HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 3610 Memo1
To: City Council
From: Parks and Recreation Commission
Date: May 28, 2013
Subject: El Camino Park Re-Design
The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the park re-design presented to the
Commission by Staff and the architect on 3/26/13. That design - and our focus - was in the area
of the park bounded by El Camino on the west, Alma on the north, the railroad tracks on the
east, and the end of the outfield grass beyond the softball/baseball field on the south.
Summary
Consistent with Commissioner comments that evening, the El Camino Park Ad Hoc Committee
concluded that the newly proposed design does not meet appropriate standards for all users in
a Palo Alto park. It is a design of compromise which does not work. The inclusion of a dog park
and a space reserved as a possible location for the Julia Morgan building forces too many
elements into too little space. The design presented simply has NO passive space for use by
citizens. It is consumed by sports fields, reserved space for the Julia Morgan Building, parking
lots, and a dog park compressed into such a small space that the functionality of each use is
diminished. The commission recommends proceeding with the previously approved design.
However, if Council does not accept this recommendation and requires a contingent land bank
for the Julia Morgan building, some elements have to be removed and/or reduced in size to
create a minimum amount of open space. There are only a few options: the dog park, the
soccer field, the multi-use field (baseball/softball/lacrosse), or some parking.
The commission reiterates the three (3) following recommendations:
1. We recommend against moving the Julia Morgan building to the park. In addition to
negatively impacting other park uses, the addition of the building without a plan for
how it will be used impedes appropriate facility planning for access and parking
requirements as well as for management, operations and staffing costs. Furthermore, in
order to reserve space in the park for the Julia Morgan building, the proposed redesign
shifts the soccer field substantially to the north (Attachment A – March 26, 2013 Staff
Report to the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding El Camino Park Re-Design),
resulting in insufficient usable space surrounding the soccer field for teams and
spectators, and loss of much of the open space in the original design.
Parks and Recreation Commission
MEMORANDUM
2
2. The new Baylands Golf Course should be given serious consideration for the new
location of the Julia Morgan building. The historic building would have very high
visibility as the only structure in the open space of the new Baylands course and would
retain its historic purpose as a public gathering space. The building would enhance - and
be compatible with - the beauty of the new golf course design and replace the run-down
clubhouse/restaurant building currently on the site. And, significantly compared to
other possible locations, the building will have a specific and needed purpose, be self-
supporting and be used extensively by Palo Alto residents and visitors.
3. We recommend against locating a dog park within the main body of the park.
Environmental considerations have precluded locating the dog park across Alma in the
eucalyptus grove, as in the original design. That was a large, self-contained area
separate from all other park improvements. Now that this is not an option, forcing it
into the originally designed open space compromises the one true/dedicated passive
space in the approved design. Further, we believe it is best to evaluate the optimal
locations for additional dog parks in the city via the upcoming Palo Alto Parks Master
Plan instead of on an ad hoc basis.
If the contingent land bank for the Julia Morgan building is adopted, despite the
recommendations above, these are the consequences:
A. The full-size artificial turf soccer field with lights should be reduced to a mid-size field
in order to accommodate players, spectators, and sufficient constituent flow around the
field. The primary users of mid-size fields are under age 12 and there is little demand for
artificial turf or lighted fields by this age group. Therefore, the soccer field should
become a mid-sized grass field (not artificial turf) with no lighting. This is a bad
outcome because:
It does not meet growing demand for full-size lighted artificial turf fields by
adults and older youth.
It does not meet the demand for U12 because it is not a walkable or bike-able
location.
We would be forced to sacrifice the opportunity to add a full-size lighted artificial
turf field to the City’s athletic field inventory at a location that could
accommodate such a field and is appropriate for players over age 12.
B. The dog park should be eliminated, so there is at least a bit of open space. Per the
original design, place ample picnic tables and benches within the open space.
Please consider our three recommendations instead, for the best use of El Camino Park space.
Attachment A – March 26, 2013 Staff Report to the Parks and Recreation Commission regarding
El Camino Park Re-Design
Community Services Department
MEMORANDUM
To: Parks & Recreation Commission
From: Daren Anderson
Date: March 26, 2013
Subject: El Camino Park – Update
Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Parks and Recreation Commission review the attached updated design for El
Camino Park (Attachment A). The new design incorporates all the elements of the previous Commission
and Council approved design, however there are some changes in the layout which will be explained in
the discussion section of this staff report. Staff will return to a subsequent Parks and Recreation
Commission meeting with a Park Improvement Ordinance for this updated design for El Camino Park for
their consideration and recommendation to Council.
Background
Since June 2010, staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission (Commission) have discussed possible
park improvements at El Camino Park that could coincide with construction of the Utilities Department’s
El Camino Park Emergency Water Reservoir Project (CIP WS-08002). On June 13, 2011, Council
reviewed and approved the park improvement design (as then recommended by the Commission), and
instructed staff to add a dog park and additional parking to the design; and then to return to the
Commission for final approval.
On September 27, 2011, the Commission approved the design of the project (Attachment B). The
Commission, however, recommended that staff look to other funding sources to pay for the dog exercise
area and the expanded parking lot.
On April 23, 2012, Council approved the design including the dog park and expanded parking lot.
Discussion
After Council approved the design and the funding for the El Camino Park Project, City staff met with an
environmental permitting consultant (Thomas Reid and Associates) to discuss any required mitigations
concerning the dog run. Staff was informed that because of the proximity to San Francisquito Creek,
which contains steelhead trout habitat, there is a required 100’ set-back from the Creek. This set back
requirement couldn’t be waived, even if the only amenities were a chain link fence to keep the dogs
enclosed. The setback requirement renders the proposed site unusable for a dog park.
An alternative site for the dog run has been proposed adjacent to the north soccer/lacrosse synthetic turf
field. The dog run will be split – one 7,500 sqft area for small dogs; and one 12,500 sqft area for large
dogs. This is new proposed site is approximately 4.6 acres (the dog park in the previous design was .5
acres).
The other factor that required staff to change the design of the park was the uncertainty associated with a
project at the adjacent property -27 University Avenue. The historic Hostess House designed by Julia
Morgan is located at this site. The plans for the 27 University Avenue project haven’t been finalized, but
relocating the historic Julia Morgan building was one of the possible outcomes of the project. An
alternative location for the building hasn’t been finalized, but one of the locations being considered is El
Camino Park.
Rather than wait for the 27 University Project to be reach a level of design that would inform staff if the
Julia Morgan Building would need to be relocated and where it would be moved to; Siegfried (the
consultant doing the design for El Camino Park) has created an updated design with an expanded
overflow parking area that would allow room for the Julia Morgan building in the parking lot area, while
still incorporating all the previous design elements. If the building is never moved to El Camino Park the
extra space could remain additional or overflow parking.
The Commission and Council both highlighted the importance of increasing the parking at El Camino
Park. The existing El Camino Park parking lot had 42 parking spaces (which do not meet current City
design standards). The Council and Commission approved design allowed for 68 parking spaces and an
unloading zone. The revised design allows room for Julia Morgan Building and still provides 58 parking
spaces (41 standard parking stalls, 6 ADA stalls, and 11 compact stalls). If the Julia Morgan Building is
not relocated to El Camino Park, there would be 103 parking stalls (83 standard parking stalls, 2 ADA
stalls, and 18 compact stalls).
Timeline
See Attachment C
Resource Impacts
All elements of the project, including design, are coverered completely by the Council approved Park
Development Impact Fee funding, the General Fund CIP for the restroom, and the contributions the
Utilities Department were required to make due to the reservoir project.
While the Commission isn’t being asked for review or approval of the funding of the project, a detailed
construction cost estimate has been included for background information in Attachment D.
Policy Implications
The proposed park improvements are consistent with Policy C-26 of the Community Services element of
the Comprehensive Plan that encourages maintaining park facilities as safe and healthy community assets;
and Policy C-22 that encourages new community facilities to have flexible functions to ensure
adaptability to the changing needs of the community.
The proposed project is consistent with the goals of the 2002 Athletic Fields Report.
This project is also consistent with Parks and Recreation Commission policy that staff carefully consider
the construction of dog exercise facilities for large neighborhood or regional parks when designing park
improvements.
Environmental Review
The Utilities Department’s El Camino Park Reservoir Project is subject to environmental review under
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An EIR has been completed for this
project in accordance with the CEQA requirements. An addendum to the EIR will be prepared to
incorporate the additional park improvements associated with the proposed design.
ATTACHMENTS
A – El Camino Park Design updated March 2013
B – September 27, 2011 Parks and Recreation Staff Report and Park Design
C—El Camino Park Schedule
D—Construction Cost Estimate
Community Services Department
MEMORANDUM
To: Parks & Recreation Commission
From: Daren Anderson
Date: January 24, 2012
Subject: El Camino Park – Recommendation to Council
Recommendation
Staff recommends that City Council:
1) Accept CSD staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission’s recommendation for the
approval of the final design for park improvements at El Camino Park, including pathways, a
synthetic turf playing field, landscaping, an expanded parking lot, a dog exercise area, and
other amenities (Attachment A); and
2) Accept CSD staff recommendation that $2,394,310 of Park Development Impact Fees
(impact fees) be used to fund staff’s final list of improvements to El Camino Park
(Attachment B); and
3) Defer the Council and Park and Recreation Commission’s recommended dog exercise area
until an environmental assessment can be completed to Stanford University’s approval, and
when funding can be identified and secured.
Executive Summary
Since June 2010, staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission (Commission) have discussed possible
park improvements at El Camino Park that could coincide with construction of the Utilities Department’s
El Camino Park Emergency Water Reservoir Project (CIP WS-08002). On June 13, 2011, Council
reviewed and approved the park improvement design (as then recommended by the Commission), and
instructed staff to add a dog park and additional parking to the design; and then to return to the
Commission for final approval.
At their September 27, 2011 regular meeting, the Commission approved the revised design of the project.
The Commission, however, felt that the $2,622,010 cost estimate for the project would not leave enough
in the Park Development Impact Fee account for future needs (the current impact fee balance is
$2,813,245). The Commission recommended that staff look to other funding sources to pay for the dog
exercise area ($207,000), the expanded parking lot ($450,000) and 10% contingency for those two
features ($65,700).
Staff recommends that Council approve the final proposed design and the expenditure of $2,394,310 to
fund the list of improvements. Staff understands and appreciates the Commission’s concern about using a
significant portion of the impact fee balance, but given the critical need for parking to accommodate
increased park usage, staff has included the expanded parking lot in the recommendation for impact fee
funding. Since the Commission felt that the dog park was a non-essential improvement, staff recommends
deferring this portion of the project until a future date when the impact fee balance has replenished; and
an environmental assessment and a finalized design can be funded and completed to the satisfaction of
Stanford University (landowner).
Staff recognizes that there are recommendations for capital improvement funding in the Infrastructure
Blue Ribbon Committee Report, and staff doesn’t want to further impact the already heavily committed
capital improvement budget by recommending new capital improvement projects funded by the General
Fund.
Background
The Project, which began with construction on the Utilities reservoir and ancillary buildings, has created a
unique opportunity for the City to leverage time and resources to improve several areas of the popular
park. Since June 2010, the Parks and Recreation Commission has discussed park design improvements at
nine regular meetings and one special on-site meeting at the park.
● June 22, 2010- The Utilities Department presented to the Commission an update on the El Camino Park
Reservoir Project. The Commission agreed with staff this was an opportunity to improve the park and
significantly expand recreational opportunities in the north part of Palo Alto.
● June 29, 2010- A special Commission meeting was held at the park. Staff, Commissioners, and
members of the public brain-stormed ideas for possible improvements for the park. These ideas included
synthetic turf fields, new public bathroom, improved pathways and many other creative suggestions such
as an outdoor volleyball court or a BMX bike track.
● July 27, 2010- The Commission made a motion to ask staff to submit its list of improvement ideas to
Siegfried Engineering Inc., the landscape architect firm designing the Project, to evaluate feasibility and
possible design and construction costs.
● September 28, 2010- Many of the Commission’s suggested park improvements were included in the
draft park project design. The Commission offered additional feedback on the draft design. The
Commission sent a memo to the City Council recommending that Council find a way to fund park
improvements at El Camino Park as opposed to simply rebuilding the park as it was prior to the reservoir
project.
● October 26, 2010- Siegfried presented the Commission with an update on the conceptual design of the
Project. The Commission provided additional input on the design.
● January 25, 2011- Siegfried presented the Commission with five refined design options for their
consideration. The Commission asked to see a combination of three of the refined designs, and
highlighted the importance of expanding public parking to accommodate significantly expanded field use.
● February 22, 2011- Staff presented a conceptual design incorporating the Commission’s feedback, and
presented two options for the use of impact fee to fund the improvements (discussed in detail below).
● On June 13, 2011, staff presented the Council with a recommendation for using impact fees to fund
improvements at El Camino Park (CMR 1746; Attachment C). Council approved the motion 8:1 (Price
opposed) of using $1,420,500 of impact fees for the Commission’s and staff’s recommended
improvements at El Camino Park with five amendments. Council instructed staff to:
1. Pursue connectivity at the north (across Alma Street to the pathway) and south end of the park
(past the train station) for pedestrians and bicycles. (See the bike/pedestrian page on Attachment
B)
2. Return to the Parks and Recreation Commission for final design approval. (The Commission
reviewed and approved the final design recommendation on September 27, 2011.)
3. Incorporate bike racks into the final design. (Fifteen bike racks have been added to the design
(each rack supports two bikes)
4. Return within 90 days with an alternative to the current PF zoning that would be more restrictive
or restricted to recreational uses so as to create a disincentive for other uses in the future. (Staff
has confirmed that the PF zoning is the most restrictive zoning available for this land.)
5. Incorporate into the final design some type of dog exercise area and provide more details on
public parking to ensure that there will be no overflow parking into the neighborhood. (A dog
park and additional parking are in the design; however, staff proposes deferring the final design
and construction of the dog exercise area portion until impact fee funds have replenished and an
environmental assessment is completed to address Stanford University’s environmental
concerns.)
● June 21, 2011- Staff returned to the Commission to discuss the options for dog exercise area locations
as directed by Council on June 13, 2011. Staff presented the Commission with five options for possible
dog exercise area locations for their consideration. The Commission voted 3:2 to recommend installing a
dog exercise area in the north side of the El Camino Park between Palo Alto Avenue/Alma Street and San
Francisquito Creek in an unimproved section of the El Camino Park.
● July 26, 2011- Staff returned to the Commission to discuss the options for additional parking as directed
by Council on June 13, 2011. Staff presented five options for their consideration. The Commission
concurred with staff and chose to recommend Option E, which added an additional 29 parking spaces (for
a total of 71 spaces). The Commission highlighted the need to include improvements for convenient
passenger loading/unloading area into the parking lot design. (After adding the loading and unloading
area to the final parking lot design, there are an additional 26 parking spaces, for a total of 68 spaces.)
● September 27, 2011- Staff returned to the Commission to seek their recommendation to Council for the
final design (as directed by Council on June 13, 2011). The Commission stated that they support the
revised design; however, they felt that funding for the dog exercise area ($207,000 plus contingency) and
the expanded parking lot ($450,000 plus contingency) should come from some other source rather than
Park Development Impact fees. The Commission agreed that expanding the parking at El Camino is
critically important. They also noted that the dog exercise area is a nice feature, but not essential at this
time.
The cost of the final design including the dog exercise area and the expanded parking lot is $2,622,010.
The cost of the final design without the dog exercise area and expanded parking lot would be $1,899,310.
If the dog exercise area and the expanded parking lot were funded by other means, the impact fee balance
would be $913,935. (Sept. 27, 2011 Staff Report Attachment E)
Throughout these meetings the Commission raised questions and made comments about pedestrian/bike
access to the park, the replacement restroom location (specifically related to safety and access), tree
protection efforts, maximizing parking spaces to accommodate the expansion of field and recreational
use, fencing possibilities for a joint-use dog exercise area, and lighting improvements. In addition to the
Commission’s guidance on design features, Recreation staff has collected insight from various field user
groups (during the annual field booking process) regarding preferred field design features such as
synthetic turf, field size, and multi-use designs to accommodate growing interest in sports such as
lacrosse. This input provided direction for the current design of park improvements.
Discussion
Siegfried designers incorporated the Council’s, the Commission’s, and staff’s recommendations regarding
site features to create a site design for improvements at El Camino Park (Attachment A). The design
includes a synthetic turf soccer/lacrosse field on the north-end of the park, and a natural turf
softball/multi-use field on the south-end near the transit station. The recommended design includes an
expanded parking lot that adds 26 parking spaces and a new loading/unloading area to the existing
parking lot (total of 68 spaces), and a future dog exercise area.
Dog Exercise Area
The dog exercise area design allows for a fenced dog exercise area located in the undeveloped north side
of the El Camino Park next to San Francisquito Creek. There is an existing light pole in the area that
would provide use of the dog exercise area in the evening. The approximately .5 acre (about the size of
half a football field) dog run would have a wood chip base, benches, and a water fountain for humans and
a special spigot for dogs. Stanford University requires certain mitigations to ensure that the dog exercise
area will not contaminate San Francisquito Creek and trout habitat. The City would hire a consultant to
help ensure the dog exercise area design avoids runoff into the creek and other potential environmental
impacts.
Although the use of the northern most portion of El Camino Park appears to be an appropriate location for
a dog exercise area that can serve the needs of residents of North Palo Alto, because of its proximity to
protected riparian habitat, and serious funding limitations, staff does not recommend final design and
construction of the dog exercise area at this time.
The Commission argued that it would be better to save the balance of impact fee money for future City-
wide park needs. The Commission also felt that the dog exercise area is a desirable feature, but not a
critical need at El Camino Park. Staff looked at the possibility of funding the dog exercise area through
other means, including General Fund Capital Improvement Project (CIP) funds. Unfortunately, the
funding for CIP projects is extremely limited, and populated with higher priority needs such as replacing
the restroom at El Camino Park. Once funds are available and a final El Camino Park dog exercise area
design is created, staff will ensure that its final design compliments the other dog exercise areas in Palo
Alto at Hoover, Greer, and Mitchell Parks.
If Council opted to go beyond staff’s recommendation and fund the dog exercise area with impact fees,
the cost of the dog park would be $207,000 (plus contingency), which would make the total cost for all
the improvements to El Camino Park $2,622,010. This would leave a balance in the impact fees of only
$191,235.
El Camino Park Restrooms
The existing restroom at El Camino Park was built in 1940. The restroom is in very poor condition. The
restroom must be removed to accommodate the expanded parking lot and the synthetic turf field. The
design illustrates the new location of the restroom, which will be located towards the end of the parking
lot between the two fields. The new restroom will cost approximately $300,000. A new restroom cannot
be funded with impact fees, because impact fees cannot be used to replace or repair existing
infrastructure. Staff has submitted a separate CIP request for a new restroom at El Camino Park for fiscal
year 2013, which would allow for the restroom to be built at the same time as the other El Camino Park
improvements. There is also a JC Decaux automated public toilet (accommodates only one person at a
time) located in the undeveloped, southern most portion of the park near the Red Cross parking lot.
Other Design Elements
The design also includes a new decomposed granite exercise pathway with security lighting, mulch for
the non-turf areas, soccer catchment fencing, four picnic tables, a maintenance equipment storage shed,
and electric conduit and footings, which will allow for adding soccer field lighting at a future time
without damaging the synthetic turf. Fifteen bike racks have been added to the design (each rack supports
two bikes).
Tree Impacts
The current park design requires the removal of two sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) trees (size of
the two trees: 17.4’’ and 20.4’’ diameter at breast height -dbh) for the project, and the removal of one old
Monterey Pine tree for safety reasons. The project also requires relocating two small coastal redwood
trees (size of trees 2.2’’ and 2.3’’ dbh) in the park. Thirty-six new trees will be planted in the park as part
of the recommended design.
Trail Connectivity
Staff is pursuing trail connectivity at the north end of the park (across Palo Alto Avenue to the existing
multi-use pathway) and south end of the park (past the train station) for pedestrians and bicycles.
Planning and Transportation and Parks staff will hire a contractor to perform a traffic safety study to
confirm the best route for the connectivity at the north end of the park and the exact position of a safe
crosswalk on Alma Street. Staff is also working with Stanford University and MacArthur Park to improve
the pedestrian and bicycle connectivity at the south end of the park. Staff is requesting that a concrete
sidewalk be installed to allow for pedestrians and bicyclists to continue from the corner of University Ave
at El Camino Real across the front of the MacArthur Park Restaurant past the top of Circle Drive and
connect to the existing Class I multi-use trail that runs past the Palo Alto Medical Foundation and Palo
Alto High School. (See Page 6 of Attachment A for a map illustrating trail connectivity.)
Zoning Options
Council directed staff to return with an alternative to the current PF (Public Facility) zoning designation
that would be “more restrictive” or restricted to recreational uses so as to create a disincentive for other
uses in the future.
According to Curtis Williams, Director of Planning, the PF zoning is the most restrictive zoning possible
for the El Camino Park property. The PF zoning designation does not allow for residential development.
Cost Increases
Council’s request (June 13, 2011) to include significantly increased parking ($450,000) and a dog run
($207,000) added significant costs to the project. Design, engineering services and construction
management is estimated to be at least $400,000. The significant increase is because of field and parking
lot grading issues, tree conservation efforts, and lack of City staff to assume construction management
and engineering services duties as previously projected. A 10% contingency for the park improvements
($172,665) was also not included in the previous cost estimate, but has now been added. There were also
previously undisclosed costs from the landscape architect for restoration planting of perimeter trees,
reseeding some turf areas and irrigating the natural grass area north of the synthetic turf ($89,000).
Stanford Lease for El Camino Park
Part of the approved June 13, 2011 Council motion was a directive for staff to pursue an extended term
lease with Stanford University for El Camino Park beyond the current June 2033 expiration date. Palo
Alto Utilities Department had previously secured permanent easements for areas of the park where the
reservoir and pump station are located in order to protect the sizeable investment in the infrastructure.
Given the large investment the City is making in developing and enhancing other parts of the park,
Council expressed its desire to pursue options for extending the City’s lease for El Camino Park.
A request was submitted from City Real Estate staff to Stanford University to consider the extension of
the lease. The City Attorney’s Office and the City Manager’s Office are in discussion with Stanford
University regarding Stanford’s Campus Energy System Improvement Project which would replace the
existing campus heating and cooling co-generation plant with a state of the art and energy efficient
facility. Certain portions of the development are subject to City approval under the Sand Hill
Development Agreement. Stanford’s new energy facility, located on the academic campus and in Santa
Clara County’s jurisdiction, is restricted by the development by the Development Agreement for nine
years. Stanford University has proposed extending the El Camino Park lease by nine years commensurate
with their request to allow early development of the energy facility. Should the City Council amend the
Development Agreement, the El Camino Park lease would then expire in June 2042. This matter will be
brought to Council for consideration in the near future.
Other Park Projects Fundable by Impact Fees
Staff has identified several other park projects that meet the impact fee funding requirements. These
projects include:
1. Phase II Byxbee Park. The Baylands Master Plan states that park development of Phase II at
Byxbee Park Hills would cost as much as $2,067,700 (in 1989 dollars) if all aspects of the
conceptual plan were implemented. This cost estimate was done in 1989 and was based on a
conceptual plan. Given the age and conceptual nature of the plan, staff recommends a re-
examining and updating the plan. For example, the 1989 conceptual plan envisioned the
construction of an additional parking lot, the creation of a paved astronomical viewing platform,
and the use of expensive construction elements that staff feel need to be reevaluated and
prioritized based on current park user needs. CSD staff is currently working with Public Works
staff to construct the access path/trail system for Phase II. The alignment of the shared access
path/trail system is very similar to the layout of the 1991 Hargreaves Phase II trail plan.
2. Cubberley Snack Shack/Restroom. This project is projected to cost $220,000. Because the lease
for Cubberley expires in 2014, staff recommends deferring this project until a new lease that
ensures community access is in place.
3. Cubberley Tennis Court Lighting. This project is projected to cost $130,000. Because the lease
for Cubberley expires in 2014, staff recommends deferring this project until a new lease that
ensures community access is in place.
Staff suggests that these projects, and any additional park projects that could be funded by impact fees,
should be discussed at a future Park and Recreation Commission meeting where the Commission could
review the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission’s recommendations and findings, and then consider
creating a revised top ten list of projects to be funded by impact fees that could be brought to Council for
review.
Park Project Timeline
● September 2011 - Begin Phase 1 Construction (reservoir, pump station, etc.)
● March 2012 - Architectural Review Board Review Phase 2 Park improvements
● November 2012 - Complete Phase 1 (reservoir, pump station, etc.)
● November 2012 - Begin Phase 2 (park improvement construction)
● October 2013 - Complete Phase 2 (park re-opens to the public)
Resource Impact
The El Camino Park Improvement Project would utilize $2,394,310 of the total $2,813,245 in the park
impact fee account. This would leave a balance of $418,935 for future projects at this time.
At the June 13 2011, City Council meeting, staff anticipated having a balance of $1,379,500 in the impact
fee account. However, the additional Council directed park features (expanded parking lot and dog run)
and design, engineering and construction services, and other unanticipated costs have significantly
increased the cost of the project.
The Nexus report projected $1.3 million annual revenue from the Park Development Impact Fees (based
on ABAG forecasts of population and employment).
Actual Impact fees collected since 2006:
FY 2006 $470,000
FY 2007 $1,041,000
FY 2008 $1,316,000
FY 2009 $218,000
FY 2010 $352,000
FY 2011 $151,203
FY 2012 (to Dec.) $173,483
Converting the north natural turf field (1.5 acres) to synethic turf will reduce water, fertilizer, seed, rodent
control, and mowing expenses at El Camino Park by approximately $43,131 per year. The synthetic turf
will require approximately $3,447 in annual maintenance costs. The increase in maintenance cost due to
the new dog park, trails, picnic tables, and increase in associated trash and litter would be approximately
$6,530 per year. The overall net decrease in annual operating costs associated with the improvements in
the park would be approximately $33,154.
The Utilities Department’s water bond funds will contribute approximately $1,534,050 towards the basic
cost of the park reconstruction. This contribution is what the Utilities Department would have paid to
restore the park to its original condition after the impacts from the reservoir project. The $1,705,000 has
already been factored into the calculation of the funds needed for the park improvements. The $2,394,310
from impact fees, combined with the contribution from Utilities, is necessary to fund the additional park
improvements (excluding the dog park).
City Administrative Services staff advise that unless all available impact fees are used to fund this project,
or some of the park improvement features are removed or deferred, the project will place significant
pressure on available General Funds for infrastructure rehabilitation. Furthermore, it should be noted that
this project’s improvements have not been included in the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Committee report
so it can be placed in context of overall General Fund infrastructure needs.
Policy Implications
The proposed park improvements are consistent with Policy C-26 of the Community Services element of
the Comprehensive Plan that encourages maintaining park facilities as safe and healthy community assets;
and Policy C-22 that encourages new community facilities to have flexible functions to ensure
adaptability to the changing needs of the community.
The proposed project is consistent with the goals of the 2002 Athletic Fields Report.
This project is also consistent with Parks and Recreation Commission policy that staff carefully consider
the construction of dog exercise facilities for large neighborhood or regional parks when designing park
improvements.
Environmental Review
The Utilities Department’s El Camino Park Reservoir Project is subject to environmental review under
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An EIR has been completed for this
project in accordance with the CEQA requirements. An addendum to the EIR will be prepared to
incorporate the additional park improvements called out in Attachment B.
A separate study would need to be commissioned for the review of the future dog exercise area to ensure
that the design specifically addresses the concern of Stanford University.
ATTACHMENTS
A – El Camino Park Final Design
B – Improvements funded by Impact Fees
Staff and Commission Recommended Impact Fee Use
at El Camino Park
Attachment B
Improvements Impact Fee Costs
Design, CA, and Construction Management 400,000$
Remove or Relocate Existing Trees 7,500$
Soccer Catchment Fence $ 62,500
8 foot Safety Fence $ 10,000
Synthetic Turf Soccer Field $ 809,000
New Storage Building $ 19,000
Trash Enclosure $ 25,000
Existing Restroom Demolition $ 10,000
Concrete Pathways and Flatwork $ 98,930
Extended D.G.. Pathway $ 36,000
Extended D.G.. Pathway Lighting $ 67,500
Electric Conduit for Soccer Field Lighting $ 36,715
Additional Parking with Drop Off, Lighting,
and Landscaping
$ 450,000
Picnic Areas and Bike Racks $ 25,000
Rubber Mulch Areas $ 30,000
Re-Seed and Irrigate North Grass Area and
Plant Perimeter Trees
$ 89,500
Contingency(10%) $ 217,665
Dog Park Including Contingency $ (207,000 + 10%) Defer project
Total:2,394,310$
Park Development Impact Fee Fund 2,813,245$
Park Development Impact Fee Balance 418,935$
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors
1 City of Palo Alto El Camino Park Restoration Phase II 639 days Wed 10/31/12 Mon 4/13/15
2 Project Status Meeting / Kickoff Phase II 0 days Wed 10/31/12 Wed 10/31/12
3 Authorization to Proceed to Site Plan Approval 0 days Fri 3/1/13 Fri 3/1/13
4 Project Management Services 305 days Wed 10/31/12 Tue 12/31/13
5 Monthly Progress Reports 305 days Wed 10/31/12 Tue 12/31/13 2
6 Status Meetings with City Staff 305 days Wed 10/31/12 Tue 12/31/13 2
7 Improvement Plans 552 days Fri 3/1/13 Mon 4/13/15
8 Preliminary Design Refinement, Commission, and ARB Stu 51 days Fri 3/1/13 Mon 5/13/13
9 Prepare for Parks Commission 13 days Fri 3/1/13 Tue 3/19/13 3
10 Submit materials for Parks Commission 0 days Tue 3/19/13 Tue 3/19/13 9
11 Parks Commission Meeting 0 days Tue 3/26/13 Tue 3/26/13
12 Prepare for ARB Study Session 3 days Tue 3/26/13 Thu 3/28/13 11
13 Submit materials for ARB Study Session 0 days Thu 3/28/13 Thu 3/28/13 12
14 ARB Study Session 0 days Thu 4/18/13 Thu 4/18/13
15 Prepare for Council 5 days Thu 4/18/13 Wed 4/24/13 14
16 Submit materials for Council 0 days Wed 4/24/13 Wed 4/24/13 15
17 City Council Approval 0 days Mon 5/13/13 Mon 5/13/13 16
18 Construction Documents 30% Submittal 81 days Mon 5/13/13 Mon 9/2/13
19 Prepare 65% PS & E 60 days Mon 5/13/13 Fri 8/2/13 17
20 65% Submittal 1 day Mon 8/5/13 Mon 8/5/13 19
21 City Review 20 days Tue 8/6/13 Mon 9/2/13 20
22 Meet with City to Clarify Comments 0 days Tue 7/30/13 Tue 7/30/13 20FS-5 days
23 Construction Documents 60% Submittal 55 days Tue 9/3/13 Mon 11/18/13
24 Prepare 90% PS & E 35 days Tue 9/3/13 Mon 10/21/13 21
25 90% Submittal 0 days Mon 10/21/13 Mon 10/21/13 24
26 City Review 20 days Tue 10/22/13 Mon 11/18/13 25
27 Meet with City to Clarify Comments 0 days Tue 10/15/13 Tue 10/15/13 25FS-5 days
28 Construction Documents 90% Submittal 55 days Tue 11/19/13 Mon 2/3/14 27
29 Prepare 100% PS & E 35 days Tue 11/19/13 Mon 1/6/14 26
30 100% Submittal 0 days Mon 1/6/14 Mon 1/6/14 29
31 City Review 20 days Tue 1/7/14 Mon 2/3/14 30
32 Meet with City to Clarify Comments 0 days Tue 12/31/13 Tue 12/31/13 30FS-5 days
33 Bid Set Submittal and Agency Approvals 70 days Tue 2/4/14 Mon 5/12/14
34 PrepareBid Set Submittal 15 days Tue 2/4/14 Mon 2/24/14 31
35 Submit PS & E 0 days Mon 2/24/14 Mon 2/24/14 34
36 City Review and Approval 20 days Tue 2/25/14 Mon 3/24/14 35
37 Submit Approved Plans to ARB 0 days Mon 3/24/14 Mon 3/24/14 36
38 ARB Approval Meeting 0 days Tue 4/15/14 Tue 4/15/14 37FS+16 days
39 Final Agency Approval of Project Documents 35 days Tue 3/25/14 Mon 5/12/14 37
40 Bid Period 45 days Mon 5/12/14 Mon 7/14/14
41 Release RFP 0 days Mon 5/12/14 Mon 5/12/14 39
42 Bidding Period 25 days Tue 5/13/14 Mon 6/16/14 41
43 Award 20 days Tue 6/17/14 Mon 7/14/14 42
44 Construction 190 days Mon 7/21/14 Mon 4/13/15
45 NTP to Contractor 0 days Mon 7/21/14 Mon 7/21/14 43FS+5 days
46 Construction 160 days Tue 7/22/14 Mon 3/2/15 45
47 Rain Day Allowance 10 days Tue 3/3/15 Mon 3/16/15 46
48 Substantial Completion 0 days Mon 3/16/15 Mon 3/16/15 47
49 Punch List Items 20 days Tue 3/17/15 Mon 4/13/15 48
50 Final Completion 0 days Mon 4/13/15 Mon 4/13/15 49
Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
ID Task Name Duration
1 City of Palo Alto El Camino Park Restoration Phase II 639 days
2 Project Status Meeting / Kickoff Phase II 0 days
3 Authorization to Proceed to Site Plan Approval 0 days
4 Project Management Services 305 days
5 Monthly Progress Reports 305 days
6 Status Meetings with City Staff 305 days
7 Improvement Plans 552 days
8 Preliminary Design Refinement, Commission, and ARB Stu 51 days
9 Prepare for Parks Commission 13 days
10 Submit materials for Parks Commission 0 days
11 Parks Commission Meeting 0 days
12 Prepare for ARB Study Session 3 days
13 Submit materials for ARB Study Session 0 days
14 ARB Study Session 0 days
15 Prepare for Council 5 days
16 Submit materials for Council 0 days
17 City Council Approval 0 days
18 Construction Documents 30% Submittal 81 days
19 Prepare 65% PS & E 60 days
20 65% Submittal 1 day
21 City Review 20 days
22 Meet with City to Clarify Comments 0 days
23 Construction Documents 60% Submittal 55 days
24 Prepare 90% PS & E 35 days
25 90% Submittal 0 days
26 City Review 20 days
27 Meet with City to Clarify Comments 0 days
28 Construction Documents 90% Submittal 55 days
29 Prepare 100% PS & E 35 days
30 100% Submittal 0 days
31 City Review 20 days
32 Meet with City to Clarify Comments 0 days
33 Bid Set Submittal and Agency Approvals 70 days
34 PrepareBid Set Submittal 15 days
35 Submit PS & E 0 days
36 City Review and Approval 20 days
37 Submit Approved Plans to ARB 0 days
38 ARB Approval Meeting 0 days
39 Final Agency Approval of Project Documents 35 days
40 Bid Period 45 days
41 Release RFP 0 days
42 Bidding Period 25 days
43 Award 20 days
44 Construction 190 days
45 NTP to Contractor 0 days
46 Construction 160 days
47 Rain Day Allowance 10 days
48 Substantial Completion 0 days
49 Punch List Items 20 days
50 Final Completion 0 days
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
2013
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
ID Task Name Duration
1 City of Palo Alto El Camino Park Restoration Phase II 639 days
2 Project Status Meeting / Kickoff Phase II 0 days
3 Authorization to Proceed to Site Plan Approval 0 days
4 Project Management Services 305 days
5 Monthly Progress Reports 305 days
6 Status Meetings with City Staff 305 days
7 Improvement Plans 552 days
8 Preliminary Design Refinement, Commission, and ARB Stu 51 days
9 Prepare for Parks Commission 13 days
10 Submit materials for Parks Commission 0 days
11 Parks Commission Meeting 0 days
12 Prepare for ARB Study Session 3 days
13 Submit materials for ARB Study Session 0 days
14 ARB Study Session 0 days
15 Prepare for Council 5 days
16 Submit materials for Council 0 days
17 City Council Approval 0 days
18 Construction Documents 30% Submittal 81 days
19 Prepare 65% PS & E 60 days
20 65% Submittal 1 day
21 City Review 20 days
22 Meet with City to Clarify Comments 0 days
23 Construction Documents 60% Submittal 55 days
24 Prepare 90% PS & E 35 days
25 90% Submittal 0 days
26 City Review 20 days
27 Meet with City to Clarify Comments 0 days
28 Construction Documents 90% Submittal 55 days
29 Prepare 100% PS & E 35 days
30 100% Submittal 0 days
31 City Review 20 days
32 Meet with City to Clarify Comments 0 days
33 Bid Set Submittal and Agency Approvals 70 days
34 PrepareBid Set Submittal 15 days
35 Submit PS & E 0 days
36 City Review and Approval 20 days
37 Submit Approved Plans to ARB 0 days
38 ARB Approval Meeting 0 days
39 Final Agency Approval of Project Documents 35 days
40 Bid Period 45 days
41 Release RFP 0 days
42 Bidding Period 25 days
43 Award 20 days
44 Construction 190 days
45 NTP to Contractor 0 days
46 Construction 160 days
47 Rain Day Allowance 10 days
48 Substantial Completion 0 days
49 Punch List Items 20 days
50 Final Completion 0 days
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May
2014
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO
1 SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING LS LUMP SUM 113,490.00 113,490
2 SITE UTILITIES (WET) LS LUMP SUM 210,800.00 210,800
3 ELECTRICAL LS LUMP SUM 281,900.00 281,900
4 SITE PAVING AND HARDSCAPE LS LUMP SUM 478,740.00 478,740
5 SITE AMENITIES LS LUMP SUM 1,385,615.00 1,385,615
6 IRRIGATION LS LUMP SUM 173,869.00 173,869
7 PLANTING LS LUMP SUM 255,725.00 255,725
$2,900,139
OWNER'S/OTHER COSTS
8 CONSTRUCTION CONTINGENCY (10%) LS LUMP SUM 290,013.90 290,014
9 DESIGN CONTINGENCY (10%) LS LUMP SUM 290,013.90 290,014
10 DESIGN AND CA FEES (COUNCIL APPROVED 9-10-12, NO CM) LS LUMP SUM 397,000.00 397,000
11 PERMITTING (2%) LS LUMP SUM 58,002.78 58,003
12 INSPECTION AND CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT (8%) LS LUMP SUM 232,011.12 232,012
SUBTOTAL $1,267,043
GRAND TOTAL $4,167,182
BUDGET SEE BELOW FOR SUMMARY $4,167,586
VARIANCE -$404
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2
PALO ALTO, CA
DRAFT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
OVERALL SUMMARY
12288
2013-3-19
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
($)TOTAL PRICE ($)
SUBTOTAL
ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 1 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
($)TOTAL PRICE ($)ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT
ALTERNATES (DA = DEDUCTIVE ALTERNATE, AA= ADDITIVE ALTERNATE)
AA1 ARTIFICIAL TURF SHOCK PAD LS LUMP SUM 116,100.00 $116,100
AA2 BUILDING - SCOREKEEPER'S LS LUMP SUM 12,800.00 $12,800
AA3 PARK ENTRY SIGN / MONUMENTATION LS LUMP SUM 18,000.00 $18,000
AA4 INSTALL IRRIGATION SYSTEM:
ARTIFICIAL TURF WASHDOWN LS LUMP SUM 46,440.00 $46,440
BASIS OF ESTIMATE:
1 "EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION, PHASE 2" DATED 3-19-2013
EXCLUSIONS:
1 UTILITY CONNECTION FEES
2 ALMA CROSSING
Council Approved Budget Less the Dog Park and Less the Restroom Approved at Council 4/23/12
Restroom CIP From 2012-2013 CIP Program
Utilities Restoration Contribution Approved at Council 4/23/15
Total Budget $4,167,586
$2,275,796
$250,000
$1,641,790
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 2 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx
1 MOBILIZATION LS LUMP SUM 10,000.00 10,000
2 TEMPORARY FENCE (TYPE CL-6) LF 70 2.00 140
3 CONSTRUCTION STAKING LS LUMP SUM 20,000.00 20,000
4 CONSTRUCTION AREA SIGNS LS LUMP SUM 400.00 400
5 TREE REMOVAL (DBH 16" OR GREATER) EA 1 1,600.00 1,600
6 TREE RELOCATION (DBH 4" OR LESS) EA 3 2,400.00 7,200
7 TREE PROTECTION FENCING LF 1400 2.00 2,800
8 CLEARING AND GRUBBING LS LUMP SUM 1,200.00 1,200
9 DEMOLITION: REMOVE ASPHALT/CONCRETE SF 2400 1.50 3,600
10 DEMOLITION: CONCRETE CURBING LF 800 4.00 3,200
11 DEMOLITION: BATHROOM LS LUMP SUM 5,000.00 5,000
12 MISC. SITE DEMOLITION (SIGN, FENCING) LS LUMP SUM 4,000.00 4,000
13 CONCRETE WASHOUT LS LUMP SUM 1,800.00 1,800
14 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE LS LUMP SUM 800.00 800
15 FIBER ROLL LF 2500 1.50 3,750
16 DI PROTECTION EA 0 0.00 0
17 EARTHWORK (ROUGH GRADING) CY 6000 8.00 48,000
$113,490
DRAFT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
SITE PREPARATION AND GRADING
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2 12288
PALO ALTO, CA 2013-3-19
TOTAL PRICE ($)
SUBTOTAL
ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATED
QUANTITY UNIT PRICE ($)
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 3 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx
1 SITE DRAINAGE - 4" TRENCH DRAIN LF 2500 20.00 50,000
2 SITE DRAINAGE - STRUCTURES AND CLEANOUTS LS LUMP SUM 40,000.00 40,000
3 SITE DRAINAGE - 48" HDPE PERFORATED PIPE/BEDDING LF 500 150.00 75,000
4 SITE DRAINAGE - 48" HDPE MANHOLE EA 2 5,000.00 10,000
5 SANITARY SEWERAGE 6" VC LINE LF 400 50.00 20,000
6 SANITARY SEWERAGE CLEANOUT EA 4 900.00 3,600
7 SANITARY SEWERAGE MANHOLE EA 1 1,800.00 1,800
8 POTABLE WATER CONNECTION LS LUMP SUM 800.00 800
9 POTABLE WATER BACKFLOW AND ENCLOSURE EA 1 1,200.00 1,200
10 DOG PARK: POTABLE WATER 2" LINE LF 550 8.00 4,400
11 POTABLE WATER 2" LINE LF 400 8.00 3,200
12 IRRIGATION CONNECTION LS LUMP SUM 800.00 800
13 IRRIGATION BACKFLOW AND ENCLOSURE ALLOW 0 2,400.00 0
$210,800
ASSUMPTIONS:
1 NO CONNECTION OR SERVICE FEES WILL BE CHARGED BY THE CITY
2 IRRIGATION BACKFLOW IS EXISTING
DRAFT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
SITE UTILITIES (WET)
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2 12288
PALO ALTO, CA 2013-3-19
ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
($)TOTAL PRICE ($)
SUBTOTAL
ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 4 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx
1 ELECTRICAL SERVICE LS LUMP SUM 10,000.00 10,000
2 POC TO IRRIGATION CONTROLLER LS LUMP SUM 800.00 800
3 POC TO SCOREKEEPER/STORAGE LS LUMP SUM 800.00 800
4 WEATHERPROOF CONVIENENCE OUTLETS EA 8 600.00 4,800
5 PATHWAYS/SECURITY LIGHTING EA 12 2,000.00 24,000
6 WIRES, CONDUCTOR, CONDUIT LS 1800 30.00 54,000
7 SPORTS LIGHTING AND CONTROLS EQUIPMENT (BALL FIELD) LS LUMP SUM 150,000.00 150,000
8 SPORTS LIGHTING FOUNDATIONS (SOCCER) LS LUMP SUM 0.00 0
9 SPORTS LIGHTING CONDUIT (SOCCER) LS LUMP SUM 20,000.00 20,000
10 LIGHTING: PARKING LOT EA 5 3,500.00 17,500
$281,900
ASSUMPTIONS:
1
DRAFT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
ELECTRICAL
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2 12288
PALO ALTO, CA 2013-3-19
ALL EXISTING POWER IS ON SITE, NO TRANSFORMERS REQUIRED
TOTAL PRICE ($)
SUBTOTAL
ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
($)
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 5 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx
1 PAVING ASPHALT VEHICULAR SECTION SF 33000 4.00 132,000
2 PAVING: ASPHALT OVERLAY (2") SF 0 3.00 0
3 PAVING: ASPHALT OVERLAY (1") SF 0 2.00 0
4 PAVING: CONCRETE VEHICULAR SECTION SF 4200 8.00 33,600
5 PAVING: CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN SF 17000 7.00 119,000
6 DOG PARK PAVING: CONCRETE PEDESTRIAN SF 4000 7.00 28,000
7 PAVING: PERVIOUS(AT PARKING/UNDER TREES) SF 0 16.00 0
8 PAVING: DECOMPOSED GRANITE SF 4250 4.00 17,000
9 INFIELD RESURFACE (SCRAPE, IMPORT MATERIAL, REGRADE) SF 13000 3.00 39,000
10 ADA RAMP EA 3 3,000.00 9,000
11 TRUNCATED DOMES SF 60 6.00 360
12 CURB (AT PARKING) LF 1500 15.00 22,500
13 TURNED DOWN AC EDGE AT PARKING EDGE LF 0 3.00 0
14 12" MOWBAND (INCLUDES DOG PARK BORDER) LF 2445 16.00 39,120
15 12" MOW CURB UNDER OUTFIELD FENCING LF 140 16.00 2,240
16 12" CONTAINMENT CURB FOR ARTIFICIAL TURF LF 1160 22.00 25,520
17 WHEEL STOPS EA 42 60.00 2,520
18 STRIPING: (2" PAINTED LINES) LF 2380 1.50 3,570
19 STRIPING: (12" THERMOPLASTIC CROSSWALK) LF 0 4.00 0
20 STRIPING: FIRE ACCESS LANE/CURB LF 310 1.00 310
21 STRIPING: LETTERING (TEMPORARY PARKING, ETC.) LS LUMP SUM 5,000.00 5,000
$478,740
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2 12288
PALO ALTO, CA 2013-3-19
DRAFT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
SITE PAVING
TOTAL PRICE ($)
SUBTOTAL
ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
($)
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 6 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx
1 BUILDING - RESTROOM LS LUMP SUM 200,000.00 200,000
2 BUILDING - STORAGE SF 300 63.30 18,990
3 BUILDING - TRASH ENCLOSURE (INC. GATES)LS LUMP SUM 20,000.00 20,000
4 FURNISHINGS: DRINKING FOUNTAIN EA 2 1,500.00 3,000
5 FURNISHINGS: PICNIC TABLES (WITH BENCH SEATING)EA 6 1,600.00 9,600
6 FURNISHINGS: 6' BENCH W/ BACK EA 2 500.00 1,000
7 FURNISHINGS: BICYCLE RACKS EA 12 1,200.00 14,400
8 FURNISHINGS: SPORTS EQUIP/FURNISH/FIXTURES LS LUMP SUM 20,000.00 20,000
9 SIGNAGE: ACCCESSIBLE PARKING EA 3 400.00 1,200
10 FENCING: "SMARTSTAKE" 4' TALL LF 460 35.00 16,100
11 FENCING: CHAINLINK SIDELINES 12' TALL (INC. GATES)LF 525 85.00 44,625
12 FENCING: SOCCER CATCHMENT 25' TALL LF 245 120.00 29,400
13 FENCING: SAFETY NET, 8' HIGH LF 150 60.00 9,000
14 FENCING: DOG PARK,5' HIGH LF 750 40.00 30,000
15 FENCING: DOG PARK,SALLYPORT EA 1 500.00 500
16 FURNISHINGS: DOG DRINKING FOUNTAIN EA 2 1,500.00 3,000
17 FURNISHINGS: PICNIC TABLES (WITH BENCH SEATING)EA 4 1,600.00 6,400
18 DOG PARK AMENITIES: BENCH EA 4 500.00 2,000
18 ARTIFICIAL TURF (DOG PARK AREAS)SF 10000 9.00 90,000
19 ARTIFICAL TURF BASE ROCK (4" AB)SF 10000 1.50 15,000
19 ARTIFICIAL TURF (ATHLETIC AREAS, INC. INFILL)SF 77400 9.00 696,600
20 ARTIFICAL TURF BASE ROCK (GRADUATED, TWO LAYERS)SF 77400 2.00 154,800
$1,385,615
DRAFT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
SITE AMENITIES
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2 12288
PALO ALTO, CA 2013-3-19
TOTAL PRICE ($)
SUBTOTAL
ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
($)
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 7 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx
DRAFT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
SITE AMENITIES
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2 12288
PALO ALTO, CA 2013-3-19
TOTAL PRICE ($)ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
($)
ARTIFICIAL TURF SHOCK PAD SF 77400 1.50 116,100
0
SUBTOTAL AA 1 $116,100
BUILDING - SCOREKEEPER'S SF 64 200.00 12,800
0
SUBTOTAL AA 2 $12,800
PARK ENTRY SIGN / MONUMENTATION LS LUMP SUM 18,000.00 18,000
0
SUBTOTAL AA 3 $18,000
AA
1
AA
3
A
A
2
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 8 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx
1 IRRIGATION CONTROLLER ASSEMBLY EA 1 10,000 10,000
2 IRRIGATION DUAL FLOW SENSING ASSEMBLY EA 1 1,800 1,800
3 IRRIGATION MASTER VALVE EA 1 1,400 1,400
4 IRRIGATION MAINLINE: 3" CL 200 BELL & GASKET LF 1,500 12 18,000
5
INSTALL IRRIGATION SYSTEM:
ROTOR AREAS NATURAL TURF SF 104,728 0.85 89,019
6
INSTALL IRRIGATION SYSTEM:
REGULAR DENSITY DRIP AREAS SF 0 2.50 0
7
INSTALL IRRIGATION SYSTEM:
OVERHEAD AREAS SF 29,000 1.85 53,650
$173,869
SF 77400 0.60 46,440
0
SUBTOTAL AA 5 $46,440AA
4
INSTALL IRRIGATION SYSTEM:
ARTIFICIAL TURF WASHDOWN
DRAFT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
IRRIGATION
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2 12288
PALO ALTO, CA 2013-3-19
TOTAL PRICE ($)
SUBTOTAL
ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
($)
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 9 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx
1 SOIL AMMENDMENTS SF 140,000 0.15 21,000
2 FINISH GRADING SF 140,000 0.25 35,000
3 SODDED TURF SF 104,728 0.45 47,128
4 INSTALL SHRUBS/GROUNDCOVER SF 29,000 2.50 72,500
5 INSTALL TREES (15 GAL.)EA 60 120.00 7,200
6 MULCH, NATURAL CITY PROVIDED (3")SF 10,000 1.00 10,000
7 MULCH, RECYCLED RUBBER (3")CUYD 719 70.00 50,297
8 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE (90 DAY)LS 1 12,600.00 12,600
$255,725
DRAFT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE
PLANTING
EL CAMINO PARK RESTORATION PHASE 2 12288
PALO ALTO, CA 2013-3-19
TOTAL PRICE ($)
SUBTOTAL
ITEM NO. ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT ESTIMATED
QUANTITY
UNIT PRICE
($)
Prepared by Siegfried
Page 10 of 10
12288 Baseline Cost Estimate Ver 3.xlsx