Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-11-13 City Council (4)City of Palo Alto City Manager’s Report TO: FROM: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE:NOVEMBER 13, 2001 CMR:417:01 SUBJECT:RESOLUTION APPROVING A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND CALTRANS FOR THE EL CAMINO REAL CALTRANS COMMUNITY-BASED PLANNING GRANT PROJECT RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Resolution approving a Cooperative Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Caltrans, which would allow the City to be reimbursed by federal and state matching funds up to $240,000. These funds will be used to prepare a Master Schematic Design Plan for E1 Camino Real. BACKGROUND Last year, Caltrans established a new Office of Community Planning (OCP) to address the statewide need for community-sensitive approaches to transportation decision-making. One of the functions of OCP is to administer the newly-created Community Based Transportation Planning (CBTP) demonstration grant program. This grant program supports planning studies that showcase examples of livable cormnunity concepts and encourage smart growth, and that can then be used to seek grant funds for constructing the improvements. City staff submitted a proposal for a CBTP demonstration grant to study improvements to E1 Camino Real (State Route 82) in Palo Alto that would increase safety, efficiency and comfort for all mode users (vehicle drivers, transit users, bicyclists and pedestrians) and present a more attractive urban design image. The proposal also included exploring flexibility in the application of highway design standards where exceptions to current standards may be required to achieve the project objectives. The Palo Alto project would serve as a prototype for in-town or "main street" highways, where flexibility in highway design is needed to accommodate the urban conditions along these streets. CMR:417:01 Page 1 of 4 Allowing flexibility in the application of highway design standards in relation to the unique conditions of the surrounding community was encouraged in the 1991 Intermodal SurfaceTransportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and further emphasized in the 1995 National Highway System Act. Since then, "context-sensitive" highway design has become an objective of progressive transportation agencies across the country. New context-sensitive policy directives are currently under review at Caltrans. For a review of background and issues in context sensitive highway design see the article "From Highway to My Way" by Reid Ewing, Planning Magazine, January 2001, attached to this report. The Palo Alto grant was approved by OCP in the amount of $240,000. The grant requires a 20 percent match ($48,000) from the City. The Palo Alto proposal was co-sponsored by the regional Caltrans District 4 office in Oakland, and the project will be a collaborative effort between the City and Caltrans District 4. DISCUSSION The overall goal of this project is to change the character of El Camino Real from a highway designed primarily for motor vehicle mobility to a fully multimodal, aesthetically attractive urban thoroughfare that functions safely and effectively as a transportation corridor and projects a positive image of the city. The project area is the Caltrans right of way (property line to property line) for the 4.3 miles of E1 Camino Real in Palo Alto from the north city limit at San Francisquito Creek to the south city limit at Adobe Creek. As staff indicated in the grant proposal to Caltrans, the grant will be used to fund a consultant team to prepare a concept plan identifying improvements along E1 Camino Real that would result in a more attractive, safer thoroughfare. The consultant team to be hired for this project will be an interdisciplinary team with expertise in transportation planning and engineering, pedestrian and bicycle circulation, urban design, landscape architecture, urban f~)restry and public participation. The transportation consultant, the urban design/landscape architecture consultant, and other members of the consultant team as needed will collaborate on all phases of work throughout the proj ect. The final product of the project will be a schematic design plan that will be used to solicit state and federal grant funding for implementation of identified improvements. The schematic plan will also be used to as a guide to coordinate the design of individual street improvement projects that are hnplemented incrementally by Caltrans, Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) or by private developers of projects along E1 Camino Real. Opportunities for the community to participate in the project will be provided through an advisory group of interested stakeholders, two community forums, four public hearings before City boards and commissions and the City Council, and press releases and project updates on the City’s website. In addition, educational outreach materials will be prepared for use by neighborhood groups and other cormnunity organizations. CMR:417:01 Page 2 of 4 Interdepartmental and interagency coordination is an essential part of this project. City staff in the Divisions of Planning and Transportation and the Department of Community Services are coordinating several planning efforts currently underway in the City, including the Zoning Ordinance update, the Safe Routes to Schools project, development of interim Landscape Design Guidelines for E1 Camino Real, development of Architectural Design Guidelines for E1 Camino Real, the ground floor retail ordinance, and review of current development projects along E1 Camino Real. In addition, City staff is coordinating with the citizen-led Trees For E1 Camino project and the E1 Camino Real planning and design efforts currently underway in Menlo Park, Redwood City and Stanford, and with the Santa Clara Valley Water District culvert replacement project over Adobe Creek. When this project commences, interagency coordination will expand to include Caltrans OCP in Sacramento and Caltrans District 4 in Oakland, the VTA, and the cities of Los Altos, Mountain View and Menlo Park with adjacent sections of E1 Camino Real. For additional information about the background, description, and scope of the project, see the appended Scope of Services included as Attachment V to the Cooperative Agreement (page 19). Minor revisions may be made to the Scope of Services during contract negotiations. RESOURCE IMPACT Approval of this agreement will allow the City to be reimbursed by Community Based Transportation Planning funds up to $240,000, to prepare a Master Schematic Design Plan for E1 Camino Real. The grant requires a 20 percent City match of $48,000, for a total project budget of $288,000. The $48,000 city matching funds will be provided from the $75,000 allocated in the CIP 2000-01 budget item no. 10113 for E1 Camino Real Design Guidelines. Staff will actively seek grant funding for any recommendations that come out of this study. After the Resolution is approved, staff will request a Budget Amendment Ordinance to create a new CIP. The new CIP will allow the City to accept and expend grant revenue. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendation in this report is consistent with and will help implement Policies and Programs in the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the following. Program L-33: "Study ways to make South E1 Camino Real more pedestrian-friendly, including redesigning the street to provide wider sidewalks, safe pedestrian crossings at key intersections, street trees, and streetscape improvements." Program L-34: Provide better connections across El Camino Real to bring the Ventura and Barron Park neighborhoods together and to improve linkages to local schools and parks." Policy L-66: "Maintain an aesthetically pleasing street network that helps frame and define the community while meeting the needs of pedestrian, bicyclists, and motorists." Program T-16: Evaluate the extension of a light rail line along E1 Camino Real from Mountain View through Palo Alto to Menlo Park." CMR:417:01 Page 3 of 4 TIMELINE The grant funds will be available to the City when the City Council has approved the Resolution authorizing the Cooperative Agreement. A project consultant team is expected to be selected and a contract negotiated during November, with the contract to be presented to City Council for approval in December, 2001. Work on the project will begin in January, 2002 and will be completed by December 31, 2002. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Execution of the Cooperative Agreement does not constitute a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The preparation of the Master Schematic Design Plan for E1 Camino Real is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section No. 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies). ATTACHMENTS A. Resolution including Cooperative Agreement (note Scope of Services begins on page 19) B. Article, "From Highway to My Way," by Reid Ewing, Planning, January 2001 PREPARED BY: VIRGINIA WARHEIT Senior Planner DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW~,~~@~ LES WHITE Interim Director, Planning and Community Environment CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: EMILY Assistant City Manager co:Senator Byron Sher Assemblyman Joe Simitian CMR:417:01 Page 4 of 4 ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR A SCHEMATIC STREET DESIGN PLAN FOR EL CAMINO REAL (Agreement No. 04A1432) WHEREAS, as part of the E1 Camino Real Corridor Study, the City of Palo Alto applied for and received a Community Based Transportation Planning Demonstration Grant to develop, in collaboration with the California Department of Transportation, (hereinafter "CalTrans,") a new highway design standard to implement design objectives of a safe, attractive, fully multimodal and accessible urban thoroughfare; and WHEREAS, as a condition of receiving that grant, CalTrans requires that the City enter into Agreement No. 04A1432. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby RESOLVE as follows: SECTION i. The Council hereby approves and authorizes the City Manager to execute Agreement No. 04A1432 with the State of California, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, acting by and through its Department of Transportation; SECTION 2.. This planning study is not considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act,and therefore, no environmental assessment is needed. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST:APPROVED: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM:City Manager Senior Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: Chief Transportation Official Director of Administrative Services Director of Planning and Community Environment O11106 syn 0090874 RECEIVE AUG 06 200! COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 1 of 19 THIS AGREEMENT, ENTERED INTO EFFECTIVE ON JUNE 29TM, 2001, is between the State of California, acting by and through its Department of Transportation, referred to herein as DEPARTMENT, and City of Palo Alto, hereinafter referred to as LOCAL AGENCY. RECITALS DEPARTMENT and LOCAL AGENCY, pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 130, are authorized to enter into a Cooperative Agreement affecting State Highways within the jurisdiction of LOCAL AGENCY. The LOCAL AGENCY’s governing body, under the authority of local ordinances if applicable is authorized to provide services or funding as described and specified herein pursuant to the attached LOCAL AGENCY Resolution (see Attachment IV). DEPARTMENT has requested that LOCAL AGENCY assign LOCAL AGENCY (PERSONNEL/DESCRIPTION) to perform (DESCRIPTION) for DEPARTMENT. LOCAL AGENCY and the LOCAL AGENCY (OFFICE/ORGANIZATION) have agreed to provide (DESCRIPTION) subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. All services performed by LOCAL AGENCY on DEPARTMENT rights of way pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and LOCAL AGENCY laws, ordinances, regulations, titles and DEPARTMENT manuals and procedures. Based on availability, funding for this SPR Project Work Plan is comprised of the following: SPR # F.Y. SPR Work Element Federal SPR State PTA Match Total Fundinq (#) 00/01 (Work Plan)$192,000.00 $48,000.00 $240,000.00 SECTION I LOCAL AGENCY AGREES: LOCAL AGENCY agrees to satisfactorily complete (DESCRIPTION), as described in the attached Project Description and Scope of Work. (Attachment V) SECTION II DEPARTMENT AND LOCAL AGENCY MUTUALLY AGREE: In consideration of the foregoing and the mutual promises of the parties hereto, the LOCAL AGENCY and DEPARTMENT agree as follows: EXHIBIT "A" Notification of Parties Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 2 of 19 LOCAL AGENCY Contract Manager is Virginia Warheit at (650) 329-2364. DEPARTMENT Contract Manager is Paul Svedersky at (510) 622-1639. All notices herein provided to be given, or which may be given, by either party to the other, shall be deemed to have been fully given when made in writing and deposited with the United State Postal Service registered or certified, postage prepaid, and addressed as follows: City of Palo Alto Dept. of Planning & Community Environment ATTN: Virginia Warheit, Senior Planner 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 = California Department of Transportation District 04 - Division of Transportation Planning B ATTN: Paul Svedersky, Contract Manager P.O. Box 23660 Oakland, CA 94623 Period of Performance This Agreement shall begin on the date appearing at the top of the facesheet, contingent upon approval by DEPARTMENT, and expire on December 31, 2002, unless extended by amendment. Changes in Terms/Amendment The Agreement may only be amended or modified by mutual written agreement of the parties. Termination This Agreement may be terminated by either party for any reason by giving written notice to the other party at least thirty (30) days in advance of the effective date of such termination. Cost Limitation The total amount payable to LOCAL AGENCY pursuant to this Agreement by DEPARTMENT shall not exceed $240.000.00. It is agreed and understood that both an estimate and a contract fund limit are estimates and that DEPARTMENT will pay only for services actually rendered as authorized by the DEPARTMENT Contract Manager. This is a multi-year funded Agreement. LOCAL AGENCY will not commence work, or exceed any fiscal year allotment as listed below, without the prior written approval of the DEPARTMENT Contract Manager. FISCAL YEAR* 2000/2001_ CONTRACT ALLOTMENT $240,000.00 2001/2002__$0 Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 3 of 19 TOTAL CONTRACT $240,000.00 (A Fiscal Year begins July 1 and ends on June 30.) Allowable Costs a=The method of payment for this contract will be based on actual costs. The State will reimburse the LOCAL AGENCY for actual costs (including labor costs, employee benefits, travel, overhead and other direct costs incurred by the LOCAL AGENCY in performance of the work), not to exceed the amount of $240,000.00. Actual costs shall not exceed the estimated wage rates and other estimated costs set forth in Attachment V without prior written agreement between the State and the LOCAL AGENCY. Transportation and subsistence costs shall not exceed rates authorized to be paid non-represented state employees under current State Dept. of Personnel rules. Any hourly rate shall include the actual cost of salaries (including overhead and general administrative costs) and employee benefits (including but not limited to, vacation, holiday time, and sick leave). eo The hourly rate may be adjusted for cost of living increases (with an approved LOCAL AGENCY resolution or minute order) for the position and class of LOCAL AGENCY/employee performing work on this Agreement. A copy of this resolution or minute order must be provided to the DEPARTMENT Contract Manager prior to any payment being made for any increase in the hourly rate. DEPARTMENT will reimburse LOCAL AGENCY monthly in arrears as promptly as DEPARTMENT fiscal procedures permit upon receipt of itemized signed invoices in triplicate, Invoices shall reference the DEPARTMENT Agreement No. and shall be submitted to the Contract Manager at the following address: California Department of-Transportation District 04 - Division of Transportation Planning Attention: Paul Svedersky, Contract Manager P.O. Box 23660 Oakland, CA 94623 fo Invoices shall include the following information: 2. 3. 4. Name of the LOCAL AGENCY Personnel performing work Date of Service Location of Service (LOCAL AGENCY/route/post mile) Hours Worked Americans with Disabilities Act By signing this Agreement LOCAL AGENCY assures DEPARTMENT that it complies Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 4 of 19 with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA. (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.) 10. Material/Supplies LOCAL AGENCY will be reimbursed for the actual cost of materials/supplies purchased to be consumed or installed at the DEPARTMENT worksite when required for the performance of the Agreement (including applicable sales tax), without additional allowance for markup. Cost of materials/supplies is to be substantiated by a copy of the appropriately signed invoice verifying the actual cost of the new materials/supplies and the delivery of the replaced components to DEPARTMENT. LOCAL AGENCY’s costs associated with the purchase and installation of materials/supplies are considered as a component of the LOCAL AGENCY’s hourly rate for services that include wages, overhead, general and administrative expenses and profit. Equipment Indemnification LOCAL AGENCY shall indemnify DEPARTMENT against all loss and damage to the LOCAL AGENCY’s property or equipment during its use under this Agreement and shall, at the LOCAL AGENCY’s own expense, maintain such fire, theft, liability or other insurance as may be deemed necessary for this protection. LOCAL AGENCY assumes all responsibility which may be imposed by law for property damage or personal injuries caused by defective equipment furnished under this Agreement or by operations of the LOCAL AGENCY or the LOCAL AGENCY’s employees under this Agreement. Do Co Mutual Hold Harmless Nothing in the provisions of the Agreement is intended to create duties or obligations to or rights in third parties to this Agreement or affect the legal liability of either party to the agreement by imposing any standard of care with respect to the operation, maintenance and repair of State highways different from the standard of care imposed by law. Neither DEPARTMENT nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by LOCAL AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to LOCAL AGENCY under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, LOCAL AGENCY shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless DEPARTMENT, its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by LOCAL AGENCY under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to LOCAL AGENCY under this Agreement. Neither LOCAL AGENCY nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by DEPARTMENT or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to DEPARTMENT under this Agreement. It is understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, STATE shall fully defend, indemnify and save harmless LOCAL AGENCY, its officers and employees from all claims, suits or actions of every name, kind and description brought for or on account of injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by DEPARTMENT under or in 11. Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 5 of 19 connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to DEPARTMENT under this Agreement. Non-Discrimination ao During the performance of this Agreement, LOCAL AGENCY and any subcontractors shall not unlawfully discriminate, harass or allow harassment, against any employee or applicant for employment because of sex, race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin, disability (including HIV and AIDS), medical condition (cancer), age, marital status, denial of family and medical care leave, and denial of pregnancy disability leave. LOCAL AGENCY and its subcontractors shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and applicants for employment are free from such discrimination and harassment. LOCAL AGENCY and its sub-contractors shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code, Section 12900 et seq.) and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 7285.0 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing Government Code, Section 12990 (a-f), set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations are incorporated into this contract by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. LOCAL AGENCY and its subcontractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement. LOCAL AGENCY shall include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all subagreements to perform work under this Agreement. C=Appendix A, relative to nondiscrimination on federally assisted projects, is attached hereto and made a part of this Agreement as Attachment II. LOCAL AGENCY shall comply with Title Vl of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. Accordingly, 49 CFR 21 through Appendix C and 23 CFR 710. 405 (b) are applicable to this Agreement by reference. 12.Fundinq Requirements It is mutually understood between the parties that this Agreement may have been written before ascertaining the availability of congressional or legislative appro- priation of funds, for the mutual benefit of both parties in order to avoid program and fiscal delays that would occur if the Agreement was executed after that determination was made. Do Go This Agreement is valid and enforceable only if sufficient funds are made available to DEPARTMENT by the United States Government or the California State Legislature for the purpose of this program. In addition, this Agreement is subject to any additional restrictions, limitations, conditions, or any statute enacted by the Congress or the State Legislature that may affect the provisions, terms or funding of this Agreement in any manner. It is mutually agreed that if the Congress or the State Legislature does not appropriate sufficient funds for the program, this Agreement shall be amended to reflect any reduction in funds. Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 6 of 19 DEPARTMENT has the option to void this Agreement under the 30-day termination clause or to amend this Agreement to reflect any reduction of funds. 13.Records Retention For the purpose of determining compliance with Public Contract Code Section 10115, et. seq. and Title 21, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 21, Section 2500 et. seq., when applicable, and other matters connected with the performance of this Agreement pursuant to Government Code Section 8546.7, the LOCAL AGENCY, subcontractors and DEPAFITMENT shall maintain all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of this Agreement, including but not limited to, the costs of administering this Agreement. All parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during the contract period and for three years from the date of final payment under this Agreement. DEPARTMENT, the State Auditor, FHWA, or any duly authorized representative of the Federal government shall have access to any books, records, and documents of the LOCAL AGENCY that are pertinent to this Agreement for audits, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and copies thereof shall be furnished if requested. 14.Disputes Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this Agreement that is not disposed of by agreement shall be decided by the DEPARTMENT Contract Officer, who may consider any written or verbal evidence submitted by the LOCAL AGENCY. The decision of the Contract Officer, issued in writing, shall be conclusive and binding on both parties to the Agreement on all questions of fact considered and determined by the Contract Officer. b.Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by the Contract Officer will excuse the LOCAL AGENCY from full and timely performance in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. 15.Subcontractors The LOCAL AGENCY shall perform the work contemplated with resources available within its own organization and no portion of the work shall be subcontracted without written authorization by the DEPARTMENT Contract Manager. Any subcontract in excess of $25,000 entered into as a result of this contract shall contain all the provisions stipulated in this contract to be applicable to subcontractors. 16.Federal Lobbying Activities Certification LOCAL AGENCY certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: No State or Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the LOCAL AGENCY, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any State or Federal agency, a Member of the State Legislature or United States Congress, an officer or employee of the Legislature or Congress, or any employee of a Member of the Legislature or Congress in connection with the awarding of any State or Federal contract, the making of any State or Federal grant, the making of any State or Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any State or Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 7 of 19 bo If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any Federal agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the LOCAL AGENCY shall complete and submit Standard Form-LL., "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying", in accordance with its instructions. Co This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by Section 1352, Title 31, U. S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. LOCAL AGENCY also agrees, by signing this document, that the language of this certification shall be included in all lower tier subcontracts, which exceed $100,000, and that all such subcontractors shall certify and disclose accordingly. 17.Druq-Free Workplace Certification By signing this Agreement, the LOCAL AGENCY hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the LOCAL AGENCY will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Government Code Section 8350 et seq.) and will provide a drug-free workplace by doing all of the following: a.Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a). b.Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program as required by Government Code Section 8355(b), to inform employees about all of the following: 1.the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace, 2.the person’s or organization’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace, 3.any available counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs, and 4.penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. c.Provide as required by Government Code Section 8355(c) that every employee who works on the proposed contract or grant: 1.will receive a copy of the company’s drug-free policy statement, and 2.will agree to abide by the terms of the company’s statement as a condition of employment on the contract or grant. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under this Agreement or termination of this Agreement or both and the LOCAL AGENCY may be ineligible for award of any future state contracts if DEPARTMENT determines that any of the following has Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 8 of 19 occurred: (1) the LOCAL AGENCY has made a false certification or, (2) violates the certification by failing to carry out the requirements as noted above. 18.Failure to Pay Should LOCAL AGENCY fail to pay moneys due DEPARTMENT within 30 days of demand or within such other period as may be agreed between the parties hereto, DEPARTMENT, acting through the State Controller, may withhold an equal amount from future apportionments due LOCAL AGENCY. 19.Cost Principles ao LOCAL AGENCY agrees to comply with Federal procedures in accordance with Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87, Cost Principles for State and Local Governments. LOCAL AGENCY also agrees to comply with Federal procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments. Any costs for which payment has been made to LOCAL AGENCY that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under Office of Management and Budget Circular A-87 or CFR 49, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments, are subject to repayment by LOCAL AGENCY to DEPARTMENT. do Any subcontract entered into as a result of this Agreement shall contain all of the provisions of this Article. 20.Relationship of Parties It is expressly understood that this is an agreement by and between two independent governmental entities and that this is not intended to, and shall not be construed to, create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture or association, or any other relationship whatsoever other than that of an independent party. 21.Audit Review Procedures ao Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this Agreement that is not disposed of by agreement shall be reviewed by the Chairperson of the Audit Review Committee (ARC). The ARC will consist of the DEPARTMENT Deputy Director, Audits & Investigations (Chairperson); Deputy Director of the functional Program area; the Chief Counsel, Legal Division, or their designated alternates; and if the Department chooses, two representatives of the DEPARTMENT’ choosing, from private industry. The two representatives from private industry will be advisory in nature only and will not have voting rights. Additional members or their alternates may serve on the ARC. Not later than thirty (30) days after issuance of the final audit report, LOCAL AGENCY may request a review by the ARC of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing to the Chairperson of the ARC. The request must contain detailed information of the factors involved in the dispute as well as justifications for reversal. A meeting by the ARC will be scheduled if the Chairperson concurs that further review is warranted. After the meeting, the ARC Co Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 9 of 19 will make recommendations to the appropriate DEPARTMENT Chief Deputy Director. The Chief Deputy Director wil! make the final decision for DEPARTMENT. The final decision will be made within three (3) months of receipt of the notification of dispute. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by DEPARTMENT will excuse the LOCAL AGENCY from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. For DEPARTMENT Accounting & Audit guidelines, see Attachment Ill. 22.Equipment Purchase (By LOCAL AGENCY) ao Prior authorization in writing by the DEPARTMENT Contract Manager shall be required before the LOCAL AGENCY enters into any non-budgeted purchase order or subagreement exceeding $500 for supplies, equipment, or consultant services. The LOCAL AGENCY shall provide an evaluation of the necessity or desirability of incurring such costs. b°For purchase of any item, service or consulting work not covered in Attachment V. and exceeding $500, with prior authorization by the DEPARTMENT Contract Manager, three competitive quotations must be submitted with the request or the absence of bidding must be adequately justified. Any equipment purchased as a result of this Agreement is subject to the following: The LOCAL AGENCY shall maintain an inventory record for each piece of non-expendable equipment purchased or built with funds provided under the terms of this Agreement. The inventory record of each piece of such equipment shall include the date acquired, total cost, serial number, model identification (on sale, in accordance with established DEPARTMENT procedures, purchased equipment), and any other information or description necessary to identify said equipment. Non-expendable equipment so inventoried are those items of equipment that have a normal life expectancy of one year or more and an approximate unit price of $5,000 or more. In addition, theft- sensitive items of equipment costing less than $5,000 shall be inventoried. A copy of the inventory record must be submitted to DEPARTMENT upon request by DEPARTMENT. d°At the conclusion of the Agreement or if the Agreement is terminated, the LOCAL AGENCY may either keep the equipment and credit DEPARTMENT in an amount equal to its fair market value or sell such equipment at the best price obtainable, at a public or private and credit DEPARTMENT in an amount equal to the sales price. If the LOCAL AGENCY elects to keep the equipment, fair market value shall be determined, at the LOCAL AGENCY’s expense, on the basis of a competent, independent appraisal of such equipment. Appraisals shall be obtained from an appraiser mutually agreeable to DEPARTMENT and LOCAL AGENCY. If it is determined to sell the equipment, the terms and conditions of such sale must be approved in advance by DEPARTMENT. eo CFR 49, Part 18 requires a credit to Federal funds when participating equipment with a fair market value greater than $5,000 is credited to the project. fo Any subagreement entered into as a result of this Agreement shall contain all of the provisions of this article. Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 10 of 19 23.Debarment and Suspension Certification LOCAL AGENCY’s signature affixed herein shall constitute a certification under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that LOCAL AGENCY or any person associated therewith in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer, or manager: is not currently under suspension, debarment, voluntary exclusion, or determination of ineligibility by any federal agency; has not been suspended, debarred, voluntarily excluded, or determined ineligible by any federal agency within the past three (3) years; 3.does not have a proposed debarment pending; and has not been indicted, convicted, or had a civil judgment rendered against it by a court of competent jurisdiction in any matter involving fraud or official misconduct within the past three (3) years. Any exceptions to this certification must be disclosed to DEPARTMENT. Exceptions will not necessarily result in denial of recommendation for award of this Agreement, but will be considered in determining LOCAL AGENCY responsibility. Disclosures must indicate the party to whom the exceptions apply, the initiating agency, and the dates of agency action. Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 11 of 19 ATTACHMENTS: The following attachments are incorporated and made a part of this Agreement by reference and attachment. I. II. III. IV. V. Encumbrance Distribution Appendix A Accounting & Audit Guidelines LOCAL AGENCY Resolution Project Description with Scope of Work and Costs IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first herein above written: STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION: CITY OF PALO ALTO : By:By: Title: Contract Officer Title: Date:Date: By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: ATTACHMENT 1 Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 12 of 19 Encumbrance Distribution PROGRAM/CATEGORY (CODE AND TITLE) TRANSPORTATION (OPTIONAL USE) FUND TITLE FEDERAL ITEM 2660-001-0890 (Federal) 2660-001-0046 (State - PTA) OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE (CODE AND TITLE) Dist.Unit Expenditure Authorization 04 I~b 98474304984743 CHAPTER STATUTE 52 2000 FISCAL YEAR 00/01 Special Desic~nation Obiect Code $ Amount 6 MTCPA01 ~/~ 2.$240,000 00 6 MTCPA01 $0.00 FY 00/01 01/02 I hereby cer~fy upon my own personal knowledge that budgeted funds are avaflable for the T.B.A. NO.I B.R. NO.period and purpose of the expenditure stated above IS~G.~E OF ACCO?.T~G 2FFICER Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 13 of 19 ATTACHMENT II Appendix A STATE OF CALIFORNIA ¯DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION -DEPARTMENT APPENDIX A ADM-1351 (REV.10/98) Duringthe performance of this Agreement, the LOCAL AGENCY, for itself, its assignees and successors in interest (hereinafter referred to as the "LOCAL AGENCY ") agrees as follows: (1) Compliance with regulations: The LOCAL AGENCY shall comply with regulations relative to Title Vl (nondiscrimination in federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation - Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations Part 21 - Effectuation of Title Vl of the 1964 Civil Rights Act). Title Vl provides that the recipients of federal assistance will implement and maintain a policy of nondiscrimination in which no person in the state of California shall, on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability,be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of or subject to discrimination under any program or activity by the recipients of federal assistance or their assignees and successors in interest. (2) Nondiscrimination: The LOCAL AGENCY, with regard to the work performed by it during the Agreement shall act in Accordance with Title VI. Specifically, the LOCAL AGENCY shall not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, or disability in the selection and retention of subcontractors, including procurement of materials and leases of equipment. The LOCAL AGENCY shall not participate either directly or indirectly in the discrimination prohibited by Section 21.5 of the U.S. DOT’s Regulations, including employment practices when the Agreement covers a program whose goal is employment. (3) Solicitations for Subcontracts, Including Procurements of Materials and Equipment: In all solicitations, either by Competitive bidding or negotiation made by the LOCAL AGENCY for work to be performed under a subcontract, including procurements of materials or leases of equipment, each potential subcontractor or supplier shall be notified by the LOCAL AGENCY of the LOCAL AGENCY’s obligations under this Agreement and the Regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, color or national origin. (4) Information and Reports: The LOCAL AGENCY shall provide all information and reports required by the Regulations, or Directives issued pursuant thereto, and shall permit access to its books, records, accounts, other sources of information, and facilities as may determined by DEPARTMENT or any duly authorized representative of the Federal Government to be pertinent to ascertain compliance with such regulations or directives. Where any information required of LOCAL AGENCY is in the exclusive possession of another who fails or refuses to furnish this information, the LOCAL AGENCY shall so certify to DEPARTMENT, or any duly authorized Federal Agency as appropriate, and shall set forth what efforts it has made to obtain the information. (5) Sanctions for Noncompliance: In the event of the LOCAL AGENCY’s noncompliance with the nondiscrimination provisions of Agreement, DEPARTMENT shall impose such Agreement sanctions as it or any Federal funding agency may determine to be appropriate, including, but not limited to: (a) withholding of payments to the LOCAL AGENCY under the Agreement until the LOCAL AGENCY complies, and/or (b) cancellation, termination or suspension of the Agreement, in whole or in part. ATTACHMENT III Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 14 of 19 ACCOUNTING & AUDIT GUIDELINES FOR AGREEMENTS WITH DEPARTMENT INTRODUCTION The purpose of this information is to outline for you, a potential contractor with the California State Department of Transportation (DEPARTMENT), the basic elements of an adequate accounting system, and the types and objectives of audits that will be performed in relation to your contract. In order to successfully compete for a contract and meet the audit requirements, a contractor (whether a prime or subcontractor) must have a system of record keeping and internal control. Although a specific cost accounting system is not required, a contractor needs a system which will assure compliance with the terms of the agreement. A preaward audit will be performed to assure you meet these requirements prior to contract execution. If your system is deficient, the contract will not be executed. DEPARTMENT reimburses, through your overhead rate, the costs attributable to establishing and maintaining a cost accounting system. Staff time and other costs related to an audit performed of your contract are also normally reimbursed through your overhead rate. ACCOUNTING SYSTEM Contractors (whether a prime or subcontractor) planning to contract with DEPARTMENT must have an accounting system which meets the following objectives: ¯The ability to record and report financial data in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. ¯A system of record keeping to ensure that costs billed to DEPARTMENT are: a.Supported by adequate documentation. In compliance with the terms of the contract and applicable Federal and State regulations specified in the contract. ¯A system of record keeping which ideally includes the following: a.A General Ledger b.Job cost ledger c.Labor distributions d.Time records e.Subsidiary journals Chart of accounts g.Financial statements Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 15 of 19 The ability to accumulate and segregate reasonable, allocable (incurred solely for a project) and allowable (per terms of the contract) costs through the use of a cost accounting system. The following are some of the attributes which would ideally be found in such a system: ao A chart of accounts which includes indirect and direct general ledger accounts. Indirect costs are not specifically identified to a project, for example, rent and/or utilities. Direct costs are specifically identified with a project, for example, drafting hours and/or design hours. b.Segregation of costs by contract, category of cost and milestones (if applicable). Proper recording of direct and indirect costs. For example, recording of labor costs should provide that non-project indirect hours be recorded on a timesheet and in the accounting records to an administration, vacation, sick leave or other indirect cost account/code. Direct project hours should be recorded on a timesheet and in the accounting records to a direct project cost account/code. Consistent accounting treatment of costs in recording and reporting. For example, if travel expense is charged directly to a project, all travel expense incurred on any project should be considered a direct cost. As a result, project related travel, whether reimbursable per the contract terms or not, should not be included as an indirect cost. Ability to trace from invoices submitted to DEPARTMENT to job cost records and original, approved source documents, for example, timesheets, vendor invoices, canceled checks. f.Ability to reconcile job cost records to the accounting records. Compliance with cost principles described in the Code of Federal Regulations 48, Federal Acquisition Regulations System (FAR), Chapter 1, Part 31. Information on how to obtain this regulation is described under "Audit Criteria" in this brochure. Procedures to monitor and adjust projected overhead rates to actual rates. ¯Controls to ensure that written approval is obtained prior to any changes to the contract. ¯Procedures to retain accounting records and source documentation as required by the terms of the contract. A system of internal control which provides reasonable assurance that assets are protected; financial data, records and statements are reliable; and errors and irregularities are promptly discovered, reported, and corrected. The elements of a system of internal control should include, but not be limited to, the following: Separation of duties for proper protection of assets. Incompatible duties are those that place any person in a position to both perpetrate and conceal errors or irregularities in the normal course of business. For example, the person who writes checks should be different from the person who reconciles bank statements and the person who purchases goods should be different from the person who receives goods. Do Limiting access to assets to only authorized personnel who require these assets in the performance of their assigned duties. For example, blank check stock should be locked in a safe when not in use. Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 16 of 19 Authorization and record keeping procedures which provide effective accounting control over assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenditures. A system of practices to be followed in the performance of duties and functions. Such a system normally includes policies and procedures which establish the purpose and requirements of the accounting system. For example, timekeeping practices should ideally provide for the following: Timesheets be prepared, signed, and dated by all employees. Timesheets be completed in non-erasable ink. Timesheet corrections be crossed-out and initialed by the employee. Timesheets be signed by a supervisor as reviewed and retained on file as required by the contract. e.Personnel with skills and training commensurate with their responsibilities. A system of internal review. For example, bank reconciliations and travel expense claims should be reviewed approved and signed by a supervisor. AUDITS Contractors, whether a prime or subcontractor, performing under a negotiated contract with DEPARTMENT are subject to the following audits: PREAWARD AUDITS Prior to the award of a contract, the DEPARTMENT Audits and Investigations will conduct a preaward audit to determine if the contractor’s accounting system is adequate to accumulate and segregate costs as detailed in the previous section and to determine if the proposed costs are reasonable. The audit alerts both the contractor and DEPARTMENT management to problems relative to the contractor’s cost proposal and cost accounting system. Due to time constraints in the award process, your cooperation in scheduling the preaward audit with short.notice will expedite the execution of your contract. INTERIM AUDITS Interim audits are performed on an as needed basis. During the preaward audit, if it is determined that the contractor’s accounting system is new or minor deficiencies are noted, an interim audit is scheduled to determine that the system is functioning adequately to ensure that billed costs are supported and that any deficiencies were corrected. An interim audit may be requested by the contract administrator or by DEPARTMENT management to address concerns during the course of the contract. Also, an audit manager may initiate an interim audit of a long duration contract to ensure that costs reimbursed to date are allowable. POST AUDITS Post audits of contracts are performed, routinely after project completion. Post audits are performed to determine whether the costs claimed are allowable, allocable, reasonable, and in compliance with the Federal and State laws and regulations as well as the fiscal provisions stipulated in the contract. The examination includes reviews of applicable laws and regulations, the contract requirements and the contractor’s internal controls systems. Audit tests of the contractor’s accounting records and other auditing procedures considered necessary will also be performed. Applications of all audit procedures would also be governed by the individual contract Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 17 of 19 under audit. Unsupported or unallowable costs are normally the result of weaknesses in the accounting system and will be reimbursed to DEPARTMENT. To provide contractors with a procedure for obtaining prompt and equitable resolution to a dispute arising from a post-audit of a non-highway construction cost reimbursement contract, DEPARTMENT has established an Audit Review Committee (ARC). Information explaining the ARC should be found in your contract and/or as an attachment to the post-audit report. AUDIT CRITERIA For specific information regarding basic cost accounting systems and applicable State and Federal regulations, please see the following: Code of Federal Requlations 48, Federal Acquisition Requlations System, Chapter 1, Part 31 This regulation contains cost principles and procedures for the pricing of contracts/subcontracts and the determination, negotiation, or allowance of costs. Contact: Superintendent of Documents Government Printing Office Washington, DC 20402 Washington D.C. San Francisco Los Angeles (202) 783-3238 (415) 512-2770 (213) 239-9844 California State Administrative Manual A reference source for statewide policies, procedures, regulations, and information. Contact: Office of State Publishing Department of General Services (916) 445-2295 For review of the above references, contact your local library or the California State Library. California State Library/Library and Courts Building 914 Capitol Mall P. O. Box 942837 Sacramento, CA 94237-0001 Information: (916) 654-0261 For assistance in establishing an accounting system which will meet the objectives outlined in this brochure, you should contact an accountant and/or bookkeeper who is familiar with cost accounting systems. DEPARTMENT is an affirmative action employer. Equal opportunity is offered to all regardless of race, color, creed, national origin, ancestry, sex, marital status, disability, religious or political affiliation, age or sexual orientation. Contractors that contract with DEPARTMENT are responsible for taking necessary and reasonable steps to achieve these same goals. ATTACHMENT IV Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 18 of 19 LOCAL AGENCY Resolution (Resolution provided by LOCAL AGENCY through Requester) Agreement No. 04A1432 CITY OF PALO ALTO Page 19 of 19 ATTACHMENT V PROJECT DESCRIPTION WITH SCOPE OF WORK AND COSTS (To be provided by Requester or LOCAL AGENCY) Executed copy will be attached. PASO ~ PART !11 SCOPE OF SERVICES REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS (RFP) NO. 140012 TO PREPARE A MASTER SCHEMATIC DESIGN PLAN FOR EL CAMINO REAL (STATE ROUTE 82) IN PALO ALTO Scope of Work A.,Purpose and Need The City of Palo Alto is soliciting the services of an interdisciplinary transportation/urban design team to prepare a Master Schematic Design Plan for El Camino Real (State Route #82) in Palo Alto. This project is sponsored by the City of Palo Alto Divisions of Planning and Transportation in collaboration with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans),- District 4 in accordance with Cooperative Agreement No. 04A1432. Palo Alto has received a Federal Highway Administration-Caltrans Community Based Transportation Planning Grant to explore flexibility in highway design standards that better accommodate the urban conditions on in-town highways, using El Camino Real in Palo Alto as a demonstration site. The result of this planning effort will provide the City of Palo Alto with a schematic design plan that can be used to seek construction grant funding for implementing transportation and urban design improvements to El Camino Real. It will assist Caltrans in responding to requests for Context-Sensitive Design solutions from jurisdictions where state highways function as urban arterials or Main Streets. The overall goal of this project is to change the character of El Camino Real from a highway designed primarily for motor vehicle mobility to an aesthetically. attractive, fully multimodal urban thoroughfare that functions safely and effectively as a transportation corridor and projects a positive image of the City. This study will require a consultant team with a broad and diverse experience and expertise, including public participation, urban design, landscape architecture, transportation planning, pedestrian and bicycle circulation, traffic engineering, civil engineering, and urban forestry. Additionally, the team must be knowledgeable about and have direct experience with the current Federal Highway Administration nation-wide program in Context-Sensitive Design and include at least one team member who is a recognized expert in this area. Successful experience with Caltrans projects is highly desirable. The lead consultant may be either an Urban DesignlLandscape Architecture firm or a Transportation PlanninglEngineering firm. B.Back.qround The current design of this section of El Camino Real (State Route #82) in Palo Alto dates from the 1960’s when the previously two lane road was widened and redesigned to modern highway standards. At that time, the uses along the road were mainly low intensity roadside commercial and industrial uses. In the intervening years, the adjacent land use has changed and intensified until today the road passes through a fully developed urban area. The city’s Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1998 recognized significant transportation and urban design issues on El Camino Real arising from the incompatibility of the state highway and the surrounding development, and it anticipated further intensification of land use along E1 Camino Real. The Comprehensive Plan identifies El Camino Real as possibly the city’s "most recalcitrant community design problem", and includes several policies and programs to address these urban design and transportation issues: Poficy L-66: Maintain an aesthetically pleasing street network that helps frame and define .the community while meeting the needs of pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. Poficy L-71: Strengthen the identity of important community gateways, including the entrances to the city at Highway 101, El Camino Real and Middlefield Road; the Caltrain stations; entries to commercial districts; and Embarcadero Road at El Camino Real. Program L-33: Study ways to make South El Camino Real more pedestrian- friendly, including redesigning the street to provide wider sidewalks, safe pedestrian crossings at key intersections, street trees, and streetscape improvements. Program L-34: Provide better connections across El Camino Real to bring the Ventura and Barron Park neighborhoods together and to improve linkages to local schools and parks. With the recent increase in redevelopment of obsolete buildings and underutilized parcels along El Camino Real, the need for a more pedestrian- .oriented street environment and safe pedestrian crossings is becoming more urgent. Some new neighborhood-serving uses on south El Camino Real attract large numbers of young people to the street after school. Housing projects recently completed and under consideration could add several hundred more housing units to the area. Stanford University is proposing to develop up to two million square feet of new academic buildings and up to 3,000 housing units over the next few years, some of it to be located near El Camino Real. A major expansion of the Stanford Shopping Center adjacent to El Camino Real will be completed this year. A special pedestrian crossing issue arises from the need for students attending five schools in the south El Camino Real area to cross El Camino Real to go to and from school. A community based school safety effort is currently underway through.the Safe Routes to Schools Through Safe Communities project that will evaluate the routes to and from schools within the Ventura and Barron Park ¯ neighborhoods and crossing El Camino Real. El Camino Real is an important part of the public transportation system in Palo Alto and the region. The most heavily used bus line in Valley Transportation Authority’s system, Bus Line #22, runs the length of El Camino Real and serves Palo AIto’s two Caltrain multimodal stations located at University Avenue and California Avenue. VTA has undertaken the Line #22 Rapid Bus Corridor Project to enhance the Line #22 corridor. The first phase of the VTA project will add queue-jump lanes at selected intersections, with improvements to the streetscape and other amenities for bus riders to be provided in later phases of the project. A group of local community leaders recently formed a nonprofit organization, the Trees for El Camino Project, for the purpose of planting several thousand shade trees along the length of El Camino Real in Palo Alto. This organization has set a goal of raising over one million dollars to purchase and plant the trees. El Camino Real has played an important role in the history and culture of California. From San Diego to San Francisco, it is a designated California State Historical Landmark (#784), and a segment of the street in Palo Alto is part of the National De Anza Trail. C.Description of Project Site Conditions The project site is the Caltrans right of way. (property line to property line) along the entire length of El Camino Real (State Route #82) within Palo Alto. (See attached map) El Camino Real traverses the City of Palo Alto for a distance of about 4.3 miles between the city’s northern and southern boundaries. The.street has a distinctly different character in the northern and southern parts of the city. The northern segment, extending about 1.6 miles from San Francisquito Creek to Park Boulevard, has long distances between intersections and few street-fronting uses. The entire west side of this segment is bordered by Stanford Shopping Center and the campus edge of Stanford University. Along the east side of the street are large-scale uses such as a major hotel, a medical facility, a shopping. center and a city park. The public right of way. along this segment of the street varies in width from about 110 to 140 feet. Traffic flow data (1999) for the northern segment shows 42,000 Average Daily Trips and 85th percentile speed of 43 mph. The posted speed limit is 40 mph. The southern segment, extending about 2.7 miles from Park Boulevard to Adobe ¯ Creek, has frequent intersections and nearly continuous street fronting commercial uses on relatively small, shallow parcels. Residential neighborhoods are immediately behind this narrow band of commercial uses on both sides of the street. For much of this section, the street has the general character of an auto- oriented regional commercial strip; however, there are also neighborhood-serving commercial uses and some multiple family projects fronting onto the street. The width of the public right of way in this area varies from about 80 to 120 feet. Traffic flow data (1999) shows 50,000 Average Daily Trips and 85th percentile speed of 39 mph. The posted speed is 35 mph. D.Objectives of the Project The Transportation objectives of the project are to provide safe, comfortable conditions in the public right of way for all mode users (pedestrian, bicyclists, vehicle drivers, transit riders) while continuing to convey traffic in an acceptable manner. To achieve these objectives the design plan will: ¯Enhance safety, particularly for bicycles and pedestrians ¯Enhance transit services and facilities, in the short-run (bus) and in the long run (potentially light rail or fixed guideway bus). ¯Preserve the function of El Camino Real as.an intercommunity arterial, thus avoiding traffic shifts into neighborhoods adjacent to El Camino Real ¯Increase the alternative mode share of travel along the El Camino corridor through enhancements to the safety, convenience and pleasantness of travel on the corridor by transit, on foot, and by bicycle. The Urban design objectives of the project are to improve the appearance of the street consistent with its role and status as the primary thoroughfare of the City and a designated California Historic Landmark. The design of the street should reflect its importance in the history and culture of the city, the region and the nation. Components of a successful design for the street would include: ¯A coherent and memorable urban design concept for the street ¯Street furnishings and a street tree and landscape planting scheme that provide continuity and support the overall design concept ¯Substantial tree canopy over the street and sidewalks ¯Sidewalks and pedestrian crossings designed to provide safe, attractive. and distinctive pedestrian zones E. Work Scope The consultant team would conduct the necessary data gathering and analysis, and prepare preliminary design concepts, alternative design plans and a final Master Schematic Design Plan for El Camino Real at sufficient detail that it can be used by the city to apply for construction grant funding to construct the proposed improvements. The work scope has been divided into five main Tasks. The Transportation consultant, the Urban Design/Landscape Architect consultant, and other members of the consultant team as needed, will collaborate on all phases of work throughout the project. Task 1. Existinq Conditions and Desi.qn Criteria Identify critical issues, review existing conditions, gather and analyze data, and develop design criteria. a) Data Collection and Analysis The following information will be provided to the consultant by the city: ¯Electronic data showing approximate street configuration, rights of way, above ground and underground infrastructure and land use information forthe project area in Microstation, AutoCAD and/or GIS files ¯Results of a Plan Line Study expected to be completed in mid- 2001 ¯Accident data The consultant will supplement or gather additional information as necessary to fulfill the project objectives. This may include: Conduct field observations of the project area to observe existing conditions during both day and evening, weekends and weekdays, and to verify the accuracy of existing maps and data. Compile data on corridor travel including vehicular speed, volume, classification, and turning movements; transit ridership and on and off counts; and pedestrians and bicycle volumes on and alongside the street and crossing at intersections. Data must be sufficient to perform operational analysis of existing conditions and proposed changes to road geometry. ¯Compile and analyze accident data. ¯Analyze both existing level of service and projected 2020 level of service at selected signalized intersections. Evaluate potential for vehi~;le progression at a more consistent but slower speed, including possibilities for improved signal coordination. ¯Conduct field safety audits for bicycles and pedestrians using the corridor. At representative locations, analyze sight distance, pedestrian crossing distance and time as well as barriers and obstructions .and ADA accessibility, with the objective of making the street fully accessible and fully multimodal. Evaluate ways to meet (on a corridor wide basis) Congestion Management Agency standards. Evaluate transit, bike, and pedestrian demand to 2020 and alternatives for meeting alternative modes demand. b) c) Provide vehicle trip and person trip volume projections to the year 2020. Evaluate potential for a modal shift away from single occupant travel to alternative modes. Develop project design criteria, based on input from city staff, the Advisory Group, the results of field observations and data analysis. The project design criteria will include subjective and objective elements. These criteria may include aesthetics, cost, level of community support, environmental impacts, and measurable performance standards for desired transportation patterns after implementation (e.g., desired 85th percentile speeds, changes in volumes, turning movements, congestion, bicycle and pedestrian circulation, safety). These performance standards will help shape the design alternatives and will be used to evaluate their success after implementation. Meet with Advisory Group to discuss existing conditions, data collection and analysis process and development of project design criteria. Products of this Task: Advisory Group Meeting; Interim Report #1 summarizing existing conditions, describing data collection and analysis, discussing critical issues, and identifying projectdesign criteria. Task 2. Preliminary Concept Plans Prepare and evaluate preliminary concept plans. Prepare educational outreach materials and conduct Community Forum #1. A new, creative approach to the allocation of space within the public right of way will be required in order to satisfy all of the transportation requirements and improve the urban design quality of the street. Three critical factors will shape and limit other design options: design speed, number of travel lanes, and lane widths. a)Develop a series of preliminary design concept plans. The concept plans will be general, diagrammatic plans of measures applied along 6 b) c) d) segments of El Camino Real selected to represent the various right of way widths and other site conditions present on the street. The concept plans will include design approaches that can be applied either separately or in combination. These approaches may address lane width, number and configuration of lanes, median islands, intersection modifications, roundabouts, pedestrian crossings, street trees, bulb-outs, modifications to traffic signals, special paving treatment, etc. Prepare brief evaluations of each of the concepts in terms of pros and cons and its ability to meet the design criteria. Evaluate trade-offs in allocating right-of-way for such competing uses as vehicle throughput (i.e. lane width and number of travel lanes, turning lanes and pockets), bicycle lanes, landscape medians and parkways, bus transit, potential future rail transit, and added sidewalk width, while preserving the function of El Camino as a major arterial. Consider the effects of these trade-offs, the functional effects and effects on nearby residential neighborhoods (i.e. potential for traffic shift). This evaluation should be conducted: a) for current conditions; b) in response to modal shifts toward alternative modes; and c) for the year 2020. For each concept, identify ways in which the concept would require flexibility in current highway design standards. Provide supporting evidence and rationale to justify alternatives to existing highway standards, and coordinate with appropriate Caltrans representatives. Explore a variety of urban design treatments with different character and aesthetic qualities, and involve the community in developing a preferred overall urban design concept for the street. Develop presentation and educational outreacli materials to inform the public about relevant transportation and urban design principles. The purpose is to broaden awareness, provide a common frame of reference and encourage participation by members of the community. For example, these might include a slide presentation at the Community Forum showing successful examples of urban arterials in other cities, and a self-guided tour of streets in the Bay Area selected to illustrate various streetscape characteristics and design options. The educational materials should be in a format that can be used by neighborhood groups and other community organizations to solicit broad community participation. e)Hold Advisory Group meeting to review and discuss the pros and cons of various preliminary concept plans and urban design treatments. f)Plan and Conduct Community Forum#1.. The Community Forum should educate the public about relevant urban design and transportation issues and concepts and encourage their active involvement in the development of project alternatives. Products of this Task: Advisory Group Meeting; Community Forum #1; Educational Outreach Materials; Preliminary Design Concept Plans; Interim Report #2 that will describe and evaluate preliminary transportation and urban design concepts and treatments, and discuss application of flexibility in highway design standards. Task 3. Desiqn Alternatives Develop and compare two alternative plans, and conduct Community Forum #2. a)From the preliminary concepts, develop two alternative schematic design plans in more detail, providing cross-sections, elevations, diagrams, .traffic analyses and right-of-way configurations. Provide detailed technical anal)sis of each alternative, and provide descriptions and rationale for major features of each alternative. b)Provide a schematic street tree planting plan for each alternativel showing the number and placement of large canopy trees that each plan can accommodate in the medians and along the sidewalks. c)Prepare an integrated analysis of the two alternative plans, evaluating: Motor vehicle level of service, speeds, traffic patterns and spill-over traffic Bicycle and pedestrian usage Suitability for existing and future transit service Impacts on noise, pollution and the environment Emergency vehicle response times Parking availability Itemized cost estimates to construct and maintain Need for flexibility in existing highway design standards d) Meet with Advisory.Group to review the two alternative plans. e)Conduct Community Forum #2. The Community Forum will present and evaluate the two alternative schematic design plans, provide information about the choices and trade-offs, and provide the City Council a basis for assessing the level of community support for various options addressed in the plans. Products of this Task: Advisory Group meeting; Community Forum #2; Two preliminary schematic design plans; Summary Report Task 4. Draft final schematic desi_qn plan Present two alternative plans at Public Hearings, and select a preferred alternative. a)Hold public hearings with the Architectural Review Board, the Planning and Transportation Commission, and the Public Arts Commission on the two preliminary schematic plans. b) Hold Advisory Group meeting to identify the recommended alternati,~e. c)Based on the results of the two Community Forums, the public hearings before the review Boards and Commissions, and comments from the Advisory Group and city staff, select a preferred alternative and .revise the selected alternative to reflect input from the review process. d)For the preferred alternative, provide a schematic street tree and landscape plan including: recommended tree species and plant materials; below ground soil conditions necessary for the trees to develop to the desired size; a conceptual maintenance plan; and general cost estimates to install and maintain the proposed trees and landscaping. Products of this Task: Advisory Group meeting; three public hearings before the.ARB, PTC, and PAC; Draft final schematic plan; Draft Final Report Task 5. Final Schematic Desiqn Plan and Final Report Present the preferred alternative plan for review by City Council and revise based on Council direction. a)Present the Draft final schematic design plan and Draft final report to the City Council. b)Modify the Draft final schematic design plan and Draft final report in response to City Council direction. Products of this Task: City Council public hearing; Final Schematic Design Plan; Final Report F.Community Participation The city will assemble an Advisory Group of about twelve special interest stakeholders and representatives of city Boards and Commissions. The consultant will meet with the Advisory Group at least once during development of each of the main project Tasks 1-4. During Task 2, the consultant will develop educational outreach materials to encourage and facilitate broad community participation. The consultant will plan and conduct two Community Forums, the first during Task 2, the second during Task 3. During Tasks 4 and 5, the consultant will make presentations at a total of four public hearings before the Architectural Review Board, the Public Arts Commission, and Planning and Transportation Commission, and the City Council. At least once during each of the main Tasks 1-5, the consultant will prepare a press release and a project update for the city’s Website. G.Summary of Meetings and Deliverables ¯Agendas and Minutes for all meetings ¯Meetings with city staff and Caltrans representatives- as needed ¯4 Advisory Group meetings ¯2 Community Forums ¯4 Public Hearings ¯4 Plan Iterations: Preliminary Design Concepts;Two Preliminary Schematic Designs; Draft Final Schematic Plan; Final Schematic Design Plan ¯5 Reports: Interim Report #1; Interim Report #2; Summary Report; Draft Final Report; Final Report ¯Educational Outreach materials ¯5 Press releases and project updates for posting on city Website Provide all agendas, minutes and reports in electronic format suitable for posting on the city’s Website, in addition to paper copies. Provide 20 copies of all items, except provide 40 copies of the Draft Final Report, and provide 80 copies of the Final Report. 10 H. Selection Criteria The following criteria will be used to evaluate proposals: 1.Completeness of responses to the Request for Proposals and evidence of understanding the purpose, objectives and requirements of the project. Composition and expertise of the consultant team, the Project Manager, and the time to be spent by each team member. The consultant team must include expertise in transportation planning, pedestrian and bicycle circulation, traffic engineering, urban design, landscape architecture, public participation, civil engineering, and urban forestry. The team members must be knowledgeable about and have direct experience with Context-Sensitive Design and at least one team member must be a recognized expert in this area. 3.Responsiveness to time requirements and demonstrated means to complete the project within the project schedule. Demonstrated recent experience with similar type and quality of work expected in this project, including design of urban arterial streets and Context-Sensitive Design. Successful experience with Caltrans projects is highly desirable. 5.Demonstrated experience and skill in responding to community and special interest concerns. 6.Electronic data, graphic, and other visual representation capabilities of the consultant team. 7.Estimate of required resources, including proposed fee relative to the services to be provided, and projected Palo Alto staff time in assisting consultants. Selection of a consultant is based on the best qualified proposal within the project budget. I.Pre-proposal Conference A pre-proposal conference will be held on October 18, 2001, at 1:00 p.m. in the City Council Conference Room at Palo Alto City Hall, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA. All prospective proposers are strongly encouraged toattend. J.Evaluation Procedures At least three, but not more than six consultant teams responding to the RFP will be selected to be interviewed. Interviews are tentatively scheduled for the week of November 12, 2001. Based upon the responses to the RFP, the interview, and information provided by references, the preferred candidate will be selected to enter into negotiations for a contract with the city. K.Project Schedule and Resources The project is expected to start on or before January 7, 2002, and to be completed, including review and approval of the City Council prior to December 1,2002. Proposals should clearly demonstrate how the required services can be provided within this time frame. While the actual cost of performing the required services is to be determined through the proposal selection and negotiation process, the total amount of the contract is not expected to exceed $280,000. L.Proposal Guidelines A suggested format for the consultant’s response to this Request for Proposals is indicated below. These guidelines are intended to facilitate the review and evaluation of the consultant responses. Consultants are requested, but not required, to follow these guidelines. Project Statement Prepare a brief, general statement indicating the consultant’s understanding of the nature of the project and the services to be provided. Proposed Work Program Identify specific major tasks and related work elements to accomplish the proposed services. Include for each work element: a. a statement of OBJECTIVE indicating its purpose b. a statement of PROCEDURE indicating how the work will be accomplished c. a statement of OUTPUT indicating what information and products are to be provided, and d. a statement of RESOURCES, person-days and dollar costs, estimated to complete the work. 3. Schedule Prepare a work schedule indicating total time for each work element. o Resource Summary Present a summary of the estimates of person-days and total dollar costs for each work element. Any out-of-area travel expenses should be identified. Staffing Identify specific individuals proposed for this project, including: a. their project responsibilities b. their specific experience related to their responsibilities on this project c. estimated level of effort (person-days) for each person, and d. personal resumes o References Provide three references (name, address, and telephone number) for recent similar consulting work. If you have completed projects within the Bay Area, provide locations where this work can be observed. 7. Documents Complete and return with your proposal all required proposal documents "CO~IDOR PROJECT ~ o ~~I_~ 22 Planning January 2001 From Highway to My Way ATTACI-IMENT B By Reid Ewing You know the world is changing when everyone from the Federal Highway Administration to state and local sensitive" " desi N OW that the nation’s highways are nearly complete, transportation professionals are aiming their sights on local communities and the in- herent links between transporta- tion systems and surrounding land uses. There is alot of confusion about exactly what constitutes context-sensitive highway design, what latitude exists under current standards and guidelines, what tort liability attaches to such efforts, and what effect context-sensitive designs will have on traffic safety and service levels. This article seeks to sort out myth from fact. Main Street destroyed In the course of writing Best Development Practices (1996; APA Planners Press), I visited every medium-sized town with any historic character in the state of Florida. I was on a quest for the best traditional small towns in the state, hoping to find lessons applicable to contemporary development projects. Unfor- tunately, I found very few good examples, mostly because of what was happening along Main Street. Main Street, usually part of the state highway system, no longer functioned as a comfortable shopping street. It was too wide, and on-street parking had been removed, street trees replaced with asphalt, and side- walks narrowed. Strip commercial develop- ment seemed the only practical land use. The traditional towns that did end up in the book, such as Dade City, had somehow managed to evade the standard DOT definition of "progress." The problem of context-insensitive high- ways is not, of course, unique to Florida, nor to small towns, nor to state highways. Instead of gracious boulevards, avenues, and shopping streets, America’s urban areas are crisscrossed by arcerials and collectors that move traffic but have no power to move mens’ souls. DOTs vs. dots Here are several examples proving that change is in the air. U.S. Route 6 narrows to two lanes as it runs through the town of Brooklyn, Connecticut. Sight distance is less than 250 feet at one point, driveways are closely spaced, and there is litde roadside clearance should a 23 driver lose control. Yet traffic speeds through the town still range up to 54 mph. A 1991 state plan sought to correct these dangerous conditions by widening the road to four lanes, straightening the alignment, and adding eight-foot shoulders. The village ap- pealed the plan to the Federal Highway Ad- ministration under the National Environmental Policy Act, and the Connecticut Department of Transportation was sent back to the draw- ing board. ConnDOT’s next proposal was a bypass around the town, which was also rejected. Finally, after years of additional planning, a compromise was reached in 1998. It keeps the existing alignment through the town center, retains the two-lane cross section, adds narrow shoulders and sidewalks, and realigns the road marginally at the most dan- gerous curve. Reconstruction will be com- pleted in 2003. In Anchorage, Alaska, engineers proposed the conversion of 15th Avenue into a one-way couplet with 14th Avenue after a safety study documented high accident rates and substan- dard geometrics. However, residents of the adjacent Rogers Park neighborhood had seen one-way couplets in operation in midtown, and this was exactly what they didn’t want. The couplets moved traffic efficiently but di- vided the community much as a freeway would. And so began a four-year process of rede- sign that in 1998 resulted ina four-lane, tree- lined boulevard on the east end, and a nar- rowed three-lane cross section on the west. When construction is completed later this year, lanes will be maintained at their current ll-foot width, and shoulders excluded. In- stead of a shoulder, a wide gutter pan will provide a refuge area and bike-friendly sur- face. Sidewalks will be set back from the street for the first time. In Westminster, Maryland, the base layer of East Main Street needed reconstruction, underground utility lines had to be replaced, and the storm drain system needed upgrad- ing. After Checking the Maryland R_9_oadway Design Manual, the district engineer pro- posed widening the road to 40 feet. Widening would have provided 12-foot travel lanes and eight-foot parking lanes on each side. It also would have eliminated nearly all street trees and reduced the sidewalk width to two feet in places. After learning about the widening, a local resident began a campaign to preserve the street’s historic character. She appealed to the mayor, who convinced the Maryland State HighwayAdministration to reconstruct within the street’s existing dimensions. The result is a classic main street with "bulb out" curb exten- sions at intersections, midblock crosswalks, . hundreds of additional street trees, and brick surfacing in the crosswalks. In these and many other cases uncovered in our research, the need for road improvements was undeniable, but standard design solu- tions were unacceptable to the people most affected by them--those along the right-of- way. The resulting tension between DOT and community goals led to compromise and context-sensitive designs. Reform at the top Before 1991, all roads built in the U.S. and paid for even in part with federal funds had to meet guidelines in the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) "Green Book" (A Policy on Geo- metric Design of Highways and Streets). If officials wanted to do something different, their only options were to seek design exceptions from the Federal HighwayAdministration or to build entirdy with state and local funds. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) changed all that by creating a National Highway System made up of the interstate ~ystem and other high-performance state highways, 160,000 miles of roadway in all. Other roads became eligible for federal fund- ing under a separate surface transportation program. For roads not on the NHS, ISTEA gave states latitude to adopt alternative de- sign, safer5,, and construction standards. ISTEA was followed by two other mile- stones. The National Highway System Act of 1995 provided that even NHS highways (other than interstate highways) could be designed to take into account the environ- mental, scenic, aesthetic, historic, commu- nity, and preservation impacts of any pro- posed activity. Two years later, the Federal HighwayAdministration published Flexibil- ity in Highway Design, which forcefully ad- vocates flexible design of highways running through communities, encouraging highway designers to exercise flexibility within exist- ing AASHTO guidelines. Reform in the states At the state level, much of the effort to pro- mote context sensitivity has been process- and people-oriented. Five states (Connecticut, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, and Utah) are participating in a joint FHWA/_AASHTO training program. Many states, including New Jersey, have launched training efforts of their own. The New Jersey training consists of five day-long sessions on such unconventional topics (at least for highway engineers) as placemaking, respectful communication, and negotiation and conflict management. While such efforts are laudable, they inevita- bly run up against engineering constraints un- less DOT standards and policies are revised. Michael King, a consultant on the NJDOT flexible highway design project, surveyed 21 states to find out about their efforts to develop new standards and policies. As evident in the accompanying table, substantive changes are happening at the state level now. 24 Planning Januan.’2001 Don’t blame the Green Book King found that few states have adopted sub- AASHTO geometric standards. Among those that have, deviations from Green Book values are relatively slight. The difference between the cross-sectional width of a two-lane urban arterial under Vermont’s much heralded de- sign standards and that under the Green Book minimums is only three feet (43 vs. 46 feet). Notably, Dave Scott, director of project de- velopment and keeper of the Vermont stan- dards, has advised our New Jersey study team not to recommend anything less than AASHTO minimums because there is little to gain on urban main streets. This is not to say that the AASHTO Green Book is.without shortcomings. Its design guide- lines are often based on studies dating from a time when tires, braking systems, pavements, and vehicle dimensions were less forgiving than today’s. However, these guidelines mostly affect the design of high-speed rural roads. The issue in the New Jersey study is whether good urban streets can be accomplished un- der AASHTO guidelines. Here are some of the AASHTO guidelines for urban arterials: ¯ Design speed. AASHTO allows design speeds as low as 31 mph in central business districts and intermediate areas. Posted speeds would ordinarily be considerably lower. ¯ Lane width. The minimum lane width is 9.8 feet for urban arterials with lirtle or no truck traffic. A minimum of 10.8 feet is pre- scribed for general traffic on urban arterials designed for speeds up to 37 mph. ¯ Setback of street trees. On curbed sec- tions, the minimum clearance from the curb face is 1.6 feet. A 3.3-foot clearance is consid- ered desirable, particularly near intersections and driveways where turning vehicles may overhang the curb. ¯ Midblock crosswalks. AASHTO is neu- tral on these. ¯ On-street parking. Parallel parking is al- lowed where adequate street capacity is avail- able. ¯ Corners. Corner radii of 9.8 to 13.7 feet are reasonable under constrained conditions. On arterials, carrying high volumes, larger radii are recommended (in some cases, much larger) to facilitate turns to and from the through lanes. ¯ Pedestrian refuge islands. Median islands are enc~ouraged where space permits. ¯ Sidewalks. The minimum border width, including sidewalk and planting strip, is 7.9 feet; 11.8 feet is preferred. ¯ Barrier curbs. Barrier curbs are encour- aged in areas of high pedestrian traffic and speeds up to 37 mph, or on discretionary basis, up to 50 mph. At higher speeds, barrier curbs do not act as barriers an)~,ay. The conclusion: It appears that we cannot place too much blame on the Green Book for " the sorry state of urban streets. Liability isn’t the issue, either Governments used to have general immunity from tort liability, but that has changed since the 1960s, as various courts and legislatures made it possible for individuals and groups to sue in cases where government fails to exercise due care in its decisions. Government decisions are now divided into two classes: discretionary (planning decisions) and ministerial (operational decisions). Dis- cretionary decisions involve a choice among valid alternatives and are generally immune from tort claims. Ministerial decisions leave minimal leeway for personal judgment and are not immune. As part of our study for New Jersey DOT, we surveyed statutory and recent case law in 16 states. With the sole exception of local roads in Vermont, all states had replaced sov- ereign immunity with more limited discre- tionary immunity. New Jersey has a Tort Claims Act that leaves the state almost completely immune from tort liability resulting from design-re- lated decisions. All it takes is for the right body or person to approve a design (or the At least a dozen states are changing d~e standards and policies covering their main streets. In Sarasota S.~rings, New York, U.$. 9 changesj~om a semi-rural highway with a 55 mph speed limit m a three- lane urban road with a 30 mph ~eed limit, all within a stretch of l, aoo f et. standards on which a design is based). At the other extreme is Georgia, whose su- preme court held in DOTv. Brown (! 996) that the design of a roadway is an operational func- tion, not covered by discretionary immunity: "Only the decision to build, and not where or how it is built, is immune." Between these extremes are states such as California and South Carolina, which provide design immunity but allow it to lapse as conditions change. From our 16-state survey, we did not find tort liability much of an excuse for the sorry state of urban streets. Instead, we have identi- fied some real culprits. Put the blame here The AASHTO Green Book offers design poli- cies and guidelines, not standards. For each design element, AASHTO typically provides a range of acceptable values, from a minimum value to a more desirable target value. For an AASHTO guideline to become a standard, it must be adopted by a responsible agency. Many states have adopted standards toward the middle or upper end of the AASHTO ranges, on the theory that if some is good, more is better. County and city engi- neers have then blindly adopted state stan- dards. As noted, Maryland’s lane width standards would have encroached on trees and side- walks in the town of Westminster. Those standards exceededAASHTO minimums. Not only were these particular standards thrown out, but the experience convinced Bob Douglass, the Maryland State HighwayAdministrafion’s deputy chief engineer, that the standards should be thrown out wholesale. In 1998, Douglass wrote a memo banning the use of the state’s highway design manual. He found that the templates were generally oversized (especially stopping sight distance and vertical curves) and stymied creativity among engineers. The agency was losing legal challenges when an element was below the state minimum value, but above the Green Book value. Now the agency relies exclusively on the Green Book. In the wrong class Another culprit is misclassiflcation of streets. Streets and highways in this country are clas- sified by location--urban or rural--and by function: arterial, collector, and local. There is a direct relationship between classification and design standards. Classification determines design speed, design vehicle, and cross section (lane width, shoulder width, and type and width of median). 26 Planning January2001 The U.S. classification system has been criticized for ignoring distinctions among con- texts and among roadway functions. An ur- ban arterial conforms to the same basic stan- dards whether it is a main street or a bypass. Misclassification of streets commonly oc- curs for two reasons. A small town, village, or hamlet fails to meet the census definition of urban because it lacks a population of at least 5,000 and a density of at least 1,000 persons per square mile. That community may end up with a main street designed to rural standards. This was true in Brooklyn, Connecticut, be- fore the compromise described at the begin- ning of this article. The simple solution to this problem is to treat any place that is built up as urban, regardless of its census designation. The Fed- eral HighwayAdministration policy is simple: If it looks urban, use urban standards. The other common case ofmisclassiflcation occurs as road functions change over time. In Westminster, Maryland, East Main Street had always been part of Maryland State Route 32. It began functioning more like a local street when the State Road 140 bypass opened. Accordingly, this portion of Route 32 was removed from the Maryland state highway system after the street was reconstructed, and the city assumed responsibility for its opera- tion and maintenance. Other examples of reclassification include Sunset Drive in South Miami and Spring’rid Avenue (N.J. Route 124) in Maplewood, New Jersey. Level of disservice Level-of-service standards are yet another cause for concern. While there is a legal imperative to provide safe roads, there is no such reason to provide free-flowing roads. Some conges- tion may be desirable in a dmvntown. After all, a downtown without traffic isn’t a very exciting downtown. Virtually all DOTs have adopted level-of- service standards. Typically, the standard for urban areas is C or D, while the standard for suburban areas is B or C. As traffic volumes increase to the point where the standard is no longer met, a road and its intersections often will be widened regardless of the effects on adjacent land uses. The alternative is to accept congestion in areas that function as destinations. Since 1993, Florida has allowed its local governments to exempt streets through downtowns and ur- ban redevelopment areas from level-of-service standards. The effective standard becomes level-of-service F. Many cities and towns have taken this option. West Palm Beach, for example, has adopted level-of-service E as its standard and is seeking a complete exemption from level-of-service stan- dards for much of the city. This city keeps an eye on both low volume-to-capacity ratios (less than 0.6) and high ones (greater than 0.9). A low volume-to-capacity ratio may offer an op- pormnity--a place where the street can be narrowed and street life encouraged by means of widened sidewalks, on-street parking, and landscaped curb extensions and islands. It is worth noting that severalof the con- The standard cross section Nearly all state DOTs include typical sec- tions-another culprit--in their road design manuals. If an area is classified as urban, and a road is functionally classified as a principal arterial, the typical section for an urban prin- cipal arterial becomes the default roadway. Typical sections inhibit flexible and con- text-sensitive design in two ways. First, where right-of-way is constrained, something must be sacrificed to maintain standard travel lanes: the sidewalk, landscape buffer, parking lane, Su~uet Drive in South Miami, Florida, is one of many roads around the country that have been reclassified to the ben~t~t of the su,’ounding communiO,. text-sensitive projects we studied have im- proved or at least maintained roadway level- of-service despite narrowed roadways. How? Through clever treatment of intersections, where most delays occur. or bike lane. Also, there is the tendency to adopt a single, typical section for an entire stretch of road, even when conditions change along its length. Having a single typical sec- tion is convenient for the design engineer and 27 construction crew, but it is not good policy. A dramatic example, to be featured in our upcoming guidebook for New Jersey DOT, is found in Saratoga Springs, New York. South Broadway (U.S. 9) changes from a four-lane, semi-rural highway with a striped median and posted speed of 55 mph to a three-lane urban road with a raised median, single northbound lane, and posted speed of 30 mph, all in a stretch of 1,800 feet. By all accounts, the section in question would have been reconstructed as a uniform four-lane road, but for two things. First, in 1999, the New York State DOT started an environmen- tal initiative, with context-sensitive design at its heart. Second, the highway passes Saratoga Spa State Park, the Lincoln Baths, and the Museum of Dance. Something special, more like a gateway, was required. Ultimately, a series of roadway sections were built that make a smooth transition from the high-speed semi- rural environment to the south to the low- speed urban environment to the north. The three Rs At least in theory, roads that are being resur- faced, restored, or rehabilitated (so-called 3R projects) do not have to be upgraded to cur- rent geometric standards. In some states, 3R projects are instead subject to special stan- dards below those of AASHTO---~th the blessing of the Green Book. By contrast, un- der state and federal policies, roads recon- structed down to their bases must be brought up to current standards. In a constrained main street environment, there is no reason to treat 3R and reconstruc- tion projects differently. In both cases, de- signers already know how a road performs based on historical accident and other data. The Maryland State Highway Administra- tion reached this conclusion recently, and now leaves existing cross sections alone unless there is a documented crash problem. Exceptions to the rules The Federal Highway Administration grants design exceptions on the National Highway System, and the same is true for state or local DOTs on non-NHS roads. Between 1997 and 1999, New Jersey DOT engineers re- quested and received design exceptions for 81 projects, including most major highway projects undertaken by the state. From our review of the 81 reports, excep- tions were commonly granted for substan- dard shoulder width, substandard banking on horizontal curves, and substandard stopping sight distance on vertical curves. The process appears flexible--but exceptions are typically requested in order to save money, not to preserve context. Here is a typical scenario: A road is being reconstructed, and a sharper curve must to be straightened to meet the standard for hori- zontal curvature. However, someone’s house or business would be taken, some park or cemetery would be encroached on, a lot of extra asphalt would have to poured, or some other big expense would be incurred. And so the design engineer chec -ks accident statistics for the location in question, focusing on the types of accidents associated with sub- standard horizontal curves, and finds that the curve generates only an average number of accidents compared to state norms. Noting that substantial costs can be avoided by allow- ing a substandard horizontal curve, a design exception is requested and granted. Sometimes context also is taken into ac- count, as with a road and bridge project in an historic district of Oxford Township, New Jersey. But that is a rare occurrence. Let’s use common sense Gary Toth, one of the overseers of our re- search at New Jersey DOT, keeps saying that context sensitive design is just a matter of common sense. If the designer understands the transportation context, the safety and mo- bility needs to be addressed, and then uses common sense to fit sound engineering prin- ciples into the environmental and c_ommu- niry context, a design will emerge that repre- sents the best of both worlds. On 15th Avenue in Anchorage, Alaska, the first common sense decision was to divide the roadway section into three segments because traffic turns off as one heads west. Daily vol- umes drop from 22,000 at one end of the avenue to 4,000 at the other, implying very different cross sections. Focusing on the westernmost segment, the second common sense decision was to drop a lane, from four to three, the center lane becoming a continuous left-turn lane. In a third common sense decision, the top westbound lane was replaced with a five-foot sidewalk and landscape buffer between the road and sidewalk. By reducing the number of lanes, the state is also reducing the amount of snow to be cleared, and creating more storage space for it in the landscape buffer. With Anchorage’s low sun angle, and the sun blocked by buildings and trees, the engi- neers expect that three additional weeks of bare pavement a year will result from the decision to place the sidewalk on the north side of the street rather than dropping an eastbound lane and placing the sidewalk on the south side. The final exercise of common sense was to seek several design exceptions. Some stopping and intersection sight distances, curb return radii, shoulder widths, and clearances to ob- structions will remain substandard. However, the-project will still improve safety and, with the design exceptions in place, cost about a third as much. What’s next Because AASHTO has been responsible for, or at least been blamed for, so much of what of what we don’t like about urban streets in this country, it seems fitting to end on a positive note from an AASHTO draft document. "The notion of designing a ’high quality,’ low speed road is counterintuitive to many highway engineers, yet it is in many cases the approptiate solution .... Context sensitive design in the urban environment often in- volves creating a safe roadway environment [by encouraging drivers] to operate at low speeds." The document then offers a qualified en- dorsement of traffic calming, something un- imaginable five years ago. Reid Ewing is a researchprofessor at Rutgers Univer- sity and the research director of the Surface Trans- portation Policy Project in Washington, D.C. This article is an outgrowv.h of the Flexible Design Stan- dards for Communities project, conducted by Rutgers University under contract with the New Jersey-De- partment of Transportation. In print. Federal Highway Administration, Flexibili9, in Highway Design, Washin~on, D.C., 1997. Harold Peaks and Sandra Hayes, "Building Roads in Sync With Community Values," Public Roads, Federal Highway Ad- ministration, March/April 1999. Portland Metro, Creating Livable Streets: Street Desi~ Guidelines for 2OqO, Portland, Oregon, 1997. North Carolina Department of Transporta- tion, Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) Guidelines, Raleigh, North Carolina, 2000. Oregon Department of Transporta- tion, Main Street... u,hen a highway ~ns through it: A Handbook for Oregon Communi- ties, Salem, 1999. Conservation La~v Founda- tion, Take Back Your Streets: How to Protect Communities fi’om Asphalt and Traffic, Con- cord, New Hampshire, 1998. Reid Ewing, Traj~% Cabning: State-of-the-Practice, Insti- tute of Transportation Engineers, 1999. TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT DATE: SUBJECT: NOVEMBER 13, 2001 CMR:417:01 RESOLUTION APPROVING A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND CALTRANS FOR THE EL CAMINO REAL CALTRANS COMMUNITY-BASED PLANNING GRANT PROJECT RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Resolution approving a Cooperative Agreement between the City of Palo Alto and Caltrans, which would allow the City to be reimbursed by federal and state matching funds up to $240,000. These funds will be used to prepare a Master Schematic Design Plan for E1 Camino Real. BACKGROUND Last year, Caltrans established a new Office of Community Planning (OCP) to address the statewide need for community-sensitive approaches to transportation decision-making. One of the functions of OCP is to administer the newly-created Community Based Transportation Planning (CBTP) demonstration grant program. This grant program supports planning studies that showcase examples of livable community concepts and encourage smart growth, and that can then be used to seek grant funds for constructing the improvements. City staff submitted a proposal for a CBTP demonstration grant to study improvements to E1 Camino Real (State Route 82) in Palo Alto that would increase safety, efficiency and comfort for all mode users (vehicle drivers, transit users, bicyclists and pedestrians) and present a more attractive urban design image. The proposal also included exploring flexibility in the application of highway design standards where exceptions to current standards may be required to achieve the project objectives. The Palo Alto project would serve as a prototype for in-town or "main street" highways, where flexibility in highway design is needed to accommodate the urban conditions along these streets. CMR:417:01 Page 1 of 4 Allowing flexibility in the application of highway design standards in relation to the unique conditions of the surrounding community was encouraged in the 1991 Intermodal SurfaceTransportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and further emphasized in the 1995 National Highway System Act. Since then, "context-sensitive" highway design has become an objective of progressive transportation agencies across the country. New context-sensitive policy directives are currently under review at Caltrans. For a review of background and issues in context sensitive highway design see the article "From Highway to My Way" by Reid Ewing, Planning Magazine, January 2001, attached to this report. The Palo Alto grant was approved by OCP in the amount of $240,000. The grant requires a 20 percent match ($48,000) from the City. The Palo Alto proposal was co-sponsored by the regional Caltrans District 4 office in Oakland, and the project will be a collaborative effort between the City and Caltrans District 4. DISCUSSION The overall goal of this project is to change the character of E1 Camino Real from a highway designed primarily for motor vehicle mobility to a fully multimodal, aesthetically attractive urban thoroughfare that functions safely and effectively as a transportation corridor and projects a positive image of the city. The project area is the Caltrans right of way (property line to property line) for the 4.3 miles of E1 Camino Real in Palo Alto from the north city limit at San Francisquito Creek to the south city limit at Adobe Creek. As staff indicated in the grant proposal to Caltrans, the grant will be used to fund a consultant team to prepare a concept plan identifying improvements along E1 Camino Real that would result in a more attractive, safer thoroughfare. The consultant team to be hired for this project will be an interdisciplinary team with expertise in transportation planning and engineering, pedestrian and bicycle circulation, urban design, landscape architecture, urban forestry and public participation. The transportation consultant, the urban design/landscape architecture consultant, and other members of the consultant team as needed will collaborate on all phases of work throughout the project. The final product of the project will be a schematic design plan that will be used to solicit state and federal grant funding for implementation of identified improvements. The schematic plan will also be used to as a guide to coordinate the design of individual street improvement projects that are implemented incrementally by Caltrans, Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) or by private developers of projects along E1 Camino Real. Opportunities for the community to participate in the project will be provided through an advisory group of interested stakeholders, two community forums, four public hearings before City boards and commissions and the City Council, and press releases and project updates on the City’s website. In addition, educational outreach materials will be prepared for use by neighborhood groups and other community organizations. CMR:417:01 Page 2 of 4 Interdepartmental and interagency coordination is an essential part of this project. City staff in the Divisions of Planning and Transportation and the Department of Community Services are coordinating several planning efforts currently underway in the City, including the Zoning Ordinance update, the Safe Routes to Schools project, development of interim Landscape Design Guidelines for E1 Camino Real, development of Architectural Design Guidelines for E1 Camino Real, the ground floor retail ordinance, and review of current development projects along El Camino Real. In addition, City staff is coordinating with the citizen-led Trees For E1 Camino project and the E1 Camino Real planning and design efforts currently underway in Menlo Park, Redwood City and Stanford, and with the Santa Clara Valley Water District culvert replacement project over Adobe Creek. When this project commences, interagency coordination will expand to include Caltrans OCP in Sacramento and Caltrans District 4 in Oakland, the VTA, and the cities of Los Altos, Mountain View and Menlo Park with adjacent sections of E1 Camino Real. For additional information about the background, description, and scope of the project, see the appended Scope of Services included as Attachment V to the Cooperative Agreement (page 19). Minor revisions may be made to the Scope of Services during contract negotiations. RESOURCE IMPACT Approval of this agreement will allow the City to be reimbursed by Community Based Transportation Planning funds up to $240,000, to prepare a Master Schematic Design Plan for E1 Camino Real. The grant requires a 20 percent City match of $48,000, for a total project budget of $288,000. The $48,000 city matching funds will be provided from the $75,000 allocated in the CIP 2000-01 budget item no. 10113 for E1 Camino Real Design Guidelines. Staff will actively seek grant funding for any recommendations that come out of this study. After the Resolution is approved, staff will request a Budget Amendment Ordinance to create a new CIP. The new CIP will allow the City to accept and expend grant revenue. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommendation in this report is consistent with and will help implement Policies and Programs in the Comprehensive Plan, particularly the following. Program L-33: "Study ways to make South E1 Camino Real more pedestrian-friendly, including redesigning the street to provide wider sidewalks, safe pedestrian crossings at key intersections, street trees, and streetscape improvements." Program L-34: Provide better connections across E1 Camino Real to bring the Ventura and Barron Park neighborhoods together and to improve linkages to local schools and parks." Policy L-66: "Maintain an aesthetically pleasing street network that helps frame and define the community while meeting the needs of pedestrian, bicyclists, and motorists." Program T-16: Evaluate the extension of a light rail line along El Camino Real from Mountain View through Palo Alto to Menlo Park." CMR:417:01 Page 3 of 4 TIMELINE The grant funds will be available to the City when the City Council has approved the Resolution authorizing the Cooperative Agreement. A project consultant team is expected to be selected and a contract negotiated during November, with the contract to be presented to City Council for approval in December, 2001. Work on the project will begin in January, 2002 and will be completed by December 31, 2002. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Execution of the Cooperative Agreement does not constitute a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The preparation oft he Master Schematic Design Plan for E1 Camino Real is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section No. 15262 (Feasibility and Planning Studies). ATTACHMENTS A. Resolution including Cooperative Agreement (note Scope of Services begins on page 19) B. Article, "From Highway to My Way," by Reid Ewing, Planning, January 2001 PREPARED BY: VIRGINIA WARHEIT Senior Planner DEPARTMENT HEAD REVIEW: LES WHITE Interim Director, Planning and Community Environment CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: Senator Byron Sher Assemblyman Joe Simitian EMILY HARRISON Assistant City Manager CMR:417:01 Page 4 of 4