineering service fee (per hour) ............................................................................$151.00
(B) Inspection Service Fee (Per Hour) .......................................... 102.00service fee (per hour):
ATTACHMENT G
WASTEWATER SERVICE CONNECTION FEES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 7-2-201005-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No. S-5-5 dated 7-06-200902-2010 Sheet No. S-5-5
i. Inspection during regular work hours (M-F 8 AM to 5 PM) .................................$118.00
ii. Inspection during non-regular work hours ............................................................$139.00
iii. Inspection during non-regular work hours for Customer’s convenience .............$159.00
(C) Engineering and inspection for new lateral ............................................................$2,157.00
(D) Engineering and inspection for new main (per lineal foot) .........................................$34.00
(E) Engineering and inspection for new manhole ........................................................$2,696.00
(F) Engineering and inspection for lateral abandonment .............................................$1,348.00
{End}
ATTACHMENT G
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 05-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No.C-1-1 dated 3-18-2013 Sheet No.C-1-1
UTILITY MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE C-1
Customer Charges under this schedule, except for disconnection or restoration of Service for non-payment,
may be added to the regular monthly Utilities bill of the Customer receiving the Service, and payment
thereof will be subject to the Utilities Rules and Regulations regarding disconnection of Service for non-
payment. All Charges related to disconnection or restoration for non-payment, are due and payable prior to
the restoration of Utilities Service. Regular work hours are 8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday.
Charges During Charges After
Regular Hours Regular Hours
A. SERVICE CALLS AND OTHER SERVICE WORK:
1. Setting Electric Meter (for Water Meters see Utility Rate
Schedule W-5, for Gas Meters see Utility Rate Schedule G-5) No Charge $300.00
2. Dispatch of CPAU staff to disconnect Service
at Meters for non-payment of Utilities bill $147.00 Not applicable
3. Restoration of Service at Meters following
disconnection for non-payment of Utilities bill $147.00 $300.00
4. Restoration of Electric Service at power pole following
disconnection for non-payment of Utilities bill $294.00 $504.00
B. LABOR RATES PER HOUR PER PERSON:
1. Service provided during regular work hours $123.00 Not applicable
2. Service provided on overtime basis where the
overtime is scheduled at the City's convenience. Not applicable $144.00
3. Service provided on overtime basis where the
overtime is scheduled at the Customer's convenience. Not applicable $166.00
C. RETURNED PAYMENT FEES: See City of Palo Alto Municipal Fee Schedule.
D. LATE PAYMENT CHARGE: Two percent (2%) of unpaid balance of Utilities Bill
E. DEPOSITS:
1. Customer deposit for Meter accuracy test $0-300.00 Not applicable
{End}
ATTACHMENT H
UTILITY MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE C-1
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 3-18-201305-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No.C-1-1 dated 7-1-2009 3-18-2013 Sheet No.C-1-1
UTILITY MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE C-1
Customer chargesCharges under this schedule, except for disconnection or restoration of serviceService
for non-payment, may be added to the regular monthly Utilities bill of the customerCustomer receiving the
serviceService, and payment thereof will be subject to the Utilities Rules and Regulations regarding
disconnection of serviceService for non-payment. All chargesCharges related to disconnection or
restoration for non-payment, are due and payable prior to the restoration of Utilities service.Service.
Regular work hours are 8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday.
Charges during During Charges
After
BusinessRegular Hours
Business Regular Hours
A. SERVICE CALLS AND OTHER SERVICE WORK:
1. Setting Electric Meter (for Water Meters see Utility Rate
Schedule W-5, for Gas Meters see Utility Rate Schedule G-5) No Charge $300.00
$273.00
1.2. Dispatch of service personCPAU staff to disconnect serviceService
at metersMeters for non-payment of Utilities bill $147.00
$109.00 Not applicable
2.3. Restoration of serviceService at metersMeters following
disconnection for non-payment of Utilities bill $147.00 $300.00
$109.00 $273.00
3.4. Restoration of electric service Electric Service at power pole following
disconnection for non-payment of Utilities bill $294.00 $504.00
$218.00 $436.00
Customer deposit for meter accuracy test (Rule 15) $0-300.00 Not applicable
Note: Customer deposit for meter accuracy test will be refunded if tested meter is
more than two percent (2%) over-registering, Deposit will be forfeit if tested
meter registers within +/-2% (plus or minus two percent) accurate.
B. LABOR RATES PER HOUR PER PERSON: B. LABOR RATES PER HOUR PER PERSON:
1. Service provided during normal workingregular work hours $123.00
$109.00 Not applicable
2. Service provided on overtime basis where the
overtime is scheduled at the City's convenience. Not applicable $144.00
$128.00
ATTACHMENT I
UTILITY MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES
UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE C-1
CITY OF PALO ALTO UTILITIES
Issued by the City Council
Effective 3-18-201305-01-2015
Supersedes Sheet No.C-1-1 dated 7-1-2009 3-18-2013 Sheet No.C-1-1
3. Service provided on overtime basis where the
overtime is scheduled at the customer'sCustomer's convenience. Not applicable $166.00
$147.00
C. RETURNED PAYMENT FEES: See City of Palo Alto Municipal Fee Schedule.
D. LATE PAYMENT CHARGE: Two percent (2%) of unpaid balance of Utilities Bill
E. DEPOSITS:
1. Customer deposit for Meter accuracy test $0-300.00 Not applicable
{End}
ATTACHMENT I
PLAN REV FEES NEW SFR OR RES REMODEL NEW 1 EA NEW $848.00 NEW
PLAN REV FEES NEW SUBDIVISION EACH SFR GAS ONLY NEW 1 EA NEW $348.00 NEW
PLAN REV FEES NEW COMMERCIAL BLDG OR COMM REMODEL GAS ONLY NEW 1 EA NEW $2,316.00 NEW
PLAN REV FEES SYSTEM EXTENSION 2" PE GAS MAIN NEW 1 FT NEW $12.00 NEW
TYPE OF SERVICE SIZE WORK EFFECTIVE UNITS UNIT
EXISTING
CONNECTION RECOMMENDED PERCENT
DESCRIPTION DATE MEASURE CHARGE CONNECTION INCREASE
CHARGEIncludes Wages,
Materials and Trenching
MAIN 2"GAS SYSTEM EXTENSION 8/8/2008 1 FT $93.00 $173.00 86%
SERVICE BORING 1"NEW SERVICE CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $2,766.00 $4,343.00 57%
SERVICE BORING 2"NEW SERVICE CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $4,156.00 $5,250.00 26%
SERVICE BORING 1" or 2" ADDITIONAL PIPE INSTALLATION FOR NEW SERVICE NEW 1 FT NEW $49.00 NEW
SERVICE INSTALL 2" 2" PE PIPE INSTALLATION IN CONTRACTOR PROVIDED TRENCH NEW 1 FT NEW $60.00 NEW
SERVICE TRENCHING 1" OR 2"NEW SERVICE CONNECTION NEW 1 EA NEW $5,976.00 NEW
SERVICE PE PIPE RISER RELOCATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $834.00 $1,422.00 71%
CURB METER SERVICE 1"CURB RISER RELOCATION ON EXIST. 1" PE PIPE 8/8/2008 1 EA $594.00 $796.00 34%
CURB METER SERVICE ½" - 1"CURB RISER RELOCATION ON SAME ALIGNMENT OF EXISTING SERVICE 8/8/2008 1 EA $965.00 $1,274.00 32%
CURB METER SERVICE ½" - 1"CURB RISER RELOCATION NEW SERVICE AND ALIGNMENT 8/8/2008 1 EA $1,408.00 $2,038.00 45%
TAP MAIN 1"-2"TAP MAIN FOR CONTRACTOR INSTALLED SERVICE NEW 1 EA NEW $1,603.00 NEW
TAP MAIN 4"-6"TAP MAIN FOR CONTRACTOR INSTALLED SERVICE NEW 1 EA NEW $2,212.00 NEW
ADD METER UP TO 630 ADDITIONAL METER WITH NEW SERVICE CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $86.00 $529.00 515%
ADD METER UP TO 630 ADDITIONAL METER ON EXISTING SERVICE CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $286.00 $1,193.00 317%
METER - REGULATOR 250 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $347.00 $850.00 145%
METER - REGULATOR 400 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $468.00 $961.00 105%
METER - REGULATOR 630 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $697.00 $1,329.00 91%
METER - REGULATOR 800 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION NEW 1 EA NEW $1,781.00 NEW
METER - REGULATOR 1000 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $1,665.00 $1,886.00 13%
CURB METER 250 CFH METER CHARGE CURB INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $813.00 $1,805.00 122%
CURB METER 400 CFH METER CHARGE CURB INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $934.00 $2,023.00 117%
CURB METER 630 CFH METER CHARGE CURB INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $975.00 $2,285.00 134%
METER - COMMERCIAL 1500 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION - ROTARY 8/8/2008 1 EA $1,735.00 $2,487.00 43%
METER - COMMERCIAL 2000 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION - ROTARY 8/8/2008 1 EA $1,999.00 $3,417.00 71%
METER - COMMERCIAL 3000 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION - ROTARY 8/8/2008 1 EA $2,140.00 $3,431.00 60%
METER - COMMERCIAL 5000 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION - ROTARY 8/8/2008 1 EA $2,983.00 $3,837.00 29%
METER - COMMERCIAL 7000 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION - ROTARY 8/8/2008 1 EA $3,625.00 $4,418.00 22%
METER - COMMERCIAL 11,000 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION - ROTARY 8/8/2008 1 EA $4,997.00 $11,405.00 128%
METER - COMMERCIAL 16,000 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION - ROTARY 8/8/2008 1 EA $6,300.00 $12,472.00 98%
METER - COMMERCIAL 23,000 CFH METER CHARGE INSTALLATION - ROTARY NEW 1 EA NEW $14,760.00 NEW
EVC COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC VOLUME CORRECTOR SYSTEM 8/8/2008 1 EA $5,808.00 $5,808.00 0%
AMR ERT DIAPHR METER UP TO 1000 ERT INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $81.00 $155.00 91%
AMR ERT ROTARY METER OVER 1500 ERT INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $130.00 $208.00 60%
VENT LINE FOR REG 3/4"VENT LINE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $108.00 $305.00 182%
2" BOLLARD 2"BOLLARD INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $162.00 $339.00 109%
4" BOLLARD 4"BOLLARD INSTALLATION NEW 1 EA NEW $494.00 NEW
ENGINEERING ENGINEERING SERVICE FEE FOR NON STANDARD CONNECTION RATES 8/8/2008 1 MANHR $132.00 $151.00 14%
INSPECTIONS INSPECTION SERVICE FEE FOR NON STANDARD CONNECTION RATES 8/8/2008 1 MANHR $102.00 $118.00 16%
INSPECTIONS INSPECTION OVERTIME SERVICE FEE AT CITY'S CONVENIENCE NEW 1 MANHR NEW $139.00 NEW
INSPECTIONS INSPECTION OVERTIME SERVICE FEE AT CUSTOMER'S CONVENIENCE NEW 1 MANHR NEW $159.00 NEW
OPERATIONS OPERATIONS SERVICE FEE FOR NON STANDARD CONNECTION RATES 8/8/2008 1 MANHR $109.00 $123.00 13%
GAS SERVICE STANDARD CONNECTION FEES - UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE G-5
ATTACHMENT J
PLAN REV FEES NEW SUBDIVISION EACH SFR WATER ONLY NEW 1 EA NEW $348.00 NEW
PLAN REV FEES NEW COMMERCIAL BLDG OR COMM REMODEL WATER ONLY NEW 1 EA NEW $3,072.00 NEW
PLAN REV FEES SYSTEM EXTENSION 8" HDPE WATER MAIN NEW 1 FT NEW $12.00 NEW
EXISTING RECOMMENDED
TYPE OF SERVICE SIZE WORK EFFECTIVE UNITS UNIT CONNECTION CONNECTION PERCENT
DESCRIPTION DATE MEASURE CHARGES CHARGE INCREASE
Includes Wages,
Materials and Trenching
MAIN 8"SYSTEM EXTENSION 8" HDPE WATER MAIN 8/8/2008 1 FT $111.00 $206.00 86%
DOMESTIC, IRR OR FIRE 2"NEW SERVICE CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $5,681.00 $4,863.00 -14%
DOMESTIC, IRR OR FIRE 4"NEW SERVICE CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $8,381.00 $7,156.00 -15%
DOMESTIC, IRR OR FIRE 6"NEW SERVICE CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $9,379.00 $8,137.00 -13%
DOMESTIC, IRR OR FIRE 8"NEW SERVICE CONNECTION NEW 1 EA NEW $9,469.00 NEW
DOMESTIC, IRR OR FIRE 10"NEW SERVICE CONNECTION NEW 1 EA NEW $10,625.00 NEW
FIRE INSTALL FIRE HYDRANT ONLY 8/8/2008 1 EA $2,830.00 $2,552.00 -10%
FIRE 6"INSTALL FIRE HYDRANT & LATERAL 8/8/2008 1 EA $9,785.00 $12,840.00 31%
FIRE 6"FIRE HYDRANT RELOCATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $4,261.00 $6,841.00 61%
DOMESTIC/ IRRIGATION 2"ADD NEW SERVICE CONNECTING TO A LARGER SERVICE 8/8/2008 1 EA $2,383.00 $3,122.00 31%
DOMESTIC/IRRIGATION 4"ADD NEW SERVICE CONNECTING TO A LARGER SERVICE 8/8/2008 1 EA $5,043.00 $4,449.00 -12%
DOMESTIC/ IRRIGATION 6"ADD NEW SERVICE CONNECTING TO A LARGER SERVICE NEW 1 EA NEW $4,842.00 NEW
TAP WATER MAIN 2"TAP WATER MAIN FOR 2" SERVICE NEW 1 EA NEW $1,649.00 NEW
TAP WATER MAIN 4"TAP WATER MAIN FOR 4" SERVICE NEW 1 EA NEW $2,162.00 NEW
TAP WATER MAIN 6"TAP WATER MAIN FOR 6" SERVICE NEW 1 EA NEW $3,288.00 NEW
TAP WATER MAIN 8"TAP WATER MAIN FOR 8" SERVICE NEW 1 EA NEW $4,498.00 NEW
ADD METER 5/8" - 2"ADDITIONAL METER ON NEW CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $321.00 $1,264.00 294%
ADD METER 5/8" - 2"ADDITIONAL METER ON EXISTING CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $783.00 $1,866.00 138%
DOMESTIC 5/8"x3/4"METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $222.00 $698.00 214%
DOMESTIC 1"METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $276.00 $862.00 212%
DOMESTIC 1-1/2"METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $492.00 $1,444.00 193%
DOMESTIC 2"METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $601.00 $1,635.00 172%
DOMESTIC 4"METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $2,429.00 $5,740.00 136%
DOMESTIC 6"METER CHARGE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $4,138.00 $8,051.00 95%
DOMESTIC 2"2 METER MANIFOLD INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $612.00 $724.00 18%
ANY TYPE 8"-12"INSPECT & ENG FOR METERS PURCH & INSTALL BY OTHERS NEW 24 MANHR NEW $3,235.00 NEW
ANY TYPE 3/4" - 2"SERVICE DEMOLITION 8/8/2008 1 EA $952.00 $2,653.00 179%
ANY TYPE 3" - 8"SERVICE DEMOLITION 8/8/2008 1 EA $1,383.00 $3,715.00 169%
ENGINEER & INSPECT 2"INSPECT & ENG NEW 2" DOM/IRR SVC INSTALLED BY OTHERS NEW 12 MANHR NEW $1,618.00 NEW
ENGINEER & INSPECT 2"INSPECT & ENG 2" DOM/IRR SVC TO FIRE SVC INSTALLED BY OTHERS NEW 8 MANHR NEW $1,078.00 NEW
ENGINEER & INSPECT 4"-8"INSPECT & ENG FOR 4" OR LARGER SVC INSTALLED BY OTHERS NEW 18 MANHR NEW $2,426.00 NEW
ENGINEER & INSPECT 6"INSPECT & ENG NEW FIRE HYDRANT & LAT INSTALLED BY OTHERS NEW 18 MANHR NEW $2,426.00 NEW
ENGINEER & INSPECT 3/4" - 2"INSPECT & ENG ABAND UP TO 2" WATER SVC BY OTHERS NEW 6 MANHR NEW $809.00 NEW
ENGINEER & INSPECT 3" - 8"INSPECT & ENG ABAND 3" & LARGER WATER SVC BY OTHERS NEW 8 MANHR NEW $1,078.00 NEW
ENGINEER & INSPECT 8"INSPECT & ENGINEERING FOR NEW 8" MAIN INSTALLED BY OTHERS NEW 0.2 MANHR/FT NEW $27.00 NEW
ENGINEERING ENGINEERING SERVICE FEE FOR NON STANDARD CONNECTION RATES 8/8/2008 1 MANHR $132.00 $151.00 14%
OPERATIONS OPERATIONS SERVICE FEE FOR NON STANDARD CONNECTION RATES 8/8/2008 1 MANHR $109.00 $123.00 13%
INSPECTIONS INSPECTION SERVICE FEE FOR NON STANDARD CONNECTION RATES 8/8/2008 1 MANHR $102.00 $118.00 16%
INSPECTIONS INSPECTION OVERTIME SERVICE FEE AT CITY'S CONVENIENCE NEW 1 MANHR NEW $139.00 NEW
INSPECTIONS INSPECTION OVERTIME SERVICE FEE AT CUSTOMER'S CONVENIENCE NEW 1 MANHR NEW $159.00 NEW
WATER SERVICE STANDARD CONNECTION FEES - UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE W-5
ATTACHMENT J
PLAN REV FEES NEW SUBDIVISION EACH SFR SEWER ONLY NEW 1 EA NEW $160.00 NEW
PLAN REV FEES NEW COMMERCIAL BLDG OR COMM REMODEL SEWER ONLY NEW 1 EA NEW $2,316.00 NEW
PLAN REV FEES SYSTEM EXTENSION 8" HDPE WASTEWATER MAIN NEW 1 FT NEW $22.00 NEW
TYPE OF SERVICE SIZE WORK EFFECTIVE UNITS UNIT RECOMMENDED PERCENT
DESCRIPTION DATE MEASURE CONNECTION INCREASE
CHARGE
Includes Wages,
Materials and Trenching
MAIN < 8' 8"COLLECTION SYSTEM EXTENSION 8/8/2008 1 FT $119.00 $204.00 71%
LATERAL DEPTH < 6' 4"NEW LATERAL CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $5,876.00 $6,589.00 12%
LATERAL DEPTH < 6' 6"NEW LATERAL CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $6,388.00 $7,124.00 12%
LATERAL DEPTH > 6'4"NEW LATERAL CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $6,476.00 $8,225.00 27%
LATERAL DEPTH > 6'6"NEW LATERAL CONNECTION 8/8/2008 1 EA $7,332.00 $8,748.00 19%
LATERAL PIPE BURST 4" OR 6"REHABILITATE EXISTING LATERAL NEW 1 EA NEW $4,233.00 NEW
MANHOLE DEPTH < 6'NEW MANHOLE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $6,011.00 $10,743.00 79%
MANHOLE DEPTH > 6'NEW MANHOLE INSTALLATION 8/8/2008 1 EA $7,889.00 $13,726.00 74%
NEW CLEANOUT 4" OR 6"NEW CLEANOUT INSTALLATION NEW 1 EA NEW $2,109.00 NEW
DEMO LATERAL 4" OR 6"DEMOLITION AND ABANDONMENT 8/8/2008 1 EA $1,270.00 $2,753.00 117%
ENGINEER & INSPECT 4" OR 6"INSPECT & ENG FOR NEW WASTEWATER LATERAL NEW 16 MANHR NEW $2,157.00 NEW
ENGINEER & INSPECT 8"INSPECT & ENG FOR NEW 8" WASTEWATER MAIN NEW 0.25 MH/FT NEW $34.00 NEW
ENGINEER & INSPECT INSPECT & ENG FOR NEW WASTEWATER MANHOLE NEW 20 MANHR NEW $2,696.00 NEW
ENGINEER & INSPECT 4" OR 6"INSPECT & ENG FOR ABANDONMENT OF WASTEWATER SERVICE NEW 10 MANHR NEW $1,348.00 NEW
ENGINEERING ENGINEERING SERVICE FEE FOR NON STANDARD CONNECTION RATES 8/8/2008 1 MANHR $132.00 $151.00 14%
OPERATIONS OPERATIONS SERVICE FEE FOR NON STANDARD CONNECTION RATES 8/8/2008 1 MANHR $109.00 $123.00 13%
INSPECTIONS INSPECTION SERVICE FEE FOR NON STANDARD CONNECTION RATES 8/8/2008 1 MANHR $102.00 $118.00 16%
INSPECTIONS INSPECTION OVERTIME SERVICE FEE AT CITY'S CONVENIENCE NEW 1 MANHR NEW $139.00 NEW
INSPECTIONS INSPECTION OVERTIME SERVICE FEE AT CUSTOMER'S CONVENIENCE NEW 1 MANHR NEW $159.00 NEW
WASTEWATER SERVICE STANDARD CONNECTION FEES - UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE S-5
EXISTING
CONNECTION
CHARGES
ATTACHMENT J
CHARGED BY WORK PERFORMED BY WORK DESCRIPTION EFFECTIVE
DATE QUANTITY UNIT MEASURE
EXIST CHARGE
DURING BUSINESS
HOURS
RECOMMENDED
CHARGE DURING
BUSINESS HOURS
PERCENT
INCREASE
EXISTING CHARGE
AFTER BUSINESS
HOURS
RECOMMENDED
CHARGE AFTER
BUSINESS HOURS
PERCENNT
INCREASE
UTIL CUSTOMER SERVICE ELECTRIC OPERATIONS SETTING METER 3/18/2013 1 MANHR NO CHARGE NO CHARGE NO CHARGE $273.00 $300.00 10%
UTIL CUSTOMER SERVICE ELECTRIC OPERATIONS DISPATCH OF SERVICE PERSON TO DISCONNECT SERVICE AT METERS FOR NON-
PAYMENT 3/18/2013 1 MANHR $109.00 $147.00 35%NOT APPLICABLE NOT APPLICABLE NOT
APPLICABLE
UTIL CUSTOMER SERVICE ELECTRIC OPERATIONS RESTORATION OF SERVICE AT METERS FOLLOWING DISCONNECTION FOR NON-
PAYMENT 3/18/2013 1 MANHR $109.00 $147.00 35%$273.00 $300.00 10%
UTIL CUSTOMER SERVICE ELECTRIC OPERATIONS RESTORATION OF ELECTRIC SERVICE AT POWER POLE FOLLOWING DISCONNECTION
FOR NON-PAYMENT 3/18/2013 2 MANHR $218.00 $294.00 35%$436.00 $504.00 16%
CHARGED BY WORKED PERFORMED BY WORK DESCRIPTION EFFECTIVE
DATE QUANTITY UNIT MEASURE EXISTING RATE RECOMMENDED
RATE
PERCENT
INCREASE
ELECTRIC/WGW OPERATIONS ELECTRIC/WGW OPERATIONS SERVICE PROVIDED DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS 7/1/2002 1 RATE/HR/PERSON $109.00 $123.00 13%
ELECTRIC/WGW OPERATIONS ELECTRIC/WGW OPERATIONS SERVICE PROVIDED ON OVERTIME BASIS (CITY'S CONVENIENCE)7/1/2002 1 RATE/HR/PERSON $128.00 $144.00 13%
ELECTRIC/WGW OPERATIONS ELECTRIC/WGW OPERATIONS SERVICE PROVIDED ON OVERTIME BASIS (CUSTOMER'S CONVENIENCE)7/1/2002 1 RATE/HR/PERSON $147.00 $166.00 13%
UTILITY MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES - UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE C-1
LABOR RATES PER HOUR PER PERSON - UTILITY RATE SCHEDULE C-1
ATTACHMENT J
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 2.00 $302.69 0.07 $10.59 20.00 $3,026.88
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.01 $0.91 0.50 $45.46
TOTALS 2.50 $348.15 0.08 $11.50 20.50 $3,072.34
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25
Operations Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 2.00 $369.45 2.00 $369.45 0.50 $92.36
Sawcut Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 1.00 $112.84 1.00 $112.84 1.00 $112.84 2.00 $225.68
Lead Heavy Eq O.$37.13 $106.93 6.00 $641.61 8.00 $855.48 9.00 $962.41 8.00 $855.48
Lead Inst Install/Rep L $42.76 $123.15 6.00 $738.89 8.00 $985.19 9.00 $1,108.34 8.00 $985.19
Inst/Rep Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 6.00 $677.03 8.00 $902.71 9.00 $1,015.55 8.00 $902.71
Inst/Rep A.Install/Rep A.$33.23 $95.70 6.00 $574.21 8.00 $765.62 9.00 $861.32 8.00 $765.62
Paving Equip Oper $32.79 $94.44 1.50 $141.65 3.00 $283.31 3.00 $283.31 1.50 $141.65
Concrete Cement Finisher Lead $37.93 $109.24 1.50 $163.86 3.00 $327.72 3.00 $327.72 1.50 $163.86
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 1.00 $90.92 1.00 $90.92 0.50 $45.46
TOTALS 32.00 $3,595.33 47.50 $5,008.28 51.50 $5,446.90 40.50 $4,493.06
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 0.01 $1.51
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.01 $0.91
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 3.00 $354.76 3.00 $354.76 0.10 $11.83
Operations Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 2.00 $369.45 3.00 $554.17 0.10 $18.47
Sawcut Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 $0.00 $0.00 0.01 $1.13
Lead Heavy Eq O.$37.13 $106.93 10.00 $1,069.34 12.00 $1,283.21 0.20 $21.39
Lead Inst Install/Rep L $42.76 $123.15 10.00 $1,231.49 12.00 $1,477.79 0.20 $24.63
Inst/Rep Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 10.00 $1,128.38 12.00 $1,354.06 0.20 $22.57
Inst/Rep A.Install/Rep A.$33.23 $95.70 10.00 $957.02 12.00 $1,148.43 0.20 $19.14
Paving Equip Oper $32.79 $94.44 3.00 $283.31 4.00 $377.74 0.10 $9.44
Concrete Cement Finisher Lead $37.93 $109.24 3.00 $327.72 3.00 $327.72 0.10 $10.92
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.01 $0.91
TOTALS 53.00 $5,963.73 63.00 $7,120.14 1.24 $142.85
PER EACH
Hourly Wages
Including benefits &
Overhead
TABLE 2 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR WATER SERVICE INSTALLATION
Effective
12/01/14
SUBDIVISION SFR MAIN EXTENSION COMM BLDG
TABLE 1 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR REVIEW OF PLAN SUBMITTALS FOR WATER
PLAN REVIEW COSTS
PER EACH PER LF
8" HDPE WATER
MAIN
LARGE DOMESTIC AND FIRE WATER
SERVICES
DIRECTIONALY BORE DOMESTIC, IRRIGATION AND FIRE WATER SERVICES
Hourly Wages
Including benefits &
Overhead
4" HDPE 6" HDPE2" HDPEffective
12/01/14
2" CU
TABLE 3 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR LARGE SERVICE AND MAIN INSTALLATIONS
10" HDPE8" HDPE 8" MAIN PER FOOT
Hourly Wages
Including benefits &
OverheadEffective
12/01/14
ATTACHMENT J
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 1.00 $90.92 1.00 $90.92 0.50 $45.46
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 $0.00 3.00 $354.76 3.00 $354.76 $0.00
Operations Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 0.50 $92.36 2.00 $369.45 2.00 $369.45 0.50 $92.36
Sawcut Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Lead Heavy Eq O.$37.13 $106.93 3.00 $320.80 4.00 $427.74 4.00 $427.74 2.00 $213.87
Lead Inst Install/Rep L $42.76 $123.15 3.00 $369.45 4.00 $492.60 4.00 $492.60 2.00 $246.30
Inst/Rep Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 3.00 $338.52 4.00 $451.35 4.00 $451.35 2.00 $225.68
Inst/Rep A.Install/Rep A.$33.23 $95.70 3.00 $287.11 4.00 $382.81 4.00 $382.81 2.00 $191.40
Paving Equip Oper $32.79 $94.44 1.00 $94.44 1.00 $94.44 1.00 $94.44 1.00 $94.44
Concrete Cement Finisher Lead $37.93 $109.24 1.00 $109.24 1.00 $109.24 1.00 $109.24 1.00 $109.24
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46
TOTALS 16.50 $1,854.17 25.50 $2,970.10 25.50 $2,970.10 12.50 $1,415.55
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25
Operations Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 2.00 $369.45 3.00 $554.17 2.00 $369.45 3.00 $554.17
Sawcut Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $112.84 1.00 $112.84
Lead Heavy Eq O.$37.13 $106.93 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 3.00 $320.80 5.00 $534.67
Lead Inst Install/Rep L $42.76 $123.15 2.00 $246.30 2.00 $246.30 4.00 $492.60 5.00 $615.74 3.00 $369.45 5.00 $615.74
Inst/Rep Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 2.00 $225.68 2.00 $225.68 4.00 $451.35 5.00 $564.19 3.00 $338.52 5.00 $564.19
Inst/Rep A.Install/Rep A.$33.23 $95.70 2.00 $191.40 2.00 $191.40 4.00 $382.81 5.00 $478.51 3.00 $287.11 5.00 $478.51
Paving Equip Oper $32.79 $94.44 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $94.44 1.00 $94.44
Concrete Cement Finisher Lead $37.93 $109.24 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $109.24 1.00 $109.24
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46
TOTALS Totals 10.00 $1,208.62 10.00 $1,208.62 17.00 $2,056.72 38.50 $2,573.14 20.00 $2,362.35 38.50 $3,424.32
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 0.50 $75.67 0.50 $75.67 2.00 $302.69 4.00 $605.38 1.00 $75.67 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $22.73 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Operations Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 $0.00 $0.00 0.50 $92.36 0.50 $92.36 0.50 $0.00 0.50 $92.36 0.50 $92.36
Sawcut Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 $0.00 1.00 $112.84 $0.00 1.00 $112.84 $0.00 1.00 $112.84 $0.00
Lead Heavy Eq O.$37.13 $106.93 $0.00 $0.00 11.00 $1,176.28 8.00 $855.48 $0.00 2.00 $213.87 $0.00
Lead Inst Install/Rep L $42.76 $123.15 2.00 $246.30 2.00 $246.30 11.00 $1,354.64 8.00 $985.19 2.00 $492.60 2.00 $246.30 1.00 $123.15
Inst/Rep Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 $0.00 2.00 $225.68 11.00 $1,241.22 8.00 $902.71 2.00 $451.35 2.00 $225.68 1.00 $112.84
Inst/Rep A.Install/Rep A.$33.23 $95.70 $0.00 $0.00 11.00 $1,052.73 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Paving Equip Oper $32.79 $94.44 $0.00 $0.00 4.00 $377.74 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Concrete Cement Finisher Lead $37.93 $109.24 $0.00 2.00 $218.48 3.00 $327.72 3.00 $327.72 $0.00 2.00 $218.48 $0.00
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 $0.00 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 1.00 $90.92 0.50 $22.73 0.50 $45.46 $0.00
TOTALS Totals 3.00 $367.43 8.50 $969.88 54.50 $6,016.29 34.00 $4,018.05 6.50 $1,065.08 11.50 $1,351.79 4.00 $525.15
Effective
12/01/14
4" HDPE
TAPPING MAIN FOR NEW WATER SERVICE
Fire Hydrant
Relocation
Hourly Wages
Including Benefits &
Overhead
2" CU
Hourly Wages
Including benefits &
Overhead
Water Meter
Relocation
2" HDPEffective
12/01/14
TABLE 4 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR WATER SERVICES TAPPING A LARGER WATER SERVICE
Effective
12/01/14
6" SERVICE
TABLE 5 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR WATER MAIN TAPPING
2" SERVICE 4" SERVICE 8" SERVICE
6" HDPE
DEMO EXISTING WATER SERVICES
DEMO 3/4" - 2"
Install Fire Hydrant
and Lateral
Add 5/8" - 1" on new
conn
Add 5/8" - 1" on existing
conn
DEMO 3" - 8"
TABLE 6 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR OTHER WATER INSTALLATIONS
WATER SERVICES
Hourly Wages
Including benefits &
Overhead
Install 1" x 3/4" U-
branch for two 5/8"
mtrs
Install Fire Hydrant
only
ATTACHMENT J
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 0.50 $75.67 0.50 $75.67 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 $0.00 $0.00 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 4.00 $473.01 4.00 $473.01
Inspection II Water Meter Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 0.50 $92.36 0.50 $92.36 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 4.00 $738.89 4.00 $738.89
Meter Set Meter Repair $31.73 $91.38 1.50 $137.07 1.50 $137.07 2.00 $182.76 2.00 $182.76 8.00 $731.06 10.00 $913.82
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 1.00 $90.92 1.00 $90.92
TOTALS Totals 3.50 $396.03 3.50 $396.03 7.00 $846.26 7.00 $846.26 18.50 $2,230.69 20.50 $2,413.45
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 5.00 $756.72 2.00 $302.69 0.07 $10.59 15.00 $2,270.16
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 1.00 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.01 $0.91 0.50 $45.46
TOTALS 6.00 $847.64 2.50 $348.15 0.08 $11.50 15.50 $2,315.62
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 2.00 $302.69 2.00 $302.69 2.00 $302.69 0.01 $1.51 0.00 $0.00 0.01 $1.51
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.01 $0.91 0.00 $0.00 0.01 $0.91
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 0.01 $1.18 0.01 $1.18 0.01 $1.18
Operations Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 0.05 $9.24 0.01 $1.85 0.01 $1.85
Sawcut Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 1.00 $112.84 1.00 $112.84 $0.00 0.20 $22.57 0.10 $11.28 $0.00
Lead Heavy Eq O.$37.13 $106.93 6.00 $641.61 7.00 $748.54 $0.00 0.20 $21.39 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
Lead Inst Install/Rep L $42.76 $123.15 6.00 $738.89 7.00 $862.04 2.00 $246.30 0.20 $24.63 0.10 $12.31 0.15 $18.47
Inst/Rep Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 6.00 $677.03 7.00 $789.87 2.00 $225.68 0.20 $22.57 0.10 $11.28 0.15 $16.93
Inst/Rep A.Install/Rep A.$33.23 $95.70 6.00 $574.21 7.00 $669.92 $0.00 0.20 $19.14 0.10 $9.57 0.15 $14.36
Paving Equip Oper $32.79 $94.44 1.50 $141.65 1.50 $141.65 $0.00 0.10 $9.44 0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Concrete Cement Finisher Lead $37.93 $109.24 1.50 $163.86 1.50 $163.86 $0.00 0.10 $10.92 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.01 $0.91 0.00 $0.00 0.01 $0.91
TOTALS 34.00 $3,864.93 38.00 $4,303.56 10.00 $1,296.81 1.29 $144.41 0.42 $47.48 0.50 $56.62
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 0.10 $15.13 0.10 $15.13
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 $0.00 $0.00
Operations Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 0.01 $1.85 0.01 $1.85
Sawcut Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $112.84 $0.00 $0.00
Lead Heavy Eq O.$37.13 $106.93 $0.00 $0.00 8.00 $855.48 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
Lead Inst Install/Rep L $42.76 $123.15 2.00 $246.30 3.00 $369.45 8.00 $985.19 0.50 $61.57 1.00 $123.15
Inst/Rep Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 2.00 $225.68 3.00 $338.52 8.00 $902.71 0.50 $56.42 1.00 $112.84
Inst/Rep A.Install/Rep A.$33.23 $95.70 2.00 $191.40 3.00 $287.11 8.00 $765.62 $0.00 $0.00
Paving Equip Oper $32.79 $94.44 $0.00 $0.00 2.00 $188.87 $0.00 $0.00
Concrete Cement Finisher Lead $37.93 $109.24 $0.00 $0.00 3.00 $327.72 1.00 $109.24 1.00 $109.24
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.00 $0.00 0.00 $0.00
TOTALS Totals 11.00 $1,326.87 14.00 $1,658.56 43.00 $4,801.91 2.11 $246.32 3.11 $365.32
4" compound meter 6" compound meter
PLAN REVIEW COSTS
TABLE 8 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR REVIEW OF PLAN SUBMITTALS FOR GAS
Hourly Wages
Including benefits &
OverheadEffective
12/01/14
TAPPING MAIN FOR NEW GAS CONNECTION TRENCHED
SERVICE BOLLARDS
WATER METER
1" water E-meter
TABLE 9 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR GAS SERVICE & MAIN INSTALLATIONS
Hourly Wages
Including Benefits &
Overhead
Hourly Wages
Including Benefits &
Overhead
4" BOLLARD
TABLE 7 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR WATER METER INSTALLATIONS
5/8" water E-meter
TABLE 10 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR OTHER GAS INSTALLATIONS
1"2"
Effective
12/01/14
GAS SERVICES
1" 0R 2"
CONNECTION
ADDITIONAL
FOOTAGE FOR
SERVICES
INSTALL 2" PE PIPE
IN CONTRACTOR'S
TRENCH
2" water E-meter
Effective
12/01/14
1-1/2" water E-meter
MAIN EXTENSION
4" OR 6" CONNECTION
COMM BLDG
PER EACH
1" 0R 2" SERVICE
RISER RELOCATION
2" BOLLARD
PER LFPER EACH PER EACH
2" MAIN PER FOOT
Hourly Wages
Including benefits &
Overhead
Effective
12/01/14
SFR SUBDIVISION SFR
ATTACHMENT J
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 0.50 $75.67
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.10 $9.09
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 0.50 $59.13
Inspection II Gas Meter Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 0.50 $92.36 0.50 $92.36 0.50 $92.36 0.50 $92.36 0.50 $92.36 0.25 $46.18
Meter Set Gas Meter Tech $35.79 $103.08 1.50 $154.61 1.50 $154.61 2.00 $206.15 3.00 $309.23 3.00 $309.23 1.00 $103.08
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.10 $9.09
TOTALS 6.00 $725.75 6.00 $725.75 6.50 $783.78 7.50 $880.36 7.50 $880.36 2.45 $304.69
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 0.50 $75.67 1.00 $151.34 0.10 $15.13 0.10 $15.13
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.10 $4.55 0.10 $4.55
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 2.00 $236.51 0.50 $59.13 2.00 $236.51 $0.00 $0.00
Inspection II Gas Meter Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 0.50 $92.36 1.00 $184.72 0.10 $18.47 0.10 $18.47
Meter Set Gas Meter Tech $35.79 $103.08 3.00 $309.23 3.00 $309.23 3.00 $309.23 1.00 $103.08 4.00 $412.30 0.25 $77.31 0.25 $77.31
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 $0.00 $0.00
TOTALS 8.00 $972.72 8.00 $972.72 8.00 $980.72 3.50 $421.16 9.00 $1,084.80 0.55 $115.46 0.55 $116.01
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 2.00 $302.69 2.00 $302.69 2.00 $302.69
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 2.00 $236.51 4.00 $473.01 4.00 $473.01 4.00 $473.01 4.00 $473.01 6.00 $709.52 6.00 $709.52 6.00 $709.52
Inspection II Gas Meter Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 2.00 $369.45 2.00 $369.45 2.00 $369.45 2.00 $369.45 4.00 $738.89 4.00 $738.89 4.00 $738.89
Meter Set Gas Meter Tech $35.79 $103.08 4.00 $412.30 6.00 $618.45 6.00 $618.45 6.00 $618.45 6.00 $618.45 24.00 $2,473.80 24.00 $2,473.80 24.00 $2,473.80
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46
TOTALS 9.00 $1,075.80 14.00 $1,703.17 14.00 $1,717.17 14.00 $1,703.17 14.00 $1,703.17 37.00 $4,352.82 37.00 $4,315.82 37.00 $4,315.82
ADDITONAL GAS METER(S)
Effective
12/01/14
TABLE 11 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR HOUSE DIAPHRAGM GAS METER INSTALLATIONS
Hourly Wages
Including Benefits &
Overhead
Effective
12/01/14
Effective
12/01/14
TABLE 13 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR ROTARY GAS METER INSTALLATIONS
GAS REGULATOR
VENT LINE630
AMR ERTS
250
400
5000 11000 160007000
ON EXISTING
SERVICE
1000
23000
ROTARY GAS METERS
1500 2000 3000
400
DIAPHRAGM GAS METERS
800
630 ON NEW SERVICE
CURB DIAPHRAGM GAS METERSHourly Wages
Including Benefits &
Overhead
Hourly Wages
Including Benefits &
Overhead
250
TABLE 12 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR VAULT DIAPHRAGM GAS METER INSTALLATIONS
DIAPHRAGM GAS
METER ERT
ROTARY GAS
METER ERT
ATTACHMENT J
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 0.14 $21.19 15.00 $2,270.16
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.10 $9.09 0.01 $0.91 0.50 $45.46
TOTALS 1.10 $160.44 0.15 $22.10 15.50 $2,315.62
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Engineering Engineering $52.55 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 0.01 $1.51 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 1.00 $151.34 0.50 $75.67
Administra Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.01 $0.91 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.00 $0.00
Inspection I Util Inspector $41.06 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 1.00 $118.25 0.10 $11.83 2.00 $236.51 1.00 $118.25 2.00 $236.51 5.00 $591.26 1.00 $118.25
Operations Supervisor $64.14 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 2.00 $369.45 2.00 $369.45 0.10 $18.47 1.00 $184.72 1.00 $184.72 4.00 $738.89 6.00 $1,108.34 1.00 $184.72
Sawcut Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 1.00 $112.84 1.00 $112.84 1.00 $112.84 1.00 $112.84 0.01 $1.13 1.00 $112.84 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Lead Heavy Eq O.$37.13 $106.93 8.00 $855.48 9.00 $962.41 10.00 $1,069.34 11.00 $1,176.28 0.20 $21.39 2.50 $267.34 5.50 $588.14 12.00 $1,283.21 14.00 $1,497.08 4.00 $427.74
Lead Inst Install/Rep L $42.76 $123.15 8.00 $985.19 9.00 $1,108.34 10.00 $1,231.49 11.00 $1,354.64 0.20 $24.63 2.50 $307.87 5.50 $677.32 12.00 $1,477.79 14.00 $1,724.08 4.00 $492.60
Inst/Rep Install/Rep $39.18 $112.84 8.00 $902.71 9.00 $1,015.55 10.00 $1,128.38 11.00 $1,241.22 0.20 $22.57 1.00 $112.84 5.50 $620.61 12.00 $1,354.06 14.00 $1,579.74 4.00 $451.35
Inst/Rep A.Install/Rep A.$33.23 $95.70 8.00 $765.62 9.00 $861.32 10.00 $957.02 11.00 $1,052.73 0.20 $19.14 1.00 $95.70 5.50 $526.36 12.00 $1,148.43 14.00 $1,339.83 4.00 $382.81
Paving Equip Oper $32.79 $94.44 3.00 $283.31 3.00 $283.31 3.00 $283.31 3.00 $283.31 0.10 $9.44 $0.00 3.00 $283.31 10.00 $944.35 10.00 $944.35 3.00 $283.31
Concrete Cement Finisher Lead $37.93 $109.24 3.00 $327.72 3.00 $327.72 3.00 $327.72 3.00 $327.72 0.10 $10.92 1.00 $109.24 0.00 $0.00 8.00 $873.91 8.00 $873.91 0.00 $0.00
Operations Admin $31.57 $90.92 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.01 $0.91 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46 0.50 $45.46
TOTALS 43.00 $4,778.09 47.00 $5,216.72 52.00 $5,840.06 56.00 $6,278.69 1.24 $142.85 14.00 $1,669.32 29.00 $3,240.98 74.00 $8,299.41 87.00 $9,900.86 22.00 $2,461.91
$145.04 $159.66 average:$179.86 average:$126.73 $93.80
Hourly Wages
Employee Employee
Function Title Using Rate 2.88 # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages # hours Wages
Operations Overhead Underground
Troubleman $51.04 $147.00 NO CHARGE 2.00
DOUBLE TIME $300.12 1.00 $147.00 NOT APPLICA
BLE 1.00 $147.00 2.00
(DOUBLE TIME)$300.12 2.00 $293.99 4.00
(DOUBLE TIME)$504.28
TOTALS NO CHARGE 2.00 $300.12 1.00 $147.00 NOT APPLICA
BLE 1.00 $147.00 2.00 $300.12 2.00 $293.99 4.00 $504.28
Hourly Wages
Including Benefits &
Overhead
Effective
12/01/14
8" MAIN PER FOOT SEWER CLEANOUT
NEW SEWER LATERALS < 6'
TABLE 15 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR SEWER LATERAL & MAIN INSTALLATIONS
TABLE 14 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR REVIEW OF PLAN SUBMITTALS FOR WASTEWATER
NEW MANHOLE > 6'
DEEP
DEMO EXISTING
LATERAL
PIPE BURST
LATERAL
NEW MANHOLE < 6'
DEEP4"6"
Effective
12/01/14
PER LF
NEW SEWER LATERALS > 6' < 10'
4"
PLAN REVIEW COSTS
Hourly Wages
Including benefits &
Overhead
SUBDIVISION SFR MAIN EXTENSION COMM BLDG
PER EACH
Hourly Wages
Including benefits &
Overhead DURING BUSINESS AFTER BUSINESS DURING BUSINESS
DISPATCH OF SERVICE PERSON TO
DISCONNECTION SERVICE AT METERS
FOR NON-PAYMENT
PER EACH
6"
Effective
12/01/14
HOURS HOURS HOURS HOURS
AFTER BUSINESS
HOURS
AFTER BUSINESS DURING BUSINESS
RESTORATION OF SERVICE AT METERS
FOLLOWING DISCONNECTION FOR NON-
PAYMENT
SETTING ELECTRICAL METER
TABLE 16 - ESTIMATED PERSONNEL HOURS & WAGES FOR SERVICE CALLS AND OTHER SERVICE WORK
HOURSHOURS
AFTER BUSINESSDURING BUSINESS
RESTORATION OF ELECTRIC SERVICE AT
POWER POLE FOLLOWING
DISCONNECTION FOR NON-PAYMENT
HOURS
ATTACHMENT J
Material List 1
Water
2" HDPE Water Service material #avg price
2" x 8 Tapping saddle 24710 $171.98
2" Corp stop 21003 $268.23
30' 2" HDPE SDR 9 pipe $100.00
Poly-cam series 914 transition fitting 24110 $123.08
2" angle meter stop 21014 $230.55
2" HDPE 90 24104 $63.72
Tracer wire 24150 $10.00
marker ball 28507 $8.85
Total $976.41
4" HDPE Water Service material #avg price
4" x 8" Tapping sleve 24711 $255.69
4" AVK gate valve w/ PE ends 24730 $697.37
30' of 4" HDPE SDR 11 pipe $150.00
Traffic valve box 20000 $24.27
Traffic valve box lid 20001 $16.95
Tracer wire 24150 $10.00
marker ball 28507 $8.85
4" flange HDPE transition $25.00
Total $1,188.13
material #avg price
6" HDPE Water Service
6" x 10" tapping sleve 24717 $312.33
6" AVK gate valve w/ PE ends 24731 $918.97
30' 6" HDPE SDR 11 pipe $240.00
Traffic valve box 24150 $24.27
Traffic valve box lid 28507 $16.95
Tracer wire 24150 $10.00
marker ball 28507 $8.85
6" flange HDPE transition $50.00
Total $1,581.37
material #avg price
8" HDPE Water Service
8" x 10" Tapping sleve 24718 $423.25
8" AVK gate valve w/ PE ends 24732 $1,501.20
8" HDPE SDR 11 pipe $350.00
Traffic valve box lid 24150 $24.27
Traffic valve box 28507 $16.95
Tracer wire 24150 $10.00
marker ball 28507 $8.85
8" flange HDPE transition $50.00
Total $2,384.52
ATTACHMENT J
Material List 2
Water
material # avg price
2" HDPE Fire service
2" x 8 Tapping saddle 24710 $171.98
2" Corp stop 21003 $268.23
30' 2" HDPE pipe $100.00
Poly-cam series 911 transition fitting 24105 $169.91
Tracer wire 24150 $10.00
marker ball 28507 $8.85
Total $728.97
material #avg price
2" HDPE connect to larger service
2" x 8 Tapping saddle 24710 $171.98
2" Corp stop 21003 $268.23
5' of 2" HDPE SDR 9 pipe $20.00
Poly-cam series 914 transition fitting 24110 $123.08
2" angle meter stop 21014 $230.55
2" HDPE 90 24104 $63.72
Tracer wire 24150 $10.00
marker ball 28507 $8.85
Total $896.41
material #avg price
4" HDPE connect to larger service
4" x 8" Tapping sleve 24711 $255.69
4" AVK gate valve w/ PE ends 24730 $697.37
5' of 4" HDPE SDR 11 pipe $25.00
Traffic valve box 20000 $24.27
Traffic valve box lid 20001 $16.95
Tracer wire 24150 $10.00
marker ball 28507 $8.85
4" flange HDPE transition $25.00
Total $1,063.13
8" Water Main material #avg price
8" main $12.00
Tracer wire 24150 $10.00
8" AVK gate valve w/ PE ends 24732 $8.60
Total $30.60
ATTACHMENT J
Material List 3
Water
2" Water Tap
2" x 8 Tapping saddle 24710 $171.98
2" Corp stop 21003 $268.23
Total $440.21
4" Water Tap
4" x 8" Tapping sleve 24711 $255.69
4" AVK gate valve w/ PE ends 24730 $697.37
Total $953.06
6" Water Tap
6" x 10" tapping sleve 24717 $312.33
6" AVK gate valve w/ PE ends 24731 $918.97
Total $1,231.30
8"Water Tap
8" x 10" Tapping sleve 24718 $423.25
8" AVK gate valve w/ PE ends 24732 $1,501.20
Total $1,924.45
material # avg price
Fire hydrant
6" x 10" tapping sleve 24717 $312.33
6" AVK gate valve w/ PE ends 24731 $918.97
30' 6" HDPE SDR 11 pipe $240.00
Traffic valve box 24150 $24.27
Traffic valve box lid 28507 $16.95
Tracer wire 24150 $10.00
marker ball 28507 $8.85
6" flange HDPE transition $50.00
Hydrant bury 27200 $164.73
AVK Fow-Guard II Breakaway $2,482.00
Hydrant 27302 $1,487.13
Total $5,715.23
ATTACHMENT J
Material List 4
Water
5/8" Meter Water material #avg price
5/8" meter $146.50
1017 meter box and lid $48.31
2"FL x 2" FIP transition $95.00
3/4" x 2" bushing $12.00
Total $301.81
1" Meter Water material #avg price
1" meter $190.50
1120 meter box and lid $160.50
2"FL x 2" FIP transition $95.00
1" x 2" bushing $20.00
Total $466.00
1-1/2" Meter Water material #avg price
1-1/2" meter $443.00
1324 meter box and lid $60.00
1-1/2" x 2" flange $95.00
Total $598.00
2" Meter Water material #avg price
2" meter $592.00
1730 meter box and lid $197.00
Total $789.00
4" Meter Water material #avg price
4" meter 28014 $2,752.00
4" strainer 28026 $682.76
4" x 30" spool $75.00
Total $3,509.76
6" Meter Water material #avg price
6" meter 28016 $4,468.00
6" strainer 28026 $1,070.00
6" x 30" spool $100.00
Total $5,638.00
Install 1" x 3/4" U branch
U branch 1"x3/4", 6-1/2"21110 $30.75
3/4" corp stop 21005 2 26.62 $53.24
2"FL x 2" FIP transition $95.00
1" x 2" bushing $20.00
$198.99
ATTACHMENT J
Material List 5
Gas
1" PE Service material #avg price
Tape Elect BLK 3/4" x 66' #37 38525 $3.44
Pipe PE 1" CTS 500' Coil 40701 70 $21.00
Plug BLK 3/4 41600 $36.40
Valve Meter BLK 3/4" Insulated 42998 $45.90
Riser Meter prebent 1-1/4" 43050 $15.74
1" coupling 45421 $11.50
Tee Steel Saddle 2 IPS x 1 CTS 45533 $119.62
Wire CU #10 sol HMW-PE 45 mil 45700 70 0.25 $17.50
Total $271.10
2" PE Service material # # units avg price avg price
Tape Elect BLK 3/4" x 66' #37 38525 $3.44
Pipe PE 2" IPSW 500' Coil 40702 70 $68.00
Nipple BLK 2 x CL 41450 2 1.18 $2.36
Plug BLK 2 41604 $1.62
Tee BLK 2 41804 $6.87
Valve Meter BLK 2" Insulated 43005 $199.68
Riser Meter Prebent 2"x2" IPS 43057 $96.52
Tee Service 2" Weld Inlet 43108 $54.04
Valve PE Ball 2" IPS 45562 $222.53
Valve Box 2" x 28-42" w/CI Lid 45570 $59.02
Vavle Support for 2" PE Valve 45575 $6.87
Wire CU #10 sol HMW-PE 45 mil 45700 70 0.25 $17.50
Total $738.45
Relocate 1" PE Service
Tape Elect BLK 3/4" x 66' #37 38525 $1.00
Pipe PE 1" CTS 500' Coil 40701 10 $3.00
Plug BLK 3/4 41600 $36.40
Valve Meter BLK 3/4" Insulated 42998 $45.90
Riser Meter prebent 1-1/4"43050 $15.74
1" coupling 45421 2 $23.00
Total $125.04
2" PE main
Pipe PE 2" IPSW 500' Coil 40701 $1.00
Wire CU #10 sol HMW-PE 45 mil 45700 $0.25
Tape Elect BLK 3/4" x 66' #37 38525 $1.00
Valve PE Ball 2" IPS 45562 $1.00
Total $3.25
ATTACHMENT J
Material List 5
Gas
material # # units avg price avg price
Additional diaphragm gas meter on service
Nut Galv Swivel Sprague 1A 44207 $1.24
Manifold per meter 44601 $106.57
Total $107.81
2" Bollard
2" steel pipe 41516 $12.00
Cement Allcrete 5 Min. Set 60025 $81.00
Total $93.00
4" Bollard
4" steel pipe 41519 $48.00
Cement Allcrete 5 Min. Set 60025 $81.00
Total $129.00
44502 $39.38
44500 $92.15
250 meter
Nipple BLK 3/4 x 3-1/2 41404 $0.84
Plug BLK 3/4 41600 $0.69
Tee BLK 3/4 41800 $1.05
Meter Gas House Class 250 44101 $93.39
Nut Galv Swivel Sprague 1A 44207 $1.24
Bend BLK Meter, Double, 4" x 6"44220 $4.59
Regulator Gas 3/4" Class 1 44300 $22.19
Total $123.99
400 meter
Elbow BLK Reducing 1-1/2 x 3/4 41350 $3.66
Nipple BLK 3/4 x 3-1/2 41404 $0.84
Plug BLK 1-1/2 41603 $1.23
Swivel Galv 1-1/2" Female 44203 $5.91
Meter Gas House Class 400 44103 $193.03
Nut Galv Swivel Sprague #4 44209 $3.49
Bend BLK Meter, Double, 7" x 4, 2" rad 44220 $4.59
Regulator Gas 3/4" Class 1 44300 $22.19
Total $234.94
630 meter
Elbow BLK Reducing 1-1/2 x 3/4 41350 $3.66
Nipple BLK 3/4 x 3-1/2 41404 $0.84
Plug BLK 1-1/2 41603 $1.23
Swivel Galv 1-1/2" Female 44203 $5.91
Meter Gas House Class 630 44118 $503.71
Nut Galv Swivel Sprague #4 44209 $3.49
Bend BLK Meter, Double, 7" x 4, 2" rad 44220 $4.59
Regulator Gas 3/4" Class 1 44300 $22.19
Total $545.62
AMR ERT DIAPHRAGM GAS METER
AMR ERT ROTARY GAS METER
ATTACHMENT J
Material List 6
Gas
250 curb meter material # # units avg price avg price
Nipple BLK 3/4 x 3-1/2 41404 $0.84
Plug BLK 3/4 41600 $0.69
Tee BLK 3/4 41800 $1.05
Meter Gas curb Class 250 44110 $323.65
Nut Galv Swivel Sprague 1A 44207 $1.24
Bend BLK Meter, Double, 4" x 6"44220 $4.59
Regulator Gas 3/4" Curb 44298 $500.68
Total $832.74
400 curb meter
Elbow BLK Reducing 1-1/2 x 3/4 41350 $3.66
Nipple BLK 3/4 x 3-1/2 41404 $0.84
Plug BLK 1-1/2 41603 $1.23
Swivel Galv 1-1/2" Female 44203 $5.91
Meter Gas curb Class 400 44100 $530.27
Nut Galv Swivel Sprague #4 44209 $3.49
Bend BLK Meter, Double, 7" x 4, 2" rad 44220 $4.59
Regulator Gas 3/4" Curb 44298 $500.68
Total $1,050.67
630 curb meter
Elbow BLK Reducing 1-1/2 x 3/4 41350 $3.66
Nipple BLK 3/4 x 3-1/2 41404 $0.84
Plug BLK 1-1/2 41603 $1.23
Swivel Galv 1-1/2" Female 44203 $5.91
Meter Gas House Class 750 44104 $783.92
Nut Galv Swivel Sprague #4 44209 $3.49
Bend BLK Meter, Double, 7" x 4, 2" rad 44220 $4.59
Regulator Gas 3/4" Class 1 44298 $500.68
Total $1,304.32
800 meter
Elbow BLK Reducing 1-1/2 x 3/4 41350 $3.66
Nipple BLK 3/4 x 3-1/2 41404 $0.84
Plug BLK 1-1/2 41603 $1.23
Swivel Galv 1-1/2" Female 44203 $5.91
Meter Gas House 800 44104 $681.00
Nut Galv Swivel Sprague #4 44209 $3.49
Bend BLK Meter, Double, 7" x 4, 2" rad 44220 $4.59
Regulator Gas 1-1/2" body 44303 $199.78
Total $900.50
1000 meter
Elbow BLK Reducing 1-1/2 x 3/4 41350 $3.66
Nipple BLK 3/4 x 3-1/2 41404 $0.84
Plug BLK 1-1/2 41603 $1.23
Swivel Galv 1-1/2" Female 44203 $5.91
Meter Gas House 1000 $786.64
Nut Galv Swivel Sprague #4 44209 $3.49
Bend BLK Meter, Double, 7" x 4, 2" rad 44220 $4.59
Regulator Gas 1-1/2" body 44303 $199.78
Total $1,006.14
ATTACHMENT J
Material List 7
Gas
material # # units avg price avg price
1500 rotary meter 44125 $959.78
Elbow, BLK Street Red 1-1/2x1-1/4" 41361 $6.69
Nipple BLK 1-1/4" x 3-1/2 41434 $2.57
Nipple BLK 1-1/2" x 2 41441 $1.19Nipple BLK 1-1/2" x 4-1/2 41446 $2.20
Cap Screw Hex 5/8" x 1-1/2" 43312 $0.43
Flange Reducing, 2"x1-1/2" FF 43320 $61.07
Gasket, 2"x1/16" Full Face 43350 $3.47
Filter Gas, 1-1/4" NPT 44315 $142.87
Regulator Gas 1-1/2", 1/2" orf 44324 $231.21
Total $1,411.48
2000 rotary meter 44126 $1,153.59
Cap BLK 2 41104 $2.31
Elbow, BLK Street 2" M/F 41365 $5.03
Nipple BLK 2 x 3-1/2 41453 $2.66
Nipple BLK 2 x 4-1/2 41455 $4.66
Nipple BLK 2"x3" Thrd 1 end 41490 $1.50
Tee Stl 2" Weld-end 41811 $21.28
Cap Screw Hex 5/8" x 1-1/2" 43312 $0.43Flange Reducing, 2"x1-1/2" FF 43320 $61.07
Flange 2" Lap Joint 43325 $8.37
Flange, 2" Stud End 43340 $34.78
Gasket, 2"x1/16" Full Face 43350 $3.47
Gasket, 2" 1/16" Ring 43355 $3.06
Filter Gas, 2" NPT 44317 $175.45
Regulator Gas 2" Screwed 44330 $235.92
Total $1,713.58
3000 rotary meter 44127 $1,153.59
Cap BLK 2 41104 $2.31
Elbow, BLK Street 2" M/F 41365 $5.03
Nipple BLK 2 x 3-1/2 41453 $2.66
Nipple BLK 2 x 4-1/2 41455 $4.66
Nipple BLK 2"x3" Thrd 1 end 41490 $1.50
Tee Stl 2" Weld-end 41811 $21.28
Cap Screw Hex 5/8" x 1-1/2" 43312 $0.43
Flange Reducing, 2"x1-1/2" FF 43320 $61.07
Flange 2" Lap Joint 43325 $8.37
Flange, 2" Stud End 43340 $34.78
Gasket, 2"x1/16" Full Face 43350 $3.47
Gasket, 2" 1/16" Ring 43355 $3.06
Filter Gas, 2" NPT 44317 $175.45
Regulator Gas 2" Screwed 44330 $235.92
Total $1,713.58
5000 rotary meter 44128 $1,573.41
Cap BLK 2 41104 $2.31
Elbow, BLK Street 2" M/F 41365 $5.03
Nipple BLK 2 x 3-1/2 41453 $2.66
Nipple BLK 2 x 4-1/2 41455 $4.66
Nipple BLK 2"x3" Thrd 1 end 41490 $1.50Tee Stl 2" Weld-end 41811 $21.28
Cap Screw Hex 5/8" x 1-1/2" 43312 $0.43
Flange Reducing, 2"x1-1/2" FF 43320 $61.07
Flange 2" Lap Joint 43325 $8.37
Flange, 2" Stud End 43340 $34.78
Gasket, 2"x1/16" Full Face 43350 $3.47
Gasket, 2" 1/16" Ring 43355 $3.06
Filter Gas, 2" NPT 44317 $175.45
Regulator Gas 2" Screwed 44330 $235.92
Total $2,133.40
ATTACHMENT J
Material List 8
Gas
material # # units avg price avg price
7000 rotary meter 44129 $2,154.35
Cap BLK 2 41104 $2.31
Elbow, BLK Street 2" M/F 41365 $5.03
Nipple BLK 2 x 3-1/2 41453 $2.66
Nipple BLK 2 x 4-1/2 41455 $4.66
Nipple BLK 2"x3" Thrd 1 end 41490 $1.50
Tee Stl 2" Weld-end 41811 $21.28
Cap Screw Hex 5/8" x 1-1/2" 43312 $0.43
Flange Reducing, 2"x1-1/2" FF 43320 $61.07
Flange 2" Lap Joint 43325 $8.37
Flange, 2" Stud End 43340 $34.78
Gasket, 2"x1/16" Full Face 43350 $3.47Gasket, 2" 1/16" Ring 43355 $3.06
Filter Gas, 2" NPT 44317 $175.45
Regulator Gas 2" Screwed 44330 $235.92
Total $2,714.34
11,0000 rotary meter
Cap BLK 2 41104 $2.31
Elbow, BLK Street 2" M/F 41365 $5.03
Nipple BLK 2 x 3-1/2 41453 $2.66
Nipple BLK 2 x 4-1/2 41455 $4.66Nipple BLK 2"x3" Thrd 1 end 41490 $1.50Pipe Steel 2" Plain end 41516 $20.00Pipe Steel 3" Plain end 41518 $30.00Tee Stl 2" Weld-end 41811 $21.28Tee Stl 3x3x2 Weld-end 41812 $21.38
Cap Screw Hex 5/8" x 1-3/4" 43313 $0.43Flange Reducing, 3"x 2" Slip on 43322 $37.92Flange 2" Lap Joint 43325 $8.37Flange, 3" Lap Joint 43326 $9.97Flange, 2" Weld neck Flat face 43330 $14.64Flange, 3" Weld neck flat face 43331 $22.45Flane, 2" Stud end 43340 $34.78Flange, 3" Stud end 43341 $31.14Gasket, 3"x1/16" Full Face 43351 $2.70Gasket, 2" 1/16" Ring 43355 $3.06
Meter Gas Rotary, 11000 SCFH 44130 $2,557.65
Regulator Gas 2 ea 44332 $4,045.02
Filter Gas, 2" NPT 44317 $175.45
Total $7,052.40
16,0000 rotary meterCap BLK 2 41104 $2.31Elbow, BLK Street 2" M/F 41365 $5.03Nipple BLK 2 x 3-1/2 41453 $2.66Nipple BLK 2 x 4-1/2 41455 $4.66
Nipple BLK 2"x3" Thrd 1 end 41490 $1.50
Pipe Steel 2" Plain end 41516 $20.00
Pipe Steel 3" Plain end 41518 $30.00
Tee Stl 2" Weld-end 41811 $21.28
Tee Stl 3x3x2 Weld-end 41812 $21.38
Cap Screw Hex 5/8" x 1-3/4" 43313 $0.43
Flange Reducing, 3"x 2" Slip on 43322 $37.92
Flange 2" Lap Joint 43325 $8.37
Flange, 3" Lap Joint 43326 $9.97
Flange, 2" Weld neck Flat face 43330 $14.64Flange, 3" Weld neck flat face 43331 $22.45Flane, 2" Stud end 43340 $34.78Flange, 3" Stud end 43341 $31.14Gasket, 3"x1/16" Full Face 43351 $2.70Gasket, 2" 1/16" Ring 43355 $3.06
Meter Gas Rotary, 16000 SCFH 44152 $3,661.50
Regulator Gas 44332 $4,045.02
Filter Gas, 2" NPT 44317 $175.45
Total $8,156.25
23,000 rotary meterCap BLK 2 41104 $2.31Elbow, BLK Street 2" M/F 41365 $5.03Nipple BLK 2 x 3-1/2 41453 $2.66Nipple BLK 2 x 4-1/2 41455 $4.66Nipple BLK 2"x3" Thrd 1 end 41490 $1.50Pipe Steel 2" Plain end 41516 $20.00Pipe Steel 3" Plain end 41518 $30.00Tee Stl 2" Weld-end 41811 $21.28Tee Stl 3x3x2 Weld-end 41812 $21.38
Cap Screw Hex 5/8" x 1-3/4" 43313 $0.43Flange Reducing, 3"x 2" Slip on 43322 $37.92Flange 2" Lap Joint 43325 $8.37Flange, 3" Lap Joint 43326 $9.97Flange, 2" Weld neck Flat face 43330 $14.64
Flange, 3" Weld neck flat face 43331 $22.45
Flane, 2" Stud end 43340 $34.78
Flange, 3" Stud end 43341 $31.14
Gasket, 3"x1/16" Full Face 43351 $2.70
Gasket, 2" 1/16" Ring 43355 $3.06
Meter Gas Rotary, 23000 SCFH 44159 $5,949.79
Regulator Gas 44332 $4,045.02
Filter Gas, 2" NPT 44317 $175.45
Total $10,444.54
ATTACHMENT J
Sewer Material List 9
4" lateral material # # units avg price avg price
Box Sewer Cleanout Concrete 60000 $14.04
Lid Sewer Cleanout Marked Sewer 60001 $12.76
Band HDPE 1/16 4" 60002 $18.00
WYE 60003 $40.00
Bend 1/8 4" 60004 $18.00
Adapter Female 4" Cleanout 60009 $5.00
Cement Allcrete 5 Min. Set 60025 $40.67
Pipe SDR-17 butt fuse pipe 64214 40 3.96 $158.40
Saddle 8"X4" EF DR17 62500 $310.00
Total $616.87
6" lateral
Box Sewer Cleanout Concrete 60000 $14.04
Lid Sewer Cleanout Marked Sewer 60001 $12.76
WYE 60005 $50.00
Bend 1/8 6"60007 $20.00
Adapter Female 4" Cleanout 60009 $5.00
Cement Allcrete 5 Min. Set 60025 $40.67
Pipe SDR-17 butt fuse pipe 64215 40 5.96 $238.40
Saddle 8"X6" EF DR17 62501 $320.00
Total $700.87
Sewer manhole < 6' deep
mahole frame/cover 63002 $500.00
Lid Sewer manhole with tree 63010 $136.76
Cement Allcrete 5 Min. Set 60025 $40.67
48" base $200.00
5' - 48" manhole - rubber joint $350.00
48" to 24" MH reducer $200.00
Cement Allcrete 5 Min. Set 60025 $40.67
Total $1,468.10
Sewer manhole > 6' deep
mahole frame/cover 63002 $500.00
Lid Sewer manhole with tree 63010 $136.76
Cement Allcrete 5 Min. Set 60025 $40.67
60" base $300.00
7' - 60" manhole - rubber joint $1,000.00
60" to 24" MH reducer $400.00
Cement Allcrete 5 Min. Set 60025 $40.67
Total $2,418.10
8" SS main per foot $11.00
Cleanout
Box Sewer Cleanout Concrete 60000 $14.04
Lid Sewer Cleanout Marked Sewer 60001 $12.76
Band HDPE 1/16 4"60002 $18.00
WYE 60003 $40.00
Bend 1/8 4"60004 $18.00
Adapter Female 4" Cleanout 60009 $5.00
Cement Allcrete 5 Min. Set 60025 $40.67
Total $148.47
ATTACHMENT J
Utility
LABCDE Totals
Service Pipe trench pave pipe sand
Length Size, width width depth depth Qty.Unit Qty Unit Qty.Unit Qty.Unit Qty. Unit Qty Unit
Ft In. In. In. In. In. Tons Price CY Price CY Price CY Price CY Price LF Price
$108.90 $139.00 $139.00 $139.00 $20.24 $4.00
Gas service 4 1 36 48 30 27 0.40 $43.67 0.10 $13.56 $0.00 $0.00 1.00 $20.24 16 $64.00 $141.47
Boring 4 2 36 48 30 28 0.40 $43.67 0.10 $13.56 $0.00 $0.00 1.04 $20.99 16 $64.00 $142.22
Gas service trench 40 1&2 12 24 30 24 2.01 $218.35 0.49 $67.80 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 2.96 $59.97 68 $272.00 $687.62
Gas main trench 1 2 12 24 30 24 0.05 $5.46 0.01 $1.70 $0.00 $0.00 0.07 $1.50 2 $8.00 $16.65
Water Bore 4 2 36 48 30 28 0.40 $43.67 0.10 $13.56 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 1.04 $20.99 16 $64.00 $211.72
Water Service 30 4 18 30 36 36 1.88 $204.70 0.46 $63.57 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 5.00 $101.20 68 $272.00 $710.97
Trench 30 6 24 36 36 38 2.26 $245.64 0.55 $76.28 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 7.04 $142.43 68 $272.00 $805.85
30 8 24 36 36 40 2.26 $245.64 0.55 $76.28 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 7.41 $149.93 68 $272.00 $813.35
Water Main 1 8 24 36 36 40 0.08 $8.19 0.02 $2.54 $0.00 $0.00 0.25 $5.00 2 $8.00 $23.73
Sewer Lateral 30 4 24 36 60 60 2.26 $245.64 0.55 $76.28 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 11.11 $224.89 58 $232.00 $848.31
Trench < 6'30 6 24 36 60 62 2.26 $245.64 0.55 $76.28 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 11.48 $232.39 58 $232.00 $855.80
Sewer Lateral 30 4 36 48 80 86 3.01 $327.52 0.73 $101.71 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 23.89 $483.51 58 $232.00 $1,214.24
Trench > 6'30 6 36 48 80 86 3.01 $327.52 0.73 $101.71 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 23.89 $483.51 58 $232.00 $1,214.24
Sewer Lateral PB 4 4 36 48 30 28 0.40 $43.67 0.10 $13.56 0.2 $27.80 0.3 $41.70 1.04 $20.99 16 $64.00 $211.72
Sewer Manhole < 6'9 96 108 60 60 2.03 $221.08 0.49 $68.65 $0.00 $0.00 13.33 $269.87 32 $128.00 $687.59
Sewer Manhole > 6'10 108 120 84 84 2.51 $272.93 0.61 $84.76 $0.00 $0.00 23.33 $472.27 36 $144.00 $973.96
Sewer Main 1 8 36 48 60 66 0.10 $10.92 0.02 $3.39 $0.00 $0.00 0.61 $12.37 2 $8.00 $34.68
SERVICE TRENCH DIMENSIONS TRENCH, BACKFILL & RESTORATION
AC, In PCC, In Curb & Gutter SAND SAW-CUT
46
Sidewalk, ft
5
TRENCHING & BACKFILLING COSTS
ATTACHMENT J
Utility
LABCDE Totals
Service Pipe trench pave pipe dirt
Length Size, width width depth depth Qty. Unit Qty Unit Qty. Unit Qty. Unit Qty. Unit
Ft In. In. In. In. In.CY Price CY Price CY Price CY Price CY Price
$67.65 $67.65 $67.65 $67.65 $11.28
Gas service 4 1 36 48 30 27 0.40 $27.13 0.10 $6.60 $0.00 0.3 $20.30 1.00 $11.28 $65.30
Boring 4 2 36 48 30 28 0.40 $27.13 0.10 $6.60 $0.00 0.3 $20.30 1.04 $11.70 $65.72
Gas service trench 40 1&2 12 24 30 24 2.01 $135.64 0.49 $33.00 0.2 $13.53 $0.00 2.96 $33.42 $215.59
Gas main trench 1 8 24 36 36 40 0.08 $5.09 0.02 $1.24 $0.00 $0.00 0.25 $2.79 $9.11
Water Service Bore 4 2 36 48 30 28 0.40 $27.13 0.10 $6.60 0.2 $13.53 0.3 $20.30 1.04 $11.70 $79.25
Water Service 30 4 18 30 36 36 1.88 $127.16 0.46 $30.94 0.2 $13.53 0.3 $20.30 5.00 $56.40 $248.32
Trench 30 6 24 36 36 38 2.26 $152.59 0.55 $37.13 0.2 $13.53 0.3 $20.30 7.04 $79.38 $302.92
30 8 24 36 36 40 2.26 $152.59 0.55 $37.13 0.2 $13.53 0.3 $20.30 7.41 $83.56 $307.10
Water Main 1 8 24 36 36 40 0.08 $5.09 0.02 $1.24 $0.00 $0.00 0.25 $2.79 $9.11
Sewer Lateral 30 4 24 36 60 60 2.26 $152.59 0.55 $37.13 0.16 $10.82 0.3 $20.30 11.11 $125.33 $346.17
Trench < 6'30 6 24 36 60 62 2.26 $152.59 0.55 $37.13 0.17 $11.50 0.3 $20.30 11.48 $129.51 $351.03
Sewer Lateral 30 4 36 48 80 86 3.01 $203.46 0.73 $49.50 0.16 $10.82 0.3 $20.30 23.89 $269.47 $553.54
Trench > 6'30 6 36 48 80 86 3.01 $203.46 0.73 $49.50 0.17 $11.50 0.3 $20.30 23.89 $269.47 $554.22
Sewer Manhole < 6'9 96 108 60 60 2.03 $137.33 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 13.33 $150.40 $287.73
Sewer Manhole > 6'10 108 120 84 84 2.51 $169.55 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 23.33 $263.20 $432.75
Sewer Lateral PB 4 4 36 48 30 28 0.40 $27.13 0.10 $6.60 0.2 $13.53 0.3 $20.30 1.04 $11.70 $79.25
Sewer Main 1 8 36 48 60 66 0.10 $6.78 0.02 $1.65 $0.00 $0.00 0.61 $6.89 $15.33
AC, In PCC, In Curb & Gutter DIRT
DISPOSAL CHARGES
5
Sidewalk, ft
46
SERVICE TRENCH DIMENSIONS OPEN TRENCH REMOVED MATERIALS WITHOUT CONTAMINATION
ATTACHMENT J
WGW Cost Multiplier based on FY 2015 Budget (E&O and Admin)
GL Description Water Gas WWC Total WGW
30010 REGULAR SALARIES 2,471,049 2,733,089 1,793,701 6,997,839
30030 TEMPORARY SALARIES 71,710 78,068 35,997 185,775
30040 OVERTIME SALARIES 320,191 238,922 164,360 723,474
30050 NIGHT SHIFT PREMIUM 8,876 9,683 6,729 25,288
30110 FLSA CHARGES 643 701 487 1,831
30120 PREMIUM PAY - - - -
30130 MGMT EXCESS & PROF 17,520 19,350 12,330 49,200
30140 DISABILITY/WRKR COMP 179,813 78,488 69,080 327,381
30170 PAID LEAVE 558,588 617,212 404,081 1,579,881
30240 LONG TERM DISABILITY 8,865 12,902 5,848 27,615
30260 MEDICARE EMPLR CONTR 43,534 48,142 31,357 123,034
30290 PERS ALT MED REIMB 19,494 15,370 9,440 44,305
30370 RETIRE PREM PD BY C 201,650 451,282 117,161 770,093
30460 EMPL COMMUTE PROG - - - -
30470 MEDICAL STIPEND 10,014 3,394 9,278 22,686
30480 ER PENSION EXP SEIU 571,937 637,480 423,667 1,633,084
30481 ER PENSION EXP MGMT 8,822 8,822 7,492 25,136
30485 ER PENSION EXP UTLM 202,527 220,077 137,383 559,987
30500 ER MEDICAL SEIU 384,059 502,664 347,293 1,234,015
30501 ER MEDICAL MGMT 4,856 4,856 3,994 13,707
30505 ER MEDICAL UTLM 113,209 117,342 83,620 314,171
30510 ER DENTAL SEIU 53,331 63,956 43,407 160,695
30511 ER DENTAL MGMT 427 427 341 1,194
30515 ER DENTAL UTLM 13,243 13,914 8,124 35,281
30520 ER VISION SEIU 3,694 4,429 3,006 11,129
30521 ER VISION MGMT 30 30 24 83
30525 ER VISION UTLM 917 963 563 2,443
30990 BENEFITS ALLOCATION 16,113 33,628 16,814 66,555
39010 COST PLAN CHARGES 793,617 621,460 577,766 1,992,843
39020 MAIL SVC/ASD USE OLY 20,297 13,991 - 34,288
39040 PRNT SVC/ASD USE OLY 11,910 9,311 5,258 26,479
39080 VEHICLE EQPT MAINT S 158,452 182,223 211,336 552,012
39090 COMMUNICATIONS 73,116 186,105 83,788 343,008
39100 UTILITIES ADMINISTRA 1,336,930 1,483,976 1,014,506 3,835,412
39120 ENVIRONMENTAL DISPOS - 6,206 - 6,206
39130 ENVIRONMENTAL ADMIN - 7,433 - 7,433
39160 LIABILITY INSURANCE 16,052 18,983 14,040 49,076
39200 GF SVC PROV TO ENT F 3,692 55,061 4,429 63,182
39220 ENG&INSPC-PW SVC 5,841 6,112 11,679 23,632
39260 SURVEYING - PW SVC 7,788 - - 7,788
39270 GROUND MAINT-PW SRV 3,977 3,380 - 7,358
39390 STREET CUT FEES-INTE 42,834 54,330 93,433 190,596
39500 UTIL SVC PROV/OTHER 34,267 - - 34,267
39600 WATER SALES TO CITY 40,697 261 - 40,958
39610 ELECT SALES TO CITY 115,902 142 544 116,587
39630 REFUSE SALES TO CITY - - 9,958 9,958
39670 STORM DRAIN SALES TO 163 36 - 199
39700 LANDFILL CHRG TO CIT 231 8,369 2,376 10,976
39770 VEH REPLACEMNT ALLOC 163,216 191,220 144,064 498,500
Total Expense (30000-30990 &
39000-39990)8,114,097 8,763,789 5,908,754 22,786,641
Engineering & Operations FTE 35.56 40.91 26.32 102.79
Salaries (30000-30040)2,862,951 3,050,079 1,994,058 7,907,088
Total S&B & Allocated Chgs 8,114,097 8,763,789 5,908,754 22,786,641
Cost Multiplier 2.83 2.87 2.96 2.88
ATTACHMENT J
COMPARISON OF BAY AREA UTILITY INSTALLATION FEES
Installation Type Alameda County Redwood
current Proposed EBAY MUD Water district Hayward Napa City
WATER
2" water service $5,681.00 $4,863.00 $7,301.00 $4,050.00 $4,100.00
4" water service $8,381.00 $7,156.00 $4,725.00
6" fire service $9,379.00 $8,137.00 $5,210.00
8" fire service n/a $9,469.00 $5,550.00
new hydrant and lateral $9,785.00 $12,840.00 $13,796.00 $14,460.00
Eng & inspection for 2" svc n/a $1,618.00
Eng & inspection for hydrant & lat n/a $2,426.00 $3,012.00
demo 1" to 2" svc $952.00 $2,653.00 $1,463.00 $3,420.00
demo 3" to 12" svc $1,383.00 $3,715.00 $3,748.00
5/8" water meter $222.00 $698.00 $600.00 $330.00 $150.00
1" water meter $276.00 $862.00 $800.00 $440.00 $200.00
1-1/2" water meter $492.00 $1,444.00 $1,000.00 $730.00 $350.00
2" water meter $601.00 $1,635.00 $1,200.00 $660.00 $2,400.00 $450.00
4" water meter $2,429.00 $5,740.00 $4,760.00 $1,400.00
GAS (no comparisons available)
1" gas service $2,766.00 $4,343.00
2" gas service $4,156.00 $5,250.00
400CFH meter $468.00 $961.00
630 CFH meter $697.00 $1,329.00
WASTEWATER (most don't own lateral)
4" sewer latera $5,876.00 $6,589.00
6" sewer lateral $6,388.00 $7,124.00
Eng & inspection for new lateral n/a $2,157.00 $4,050.00
Palo Alto
ATTACHMENT K
Page 1 of 8
4
MEMORANDUM
TO: UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION
FROM: UTILTIES DEPARTMENT
DATE: December 10, 2014
SUBJECT: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission Recommend
that Council Adopt a Resolution Amending Water, Gas and Wastewater
Connection and Capacity Fees and Miscellaneous Utility Charges (Utility Rate
Schedules G-5, W-5, S-5 and C-1)
REQUEST
Staff requests that the Utilities Advisory Commission recommend that the City Council:
1.Adopt a resolution amending the following Utility Rate Schedules: W-5 (Water Service
Connection Fees), G-5 (Gas Service Connection Fees), S-5 (Wastewater Service
Connection Fees), and C-1 (Utility Miscellaneous Charges), effective April 1st, 2015.
BACKGROUND
The Utilities Department provides service connections to meet customers’ needs for new gas,
water, wastewater and electric services. Service connection fees and service call fees are
designed to recover costs that the Utilities Department incurs to provide installation,
connection, inspection and engineering of new service connections, including labor, equipment
and other associated charges. Service connection fees also cover all charges related to the
installation, relocation or abandonment of gas, water and wastewater services, which include
Utility plan review charges, meter and hydrant installations and other service installation and
inspection costs.
The proposed changes also add some new meter sizes to the existing capacity fee options for
water and wastewater service. No increases are proposed to any existing capacity fees.
The method used for recovering the costs is either: a single fee based on average conditions or
an estimated cost based on unusual field conditions. Most service connection costs are
recovered through the single fee methodology, with the single fees presented in the attached
rate schedules W-5, G-5, S-5 and C-1. Unusual field conditions and the associated costs are
determined by the Utilities Engineering Manager. The connection fees typically are a sum of
the costs of labor, materials, equipment, overhead, street paving, meter costs (where
applicable), and landfill dump charges.
The last time a cost-of-service study of connection fees, excluding capacity fees, was performed
by staff was in 2008. The water and wastewater capacity fees study was performed by Black
ATTACHMENT L
Page 2 of 8
and Veatch that same year. Both the connection fees and capacity fees increases were
approved by Council in 2008 following the studies, with the phase-in of only the capacity fee
increases in 2009 and 2010 to manage the impact of the increases to mainly developers of new
residential single family and multi-family dwellings, and hotel construction (CMR: 227:08, CMR
222:09, and CMR: 214:10). Staff’s recent internal cost-of-service study of connection and
service-related costs indicates that current fees do not fully recover the Utilities Department’s
direct and indirect costs; therefore, an increase is necessary.
Fees are developed to cover standard connections under basic assumptions. New items are
added to the rate schedule to cover additional scenarios and changing conditions. However,
engineering estimates are required to determine the appropriate fees for special requirements
that arise occasionally.
DISCUSSION
Besides the changes proposed and described below, staff reviewed each of the attached rate
schedules for clarity, making edits as needed to improve readability and ensure that defined
terms used in Rule 2 (Definitions and Abbreviations) were properly capitalized in each rate
schedule. All changes are shown in redline and attached.
Water-Gas-Wastewater Connection Fees
The proposed increases in water, gas, and wastewater connection fees are due to a
combination of factors including higher labor rates, additional meter costs, and an increase in
work time to reflect the actual time required to complete each job. The proposed water service
connection fees increased on average of 87% with a decrease on average of 14% for domestic,
irrigation and fire combined service connection charges; the proposed gas service connection
fees increased on average 94%; and the proposed wastewater service connection fees
increased on average 41%.
The largest proposed fee increases are for meter installation charges for water and gas services.
The current fees for domestic water and gas meter installations do not cover the material cost
of the meter box and the new standard electronic water meter (E-meter), which was adopted in
the 2013 Water, Gas, and Wastewater Utility Standards. They also do not cover the labor costs
for setting or inspecting new meters on new or existing services.
The proposed connection fee schedules will also recover utility plan review costs through the
proposed addition of standardized utility plan review fees, along with engineering and
inspection costs for a variety of utility work performed by outside contractors. Standardizing
these fees will shorten the permit issuing process by eliminating the labor intensive estimation
work that was done previously for water, gas and wastewater utility plan reviews and
engineering and inspection work for unusual/large projects. In addition, new fees for tapping
water and gas mains are proposed to be added to the connection fee schedules to provide an
option to customers who prefer to use their own contractors for the service installation.
Page 3 of 8
Per Palo Alto Municipal Code Titles 15 and 16 (Palo Alto Fire Code and Building Regulations),
adopted in 2008, all new construction or renovation of one- and two-family dwellings is
required to install automatic sprinkler systems. The proposed decreases in new water service
connection fees, on average 14%, are due to combining domestic water, fire, and/or irrigation
capability into one system. New customers will be charged, under the proposed fee schedule,
for installing only one pipe servicing any purpose (fire, domestic or irrigation).
Tables 1, 2, and 3 present summary of proposed changes to Gas, Water, and Wastewater
Service Connection Fees, respectively.
Page 4 of 8
Table 1 – Summary of Proposed Changes to Gas Service Standard Connection Fees
(Attachment B – Utility Rate Schedule G-5)
Rate Schedule Section
and Title
Reason(s) for Proposed Changes
B.1 & B.2 Plan Review
Fees
New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance. Fees are based on estimated hours for plan review.
Mainly used for commercial projects in excess of $200,000 and
new subdivisions.
B.3 Distribution System
Extension Charge
Increased labor rates and installation time
B.4. Connection Charge
for Service Installed on
Existing Main -
directionally bored
connections
Increased labor rates, material costs, and installation time
B.4 Connection Charge
for Service Installed on
Existing Main -
trenched connections
and contractor
provided trenches)
Provides fee for when field conditions call for open -trench
method, instead of directionally bored (trenchless) method
Provides an option for customers who wish to have their
contractor provide the trench for service installations by City
staff
B.5 Meter Charges Increased material costs and inclusion of actual labor costs for
setting and inspection of meters
B.5 4" Bollard New standard bollard size
B.6 Additional meters
on existing and new
services
Increased material costs and inclusion of actual labor costs for
setting and inspection of meters
B.7 Service Riser
Relocation
Increased labor rates and relocation time
B.9 Tapping the gas
main for contractor
installed services
Provides an option to customers in wanting to employ their own
contractor for the service installation. City staff will perform
tapping of live gas main.
D.1 Engineering and
Inspection Service Fees
Increased labor rates.
New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance.
Page 5 of 8
Table 2 – Summary of Proposed Changes to Water Service Standard Connection Fees
(Attachment D – Utility Rate Schedule W-5)
Rate Schedule Section
and Title
Reason(s) for Proposed Changes
B. 1 Plan Review Fees New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance. Fees are based on estimated hours for plan review.
Mainly used for commercial projects in excess of $200,000 and
new subdivisions.
B.2 Distribution System
Extension Charge
New standard material and larger minimum diameter pipes for
mains
B.3 Service Connection
Charges (for Domestic,
Fire, & Irrigation)
Combining of Domestic, Fire, and Irrigation for multiple purposes
reduced required work hours and material costs for installation
B.4 Meter Charges New standard electronic (E-meter) and compound meters and
inclusion of actual labor costs for setting and inspection of
meters
B.5 Additional Meters
on Connection
New standard electronic (E-meter) and compound meters and
inclusion of actual labor costs for setting and inspection of
meters
B.7 Capacity Fees New minimum fixture units are proposed to align meter size with
customer-identified on-site current and future demand
D.1 2-Meter Manifold Increased labor rates and material costs
D.2 Service
Abandonment
Increased time for demolition due to unpredictable underground
field conditions
D.3 Meter Installation Standardized fee for engineering and inspection for large meter
purchase and installation by other parties
D.4 Hydrant Installation Increased installation time and material costs
D.5 Tapping the water
main for contractor
installed services
Provides an option to customers who want to employ their own
contractor for the service installation. City staff will perform
tapping of live water main.
D.6 Engineering and
Inspection
Increased labor rates.
New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance.
Page 6 of 8
Table 3 – Summary of Proposed Changes to Wastewater Service Standard Connection Fees
(Attachment F – Utility Rate Schedule S-5)
Rate Schedule Section
and Title
Reason(s) for Proposed Changes
B. 1 Plan Review Fees New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance. Fees are based on estimated hours for plan review.
Mainly used for commercial projects in excess of $200,000 and
new subdivision.
B.2 Collection System
Extension Charge
Increased labor rates, material costs, and installation time
B.3 Connection Charges Increased labor rates and material costs
B.3 Connection Charges
- Rehab Existing Lateral
Provides option for customer with existing vitrified clay pipe and
other laterals that can be rehabilitated by trenchless
rehabilitation methods
B.5 Capacity Fees No changes
D.1 Install Manhole Increased labor rates, materials costs, and time for installation
due to traffic congestion, night time work, and difficult
underground field conditions
D.2 Abandonment and
Demolition
Increase labor rates and time for demolition due to difficult
underground field conditions
D. 3 Install New
Cleanout
New standard fee for cleanout installation
D.4 Engineering and
Inspection Fees
Increased labor rates.
New standardized fees to shorten processing time for permit
issuance.
Capacity Fees
No increases are proposed to any existing capacity fees, but some new meter size options are
being added to align meter size with customer demand. A minimum number of fixture units is
proposed for 4-inch and 6-inch water meters; currently no minimum is required. The proposed
minimums offer an incentive for customers to accurately report the number of fixture units and
to request meters that will supply their stated fixture units and corresponding gallons-per-
minute of demand. The City installs water meters to match the customer’s demand as stated
on the Customer Utility application/load sheet. Customers who want a large 4-inch or 6-inch
compound meter will need to meet the proposed minimum number of fixture units on the
application/load sheet or pay the capacity fee based on this minimum number of fixture units,
with additional fixture units beyond the minimum number to be calculated at $125.00 per
fixture unit.
Utility Miscellaneous Charges (Attachment H – Utility Rate Schedule C-1)
Utility Rate Schedule C-1 covers flat rate charges for service calls related to service
disconnection and restoration for non-payment. In addition, labor rates per hour per person
Page 7 of 8
for non-standard service work have been revised and the proposed rates are increasing 13% to
reflect updated labor costs since 2002. The proposed service call flat rates are increasing 35
percent due to increases in pension and medical costs, market salary re-alignment, and
additional infrastructure expenses since 2008.
Connection Fees in Other Local Utilities
The proposed fee changes for the water utility will be more in-line with other local utilities.
Attachment K, Connection Fees Comparison 2014, shows some of the comparable water utility
connection fees with other local utilities. There were no comparable gas utility connection fees
and most local utilities do not own wastewater laterals.
The proposed fee changes were developed in accordance with the Mitigation Fee Act
(California Government Code Section 66000 – 66008), which governs water and wastewater
utility connection and capacity charges. The Act sets forth notice and hearing procedures and
requires that fees not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which
the fee is imposed. Although the City’s gas connection fees and service call fees are not
covered by the Act, the City has followed its procedural and substantive requirements with
respect to these cost-based fees, for transparency and ease of administration.
Government Code 66016 requires that prior to levying a new or increased fee or service charge,
the City Council must hold at least one public meeting to listen to any oral or written
presentations on the fees. If approved, the proposed fee changes will take effect on April 1,
2015, 60 days after the City Council adopts the resolution amending the fees, in accordance
with Government Code Section 66017.
RESOURCE IMPACT
Based on the assumption that the fee changes will take effect in April 2015, the estimated
increase in annual connection fee revenues is approximately $225,000 in the Gas Fund,
$150,000 in the Water Fund, and $75,000 in the Wastewater Fund.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
These recommendations do not represent a change in current City policies.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The adoption of the resolution is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Air
Quality Act; under California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15273(a), because
CEQA does not apply to the modification, restructuring, or approval of rates and charges for the
purpose of meeting operating expenses and obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to
maintain service.
AITACHMENTS
Attachment A: Resolution to amend rate sched G-5, W-5, S-5, C-1effective04_01_2015
Attachment B: Rate Sched G-5 effective 04_01_2015 -
Attachment C: Redline Rate Sched G-5 effective 04_01_2015
Attachment D: Rate Sched W-5 effective 04_01_2015
Attachment E: Redline Rate Sched W-5 effective 04_01_2015
Attachment F: Rate Sched S-5 effective 04_01_2015
Attachment G: Redline Rate Sched S-5 effective 04_01_2015
Attachment~: Rate Sched C-1effective04_01_2015
Attachment. I: Redline Rate Sched C-1 effective 04_01_2015
Attachment J: Backup Spreadsheets FY2014-2015
Attachment K: Connection fees comparison_2014
PREPARED BY: Tuan Nguyen, Engineer
Silvia Santos, Senior Engineer
Edward Wu, WGW Engineering Manager
REVIEWED BY: T~
Assistant Director, U~ilities Engineering
DEPARTMENT HEAD: VALE~
Director of Utilities
Page 8 of 8
EXCERPTED DRAFT MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 10, 2014
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
ITEM 1 (Original Agenda New Business Item 4): ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the
Utilities Advisory Commission Recommend that Council Adopt a Resolution Amending Water,
Gas and Wastewater Connection and Capacity Fees and Miscellaneous Utility Charges (Utility
Rate Schedules G-5, W-5, S-5 and C-1)
Tomm Marshall, Assistant Director for Engineering, said that it has been at least 5 years since
the fees in question have been updated; therefore there may be a substantial increase. The
fees are based on the time and materials it takes to recover the cost to do the work.
Vice Chair Waldfogel said that he’d like to get a sense of before and after impact of the fees.
He asked what the change is in the total cost due to the proposed change in fees for a
homeowner. Marshall said that every service is different, but for a typical residential customer
needing new gas, water, and sewer services, the cost would change from $13,700 to $17,400, a
27% increase.
Chair Foster asked how long it has been since the fees were changed. Marshall replied at least
5 or 6 years.
Commissioner Hall asked how these fees compare to those for other entities, such as PG&E for
gas and other agencies for sewer, and if the other entities’ fees are based on time and materials
too. Marshall said that on PG&E’s website, gas service fee schedule provides a range from
$2,000 to $12,000 and it appears to be prepared by their Estimators on a case by case basis. He
said that Palo Alto uses a fixed price. Commissioner Hall asked the same question for sewer.
Marshall said that Palo Alto is different since the City owns the lower sewer laterals. For most
of the other agencies, the customer owns the entire sewer lateral. Commissioner Hall asked if
there would be a cost saving to the City if we transfer the ownership of the lower laterals to the
customers. Marshall said that the City has evaluated the possibility but we received strong
push back because the customers didn’t want to take on the additional cost. We may re-
evaluate that option and go through the policy change process, after the laterals have been
examined and/or repaired as a result of the cross-bore inspection program.
Commissioner Hall asked what the excess length fee for gas services greater than 40 feet is, and
who covers the additional trenching cost. Marshall said that it’s the incremental cost of boring
to get to a distant meter location and that trenching is not usually needed.
ATTACHMENT M
Commissioner Eglash asked if there was a concern about customers who have been planning a
project, but would suddenly be facing a large fee increase. He asked if the fee increase could
be adopted, but be delayed until 2016, to allow adequate time for notices to customers.
Marshall said that when fees change, the City sends a letter to those with projects on file and
provides a 90-day notice during which they can pay the fees under the old rates. Commissioner
Eglash asked if there are issues with this approach, for example, in the case of the project not
being far enough along in the planning phase so that the fee estimate cannot be firmed up.
Marshall said that generally, if there is a project on file, the City has already provided an
estimate.
Vice Chair Waldfogel asked if the fees could be based on labor costs and changed
administratively so that they wouldn't have to wait for the lengthy review process to be
updated. Marshall said that there was a legal issue for how these fees can be changed.
Commissioner Cook asked if it could be setup for an annual automatic renewal approved by the
City Manager. Senior Deputy City Attorney Jessica Mullan stated that the fees can't be
automatically renewed, but most go through a public review and hearing process and it
requires the Council’s approval.
Vice Chair Waldfogel noted that the gas commodity rates are changed based on market
conditions within a Council-established range and do not go back for Council approval each
month. Mullan said that the applicable law is different for gas rates.
Commissioner Hall noted that the fees show an encouragement for cost savings for folks with
combined fire service and domestic water service, but it looks like there are actually two
charges. Marshall replied that a residential customer can have one pipe to serve both fire and
domestic water services. For commercial customers, it’s usually one larger pipe for fire service
with a pipe tapped off from it for potable water service; therefore two charges would apply.
ACTION:
Commissioner Eglash made a motion to approve staff’s recommendation. Commissioner Cook
seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (6-0 with Chair Foster, Vice Chair
Waldfogel, Commissioners Cook, Eglash, Hall and Melton voting yes, and with Commissioner
Chang absent).
City of Palo Alto (ID # 5565)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 3/2/2015
Summary Title: Establishment of an Office/R&D Annual Growth Limit -
continuation
Title: Discussion and Direction to Staff Regarding Establishment of an
Office/R&D Annual Growth Limit (Continued from February 9, 2015)
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the City Council discuss its objectives and issues associated with
establishment of an annual limit on office/R&D development, and provide direction to staff
regarding next steps which may include:
1. identifying alternative approaches or annual limits on office/R&D development that can
be further defined and evaluated as part of the Comprehensive Plan Update process, for
example:
a. an annual limit of 35,000 or 50,000 net new square feet of office/R&D per year,
with a competitive process for project approvals each year that applications
exceed the limit; and/or
b. slowing the pace of office/R&D development by imposing a more robust impact
fee program.
2. Identifying zoning changes or requirements that can be considered for adoption on an
interim basis until an annual limit or alternative approach to addressing the pace of
office/R&D development can be adopted concurrent with the Comprehensive Plan
Update. For example:
a. requiring on-site parking, funding for a transportation management association,
or other approaches to address traffic and parking demand associated with
development; or
b. a temporary reduction in allowable office densities (floor area ratio or FAR).
Executive Summary
One of the intriguing policy ideas that came up during the Comprehensive Plan workshops in
the summer of 2014 was the idea that the City should somehow moderate or meter the pace of
City of Palo Alto Page 1
non-residential development. The idea was to manage growth by having an annual limit on
office development, rather than by relying on an overall multi-year cumulative “cap” on non-
residential square footage like the one that the current Comprehensive Plan establishes for the
Downtown (Program L-8) and the City (Policy L-8).
This idea was advanced by staff as a concept worthy of exploration during the Comprehensive
Plan Update. Then on December 8, 2014, the City Council directed staff to schedule a Council
work session to give them an opportunity to consider and discuss the idea further.
Tonight’s work session responds to this directive and this staff report focuses on a couple of
big-picture questions, which could guide the Council’s discussion; Specifically:
What are the objectives of establishing an annual limit program, and are there various
ways those objectives could be met?
What issues would have to be resolved to establish such a program?
In addition, staff expects that the City Council will wish to discuss potential interim measures
that can be pursued until an annual limit (or alternative approach) can be adopted. These
interim measures could include new requirements for office/R&D development proposals (e.g.
on-site parking, transportation management association funding, or a reduction in FAR unless
affordable housing is included as part of a mixed use development.)
Supporting information includes a memo (first prepared for the December 8, 2014 Council
meeting) summarizing annual limit programs in three other jurisdictions, and another memo
describing two datasets that are available to inform the Council’s discussion about the annual
rate of office/R&D development over time. (See Attachments A and B)
Background
Please see Attachment A for background information regarding other jurisdictions with some
form of annual growth limit on non-residential development. Attachment A also discusses the
potential timing for establishment of an annual limit, and outlines some of the issues that
would have to be resolved to put a limit in place.
Please see Attachment B for background information regarding datasets available to
characterize the pace of non-residential development over time in Palo Alto, as well as the sum
total of pending (“pipeline”) development applications;
It’s also important to recognize that increases in employment, which are credited with creating
additional traffic and parking demand, are not directly proportional to new development of
office/R&D. This is because there are other types of non-residential development that
generate jobs (as explained in Attachment B) and, more importantly, the number of employees
per square foot of existing building space fluctuates over time based on the economic climate
and the demand for office space. The true relationship between jobs and square footage in
Palo Alto will not be fully understood until the business registry is in place for one or two
City of Palo Alto Page 2
business cycles.
As noted in Attachment B, the City has approved significant medical uses which will come on
line, related mostly to the Stanford Hospital Project, and have impacts in the coming years,
although this report does not propose or discuss limits on such uses. This report also does not
propose or discuss limits on housing development as such regulations can be legally
problematic and staff was not directed to pursue these.
Discussion
Development and establishment of a growth management program with annual development
restrictions will require careful consideration of program objectives, pros/cons, as well as the
issues and mechanics of the program. Some initial thoughts on these topics are provided below
for the Council’s consideration;
What are the objectives of establishing an annual limit program, and are there various ways
those objectives could be met?
Attendees at the Comprehensive Plan workshops last summer expressed some
frustration that the current Comprehensive Plan’s approach to growth management (i;e;
an overall “cap” on non-residential development) has been ineffective at moderating
the pace of growth and development in the robust economic recovery following the
“great recession;” Based on this frustration and an examination of growth management
strategies in use elsewhere in California, attendees suggested planning scenarios with a
growth management program that moderated or metered the rate of development
rather than the overall amount. This focus on the rate of development had its genesis in
the impacts associated with increased employment in the City as experienced by Palo
Alto residents. Impacts include traffic congestion/delay, parking demand, increased
housing costs, and more. Additionally, an annual limit can be response to the ups and
downs of the business cycle.
Thus, the objective of an annual limit program would be to moderate the rate of non-
residential development so as to reduce the rate of employment growth, reduce related
impacts and allow for effective mitigation of residual impacts. Establishing an annual
limit program could also ensure that the development approved under the program
meets stringent requirements related to “good” planning and design, public benefit,
etc., etc.
Program objectives could be met by establishing an annual limit on square footage such
as the one in San Francisco and Walnut Creek, or by establishing a limit on net new auto
trips such as the one in Santa Monica. (All three examples are cited in Attachment A).
Alternatively, this objective could be met by establishing new, stringent requirements
on development, and/or by increasing the cost of development to better compensate
for its impacts, for example by significantly adjusting housing and transportation impact
City of Palo Alto Page 3
fees. (In theory, once the business registry is in place, the City could also consider ways
to directly regulate new employment, but staff would need to do some additional
research into the legal and implementation issues associated with this approach, as well
as any comparable programs in other jurisdictions.)
What issues would have to be resolved to establish such a program?
As indicated in Attachment A, there are quite a number of issues that would need to be
resolved if the City Council wished to adopt an annual limit on office/R&D development,
not least of which would be to decide what the limit should be, and what procedures
should be used to implement the limit on an annual basis. Staff has provided some
initial thoughts on each below.
What should the annual limit be? The data in Attachment B has been provided to
inform this discussion and show that the rate of non-residential development in Palo
Alto has varied over time. Specifically, if the Congestion Management Program (CMP)
data is used, the annual rate of office/R&D development has been around 34,000
square feet per year if you look at the period from 2001-2015, about 67,000 square feet
per year if you look at the period from 2008-2015, and about -2,800 square feet per
year if you look at the period from 2001 to 2007 (because non-residential space was
removed and replaced with housing in this period). The CMP data set separates
office/R&D from other non-residential uses, including retail and medical office, and thus
may provide a better basis for this discussion than the monitoring data which was
initially presented in the August 29, 2014 Existing Conditions Report. (The August data
set, which has been updated in Attachment B, presents the combined non-residential
square footage within nine planning areas that are a legacy of the 1989 Citywide Study.)
What should be the process and criteria for receiving and considering applications?
Attachment A provides some explanation of the approaches in Walnut Creek, which
uses a first-come-first served staff-implemented approach, and San Francisco, which has
relied on their Planning Commission to decide between competing proposals using
specific criteria in times when pending applications have exceeded the available
allocation of square footage.
Should there be a geographic component to the program? The City has historically
monitored and regulated downtown Palo Alto separately from the rest of the City and
should consider whether this continues to be a valuable practice.
Should some areas of the City or types/sizes of projects be exempt? Walnut Creek
exempts a business park where they would like development to occur from their
program. Palo Alto does not have a comparable area where development is desired and
where that development would not cause the impacts that the annual develop limit is
intended to address. Nonetheless, the idea of exempting areas that are some distance
City of Palo Alto Page 4
from residential areas could be explored further. Also, the idea of exempting small
projects (less than 5,000 square feet?) could be explored as a way to protect the City’s
reputation for supporting innovation and start-up businesses. Further, limited
exemptions for vacant properties or highly under-utilized properties might be necessary
in order to avoid legal challenges.
Should unused allocations roll forward for some period of time? If the allocations were
to roll forward indefinitely (as in San Francisco), there may be concerns as to whether
the program objectives had been addressed. However, if unused allocations roll forward
for at least several years (as in Walnut Creek), it would serve to level-out volatile
economic upswings and downturns.
How would applications already in the “pipeline” be handled? This would depend on
how and when an annual limit is established and will require careful consideration.
How would the City ensure continued conformance with the Permit Streamlining Act?
We can look to San Francisco and Walnut Creek as models. In San Francisco, completed
applications that did not receive an allocation under the annual limit are either
continued to the next allocation period or denied, depending on the wishes of the
applicant.
What changes would be needed to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and zoning? Please
see the Policy Implications section below for a brief overview.
What would the potential impacts and benefits of the program be? As noted in the
Timeline section below, conceptual approach(s) developed by the City Council will be
reviewed to determine their potential fiscal and environmental impacts and benefits to
the extent feasible.
Timeline
Adoption of an annual limit on office/R&D development would require considerable discussion
and deliberations by the City Council and is likely to be controversial, requiring significant
outreach to stakeholders and the community at large. Stanford University has already pointed
out how the annual rate of development in the Research Park has fluctuated dramatically over
time, and that opportunities would have been lost to Stanford and Palo Alto if an annual limit
had constrained development in certain years.
Because of the potential for controversy and the need for ample community input, staff
assumes that the City Council would like to explore a couple of different approaches/annual
limits, and that these would be defined in the first few months of 2015 and evaluated as part of
the Comprehenisve Plan Update process. Next steps in the Comprehensive Plan Update
process include a community “summit” in May 2015, preparation of a program-level
environmental analysis (Draft EIR) and a fiscal study that can be used to inform community
City of Palo Alto Page 5
discussions and decision making. The current schedule calls for completion and adoption of the
Comprehensive Plan Update and concurrent zoning changes in the first part of 2016.
Given this timeline, staff expects that the City Council will wish to discuss potential interim
measures (such as those suggested earlier in this report) that can be pursued until an annual
limit (or alternative approach) can be adopted.
Resource Impact
As noted above, adoption of an annual limit on office/R&D development would require
considerable discussion and deliberations by the City Council. These deliberations in turn
would require considerable staff support and analysis. Also, if a growth management program
with an annual limit on office/R&D development is ultimately adopted, implementation of the
program each year will require considerable staff time and time on the City Council’s agenda;
The City may also wish to contract with a third party to conduct an independent review of
competing proposals that seek an allocation under the annual limit.
Larger fiscal impacts of a growth management program will have to be assessed carefully. At a
minimum, the assessment will have to consider likely reductions in permit revenues and impact
fees, potential longterm impacts to the City’s tax revenues and expenses, and a qualitative
discussion of the impact on the City’s overall economic “climate;” The extent and nature of
fiscal impacts will, of course, depend on the approach(es) that the City Council elects to
consider, and the analysis can potentially be combined with a fiscal study of other policy
choices inherent in the Comprehensive Plan Update. Planning staff is currently working with
staff in the Administrative Services Department to define the scope of this study, which will
have to look at expected revenues from commercial and residential property taxes, sales taxes
and other sources, as well as the cost of services over time.
Preparation of some kind of interim ordinance for the City Council’s consideration and adoption
for the period during which an annual office/R&D limit (or other approach) is being analyzed, is
potentially time consuming and resource intensive. Thus it may affect delivery of other
priorities.
Policy Implications
If the City adopts a growth management program with an annual limit on office/R&D
development, the program would effectively implement Comprensive Plan 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.”
Nonetheless, it is likely that a new growth management program would require an amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan as well as the City’s Municipal Code; The Comprehensive Plan
amendment would likely modify or replace policies and programs that establish an overall
“cap” on non-residential development in the Downtown (Program L-8) and the Citywide
planning areas identified on Comprehensive Plan Map L-6 (Policy L-8), and would also have to
City of Palo Alto Page 6
consider compatibility with policies like Policy B-9: “Encourage new businesses that meet the
business and economic goals to locate in Palo Alto.”
The Municipal Code amendment would have to establish the procedures and standards
associated with the new growth management program.
Environmental Review
This work session is intended for City Council discussion and direction to staff. No final action
will be taken and thus no review is required under the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). If the Council elects to proceed with establishment of an annual limit or another
growth management program at some time in the future, that decision (in the form of
implementing policies and regulations) will require CEQA review. Adoption of an interim
ordinance or other temporary zoning requirement may also require environmental review
depending on the duration and scope of the changes.
The level and complexity of environmental review will depend on the nature of the program(s)
and its potential to directly or indirectly stimulate a particular kind of development or focus
development in a specific area. For example, limiting the development of office/R&D in Palo
Alto could stimulate housing development if property owners see that as a way to increase the
value of their property. Also, the City would have to consider whether limiting the
development of office/R&D development in Palo Alto could focus additonal office/R&D
development in adjacent communities.1
Attachments:
Attachment A: Memorandum Regarding Annual Limit on Office/R&D (PDF)
Attachment B: Comp. Plan Memo on Growth Trends (PDF)
Attachment C: Documents Received "At Places" at the January 26, 2015 City Council
meeting (PDF)
Attachment D: Correspondence (PDF)
1 While CEQA does not require a lead agency to speculate where specfic impacts cannot be reasonably anticipated,
the City would have to at least consider this question.
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Attachment A
CITY OF PALO ALTO
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER &
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
AGENDA DATE: December 8, 2014 ID#: 5286
SUBJECT: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE & ZONING CHANGES: ANNUAL LIMIT ON
OFFICE/R&D DEVELOPMENT
At the November 3, 2014 City Council meeting, a Councilmember asked whether the suggested
Council work session regarding establishment of an annual limit on office/R&D could consider
adoption of an annual limit as an interim ordinance. Subsequently, the same Councilmember
also asked staff to provide information regarding other jurisdictions with annual office limits
immediately, rather than as preparation for the January work session.
This memo responds to both questions/requests and will be supplemented by additional staff
analysis and a staff recommendation in advance of the January work session. Specifically, staff
and the City Council will have to explore a number of issues when considering establishment of
an annual limit on office/R&D development. At a minimum, these include the following:
(1) what the annual limit should be;
(2) what the process and criteria for receiving and considering applications should be (i.e.
should applications be considered in the order received, or based on some criteria
establishing preferences; what should those criteria be?);
(3) whether there should be a geographic component to the program;
(4) whether some areas of the City or types/sizes of projects should be exempt;
(5) whether unused allocations should roll forward for some period of time;
(6) how to handle applications already in the “pipeline-”
(7) how to ensure continued conformance with the Permit Streamlining Act;
(8) necessary changes to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and zoning; and
(9) potential impacts and benefits.
CAN THE COUNCIL CONSIDER AN ANNUAL OFFICE CAP AS AN INTERIM ORDINANCE?
The short answer is yes, the Council could consider adoption of an annual cap on office/R&D
development under the provision in State law (Government Code Section 65858) which allows
cities to temporarily prohibit any uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan,
specific plan, or zoning proposal that the city is studying or intends to study within a reasonable
time. To enact an interim ordinance, a 4/5 vote (8 votes) would be required, and the City
Council would have to make legislative findings that there is a current and immediate threat to
the public health, safety, or welfare, and that the approval of additional development would
result in that threat to public health, safety, or welfare.
An interim ordinance is effective for 45 days, after which it may be extended, but in no instance
may it be in effect for over two years. An interim ordinance does not require review by the
Planning and Transportation Commission and many are exempt from review under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This is because interim ordinances are temporary
and many, in practice, perpetuate the status quo. To the extent this is not the case, additional
review may be required.
It should be noted again, however, that there are many complexities that would need to be
resolved to establish an annual office limit, suggesting that considerable time and effort will be
involved.
Whether it’s adopted as an interim ordinance or concurrent with the Comprehensive Plan
Update, an annual limit is also likely to cause concern by property owners in areas zoned for
commercial use, resulting in the need for extended outreach, public hearings, and etc. Stanford
University has already voiced its concerns about the effect that an annual office limit could
have on the Research Park.
WHAT OTHER JURISDICTIONS HAVE AN ANNUAL OFFICE CAP?
Earlier this year, the City’s Comprehensive Plan consultants, Placeworks, gathered information
regarding a number of growth management systems used by California jurisdictions to meter
the amount or pace of non-residential development. They identified communities that, like
Palo Alto, have some kind of cap on non-residential development (for example Cupertino), as
well as communities that have attempted to cap residential development (for example
Pleasanton).
Page 2
December 2, 2014
Memo RE: Annual Limit on Office/R&D
Placeworks identified Walnut Creek and Santa Monica as two jurisdictions that have
implemented programs to govern the pace of non-residential development, and these
programs are summarized below, along with the program in place in San Francisco.
These three examples are presented for background information only, and are not intended as
a recommendation to adopt one or more of these strategies. As the Placeworks staff observed,
any program adopted in Palo Alto would need a high degree of customization to fit its unique
local conditions. In addition, if a program is developed for Palo Alto, it would require careful
legal analysis to ensure that it can operate effectively in tandem with the State’s Permit
Streamlining Act and withstand legal challenge.
Walnut Creek
Walnut Creek has regulated commercial growth since 1985, when voters approved Measure H,
a growth-control initiative that would have limited or prevented non-residential development
until traffic congestion at major intersections improved. Measure H was a reaction to resident
concerns about traffic and the construction in the late 1970s and early 1980s, when a number
of large commercial office buildings in downtown Walnut Creek, primarily around the Walnut
Creek BART station. A major local landowner sued the City, and the case eventually went to the
California Supreme Court.
In 1990, the Court ruled that Measure H was invalid because it functioned as a zoning ordinance
but conflicted with the City’s adopted General Plan, which called for Walnut Creek to be a
regional job and retail center. Although Measure H was invalidated, the City continued to
regulate the amount of commercial and residential development allowed each year,
acknowledging the residents’ desire to meter growth in Walnut Creek. In 1993, the City Council
adopted a Growth Limitation Program that limited new commercial growth to 75,000 square
feet per year, metered in increments of 150,000 square feet every 2 years, and was adopted for
10 years. The program helped the City to limit growth to 620,000 square feet of new
commercial development in the first 10 years (1993-2003), and was extended through 2015 in
the City’s 2005 General Plan Update. The Growth Limitation Program excludes the Shadelands
Business Park.1
1. Does the system include an annual limit on non-residential approvals? If so, how is
that set? Changed? Enforced?
1 City of Walnut Creek, Walnut Creek General Plan 2025, page 4-13. Available online at http://www.walnut-
creek.org/citygov/depts/cd/planning/documents/general plan 2025.asp.
Page 3
December 2, 2014
Memo RE: Annual Limit on Office/R&D
Yes. The Walnut Creek Growth Management Program includes a cap of 75,000
commercial square feet/year metered in 2-year increments. Therefore allocations for
150,000 square feet of commercial development are available in each two year cycle.
The cap is set in the General Plan (which incorporated an earlier Growth Limitation
Program from the 1990s). It is enforced by the Planning Division. Staff tracks available
allocation and a building permit cannot be issued unless an allocation is available. If the
building permit is allowed to expire prior to construction, the allocation is revoked and
returns to the pool. Unused allocations from one cycle are rolled over to the next
cycle. Project applicants get credit for any existing commercial SF that would be
demolished with construction of their project.
2. Does the system include a competitive point system pitting projects against each
other? Are any categories of project exempted (e.g. certain type of industry, projects
under 10k sf)? How much flexibility is there?
There is no “beauty contest” type competition. Allocations are awarded on a first-come,
first-served basis when the project planner deems a project application complete.
Development in the Shadelands Business Park on the eastern edge of the City and
specific types of Community Facilities are exempt from the Growth Management
Program. Additionally, the Planning Manager can grant exemptions to larger, more
complex projects so that their allocation can be reserved for longer than the 12-month
period for which allocations are usually reserved.
The system had a fair degree of flexibility built in – not in the cap, but rather in how it is
calculated and implemented. Calculating the cap in 2-year increments of up to 150,000
sf offers some flexibility; as does carrying forward the unused allocation. In addition,
the system allows project applicants to reserve allocations as soon as their application is
deemed complete, with the possibility of having that reservation extended at the
discretion of the Planning Manager for larger, more complex projects.
Santa Monica
Goal T19 in the Santa Monica Land Use and Circulation Element (LUCE) of the Santa Monica
General Plan (adopted in 2010) is to “Create an integrated transportation and land use program
that seeks to limit total peak period vehicle trips with a Santa Monica origin or destination to
2009 levels.” This goal is also known as the “No Net New Evening Peak Period Vehicle Trips”
goal. The LUCE focuses not only on reducing vehicle trips, but also on encourage walking,
bicycling and transit use, creating pedestrian-oriented neighborhoods, and reducing
greenhouse gas emissions. The LUCE foresees the creation of a multi-modal transportation
system and “identifies local strategies to manage trips, treating the entire City as an integrated
Page 4
December 2, 2014
Memo RE: Annual Limit on Office/R&D
transportation management system with aggressive requirements for trip reduction, transit
enhancements, pedestrian and bike improvements, and shared parking. Transportation
demand management (TDM) programs that reduce automobile travel demand and incentivize
alternative modes such as carpool, vanpools, and shuttles, walking, bicycling, and shared
parking are all encouraged.”2 The LUCE calls for the City to manage new trips from new
development and reduce trips from existing major employers. New trips must be offset through
the development of new transportation infrastructure providing alternatives to automobile
travel, including public transit, bicycling, ridesharing, and walking. The LUCE also contains a list
of transportation policies, projects, and programs that are necessary to accommodate
projected growth with no net increase in PM peak hour vehicle trips through 2030.
The LUCE identifies the establishment of fees as a tool to manage vehicle trips and increase
alternative transportation options. The LUCE states that “New projects will be required to
minimize the trips they generate and contribute fees to mitigate their new trips.” However, the
LUCE also states that “To achieve the No Net New Trips goal, developers cannot be expected to
have every project generate zero trips by itself;” rather, developers will pay mitigation fees that
will fund capital improvement projects citywide, such that the net impact of each development
project ultimately is zero. Fees will be used for improvements that benefit the City’s
transportation system overall, such as additional buses to increase frequency, improved
walking routes and new bike lanes.”3 The provision that the City as a whole will achieve no net
new trips by 2030, but that individual projects will not be required to generate no net new
trips, has created some confusion and concern among Santa Monica residents as the LUCE is
implemented.
1. Does the system include an annual limit on non-residential approvals? If so, how is
that set? Changed? Enforced?
No. Santa Monica’s growth management program resembles a performance measure,
rather than an annual limit, and the City is still developing the zoning ordinance that will
implement the program set forth in its General Plan.
2 City of Santa Monica, Transportation Impact Fee Nexus Study (Final), April 2012. Page 1-3. Available online at
http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Transportation/Developers/Santa-Monica-Nexus-
Study.pdf
3 City of Santa Monica, Land Use and Circulation Element, July 2010. Page 4.0-12. Available online at
http://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Plans/General-Plan/Land-Use-and-Circulation-
Element.pdf
Page 5
December 2, 2014
Memo RE: Annual Limit on Office/R&D
2. Does the system include a competitive point system pitting projects against each
other? Are any categories of project exempted (e.g. certain type of industry, projects
under 10k sf)? How much flexibility is there?
It does not appear that Santa Monica envisions projects competing against each other
for allocations. Instead, projects that cannot achieve the “No Net New Trips” goal on
their own can pay into a fund for investments that will offset their trips.
San Francisco
San Francisco’s Downtown Plan dates from 1985 and included the City’s first annual cap on
office development, which was intended as a temporary measure. This original office cap was
modified and extended by the voters when Proposition M was adopted in 1986. The annual
growth limit is codified in Section 320-25 of the City’s Zoning Code and from time to time, the
City’s Planning Commission has adopted implementing policies and procedures.
1. Does the system include an annual limit on approvals? If so, how is that set? Changed?
Enforced?
San Francisco has two office caps, one for small projects and one for larger ones. The
“small” cap is 75,000 square feet per year and applies to projects between 25,000 and
50,000 square feet. The “large” cap is 875,000 square feet per year and applies to
projects over 50,000 square feet.
The two annual office limits were set by the voters and cannot be changed except with
voter approval, although the Planning Commission has been able to adopt implementing
policies and procedures as needed.
Unused allocations roll forward indefinitely, and the annual cap has only been a
constraint on development in periods like the dot com boom, when new office
development proposals exceeded the available allocation. In the current tech boom,
San Francisco is once again in this situation and the Planning Department has started
discussions about policies and procedures to implement the annual limit.
2. Does the system include a competitive point system pitting projects against each
other? Are there any categories of project exempted (e.g. certain type of industry,
projects under 10k sf)? How much flexibility is there?
Prop M itself did not include a competitive system, but the City Planning Commission
has had to establish procedures to compare and select among projects when the
number of projects exceed the available allocation. For example, in the 1990s, the City
conducted a “beauty contest” in which large office projects competed with each other
for the annual allocation. Each application was subject to analysis and environmental
Page 6
December 2, 2014
Memo RE: Annual Limit on Office/R&D
review, and the Planning Commission compared the projects to each other before
approving one or more. Applicants whose projects were not approved had the choice to
either request continuance to the next evaluation period, or to have their projects
denied. The Planning Department has recently begun discussing implementation of a
revised competitive process, which is expected to focus on “good planning” issues such
as proximity to transit and housing displacement rather than aesthetics or public
benefits. In fact, Prop M prohibits the City from considering monetary contributions in
any competition, by stating that “Payments, other than those provided for under
applicable ordinances, which may be made to a transit or housing fund of the City, shall
not be considered.”
Office projects less than 25,000 square feet are exempted from San Francisco’s annual
limit, as are City projects. State, Federal, Port, and Redevelopment Agency projects are
not exempt, and reduce the allocation available for private development projects.
Page 7
December 2, 2014
Memo RE: Annual Limit on Office/R&D
Attachment B -
CITY OF PALO ALTO
MEMORANDUM
TO: HILLARY GITELMAN,
Director, Planning & Community Environment
FROM: ROLAND RIVERA,
Land Use Analyst DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
AGENDA DATE: January 26, 2015 ID#: 5404
SUBJECT: Background information and data sets associated with establishment of an
annual limit on office/R&D development.
Per your request, the following data analysis describes the data sets regarding non-residential
development that are available to inform discussions of an “annual limit” on office/R&D. The analysis
presents two data sets: one grew out of Policy L-8 of our current Comprehensive Plan and the other
derives from Santa Clara County’s Congestion Management Program (CMP).
Key element of the approved work program for the Comprehensive Plan Update involve establishing
baseline conditions utilizing new development data and identifying a realistic growth rate for
development through 2030. Understanding the details and some of the limitations of the Commercial
Growth Limit specified in the Comprehensive Plan Policy L-8 data set may be useful in both endeavors.
Another, more straightforward, data set is derived from the City’s annual report to the Santa Clara
County Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). The CMP’s Annual Land Use Monitoring Report requires
that Member Agencies provide the VTA with information on all development projects approved/entitled
during the fiscal year.
Please review the following background information and summaries on the data sets and let me know if
you have any questions.
Thank you.
1989 Citywide Study and the Comprehensive Plan Policy L-8 Data
A Citywide Study adopted in 1989 was an important summation of the numerous planning studies that
were undertaken by the City in the 1980's. The focus of these studies was to address non-residential
development and ways to improve the provision of housing and the jobs/housing imbalance. At the
time, the City was experiencing commercial growth but residential growth was very limited.
The 1989 Citywide Study divided the City's non-residential areas into nine analysis areas (1989 Citywide
Study Area Map), which were subsequently adopted as Map L-6 in the current Comprehensive Plan. The
development potential for Palo Alto identified in the Citywide Study was 3,257,900 square feet;
however, that development potential did not include some Planned Community zones and public
facilities such as City Offices and the Veteran's Administration Hospital, which were termed “not-
monitored areas.”
In 1996, the City Council asked the Policy and Services Committee to study the issue of Citywide non-
residential development "limit" for the nine analysis areas and determine how to incorporate thelimit
into the Comprehensive Plan. On April 1996, the City Council approved the Policy and Services
Committee's recommendation to include the Citywide Study's overall future development square
footage within Policy L-8 and Program L-7 into the Comprehensive Plan.
POLICY L-8:
Maintain a limit of 3,257,900 square feet of new non-residential development for the nine planning areas
evaluated in the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study, with the understanding that the City
Council may make modifications for specific properties that allow modest additional growth. Such
additional growth will count towards the 3,257,900 maximum.
PROGRAM L-7:
Establish a system to monitor the rate of non-residential development and traffic conditions related to
both residential and non-residential development at key intersections including those identified in the
1989 Citywide Study and additional intersections identified in the Comprehensive Plan EIR. If the rate of
growth reaches the point where the citywide development maximum might be reached, the City will
reevaluate development policies and regulations.
Policy L-8 aims to "Maintain a limit of 3,257,900 square feet of new non-residential development for the
nine planning areas evaluated in the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation Study," and Program L-
7 implements Policy L-8 by establishing a system to monitor the rate of non-residential development in
the areas identified in the 1989 Citywide Land Use and Transportation study. Importantly, Program L-7
calls for monitoring non-residential development within the nine planning area boundaries but does not
distinguish between the different types of non-residential development within those areas.
Attachment A presents the annual monitoring data for all types of non-residential development
collected pursuant to Program L-7 from 1989 to the present and total square footages are shown below.
In both cases, the non-residential square footage is net floor area and does not include floor area that
replaces demolished floor area.1
Table 1, Non-Residential Development Potential in the Nine Planning Areas per Policy L-8
Development Potential per
Comprehensive Plan Policy L-8
Net square feet increase
1989 to December 2014 for the
nine planning areas*
Remaining in Growth Monitoring
Development Potential
3,257,900 1,400,367 1,857,533
*Non-Residential net change in square feet based on Planning Entitlements from 1989 -2014. Data excludes Mayfield Development
Agreement Projects which demolishes approximately 323k of non-residential square feet and replaces 300k of demolished square feet into
Stanford Research Park
Source: Planning and Community Environment, December 22, 2014
As shown in Attachment A, when non-residential development projects currently in the entitlement
process (“pipeline projects”) are included, an additional 139,524 non-residential square feet could be
entitled or approved within the nine planning areas, affecting the totals as shown below.
Table 2, Non-Residential Development Potential in the Nine Planning Areas per Policy L-8 with
“Pipeline Projects”
Development Potential After
Citywide Study
Net square feet increase
1989 to December 2014 for the
nine planning areas including
Pipeline Projects*
Remaining in Growth Monitoring
Development Potential
3,257,900 1,539,891 1,718,009
*Non-Residential net change in square feet based on Planning Entitlements from 1989 -2014 and current pipeline projects. Data excludes
Mayfield Development Agreement Projects which demolishes approximately 323k of non-residential square feet and replaces 300k of
demolished square feet into Stanford Research Park.
Source: Planning and Community Environment, December 22, 2014
As noted before, there are areas within the nine planning areas that are considered “not monitored”
including some Planned Community zones and public facilities. Approvals within the “not monitored”
areas currently amount to approximately 1million square feet which includes expansion of the Veterans
Administration Hospital, Palo Alto Medical Foundation, Stanford Cancer Research Center and other
facilities identified as “not monitored” in Map L-6. One of these “not monitored” areas includes the
Stanford University Medical Center (SUMC) facility. On June 6, 2011, Council amended Policy L-8 to
include language exempting the Medical Center’s expansion from the policy and amended Map L-6 to
expand the “not-monitored” area to be coterminous with the boundaries of the “Hospital District”
zoning district. The 1.3 million square feet entitled SUMC expansion is not reflected in Attachment A or
1 Attachment A is an updated version of the Table 8-3 in the August 29, 2014 Existing Conditions Report. An error
has been corrected in data for years 2001, 2008, 2012, and 2013 and “pipeline” information has been updated as
described further later in this memo.
Table 8-3 of the Existing Conditions Report because build-out and occupancy is expected in the future. If
it had been included, the 1.3 million square feet SUMC expansion would be listed as ‘not-monitored’ in
the year 2011, when the development agreement was approved.
Assuming all pipeline projects are entitled, the net square feet increase within the last 27 years (1989-
2015) could be approximately 1.5 million square feet or an average annual increase of approximately
57,000 square feet per year. The following table details average annual non-residential growth within
the nine planning areas.
Table 3: Annual Average Non-Residential Growth within the Nine Planning Areas per Policy L-8
Years Total Non-Residential net square feet
increase
Average Annual Growth
(total/# of years)
1989 – 2015 1,539,891 57,033
1989 – 2007 721,074 37,951
2008 – 2015 818,817 102,352
Source: Planning and Community Environment, December 22, 2014
Projects converting non-residential to residential uses, such as 901 San Antonio Ave, 901 and 1101 East
Meadow Blvd, Hyatt Rickey’s (4219 El Camino Real), contributed to the significantly lower non-
residential development from 1998-2007.
Policy L-8, Program L-7, and Attachment A can inform discussions regarding the amount and pace of
non-residential development, but there are significant limitations to the data which should be
understood. First, as noted above, Policy L-8 and the monitoring program do not distinguish between
various types of non-residential development, so the square footages presented include retail and
medical offices as well as general office/R&D. Secondly, monitoring is limited to the nine planning areas
as defined by Map L-6, and the City increasingly has seen some development outside of these areas. For
example, the project at 441 Page Mill Road which will be considered by the City Council in January, falls
outside of the nine planning areas and thus is not included in the “pipeline” numbers presented here.
Source: Planning and Community Environment, December 22, 2014
The CMP dataset can inform the discussions regarding non-residential development, and does not have
some of the disadvantages of the Policy L-8 data described above. The CMP dataset contains citywide
development information, and is collected by fiscal year as opposed to calendar year. But it does
provide useful information about different non-residential land use categories.
Table 5, below summarizes the key points of the Policy L-8 and the CMP datasets.
Table 5: Summary of Policy L-8 and CMP Datasets
Policy L-8 Dataset CMP Dataset
Timeline 1989-2014
plus 2015 pipeline projects
FY 2001-FY 2014
plus 2015 pipeline projects
Geography Nine Planning Areas as shown on
Map L-6 Citywide
Non-Residential Land Use
Categories
Total of all Non-Residential
square footage
Contains information on
Different Non-Residential Land
Use Categories (e.g. retail,
office/R&D, Hotel, etc)
Exemptions
Areas within the nine planning
areas that are considered “not
monitored” including some
Planned Community zones and
public facilities.
None
Source: Planning and Community Environment, December 22, 2014
"U
U
B
D
I
N
F
O
U
#
20
1
3
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
a
n
d
C
o
n
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
4
Pa
g
e
1
o
f
1
AN
N
U
A
L
L
A
N
D
-
U
S
E
M
O
N
I
T
O
R
I
N
G
S
U
M
M
A
R
Y
Me
m
b
e
r
A
g
e
n
c
y
:
Ci
t
y
o
f
P
a
l
o
A
l
t
o
Mo
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
P
e
r
i
o
d
:
07
/
0
1
/
1
2
-
0
6
/
3
0
/
1
3
1
2
3
4
5
TA
Z
*
L-
U
NU
M
B
E
R
O
F
D
W
E
L
L
I
N
G
U
N
I
T
S
NU
M
B
E
R
O
F
CO
M
M
E
R
C
I
A
L
/
I
N
D
U
S
T
R
I
A
L
SQ
U
A
R
E
F
E
E
T
NU
M
B
E
R
O
F
A
C
R
E
S
(Z
o
n
i
n
g
C
h
a
n
g
e
O
n
l
y
)
3a
3b
3
c
4a
4
b
4
c
5a
5
b
5
c
Nu
m
b
e
r
Cl
a
s
s
Ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
Re
m
o
v
e
d
Ne
t
A
d
d
e
d
Ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
Re
m
o
v
e
d
Ne
t
A
d
d
e
d
Ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
Re
m
o
v
e
d
Ne
t
A
d
d
e
d
42
9
C3
12
7
,
0
6
3
22
8
,
9
8
6
-1
0
1
,
9
2
3
43
1
C5
19
,
9
6
0
0
19
,
9
6
0
43
1
R2
2
0
2
43
7
C5
14
,
5
6
7
4,
5
8
8
9,
9
7
9
44
3
P3
31
3
5
3
24
6
7
8
66
7
5
45
8
C5
0
67
,
0
0
0
-6
7
,
0
0
0
45
8
M2
11
6
,
0
0
0
0
11
6
,
0
0
0
46
5
C3
0
1.
5
7
-1
.
5
7
46
5
P2
1.
5
7
0
1.
5
7
46
5
P2
51
,
9
4
8
0
51
,
9
4
8
46
6
R2
3
3
0
49
9
P1
2,
3
1
9
0
2,
3
1
9
51
4
M1
5,
6
7
2
1,
9
4
1
3,
7
3
1
51
7
R1
0
0.
6
2
-0
.
6
2
51
7
C2
3,
2
5
0
2,
5
2
2
72
8
0.
6
2
0
0.
6
2
52
0
C5
0
3,
2
0
0
-3
,
2
0
0
52
0
C6
22
,
9
5
7
0
22
,
9
5
7
52
2
C5
27
7
5
0
27
7
5
52
2
R1
1
0
1
52
7
P1
4,
1
3
2
0
4,
1
3
2
53
5
P2
0
50
,
0
0
0
-5
0
,
0
0
0
53
5
C6
50
,
0
0
0
0
50
,
0
0
0
CM
P
A
n
n
u
a
l
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
C
o
n
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
Ju
n
e
2
0
1
3
Attachment D -
Betten, Zariah
From: ilyanep@gmail.com on behalf of Ilya Nepomnyashchiy <ilya@ilyanep.com>
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 5:09 PM
To: Council, City
Subject: Comment on Agenda Item
To the Palo Alto City Council:
My name is Ilya Nepomnyashchiy, and I currently work in Downtown Palo Alto. I'm writing to comment on
tonight's meeting agenda item #11, the action items discussed in staff report ID #5518.
I would like to support approaches similar to that proposed by Palo Alto Forward. It seems that the desire of all residents and employees in Palo Alto is to reduce traffic, reduce the parking strain, reduce our environmental
impact and preserve the beautiful neighborhood feeling that we all know and love in downtown.
Unfortunately, a hard cap on new office space is not properly aligning incentives for these desires to be realized. Office space is more profitable for developers than, say, residential space, so a cap on office space development will simply ensure that office space is built at exactly the cap every year. Under such a cap, no consideration
will be made as to where the employees in those new offices will be living or how they will be traveling to
work. They will likely have to drive, causing traffic downtown, and park, causing a parking strain.
However, this is a wonderful opportunity to align incentives and build a Palo Alto of the future. Instead of hard caps, we should use established or new metrics that measure new trips to these new offices. A new office space
construction should either be able to show a reasonable amount of residential space included for the number of
workers who will work there (either in the same building as a mixed-use development or nearby). This way, the
neighborhood can continue to welcome new workers and new innovators while also giving them a place to live, rather than driving them to surrounding neighborhoods and even as far as Gilroy.
As someone who is currently priced out of Palo Alto and forced to live in Mountain View, I strongly feel that
this plan would ensure that new residences are commensurate with new office production, whereas a hard cap
would not.
Thank you for your time,
Ilya Nepomnyashchiy
1
Betten, Zariah
From: Drenner, Kellie <kellie.drenner@sap.com>
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 5:42 PM
To: Council, City; Clerk, City; Holman, Karen; Keene, James; Gitelman, Hillary
Subject: 2/9/15 - City of Palo Alto Council Meeting - Comments
Attachments: SAP_Annual Growth Limit (3).pdf
Dear Mayor Holman and the Members of the City Council:
Please find attached comments in response to Agenda Item 11 – Discussion and Direction to Staff Regarding
Establishment of an Office/R&D Annual Growth Limit.
If you have any questions, do not hesitate to reach out to me.
Best regards,
Kellie Drenner
Kellie Drenner
Silicon Valley Marketing and Community Engagement
SAP
C – 408‐612‐9348
E – kellie.drenner@sap.com
Follow SAP Silicon Valley on Twitter
1
SAP America
3410 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94304
T +1 650.849.4000
F +1 650.849.4200
www.sap.com
February 9, 2015
Mayor Holman and Members of the City Council
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Ave
Palo Alto, CA 94301
RE: The Establishment of an Office/R&D Annual Growth Limit
Dear Mayor Holman and the Members of the City Council:
SAP has become aware of the discussion this evening about an annual growth limit and we want to write
to express that we are concerned. While SAP does not have imminent plans to add square footage, this
tool for controlling growth in the Research Park would have detrimental impacts by eliminating the
predictability and certainty around how projects are handled in the Stanford Research Park. Until now,
we have understood how to work within the existing zoning in our efforts to modernize our Palo Alto
facilities when we have undertaken such efforts.
SAP is highly motivated by the principles of sustainability, and so, we often invest in our real estate in
order to improve our facilities' sustainable features. Having certainly that we can grow
to accommodate such efforts or expand our Palo Alto presence is essential for our success in this City.
Flexibility is critical if SAP and our fellow Research Park companies are to remain competitive and
thriving here in Palo Alto.
We respectfully request that you reconsider the proposed annual growth limits. Thank you for taking
our point of view into account. Please feel free to discuss our concerns with us further.
Sincerely,
Dwain Christensen
Head of Facilities – Bay Area Region
Director of Workplace Strategies
Global Facility Management - Americas
SAP America – Palo Alto
T: +1 650-320-3074 F: +1 650-433-5203
Betten, Zariah
From: Alusic, Lorin <lorin.alusic@hp.com>
Sent: Monday, February 09, 2015 3:46 PM
To: Holman, Karen; Council, City
Cc: Clerk, City; Keene, James; Gitelman, Hillary; jcunneen@calstrat.com
Subject: HP Comments - 2/9/15 Agenda Item #11 - Office/R&D Growth Limits
Attachments: HP_Comments_PA_Holman_OfficeGrowthLimits_2015_LH.pdf
Dear Mayor Holman and Members of the City Council:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide HP’s comments on the proposed office/R&D annual growth limit. Please find
HP’s comments attached.
While discussing the issue at tonight’s City Council meeting, please consider HP’s concerns.
Should you have any questions about our comments or concerns, do not hesitate to contact me directly.
Lorin Alusic Director, Western Region
State and Local Government Relations Corporate Affairs
lorin.alusic@hp.com
M +1 202-256-9198 O +1 650-857-6099
Hewlett-Packard Company 3000 Hanover St.
Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA
1
From: Hamilton Hitchings
To: Council, City
Cc: Keene, James
Subject: Office Building Zoning Follow-on Thoughts
Date: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 10:18:42 AM
Dear City Council Members,
Thank you for a thoughtful and productive dicussion on limiting office building
development last night. I spoke strongly in favor of limiting office building
development and enforcing zoning codes. After listening to everyone speak I have
the following additional thoughts:
1. Exempt Stanford Research Park or at most make their zoning based on car trips
per day. Most of the residents concerns including mine are primarily about
downtown University and California areas and to a lesser extent the El Camino
corridor.
2. Make a different limit for large office buildings and a separate one for small offices
and businesses in order to help small businesses.
3. I worry that a 35,000 to 45,000 square foot limit per year for Palo Alto is still much
too high, especially for large office buildings.
4. Tech job growth is limited by housing (not the ability to site office buildings)
according to an economist who spoke recently at Palo Alto Forward
5. Prevent retail to office conversions somehow
6. I would strongly prefer a beauty contest over first come first serve for choosing
office buildings as that would increase the quality of projects, something that has
been sorely lacking.
7. Beauty contest criteria could be scorecarded according to the following criteria:
* Whether they conform to ALL zoning rules
* Their parking and traffic impacts
* Their architectual appearance (so far very lacking in newer large projects. Note,
the architectual review board, in my humble opinion, is currently failing the residents
when approving these large, ugly, impactful office building projects).
* Are they mixed use (especially if they provide apartments or space for small
businesses)
Hamilton Hitchings
212 Heather Lane, Palo Alto
Duveneck Neighborhood
1-650-862-9657 (mobile)
Betten, Zariah
From: Rock, Steve
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2015 10:56 AM
To: Council, City
Subject: cost/benefit office buildings
Dear Folks, I was at the Office Building study session last night and did not speak. Some people stated that
there were more monetary costs to the city (for services) for an office building than income from the
taxes it produced. I think there are important additions to that.
1)SCHOOLS: While the city may have costs, (fire, police, road repair, etc.) the school district has no additional costs and lots of benefits in terms of taxes. In making your decisions it is very important to
consider the impact on the school district. When I moved to Palo Alto 38 years ago it was claimed
that the schools were excellent because of money from all the industry in Palo Alto. (That was before
Prop 13, see below). So because of the jobs/housing imbalance Palo Alto had more school money
per pupil.
2) PROP 13 altered the ratio between property tax from business/residential from 0.6/0.4 to 0.4/0.6
statewide. I don't know the numbers in Palo Alto. I read fairly recently that many businesses were
able to grandfather their property tax back to 1978 levels by various real estate scams of keeping
nominal ownership in the hands of the original owners or their descendents while the actual users of the property changed. Thus adjacent land was taxed at a very different rate.
a) If you decide to limit office development, one consideration of where it is done should include
where the taxes will be the greatest.
b) Palo Alto should lobby the state to repeal Prop 13 regarding property tax on business property.
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
At the meeting, several people spoke about building housing instead of commercial
buildings. However, the original "rebellion" against development a year or so ago, involved senior
HOUSING. Residential development creates traffic problems also as people leave their homes to go
to work/school. It also decreases the amount of money per pupil in the school coffers.
-Steve
Stephen Rock
3872 Nathan Way
Palo Alto CA 94303 ser84@columbia.edu
1