Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-06-29 City Council Agenda PacketCITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL June 29, 2015 Special Meeting Council Chambers 6:00 PM Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the Council Chambers on the Thursday preceding the meeting. 1 June 29, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak to agendized items; up to three minutes per speaker, to be determined by the presiding officer. If you wish to address the Council on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council, but it is very helpful. TIME ESTIMATES Time estimates are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item is called. HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW Applicants and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken. Call to Order Special Orders of the Day 6:00-6:10 PM 1. Recognition of Fire Explorer Madison Valentine and her honor of being selected the Explorer of the Year by the Santa Clara / San Mateo Region Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Comments 6:10-6:20 PM Oral Communications 6:20-6:35 PM Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. 2 June 29, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Consent Calendar 6:35-6:40 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 2. Approval and Authorization of the City Manager to Execute a Contract with Electronic Innovations, Inc. in the Amount of $272,914 for Phase 4 of the Video Surveillance and Intrusion Detection System Project (EL-04012) and 10 Percent Contingency of $27,000 for Related, but Unforeseen, Work for a Total Authorized Amount of $299,914 3. Approval of Contract Amendment No. 2 to S15155476 with AECOM for Consulting Services in the Amount of $133,000 for Technical Services and Studies to Develop Zoning Regulations to Address Hazardous Materials Limitations and Compliance in Industrial Areas. 4. Approval of a Three-Year Contract No. C15159248 With Geodesy for Maintenance, Support and Professional Services for the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS) in the Amount of $195,000 Per Year 5. Approval of a One–Year Extension of the Option to Lease Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto History Museum for the Roth Building Located at 300 Homer Avenue and Approval of a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Capital Improvement Fund to Establish a Roth Building Historical Rehabilitation Reserve in the Amount of 3.88 Million Dollars 6. Approval of Amendment One to Contract No. C14152025 with SP Plus to Add $637,652 for Expansion of the Downtown Valet Parking Program to Additional Garages and a Total Not to Exceed Amount of $997,652 over a Three Year Period 7. Approval and Authorization of the City Manager to Execute a Contract with Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc., in the Amount of $4,679,100, for the Seismic Upgrade of Four Steel Tanks and Three Receiving Stations Project, WS-07000, WS-08001 and WS-09000 and Approval of a Budget Amendment Ordinance Increasing the Water Regulation System Improvements Project Budget (WS-08000) in the Amount of $786,375 8. Approval of Contract No. C15159142 with Saviano Company in the Amount of $372,550 with a 10 Percent Contingency for Unforeseen 3 June 29, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Expenses for Tennis Court Improvements at Hoover Park, Terman Park and Weisshaar Park (Capital Improvement Project PG-06001) 9. Approval of an Agreement with Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) for PAUSD Athletic Field Brokering and Maintenance 10. Authorize the City Manager or His Designee to Enter Into a 20-Year Lease Agreement (Attachment A) with Pristine Sun to Install and Maintain Photovoltaic Systems at Five City-Owned Parking Structures 11. Adoption of a Resolution Determining the Proposed Calculation of the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2016 12. Approval of Contract Amendment No. 3 With Van Scoyoc Associates Inc. for a One-Year Extension in an Amount Not to Exceed a Total of $101,000 for Federal Legislative Representation 13. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Future Grant Agreements Offered to the City by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and/or the California Department of Transportation (DOT) for the Preparation of Planning Documents and the Study, Design and Construction of Safety, Security and Maintenance Improvements at the Palo Alto Airport and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Supporting Documents Associated with the Application and Acceptance of Said Grant Funds 14. Staff Recommendation to Initiate a Special Recruitment to Fill One Unscheduled Vacancy on the Utilities Advisory Commission, Ending on April 30, 2018 15. Approval of a Contract with Global Learning Solution Inc. in the Amount of $250,000 for the Support of Human Resources SAP Modules and Business Processes Improvements 16. Approval of Amendment No. 5 to Add the Amount of $250,000 to Contract No. S12141479 with Val Security, Inc. and Extend Term of Agreement by Six Months to December 31, 2015 4 June 29, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 6:40-7:00 PM 17. Buena Vista Mobile Home Park: Update and Possible Direction Regarding Affordable Housing Funds 7:00-7:20 PM 18. PUBLIC HEARING: to Hear Objections to the Levy of Proposed Assessments on the Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District and Adoption of a Resolution Confirming the Report of the Advisory Board and Levying Assessment for Fiscal Year 2016 on the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District and Approve a Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Business Improvement District Fund 7:20-8:45 PM 19. Adoption of an Ordinance Deleting Section 18.42.110 of Chapter 18.42 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Adding a New Section 18.42.110 Pertaining to the Siting and Permitting of Wireless Communications Facilities; Exempt from California Environmental Quality Act under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b) and 15301, 15302 and 15305 8:45-9:15 PM 20. Approval of a Record of Land Use Action for a Site and Design Permit and a Conditional Use Permit to Implement a Public Bicycle/Pedestrian Path Connecting Wilkie Way to the Redwood Gate Neighborhood, with Associated Site Improvements, on a 5,000 Square-Foot Site Fronting Wilkie Way, Zoned CS-L-D (Service Commercial with Landscape and Site and Design Combining Districts) located at 4261 El Camino Real. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from CEQA Pursuant to Sections 15303 and 15304 (New Construction of Small Structures and Minor Alterations to Land) 9:15-10:15 PM 21. Consideration of Impasse and Factfinding Recommendation Regarding RPP Enforcement Staffing, Approval of Three-Year Contract to Serco, Inc. For $1,509,630 For Contract Enforcement for the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program, Approval of a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Amount of $378,000 To Appropriate Funds for the First Year of the Contract, and Adoption of Resolution Amending the Administrative Penalty Schedule for Violation of the RPP Program 10:15-11:30 PM 22. Consideration of Capping the Fee for Establishment of Single Story Overlay Districts and Referral of a Policy Discussion Regarding Single Story Overlay Districts and Alternative Neighborhood Protections 5 June 29, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Members of the public may not speak to the item(s) Adjournment AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA) Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance. 6 June 29, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Additional Information Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Informational Report Council Update on the Fiber-to-the-Premise Master Plan and a Complementary Wireless Network Plan by Columbia Telecommunications dba CTC Technology & Energy for Consulting Services, Including the Status of the City's Participation in the Google Fiber City Checklist Process City of Palo Alto Utilities Quarterly Update for the Third Quarter of Fiscal Year 2015 Informational Report on New Water Use Reductions at City Facilities as a Result of Drought Conditions City of Palo Alto Sales Tax Digest Summary Fourth Quarter Sales (October - December 2014) Palo Alto Fire Department Quarterly Performance Report for Third Quarter Fiscal Year 2015 Media Center Flyer Yappy Hour Flyer Public Letters to Council Set 1 City of Palo Alto (ID # 5842) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Video Surveillance and Intrusion Detection System – Phase IV Title: Approval and Authorization of the City Manager to Execute a Contract with Electronic Innovations, Inc. in the Amount of $272,914 for Phase 4 of the Video Surveillance and Intrusion Detection System Project (EL-04012) and 10 Percent Contingency of $27,000 for Related, but Unforeseen, Work for a Total Authorized Amount of $299,914 From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with Electronic Innovations, Inc. in the amount of $272,914 for the Video Surveillance and Intrusion Detection System project at two of the City’s electric substations. 2. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract with Electronic Innovations, Inc. for related, but unforeseen, work which may develop during the project; the total of which shall not exceed $27,000. Staff is requesting a total authorized amount of $299,914 to cover the contract amount of $272,914 plus a 10% contingency amount of $27,000. Background In 2004, a utility site assessment was completed which recommended physical security be installed at the City’s electric substations, gas stations, water pumping plants and reservoirs. To date, the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department has completed three security construction phases installing video surveillance and intrusion detection systems at five electric substation, three water booster stations, and one reservoir. An additional phase is planned for fiscal year 2016 to cover priority water and gas stations. Discussion This project involves installing a security system at two additional electric substations, including multiple cameras throughout each facility, as well as door alarms on entrances to the control City of Palo Alto Page 2 buildings. This project also includes integrating the new camera system and door alarms into the City’s existing SCADA system so that the system operators can respond to a single user interface. Appropriate camera views will be set to respond to different types of alarms to provide relevant video footage. Live video and alarms will be recorded and accessible at the Utilities Control Center for 30 days. The security system specifications were written by an independent security consultant, Priax Corporation, and the design and procurement of all the equipment is being provided by the contractor, Electronic Innovations, and approved by City staff. The work to be performed under this contract is for the construction activities to provide and install underground conduit and cable, cameras, door contact alarms, video and alarm processing and recording equipment. It includes labor, equipment, and management of all field activities in coordination with City’s operations staff. This project is being contracted out due to the high degree of specialized technical expertise required for the installation and programming of a security system. The following table is a summary of the bid process: Bid Name / Number Video Surveillance and Intrusion Detection System Project / IFB – 158279 Proposed Length of Project 3 months Number of Bids Mailed to Contractors 15 Number of Bids Mailed to Builder’s Exchanges 0 Total Days to Respond to Bid 14 Pre-Bid Meeting Yes Number of Company Attendees at Pre-Bid Meeting 10 Number of Bids Received 2* Bid Price Range From $272,914 to $309,000 * Bid summary provided in Attachment A. Included in the bid items, staff requested optional pricing for underground conduit installation to compare with the City’s current underground contractor’s estimate. Staff also requested pricing for an optional 1-year maintenance plan to compare with City’s previous and current maintenance cost. Staff has reviewed all bids submitted and recommends that the bid of $272,914 submitted by Electronic Innovations, Inc., which includes the security system plus the optional underground conduit, be accepted. The bid for the optional underground conduit is significantly less than the estimate from the City’s on-call, underground contractor. Staff Recommends that Electronic Innovations Inc. be declared the lowest responsible bidder by Council. The bid amount is approximately 23% above the engineer’s estimate of $221,300. Some of the variation between the engineer’s estimate and actual bid is because the City now requires contracts pay prevailing wage, which was not accounted for in the original estimate. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Staff confirmed with the Contractor’s State License Board that the contractor has an active license on file. Staff checked references supplied by the contractor for previous work performed and found all to be satisfactory. Timeline Construction is to be completed within 90 days. Resource Impact Funding for this capital improvement project is available in the Fiscal Year 2015 budget, with additional funds included in the Fiscal Yeaer 2016 Proposed Budget for the Utility Site Security project (EL-04012). Issuance of the Notice to Proceed to Electronic Innovations, Inc. is contingent upon City Council’s approval and authorization of a contract and the Fiscal Year 2016 Capital Budget. Policy Implications The approval of a contract is consistent with existing City policies, including the Council approved Utilities Strategic Plan to operate the distribution system in a cost effective manner and to invest in utility infrastructure to deliver reliable service. Environmental Review (If Applicable) This project is categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15401 (minor alteration of existing public or private facilities involving no expansion of use). Attachments:  Attachment A: Bid Summary (PDF)  Attachment B: Contract (PDF)  Attachment C: Contractor Agreement Justification (PDF) CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Contract No. C15158279 City of Palo Alto Project: “Video Surveillance and Intrusion Detection System” Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 1 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT ATTACHMENT B CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS…………………………………….…………..6 1.1 Recitals…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 1.2 Definitions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 SECTION 2 THE PROJECT………………………………………………………………………………………………………...6 SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS………………………………………………………………………………..7 3.1 List of Documents…………………………………………………………………………………………….........7 3.2 Order of Precedence……………………………………………………………………………………………......7 SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY…………………………………………………………………………………………..8 4.1 Contractor's Duties…………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM……………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 5.1 Contractor's Co-operation………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION…………………………………………………………………………………….......8 6.1 Time Is of Essence…………………………………………………………………………………………………….8 6.2 Commencement of Work…………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.3 Contract Time…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 6.4 Liquidated Damages…………………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.4.1 Other Remedies……………………………………………………………………………………………………..9 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time………………………………………………………………………………….9 SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR……………………………………………………………………….9 7.1 Contract Sum……………………………………………………………………………………………………………9 7.2 Full Compensation……………………………………………………………………………………………………9 SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE……………………………………………………………………………………………..9 8.1 Standard of Care…………………………………………………………………………………..…………………9 SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION…………………………………………………………………………………………..…10 9.1 Hold Harmless……………………………………………………………………………………………………….10 9.2 Survival…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION……..………………………………………………………………………………10 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement…………….………………………………..……………………………….10 SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS.…………………………………………………………………………………10 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 2 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 11.1 Evidence of Coverage…………………………………………………………………………………………..10 SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST RANSFERS………………………………………………………………….…11 12.1 Assignment………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 12.2 Assignment by Law.………………………………………………………………………………………………11 SECTION 13 NOTICES …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.1 Method of Notice …………………………………………………………………………………………………11 13.2 Notice Recipents ………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.3 Change of Address……………………………………………………………………………………………….12 SECTION 14 DEFAULT…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...12 14.1 Notice of Default………………………………………………………………………………………………….12 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default…………………………………………………………………………………12 SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES…………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1 Remedies Upon Default……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services…………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold……………………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract…………………………………………………………………13 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default………………………………………………13 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.6 Additional Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.2 Delays by Sureties……………………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.3 Damages to City…………………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default…………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.4 Suspension by City……………………………………………………………………………………………….14 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience……………………………………………………………………………..14 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.5 Termination Without Cause…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.5.1 Compensation………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 15.5.2 Subcontractors………………………………………………………………………………………………..15 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination………………………………………………………………...15 SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES……………………………………………………………16 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies……………………………………..………………………………..………………….16 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 3 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage……………………………………………………………………………………………16 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment…………………………………………………………………………………….16 16.2 Damages to Contractor………………………………………………………………………………………..16 SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS………………………………………………………………………………….…16 17.1 Financial Management and City Access………………………………………………………………..16 17.2 Compliance with City Requests…………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES……………………………………………………………………………………..17 18.1 Status of Parties……………………………………………………………………………………………………17 SECTION 19 NUISANCE……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…17 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited……………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES…………………………………………………………………………………….17 20.1 Payment of Fees…………………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 21 WAIVER…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 21.1 Waiver………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS……………………………….18 22.1 Governing Law…………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 22.2 Compliance with Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………18 SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT……………………………………………………………………………………18 23.1 Integration………………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………..18 24.1 Survival of Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………………18 SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION……………………………………………………………………………………….19 26.1 Appropriation………………………………………………………………………………………………………19 SECTION 27 AUTHORITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 27.1 Representation of Parties…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS………………………………………………………………………………………………..19 28.1 Multiple Counterparts………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………19 29.1 Severability………………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES …………………………………………………..19 30.1 Amendments of Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………..19 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 4 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION………………………………………………….….19 31.1 Workers Compensation…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS………………………………..…20 32.1 General Notice to Contractor…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a)…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.3 DIR Registration Required…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.5 Payroll Records…………………………………………………………………………………………………20 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 5 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on June 29th, 2015 (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and ELECTRONICS INNOVATIONS, INC. ("Contractor"), is made with reference to the following: R E C I T A L S: A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City. B. Contractor is a corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of California, Contractor’s License Number 406608. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Construction Contract. C. On March 16, 2015, City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the “Video Surveillance and Intrusion Detection System Project” (“Project”). In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a Bid. D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other services as identified in the Contract Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS. 1.1 Recitals. All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 Definitions. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the General Conditions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail. SECTION 2 THE PROJECT. The Project is to construct and install physical security (cameras and door contacts) at Adobe Creek, Maybell and Colorado Substation, located in Palo Alto, CA. ("Project"). Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 6 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by reference. 1) Change Orders 2) Field Orders 3) Contract 4) Bidding Addenda 5) Special Provisions 6) General Conditions 7) Project Plans and Drawings 8) Technical Specifications 9) Instructions to Bidders 10) Invitation for Bids 11) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Affidavit 12) Reports listed in the Contract Documents 13) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications (most current version at time of Bid) 14) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards (most current version at time of Bid) 15) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements 16) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations 17) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre- Qualification Checklist (if applicable) 18) Performance and Payment Bonds 3.2 Order of Precedence. For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 7 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY. 4.1 Contractor’s Duties Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work required for the Project, as specified in the Contract Documents, all of which are fully incorporated herein. Contractor shall provide, furnish, and supply all things necessary and incidental for the timely performance and completion of the Work, including, but not limited to, provision of all necessary labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and utilities, unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents. Contractor also agrees to use its best efforts to complete the Work in a professional and expeditious manner and to meet or exceed the performance standards required by the Contract Documents. SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. 5.1 Contractor’s Co-operation. In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project. The Contract requires that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other members of the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the Project. SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION. 6.1 Time Is of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. 6.2 Commencement of Work. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. 6.3 Contract Time. Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City’s Notice to Proceed and shall be completed within ninety calendar days (90) after the commencement date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. By executing this Construction Contract, Contractor expressly waives any claim for delayed early completion. 6.4 Liquidated Damages. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.85, if Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time, including any approved extensions thereto, City may assess liquidated damages on a daily basis for each day of Unexcused Delay in achieving Substantial Completion, based on the amount of five hundred dollars ($500) per day, or as otherwise specified in the Special Provisions. Liquidated damages may also be separately assessed for failure to meet milestones specified elsewhere in the Contract Documents, regardless of impact on the time for achieving Substantial Completion. The assessment of liquidated damages is not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages City will suffer by delay in completion of the Work. The City is entitled to setoff the amount of liquidated damages assessed against any payments otherwise due to Contractor, including, but not limited to, setoff against release of retention. If the total amount of liquidated damages assessed exceeds the amount of unreleased retention, City is entitled to recover the balance from Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 8 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Contractor or its sureties. Occupancy or use of the Project in whole or in part prior to Substantial Completion, shall not operate as a waiver of City’s right to assess liquidated damages. 6.4.1 Other Remedies. City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and memorialized in a Change Order approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR. 7.1 Contract Sum. Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents the Contract Sum of Two Hundred Seventy Two Thousand Nine Hundred Fourteen Dollars ($272,914). [This amount includes the Base Bid and Additive Alternates.] 7.2 Full Compensation. The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor and, except as otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover all Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to suspension or discontinuance of the Work, except as expressly provided herein. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted for Change Orders approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE. 8.1 Standard of Care. Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised personnel. All services performed in connection with this Construction Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 9 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION. 9.1 Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers (hereinafter individually referred to as an “Indemnitee” and collectively referred to as "Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and liability, loss, damage, claims, expenses (including, without limitation, attorney fees, expert witness fees, paralegal fees, and fees and costs of litigation or arbitration) (collectively, “Liability”) of every nature arising out of or in connection with the acts or omissions of Contractor, its employees, Subcontractors, representatives, or agents, in performing the Work or its failure to comply with any of its obligations under the Contract, except such Liability caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of an Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs City incurs to enforce this provision. Except as provided in Section 9.2 below, nothing in the Contract Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of Contractor against City or any other Indemnitee. Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of any third-party claim relating to the Contract. 9.2 Survival. The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract. SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION. 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS. 11.1 Evidence of coverage. Within ten (10) business days following issuance of the Notice of Award, Contractor shall provide City with evidence that it has obtained insurance and shall submit Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 10 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS. 12.1 Assignment. City is entering into this Construction Contract in reliance upon the stated experience and qualifications of the Contractor and its Subcontractors set forth in Contractor’s Bid. Accordingly, Contractor shall not assign, hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or transfer without said consent shall be null and void, and shall be deemed a substantial breach of contract and grounds for default in addition to any other legal or equitable remedy available to the City. 12.2 Assignment by Law. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity. SECTION 13 NOTICES. 13.1 Method of Notice. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following: (i) On the date delivered if delivered personally; (ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as hereinafter provided; (iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission; (iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or (v) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail. 13.2 Notice to Recipients. All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Change Order Requests and Claims) from Contractor to City shall include the Project name and the number of this Construction Contract and shall be addressed to City at: To City: City of Palo Alto City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copy to: City of Palo Alto Public Works Administration 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: AND Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 11 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT City of Palo Alto Utilities Engineering 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: Jim Pachikara In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided to the following: Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to: Electronic Innovations, Inc. 21 Parr Blvd. Richmond, CA 94801 Attn: Eric Bledsoe, President 13.3 Change of Address. In advance of any change of address, Contractor shall notify City of the change of address in writing. Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any individuals to whom and addresses to which notice shall be provided. SECTION 14 DEFAULT. 14.1 Notice of Default. In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract, with a copy to Contractor’s performance bond surety. 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after receipt of such written notice. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 12 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 15.1 Remedies Upon Default. If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth above in Section 14, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work. 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default. City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 14. City’s election to terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein. 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond. 15.1.6 Additional Provisions. All of City’s rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City’s authority to designate other breaches as material nor limit City’s right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material. City’s determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City. 15.2 Delays by Sureties. Time being of the essence in the performance of the Work, if Contractor’s surety fails to arrange for completion of the Work in accordance with the Performance Bond, within seven (7) calendar days from the date of the notice of termination, Contractor’s surety shall be deemed to have waived its right to complete the Work under the Contract, and City may immediately make arrangements for the completion of the Work through use of its own forces, by hiring a replacement contractor, or by any other means that City determines advisable under the circumstances. Contractor and its surety shall be jointly and severally Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 13 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT liable for any additional cost incurred by City to complete the Work following termination. In addition, City shall have the right to use any materials, supplies, and equipment belonging to Contractor and located at the Worksite for the purposes of completing the remaining Work. 15.3 Damages to City. 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default. City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents. 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to deduct the cost of such Losses from monies otherwise payable to Contractor. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount payable, Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City. 15.4 Suspension by City 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience. City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time. The order shall be specifically identified as a Suspension Order by City. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order. During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered by the Suspension Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. A Suspension Order shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work. 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause. In addition to all other remedies available to City, if Contractor fails to perform or correct work in accordance with the Contract Documents, City may immediately order the Work, or any portion thereof, suspended until the cause for the suspension has been eliminated to City’s satisfaction. Contractor shall not be entitled to an increase in Contract Time or Contract Price for a suspension occasioned by Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents. City’s right to suspend the Work shall not give rise to a duty to suspend the Work, and City’s failure to suspend the Work shall not constitute a defense to Contractor’s failure to comply with the requirements of the Contract Documents. 15.5 Termination Without Cause. City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or in whole upon written notice to Contractor. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the notice and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs to close out and demobilize. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 15.5 shall be the Contractor’s sole and exclusive compensation for such termination and Contractor waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind resulting from termination without cause. Termination pursuant to this provision does not relieve Contractor or its sureties from any of their obligations for Losses arising from or related to the Work performed by Contractor. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 14 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 15.5.1 Compensation. Following such termination and within forty-five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 15.5.1, City shall pay the following to Contractor as Contractor’s sole compensation for performance of the Work : .1 For Work Performed. The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor. .2 For Close-out Costs. Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors: (i) Demobilizing and (ii) Administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (30) Days after receipt of the notice of termination. .3 For Fabricated Items. Previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work. .4 Profit Allowance. An allowance for profit calculated as four percent (4%) of the sum of the above items, provided Contractor can prove a likelihood that it would have made a profit if the Construction Contract had not been terminated. 15.5.2 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor against City under this Section. 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not discontinued; (iii) Provide to City a description in writing, no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto. Upon termination, whether for cause or for convenience, the provisions of the Contract Documents remain in effect as to any Claim, indemnity obligation, warranties, guarantees, Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 15 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT submittals of as-built drawings, instructions, or manuals, or other such rights and obligations arising prior to the termination date. SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the following: 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage. The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable. This provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City’s issuance of a suspension notice issued either for cause or for convenience. 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment. If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a second notice to City of Contractor’s intention to terminate the Construction Contract. 16.2 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Paragraph 15.5.1 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind. SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. 17.1 Financial Management and City Access. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants during normal business hours, may inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project. Contractor shall retain these documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) Final Payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by law. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 16 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 17.2 Compliance with City Requests. Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 17 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. City many enforce Contractor’s obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred to in Section 17.1 for inspection or copying by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony. SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. 18.1 Status of parties. Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint ventures’ of the other party. City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth. SECTION 19 NUISANCE. 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract. SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES. 20.1 Payment of Fees. Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work. Payment of all costs and expenses for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non-City inspectors or conditions set forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies. SECTION 21 WAIVER. 21.1 Waiver. A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 17 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. 22.1 Governing Law. This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California, and venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Santa Clara, and no other place. 22.2 Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal and California laws and city laws, including, without limitation, ordinances and resolutions, in the performance of work under this Construction Contract. SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. 23.1 Integration. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. 24.1 Survival of Provisions. The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment obligations, and City’s right to audit Contractor’s books and records, shall remain in full force and effect after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract. SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES. Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Copies of these rates may be obtained at the Purchasing Division’s office of the City of Palo Alto. Contractor shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or subcontractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of all sections, including, but not limited to, Sections 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1782, 1810, and 1813, of the Labor Code pertaining to prevailing wages. SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION. 26.1 Appropriations. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 18 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT for this Construction Contract are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 27 AUTHORITY. 27.1 Representation of Parties. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS 28.1 Multiple Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement. SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY. 29.1 Severability. In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected. SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES. 30.1 Amendments to Laws. With respect to any amendments to any statutes or regulations referenced in these Contract Documents, the reference is deemed to be the version in effect on the date that the Contract was awarded by City, unless otherwise required by law. SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION. 31.1 Workers Compensation. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, by signing this Contract, Contractor certifies as follows: “I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work on this Contract.” SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS. 32.1 General Notice to Contractor. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of SB 854. 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a) City provides notice to Contractor of the requirements of California Labor Code section 1771.1(a), which reads: Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 19 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT “A contractor or subcontractor shall not be qualified to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, subject to the requirements of Section 4104 of the Public Contract Code, or engage in the performance of any contract for public work, as defined in this chapter, unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5. It is not a violation of this section for an unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and Professions Code or Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the contactor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract is awarded.” 32.3 DIR Registration Required. City will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Construction Contract with Contractor without proof that Contractor and its listed subcontractors are registered with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) to perform public work, subject to limited exceptions. 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices. City gives notice to Contractor and its listed subcontractors that Contractor is required to post all job site notices prescribed by law or regulation and Contractor is subject to SB 854-compliance monitoring and enforcement by DIR. 32.5 Payroll Records. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of Labor Code section 1776, including: (i) Keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by, respectively, Contractor and its listed subcontractors, in connection with the Project. (ii) The payroll records shall be verified as true and correct and shall be certified and made available for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of Contractor and its listed subcontractors, respectively. (iii) At the request of City, acting by its project manager, Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall make the certified payroll records available for inspection or furnished upon request to the project manager within ten (10) days of receipt of City’s request. City requests Contractor and its listed subcontractors to submit the certified payroll records at the end of each week during the Project. (iv) If the certified payroll records are not produced to the project manager within the 10-day period, then Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall be subject to a penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker, and City shall withhold the sum total of penalties from Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 20 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT the progress payment(s) then due and payable to Contractor. This provision supplements the provisions of Section 15 hereof. (v) Inform the project manager of the location of contractor’s and its listed subcontractors’ payroll records (street address, city and county) at the commencement of the Project, and also provide notice to the project manager within five (5) business days of any change of location of those payroll records. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed the date and year first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney ELECTRONIC INNOVATIONS, INC. By:___________________________ Name:________________________ Title:__________________________ Date: _________________________ Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 21 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT This project involves installing a security system at two electric substations in the City of Palo Alto,  including multiple cameras throughout each facility, as well as door alarms on entrances to the control  buildings. The security system specifications were written by an independent security consultant, Priax  Corporation, and the design and procurement of all the equipment is being provided by the contractor,  Electronic Innovations, and is approved by City staff. This project also includes integrating the new  camera system and door alarms into the City’s existing SCADA system so that the system operators can  respond to a single user interface. Appropriate camera views will be set to respond to different types of  alarms to provide relevant video footage. Live video and alarms will be recorded and accessible at the  Utilities Control Center for 30 days. Electronic Innovations Inc. submitted the lowest bid of $272,914.  The engineer’s estimate was $221,300.   The work to be performed under this contract is for the construction activities to provide and install  underground conduit and cable, cameras, door contact alarms, video and alarm processing and  recording equipment. It includes labor, equipment, and management of all field activities in  coordination with City’s operations staff. The contractor will also be responsible for providing a  construction schedule for approval by the CPA Project Manager.  For final acceptance from the City, the  new security system will be tested and all equipment installed will be inspected.    Contractor services for this project were planned. This project is being contracted out due to the  expertise required for the installation and programming of a security system.  An Invitation for Bid (IFP) was issued by the Purchasing Department for this work on March  16th, 2015. The IFB was out for bid for approximately two weeks and attendance was required  at a pre‐bid meeting to discuss and answer any questions about the scope of work. Two bids  were received by the City and CPA staff determined that Electronic Innovations, Inc.’s submittal  is a responsible bid of $272,914. City staff contacted the other (8) contractors that attended the  mandatory pre‐bid meeting and questioned their decision not to bid on this project. None  provided an answer that would justify re‐bidding the project and disqualifying Electronic  Innovations’ current bid.   Electronic Innovations has not been awarded any projects with City of Palo Alto prior to this  bid.   ATTACHMENT C   Part of the evaluation process required contractors to submit references and information of  similar work experience. Electronic Innovations has done similar camera installations for City of  Oakland, San Francisco International Airport, security improvements on the Golden Gate  Bridge, and Shell Oil Company. All of the contractor’s references were contacted and spoke  highly of the contractor’s workmanship and customer service.       The term of this agreement is approximately 90 days. The Utilities Department is anticipating  this project to start the week of July 20th, 2015 and to be completed by October 18th, 2015.  Staff hired a security consultant, Priax Corporation, to prepared project designs and cost  estimates prior to starting the bid process. These estimates were used to validate the  contractor bids that were received.       Staff does not anticipate the need for any amendments to the agreement at this time.    Attachment A – Bid Summary  Attachment B – Contract  Attachment C – Contractor Agreement Justification       City of Palo Alto (ID # 5850) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: AECOM Contract Amendment Title: Approval of Contract Amendment No. 2 to S15155476 with AECOM for Consulting Services in the Amount of $133,000 for Technical Services and Studies to Develop Zoning Regulations to Address Hazardous Materials Limitations and Compliance in Industrial Areas. From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager or his designee to approve the amendment of contract #S15155476 with AECOM Technical Services, Inc. to add $133,000 and extend the term of the contract to June 30, 2017. The proposed changes are necessary to continue work on zoning and planning issues related to businesses like Communications & Power Industries, LLC (CPI) that use hazardous materials in proximity to sensitive receptors. When added to the existing Second AECOM Contract, the amendment brings the contract to an amount not to exceed ($215,600) Background AECOM Technical Services, Inc. (AECOM) has completed a technical risk assessment of hazardous material operations and accidental release scenarios at the Communications & Power Industries, LLC (CPI) facility located at 811 Hansen Way. This report was completed in January 2014 and supplemented with an additional scenario requested by Barron Park residents in October 2014. At that time, the City Council directed staff to prepare draft zoning regulations and update information related to potential amortization of non-conforming uses, with the expectation that a draft ordinance could be prepared for review by the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) and City Council in early 2015. The City had entered into a second Contract with AECOM in July 2014 for $42,600 for their assistance in incorporating appropriate information based on the technical risk assessment of hazardous materials operations and accidental release scenarios into zoning and regulatory strategies that could reduce potential human health risks from adjoining businesses to sensitive receptors (residential areas, schools, homes for the elderly, etc.). In April 2015, this contract City of Palo Alto Page 2 was amended to add $40,000 for a total not to exceed $82,600. The April 2015 amendment was necessary to accomplish a peer review of a CPI-provided seismic structural engineering study, to advise planning staff on ways to incorporate risk assessment findings into a useable zoning/regulatory approach, and to prepare for and participate in public meetings as requested by City staff. The attached scope of work would be the second amendment of the July 2014 contract, and reflects the evolution of the original tasks and summarizes the range of activities associated with reviewing and providing guidance on the amortization studies. As the work has progressed, AECOM’s services related to the incorporation of the risk assessment findings into a useable zoning/regulatory approach have expanded and additional resources are needed to allow for a review of existing amortization studies and provide updates as needed. Based on the initial review of the amortization studies additional work may be requested. The amended scope also provides for participation in public presentations and optional additional work that might arise during preparation of the zoning ordinance. The cost for this amendment to AECOM’s Second Contract is $133,000, bringing the total contracted cost for the Second Contract with AECOM #15155476 to $215, 600. This proposed contract amendment includes an extension in time to the second Contract from December 30, 2015 to December 30, 2017 in the unlikely event that additional time is needed to complete some of the tasks related to the amortization studies. Staff’s current schedule proposes to bring forward a draft zoning ordinance for public review in the fall of this year. Resource Impact The funds to support this amendment to the existing AECOM contract are available within the Planning and Community Environment Department’s Fiscal Year 2015 Adopted Operating Budget. No additional funding is needed. Attachments:  Attachment A: Contract Amendment 2 to AECOM Contract S15155476 (PDF) 1 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. S15155476 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. This Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. S15155476 (“Contract”) is entered into June 29, 2015, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC., a California corporation, located at 4840 Cox Road, Glen Allen, VA, 23063, Telephone (916) 361-6400 ("CONSULTANT"). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of incorporation of appropriate information from the technical risk assessment of hazardous materials operations and accidental release scenarios into possible zoning and regulatory strategies that could reduce potential health risks to residential areas that adjoin the Communications and Power Industries, Inc. (CPI) facility in Palo Alto, California property. B. CITY intends to increase compensation by $133,000.00 from $82,600.00 to $215,600.00 for additional services as specified in EXHIBIT “A”, Scope of Services. C. The parties wish to amend the Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 4 is hereby amended to read as follows: “SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed One Hundred Seventy Two Thousand Eight Hundred Forty Dollars ($172,840.00). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for Services, Additional Services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Two Hundred Fifteen Thousand Six Hundred Dollars ($215,600.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit “A”.” SECTION 2. The following exhibit(s) to the Contract is/are hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference: DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D ATTACHMENT A 2 Revision April 28, 2014 a. Exhibit “A” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”. b. Exhibit “B” entitled “SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE”. c. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”. d. Exhibit “C1” entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE”. SECTION 3. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVED AS TO FORM: AECOM TECHNICAL SERVICES, INC. Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE EXHIBIT "C": COMPENSATION EXHIBIT “C1” HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D Principal/Project Director 3 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES Background CONSULTANT has completed a technical risk assessment of hazardous materials operations and accidental release scenarios at Communications and Power Industries, Inc. (CPI) facility in Palo Alto, California. This assessment focused on the plating operations in Building 2. This work was performed under Contract No. S13148916. CITY seeks to incorporate appropriate information from the Risk Assessment into possible zoning and regulatory strategies that could reduce potential health risks to residential areas that adjoin the CPI property. CITY has already performed an initial review of regulatory approaches adopted by other jurisdictions with similar circumstances. CONSULTANT shall assist CITY in developing a recommended approach and participating with CITY staff at public meetings to inform local decision makers and the public about the approach and alternatives. The completed Risk Assessment considers potential impacts of an accidental release of hazardous materials from CPI facilities, under various “extreme event” scenarios. At the neighbors’ request, work under Contract No. S13148916 was expanded to include an analysis of a potential release of hazardous materials after a major earthquake, with the assumption that such an earthquake could substantially compromise the structural integrity of Building 2. CPI is preparing a structural review of this building and its performance in the event of a major earthquake, and CITY has requested that CONSULTANT conduct a peer review of this structural study. The structural evaluation and peer review will inform discussions regarding the assumptions about building damage included in the evaluation of an earthquake scenario and the release scenario associated with this event. Specific tasks to undertake the above activities follow. The tasks related to developing and presenting the regulatory approach shall be shared with CITY staff and the level of effort will be collaborative and evolve as the work progresses, a precise level of effort and completion date cannot be estimated. Accordingly, this contract shall include an Additional Services fund, use of which will occur only with prior approval by CITY. Work Tasks Task 1: Peer Review of CPI Provided Seismic Structural Engineering Study CONSULTANT shall provide high-level peer review of a CPI-prepared seismic structural engineering report of Building 2 which includes the plating shop. The work will be performed by a professional structural engineer licensed in the State of California. The intent of the review shall be to comment on the adequacy of the CPI evaluation based on accepted industry practices and applicable regulations. The CPI study and the peer review are intended to inform discussions regarding the assumptions about building damage included in the evaluation of an earthquake and the release scenario that resulted from that event. The review will identify faulty assumptions, or inappropriate methods or data that could significantly influence the conclusions of CPI’s study. CONSULTANT’s review will not include new analyses of the structural integrity of Building 2. Should alternative assumptions, methods, or data be identified by CONSULTANT that CPI should have incorporated into its study, CONSULTANT will only indicate those assumptions, methods, or data and the reasons why they should have been included in CPI’s report. The application of the suggested assumptions, methods, or data would be the responsibility of CPI and its structural DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 4 Revision April 28, 2014 engineer. A letter report shall be provided describing CONSULTANT’s review approach, methods, and key findings. It is assumed that the draft report will be prepared for CITY review and comment, and that a final report will then be prepared to address CITY comments and suggestions. A one-hour conference call has been allotted to receive and discuss CITY comments on the draft memo. Task 2: Consultation on Incorporating Risk Assessment Findings into City-Recommended Zoning / Regulatory Approach CONSULTANT shall work with CITY as needed to assist in developing regulations that effectively apply the findings of the Risk Assessment and/or other standards that implement effective protections from hazardous materials impacts when incompatible land uses adjoin. CONSULTANT’s level of support for this task will be a function of CITY’s expectations, availability, and resources, and is assumed to become better defined once the contract for this scope of services is executed. Accordingly, the specific activities and costs will be subject to ongoing discussions between CITY and CONSULTANT. For purposes of this contract, an estimate of 40 hours has been assumed, but can be expanded through CITY’s authorized use of the Additional Services funds (described below) or reduced based on CITY’s level of involvement. No travel or direct face-to-face meetings have been assumed for this task, since co-ordination with CITY on this task can readily be achieved via email and conference calls. Task 3: Participation in Public Review and Meetings CONSULTANT shall participate in the public review of the application of the Risk Assessment to proposed zoning / regulatory changes at meetings before CITY Council, Planning and Transportation Commission, and possibly residents of the Barron Park Neighborhood. CONSULTANT’s primary role will be to serve as a technical resource, providing information on the methodology, assumptions, and findings of the Risk Assessment and on the nexus and rationale for the regulatory recommendations and the Risk Assessment. This participation is assumed to include assistance in developing and reviewing presentation materials, presenting appropriate portions of staff reports, and responding to questions either at the meeting or subsequently. For purposes of this contract, an estimate of up to seven meetings involving CONSULTANT Project Manager and up to three meetings including CONSULTANT’s principal author of the Risk Assessment, with each meeting averaging 8 hours, including preparation time, attendance, and follow-up, has been assumed, but can be expanded through CITY’s authorized use of the Additional Services funds (described below) or reduced based on CITY’s needs. Additional Services Fund Given the dynamic and collaborative nature of this scope of services, a precise set of activities and level of effort cannot be readily defined. Only Task 1 is a discrete, independent effort that can be estimated with confidence. Accordingly, to provide CITY with the flexibility it needs to solicit assistance from the CONSULTANT as needed, Additional Services funds are established and their use will require prior authorization by CITY. These funds shall enable CITY to expand the CONSULTANT’s role and responsibilities as necessary, subject to the not-to-exceed contract value. DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 5 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 1, ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES Background CONSULTANT was retained by the City to perform technical services (under Contract No. S15155476) related to: (1) peer review of a seismic evaluation completed by CPI consultants; (2) assisting staff with a regulatory approach for possible land use incompatibilities stemming from the use of hazardous materials at CPI and other similar uses; and (3) attending public meetings to discuss the first two items. It was acknowledged in the original scope of services that a precise level of effort could not be estimated for the latter two items because those efforts were shared with City staff and depended on the direction from the Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council. As the work has progressed, the services associated with the latter two tasks have expanded. This amended scope reflects the evolution of the original tasks and the additional services included in this contract amendment. Work Tasks Task 1: Peer Review of CPI Provided Seismic Structural Engineering Study This task was completed and no new work is expected. Task 2: Consultation on Incorporating Risk Assessment Findings into City-Recommended Zoning / Regulatory Approach In this task, CONSULTANT and the City have been working on methodologies to best identify a screening tool to identify facilities using hazardous materials in the City’s industrial zones that could pose a hazard to proximate identified sensitive receptors. For several months, the CONSULTANT and the City have been discussing the merits of different methodologies and exchanging draft memos describing the different screening approaches and outcomes. Additional time and effort are required to refine the methodologies. In particular, additional research is needed by CONSULTANT’s toxicologist/health risk assessor and other technical specialists to review and update the draft materials developed to date. In addition, with the contract amendment, Task 2 will continue to be in effect to enable CONSULTANT to provide ongoing support to City staff in drafting zoning language based on CONSULTANT’s prior risk assessment analysis of the CPI facilities and the draft screening approach. It is anticipated that this ongoing support will consist of:  Involving appropriate technical staff to assist in refining the screening tool and methodology,  Drafting zoning text as requested by City staff, DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 6 Revision April 28, 2014  Reviewing and commenting on zoning provisions developed by staff, and  Participating in ongoing communications and discussions with staff regarding technical findings and zoning. Similar to the original scope for Task 2, an assumed level of effort (number of hours) is made to perform requested services for this task, which will evolve as the zoning ordinance revisions get underway. For purposes of this amended scope of work, an estimate of 120 hours has been included and is reflected in Exhibit “C,” Compensation. This scope of services and cost estimate does not include additional work that will be needed should any property be subject to amortization as a result of this work. Task 3: Participation in Public Review and Meetings Due to unforeseen circumstances under the original scope of services, CONSULTANT did not complete the number of meetings identified in the original scope of services. Budget allocated for those meetings was used partially to respond to Council requests. Task 3 will continue to remain in effect and its purpose remains unchanged from the original scope of work; namely, to participate at public meetings to answer questions about alternative approaches and their implications for amortization as well as questions for the proposed zoning/regulatory changes. These meetings could include those with the neighbors, the Planning and Transportation Commission, or the City Council. For purposes of this contract amendment and the cost estimate, six additional meetings are included in this task. The same assumptions regarding level of effort as before apply (i.e., an average of 8 hours per meeting, for preparation, attendance, and summaries; additional assignments to rework the screening approach or revise zoning regulations are not included in these hours). Only the CONSULTANT Project Manager is scheduled to participate at these public meetings. AMENDMENT NO. 2, ADDITIONAL SCOPE OF SERVICES Background CONSULTANT was retained by CITY to perform technical services (under Contract No. S15155476) related to: (1) peer review of a seismic evaluation completed by CPI consultants; (2) assisting staff with a regulatory approach for possible land use incompatibilities stemming from the use of hazardous materials at CPI and other similar uses; and (3) attending public meetings to discuss the first two items. It was acknowledged in the original scope of services that a precise level of effort could not be estimated for the latter two items because those efforts were shared with City staff and depended on the direction from the Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council. As the work progressed, the services associated with the latter two tasks have expanded, and a new effort to review the previous amortization studies prepared for the CPI facilities and to advise CITY on their validity, has been requested. This amended scope reflects the evolution of the original tasks and presents an approach and activities related to the new effort. DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 7 Revision April 28, 2014 Work Tasks Task 1: Peer Review of CPI Provided Seismic Structural Engineering Study This task was completed and no new work is expected. Task 2: Consultation on Incorporating Risk Assessment Findings into City-Recommended Zoning / Regulatory Approach This task was updated by Contract Amendment No. 1, entered into on April 6, 2015, and the scope and level of effort for Task 2 are defined by that amendment. Task 3: Participation in Public Review and Meetings This task was updated by Contract Amendment No. 1, entered into on April 6, 2015, and the scope and level of effort for Task 3 are defined by that amendment. Task 4: Review of Prior Amortization Studies CONSULTANT will compare the two prior amortization studies for CPI facilities, render an opinion regarding the validity of each, and advise CITY regarding possible next steps. The steps to performing this task are described below. Review Prior CPI Studies and Background Information (by CONSULTANT economist/facility assessment team). CONSULTANT professional staff in market valuations, appraisals, building conditions assessment, and life cycle costing will obtain relevant background materials from CPI, as well as information gathered in prior site visits by CONSULTANT health and safety staff. These materials include at a minimum:  2011 CBRE report that concluded a 15-year amortization period for the plating shop from the time that major upgrades were made in 2006;  Subsequent study prepared for CPI that countered that the facilities are integrally related, that the plating shop (within Building 2) alone could not be amortized, and that a reasonable time for CPI to recoup its investment would require a 40-year amortization period;  Information regarding CPI facilities, operations, process flows, improvement plans, and equipment;  Updated financial information from CPI to understand its capital costs, depreciation, and remaining useful life and value estimates for building and/or fixtures and equipment  Lease agreements with Stanford Real Estate. Should some data be unavailable, CONSULTANT will discuss with CPI and CITY staff “surrogate” or proxy materials that could be used in lieu of the requested studies and information. For example, while the actual lease for the CPI property with Stanford Real Estate is not public, CONSULTANT or CITY staff could contact Stanford Real Estate to obtain general lease terms that are not property specific. Similarly, contacting the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and local Certified Unified Program Agencies may yield information regarding similar businesses, involving plating operations in their manufacturing processes. Review Available City Background Information (by CONSULTANT economist/facility assessment team). CONSULTANT professional staff in building assessment and life cycle costing will obtain and review CITY and County assessment and tax data, building permits, environmental regulatory permits, fire department DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 8 Revision April 28, 2014 records, and other information to assist in understanding CPI’s operations and infrastructure, the assessed improvement values, and dates and value of facility improvements. Facility Conditions Assessment (by CONSULTANT facility assessment team). In order to evaluate the prior amortization studies and to appreciate the role that the plating shop performs in the overall product manufacturing, an assessment of the property’s conditions and processes is proposed. This assessment can be performed based on an inventory of assets and improvements, their age, site plans, and other information gathered from CPI above. However, to better estimate the facility conditions, value, and life, a site visit is desirable. This visit will be an opportunity to ask questions and better understand CPI’s sponsored amortization study and its assumptions. Recognizing the proprietary and confidential nature of the facilities and equipment and that a site visit may not be possible, CONSULTANT will seek to coordinate closely with CPI. Up to four members from the CONSULTANT team are expected to participate in this visit. In the event that access to CPI’s facilities is not possible or secured within the timeframe to perform this study, CONSULTANT will review data, information, and drawings to be provided by CPI. The specific data, information, and/or drawings will be solicited through a Request for Information/Questionnaire to be prepared by CONSULTANT on behalf of the City and submitted to CPI. Render Opinion on the Prior Amortization Studies (by CONSULTANT economist). Following the data collection and review steps, and concurrent with the facility assessment, CONSULTANT will discuss with the City the different methodologies for estimating useful life and remaining value used in the prior amortization studies, their utility, and their validity. CONSULTANT will identify which approach appears to be more appropriate given the background materials reviewed. CONSULTANT will meet with City staff to discuss the opinion of the amortization studies and its implications for the economic life of the property and the length of CPI’s lease with Stanford. Based on this discussion, City staff may request CONSULTANT to perform additional work, but this cannot be determined at this time. For purposes of this scope of work, following initial recommendations regarding the utility of the two prior amortization studies, one round of revisions is assumed. Following the revisions, CONSULTANT will draft the results, as described in the next task. Draft Report (by CONSULTANT economist/facility assessment team). Based on staff’s review of the preliminary findings, CONSULTANT will draft a report describing the data reviewed, the results of the comparative assessment, and the limitations/issues with each of the amortization analyses. It is anticipated that this report will be revised and updated up to two times before presentation to the Planning and Transportation Commission and/or the CITY Council. Presentation to Planning and Transportation Commission and/or City Council (by CONSULTANT economist/facility assessment team). Up to two presentations to the Commission and/or Council are assumed. The level of effort with respect to hours/staff is similar to that assumed for Task 3 earlier. For these meetings, two CONSULTANT representatives are expected to participate, one having involvement in the facility assessment and one having involvement in the appraisal model and results. Other meetings may be necessary and would be regarded as part of the Additional Services included in this scope of work. DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 9 Revision April 28, 2014 Final Report (by CONSULTANT economist/facility assessment team). Based on comments received from the Commission and/or Council, CONSULTANT will prepare a final version of the report. The final report will be submitted to the CITY as a Word file and as a pdf. DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 10 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. MILESTONES COMPLETION DATE Task 1: Draft Peer Review Letter Report of CPI 15 Working Days seismic structural engineering report of Building B from NTP or receipt of report from CPI, whichever is later Final Peer Review Letter Report 5 Working Days after conference call with the CITY to receive comments on the draft memo Task 2: Consultation on Zoning / Regulatory Approach June 30, 2015 Task 3: Public Review and Meetings June 30, 2015 AMENDMENT NO. 1, SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE Task 1: Peer Review of CPI Seismic Evaluation Completed Task 2: Assistance with Regulatory Approach Revised memo on approach to defining businesses/ May land uses that will be subject to zoning approach Draft text for zoning ordinance revision Within 6 weeks (assumed to be in mid-June) of Council direction to prepare zoning revisions Revisions to draft text Ongoing with completion to be determined in consultation with CITY staff Task 3: Public Meetings As scheduled by CITY staff DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 11 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 2, SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE Task 1: Peer Review of CPI Seismic Evaluation Completed Task 2: Assistance with Regulatory Approach Memo on approach to defining businesses/ land Completed uses that will be subject to zoning approach Draft text for zoning ordinance revision Within 4 weeks of Council direction to prepare zoning revisions Revisions to draft text Ongoing with completion to be determined in consultation with CITY staff Task 3: Public Meetings As scheduled by CITY staff Task 4: Amortization Study (generally concurrent with Task 2) Data Collection and Review/Facility Assessment Within 4 weeks of CPI site visit or receipt of completed RFI/Questionnaire from CPI Preliminary Findings on Amortization Studies Within 6 weeks of CPI site visit or receipt of completed RFI/Questionnaire from CPI First Draft Report Within 3 weeks of the Preliminary Findings Subsequent Drafts Dependent on availability of staff and nature of comments Presentations Dependent on Commission and/or Council meeting dates and agendas DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 12 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $172,840.00. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $215,600.00. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $172,840.00 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $42,760.00. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task 1 $8,150.00 (Peer Review Letter Report) Task 2 $9,660.00 (Consultation on Zoning/Regulatory Approach) Task 3 $19,380.00 (Public Review and Meetings) Task 4 (Amendment No. 1) $22,780.00 (Assistance with Regulatory approach) Task 5 (Amendment No. 1) $13,200.00 Public Meetings Task 6 Amortization Study Review (Amendment No. 2) $93,440.00 (Including Facility Conditions Assessment) DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 13 Revision April 28, 2014 Sub-total Basic Services $166,610.00 Reimbursable Expenses $6230.00 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $172,840.00 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $42,760.00 Maximum Total Compensation $215,600.00 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: A. Travel outside the San Francisco Bay area, including transportation and meals, will be reimbursed at actual cost subject to the City of Palo Alto’s policy for reimbursement of travel and meal expenses for City of Palo Alto employees. B. Long distance telephone service charges, cellular phone service charges, facsimile transmission and postage charges are reimbursable at actual cost. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $2500.00 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D 14 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “C-1” HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Project Director $275 Sr. Air Quality Meteorologist $190 Safety and Health Services Manager $160 Sr. Planner $150 Planner II $130 AMENDMENT NO. 1, HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Project Director $275 Sr. Planner – Zoning $150 Sr. Air Quality/Health Risk Assessor $195 Environmental Planner $110 AMENDMENT NO. 2, HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Project Director $275 Sr. Planner – Zoning $150 Economics Director $205 Sr. Economist / Scientist $155-$180 Economist $100-110 Facility/Cost Consulting Director $275 Facility Assessment Director / Sr. Process Engineer $200-$235 Sr. Engineer – Facility Assessment $150-$180 Engineer $125-$150 Cost Estimator $125-$150 DocuSign Envelope ID: 601C855D-31FF-45C6-82D4-E31B6266A54D City of Palo Alto (ID # 5745) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: GIS 3-year contract Title: Approval of a Three-Year Contract No. C15159248 With Geodesy for Maintenance, Support and Professional Services for the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS) in the Amount of $195,000 Per Year From: City Manager Lead Department: IT Department Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached agreement in the amount of $195,000 annually with Geodesy for a three-year term (July 1, 2015 – June 30, 2018) for maintenance, support and consulting services for the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS). Cost for additional years will be predicated on actual scope of services required and will not exceed $195,000 annually. Executive Summary The citywide Geographic Information System (GIS) solution consists of a framework of geographic information, software applications, an information network, and a management structure providing GIS information to all users. The GIS solution supports all departments and mission critical departmental business processes which includes Utilities, Police, Fire, and the Office of Emergency Services. Geodesy’s unique understanding of the City's specialized existing GIS system and experience in developing GIS applications for the City make it necessary to render the award as a sole source contract. City’s GIS software environment also makes it necessary to render the award as a contract exempted from solicitation. A solicitation would be impractical at this time where any resulting award to other than the incumbent (Geodesy) would cause substantial financial loss and risk substantial delay/ disruption and potential inferior results to delivering a public service. Ref. PAMC 2.30.360(b)(2). City of Palo Alto Page 2 Background Geodesy is a GIS consulting company that has been instrumental in the development of Palo Alto’s GIS and related applications for over 20 years. Council previously approved a five-year contract with Geodesy for maintenance and support, and professional services (C12141134) which is set to expire on June 30, 2015. The GIS is an integral part of the city’s day-to-day operations, combining digital maps with linked databases to support the inventory, management, analysis, and display of geographic information important to the many departments at the City of Palo Alto. It allows the access to and maintenance of all the departments’ GIS infrastructure data through PC’s, Tablets, and phones over the web or through specific applications. Departments and divisions are responsible for maintaining information they originate or are mandated to oversee; however, information that is common to all users, referred to as the foundation basemap, is maintained only by the City’s GIS team, which consists of one full-time City employee supported by the Geodesy consultants. The accuracy and currency of the foundation basemap is essential to all other elements of the system and requires specialized geospatial knowledge and skill to maintain. For these reasons, the Information Technology department is requesting continued support be provided by Geodesy to help meet the software enhancement needs and basemap data needs of the GIS. The current system is scheduled for a full evaluation in Fiscal Year 2016 to assess how it aligns with the future GIS needs of the City. Any transition to a new system that may occur based on the assessment would require at least two years, and could terminate this recommended 3-year contract prior to its expiration. Discussion The following tasks will be performed by Geodesy in support of the City’s GIS needs for fiscal years 2016 – 2018. This work plan will include but is not limited to the following tasks on an as-needed basis. Service requests will be initiated by the GIS manager from the approved GIS Steering Committee projects with estimated efforts. 1. Standard software maintenance and support: $45,000 per year 2. Software enhancement based on Projects approved by the GIS Steering Committee, and Data Support work: $150,000 per year. This can include: City of Palo Alto Page 3 o Analyze and design GIS data exchange with surrounding jurisdictions, including cities, counties, public utilities, and Stanford University. Update foundation basemap as appropriate with this information. o Analyze and update foundation basemap data to meet new requirements from City staff, other public agencies, and the public. o Acquire and analyze quarterly updates of Santa Clara County (SCC) Recorder’s office map documents. Tasks include: identifying areas affecting Palo Alto’s foundation basemap, editing all cadastral data impacted by information on these documents (i.e. parcel lines, subdivisions, parcel maps, certificates of compliance, easements, etc.) by using distance and bearing methods within the Encompass Traverse tool set, and linking all relevant documents to appropriate features in the foundation basemap by using GIS- based document management functionality. o Acquire and analyze quarterly updates of the Santa Clara County Assessor’s office parcel rolls for Palo Alto. Tasks include: comparing these listings with the GIS data to identify changes in cadastral data affecting the foundation basemap and reconciling these changes and making edits as necessary by using the tools and techniques described previously. o Work with City’s Real Property staff to review archives of consummated transaction files. Identify cadastral data changes made by those transactions (i.e. easement deeds, right-of-way transfers, etc.) edit the GIS foundation basemap to reflect these changes and link a digital copy of the file together with other relevant documents to the affected parcels in the GIS. o Conceive, create and update GIS training exercises, using both PowerPoint and Video-based (Camtasia) software for exercises linked to GIS applications. o Assist GIS staff in teaching in-house training classes on GIS applications, demonstrating all functionality of Encompass software in the context of Palo Alto’s operations. o Perform other data tasks as assigned by the City’s GIS Manager as approved by the GIS Steering Committee. Resource Impact The funds for the payment of this contract for Fiscal Year 2016 were budgeted within City of Palo Alto Page 4 the Information Technology Fund as part of the Fiscal Year 2016 Proposed Operating Budget. For Fiscal Year 2017 and Fiscal Year 2018, the cost for the contract will be subject to the City Council annual appropriation of funds. Environmental Review Approval of this agreement does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); therefore, no environmental assessment is required. Attachments:  Contract C15159248 Geodesy (PDF) Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 1 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C15159248 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND GEODESY FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES “Maintain the GIS Database” This Agreement is entered into on this 1st day of July, 2015, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and GEODESY, a Partnership, located at 55 New Montgomery Street, Suite 601, San Francisco, CA 94105, Tel: (415) 677-8750 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to maintain the GIS database (“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant to provide maintenance and support of the Encompass GIS software applications and components used by the City of Palo Alto, as well as software development, data support, training and staff support services in connection with the Project (“Services”). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit “A”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described at Exhibit “A” in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through June 30, 2018 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 2 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and expenses, shall not exceed One Hundred Ninety-five Thousand Dollars ($195,000.00) per fiscal year. In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for Services, Additional Services and expenses shall not exceed One Hundred Ninety-five Thousand Dollars ($195,00.00) per fiscal year. The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out at Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described at Exhibit “A”. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT’s billing rates (set forth in Exhibit “C- 1”). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 3 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. This Section is not applicable. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%) of CITY’s stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to CITY for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Chip Eitzel as the project director to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and Jean-Paul Lavoie and Dave Matson as the project staff to represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY’s project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 3 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. CITY’s project manager is John Thayer, Information Technology Department, IT Project Services Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, 2nd Floor, Palo Alto, CA 94303, and Telephone: (650) 617-3134. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all software and associated documentation developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CONSULTANT. City is granted an unrestricted, perpetual, non-exclusive license to use these materials on any of the City’s computers. This extends to outside government agencies where there are joint operations. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 5 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Chief Procurement Officer during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 6 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 7 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the CITY’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of CITY’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, CONSULTANT shall comply with the following zero waste requirements:  All printed materials provided by CCONSULTANT to CITY generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post- consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks.  Goods purchased by CONSULTANT on behalf of CITY shall be purchased in accordance with CITY’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Division’s office.  Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by CONSULTANT, at no additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. CONSULTANT shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION 24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 8 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, CITY shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City’s express written consent. 25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. 25.11 This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 9 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO: ____________________________ City Manager (Required on contracts over $85,000) Purchasing Manager (Required on contracts over $25,000) Contracts Administrator (Required on contracts under $25,000) APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney (Required on Contracts over $25,000) CONSULTANT: GEODESY By:___________________________ Name:___ Chip Eitzel ____________ Title:_____Partner_______________ Attachments: EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF WORK EXHIBIT “B”: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE EXHIBIT “C”: COMPENSATION EXHIBIT “C-1”: HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE EXHIBIT “D”: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 11 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES The following tasks will be performed by Geodesy in support of the City’s GIS needs for a period of three years (2015-2018).  Task Item 1 is the annual GIS software maintenance agreement.  Task Item 2 is for hourly services. Requests for services will be initiated by the GIS manager from the approved GIS Steering Committee projects with estimated efforts and schedules on case-by-case basis. Task Item 1: Encompass Maintenance and Support This item provides for the maintenance and support of the Encompass GIS software applications and components used by Palo Alto. The applications supported under this agreement were each previously developed by Geodesy and are each site-licensed to Palo Alto. The applications are: • AccelaService mines permit data using web services provided by Accela and loads the mined data into the GIS. • AME Metadata Sync extends FDM to identify and fix metadata differences between CPAU’s Autodesk AME and the City’s GIS. • Avec interactively edits RDBMS-based map feature data either while connected to the master data server or while remotely editing data in the field. • CompLoad installs and registers ActiveX components on any computer regardless of user privileges. • ReconA supports mobile reporting to support emergency management and utilities field operations (operates on Android 3.0 and higher). ReconA works with a Recon server. • DoxView displays previously scanned documents organized by department or address. • Encompass Services provides an HTTP master web service which supports sub-services such as the Parcel Reporter. • FDM provides a graphic user interface for editing the Feature Dictionary data. • FeBulk mass-edits feature geometry and data (operates on an entire feature class). • Flo manages Storm Water system data. • Gedit provides map displays through web browsers using Google Fusion-based data. • Gist provides general GIS viewing and analyses. • Importer loads and geocodes data from external data sources such as Davey TreeKeeper. • InDox indexes scanned documents into an address-based folder structure. • InfraCat provides query and edit capabilities on GIS-based infrastructure data. • MapView provides access to GIS data for casual users. • NcAdmin provides data definition and replication tools to manage multiple GIS databases. Includes Google Fusion table replication. • NcUpdate synchronizes data, metadata and software between servers and mobile units. DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 12 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx • ParcelReporter creates parcel reports in batch and keeps them up-to-date when parcel or address features change. • Pavement Manager manages and analyses pavement section data. • Project Coordinator manages Public Works and Utilities project locations and flags possible opportunities for coordination. • QC reports and corrects data errors in Encompass databases. • Recon Service provides two-way data syncing for mobile platforms and external developers. • SccAssessor extends Recon to load data from the Santa Clara County Assessor’s office. • Service! Allows the non-graphic entry of geocoded point data. • Sync updates data between mobile client PCs and the GIS server when the client is connected to the network. • SyncService updates data between GIS database instances as the data is edited. Many of PC-based applications listed above use a number of Microsoft COM-based GIS components that are also site-licensed to Palo Alto: • gxAdo, ADO Connection Manager • gxAe, Attribute Editor • gxAv, Application Variables Manager • gxDi, DxfIn (to Blob) Translator • gxDmNc, Draw Map Frames • gxDo, DxfOut (from Blob) Translator • gxDoxV, Dox Document Viewer • gxEcw, Earth Resources ECW interface • gxFcb, Feature Class Browser • gxFd, Feature Dictionary • gxFlt, View Entry Filter • gxGctp, Map Projection library • gxGe, Geometry Editor • gxGc, Geocoder • gxGdb, ESRI Geodatabase Translator • gxGpc, Polygon Overlay library • gxGps, Garmin GPS interface • gxGrd, Grid control • gxHlp, User Help control • gxImg, Image Server • gxKm, KeyMap • gxKo, KmlOut • gxLeg, Legend • gxLib, Library • gxMBP, MapBox PAGIS • gxMtb, Map Toolbar • gxMeNc, Nc Map Engine • gxMLoc, Map Locator • gxMmNc, ManyMap Map Layout tool • gxMwNc, Nc Map Window Wrapper DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 13 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx • gxNm, NetMap interface • gxParRep, Parcel Reporter • gxPfo, Trimble PathFinder Office interface • gxPm, Print Map • gxQfl, Query Feature List • gxQg, Query Grid • gxQm, Query Manager • gxQry, Query support library • gxSe, Symbol Editor • gxShp, Shape File / Blob Translator • gxStb, Style Bar • gxTvw, Treeview control • gxUa, User Authorization • gxVc, View Contents • gxVm, View Manager • gxVs, View Selector The following .NET-based components are supported: • Encompass.Args, centralizes function argument classes. • Encompass.AttrEdit, edits feature attributes. • Encompass.Common, general library function. • Encompass.ControlGroup, displays a meta-defined panel for attribute editing. • Encompass.Converter, Well Known Geometry for syncing with Topobase. • Encompass.Db, database access and editing. • Encompass.Document, retrieves related documents. • Encompass.Edits, manages storing and tracking feature edits. • Encompass.EsriDb, converts between ESRI geodatabase and Encompass formats. • Encompass.Fd, feature dictionary meta data. • Encompass.Feature, class definitions for graphic features. • Encompass.Geometry, graphic manipulation methods. • Encompass.Grid, displays and edits feature records. • Encompass.Keymap, keymap pan and zoom UI control. • Encompass.Location, processes locations for geocoding and zoom functions. • Encompass.Log, creates and manages writing to log files. • Encompass.MailLabels, generates mailing labels from parcel searches. • Encompass.MapContents, describes map definitions. • Encompass.Projections, converts coordinates between map projections. • Encompass.Statics, container for shared meta data. • Encompass.Styles, processes graphic display styles for feature display. • Encompass.SyncDb, data sync for disconnected and mobile computers. • Encompass.SyncFile, file sync for disconnected and mobile computers. • Encompass.SyncUI, data sync UI control. • Encompass.Tools, map tools for panning and zooming. • Encompass.Vars, application variables. • Encompass.ViewComtents, class definitions for the display of map contents. DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 14 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx The following ESRI ArcGIS 10.3 add-ins are also supported: • AttrEditAg.esriAddIn, wraps AttrEdit.dll for ArcGIS • KeymapAg.esriAddIn, wraps Keymap.dll for ArcGIS • LocationAg.esriAddIn, wraps LocationUi.dll for ArcGIS • MailLabelsAg.esriAddIn, wraps MailLabels.dll for ArcGIS The services provided under this agreement are: • Geodesy will provide telephone, e-mail, and periodic on-site support to Palo Alto’s technical GIS staff for the applications and components listed above. Telephone and e- mail response will be provided by the end of the business day following the request unless otherwise previously arranged. • Under this agreement, Geodesy will track Palo Alto’s requests for enhancements to the supported applications and components. Geodesy will review these enhancements with Palo Alto to determine which to implement under this agreement. • Most of the applications and components supported under this agreement are used at sites other than Palo Alto’s. Enhancements made in these applications and components for other sites will be provided to Palo Alto under this agreement where applicable. • Geodesy will store a backup copy of Palo Alto’s GIS data at their offices in San Francisco upon request. Site License Geodesy grants Palo Alto an unrestricted non-exclusive license to use the Encompass GIS on any of their computers. This software license extends to outside government agencies where there are joint operations. Direct support services to outside government agencies is not included under this maintenance agreement. All third party software with the exception of ESRI’s ArcObjects has been licensed by Geodesy under software developer agreements so that there are no per-seat runtime costs. ArcObjects is used for data conversion and must be licensed by Palo Alto directly from ESRI. Palo Alto can request a copy of source code for their internal use only. Source code that has been modified by Palo Alto is not supported under this maintenance agreement. Task Item 2: Consulting, Software Development, Data Support, Training and Staff Support Services Provide hourly services in response to requests by the GIS Steering Committee and with the approval of the City’s GIS Manager and CIO. Projects under this scope will be described using IT’s Project Proposal format. Each proposal will outline the work to be performed, the deliverables, and duration of the task. DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 15 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx Consulting Services included but not limited to: • Software enhancements based on projects approved by the GIS Steering Committee. • Analysis and design of GIS data exchange with surrounding jurisdictions, including cities, counties, public utilities, and Stanford University. Update foundation base map as appropriate with this information. • Analysis and update foundation base map data to meet new requirements from city staff, other public agencies and the public. • Acquisition and analysis of quarterly updates of Santa Clara County (SCC) Recorder’s office map documents, tasks include, identifying areas affecting Palo Alto’s foundation base map, editing all cadastral data impacted by information on these documents, i.e. parcel lines, subdivisions, parcel maps, certificates of compliance, easements, etc. by using distance and bearing methods within the Encompass Traverse tool set, and linking all relevant documents to appropriate features in the foundation base map by using GIS- based document management functionality. • Acquisition and analysis of quarterly updates of the Santa Clara County Assessor’s office of their most current parcel rolls for Palo Alto. Tasks include: comparing these listings with the GIS data to identify changes in cadastral data affecting the foundation base map and reconciling these changes and make edits as necessary by using the tools and techniques described previously. • Work with City’s Real Property staff to review (paper) archive of consummated transaction files. Identify cadastral data changes made by those transactions, i.e. easement deeds, right-of-way transfers, etc., edit the GIS foundation base map to reflect these changes and link a digital copy of the file together with other relevant documents to the affected parcels in the GIS. • Conceive, create and update GIS training exercises, using both PowerPoint and Video- based (Camtasia) software for exercises linked to GIS applications. • Assist GIS staff in teaching in-house training classes on GIS applications, demonstrating all functionality of Encompass software in the context of Palo Alto’s operations. • Perform other data tasks as assigned by the City’s GIS Manager as approved by GIS Steering Committee. END OF SCOPE DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 16 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete within the period specified below. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the time period below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed. Milestones Completion from NTP 1. On-going Services 36 Months DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 14 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation for Task Item #1 shall be a lump sum payment per fiscal year and compensation for Task Item #2 shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount the task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and expenses shall not exceed $195,000 per fiscal year. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $195,000 per fiscal year. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s project manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including expenses, does not exceed $195,000 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $0.00 per fiscal year. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT (Per fiscal year) Task Item 1 $45,000 (Encompass Maintenance and Support) Task Item 2 $150,000 (Consulting, Software Development, Data Support, Training and Staff Support Services) Sub-total Basic Services $195,000 Reimbursable Expenses $0.00 Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $195,000 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $0.00 Maximum Total Compensation $195,000 DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 15 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: None ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s project manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 18 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx EXHIBIT “C-1” HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Time will be billed on a monthly basis for Task Item #2 and for any approved Additional Services at the following rates: Consultant Staff Rate  Chip Eitzel: $150/hour  Jean-Paul Lavoie: $150/hour  Dave Matson: $100/hour DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 19 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx EXHIBIT “D” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRE D TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY (30) DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 20 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\ITS - CSD JOSE - CK FILES\JOSE - April 2015\Council Approved\Contract C15159248 - Geodesy\Contract C15159248 GeodesyR1.docx B. CROSS LIABILITY THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON- PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 EMAIL: InsuranceCerts@CityofPaloAlto.org DocuSign Envelope ID: 56D72642-88A2-47FF-88FC-61852A01936C City of Palo Alto (ID # 5879) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Palo Alto Historical Museum Option To Lease for the Roth Building Title: Approval of a One–Year Extension of the Option to Lease Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto History Museum for the Roth Building Located at 300 Homer Avenue and Approval of a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Capital Improvement Fund to Establish a Roth Building Historical Rehabilitation Reserve in the Amount of 3.88 Million Dollars From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that Council approve the following recommendations: 1. Approve a one year extension of the Option to Lease Agreement between City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto History Museum. 2. Approve a Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment “A”) in the Capital Improvement Fund to recognize $2,880,000 in transfer development rights revenue and a transfer from the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve in the amount of $1,000,000 to establish the Roth Building Rehabilitation Reserve in the amount of $3,880,000. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In the past ten years, the Palo Alto History Museum (PAHM) has been utilizing various strategies and activities including raisings funds from private and public sources to raise sufficient capital to renovate the Roth Building and to operate a historical museum. The Palo Alto History Museum proposes to restore, preserve, and rehabilitate the City’s Roth Building as a museum. After several recent presentations to Council requesting public funding, on December 15, 2014, City Council passed a motion instructing staff to identify $1.0 million to fund rehabilitation costs for the Roth building. All potential sources were examined and staff recommends that the Budget Stabilization be drawn down to provide the $1.0 million. Historical Museum City of Palo Alto Page 2 representatives asserted that with this contribution and the sale of Transportation Development Rights (TDRs), further fundraising would gain traction. Prior to this action, Council approved the designation of the Roth Building as a “Sender Site” in the TDRs program. At a specified, minimum price of $200 per square foot, the TDRs were put to bid and were sold at $300.25 per square foot. This raised $2.88 million. During the last presentation to Council the History Museum stated it privately had raised $3.5 million (excluding the projected revenue of TDRs and Library Impact Fee – Archives) toward total estimated construction costs of $9.1 million dollars. Since that time, in addition to the City and TDR funding, PAHM has raised $113,530 in new pledges, restricted and unrestricted donations since the beginning of the year. PAHM continues to work on fundraising, and has an expectation of a major donation in the very near future that is prompted by the City’s support of the building. While staff has completed the above designated assignments, the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Architectural Plan Review that allowed the historical museum to move forward expired at the end of December of 2014. With these expirations, new applications (whose processing time typically takes three to six months) must be activated. PAHM will be applying for City’s customary planning reviews to update the expired Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Staff requests that Council review the History Museum’s request for another one year extension of the option to lease agreement on the Roth building. With an extension, staff requests that a Budget Amendment Ordinance for $1.0 million be approved as well. In summary, a total of $3.8 million is being earmarked with interest by the City for the renovation of the Roth Building. BACKGROUND Background information on the development of the Roth Building since the City’s acquisition in April 2000 is extensive. Since 2007, Museum personnel and City staff have examined a variety of proposals to fund the capital and operating needs of the Roth Building historical museum. Additional background information can be found by referring to CMRs: 2197, 2891, 4703, 5365 and 5551. Briefly, the Palo Alto Historical Museum (PAHM) proposed project is to renovate the existing building and add 1,398 square feet to the existing square footage. This would accommodate: a basement egress stairway; additional first floor level area for additional gallery space; new second floor space for exhibits and archives; and add space at roof level to have an open roof area. For a detailed description of rehabilitation plans, please note Report to Historical Resource Board & Architectural Review Board on February 16, & 17, 2011. After rehabilitating the Roth Building, PAHM would operate the building and conduct its programs. The last business plan submitted by PAHM indicated that an operating budget of City of Palo Alto Page 3 $1.9 million would be needed. These expenses would be funded through fees, rentals and donations. Over the past few meetings between the Historical Museum and the City Council, the Council directed staff to take two actions to support the capital needs for the Roth Building: 1) the sale of TDRs and 2) the identification of $1.0 million from available City resources. Staff has completed these assignments. DISCUSSION City Activity on Funding Since the Roth Building has historical designation, staff followed the provisions for eligible City- owned buildings to participate in the TDR program as outlined in Chapters 18.18.080 and 18.28.060 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC). The program allows a Category 2 resource, (the Roth Building) to be eligible as a “sender site” for a 9,592 square foot floor area bonus. City staff prepared and issued a request for bids (RFB) to market the Roth Building TDRs on Monday April 20th 2015 and closed the bidding on Tuesday May 5, 2015. The minimum price set was $200 per square foot and the highest bid received was for $300.25 per square foot. This resulted in a sale for $2.88 million. The funds will be set aside in the Roth Building Rehabilitation Reserve and be available when PAHM has fulfilled its fund raising goal for the construction phase of the project from other potential sources. In addition to the sale of TDRs, staff has identified $1.0 million in funding for Roth Building capital costs. All potential sources were examined and staff recommends that the Budget Stabilization be drawn down to provide the $1.0 million. Historical Museum representatives asserted that with this contribution and the sale of Transportation Development Rights (TDRs), further fundraising would gain traction. The Option to Lease between the City and PAHM will expire on June 30, 2015 and it will need to be extended to allow for the museum project to move forward. The Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and Architectural Review expired at the end of December of 2014. The application processing time to re-activate these permits is typically three to six months. PAHM is in the process of applying for an updated Conditional Use Permit (CUP). PAHM Activity on Funding PAHM has focused on moving this project forward by raising funds from private donors and applying for grants from various sources. It has hired a new executive director to work on new strategies for fundraising and for program development at the Museum. Details on the capital budget for Roth Building renovation and financial progress can be found in (Attachment “B”). The projected rehabilitation cost is $9.1 million. The TDR sale and $1.0 million drawdown of the GF Budget Stabilization Reserve provide $3.88 million of capital funds required. Since December of 2014, it appears that PAHM has raised $113,530 in new pledges, restricted and unrestricted donations and according to PAHM, there is an expectation of a major donation in the very near future. Creation of exhibits and programs for the Museum are estimated at $9.0 City of Palo Alto Page 4 million and annual operating costs, expected to be covered by fees, rentals and fundraising are estimated at $1.9 million. Staff requests that Council review the History Museum’s request for another one year extension of the option to lease agreement on the Roth building. With an extension, staff requests that a Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) for $1.0 million be approved as well. TIMELINE Staff will return to Council in the future with periodic updates. In the meantime, the Palo Alto Historical Museum will continue its effort for fund raising until it is ready to exercise its option to enter into lease with the City for Roth Building. RESOURCE IMPACT TDRs from the Roth Building sold for $2.88 million, which will be set aside in the Roth Building Rehabilitation Reserve. If Council approves the attached BAO, an additional $1.0 million will be available for Roth Building capital costs increasing the amount to $3.88 million. These funds plus interest earned will be available for capital costs incurred for the rehabilitation of the Roth Building. POLICY IMPLICATIONS This recommendation is consistent with existing City policy. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Designation of the Roth Building site as an eligible TDR “sender” site is Categorically Exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review under CEQA guidelines section 15305, Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitation. The rehabilitation project is Categorically Exempt from CEQA review pursuant to CEQA guidelines section 15331, Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation, as a project limited to maintenance, repair, and rehabilitation in accordance with the secretary of interior standards for historic preservation. Attachments:  Attachment A: Budget Amendment Ordinance to Establish Roth Building Rehabilitation Reserve (DOCX)  Attachment B-Letter PAHM to City Progress Report June 2015 (PDF) ATTACHMENT A 1 Revised June 2, 2015 5879 so Ordinance No. XXXX ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND AND THE GENERAL FUND TO RECOGNIZE $2,880,000 IN TRANSFER DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS REVENUE IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND, REDUCE THE BUDGET STABILIZATION RESERVE IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,000,000 IN THE GENERAL FUND AND TRANSFER THAT AMOUNT TO THE CAPITAL IMRPOVEMENT FUND, AND ESTABLISH A ROTH BUILDING REHABILITATION RESERVE IN THE AMOUNT OF $3,880,000 IN THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND. The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and determines as follows: A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 16, 2014 did adopt a budget for fiscal year 2015; and B. The Palo Alto History Museum (PAHM) proposed to restore, preserve, and rehabilitate the City’s Roth Building at 300 Homer Street as a Museum. PAHM’s proposal was accepted by the Council in April 2004; and C. In the past ten years, PAHM has been utilizing various strategies and methods to raise sufficient capital to renovate the Roth Building and to operate a historical museum. On June 22, 2007, the City granted PAHM a two year Option to Lease which has since been extended several times an currently expires on July 1, 2015; and D. PAHM plans to continue its fund raising process and meet all the other remaining option conditions in order to exercise the Option and enter into a long term lease with the City of Palo Alto; and E. As part of its development plan to begin work on the Building, the Palo Alto Historical Museum (PAHM) has requested additional assistance to raise funding toward the cost of historical rehabilitation and seismic work of the Roth building. F. On December 15, 2015, City Council approved a one-time contribution of one million ($1,000,000) toward the cost of historical rehabilitation and seismic work for City owned Roth Building located at 300 Homer Avenue; and G. On March 2, 2015, the City Council approved the designation of 300 Homer Street known the Roth Building to be eligible as a “Sender Site” in the Transfer Development Rights (TDRs) program and the sale release of 9,592 square feet of TDRs at the price of $200 per square foot in the market in order to raise funds for the rehabilitation and seismic improvement of the Roth Building; and ATTACHMENT A 2 Revised June 2, 2015 5879 so H. City staff issued a request for bids to market the TDRs on April 20, 2015 and bidding closed on Tuesday, May 5th. The highest bid was for $300.25 per square foot resulting in the total of $2,880,000 of proceeds from the sale of the TDRs. The proceeds of the sale will be deposited in the Roth Building Rehabilitation Reserve to be used toward the rehabilitation of the Roth Building. The funds will be available when PAHM has fulfilled its fund raising goal for the construction phase of the project from other potential sources; and SECTION 2. Therefore, the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve is reduced by One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) and One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) is transferred to the Capital Improvement Fund. SECTION 3. The Roth Building Rehabilitation Reserve in the amount of Three Million Eight Hundred and Eighty Thousand Dollars ($3,880,000) is hereby established in the Capital Improvement Fund funded with Two Million Eight Hundred and Eighty Thousand Dollars ($2,880,000) in Transfer Development Revenues and a transfer of One Million dollars ($1,000,000) from the General Fund. SECTION 4. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. SECTION 5. As specified in Section 2.28.080(a) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, a two-thirds vote of the City Council is required to adopt this ordinance SECTION 6. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby finds that this is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. // // // // // // // // // // // // // // // // ATTACHMENT A 3 Revised June 2, 2015 5879 so // // INTRODUCED AND PASSED: Enter Date Here AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services June 9, 2015 Lalo Perez Director of Administrative Services City of Palo Alto Dear Mr. Perez, I am pleased to send you this letter to both update the City on the progress of the Palo Alto History Museum and its plans for the historic Roth Building, and to request an extension of the current lease option. We are currently in the process of re-submitting plans to renew the Conditional Use Permit. Once the CUP is issued, we will work with a contractor to value engineer the plans with the expectation of lowering costs. We request a one-year extension of the lease option to complete the permit process, reach the Phase One funding goal, and commence work on the building once we have permits. With that in mind, we expect work to begin on the building in roughly six months. Fundraising In December of last year we reported a need of $4.3 million in capital to begin Phase One of the project. That need has shrunk to $1.30 million, and we continue to work diligently to close the gap. Estimated project cost: Phase One: Roth Rehabilitation (Contractor’s estimate) $9.1 M Phase Two: Archives, Museum Exhibits and Programs $9.0 M Operating Costs through 2018 $1.9 M Capital Expenditures to Date ($0.67 M) Total $19.33 M To date, PAHM has gathered $7,762,229.87 in donations, pledges and fees, including an appropriation by the City of Palo Alto of $1,000,000 for the seismic reconstruction of the Roth Building’s back wall, and $2,879,998 resulting from the sale of the Roth Building’s Transferable Development Rights. Since January 1, PAHM has raised $113,530 in new pledges, and restricted and unrestricted donations for the Capital Campaign, and to support operations and fundraising activities. Fundraising is ongoing, and we currently have an expectation of a major gift in the near future that is prompted by the City’s support of the building. Of the funds it has raised, PAHM has spent approximately $670,000 on architectural drawings and city permit fees. ATTACHMENT B We look forward to commencing rehabilitation of the Roth Building, which will provide many community benefits when completed: •The historic Roth building is listed on the National Register and designed in the Spanish Colonial Revival style by native son, Birge Clark. The rehabilitation preserves a significant historic structure, including the preservation of murals painted by Victor Arnautoff. •A City building will be brought up to LEED gold standard. •An expanded home for the City Archives will be created and accessible to all Palo Altans at no charge. As the permanent home of the City Archives, the Palo Alto History Museum will showcase the remarkable heritage of Palo Alto through the careful collection, preservation and continued social engagement with precious local artifacts and documents. •The Museum provides a location to fill the need of a tangible resource for third and fourth grade PAUSD students studying state and local history. • •The rehabilitated building will provide a public restroom for park visitors. •The building will contain a community meeting room available for scheduling by community members at no charge. •The Museum provides an additional and unique venue for public and private events. •The Museum will preserve the history of Palo Alto, and be the repository for artifacts currently scattered and vulnerable to loss or destruction. •The new History Museum will be a free cultural destination in the heart of historic Palo Alto, with exhibitions and programs on the story of Palo Alto and its legacy of innovation and world-changing impact. Additionally, the museum will provide resources, space and opportunities for a variety of non-profits to create, and partner on, programs that enhance Palo Alto’s quality of life. The space design will inspire community participation, attracting the diversity of our local history-makers while reaching out to the next generation of inquisitive school children. Thank you for your support, and for your consideration of this request. Myron Freedman Executive Director Palo Alto History Museum ATTACHMENT B City of Palo Alto (ID # 5685) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: SP Plus Contract Amendment for Valet-Assist Program Expansion Title: Approval of Amendment One to Contract No. C14152025 with SP Plus to Add $637,652 for Expansion of the Downtown Valet Parking Program to Additional Garages and a Total Not to Exceed Amount of $997,652 over a Three Year Period From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve Amendment Number One to Contract C14152025 (Attachment A) with SP Plus to add $637,652 to expand valet-assist services to up to three additional Downtown garages (Bryant/Lytton, Civic Center, and Cowper/Webster) for a total contract amount not to exceed $997,652 over a three year period. With expansion of the valet program to three additional garages, the City will have added capacity for a total of approximately 230 valet parkers Downtown and will be able to provide additional garage permits concurrent with commencement of the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program. Expansion of the valet program to Bryant/Lytton (Lot S) and Civic Center (Lot CC) would occur immediately, with expansion to the Cowper Webster garage only if/as needed based on occupancy. Executive Summary In early 2014, Staff began significant efforts to address the City’s parking and traffic challenges, particularly in the Downtown core, through a strategic multi-pronged approach. The strategy includes projects to increase parking supply and availability (parking supply measures), improving how the existing parking facilities are utilized and controlled (parking management strategies), and projects to reduce overall traffic demand and encouraging alternatives to driving (transportation demand management strategies). One component of this strategy is more efficient usage of the existing parking capacity, and valet-assist parking is one part of this program. In February 2014, City Council approved a three year contract with SP Plus that initiated a one- City of Palo Alto Page 2 year trial valet-assist program in the Alma/High Street garage (Lot R) to facilitate an increase in both the number of cars parked in permit spaces and the number of permits sold at that garage. City Council approved a continuation of that program in February 2015 (Item 5472, Attachment B), approving an extension of the program through FY 2015. The Lot R trial program has been successful, parking an additional 43 people on average per day in March 2015, and allowing the City to sell 89 additional permits for the garage since program inception in March 2014. The impending implementation of the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program predicates an imminent need for expansion of this program. With the proposed expansion, 2 parking attendants would be stationed in three additional garages during the hours of 8:00am to 6:00. The use of parking attendants in these garages would add to the garage capacity (approximately 180 parkers) and enable the sale of additional permits each year. Staff is recommending immediate expansion of the valet program to Lot S (Bryant/Lytton) and Lot CC (Civic Center), with potential expansion to the Cowper Webster garage based on parking occupancy. Background City staff is engaged in a number of parking management programs to improve parking utilization and maximize parking supply, including parking guidance systems (PGS), Parking Access and Revenue Controls (PARCs) and parking wayfinding signage. The PGS and PARCs equipment study, in addition to a proposed study on parking pricing for FY16, will support the development of potential recommendations on pricing strategy for garages. Staff are also bringing forward a scope of work for the creation of a new parking facility at Lot D (Hamilton and Waverley), in addition to the launching of the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association (TMA) which will fund transportation programs for Downtown employees. However, with the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program being implemented in late summer 2015, non-resident parking in the neighborhoods will be further restricted. The RPP program, which will regulate non-resident parking in the Downtown neighborhoods, is expected to increase demand for parking in Downtown garages. While a new garage would offer additional supply, construction of a new facility may take a number of years, and maximizing utilization of existing parking supply in the meantime is crucial. The valet-assist program, if implemented at the three additional garages, may allow up to 180 additional cars to be parked with no increase in capital investment (in addition to the additional 40-50 cars that can be parked in the Alma/High Street garage [Lot R]). The existing valet-assist trial program at Lot R has been successful in increasing the number of permitted vehicles parked during the day. As seen in Figure 1 below, on average the program allowed for an additional 29 vehicles on average to be parked per day between from January through May 2015. An additional 43 people were served per day on average in March 2015. Figure 1. Valet-Assist Parking Statistics at Lot R, January through May 2015 City of Palo Alto Page 3 Staff recommends expanding the scope of the SP Plus contract to implement the valet-assist program at the Bryant/Lytton garage, Civic Center garage, and the Cowper/Webster garage if capacity indicate that expansion at this garage is appropriate. Discussion The existing Lot R program is staffed by two valet attendants, stationed at the third floor of the garage. When the permit spaces at the garage are nearing capacity, the attendants use signage to direct permit parkers to park in the drive aisle and leave their key with the attendant. Prior to beginning the program, Lot R occupancy was at capacity during the midday peak parking hours. The proposed contract amendment allows for phased implementation of the valet-assist program to the Bryant/Lytton Garage, Civic Center, and Cowper/Webster. At the writing of this report, occupancy studies by City staff show that the Bryant/Lytton garage permit parking is on average 91% full during the midday peak parking hours, and Civic Center permit parking is on average 85% occupied. A valet program at the Bryant/Lytton and Civic Center garages would allow for 50 additional vehicles to be parked at each garage, providing capacity for 100 total additional vehicles that City of Palo Alto Page 4 may be affected by the upcoming RPP implementation. Implementation of the valet-parking program at Cowper/Webster would allow for parking an additional 80 vehicles, although that garage currently has existing capacity available for permit parkers. Staff is proposing to implement the valet program at Lot S and Lot CC prior to the initiation of the Downtown RPP program, and monitor the Cowper Webster garage’s utilization. If the CW garage reaches appropriate occupancy levels staff will implement the program at this garage in FY16. Timeline Staff expects to implement the new valet parking programs at Lot S and Civic Center in late Summer 2015, prior to implementation of the Downtown RPP. Implementation at Cowper/Webster would come at a later timeframe depending on utilization of the garage. Resource Impact The Fiscal Year 2016 Operating Budget for University Avenue Parking Permit Fund includes sufficient funding for this program, which would require staffing each garage with two full time valet attendants, and providing for managerial oversight for 10 hours per week per garage. A start-up fee of $2,500 is required at each location. The total annual costs for expansion at each garage are as follows: Year 1 (March 2014 - March 2015, already expended) Year 2 Year 3 Start-Up Costs Total Lot R $101,920.00 $101,920.00 $101,920.0 0 n/a $305,760.0 0 Lot CC n/a $72,453.33 $86,944.00 $2,500.00 $161,897.3 3 Lot S n/a $72,453.33 $86,944.00 $2,500.00 $161,897.3 3 Lot CW n/a $72,453.33 $86,944.00 $2,500.00 $161,897.3 3 Subtotal $101,920.00 $319,279.99 $362,752.0 0 $7,500.00 $791,451.9 9 Year 1 Additional Services $15,000.00 n/a n/a n/a Year 1 Start Up Costs $2,500.00 Year 2 Start Up Costs Year 2 - 3 Contingency If Needed (Total $60,000) n/a $30,000.00 $30,000.00 Year 2 - 3 Supervisor (Additional Labor Hours) n/a $64,350.00 $64,350.00 n/a City of Palo Alto Page 5 Total $119,420.00 $413,629.99 $457,102.0 0 $7,500.00 $997,651.9 9 As the chart shows, the total costs of the program in year two are anticipated to be $413,630. As part of the Fiscal Year 2016 Budget adoption, $375,572 was approved for additional valet service in the University Avenue Parking Permit Fund, on top of the existing base budget of $90,000, giving a total year 2 budget of $465,572. No additional funds are required at this time. Staff also expects to sell at least 180 more permits per year for the three additional garages (Lots CC, S, & CW), which would create a revenue stream of $83,880 in years 2 and 3 for the University Avenue Parking Permit Fund. With anticipated revenues of $175,216 from the sale of additional permits, the net cost of the program is anticipated to be $238,414, assuming the program is indeed implemented at the Cowper Webster garage. Policy Implications Expansion of the valet-assist program to other Downtown garages is consistent with the current Comprehensive Plan Goals: Policy T-45: Provide sufficient parking in the University Avenue/Downtown and California Ave business districts to address long-range needs. Program T-52: Evaluation options to ensure maximum use of the City parking structures in the University Avenue/Downtown and California Avenue areas. Environmental Review The proposed action would implement operational changes at existing garages and is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class One (CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities) and because it can be seen with certainty that the proposed action to incrementally increase garage capacity via operational changes could not have a significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), the “general rule”). Attachments:  Attachment A: Amendment 1 to SP+ Valet Agreement C14152025 (PDF)  Attachment B: ID 5472 City Council Staff Report of February 23 2015 and Action Minutes (PDF) 1 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO CONTRACT NO. C14152025 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND SP PLUS CORPORATION This Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. C14152025 (“Contract”) is entered into June 29, 2015, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and SP PLUS CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation ("CONSULTANT"). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of the operation of a Parking Attendant Program at the Lot R Parking Garage on High Street between University Avenue and Hamilton Avenue. B. The CITY intends to increase the compensation for the addition of parking garages utilizing attendant services as specified in Exhibit “A” Amendment No. 1, Scope of Services. C. The parties wish to amend the Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 4 COMPENSATION, is hereby amended to read as follows: “SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Nine Hundred Thirty Seven Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Two Dollars ($937,652.00). In the event Additional Services are authorized, the total compensation for such Additional Services and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed Sixty Thousand Dollars ($60,000.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, as described within the Scope of Services in Exhibit “A”.” SECTION 4. The following exhibit(s) to the Contract is/are hereby amended to read as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Amendment, which are incorporated in full by this reference: DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 ATTACHMENT A 2 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014 a. Exhibit “A” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”. b. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”. c. Exhibit “C1” entitled “RATE SCHEDULE”. SECTION 5. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVED AS TO FORM: SP PLUS CORPORATION By: _______________________ Steven Aiello Senior Vice President Attachments: EXHIBIT "A": SCOPE OF SERVICES EXHIBIT "C": COMPENSATION EXHIBIT “C1” RATE SCHEDULE DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 3 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES Project Description CITY is contracting with CONSULTANT to operate the Parking Attendant Program at the Lot R Parking Garage on High Street between University Avenue and Hamilton Avenue. The CONSULTANT has sufficient experience and knowledge in parking lot operations and was selected through a Request for Proposals selection process as the preferred CONSULTANT for this project. Lot R Parking Attendant Program CONSULTANT will be required to staff the Lot R parking garage initially between 8:00AM and 6:00PM and guide vehicles with valid Permits issued by CITY to available open parking spaces. As standard marked parking spaces reach capacity CONSULTANT will then be required to guide motorists to parking locations within the drive aisles of the parking garages, issue a Claim Ticket, and take possession of the vehicle until the motorist returns to claim their vehicle. As motorists exit the garage through the course of the day CONSULTANT will be required to move vehicles that block vehicles parked in standard marked spaces and move vehicles parking in the drive aisle into the standard parking marked spaces. CONSULTANT will be required to furnish all signage, kiosks, claim tickets, and security boxes for vehicle keys, and provide cell phones for the operators so that motorists may contact them to claim their keys during normal business hours (8:00AM to 6:00PM). After an initial 30-day monitoring period CONSULTANT will attend a meeting with CITY to discuss the program operations and recommend new hours of operation or permit increases to the community to take better advantage of the parking attendant program. Project Schedule and Term The first 12 months of the parking attendant program is on trial and shall only be extended upon successful completion of the trial. CONSULTANT will operate the Lot R Parking Attendant Program using a minimum of two parking lot attendants. CITY shall provide quarterly assessments of the program to evaluate the parking attendant program and CONSULTANT operations and performance. This agreement also includes pre-defined pricing for options to extend the Parking Attendant Program to additional parking structures in the University Downtown Business District and may elect to extend the program to additional parking structures at any time upon reasonable written notice to CONSULTANT. DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 4 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014 Technical Specifications Lot R – High Street South Parking Garage The Lot R Parking Garage has entrances on both High Street and Alma Street and is located mid- block between University Avenue and Hamilton Avenue. Lot R has 5 floors divided into Hourly visitor parking (Floors 1-2) and Permit parking (Floors 3-4-5) between 8AM and 6PM. Technical details regarding the garage operations are provided below. Table 1 Lot R Parking Garage Specifications Lot Name # Hourly Spaces # Permit Spaces Total # Spaces Max # Permits Sold R High St South 77 134 211 225 CITY already sells 68% additional permits over the available Permit parking supply as usage of the permits varies by season. Upon setup and implementation of the Parking Attendant Operator program CITY will release an initial 25 additional permits to motorists on the Permit Wait List for this garage. CONSULTANT will be required to maintain daily reports on the number of vehicles parked within aisles and actively managed by the parking attendants, time period at which aisle parking begins and relief is observed allowing the parking attendants to move vehicles back into standard permit parking spaces. After an initial 30-day evaluation period, CONSULTANT will provide CITY with a report summarizing parking patterns. Based on CONSULTANT report, CITY will release additional lots of permits to maximize the Parking Attendant Operator program. The parking of vehicles in aisles of the garage will only be permitted with the floors where permit parking is provided. Vehicles moved by the Parking Attendant Operator must be parked in permit parking spaces. No parking of vehicle with permits is allowed on the floors where Hourly parking for downtown visitors is provided. Lot R Parking Attendant Operation – Start Up CITY will reimburse CONSULTANT for all startup costs (“Start Up Costs”) associated for the implementation of the Parking Attendant Program at Lot R and other CITY lots as applicable; provided, however, CITY shall not reimburse more than $2,500.00 per lot. Start-up operations shall include a detailed report by CONSULTANT highlighting recommended signage standards, location of signage, any markings improvements. The report shall be submitted a minimum of four weeks prior to the commencement of parking attendant operations. Upon approval by CITY, CONSULTANT shall procure and install all signage and marking improvements. The report shall also highlight CONSULTANT’s recommended team members that will staff the parking attendant program. CONSULTANT shall identify up to five team members for CITY to select for use in the program. The report shall include Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) on key attendant operations to be defined by CONSULTANT, including but not limited to: DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 5 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014  Parking Attendant Program – Start of Work Day Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Break/Lunch Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Vehicle Check In Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Key Return and Owner Validation Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Key Storage and Late Return Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Vehicle Storage and Security Procedures CONSULTANT shall also be responsible for procurement of kiosks used by the parking attendants, lock boxes for key storage, and valet tickets, which shall be reimbursed as Start Up Costs. Additional Services CONSULTANT shall be available to provide Additional Services to the CITY including, but not limited to:  Parking Guidance System Assessment and Recommendations  Parking Access and Revenue Collection Equipment Assessment and Recommendations  Technical Writing for Request for Proposals  Grant Writing Assistance  Parking Garage Lighting Assessment  Parking Facility Lighting  Consultant does not provide security services As of June 29, 2015, the foregoing Exhibit “A” is replaced with the following: AMENDMENT NO. 1 SCOPE OF SERVICES Project Description CITY is contracting with CONSULTANT to continue the existing Parking Attendant Program at Lot R and expand services to the Lot CC, Lot S, and Lot CW Parking Garages. Parking Attendant Program CONSULTANT will be required to staff the Lot R, Lot CC, Lot S, and Lot CW parking garages between 8:00AM and 6:00PM and guide vehicles with valid Permits issued by CITY to available open parking spaces. As standard marked parking spaces reach capacity CONSULTANT will then be required to guide motorists to parking locations within the drive aisles of the parking garages, issue a Claim Ticket, and take possession of the vehicle until the motorist returns to claim their vehicle. As motorists exit the garage through the course of the day CONSULTANT will be required to move vehicles that block vehicles parked in standard marked spaces and move vehicles parking in the drive aisle into the standard parking marked spaces. DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 6 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014 CONSULTANT is required to furnish all signage, kiosks, claim tickets, and security boxes for vehicle keys at each garage, and provide cell phones for the operators so that motorists may contact them to claim their keys during normal business hours (8:00AM to 6:00PM). CONSULTANT will be required to provide an on-site Valet Supervisor or Manager per the hourly rate schedule in Exhibit “C-1”. Project Schedule and Term CONSULTANT will operate the Parking Attendant Program using a minimum of two parking lot attendants at each site for a minimum of two (2) years commencing in March 2015 through February 2017. CITY shall provide quarterly assessments of the program to evaluate the parking attendant program and CONSULTANT operations and performance. Technical Specifications Technical details regarding the garage operations are provided below. Table 1 Parking Garage Specifications Lot Name # Hourly Spaces # Permit Spaces Total # Spaces Max # Permits Sold R High St South 77 134 211 330 CC Civic Center 183 509 692 875 S Bryant/Lytton 381 307 688 665 CW Cowper/Webster 201 388 589 750 CONSULTANT will be required to maintain daily reports on the number of vehicles parked within aisles and actively managed by the parking attendants, time period at which aisle parking begins and relief is observed allowing the parking attendants to move vehicles back into standard permit parking spaces. The parking of vehicles in aisles of the garage will only be permitted with the floors where permit parking is provided. Vehicles moved by the Parking Attendant Operator must be parked in permit parking spaces. No parking of vehicle with permits is allowed on the floors where Hourly parking for downtown visitors is provided. Parking Attendant Operation – Start Up CITY will reimburse CONSULTANT for all startup costs (“Start Up Costs”) associated for the implementation of the Parking Attendant Program at Lot CC, Lot S, and Lot CW; provided, however, CITY shall not reimburse more than $2,500.00 per lot. Startup operations shall include a DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 7 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014 detailed report by CONSULTANT highlighting recommended signage standards, location of signage, any markings improvements. The report shall be submitted a minimum of four weeks prior to the commencement of parking attendant operations. Upon approval by CITY, CONSULTANT shall procure and install all signage and marking improvements. The report shall also highlight CONSULTANT’s recommended team members that will staff the parking attendant program. CONSULTANT shall identify up to five team members for CITY to select for use in the program. The report shall include Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) on key attendant operations to be defined by CONSULTANT, including but not limited to:  Parking Attendant Program – Start of Work Day Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Break/Lunch Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Vehicle Check In Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Key Return and Owner Validation Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Key Storage and Late Return Procedures  Parking Attendant Program – Vehicle Storage and Security Procedures CONSULTANT shall also be responsible for procurement of kiosks used by the parking attendants, lock boxes for key storage, and valet tickets. Additional Services CONSULTANT shall be available to provide Additional Services to the CITY including, but not limited to:  Parking Guidance System Assessment and Recommendations  Parking Access and Revenue Collection Equipment Assessment and Recommendations  Technical Writing for Request for Proposals  Grant Writing Assistance  Parking Garage Lighting Assessment  Parking Facility Lighting  Consultant does not provide security services DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 8 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $937,652.00. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. In the event CITY authorizes any Additional Services, the maximum compensation shall not exceed $60,000.00. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s Project manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $937,652.00 and the total compensation for Additional Services does not exceed $60,000.00. BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT Task 1 $116,920.00 (Year 1) Task 2 $377,780.00 (Year 2) Task 3 $432,952.00 (Year 3) Sub-total Basic Services $927,652.00 Reimbursable Expenses $10,000.00 (Start-up costs) Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $937,652.00 Additional Services (Not to Exceed) $60,000.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 9 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014 Maximum Total Compensation $997,652.00 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are limited to the Start Up Cost. All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated to be more than $2500.00 shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 10 of 8 Revision April 28, 2014 EXHIBIT “C-1” RATE SCHEDULE Compensation Schedule CONSULTANT shall be paid hourly for each parking attendant operator or manager that maintains the Parking Attendant Program. Table 2 below includes the payment compensation schedule for the program including pre-defined pricing for implementation of the program. The compensation table will remain fixed for the term of the contract. Months/Quantity Cost Months/Quantity Cost Months/Quantity CostBase Project Lot R Base Project:$24.50 173.33333 2 $8,493.33 12 $101,920.00 12 $101,920.00 12 $101,920.00 Parking Attendant Program with TwoParking Attendants Lot R Start-Up Cost $2,500.00 1 $2,500.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 Additional Services Additional Services (Per Exhibit A)$150.00 Per Hour for Consulting Services 100 $15,000.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00Alternative Project Sites - Fixed Pricing to be Implemented as NeededLot CC Alternate Project:$20.90 173.33333 2 $7,245.33 10 $72,453.33 12 $86,944.00 Civic Center Garage Parking Attendant Program Lot CW Alternate Project:$20.90 173.33333 2 $7,245.33 10 $72,453.33 12 $86,944.00 Cowper-Webster Parking Attendant Program Lot S Alternate Project:$20.90 173.33333 2 $7,245.33 10 $72,453.33 12 $86,944.00Bryant Street Garage Parking Attendant Program Start-Up Cost at Each Alternate Project Sites $2,500.00 3 $7,500.00 0 $0.00Valet Manager1 Additional Site (2 Total)$33.75 43.33333 1 $1,462.50 2 Additional Sites (3 Total)$33.75 86.66666 1 $2,925.00 3 Additional Sites (4 Total)$33.75 173.3333 1 $5,850.00 10 $58,500.00 12 $70,200.00 Three Year Total $937,651.98Total Cost Estimates Year 1 (Mar 14 - Feb 15)Year 2 (Mar 15 - Feb 16)Year 3 (Mar 16 - Feb 17) Task Category Hourly Rate Est. Monthly Hours No. of Employees Extended Monthly Cost Estimated Annual Costs Estimated Total Contract CostYear 1 (Mar 14 - Feb 15)Year 2 (Mar 15 - Feb 16)Year 3 (Mar 16 - Feb 17) $119,420.00 $385,279.99 $432,951.99 DocuSign Envelope ID: F9026A30-20E7-436A-8570-30CEF25C2D46 City of Palo Alto (ID # 5472) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/23/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: BAO for Lot R Valet Parking Title: Approval of Continuation of Valet-Assist Services at Lot R for the Remainder of FY2015 and Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the University Avenue Parking Permit Fund in the Amount of $30,000 From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve the continuation of the Parking Valet Service program at Lot R (Alma/High Street) garage for the balance of Fiscal Year 2015 and adopt a related Budget Amendment Ordinance in the University Avenue Parking Permit Fund in the amount of $30,000. Executive Summary Since early 2014, Staff has been making significant efforts to address the City’s parking and traffic challenges, especially around the Downtown Commercial core. One of the components of the overall strategy is to improve the utilization of the City’s existing parking garages and lots. In February of 2014, City Council approved a three year contract with SP Plus (Contract C14152025) and established a one-year trial valet-assist program in the Alma/High Street garage which could facilitate an increase in the number of cars parked in the permit spaces of the garages from 134 to 179 (an increase of 45). The Lot R program has been successful in parking between 20 and 30 people per day on most days, allowing City staff to sell more permits for the garage than could otherwise be accommodated. Background Recognizing that maximizing garage utilization was a critical component of the overall parking strategy for Downtown, Council approved a three-year contract with SP Plus on March 3, 2014, and approved funds to move forward with the program at Lot R for a trial period. This contract expires on March 2, 2017, and includes pricing for all four City-owned Downtown garages (Lot R, CC Garage, Lot S and Lot CW). Additional parking supply strategies in various stages of evaluation and implementation by Staff City of Palo Alto Page 2 are listed in the table below: Fig. 1 Parking Supply Strategies New Parking Garages Staff evaluated the potential for public/private collaboration to construct additional parking garages in the Downtown and California Avenue business districts. Council directed staff to return with a scope of work for an RFP for a publicly funded garage on Lot D early in 2015. Satellite Remote Parking Council authorized consideration of the potential for an additional 132 parking spaces along the segment of Embarcadero Road east of Highway 101 in August of 2014. A consultant is working with staff on a preliminary design and analysis of potential traffic impacts. Valet-Assist Programs An update on the Lot R Valet-Assist program trial is provided in this staff report. In addition to the parking supply strategies, City staff are also working on a number of parking management strategies including parking guidance systems for lots and garages and new parking wayfinding signage to assist visitors and customers in locating available parking. Maximizing the number of vehicles which can be parked at existing facilities is critical, especially as the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program will be implemented in early 2015. The RPP program will restrict non-resident parking in neighborhoods and is expected to consequently increase parking demand in Downtown garages. Additionally, construction of a new garage on Lot D may take several years, so in the interim existing parking assets should be utilized to their fullest potential. In light of this, Staff recommends continuing the trial Lot R valet-assist program for the remainder of FY2015. Staff also plans to return to Council as part of the 2016 budget process with a recommendation to expand the scope of the SP Plus contract to include implementation of valet-assist programs at the Cowper Webster garage, the Civic Center garage and the Bryant/Lytton garage, concurrent with RPP implementation. Discussion The Lot R valet program is staffed by two valet attendant staffers, stationed at the third floor of the garage beginning at 9:00am on weekdays. When the permit spaces of the garage are close to full, the attendants direct permit parkers to park in the drive aisles of the garage in a manner which still allows vehicles to enter and exit. The motorists provide their key to the attendant, and the attendant may move the vehicle during the day to accommodate other vehicles. The motorist receives their key back from the attendant when they return to the garage. The program has allowed permit sales in the garage to increase from 241 at the beginning of 2014 to 330 at the writing of this report. Additionally, occupancy studies conducted by city staff City of Palo Alto Page 3 between March and November of 2014 show that Lot R has consistently been more full than all of the other garages, ostensibly due to the valet-assist program. Continuing the program will assist the City in ensuring that Lot R continues to achieve high parking occupancy levels and that the current level of permit sales for the garage can be maintained. Resource Impact The Fiscal Year 2015 Adopted Operating Budget for the University Avenue Parking Permit Fund included a budget of $90,000 for valet operations during the trial period only. Staff is requesting a BAO in the amount of $30,000 to continue the Lot R trial program through the end of FY2015. Staff plans to return to Council with a recommendation to extend the Lot R program for FY2016, and potentially to expand the program to other garages. It should also be noted that the implementation of the Lot R program has allowed the sale of 89 additional permits at Lot R, which results in additional revenues for the Parking Assessment District of $41,474. While this does not offset the total cost of the SP Plus yearly fee for Lot R services which is approximately $104,000, the loaded cost of constructing an additional 89 parking spaces (at approximately $60,000 each) exceeds 5 million dollars. Environmental Review The proposed action would allow for continuation of an existing program and is exempt from review pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities). Attachments:  Attachment A: Budget Amendment Ordinance xxxx for Parking Valet Program (DOCX) Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. xxxx ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION OF $30,000 IN THE UNIVERSITY AVENUE PARKING PERMIT FUND FOR THE CONTINUING PROVISION OF A PARKING ATTENDANT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015. The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and determines as follows: A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 16, 2014 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2015; and B. At the time the 2015 Adopted Budget was being considered by the City Council, the Planning and Community Environment Department was piloting a valet parking program at Lot R (Alma/High Street) garage as approved by the Council on February 14, 2014 as part of a series of near term parking strategies aimed at helping to alleviate concerns from adjacent residential areas regarding spillover parking; and C. After the one-year pilot program, 89 additional parking permits were sold which resulted in approximately $42,000 at a cost of $104,000. SECTION 2. The sum of Thirsty Thousand Dollars is hereby appropriated for the continuation of the Trial Parking Attendant Program at Lot R for the remainder of the fiscal year offset with a corresponding decrease of the ending fund balance in the University Avenue Parking Permit Fund. SECTION 3. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. SECTION 4. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby finds that this is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: Enter Date Here AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager ___________________________ Director of Planning, Community, and Environment ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 5 Special Meeting February 23, 2015 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 6:01 P.M. Present: Berman, Burt, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Schmid, Wolbach arrived at 6:10 P.M. Absent: DuBois, Scharff Closed Session MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to go into Closed Session. MOTION PASSED: 6-0 DuBois, Scharff, Wolbach absent City Council went into closed session at 6:03 P.M. 1. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY/LEGAL COUNSEL ANTICIPATED LITIGATION (as defendant/plaintiff) Subject: Turner Construction – construction management services, Mitchell Park Library and Community Center Authority: California Government Code sections 54956.9(d)(2) and 54956.9(d)(4) Council reconvened from Closed Session at 6:49 P.M., Mayor Holman advised no reportable action. Special Orders of the Day 2. Acknowledgement of Recipients of Mayor’s “Green Leader Business Award". 3. Heart Across America Presentation. ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 5 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 2/23/15 Minutes Approval MOTION: Council Member Berman moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to approve the minutes of November 10 and 17, 2014. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 DuBois, Scharff absent Consent Calendar MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-12. 4.Resolution 9495 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Electric Rate Schedule E-1 TOU (Residential Time-of- Use Rate Adjustment) to Extend its Term Through December 31, 2017.” 5.Approval of Utilities Enterprise Fund Contract with Daleo, Inc. In The Amount of $4,409,031 for Water Main Replacement Capital Improvement Program WS-11000 Project 25 in University South and the Leland Manor/Garland Subdivisions. 6.Approval of a Contract with St Francis Electric in the Amount of$274,290 for Traffic Signal Modifications at the Embarcadero Road Town and Country-Palo Alto High School Intersection. 7.Approval of Continuation of Valet-Assist Services at Lot R for the Remainder of FY2015 and Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance 5305 entitled “Budget Amendment Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto in the University Avenue Parking Permit Fund in the Amount of $30,000.” 8.Approval of an Amendment to Contract C14153012 with Metropolitan Planning Group for Planning Support Services Needed Due to Unanticipated Staff Vacancies Adding $98,000 for a Not to Exceed Amount of $150,000. 9.Approval of Utilities Enterprise Fund Contract with Utility Tree Service, Inc. (UTS), Not To Exceed $1,209,406 for the First Year and up to $5,251,499 for Four Additional Years for the 2015 Power Line Clearing Project. ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 5 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 2/23/15 10. Appointment of 2015 Emergency Standby Council. 11. Resolution 9496 entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving Interim Appointment of James Lightbody to Chief Transportation Official Position Pursuant to Government Code Section 21221(h).” 12. Approval to Cast Ballot for Council Member Liz Kniss for Vice President of the Peninsula Division Executive Committee of the League of California Cities. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 DuBois, Scharff absent Action Items 13. Appeal of Director of Planning and Community Environment’s Individual Review Approval of a New Two-Story Home located at 3864 Corina Way (Continued from February 2, 2015). MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to uphold the Director of Planning and Community Environment approval by adopting the Record of Land Use Action approving an Individual Review (IR) application for a new two-story home at 3864 Corina Way, adding to Section 6 – Conditions of Approval, Condition #6 – “The trees and climbing vines shall be maintained in perpetuity.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to Section 6 – Conditions of Approval, Condition Number 8 – “In either event screening trees are to be maintained.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to modify addition to Section 6 – Conditions of Approval, Condition Number 8 – “in either event screening trees are to be maintained for the natural life of the home.” AMENDMENT: Mayor Holman moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to direct Staff to look at locating an additional bedroom on the first floor to reduce the second floor mass. AMENDMENT FAILED: 2-5 Holman, Schmid yes ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 5 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 2/23/15 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to modify Section 6 – Conditions of Approval, Condition Number 6 – “Trees and vines will be maintained for the natural life of the home.” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 6-1 Schmid no, DuBois, Scharff absent 14. Policy and Services Committee Recommends the City Council Amend Policy and Procedure 1-48/ASD (Procedure for Sale/Transfer of Surplus City-Owned Real Property) to Address Unsolicited Offers and Provide for Broad Marketing of City Lands Through Use of Electronic Media. MOTION: Vice Mayor Schmid moved, seconded by Mayor Holman to approve the Policy and Services Committee recommendation to amend “Policy and Procedures 1-48/ASD (Procedure for Sale/Transfer of Surplus City – Owned Real Property”; adding to the last sentence of Procedure Section A.3) “, and shall provide public notice of any deed restrictions on the property.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to Procedure Section A.3) “, and shall provide public notice of any deed restrictions, easements, or any other encumbrances on the property.” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-0 DuBois, Scharff absent Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs 15. Review and Approval of the Draft Legislative Program Manual and Draft Semi-Annual Legislative Strategic Initiatives. MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to approve the Draft Legislative Program Manual and the Draft Spring 2015 Semi-Annual Legislative Strategic Initiatives document. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to refer the adopted Legislative Program Manual and Spring 2015 Semi-Annual Legislative Strategic Initiatives document to Policy and Services Committee for review and refinement. ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 5 City Council Meeting Action Minutes: 2/23/15 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add under Top Six 2015 Semi-Annual Legislative Strategic Initiatives: Advocate for policies at the state and federal level to provide protection against sea level rise for local communities. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add under Transportation: Advocate for federal and state policies that support local rail and other local transportation programs that reduce single occupancy vehicle trips. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add under Top Six 2015 Semi-Annual Legislative Strategic Initiatives: Initiative 5 add “and reforms to the State Density Bonus law to elements that are counterproductive to the jobs/housing imbalance. MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-0 DuBois, Scharff absent Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements None Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:13 P.M. City of Palo Alto (ID # 5634) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: BAO Seismic Upgrade of 4 Tanks & 3 Turnouts Title: Approval and Authorization of the City Manager to Execute a Contract with Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc., in the Amount of $4,679,100, for the Seismic Upgrade of Four Steel Tanks and Three Receiving Stations Project, WS-07000, WS-08001 and WS-09000 and Approval of a Budget Amendment Ordinance Increasing the Water Regulation System Improvements Project Budget (WS-08000) in the Amount of $786,375 From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract with Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. (Attachment A) in a total not-to-exceed amount of $4,679,100 for seismic upgrades to four steel tanks and three turnouts (Projects WS-07000, WS-08001 and WS-09000). 2. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract with Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. for related additional but unforeseen work, which may develop during the project, the total value of which shall not exceed $467,910 or 10% of the contract’s not-to-exceed amount, which when combined with the contract’s not to exceed amount of $4,679,100 shall not exceed a total in the amount of $5,147,010. 3. Approve the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment B) increasing the Water Regulation System Improvements project (WS-07000) in the amount of $786,375, offset by reductions to the Water Reservoir Coating Improvements project (WS-08001) in the amount of $393,188 and the Seismic Water System Upgrades project (WS-09000) in the amount of $393,187, with no impact to the reserve levels in the Water Fund. Background City of Palo Alto Page 2 The City of Palo Alto (City) maintains a water system consisting of nine pressure zones, five receiving stations, or turnouts, from the SFPUC’s Hetch Hetchy aqueduct system, seven reservoirs, seven booster pumping stations, eight wells and approximately 234 miles of water transmission and distribution mains. The City’s primary source of potable water, since 1962, has been the Hetch Hetchy aqueduct system. This construction contract supports the City’s ongoing efforts to improve the reliability of the City’s water distribution system during emergency periods, when the traditional supply is not available. The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) recommends that water systems have the ability to supply an 8 hour maximum day demand plus have a sufficient supply of water to fight fires during periods of supply curtailment. The improvements recommended in as part of this contract were addressed in the Water Wells, Regional Storage and Distribution System Study (1999 Study), which the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) and Council supported. During the project development, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) titled “City of Palo Alto Emergency Water Supply and Storage Project” was prepared and approved by Council on March 5, 2007 (CMR 161:07). The project description in the EIR proposed implementing capital improvements which would allow the City to provide water in the event of an emergency. The seismic upgrade of the Corte Madera, Park, Dahl and Montebello Reservoirs and Page Mill, Arastradero and California Turnouts is one of the recommended capital improvements projects that will provide stored water supply during an emergency, in the event the Hetch Hetchy regional water supply system cannot deliver water to Palo Alto. A project location map is provided in Attachment C. Discussion The work covered by this construction contract will provide construction services to seismically upgrade the Corte Madera, Park, Dahl and Montebello Reservoirs, all of which are above ground steel tanks, and the Page Mill, Arastradero and California Turnouts, to ensure reliability during a seismic event or other emergency. Work at the Corte Madera, Park, Dahl and Montebello Reservoir sites will bring each reservoir up to current seismic performance codes and will include removal of all existing interior and exterior paint/coatings and application of new interior and exterior coating systems. Tank seismic improvements include the installation of new concrete ring footings, rock anchors, anchor bolts, column and wall stiffener plates for seismic reliability, seismic bracing for pipes, anchorage for each reservoir roof and miscellaneous appurtenances. Additional improvements include replacement of existing access safety systems and rehabilitation of the cathodic protection system. Work at the Page Mill, Arastradero and California Turnouts include seismic restraints, base isolation and pipe supports, recoating and/or replacement of existing pipe and electrical upgrades. The work is being performed by contract because the project resource requirements are beyond City’s personnel and equipment capacity. AECOM (formerly known as URS Corporation) will be the Engineer of Record for this project and will provide construction management and City of Palo Alto Page 3 specialty inspections throughout construction, pursuant to the April 7, 2014 Council-approved Contract No. C14152781 (ID #4444). Construction is currently expected to begin in July 2015 and will be completed by the middle of Fiscal Year 2018 (December 2017). Summary of Solicitation Process Bid Name/Number Seismic Upgrade of Four Steel Tanks and Three Turnouts, IFB Number 157871 Proposed Length of Contract 790 Calendar Days Number of Bids Mailed to Contractors 0 (electronic documents were available on CPA website) Number of Bids Notices Emailed to Contractors and Builder’s Exchanges 13 Total Days to Respond to Bid 27 Calendar Days Pre-Bid Meeting? Yes (Mandatory) Number of Company Attendees at Pre-Bid Meeting 18 Number of Bids Received 6 Bid Price Range $4,679,100 to $6,472,700 Company Name Location (City, State) Amount* Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. Santa Clara, CA $4,679,100 *Bid summary provided in Attachment D. As noted above, the City received six qualified bids for this work as listed on the attached bid summary (Attachment D). Additional details concerning Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc.’s qualifications and experience is provided in the IFB Construction Contract Agreement Justification attached to this staff report (Attachment E). Staff has reviewed the submitted bids and recommends that the bid of $4,679,100 submitted by Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. be accepted and Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. be declared the lowest responsible bidder. The bid is 10% percent below the engineer’s estimate of $5,207,068. The engineer’s final project estimate was prepared after the final project design plans were completed in March 2015. Staff believes the apparent low bid is the lowest cost the City can expect for this project. Staff recommends Council approve a BAO for $786,375 to complete all construction. The change order amount of $467,910, which equals 10% of the total contract, is requested for additional unforeseen work that may develop during the project. This 10% contingency amount is requested to address unknown existing conditions of the reservoir foundations, and other unknown factors such as irregularity in existing soil conditions, underground obstacles and current interior reservoir conditions. This 10% contingency fund will be used for the reservoir, reservoir vault and turnout work associated with this project. This contingency amount is appropriate and typical industry standard for this type of construction work. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Staff confirmed with the Contractor’s State License Board that the contractor has an active license on file, and checked the references supplied by the contractor for previous work performed and found no significant complaints. Resource Impact The attached BAO requests an additional appropriation of $786,375, for the Seismic Upgrade of Four Steel Tanks and Three Turnouts Project, to be transferred from funds in Water Enterprise Fund Projects WS-08001 ($393,188; Water Reservoir Coating Improvements) and WS-09000 ($393,187; Seismic Water System Upgrades) to Water Enterprise Fund Project WS-07000 (Water Regulation Station Improvements). Original budget numbers for Project WS-07000 (Water Regulation Station Improvements) were based on a preliminary Design Report that was completed in 2010. This additional funding is needed to account for changes in scope and economic fluctuations in construction costs over the past five years. There will be no excavations in City roads; therefore, Street Cut Fees do not apply to this project. Funding for this project, including contingency, totals to $5,147,010. The project is budgeted in the current Fiscal Year 2015, CIP WS-07000, WS-08001 and WS-09000. Funding is recommended to be shifted between these three projects as part of this report to ensure that each phase of the project is accounted for within the correct capital improvement project. See below for a breakdown of the construction costs associated with each project number. Staff does not have the ability to perform the specialized work in-house. This project will be managed by AECOM through a previously approved contract (ID #4444). Summary of Construction Costs per Project Number Total Cost of Construction Staff Time Total Cost WS-07000 – Water Regulation System Improvements $669,350 $117,025 $786,375 WS-08001 – Water Reservoir Coating Improvements $1,430,000 $526,613 $1,956,613 WS-09000 – Seismic Water System Upgrades $3,047,660 $526,613 $3,574,273 TOTAL $5,147,010 $1,170,251 $6,317,261 Policy Implications The approval of this Water Enterprise Fund construction contract is consistent with existing City policies. This recommendation is consistent with the Council-approved Utilities Strategic Plan (Staff Report 1880), especially Key Strategy No. 1, “Ensure a high level of system reliability in a cost effective and timely manner.” Environmental Review Council’s award of this contract is categorically exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), under Section 15301 (repair and maintenance of existing facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines. Attachments: City of Palo Alto Page 5  Attachment A: Contract #C15157871 (PDF)  Attachment B: BAO for Steel Tanks Project (PDF)  Attachment C: Location Map (PDF)  Attachment D: Bid Summary (PDF)  Attachment E: Executive Summary (PDF) CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Contract No. C15157871 City of Palo Alto Project: “Seismic Upgrade of 4 Steel Reservoirs and 3 Turnouts” Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 1 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT ATTACHMENT A CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS…………………………………….…………..6 1.1 Recitals…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 1.2 Definitions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 SECTION 2 THE PROJECT………………………………………………………………………………………………………...6 SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS………………………………………………………………………………..7 3.1 List of Documents…………………………………………………………………………………………….........7 3.2 Order of Precedence……………………………………………………………………………………………......7 SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY…………………………………………………………………………………………..8 4.1 Contractor's Duties…………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM……………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 5.1 Contractor's Co-operation………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION…………………………………………………………………………………….......8 6.1 Time Is of Essence…………………………………………………………………………………………………….8 6.2 Commencement of Work…………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.3 Contract Time…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 6.4 Liquidated Damages…………………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.4.1 Other Remedies……………………………………………………………………………………………………..9 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time………………………………………………………………………………….9 SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR……………………………………………………………………….9 7.1 Contract Sum……………………………………………………………………………………………………………9 7.2 Full Compensation……………………………………………………………………………………………………9 SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE……………………………………………………………………………………………..9 8.1 Standard of Care…………………………………………………………………………………..…………………9 SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION…………………………………………………………………………………………..…10 9.1 Hold Harmless……………………………………………………………………………………………………….10 9.2 Survival…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION……..………………………………………………………………………………10 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement…………….………………………………..……………………………….10 SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS.…………………………………………………………………………………10 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 2 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 11.1 Evidence of Coverage…………………………………………………………………………………………..10 SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST RANSFERS………………………………………………………………….…11 12.1 Assignment………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 12.2 Assignment by Law.………………………………………………………………………………………………11 SECTION 13 NOTICES …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.1 Method of Notice …………………………………………………………………………………………………11 13.2 Notice Recipents ………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.3 Change of Address……………………………………………………………………………………………….12 SECTION 14 DEFAULT…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...12 14.1 Notice of Default………………………………………………………………………………………………….12 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default…………………………………………………………………………………12 SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES…………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1 Remedies Upon Default……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services…………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold……………………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract…………………………………………………………………13 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default………………………………………………13 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.6 Additional Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.2 Delays by Sureties……………………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.3 Damages to City…………………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default…………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.4 Suspension by City……………………………………………………………………………………………….14 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience……………………………………………………………………………..14 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.5 Termination Without Cause…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.5.1 Compensation………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 15.5.2 Subcontractors………………………………………………………………………………………………..15 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination………………………………………………………………...15 SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES……………………………………………………………16 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies……………………………………..………………………………..………………….16 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 3 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage……………………………………………………………………………………………16 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment…………………………………………………………………………………….16 16.2 Damages to Contractor………………………………………………………………………………………..16 SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS………………………………………………………………………………….…16 17.1 Financial Management and City Access………………………………………………………………..16 17.2 Compliance with City Requests…………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES……………………………………………………………………………………..17 18.1 Status of Parties……………………………………………………………………………………………………17 SECTION 19 NUISANCE……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…17 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited……………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES…………………………………………………………………………………….17 20.1 Payment of Fees…………………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 21 WAIVER…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 21.1 Waiver………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS……………………………….18 22.1 Governing Law…………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 22.2 Compliance with Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………18 SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT……………………………………………………………………………………18 23.1 Integration………………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………..18 24.1 Survival of Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………………18 SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION……………………………………………………………………………………….19 26.1 Appropriation………………………………………………………………………………………………………19 SECTION 27 AUTHORITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 27.1 Representation of Parties…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS………………………………………………………………………………………………..19 28.1 Multiple Counterparts………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………19 29.1 Severability………………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES …………………………………………………..19 30.1 Amendments of Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………..19 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 4 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION………………………………………………….….19 31.1 Workers Compensation…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS………………………………..…20 32.1 General Notice to Contractor…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a)…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.3 DIR Registration Required…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.5 Payroll Records…………………………………………………………………………………………………20 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 5 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on June 15, 2015 (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and ANDERSON PACIFIC ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. ("Contractor"), is made with reference to the following: R E C I T A L S: A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City. B. Contractor is a corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of California, Contractor’s License Number 245215. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Construction Contract. C. On April 1, 2015, City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the “Seismic Upgrade of 4 Steel Reservoirs and 3 Turnouts” (“Project”). In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a Bid. D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other services as identified in the Contract Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS. 1.1 Recitals. All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 Definitions. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the General Conditions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail. SECTION 2 THE PROJECT. The Project is the “Seismic Upgrade of 4 Steel Reservoirs and 3 Turnouts” Project, located at Palo Alto, CA. ("Project"). Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 6 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by reference. 1) Change Orders 2) Field Orders 3) Contract 4) Bidding Addenda 5) Special Provisions 6) General Conditions 7) Project Plans and Drawings 8) Technical Specifications 9) Instructions to Bidders 10) Invitation for Bids 11) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Affidavit 12) Reports listed in the Contract Documents 13) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications (most current version at time of Bid) 14) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards (most current version at time of Bid) 15) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements 16) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations 17) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre- Qualification Checklist (if applicable) 18) Performance and Payment Bonds 3.2 Order of Precedence. For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 7 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY. 4.1 Contractor’s Duties Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work required for the Project, as specified in the Contract Documents, all of which are fully incorporated herein. Contractor shall provide, furnish, and supply all things necessary and incidental for the timely performance and completion of the Work, including, but not limited to, provision of all necessary labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and utilities, unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents. Contractor also agrees to use its best efforts to complete the Work in a professional and expeditious manner and to meet or exceed the performance standards required by the Contract Documents. SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. 5.1 Contractor’s Co-operation. In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project. The Contract requires that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other members of the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the Project. SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION. 6.1 Time Is of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. 6.2 Commencement of Work. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. 6.3 Contract Time. Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City’s Notice to Proceed and shall be completed within 760 calendar days after the commencement date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. By executing this Construction Contract, Contractor expressly waives any claim for delayed early completion. 6.4 Liquidated Damages. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.85, if Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time, including any approved extensions thereto, City may assess liquidated damages on a daily basis for each day of Unexcused Delay in achieving Substantial Completion, based on the amount of One Thousand Three Hundred Fifty dollars ($1,350.00) per day, or as otherwise specified in the Special Provisions. Liquidated damages may also be separately assessed for failure to meet milestones specified elsewhere in the Contract Documents, regardless of impact on the time for achieving Substantial Completion. The assessment of liquidated damages is not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages City will suffer by delay in completion of the Work. The City is entitled to setoff the amount of liquidated damages assessed against any payments otherwise due to Contractor, including, but not limited to, setoff against release of retention. If the total amount of liquidated damages assessed exceeds the amount of unreleased retention, City is entitled to recover the Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 8 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT balance from Contractor or its sureties. Occupancy or use of the Project in whole or in part prior to Substantial Completion, shall not operate as a waiver of City’s right to assess liquidated damages. 6.4.1 Other Remedies. City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and memorialized in a Change Order approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR. 7.1 Contract Sum. Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents the Contract Sum of Four Million Six Hundred Seventy Nine Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($4,679,100.00). [This amount includes the Base Bid and Additive Alternates.] 7.2 Full Compensation. The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor and, except as otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover all Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to suspension or discontinuance of the Work, except as expressly provided herein. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted for Change Orders approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE. 8.1 Standard of Care. Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised personnel. All services performed in connection with this Construction Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 9 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION. 9.1 Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers (hereinafter individually referred to as an “Indemnitee” and collectively referred to as "Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and liability, loss, damage, claims, expenses (including, without limitation, attorney fees, expert witness fees, paralegal fees, and fees and costs of litigation or arbitration) (collectively, “Liability”) of every nature arising out of or in connection with the acts or omissions of Contractor, its employees, Subcontractors, representatives, or agents, in performing the Work or its failure to comply with any of its obligations under the Contract, except such Liability caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of an Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs City incurs to enforce this provision. Except as provided in Section 9.2 below, nothing in the Contract Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of Contractor against City or any other Indemnitee. Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of any third-party claim relating to the Contract. 9.2 Survival. The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract. SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION. 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS. 11.1 Evidence of coverage. Within ten (10) business days following issuance of the Notice of Award, Contractor shall provide City with evidence that it has obtained insurance and shall submit Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 10 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS. 12.1 Assignment. City is entering into this Construction Contract in reliance upon the stated experience and qualifications of the Contractor and its Subcontractors set forth in Contractor’s Bid. Accordingly, Contractor shall not assign, hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or transfer without said consent shall be null and void, and shall be deemed a substantial breach of contract and grounds for default in addition to any other legal or equitable remedy available to the City. 12.2 Assignment by Law. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity. SECTION 13 NOTICES. 13.1 Method of Notice. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following: (i) On the date delivered if delivered personally; (ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as hereinafter provided; (iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission; (iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or (v) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail. 13.2 Notice to Recipients. All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Change Order Requests and Claims) from Contractor to City shall include the Project name and the number of this Construction Contract and shall be addressed to City at: To City: City of Palo Alto City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copy to: City of Palo Alto Public Works Administration 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: AND [Include Construction Manager, If Applicable.] Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 11 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT City of Palo Alto Utilities Engineering 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: Jennifer Cioffi In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided to the following: Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to: Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. 1390 Norman Avenue Santa Clara, CA 95054 Attn: Peter Anderson 13.3 Change of Address. In advance of any change of address, Contractor shall notify City of the change of address in writing. Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any individuals to whom and addresses to which notice shall be provided. SECTION 14 DEFAULT. 14.1 Notice of Default. In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract, with a copy to Contractor’s performance bond surety. 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after receipt of such written notice. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 12 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 15.1 Remedies Upon Default. If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth above in Section 14, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work. 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default. City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 14. City’s election to terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein. 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond. 15.1.6 Additional Provisions. All of City’s rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City’s authority to designate other breaches as material nor limit City’s right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material. City’s determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City. 15.2 Delays by Sureties. Time being of the essence in the performance of the Work, if Contractor’s surety fails to arrange for completion of the Work in accordance with the Performance Bond, within seven (7) calendar days from the date of the notice of termination, Contractor’s surety shall be deemed to have waived its right to complete the Work under the Contract, and City may immediately make arrangements for the completion of the Work through use of its own forces, by hiring a replacement contractor, or by any other means that City determines advisable under the circumstances. Contractor and its surety shall be jointly and severally Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 13 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT liable for any additional cost incurred by City to complete the Work following termination. In addition, City shall have the right to use any materials, supplies, and equipment belonging to Contractor and located at the Worksite for the purposes of completing the remaining Work. 15.3 Damages to City. 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default. City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents. 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to deduct the cost of such Losses from monies otherwise payable to Contractor. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount payable, Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City. 15.4 Suspension by City 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience. City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time. The order shall be specifically identified as a Suspension Order by City. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order. During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered by the Suspension Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. A Suspension Order shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work. 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause. In addition to all other remedies available to City, if Contractor fails to perform or correct work in accordance with the Contract Documents, City may immediately order the Work, or any portion thereof, suspended until the cause for the suspension has been eliminated to City’s satisfaction. Contractor shall not be entitled to an increase in Contract Time or Contract Price for a suspension occasioned by Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents. City’s right to suspend the Work shall not give rise to a duty to suspend the Work, and City’s failure to suspend the Work shall not constitute a defense to Contractor’s failure to comply with the requirements of the Contract Documents. 15.5 Termination Without Cause. City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or in whole upon written notice to Contractor. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the notice and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs to close out and demobilize. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 15.5 shall be the Contractor’s sole and exclusive compensation for such termination and Contractor waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind resulting from termination without cause. Termination pursuant to this provision does not relieve Contractor or its sureties from any of their obligations for Losses arising from or related to the Work performed by Contractor. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 14 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 15.5.1 Compensation. Following such termination and within forty-five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 15.5.1, City shall pay the following to Contractor as Contractor’s sole compensation for performance of the Work : .1 For Work Performed. The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor. .2 For Close-out Costs. Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors: (i) Demobilizing and (ii) Administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (30) Days after receipt of the notice of termination. .3 For Fabricated Items. Previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work. .4 Profit Allowance. An allowance for profit calculated as four percent (4%) of the sum of the above items, provided Contractor can prove a likelihood that it would have made a profit if the Construction Contract had not been terminated. 15.5.2 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor against City under this Section. 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not discontinued; (iii) Provide to City a description in writing, no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto. Upon termination, whether for cause or for convenience, the provisions of the Contract Documents remain in effect as to any Claim, indemnity obligation, warranties, guarantees, Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 15 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT submittals of as-built drawings, instructions, or manuals, or other such rights and obligations arising prior to the termination date. SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the following: 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage. The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable. This provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City’s issuance of a suspension notice issued either for cause or for convenience. 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment. If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a second notice to City of Contractor’s intention to terminate the Construction Contract. 16.2 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Paragraph 15.5.1 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind. SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. 17.1 Financial Management and City Access. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants during normal business hours, may inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project. Contractor shall retain these documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) Final Payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by law. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 16 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 17.2 Compliance with City Requests. Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 17 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. City many enforce Contractor’s obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred to in Section 17.1 for inspection or copying by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony. SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. 18.1 Status of parties. Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint ventures’ of the other party. City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth. SECTION 19 NUISANCE. 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract. SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES. 20.1 Payment of Fees. Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work. Payment of all costs and expenses for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non-City inspectors or conditions set forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies. SECTION 21 WAIVER. 21.1 Waiver. A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 17 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. 22.1 Governing Law. This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California, and venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Santa Clara, and no other place. 22.2 Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal and California laws and city laws, including, without limitation, ordinances and resolutions, in the performance of work under this Construction Contract. SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. 23.1 Integration. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. 24.1 Survival of Provisions. The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment obligations, and City’s right to audit Contractor’s books and records, shall remain in full force and effect after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract. SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES. This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. Contractor is not required to pay prevailing wages in the performance and implementation of the Project in accordance with SB 7, if the public works contract does not include a project of $25,000 or less, when the project is for construction work, or the contract does not include a project of $15,000 or less, when the project is for alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance (collectively, ‘improvement’) work. Or Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Copies of these rates may be obtained at the Purchasing Division’s office of the City of Palo Alto. Contractor shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or subcontractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of all sections, including, but not limited to, Sections 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1782, 1810, and 1813, of the Labor Code pertaining to prevailing wages. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 18 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION. 26.1 Appropriations. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Construction Contract are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 27 AUTHORITY. 27.1 Representation of Parties. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS 28.1 Multiple Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement. SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY. 29.1 Severability. In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected. SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES. 30.1 Amendments to Laws. With respect to any amendments to any statutes or regulations referenced in these Contract Documents, the reference is deemed to be the version in effect on the date that the Contract was awarded by City, unless otherwise required by law. SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION. 31.1 Workers Compensation. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, by signing this Contract, Contractor certifies as follows: “I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work on this Contract.” Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 19 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS. 32.1 General Notice to Contractor. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of SB 854. 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a) City provides notice to Contractor of the requirements of California Labor Code section 1771.1(a), which reads: “A contractor or subcontractor shall not be qualified to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, subject to the requirements of Section 4104 of the Public Contract Code, or engage in the performance of any contract for public work, as defined in this chapter, unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5. It is not a violation of this section for an unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and Professions Code or Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the contactor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract is awarded.” 32.3 DIR Registration Required. City will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Construction Contract with Contractor without proof that Contractor and its listed subcontractors are registered with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) to perform public work, subject to limited exceptions. 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices. City gives notice to Contractor and its listed subcontractors that Contractor is required to post all job site notices prescribed by law or regulation and Contractor is subject to SB 854-compliance monitoring and enforcement by DIR. 32.5 Payroll Records. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of Labor Code section 1776, including: (i) Keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by, respectively, Contractor and its listed subcontractors, in connection with the Project. (ii) The payroll records shall be verified as true and correct and shall be certified and made available for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of Contractor and its listed subcontractors, respectively. (iii) At the request of City, acting by its project manager, Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall make the certified payroll records available for inspection or furnished upon request to the project manager within ten (10) days of receipt of City’s request. City requests Contractor and its listed subcontractors to submit the certified payroll records at the end of each week during the Project. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 20 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (iv) If the certified payroll records are not produced to the project manager within the 10-day period, then Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall be subject to a penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker, and City shall withhold the sum total of penalties from the progress payment(s) then due and payable to Contractor. This provision supplements the provisions of Section 15 hereof. (v) Inform the project manager of the location of contractor’s and its listed subcontractors’ payroll records (street address, city and county) at the commencement of the Project, and also provide notice to the project manager within five (5) business days of any change of location of those payroll records. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed the date and year first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney ANDERSON PACIFIC ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. By:___________________________ Name:________________________ Title:__________________________ Date: _________________________ Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 21 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT 1 Revised April 14, 2015 130920 dm 0131136 Ordinance No. XXXX ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2015 TO INCREASE THE WATER REGULATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT (WS-0700) BY $786,375, OFFSET BY REDUCTIONS TO THE SEISMIC WATER SYSTEM UPGRADES PROJECT (WS-09000) IN THE AMOUNT OF $393,188 AND THE WATER RESERVOIR COATING IMPROVEMENTS (WS-08001) IN THE AMOUNT OF $393,187, WITH NO IMPACT TO RESERVE LEVELS IN THE WATER FUND The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and determines as follows: A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 16, 2014 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2015; and B. The City of Palo Alto (City) maintains a water system consisting of nine pressure zones, five receiving stations, or turnouts, from the San Francisco Public Utility Commission’s (SFPUC) Hetch Hetchy aqueduct system, seven reservoirs, seven booster pumping stations, eight wells and approximately 234 miles of water transmission and distribution mains; and C. The California Department of Public Health recommends that water systems have the ability to supply an 8 hour maximum day demand plus have a sufficient supply of water to fight fires during periods of supply curtailment; and D. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) titled “City of Palo Alto Emergency Water Supply and Storage Project” was prepared and approved by Council on March 5, 2007 (CMR 161:07). The project description in the EIR proposed implementing capital improvements which would allow the City to provide water in the event of an emergency; and E. The seismic upgrade of the Corte Madera, Park, Dahl and Montebello Reservoirs and Page Mill, Arastradero and California Turnouts is one of the recommended capital improvements projects that will provide stored water supply during an emergency, in the event the Hetch Hetchy regional water supply system cannot deliver water to Palo Alto; and F. The construction contract recommended for award will allow for seismic upgrades to the Corte Madera, Park, Dahl and Montebello Reservoirs, all of which are above ground steel tanks, and the Page Mill, Arastradero and California Turnouts to ensure reliability during a seismic event or other emergency. SECTION 2. Therefore, Seven Hundred and Eighty Six Thousand, Three Hundred and Seventy Five Dollars ($786,375) is recommended to be appropriated in the Water Fund in the Water Regulation System Improvements project (WS-07000), offset by reductions to ATTACHMENT B 2 Revised April 14, 2015 130920 dm 0131136 the Seismic Water System Upgrades (WS-09000) project in the amount of Three Hundred Ninety Three Thousand, One Hundred and Eighty Seven dollars ($393,187) and the Water Reservoir Coating Improvements project (WS-08001), in the amount of Three Hundred and Ninety Three Thousand, One Hundred and Eighty Eight Dollars ($391,188), with no impact to reserve levels in the Water Fund. SECTION 3. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. SECTION 4. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby finds that its adoption of this ordinance amending the budget for this project does not meet the definition of a project under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services ____________________________ Director of Utilities Department 3 Revised April 14, 2015 130920 dm 0131136 May 2015 City of Palo AltoSeismic Upgrade of 4 Steel Reservoirs and 3 TurnoutsPalo Alto, California PROJECT LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT A LEGEND City Boundary for City of Palo Alto City of Palo Alto Service Area Turnout Reservoir ATTACHMENT C CITY OF PALO ALTO BID SUMMARY Attachment D SEISMIC UPGRADE OF 4 STEEL TANKS AND 3 TURNOUTS, WS-07000-501, WS-08001-501 AND WS-09000-501 Bid Date: 04/28/15 BID SUMMARY Engineer's Estimate Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. Western Water Constructors, Inc. Con-Quest Contractors, Inc. Blastco Inc. RSH Construction, Inc. Utility Service Company, Inc. Item Quantity Description Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit Unit No.Price ($) Price ($) Price ($) Price ($) Price ($) Price ($) Price ($) A: BASE BID Monte Bello Reservoir 001 1 Mobilization/Demobilization $124,040.00 $85,000.00 $167,000.00 $180,000.00 $133,725.00 $252,400.00 $50,500.00 002 1 Demolition and sitework $62,600.00 $45,000.00 $84,000.00 $60,000.00 $26,712.00 $37,440.00 $44,100.00 003 1 Site restoration including tank disinfection and asphalt paving $32,200.00 $15,000.00 $50,000.00 $75,000.00 $15,900.00 $6,550.00 $8,000.00 004 1 Concrete ring foundation $48,300.00 $80,000.00 $113,000.00 $250,000.00 $97,308.00 $104,132.00 $119,400.00 005 1 Rock anchor design and installation $72,000.00 $70,000.00 $85,000.00 $125,000.00 $56,790.00 $78,613.00 $136,900.00 006 1 Steel, including tank hold-downs, columns and column connections, and roof joist connections $176,440.00 $95,000.00 $200,000.00 $125,000.00 $285,988.00 $301,300.00 $129,700.00 007 1 Steel wall plate for exterior of tank $106,760.00 $117,000.00 $178,000.00 $150,000.00 $114,497.00 $268,550.00 $114,400.00 008 1 New ladder, vents, cable lifeline system and roof hatch $30,500.00 $53,000.00 $76,000.00 $50,000.00 $66,395.00 $31,440.00 $74,600.00 009 1 Valve vault; seismic bracing, anchorage, supports and isolation butterfly valve $30,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,000.00 $35,000.00 $64,554.00 $64,452.00 $75,800.00 010 1 Valve vault; recoating with lead paint removal, opening vault wall pipe penetrations and sealing the openings $63,000.00 $60,000.00 $43,000.00 $50,000.00 $54,668.00 $13,100.00 $29,500.00 011 1 Cathodic protection system upgrades $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $12,000.00 $12,425.00 $11,790.00 $9,100.00 012 1 Tank recoating with lead paint removal including coal tar removal for column supports $608,600.00 $345,000.00 $467,000.00 $542,000.00 $383,350.00 $570,993.00 $786,700.00 013 1 Allowance for pitting repair on metal pipe or reservoir surfaces prior to coating $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Dahl Reservoir 014 1 Mobilization/Demobilization $96,324.00 $85,000.00 $146,000.00 $180,000.00 $111,184.00 $34,300.00 $50,500.00 015 1 Demolition and sitework $59,974.00 $35,000.00 $66,000.00 $60,000.00 $16,748.00 $30,955.00 $44,100.00 016 1 Site restoration including tank disinfection and asphalt paving $28,800.00 $15,000.00 $47,000.00 $75,000.00 $15,900.00 $6,550.00 $8,000.00 017 1 Concrete ring foundation $28,980.00 $55,000.00 $76,000.00 $250,000.00 $79,602.00 $89,886.00 $95,400.00 018 1 Steel, including tank hold-downs, columns and column connections, and roof joist connections $138,900.00 $100,000.00 $137,000.00 $94,000.00 $246,132.00 $216,150.00 $127,900.00 019 1 Steel wall plate for exterior of tank $93,390.00 $135,000.00 $158,000.00 $105,000.00 $95,642.00 $242,350.00 $94,200.00 020 1 New ladder, vents, cable lifeline system and roof hatch $30,500.00 $40,000.00 $79,000.00 $37,000.00 $69,045.00 $31,440.00 $65,000.00 021 1 Valve vault; seismic bracing, anchorage, supports and isolation butterfly valve $30,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,000.00 $33,000.00 $63,070.00 $68,068.00 $65,700.00 022 1 Valve vault; recoating with lead paint removal, opening vault wall pipe penetrations and sealing the openings $63,000.00 $52,000.00 $43,000.00 $59,000.00 $53,441.00 $13,100.00 $29,500.00 023 1 Cathodic protection system upgrades $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $13,761.00 $11,790.00 $9,100.00 024 1 Tank recoating with lead paint removal including coal tar removal for column supports $479,700.00 $290,000.00 $420,000.00 $275,000.00 $326,131.00 $457,233.00 $656,000.00 025 1 Allowance for pitting repair on metal pipe or reservoir surfaces prior to coating $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Park Reservoir 026 1 Mobilization/Demobilization $99,306.00 $85,000.00 $146,000.00 $180,000.00 $109,543.00 $34,300.00 $60,000.00 027 1 Demolition and sitework $60,272.00 $40,000.00 $62,000.00 $60,000.00 $16,642.00 $24,340.00 $44,100.00 028 1 Site restoration including tank disinfection and asphalt paving $26,400.00 $15,000.00 $46,000.00 $75,000.00 $15,900.00 $6,550.00 $8,000.00 029 1 Concrete ring foundation $38,640.00 $75,000.00 $91,000.00 $250,000.00 $85,224.00 $90,737.00 $97,600.00 030 1 Rock anchor design and installation $72,000.00 $65,000.00 $85,000.00 $125,000.00 $56,790.00 $79,294.00 $182,700.00 031 1 Steel, including tank hold-downs, columns and column connections, and roof joist connections $151,600.00 $135,000.00 $140,000.00 $124,000.00 $233,564.00 $189,950.00 $127,100.00 032 1 Steel wall plate for exterior of tank $87,850.00 $135,000.00 $154,000.00 $105,000.00 $131,525.00 $209,600.00 $92,500.00 033 1 New ladder, vents, cable lifeline system and roof hatch $30,500.00 $55,000.00 $86,000.00 $51,000.00 $67,207.00 $31,440.00 $61,500.00 034 1 Valve vault; seismic bracing, anchorage, supports and isolation butterfly valve $30,000.00 $50,000.00 $45,000.00 $32,000.00 $62,858.00 $68,068.00 $65,700.00 035 1 Valve vault; recoating with lead paint removal, opening vault wall pipe penetrations and sealing the openings $63,000.00 $52,000.00 $43,000.00 $59,000.00 $54,128.00 $13,100.00 $25,500.00 036 1 Cathodic protection system upgrades $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $14,006.00 $11,790.00 $9,100.00 037 1 Tank recoating with lead paint removal including coal tar removal for column supports $422,800.00 $300,000.00 $389,000.00 $275,000.00 $310,537.00 $385,385.00 $647,500.00 038 1 Allowance for pitting repair on metal pipe or reservoir surfaces prior to coating $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Corte Madera Reservoir 039 1 Mobilization/Demobilization $114,004.00 $85,000.00 $146,000.00 $180,000.00 $110,591.00 $39,300.00 $50,500.00 040 1 Demolition and sitework $77,498.00 $50,000.00 $73,000.00 $60,000.00 $16,960.00 $17,790.00 $44,100.00 041 1 Site restoration including tank disinfection and asphalt paving $29,400.00 $15,000.00 $48,000.00 $75,000.00 $19,080.00 $6,550.00 $8,000.00 042 1 Concrete ring foundation $57,960.00 $90,000.00 $123,000.00 $250,000.00 $120,946.00 $114,966.00 $131,600.00 043 1 Rock anchor design and installation $79,200.00 $100,000.00 $124,000.00 $125,000.00 $82,548.00 $122,852.00 $261,500.00 044 1 Steel, including tank hold-downs, columns and column connections, and roof joist connections $84,100.00 $55,000.00 $57,000.00 $49,000.00 $101,336.00 $153,270.00 $132,600.00 045 1 Steel wall plate for exterior of tank $170,680.00 $200,000.00 $235,000.00 $163,000.00 $144,919.00 $281,650.00 $128,200.00 046 1 New ladder, vents, cable lifeline system and roof hatch $35,500.00 $55,000.00 $116,000.00 $51,000.00 $77,013.00 $31,440.00 $85,800.00 047 1 Valve vault; seismic bracing, anchorage and supports $36,000.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $8,000.00 $14,946.00 $26,659.00 $8,000.00 048 1 Valve vault; recoating with lead paint removal $5,000.00 $40,000.00 $25,000.00 $38,000.00 $21,021.00 $10,480.00 $10,700.00 049 1 Cathodic protection system upgrades $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $8,000.00 $8,000.00 $13,034.00 $11,790.00 $8,800.00 050 1 Tank recoating with lead paint removal including coal tar removal for column supports $554,700.00 $365,000.00 $510,000.00 $340,000.00 $362,433.00 $502,737.00 $784,400.00 051 1 Allowance for pitting repair on metal pipe or reservoir surfaces prior to coating $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 Arastradero Turnout 052 1 Mobilization/Demobilization $8,500.00 $65,000.00 $50,000.00 $10,000.00 $14,759.00 $6,550.00 $10,300.00 053 1 Electrical upgrades $35,000.00 $24,000.00 $34,000.00 $30,000.00 $29,500.00 $15,720.00 $52,800.00 054 1 Mechanical upgrades including pipe hangers and supports $9,000.00 $13,000.00 $14,000.00 $7,000.00 $19,000.00 $14,135.00 $13,300.00 055 1 Pipe recoating with lead paint removal $5,000.00 $36,000.00 $25,000.00 $33,000.00 $44,320.00 $23,253.00 $29,400.00 056 1 Opening vault wall pipe penetrations, sealing the openings, site restoration $32,000.00 $27,000.00 $20,000.00 $14,000.00 $24,500.00 $29,383.00 $4,700.00 057 1 Traffic Control $4,000.00 $500.00 $7,000.00 $4,000.00 $18,000.00 $17,161.00 $8,000.00 Page Mill Turnout 058 1 Mobilization/Demobilization $12,600.00 $65,000.00 $50,000.00 $16,000.00 $22,627.00 $6,550.00 $10,300.00 059 1 Electrical upgrades $37,000.00 $25,000.00 $34,000.00 $40,000.00 $30,000.00 $15,720.00 $53,500.00 060 1 Mechanical upgrades including pipe, pipe hangers and supports plus relocation of sump discharge line $33,500.00 $42,000.00 $54,000.00 $36,000.00 $25,400.00 $28,034.00 $81,300.00 061 1 Pipe recoating with lead paint removal $7,500.00 $45,000.00 $29,000.00 $33,000.00 $61,100.00 $11,790.00 $46,800.00 062 1 Opening vault wall pipe penetrations, sealing the openings, site restoration $44,000.00 $38,000.00 $25,000.00 $24,000.00 $29,100.00 $36,484.00 $5,100.00 063 1 Traffic Control $4,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $4,000.00 $17,000.00 $20,043.00 $8,000.00 California Turnout 064 1 Mobilization/Demobilization $12,600.00 $65,000.00 $50,000.00 $14,000.00 $29,937.00 $6,550.00 $6,800.00 065 1 Electrical upgrades $37,000.00 $27,000.00 $34,000.00 $40,000.00 $30,000.00 $15,720.00 $53,500.00 066 1 Concrete curb and steel curb railing $10,000.00 $12,000.00 $15,000.00 $11,000.00 $20,900.00 $11,659.00 $49,200.00 067 1 Mechanical upgrades include pipe hangers and supports $33,500.00 $33,000.00 $60,000.00 $23,000.00 $20,000.00 $21,877.00 $28,500.00 068 1 Pipe recoating with lead paint removal $7,500.00 $36,000.00 $32,000.00 $24,000.00 $61,600.00 $6,550.00 $46,800.00 069 1 Opening vault wall pipe penetrations, sealing the openings, sump pump sewer connection and site restoration $44,000.00 $42,000.00 $22,000.00 $22,000.00 $27,100.00 $35,625.00 $4,700.00 070 1 Traffic Control $4,000.00 $6,000.00 $7,000.00 $10,000.00 $16,500.00 $16,768.00 $8,000.00 Total of Base Bid (items 001 through 070 only, with all applicable taxes included) $5,161,118.00 $4,602,500.00 $6,100,000.00 $5,926,000.00 $5,197,062.00 $5,756,192.00 $6,430,600.00 B: BID ALTERNATES 071 2,430 Additional reservoir floor coal tar removal $36,450.00 $48,600.00 $25,515.00 $43,740.00 $24,300.00 $48,600.00 $12,100.00 072 100 Transport and disposal of additional reservoir floor coal tar $9,500.00 $28,000.00 $22,000.00 $27,500.00 $30,000.00 $32,700.00 $30,000.00 Total of Bid Alternate (items 071 through 072 only, with all applicable taxes include $45,950.00 $76,600.00 $47,515.00 $71,240.00 $54,300.00 $81,300.00 $42,100.00 Total Bid (items 001 through 072 only, with all applicable taxes included) $5,207,068.00 $4,679,100.00 $6,147,515.00 $5,997,240.00 $5,251,362.00 $5,837,492.00 $6,472,700.00 Page 1   ATTACHMENT E        This project supports the ongoing efforts to improve the City’s water distribution system to be able to  supply water during emergency periods when the traditional supply is not available. The Dahl, Park and  Montebello Reservoirs were constructed in 1964. The Corte Madera Reservoir was constructed in 1969.  The California seismic standards for construction of steel water tanks have changed drastically over the  past 50 years. Due to this, and the age of the reservoirs, staff has recommended that these reservoirs be  retrofitted to ensure the City will be able to provide stored water supply during an emergency. The Page  Mill, Arastradero and California Turnouts were constructed in 1959. All three facilities are located in  underground vaults where water is received from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC)  Bay Division Pipelines. Some equipment/piping has been replaced, as needed, over the years. However,  just as with seismic standards for steel water tanks, the seismic standards for piping located above  ground have changed drastically over the years. Due to this, and the age of each turnout, staff has  recommended that these turnouts be seismically upgraded to ensure the City will be able to receive  water from SFPUC during an emergency.        This construction contract will provide construction services to seismically upgrade the Corte Madera  (1.5 MG above ground steel tank), Dahl (1 MG above ground steel tank), Park (1 MG above ground steel  tank) and Montebello (1.5 MG above ground steel tank) Reservoirs and Page Mill, Arastradero and  California Turnouts to ensure reliability during a seismic event. Work at the Reservoir sites includes  removal of all existing interior and exterior paint/coatings and application of new interior and exterior  coating systems.  Tank seismic improvements include the installation of new concrete ring footings, rock  anchors, anchor bolts, column and wall stiffener plates for seismic reliability, seismic bracing for pipes,  anchorage for each reservoir roof and miscellaneous appurtenances.  Additional improvements include  replacement of existing access safety systems and rehabilitation of the cathodic protection system.  Work at the Turnout sites includes installation of seismic restraints, base isolation and pipe supports,  recoating and/or replacement of existing pipe and electrical upgrades.       Due to the extent and nature of this work, a specialty tank contractor is needed for construction.  Therefore, the level of expertise needed for construction of the project prevented City staff from being  able to perform this work themselves.      Per current City policy, an Invitation for Bid (IFB) was issued by the Purchasing Department for this  project on April 8, 2015. The bid period was 27 days with a Bid Opening date of April 28, 2015. Six (6)  total bids were received, with Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction Inc. being the lowest  responsible bidder with a bid of $4,679,100.      ATTACHMENT E    Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction is both a small and local business. Their equipment  yard and main office is located in Santa Clara, California.      Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. has been awarded multiple contracts for similar work in  both Palo Alto and other agencies around the state of California over the past ten years.  This includes  the seismic retrofit work with the City of Daly City, City of Brisbane and City of Redwood City. In  addition, the City recently contracted with Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. for the  Seismic Upgrade of Mayfield Reservoir project that was completed in 2012.      The City has previously worked with Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. on other utility type  projects and has been pleased with their quality of work. Most recently, Anderson Pacific Engineering  Construction, Inc. successfully completed seismic upgrade work at the Mayfield Reservoir (ID #2212).       Anderson Pacific Engineering Construction, Inc. will have 790 calendar days to complete construction.  The Utilities Department is expecting to issue a Notice to Proceed in July 2015 with a completion date of  December 2017. Costs were determined through the IFB process as discussed above.      There should be no amendments to the agreement.    None.    City of Palo Alto (ID # 5884) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Tennis Court Improvements Title: Approval of Contract No. C15159142 with Saviano Company in the Amount of $372,550 with a 10 Percent Contingency for Unforeseen Expenses for Tennis Court Improvements at Hoover Park, Terman Park and Weisshaar Park (Capital Improvement Project PG-06001) From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the attached contract C15159142 with Saviano Company, Inc. (Attachment A) for Parks Tennis Court Improvements in the amount not to exceed $372,550. Approve 10% contingency amount of $37,255 for unforeseen expenses. 2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute one or more change orders to the contract with Saviano Company, Inc. for related additional but unforeseen work which may develop during the project, not to exceed amount of $37,255 Background Tennis court resurfacing work in parks is the responsibility of the Community Services Department. Capital Improvement Project (CIP) PG-06001 (Tennis and Basketball Court Resurfacing) provides annual funding for reconstruction of City maintained tennis and basketball courts. Discussion The work to be performed under the contract includes removal and disposal of existing asphalt tennis court surfacing, existing tennis netting, existing net posts and existing windscreens. The contractor will install new asphalt courts, tennis netting, net posts, windscreens and benches. On May 13, 2015, an Invitation for Bids (IFB) was posted to the City of Palo Alto website with 20 days to respond to the Invitation for Bids (IFB). A non-mandatory pre- bid meeting was held on Thursday, May 21, 2015. Proposals were received from two City of Palo Alto Page 2 qualified firms (Saviano Company, Inc., and Dryco Construction, Inc.) on June 2, 2015 (Attachment B). The award is being made to the lowest bidder (Saviano Company, Inc.) for a not-to- exceed total of $372,550, which includes a Deduct Change Order of $6,240 to reduce the scope for work that will be performed by City staff. A bid alternate for the use of concrete surfacing in lieu of asphalt surfacing was submitted but will not be awarded due to lack of funding. Timeline Terman Park Tennis Courts July to Aug 2015 Hoover Park Tennis Courts July to October 2015 Weisshaar Park Tennis Courts July to October 2015 Resource Impact The project is fully funded through (CIP) PG-06001 (Tennis and Basketball Court Resurfacing). Policy Implications POLICY C-24: Reinvest in aging facilities to improve their usefulness and appearance. Avoid deferred maintenance of City infrastructure. Attachments:  Attachment: Attachment A-Contract C15159142 Tennis Court Renovations Project (PDF)  Attachment: Attachment B- IFB159142 Bid Summary2 (PDF) Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 1 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT Contract No. C15159142 City of Palo Alto Tennis Court Renovations Project Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 2 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS…………………………………….…………..6 1.1 Recitals…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 1.2 Definitions……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….6 SECTION 2 THE PROJECT………………………………………………………………………………………………………...6 SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS………………………………………………………………………………..7 3.1 List of Documents…………………………………………………………………………………………….........7 3.2 Order of Precedence……………………………………………………………………………………………......7 SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY…………………………………………………………………………………………..8 4.1 Contractor's Duties…………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM……………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 5.1 Contractor's Co-operation………………………………………………………………………………………..8 SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION…………………………………………………………………………………….......8 6.1 Time Is of Essence…………………………………………………………………………………………………….8 6.2 Commencement of Work…………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.3 Contract Time…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..8 6.4 Liquidated Damages…………………………………………………………………………………………………8 6.4.1 Other Remedies……………………………………………………………………………………………………..9 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time………………………………………………………………………………….9 SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR……………………………………………………………………….9 7.1 Contract Sum……………………………………………………………………………………………………………9 7.2 Full Compensation……………………………………………………………………………………………………9 SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE……………………………………………………………………………………………..9 8.1 Standard of Care…………………………………………………………………………………..…………………9 SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION…………………………………………………………………………………………..…10 9.1 Hold Harmless……………………………………………………………………………………………………….10 9.2 Survival…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………10 SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION……..………………………………………………………………………………10 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement…………….………………………………..……………………………….10 SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS.…………………………………………………………………………………10 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 3 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 11.1 Evidence of Coverage…………………………………………………………………………………………..10 SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST RANSFERS………………………………………………………………….…11 12.1 Assignment………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 12.2 Assignment by Law.………………………………………………………………………………………………11 SECTION 13 NOTICES …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.1 Method of Notice …………………………………………………………………………………………………11 13.2 Notice Recipents ………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 13.3 Change of Address……………………………………………………………………………………………….12 SECTION 14 DEFAULT…………………………………………………………………………………………………………...12 14.1 Notice of Default………………………………………………………………………………………………….12 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default…………………………………………………………………………………12 SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES…………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1 Remedies Upon Default……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services…………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold……………………………………………………………………………………..13 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract…………………………………………………………………13 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default………………………………………………13 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond………………………………………………………………………….13 15.1.6 Additional Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.2 Delays by Sureties……………………………………………………………………………………………….13 15.3 Damages to City…………………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default…………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.4 Suspension by City……………………………………………………………………………………………….14 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience……………………………………………………………………………..14 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause………………………………………………………………………………………..14 15.5 Termination Without Cause…………………………………………………………………………………14 15.5.1 Compensation………………………………………………………………………………………………….15 15.5.2 Subcontractors………………………………………………………………………………………………..15 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination………………………………………………………………...15 SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES……………………………………………………………16 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies……………………………………..………………………………..………………….16 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 4 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage……………………………………………………………………………………………16 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment…………………………………………………………………………………….16 16.2 Damages to Contractor………………………………………………………………………………………..16 SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS………………………………………………………………………………….…16 17.1 Financial Management and City Access………………………………………………………………..16 17.2 Compliance with City Requests…………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES……………………………………………………………………………………..17 18.1 Status of Parties……………………………………………………………………………………………………17 SECTION 19 NUISANCE……………………………………………………………………………………………………….…17 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited……………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES…………………………………………………………………………………….17 20.1 Payment of Fees…………………………………………………………………………………………………..17 SECTION 21 WAIVER…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 21.1 Waiver………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….17 SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS……………………………….18 22.1 Governing Law…………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 22.2 Compliance with Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………18 SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT……………………………………………………………………………………18 23.1 Integration………………………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT…………………………………………………………………………………..18 24.1 Survival of Provisions……………………………………………………………………………………………18 SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES………………………………………………………………………………………….18 SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION……………………………………………………………………………………….19 26.1 Appropriation………………………………………………………………………………………………………19 SECTION 27 AUTHORITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 27.1 Representation of Parties…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS………………………………………………………………………………………………..19 28.1 Multiple Counterparts………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY……………………………………………………………………………………………………19 29.1 Severability………………………………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES …………………………………………………..19 30.1 Amendments of Laws…………………………………………………………………………………………..19 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 5 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION………………………………………………….….19 31.1 Workers Compensation…………………………………………………………………………………….19 SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS………………………………..…20 32.1 General Notice to Contractor…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a)…………………………………………………………………………….20 32.3 DIR Registration Required…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices…………………………………………………………………………………20 32.5 Payroll Records…………………………………………………………………………………………………20 Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 6 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT THIS CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT entered into on _________________ (“Execution Date”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("City"), and SAVIANO COMPANY, INC. ("Contractor"), is made with reference to the following: R E C I T A L S: A. City is a municipal corporation duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of California with the power to carry on its business as it is now being conducted under the statutes of the State of California and the Charter of City. B. Contractor is a corporation duly organized and in good standing in the State of California, Contractor’s License Number 557093 and registered with California Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) under registration number 1000007915. Contractor represents that it is duly licensed by the State of California and has the background, knowledge, experience and expertise to perform the obligations set forth in this Construction Contract. C. On May 13, 2015, City issued an Invitation for Bids (IFB) to contractors for the Tennis Court Renovations Project (“Project”). In response to the IFB, Contractor submitted a Bid. D. City and Contractor desire to enter into this Construction Contract for the Project, and other services as identified in the Contract Documents for the Project upon the following terms and conditions. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and undertakings hereinafter set forth and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, it is mutually agreed by and between the undersigned parties as follows: SECTION 1 INCORPORATION OF RECITALS AND DEFINITIONS. 1.1 Recitals. All of the recitals are incorporated herein by reference. 1.2 Definitions. Capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in this Construction Contract and/or in the General Conditions. If there is a conflict between the definitions in this Construction Contract and in the General Conditions, the definitions in this Construction Contract shall prevail. SECTION 2 THE PROJECT. The Project is the Tennis Court Renovations Project, located at three different City parks; Hoover Park, 2901 Cowper Street (between Colorado and Loma Verde); Terman Park, 655 Arastradero Road, and Weisshaar Park, 2298 Dartmouth Street (between College and California Avenues) Palo Alto, CA ("Project"). Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 7 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 SECTION 3 THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS. 3.1 List of Documents. The Contract Documents (sometimes collectively referred to as “Agreement” or “Bid Documents”) consist of the following documents which are on file with the Purchasing Division and are hereby incorporated by reference. 1) Change Orders 2) Field Orders 3) Contract 4) Bidding Addenda 5) Special Provisions 6) General Conditions 7) Project Plans and Drawings 8) Technical Specifications 9) Instructions to Bidders 10) Invitation for Bids 11) Contractor's Bid/Non-Collusion Affidavit 12) Reports listed in the Contract Documents 13) Public Works Department’s Standard Drawings and Specifications (most current version at time of Bid) 14) Utilities Department’s Water, Gas, Wastewater, Electric Utilities Standards (most current version at time of Bid) 15) City of Palo Alto Traffic Control Requirements 16) City of Palo Alto Truck Route Map and Regulations 17) Notice Inviting Pre-Qualification Statements, Pre-Qualification Statement, and Pre- Qualification Checklist (if applicable) 18) Performance and Payment Bonds 3.2 Order of Precedence. For the purposes of construing, interpreting and resolving inconsistencies between and among the provisions of this Contract, the Contract Documents shall have the order of precedence as set forth in the preceding section. If a claimed inconsistency cannot be resolved through the order of precedence, the City shall have the sole power to decide which document or provision shall govern as may be in the best interests of the City. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 8 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 SECTION 4 CONTRACTOR’S DUTY. 4.1 Contractor’s Duties Contractor agrees to perform all of the Work required for the Project, as specified in the Contract Documents, all of which are fully incorporated herein. Contractor shall provide, furnish, and supply all things necessary and incidental for the timely performance and completion of the Work, including, but not limited to, provision of all necessary labor, materials, equipment, transportation, and utilities, unless otherwise specified in the Contract Documents. Contractor also agrees to use its best efforts to complete the Work in a professional and expeditious manner and to meet or exceed the performance standards required by the Contract Documents. SECTION 5 PROJECT TEAM. 5.1 Contractor’s Co-operation. In addition to Contractor, City has retained, or may retain, consultants and contractors to provide professional and technical consultation for the design and construction of the Project. The Contract requires that Contractor operate efficiently, effectively and cooperatively with City as well as all other members of the Project Team and other contractors retained by City to construct other portions of the Project. SECTION 6 TIME OF COMPLETION. 6.1 Time Is of Essence. Time is of the essence with respect to all time limits set forth in the Contract Documents. 6.2 Commencement of Work. Contractor shall commence the Work on the date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. 6.3 Contract Time. Work hereunder shall begin on the date specified on the City’s Notice to Proceed and shall be completed not later than . within Ninety calendar days (90) after the commencement date specified in City’s Notice to Proceed. Note - Contractor must schedule work at Terman Park first to commence between July 1st and August 17th. By executing this Construction Contract, Contractor expressly waives any claim for delayed early completion. 6.4 Liquidated Damages. Pursuant to Government Code Section 53069.85, if Contractor fails to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time, including any approved extensions thereto, City may assess liquidated damages on a daily basis for each day of Unexcused Delay in achieving Substantial Completion, based on the amount of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) per day, or as otherwise specified in the Special Provisions. Liquidated damages may also be separately assessed for failure to meet milestones specified elsewhere in the Contract Documents, regardless of impact on the time for achieving Substantial Completion. The assessment of liquidated damages is not a penalty but considered to be a reasonable estimate of the amount of damages City will suffer by delay in completion of the Work. The City is entitled Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 9 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 to setoff the amount of liquidated damages assessed against any payments otherwise due to Contractor, including, but not limited to, setoff against release of retention. If the total amount of liquidated damages assessed exceeds the amount of unreleased retention, City is entitled to recover the balance from Contractor or its sureties. Occupancy or use of the Project in whole or in part prior to Substantial Completion, shall not operate as a waiver of City’s right to assess liquidated damages. 6.4.1 Other Remedies. City is entitled to any and all available legal and equitable remedies City may have where City’s Losses are caused by any reason other than Contractor’s failure to achieve Substantial Completion of the entire Work within the Contract Time. 6.5 Adjustments to Contract Time. The Contract Time may only be adjusted for time extensions approved by City and memorialized in a Change Order approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 7 COMPENSATION TO CONTRACTOR. 7.1 Contract Sum. Contractor shall be compensated for satisfactory completion of the Work in compliance with the Contract Documents the Contract Sum of Three Hundred Seventy-two Thousand Five Hundred Forty-nine and 100/49 Dollars ($372,549.49). [This amount includes the Base Bid less Line Items number 5, 24 and 43. The City will process a Deduct Change Order upon execution of the contract and will perform this scope with its own forces] 7.2 Full Compensation. The Contract Sum shall be full compensation to Contractor for all Work provided by Contractor and, except as otherwise expressly permitted by the terms of the Contract Documents, shall cover all Losses arising out of the nature of the Work or from the acts of the elements or any unforeseen difficulties or obstructions which may arise or be encountered in performance of the Work until its Acceptance by City, all risks connected with the Work, and any and all expenses incurred due to suspension or discontinuance of the Work, except as expressly provided herein. The Contract Sum may only be adjusted for Change Orders approved in accordance with the requirements of the Contract Documents. SECTION 8 STANDARD OF CARE. 8.1 Standard of Care. Contractor agrees that the Work shall be performed by qualified, experienced and well-supervised personnel. All services performed in connection with this Construction Contract shall be performed in a manner consistent with the standard of care under California law applicable to those who specialize in providing such services for projects of the type, scope and complexity of the Project. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 10 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 SECTION 9 INDEMNIFICATION. 9.1 Hold Harmless. To the fullest extent allowed by law, Contractor will defend, indemnify, and hold harmless City, its City Council, boards and commissions, officers, agents, employees, representatives and volunteers (hereinafter individually referred to as an “Indemnitee” and collectively referred to as "Indemnitees"), through legal counsel acceptable to City, from and against any and liability, loss, damage, claims, expenses (including, without limitation, attorney fees, expert witness fees, paralegal fees, and fees and costs of litigation or arbitration) (collectively, “Liability”) of every nature arising out of or in connection with the acts or omissions of Contractor, its employees, Subcontractors, representatives, or agents, in performing the Work or its failure to comply with any of its obligations under the Contract, except such Liability caused by the active negligence, sole negligence, or willful misconduct of an Indemnitee. Contractor shall pay City for any costs City incurs to enforce this provision. Except as provided in Section 9.2 below, nothing in the Contract Documents shall be construed to give rise to any implied right of indemnity in favor of Contractor against City or any other Indemnitee. Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 9201, City shall timely notify Contractor upon receipt of any third-party claim relating to the Contract. 9.2 Survival. The provisions of Section 9 shall survive the termination of this Construction Contract. SECTION 10 NON-DISCRIMINATION. 10.1 Municipal Code Requirement. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, Contractor certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. Contractor acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and will comply with all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 11 INSURANCE AND BONDS. 11.1 Evidence of coverage. Within ten (10) business days following issuance of the Notice of Award, Contractor shall provide City with evidence that it has obtained insurance and shall submit Performance and Payment Bonds satisfying all requirements in Article 11 of the General Conditions. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 11 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 SECTION 12 PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFERS. 12.1 Assignment. City is entering into this Construction Contract in reliance upon the stated experience and qualifications of the Contractor and its Subcontractors set forth in Contractor’s Bid. Accordingly, Contractor shall not assign, hypothecate or transfer this Construction Contract or any interest therein directly or indirectly, by operation of law or otherwise without the prior written consent of City. Any assignment, hypothecation or transfer without said consent shall be null and void, and shall be deemed a substantial breach of contract and grounds for default in addition to any other legal or equitable remedy available to the City. 12.2 Assignment by Law. The sale, assignment, transfer or other disposition of any of the issued and outstanding capital stock of Contractor or of any general partner or joint venturer or syndicate member of Contractor, if the Contractor is a partnership or joint venture or syndicate or co-tenancy shall result in changing the control of Contractor, shall be construed as an assignment of this Construction Contract. Control means more than fifty percent (50%) of the voting power of the corporation or other entity. SECTION 13 NOTICES. 13.1 Method of Notice. All notices, demands, requests or approvals to be given under this Construction Contract shall be given in writing and shall be deemed served on the earlier of the following: (i) On the date delivered if delivered personally; (ii) On the third business day after the deposit thereof in the United States mail, postage prepaid, and addressed as hereinafter provided; (iii) On the date sent if sent by facsimile transmission; (iv) On the date sent if delivered by electronic mail; or (v) On the date it is accepted or rejected if sent by certified mail. 13.2 Notice to Recipients. All notices, demands or requests (including, without limitation, Change Order Requests and Claims) from Contractor to City shall include the Project name and the number of this Construction Contract and shall be addressed to City at: To City: City of Palo Alto City Clerk 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Copy to: City of Palo Alto Community Services Department 1305 Middlefield Road Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: Jeanette Serna AND [Include Construction Manager, If Applicable.] Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 12 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 City of Palo Alto Utilities Engineering 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Attn: In addition, copies of all Claims by Contractor under this Construction Contract shall be provided to the following: Palo Alto City Attorney’s Office 250 Hamilton Avenue P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, California 94303 All Claims shall be delivered personally or sent by certified mail. All notices, demands, requests or approvals from City to Contractor shall be addressed to: Saviano Company, Inc. 1784 Smith Avenue San Jose, CA 95112 Attn: John Saviano 13.3 Change of Address. In advance of any change of address, Contractor shall notify City of the change of address in writing. Each party may, by written notice only, add, delete or replace any individuals to whom and addresses to which notice shall be provided. SECTION 14 DEFAULT. 14.1 Notice of Default. In the event that City determines, in its sole discretion, that Contractor has failed or refused to perform any of the obligations set forth in the Contract Documents, or is in breach of any provision of the Contract Documents, City may give written notice of default to Contractor in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract, with a copy to Contractor’s performance bond surety. 14.2 Opportunity to Cure Default. Except for emergencies, Contractor shall cure any default in performance of its obligations under the Contract Documents within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) after receipt of written notice. However, if the breach cannot be reasonably cured within such time, Contractor will commence to cure the breach within two (2) Days (or such shorter time as City may reasonably require) and will diligently and continuously prosecute such cure to completion within a reasonable time, which shall in no event be later than ten (10) Days after receipt of such written notice. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 13 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 SECTION 15 CITY'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 15.1 Remedies Upon Default. If Contractor fails to cure any default of this Construction Contract within the time period set forth above in Section 14, then City may pursue any remedies available under law or equity, including, without limitation, the following: 15.1.1 Delete Certain Services. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, delete certain portions of the Work, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.2 Perform and Withhold. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract, engage others to perform the Work or portion of the Work that has not been adequately performed by Contractor and withhold the cost thereof to City from future payments to Contractor, reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto. 15.1.3 Suspend The Construction Contract. City may, without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, suspend all or any portion of this Construction Contract for as long a period of time as City determines, in its sole discretion, appropriate, in which event City shall have no obligation to adjust the Contract Sum or Contract Time, and shall have no liability to Contractor for damages if City directs Contractor to resume Work. 15.1.4 Terminate the Construction Contract for Default. City shall have the right to terminate this Construction Contract, in whole or in part, upon the failure of Contractor to promptly cure any default as required by Section 14. City’s election to terminate the Construction Contract for default shall be communicated by giving Contractor a written notice of termination in the manner specified for the giving of notices in the Construction Contract. Any notice of termination given to Contractor by City shall be effective immediately, unless otherwise provided therein. 15.1.5 Invoke the Performance Bond. City may, with or without terminating the Construction Contract and reserving to itself all rights to Losses related thereto, exercise its rights under the Performance Bond. 15.1.6 Additional Provisions. All of City’s rights and remedies under this Construction Contract are cumulative, and shall be in addition to those rights and remedies available in law or in equity. Designation in the Contract Documents of certain breaches as material shall not waive the City’s authority to designate other breaches as material nor limit City’s right to terminate the Construction Contract, or prevent the City from terminating the Agreement for breaches that are not material. City’s determination of whether there has been noncompliance with the Construction Contract so as to warrant exercise by City of its rights and remedies for default under the Construction Contract, shall be binding on all parties. No termination or action taken by City after such termination shall prejudice any other rights or remedies of City provided by law or equity or by the Contract Documents upon such termination; and City may proceed against Contractor to recover all liquidated damages and Losses suffered by City. 15.2 Delays by Sureties. Time being of the essence in the performance of the Work, if Contractor’s surety fails to arrange for completion of the Work in accordance with the Performance Bond, within seven (7) calendar days from the date of the notice of termination, Contractor’s surety shall be deemed to have waived its right to complete the Work under the Contract, and City may immediately make arrangements for the completion of the Work through use of its own forces, by hiring a replacement contractor, or by any other means that City determines advisable under the circumstances. Contractor and its surety shall be jointly and severally Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 14 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 liable for any additional cost incurred by City to complete the Work following termination. In addition, City shall have the right to use any materials, supplies, and equipment belonging to Contractor and located at the Worksite for the purposes of completing the remaining Work. 15.3 Damages to City. 15.3.1 For Contractor's Default. City will be entitled to recovery of all Losses under law or equity in the event of Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents. 15.3.2 Compensation for Losses. In the event that City's Losses arise from Contractor’s default under the Contract Documents, City shall be entitled to deduct the cost of such Losses from monies otherwise payable to Contractor. If the Losses incurred by City exceed the amount payable, Contractor shall be liable to City for the difference and shall promptly remit same to City. 15.4 Suspension by City 15.4.1 Suspension for Convenience. City may, at any time and from time to time, without cause, order Contractor, in writing, to suspend, delay, or interrupt the Work in whole or in part for such period of time, up to an aggregate of fifty percent (50%) of the Contract Time. The order shall be specifically identified as a Suspension Order by City. Upon receipt of a Suspension Order, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the order and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs allocable to the Work covered by the Suspension Order. During the Suspension or extension of the Suspension, if any, City shall either cancel the Suspension Order or, by Change Order, delete the Work covered by the Suspension Order. If a Suspension Order is canceled or expires, Contractor shall resume and continue with the Work. A Change Order will be issued to cover any adjustments of the Contract Sum or the Contract Time necessarily caused by such suspension. A Suspension Order shall not be the exclusive method for City to stop the Work. 15.4.2 Suspension for Cause. In addition to all other remedies available to City, if Contractor fails to perform or correct work in accordance with the Contract Documents, City may immediately order the Work, or any portion thereof, suspended until the cause for the suspension has been eliminated to City’s satisfaction. Contractor shall not be entitled to an increase in Contract Time or Contract Price for a suspension occasioned by Contractor’s failure to comply with the Contract Documents. City’s right to suspend the Work shall not give rise to a duty to suspend the Work, and City’s failure to suspend the Work shall not constitute a defense to Contractor’s failure to comply with the requirements of the Contract Documents. 15.5 Termination Without Cause. City may, at its sole discretion and without cause, terminate this Construction Contract in part or in whole upon written notice to Contractor. Upon receipt of such notice, Contractor shall, at City’s expense, comply with the notice and take all reasonable steps to minimize costs to close out and demobilize. The compensation allowed under this Paragraph 15.5 shall be the Contractor’s sole and exclusive compensation for such termination and Contractor waives any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect or incidental damages of any kind resulting from termination without cause. Termination pursuant to this provision does not relieve Contractor or its sureties from any of their obligations for Losses arising from or related to the Work performed by Contractor. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 15 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 15.5.1 Compensation. Following such termination and within forty-five (45) Days after receipt of a billing from Contractor seeking payment of sums authorized by this Paragraph 15.5.1, City shall pay the following to Contractor as Contractor’s sole compensation for performance of the Work : .1 For Work Performed. The amount of the Contract Sum allocable to the portion of the Work properly performed by Contractor as of the date of termination, less sums previously paid to Contractor. .2 For Close-out Costs. Reasonable costs of Contractor and its Subcontractors: (i) Demobilizing and (ii) Administering the close-out of its participation in the Project (including, without limitation, all billing and accounting functions, not including attorney or expert fees) for a period of no longer than thirty (30) Days after receipt of the notice of termination. .3 For Fabricated Items. Previously unpaid cost of any items delivered to the Project Site which were fabricated for subsequent incorporation in the Work. .4 Profit Allowance. An allowance for profit calculated as four percent (4%) of the sum of the above items, provided Contractor can prove a likelihood that it would have made a profit if the Construction Contract had not been terminated. 15.5.2 Subcontractors. Contractor shall include provisions in all of its subcontracts, purchase orders and other contracts permitting termination for convenience by Contractor on terms that are consistent with this Construction Contract and that afford no greater rights of recovery against Contractor than are afforded to Contractor against City under this Section. 15.6 Contractor’s Duties Upon Termination. Upon receipt of a notice of termination for default or for convenience, Contractor shall, unless the notice directs otherwise, do the following: (i) Immediately discontinue the Work to the extent specified in the notice; (ii) Place no further orders or subcontracts for materials, equipment, services or facilities, except as may be necessary for completion of such portion of the Work that is not discontinued; (iii) Provide to City a description in writing, no later than fifteen (15) days after receipt of the notice of termination, of all subcontracts, purchase orders and contracts that are outstanding, including, without limitation, the terms of the original price, any changes, payments, balance owing, the status of the portion of the Work covered and a copy of the subcontract, purchase order or contract and any written changes, amendments or modifications thereto, together with such other information as City may determine necessary in order to decide whether to accept assignment of or request Contractor to terminate the subcontract, purchase order or contract; (iv) Promptly assign to City those subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City elects to accept by assignment and cancel, on the most favorable terms reasonably possible, all subcontracts, purchase orders or contracts, or portions thereof, that City does not elect to accept by assignment; and (v) Thereafter do only such Work as may be necessary to preserve and protect Work already in progress and to protect materials, plants, and equipment on the Project Site or in transit thereto. Upon termination, whether for cause or for convenience, the provisions of the Contract Documents remain in effect as to any Claim, indemnity obligation, warranties, guarantees, Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 16 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 submittals of as-built drawings, instructions, or manuals, or other such rights and obligations arising prior to the termination date. SECTION 16 CONTRACTOR'S RIGHTS AND REMEDIES. 16.1 Contractor’s Remedies. Contractor may terminate this Construction Contract only upon the occurrence of one of the following: 16.1.1 For Work Stoppage. The Work is stopped for sixty (60) consecutive Days, through no act or fault of Contractor, any Subcontractor, or any employee or agent of Contractor or any Subcontractor, due to issuance of an order of a court or other public authority other than City having jurisdiction or due to an act of government, such as a declaration of a national emergency making material unavailable. This provision shall not apply to any work stoppage resulting from the City’s issuance of a suspension notice issued either for cause or for convenience. 16.1.2 For City's Non-Payment. If City does not make pay Contractor undisputed sums within ninety (90) Days after receipt of notice from Contractor, Contractor may terminate the Construction Contract (30) days following a second notice to City of Contractor’s intention to terminate the Construction Contract. 16.2 Damages to Contractor. In the event of termination for cause by Contractor, City shall pay Contractor the sums provided for in Paragraph 15.5.1 above. Contractor agrees to accept such sums as its sole and exclusive compensation and agrees to waive any claim for other compensation or Losses, including, but not limited to, loss of anticipated profits, loss of revenue, lost opportunity, or other consequential, direct, indirect and incidental damages, of any kind. SECTION 17 ACCOUNTING RECORDS. 17.1 Financial Management and City Access. Contractor shall keep full and detailed accounts and exercise such controls as may be necessary for proper financial management under this Construction Contract in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and practices. City and City's accountants during normal business hours, may inspect, audit and copy Contractor's records, books, estimates, take-offs, cost reports, ledgers, schedules, correspondence, instructions, drawings, receipts, subcontracts, purchase orders, vouchers, memoranda and other data relating to this Project. Contractor shall retain these documents for a period of three (3) years after the later of (i) Final Payment or (ii) final resolution of all Contract Disputes and other disputes, or (iii) for such longer period as may be required by law. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 17 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 17.2 Compliance with City Requests. Contractor's compliance with any request by City pursuant to this Section 17 shall be a condition precedent to filing or maintenance of any legal action or proceeding by Contractor against City and to Contractor's right to receive further payments under the Contract Documents. City many enforce Contractor’s obligation to provide access to City of its business and other records referred to in Section 17.1 for inspection or copying by issuance of a writ or a provisional or permanent mandatory injunction by a court of competent jurisdiction based on affidavits submitted to such court, without the necessity of oral testimony. SECTION 18 INDEPENDENT PARTIES. 18.1 Status of parties. Each party is acting in its independent capacity and not as agents, employees, partners, or joint ventures’ of the other party. City, its officers or employees shall have no control over the conduct of Contractor or its respective agents, employees, subconsultants, or subcontractors, except as herein set forth. SECTION 19 NUISANCE. 19.1 Nuisance Prohibited. Contractor shall not maintain, commit, nor permit the maintenance or commission of any nuisance in connection in the performance of services under this Construction Contract. SECTION 20 PERMITS AND LICENSES. 20.1 Payment of Fees. Except as otherwise provided in the Special Provisions and Technical Specifications, The Contractor shall provide, procure and pay for all licenses, permits, and fees, required by the City or other government jurisdictions or agencies necessary to carry out and complete the Work. Payment of all costs and expenses for such licenses, permits, and fees shall be included in one or more Bid items. No other compensation shall be paid to the Contractor for these items or for delays caused by non-City inspectors or conditions set forth in the licenses or permits issued by other agencies. SECTION 21 WAIVER. 21.1 Waiver. A waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained herein shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same or any other term, covenant, or condition contained herein, whether of the same or a different character. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 18 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 SECTION 22 GOVERNING LAW AND VENUE; COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. 22.1 Governing Law. This Construction Contract shall be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of California, and venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in the County of Santa Clara, and no other place. 22.2 Compliance with Laws. Contractor shall comply with all applicable federal and California laws and city laws, including, without limitation, ordinances and resolutions, in the performance of work under this Construction Contract. SECTION 23 COMPLETE AGREEMENT. 23.1 Integration. This Agreement represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This Agreement may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. SECTION 24 SURVIVAL OF CONTRACT. 24.1 Survival of Provisions. The provisions of the Construction Contract which by their nature survive termination of the Construction Contract or Final Completion, including, without limitation, all warranties, indemnities, payment obligations, and City’s right to audit Contractor’s books and records, shall remain in full force and effect after Final Completion or any termination of the Construction Contract. SECTION 25 PREVAILING WAGES. This Project is not subject to prevailing wages. Contractor is not required to pay prevailing wages in the performance and implementation of the Project in accordance with SB 7, if the public works contract does not include a project of $25,000 or less, when the project is for construction work, or the contract does not include a project of $15,000 or less, when the project is for alteration, demolition, repair, or maintenance (collectively, ‘improvement’) work. Or Contractor is required to pay general prevailing wages as defined in Subchapter 3, Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and Section 16000 et seq. and Section 1773.1 of the California Labor Code. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 1773 of the Labor Code of the State of California, the City Council has obtained the general prevailing rate of per diem wages and the general rate for holiday and overtime work in this locality for each craft, classification, or type of worker needed to execute the contract for this Project from the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). Copies of these rates may be obtained at the Purchasing Division’s office of the City of Palo Alto. Contractor shall provide a copy of prevailing wage rates to any staff or subcontractor hired, and shall pay the adopted prevailing wage rates as a minimum. Contractor shall comply with the provisions of all sections, including, but not limited to, Sections 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1782, 1810, and 1813, of the Labor Code pertaining to prevailing wages. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 19 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 SECTION 26 NON-APPROPRIATION. 26.1 Appropriations. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that the City does not appropriate funds for the following fiscal year for this event, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Construction Contract are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 27 AUTHORITY. 27.1 Representation of Parties. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. SECTION 28 COUNTERPARTS 28.1 Multiple Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement. SECTION 29 SEVERABILITY. 29.1 Severability. In case a provision of this Construction Contract is held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the validity, legality and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected. SECTION 30 STATUTORY AND REGULATORY REFERENCES. 30.1 Amendments to Laws. With respect to any amendments to any statutes or regulations referenced in these Contract Documents, the reference is deemed to be the version in effect on the date that the Contract was awarded by City, unless otherwise required by law. SECTION 31 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CERTIFICATION. 31.1 Workers Compensation. Pursuant to Labor Code Section 1861, by signing this Contract, Contractor certifies as follows: “I am aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that code, and I will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Work on this Contract.” Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 20 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT C15159142 SECTION 32 DIR REGISTRATION AND OTHER SB 854 REQUIREMENTS. 32.1 General Notice to Contractor. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of SB 854. 32.2 Labor Code section 1771.1(a) City provides notice to Contractor of the requirements of California Labor Code section 1771.1(a), which reads: “A contractor or subcontractor shall not be qualified to bid on, be listed in a bid proposal, subject to the requirements of Section 4104 of the Public Contract Code, or engage in the performance of any contract for public work, as defined in this chapter, unless currently registered and qualified to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5. It is not a violation of this section for an unregistered contractor to submit a bid that is authorized by Section 7029.1 of the Business and Professions Code or Section 10164 or 20103.5 of the Public Contract Code, provided the contactor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract is awarded.” 32.3 DIR Registration Required. City will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Construction Contract with Contractor without proof that Contractor and its listed subcontractors are registered with the California Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”) to perform public work, subject to limited exceptions. 32.4 Posting of Job Site Notices. City gives notice to Contractor and its listed subcontractors that Contractor is required to post all job site notices prescribed by law or regulation and Contractor is subject to SB 854-compliance monitoring and enforcement by DIR. 32.5 Payroll Records. City requires Contractor and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of Labor Code section 1776, including: (i) Keep accurate payroll records, showing the name, address, social security number, work classification, straight time and overtime hours worked each day and week, and the actual per diem wages paid to each journeyman, apprentice, worker, or other employee employed by, respectively, Contractor and its listed subcontractors, in connection with the Project. (ii) The payroll records shall be verified as true and correct and shall be certified and made available for inspection at all reasonable hours at the principal office of Contractor and its listed subcontractors, respectively. (iii) At the request of City, acting by its project manager, Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall make the certified payroll records available for inspection or furnished upon request to the project manager within ten (10) days of receipt of City’s request. City requests Contractor and its listed subcontractors to submit the certified payroll records at the end of each week during the Project. Invitation for Bid (IFB) Package 21 Rev. April 20, 2015 CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT (iv) If the certified payroll records are not produced to the project manager within the 10-day period, then Contractor and its listed subcontractors shall be subject to a penalty of one hundred dollars ($100.00) per calendar day, or portion thereof, for each worker, and City shall withhold the sum total of penalties from the progress payment(s) then due and payable to Contractor. This provision supplements the provisions of Section 15 hereof. (v) Inform the project manager of the location of contractor’s and its listed subcontractors’ payroll records (street address, city and county) at the commencement of the Project, and also provide notice to the project manager within five (5) business days of any change of location of those payroll records. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Construction Contract to be executed the date and year first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ Purchasing Manager City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney APPROVED: ____________________________ Director of Community Services CONTRACTOR: SAVIANO COMPANY, INC. By:___________________________ Name:________________________ Title:__________________________ Date: _________________________ Tennis Court Renovations Project IFB NO. 159142 BID SUMMARY BID DESCRIPTION BID UNIT BID UNIT BID ITEM QTY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT HOOVER PARK 1 MOBILIZATION 1 LS $7,700.00 $7,700.00 $3,600.00 $3,600.00 2 SITE PREPARATION, CLEANING 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,600.00 $2,600.00 3 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $2,080.00 $2,080.00 4 SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 5 REMOVE EXISTING TENNIS COURT BENCHES AND FOOTINGS (DELIVER TO CITY STORAGE)2 EA $1,200.00 $2,400.00 $1,040 $2,080.00 6 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING TENNIS COURT PAVEMENT SURFACES 13,200 SF $1.00 $13,200.00 $1.12 $14,784.00 7 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING TENNIS COURT POLES, FOOTINGS, NETTING, WINDSCREENS, AND WINDSCREEN HARDWARE 1 LS $3,300.00 $3,300.00 $3,640.00 $3,640.00 8 ROUGH GRADE AND OFFHAUL (+/- 4")161 CY $62.00 $9,982.00 $96.89 $15,599.29 9 TREE PROTECTION 1 LS $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 10 INSTALL TENNIS COURT SUBGRADE AND ASPHALT PAVEMENT (2"AC/4" AB)13,200 SF $4.40 $58,080.00 $3.64 $48,048.00 11 INSTALL TENNIS COURT COLOR COATINGS AND STRIPING - DOUBLES COURTS 2 EA $6,700.00 $13,400.00 $6,240.00 $12,480.00 12 INSTALL NEW TENNIS WINDSCREENS 460 LF $10.00 $4,600.00 $12.60 $5,796.00 13 INSTALL NEW TENNIS EQUIPMENT - POSTS, GROUND SOCKETS, NETS 2 EA $3,100.00 $6,200.00 $1,560.00 $3,120.00 14 INSTALL FREE STANDING 6.5' POLY BENCH 2 EA $1,480.00 $2,960.00 $416.00 $832.00 15 REPAIR AND RECONNECT EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCING 1 LS $4,600.00 $4,600.00 $1,560.00 $1,560.00 16 REPAIR CONCRETE AND ASPHALT PATHWAY 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $5,200.00 $5,200.00 17 REPAIR NATURAL TURF - REPLACE WITH SOD 1 LS $2,800.00 $2,800.00 $2,080.00 $2,080.00 18 REPAIR IRRIGATION 1 LS $900.00 $900.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 19 BARK MULCH EXISTING PLANTING BEDS (IF DISTURBED)1 LS $500.00 $500.00 $520.00 $520.00 TERMAN PARK 20 MOBILIZATION 1 LS $7,700.00 $7,700.00 $3,600.00 $3,600.00 21 SITE PREPARATION, CLEANING 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,600.00 $2,600.00 22 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,080.00 $2,080.00 23 SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 24 REMOVE EXISTING TENNIS COURT BENCHES AND FOOTINGS (DELIVER TO CITY STORAGE)2 EA $1,200.00 $2,400.00 $1,040.00 $2,080.00 25 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING TENNIS COURT PAVEMENT SURFACES 13,800 SF $1.00 $13,800.00 $1.12 $15,456.00 26 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING TENNIS COURT POLES, FOOTINGS, NETTING, WINDSCREENS, AND WINDSCREEN HARDWARE 1 LS $3,300.00 $3,300.00 $3,640.00 $3,640.00 27 ROUGH GRADE AND OFFHAUL (+/- 4")169 CY $62.00 $10,478.00 $96.90 $16,376.10 28 TREE PROTECTION 1 LS $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 29 INSTALL TENNIS COURT SUBGRADE AND ASPHALT PAVEMENT (2" AC/4" AB)13,800 SF $4.40 $60,720.00 $3.64 $50,232.00 30 INSTALL TENNIS COURT COLOR COATINGS AND STRIPING - DOUBLES COURTS 2 EA $6,700.00 $13,400.00 $6,240.00 $12,480.00 31 INSTALL NEW TENNIS WINDSCREENS 470 LF $10.00 $4,700.00 $12.44 $5,846.80 32 INSTALL NEW TENNIS EQUIPMENT - POSTS, GROUND SOCKETS, NETS 2 EA $3,100.00 $6,200.00 $1,560.00 $3,120.00 33 INSTALL FREE STANDING 6.5' POLY BENCH 2 EA $1,480.00 $2,960.00 $416.00 $832.00 34 REPAIR AND RECONNECT EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCING 1 LS $4,600.00 $4,600.00 $1,560.00 $1,560.00 35 REPAIR CONCRETE AND ASPHALT PATHWAY 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,080.00 $2,080.00 36 REPAIR NATURAL TURF - REPLACE WITH SOD 1 LS $700.00 $700.00 $2,080.00 $2,080.00 37 REPAIR IRRIGATION 1 LS $300.00 $300.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 38 BARK MULCH EXISTING PLANTING BEDS (IF DISTURBED)1 LS $200.00 $200.00 $520.00 $520.00 DRYCO CONSTRUCTION SAVIANO COMPANY EISWSHAAR PARK 39 MOBILIZATION 1 LS $7,700.00 $7,700.00 $3,600.00 $3,600.00 40 SITE PREPARATION, CLEANING 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,600.00 $2,600.00 41 TRAFFIC CONTROL 1 LS $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $2,080.00 $2,080.00 42 SEDIMENT AND EROSION CONTROL 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 43 REMOVE EXISTING TENNIS COURT BENCHES AND FOOTINGS (DELIVER TO CITY STORAGE)2 EA $1,200.00 $2,400.00 $1,040.00 $2,080.00 44 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING TENNIS COURT PAVEMENT SURFACES 13,200 SF $1.00 $13,200.00 $1.12 $14,784.00 45 REMOVE AND DISPOSE OF EXISTING TENNIS COURT POLES, FOOTINGS, NETTING, WINDSCREENS, AND WINDSCREEN HARDWARE 1 LS $3,300.00 $3,300.00 $3,640.00 $3,640.00 46 ROUGH GRADE AND OFFHAUL (+/- 4")161 CY $62.00 $9,982.00 $96.90 $15,600.90 47 TREE PROTECTION 1 LS $2,200.00 $2,200.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 48 INSTALL TENNIS COURT SUBGRADE AND ASPHALT PAVEMENT (2" AC/4" AB)13,200 SF $4.40 $58,080.00 $3.64 $48,048.00 49 INSTALL TENNIS COURT COLOR COATINGS AND STRIPING - DOUBLES COURTS 2 EA $6,700.00 $13,400.00 $6,240.00 $12,480.00 50 INSTALL NEW TENNIS WINDSCREENS 460 LF $10.00 $4,600.00 $12.44 $5,722.40 51 INSTALL NEW TENNIS EQUIPMENT - POSTS, GROUND SOCKETS, NETS 2 EA $3,100.00 $6,200.00 $1,560.00 $3,120.00 52 INSTALL FREE STANDING 6.5' POLY BENCH 2 EA $1,480.00 $2,960.00 $416.00 $832.00 53 REPAIR AND RECONNECT EXISTING CHAIN LINK FENCING 1 LS $4,600.00 $4,600.00 $1,560.00 $1,560.00 54 REPAIR CONCRETE AND ASPHALT PATHWAY 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000.00 $2,080.00 $2,080.00 55 REPAIR NATURAL TURF - REPLACE WITH SOD 1 LS $300.00 $300.00 $2,080.00 $2,080.00 56 REPAIR IRRIGATION 1 LS $200.00 $200.00 $1,040.00 $1,040.00 57 BARK MULCH EXISTING PLANTING BEDS (IF DISTURBED)1 LS $100.00 $100.00 $520.00 $520.00 $418,202.00 $378,789.49 BID DESCRIPTION BID UNIT BID UNIT BID ITEM QTY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT PRICE AMOUNT FOOTHILLS 1 INSTALL ALTERNATE TENNIS COURT SUBGRADE AND CONCRETE PAVEMENT (4" CONCRETE OVER 4" AB) IN LIEU OF ITEM # 10 AT HOOVER PARK. 13,200 SF $5.30 $69,960.00 $11.35 $149,820.00 2 INSTALL ALTERNATE TENNIS COURT SUBGRADE AND CONCRETE PAVEMENT (4" CONCRETE OVER 4" AB) IN LIEU OF ITEM #29 AT TERMAN PARK.13,800 SF $5.15 $71,070.00 $11.35 $156,630.00 3 INSTALL ALTERNATE TENNIS COURT SUBGRADE AND CONCRETE PAVEMENT (4" CONCRETE OVER 4" AB) IN LIEU OF ITEM #48 AT EISWSHAAR PARK.13,200 SF $5.30 $69,960.00 $11.35 $149,820.00 $210,990.00 $456,270.00 DRYCO CONSTRUCTION SAVIANO COMPANY ALTERNATE BID ITEMS TOTAL: BASE BID TOTAL: City of Palo Alto (ID # 5878) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of an Agreement with PAUSD for Field Brokering and Maintenance Title: Approval of an Agreement with Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) for PAUSD Athletic Field Brokering and Maintenance From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommendation Staff recommends the Council approve and authorize the City Manager to sign the agreement (Attachment A) with the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) for the period January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2017 (the agreement is retroactive to 2014 because that is when the previous agreement expired). The referenced agreement is for athletic field and tennis court maintenance, community use of the school district’s elementary and middle school fields as well as tennis and basketball courts at middle and high schools, which will continue to be brokered by the City for recreational and athletic use. Background In 1993, the City and PAUSD met to discuss maintenance needs of school district athletic fields in light of school district budget constraints and existing public use of school district fields. A partnership was formed and commenced in 1995 for the City to maintain select PAUSD athletic fields for both school and community use with an equal cost share. The partnership included an equal cost share for capital improvements to athletic fields, however, a subsequent agreement removed cost sharing for capital improvements and the cost is now fully incurred by PAUSD. The agreement has since been revised several times with the most recent change being a one-year term which expired on December 31, 2013 (CMR: 3802). Negotiating this agreement and delays in resolving the Cubberley Community Center Agreement resulted in a delay in renewing this agreement. In future years, the agreement will be renewed before it expires. The agreement encompasses athletic fields at 13 elementary schools and three middle schools, and tennis courts at five district high schools. In addition to the field maintenance part of the agreement, there is also the public community use and City of Palo Alto Page 2 brokering of PAUSD athletic fields and courts outside of school activity hours. Community use of school district athletic fields and courts is administered by the City through a field brokering process, and revenue is shared between both parties. Discussion Staff has worked cooperatively with PAUSD staff to negotiate a new agreement. The agreement provides for the continued maintenance of school district field at all of PAUSD elementary schools, as well as the fields at Jane L. Stanford (JLS) and Jordan Middle Schools. The fields at Terman Middle School are dedicated park land and are maintained in a manner similar to other City parks’ maintenance. The maintenance of turf areas includes mowing, edging, de-thatching, reseeding, aeration, maintenance of irrigation heads, and valves and controllers. The renewal of this agreement has no substantive changes from the previous agreement. The agreement between the PAUSD and the City for has been in place since 1995. Both the City and PAUSD recognize the importance of conserving water, especially in times of drought. Consistent with the need to conserve water, the City, which manages the irrigation for the PAUSD playing fields, will apply sufficient water to ensure the turf is as healthy and safe as possible for the school children and other field users while meeting regulatory requirements. The City will frequently inspect the irrigation system to ensure that any broken sprinklers or leaking pipes are promptly repaired to avoid wasting water. The City will track the local weather reports and conduct frequent inspections of the soil moisture to ensure that the appropriate amount of water is provided. The agreement provides for the maintenance of tennis courts and basketball courts at Jordan, Terman, and JLS Middle Schools and at Gunn and Palo Alto High Schools. This work includes periodic sweeping of the court surfaces and washing during the summer months. The terms of sharing expenses for field and court maintenance continues to be divided evenly between PAUSD and the City (50%/ 50%). The City will continue to broker the fields, tennis courts and basketball courts in accordance with the Council-approved Field Use Policy (Attachment B). This policy is intended to ensure that the public, both youth and adults, has fair access to all PAUSD and City-owned fields and athletic facilities. The criteria incorporated into the Field Use Policy helps ensure that Palo Alto children and non-profit sports clubs have top priority to field space for practice and competition. The terms of the fee sharing between the City and PAUSD, for fees collected for renting the PAUSD fields the City maintains as defined in this agreement, continue to be 60% City/ 40% District. City of Palo Alto Page 3 The City places a high priority on the maintenance of school playing fields, community access to athletic fields and tennis courts for physical fitness, recreation, and safety. This agreement will continue the commitment to high quality turf and court surfaces. Policy Implications This agreement is consistent with City and PAUSD policies. The cooperative use of PAUSD fields and courts furthers Policy C-4 of the Community Services element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan: “Maintains a close, collaborative relationship with the PAUSD to maximize the use of school services and facilities for public benefit, particularly for young people, families, and seniors.” Resource Impact Sufficient funding is available in the Fiscal Year 2016 budget for this action. Staff estimates the field maintenance to be approximately $650,000 annually with PAUSD providing 50% of City expenses. In addition, the revenue sharing for field rentals is a 60%/40% split which amounts to approximately $62,000 annually in revenue to the City. As outlined in the agreement, PAUSD’s 40% share of field rental revenue is applied as a credit towards the City’s lease payment for the Cubberley facility. Environmental Review This recommendation is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to section 15301 (existing facilities) of the CEQA guidelines. Therefore, no environmental assessment is required. Attachments:  Attachment9.a: Attachment A - PAUSD Brokering and Maintenance Agreement (DOCX)  Attachment9.b: Attachment B-- Field and Tennis Court Use Policy (PDF) City of Palo Alto (ID # 3864) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/17/2013 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Field and Tennis Court Use Policy Title: Staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission Recommend that Council Approve the Revised Field and Tennis Court Use Policy From: City Manager Lead Department: Community Services Recommendation Staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission recommend that the Council should approve the revised Field and Tennis Court Use Policy – (Attachment A – 2013 Revised Field and Tennis Court Use Policy). Background In 2009, the Parks and Recreation Commission (PARC), with staff and organized sports organizations drafted and recommended to the Council for its approval a Field and Tennis Court Use Policy. The Council then approved the policy, which defined priority use of fields and provided guidelines for allocating field space to the wide variety of organizations that use Palo Alto fields. The purpose of the policy remains the same:  To strive to provide all Palo Alto residents with an opportunity to participate in their activity of choice.  To establish policies and procedures governing the use of City parks, fields, tennis courts and School District playing fields managed by the City of Palo Alto.  To ensure Palo Alto residents have priority access to parks and playing fields.  To provide for a variety of activities reflecting the athletic preferences of Palo Alto residents.  To contribute a proportionate amount of field use time to regional organizations that Palo Alto residents participate in.  To collect fees for the use of fields, in support of their ongoing maintenance.  To ensure that decisions regarding the use of City parks and athletic complexes and District sites are used in the best interests of the neighborhoods, sports organizations City of Palo Alto Page 2 and residents of Palo Alto.  To ensure that appropriate sports are permitted on appropriate fields. When the policy was adopted in 2009, it was agreed that PARC would review the policy periodically (Attachment B - 2009 Field Use Policy). Discussion After three years of allocating field and tennis court use according to the adopted policy, staff and sports user groups asked the PARC to review the policy. In the spring of 2012, an Ad Hoc Committee, consisting of Commissioners Deirdre Crommie, Paul Losch and Daria Walsh, was created. The Ad Hoc Committee began by meeting with staff to review how the policy was implemented and determine staff’s satisfaction with the policy. The Ad Hoc Committee then met with sports user groups individually to hear their comments and concerns. After identifying the major areas of concern the Ad Hoc Committee developed a set of recommendations and presented them to all stakeholders in November, 2012. Below are the primary suggestions and concerns heard from field users.  The current policy gives exclusive priority to fields to non-select sports organizations i.e. organizations that do not have try-outs such as the American Youth Soccer Association (AYSO).  The current policy on field cancellations is inconsistent with current practice.  The current policy does not define what a “practice” or “game slot” is; consequently, different organizations are operating under different definitions.  The current policy does not ensure appropriate age participants are using appropriate size fields.  The current policy does not address how sports organizations should manage the change in daylight resulting from daylight savings.  The current policy does not address how Palo Alto based sports organizations hold tournaments which use many fields for an entire weekend.  The current policy sets aside certain times and fields in the evenings and on Sunday mornings for adult play, however these times and fields are not specifically named. The Ad Hoc Committee reviewed and discussed the issues and drafted a set of policy changes that were subsequently presented and discussed with the entire Commission in December 2012 and January 2013. The recommended changes to the Athletic Field and Tennis Court Use Policy were unanimously approved by the PARC at its February 2013 meeting (Attachment A – 2013 Revised Field and Tennis Court Use Policy). City of Palo Alto Page 3 Below is a table that summarizes the recommended revisions to the Field and Tennis Court Use Policy. All of the changes recommended were unanimously supported by sports organizations except for changes regarding eligibility. Although the revisions to the eligibility section received broad support from the sports organizations, the American Youth Soccer Association’s (AYSO) regional commissioner was concerned that the round robin brokering process, based on the number of residents within a sports league, would have a negative impact on the AYSO. Summary of recommended policy changes: Policy Section Current Policy Revised Policy Eligibility The current policy gives priority to sports organizations that do not have a “try out” process. These organizations are called non-select leagues. The recommended policy removes exclusive priority for non-select leagues in favor of youth organizations with 51% or more residents and adult organizations with 35% or more, residents. Fields will be allocated based on the number of residents served in each respective organization. A round robin selection process will be used to distribute fields as defined in the Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines that accompanies the policy. The revised policy allows youth organizations with 51% or more residents and adult organizations with 35% or more residents to discuss and negotiate a field allocation agreement with City staff facilitating in advance of a round robin process. If an agreement cannot be reached the round robin brokering process will be used. 1 1 The shaded text in the table is a change recommended and approved by the Parks and Recreation Commission on May 28, 2013; all other changes were recommended and approved on February 26, 2013. City of Palo Alto Page 4 Cancellations Current policy states all cancelations must be made two weeks after the start of the permit. Current practice allows cancellations any time with no penalty. Cancellations for weekday use fields: 1. 1. Before the start of the permit - full refund.) 2. 2. After the start of the permit by the 7th of each month - 50% refund. 3. 3. After the 7th of each month - no refund Cancellations for weekend fields:  1. Up to three weeks after the publication of the leagues game schedule – full refund  2. After three weeks of the publication of the leagues game schedule, and by the 7th of each month - 50% refund.  3. After the 7th of the each month - no refund. Practice and Game slots Current policy does not define practice or game slots Practice slots are defined - for youth soccer 1.5 hours, 4-5:30pm, 5:30-7pm, with additional slots of 7-8:30pm and 8:30-10pm on fields with lights. Game slots are defined - for youth soccer 1.5 hours on small fields and 2 hours on 11 versus 11 (large fields). Field Allocations Current policy does not allocate fields by age of user and size of fields. Fields are divided into three categories; Small fields = 7 versus 7 or younger Medium fields = 8 versus 8 and 10 versus 10 Large Fields = 11 versus 11 Fields will be allocated to organizations based on the age of participants and the appropriate size of fields. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Field Allocation (daylight savings) Current policy does not consider the loss of day light in fall due to daylight savings. Organizations will be responsible for reserving sufficient 4pm field slots to accommodate the daylight savings time change. Tournaments Field brokering for tournaments is not addressed in current policy. Organizations with 51% or more residents can reserve fields for one tournament in a calendar year. Adult Play Current policy gives adults “some fields” on Sundays from 8-1:15pm, and sets aside 8:30pm-10pm on Stanford Palo Alto Community Fields on Tuesday and Thursday and 7pm-10pm on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Revised policy specifies field locations and reduces one weekday evening field slot i.e. 7-8:30pm:  Stanford Palo Alto Community Fields are reserved for adult play 8:30pm- 10pm on Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday and 7pm-10pm on Wednesday and Friday.  Adult play will also be permitted Sundays from 8am-12:30pm on Terman 1 and 2, JLS 1, 2 and 3 and Stanford Palo Alto Community Fields North and South.  As one of Palo Alto’s largest and most respected sports organizations, AYSO remained concerned about one of the recommended policy changes staff and the PARC delayed forwarding the revised policy to the Council to better understand the potential impacts to AYSO. Staff and PARC subsequently met with the AYSO’s regional commissioner several times to further listen to his concerns. Staff also developed a Frequently Asked Questions (Attachment C) regarding the revised policy and held a community meeting on March 12, 2013, with all stakeholders to explain the new policy and discuss anticipated impacts. The feedback heard at the community meeting is summarized in Attachment D. Additionally, staff drafted guidelines that accompany the revised policy to help describe the round robin brokering process (Appendix B of the revised Field and Tennis Court Use Policy). As a result of the community meeting and further discussions with sports user groups, an additional revision was made to the policy that the PARC approved at its May 28, 2013 meeting. The change (which is shaded grey in the table above) allows sports user groups to negotiate a field allocation agreement with City staff, facilitating in advance of a formal round robin field allocation process. If the sports groups can arrive at a field allocation agreement, consistent City of Palo Alto Page 6 with the policy, then a formal round robin brokering process in not needed. Allowing sports groups to discuss their needs and talk though conflicts and compromise with one another will yield the most favorable outcome for each organization in aligning field allocations with sports organizations interests. City staff and priority youth sports groups, including AYSO, have tested this process and were able to negotiate an agreement for Fall 2013 that works for each organization. In the event that sports groups cannot come to an agreement in future seasons the revised policy provides staff with a mechanism, through a round robin brokering process, to allocate fields based on the number of residents in each organization. Although the round robin brokering process will fairly distribute fields to each organization based on number of residents it may not result in sports organizations receiving the field groupings they desire. Therefore, allowing the sports groups to negotiate a fair and balanced field allocation agreement by working together would advance their interests. This change was particularly important to AYSO’s regional commissioner and was supported by all other sports organizations. The PARC unanimously approved this change at its May 28, 2013 Commission meeting. Respource imapct There are no budget implications resulting from the recommended policy changes. The budget resources needed to administer the Athletic Field and Tennis Court Use Policy already exist in the City’s budget. The recommended changes will provide greater efficiency for staff in adminisiter the policy. The recommended policy changes such as improving the process for how cancellations will be managed, better defying access to specifc fields for adult leagues and aligning age approporate fields with age approrate players will assist staff in efficiently allocating high demand athletic fields and tennis courts in Palo Alto. Policy Implications The revised policy improves the current policy in several significant ways. While the proposed Field and Tennis Court Use Policy may not resolve all of the conflicts and problems associated with administering field and tennis court use, it provides further clarity and transparency for staff and sports organizations in regard to how Palo Alto athletic fields and tennis courts will be used. The approach used to develop the recommended policy changes is aligned with the Comprehensive Plan Goal 1, Policy 2 to use advisory bodies and ad hoc committees to assist City staff and the City Council on policy issues. The Parks and Recreation Commission were very engaged in the entire process of developing the policy recommendations as were the various athletic and tennis court user groups. Attachments:  Attachment A - Revised Field Use Policy and Appendices (PDF)  Attachment B - Current Field Use Policy (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 7  Attachment C - Field Policy FAQ (DOC)  Attachment D - Community Meeting March 12 - Notes (DOC) Attachment B - Revised Policy 1 City of Palo Alto Field and Tennis Court Use Policy The City of Palo Alto (the “City”) Field Use Policy (and the procedures adopted hereunder) has been established to ensure that City-owned, -maintained and –managed park and athletic field facilities, including the fields owned by the Palo Alto Unified School District (the “District”) are utilized for recreational, athletic, cultural, educational, social and community service functions that meet the needs and interests of the community, and that permitted users are fully informed as to the City’s guidelines that govern their use of the park and athletic field facilities. Purpose:  To strive to provide all Palo Alto residents with an opportunity to participate in their activity of choice.  To establish policies and procedures governing the use of City parks, fields, tennis courts and District playing fields managed by the City of Palo Alto.  To ensure Palo Alto residents have priority access to parks and playing fields.  To provide for a variety of activities reflecting the athletic preferences of Palo Alto residents.  To contribute a proportionate amount of field use time to regional organizations that Palo Alto residents participate in.  To collect fees for the use of fields, in support of their ongoing maintenance.  To ensure that decisions regarding the use of City parks and athletic complexes and District sites are used in the best interests of the neighborhoods, sports organizations and residents of Palo Alto.  To ensure that appropriate sports are permitted on appropriate fields. Field use permits are required for exclusive field use or for any on-going seasonal, organized use of athletic fields maintained or managed by the City. In accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code Section, the Recreation and Golf Services Division issues field use permits. The exclusive use of a field or an athletic field requires the making of an advance reservation and is subject to fee and security deposit requirements. Appendix A - Available Facilities and Park Amenities Appendix B - Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines I.  Field Use Permitting: Field space usage requests are considered at three separate and seasonal intervals per fiscal  year. Field space is awarded on a priority basis at the beginning of each fall, winter/spring, and  summer period. After the original requests are processed on a priority basis, the fields are  available to other non‐priority requests. To apply for an Athletic Field Use Permit, an applicant  must submit a field request form to the Field Coordinator/Supervisor. Field request forms are  Attachment B - Revised Policy 2 available: 1. Online at www.cityofpaloalto.org;  2. In person at Cubberley Community Center; or  3. By requesting a form from the Field Coordinator/Supervisor at  playingfields@cityofpaloalto.org  Fall ~~ The first day of school (mid-August) through December 31. Winter/Spring ~~ January 1 through the last day of school (end of May early June). Summer ~~ early June through mid-August. II. Field Request Form Deadlines: 1. For Fall seasonal use dates, request forms must be submitted by May 1. 2. For Winter/Spring seasonal use dates, request forms must be submitted by November 1. 3. For Summer seasonal use dates, request forms must be submitted by March 1. III. Seasonal Use Priority:  Palo Alto resident youth non-profit soccer and football organizations have field use priority on soccer/baseball/football joint use fields during the Fall use period.  Palo Alto resident youth non-profit baseball, softball and lacrosse organizations have field priority on the baseball-softball/soccer joint use fields during the Spring use period. IV. Exceptions to Seasonal Priority:  District programs have annual priority on District fields only.  Palo Alto Recreation-administered programs have annual use priority on all fields. V. Eligibility: The following are the field use guidelines that will be used for priority booking at the start of each seasonal brokering period. Priority will be given in the order below. 1. City and District Activities 2. Palo Alto Youth, non-profit* organizations with at least 51% residency 3. Palo Alto Adult, non-profit* organizations with at least 35% residency 4. Non-profit groups with 25% or more Palo Alto residence will be given priority for any remaining fields 5. Other groups not meeting the 25% requirement or for profit will be considered at staff discretion. *To qualify for non-profit rates, organizations must provide a copy of their letter of non-profit status from the California Secretary of State’s Office with their non-profit ID number indicated thereon, Payment with an organization’s check or charge card is required. Attachment B - Revised Policy 3 Priority organizations (groups 2 and 3) will have the opportunity to discuss field use needs with City staff facilitating, and attempt to negotiate an agreement on field allocations. The negotiated field allocation agreement must be consistent with section VI Field Allocations below. If two or more organizations are unable to agree with a negotiated field allocation agreement then a round robin brokering system will be used to determine the allocation of fields among organizations. Organizations will receive priority based on seasonal sports first (see Section III), followed by organizations that meet the priority residency requirement above. Adults and youth will broker separately with slots set aside for youth and adults as defined in Section VI. Groups with less than 25% residents and for-profit groups, reserve fields on a first come first served basis as available. If a round robin process is used the first round will be based on the number of residents in each organization. The number of residents will be broken down to equal a number of teams. Each team will then receive two practice slots a week and 0.55 game slots per weekend. The second round will broker for the total number of teams each organization has, less the teams that received fields in the first round. For more information please see Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines. VI. Field Allocations: Fields will be permitted for the activities in which the field(s) are intended for, designed for, classified as, or for activities conducted in a manner that does not compromise public safety or field quality and integrity.  Youth organizations or leagues that qualify for priority booking will be allocated fields as follows:  Two (2) practice slots* per team per week.  0.55 game slots* per team per week  Fields will be allocated to age appropriate athletes  7v7 or younger - small fields  8v8 -10v10 - medium fields  11v11 - large fields *Game slots, Practice Slots and age breakdowns are defined based on sport and field When priority booking takes place, slots are reserved for the entire brokering period. Slots brokered do not change because of daylight savings.  At the Stanford/Palo Alto Playing Fields, the 8:30-10:00 pm weekday slots will be reserved for adult league play Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday. 7pm-10pm slots are reserved for adults on Wednesday and Friday.  Sunday mornings from 8:00 am to 12:30 pm, at Terman 1 and 2, JLS 1, 2 and 3 and Mayfield will be reserved for adult league play. Adult leagues will be held to a maximum of 1 slot per team every other week. Any additional slots are open to all. Each group that has seasonal priority can reserve all the slots they require based on the number of teams in their organization. Attachment B - Revised Policy 4 Tournaments: Organizations who receive priority brokering may request one tournament a year; that tournament will be given priority of fields use. Tournament dates must be given in advance of brokering and there can only be one tournament a weekend. All additional tournaments are at staff discretion. Additional information found in Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines. VII Residency: A resident is a person residing within the city limits of the City of Palo Alto. Any person owning and paying taxes on real property in Palo Alto, but who is not living in the City, and any person having only a Palo Alto business address, is NOT considered a resident for field use application purposes. Children attending District schools are considered residents for brokering purposes. The City will require identification or documentation of residency. In the event proof of residency cannot be established, the person will be classified as a non-resident and fees and brokering privileges will be adjusted accordingly. VIII. Residency Verification: Palo Alto Recreation requires a master league roster complete with players’ first and last names alphabetized, address, phone number, team, and proof of residency. Proof of residency may include:  Palo Alto Utility Number  Copy of Current driver’s license with Palo Alto Address  Copy of current school I.D. card or verification form (provided by city) signed by school (for youth attending PAUSD school) Any group or organization found to be misrepresenting its residency status will have its permit revoked for the season and will be excluded from brokering for the following season. In addition, any group or organization found to be reserving field use for any time period time for another organization (that would otherwise have a lower priority for field scheduling) will be penalized by the revocation of its permit for the season for which the permit is issued and that group or organization will be assigned the last (or lowest) priority for field use scheduling for the immediately following season. IX. Fees All fees are due and payable prior to the issuance of any approved field use permit. The fees and charges for any field use permit are established by the City Council in the Municipal Fee Schedule and are not negotiable; only the Council has the authority to waive fees and charges by amendment to the Municipal Fee Schedule. Fees will be reviewed regularly and adjusted accordingly. Fees can be found in Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines. X. Deposits 1. A refundable deposit of one hundred dollars ($100.00) is required for all single athletic field use reservations. Long term renters are required to provide a $750 refundable security deposit. 2. The City reserves the right to deduct from the security deposit any and all additional charges relating to, but not limited to, janitorial services, maintenance/repair services, staff time, or emergency services that are required as a result of the field use. 3. Forfeiture of all or part of your security/damage deposit may occur for any of the following Attachment B - Revised Policy 5 reasons: a. Damage to facility; b. Misuse of the facility; c. Inadequate cleanup by the permit holder, requiring additional custodial/staff time following the permit holder’s use; d. Violation of field use rules 4. If additional fees due and payable exceed the amount of the security deposit, the permit holder will be billed for the balance due. Payment will be due and payable within thirty (30) days of the date of invoice. Fees that are not paid will be assigned for collection to a collections agency and the user group will be ineligible to apply for field use until the unpaid amount is settled in full. Insurance Liability A valid insurance certificate is required for use of any City or District field. The insurance certificate must afford one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) of general liability coverage per occurrence and contain the following information:  General liability coverage (property and bodily injury) as evidenced by an insurance certificate with an endorsement naming the City of Palo Alto (CPA) AND the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) as ADDITIONAL INSURED, and guaranteeing 30 days prior notice to change or cancellation of the policy. Use of fields will not be permitted unless a valid insurance certificate has been received by not later than two (2) business days prior to the scheduled date of use of the field or other facility. 1. The permit holder shall be responsible for any and all damage to the City’s or the District’s premises, turf, equipment and/or property. If additional maintenance is deemed necessary (in excess of normal services/time) to restore the premises, turf, equipment and/or property to reasonable use by others. the permit holder shall be charged accordingly. 2. The City and the District disclaims responsibility for any accident, injury, liability, loss or damage to person or property as a result of unauthorized field use. 3. The permit holder will be responsible for all actions and omissions that result in damages that are caused by their attendees. XII. Tennis Court Usage 1. Tennis courts are available for reservation for Palo Alto Tennis Club and USTA tournament/match use only. 2. The City brokers all City and District tennis courts. 3. Only 50% of the available courts at any location can be reserved at the same time and date. All other courts will remain open to the general public. 4. Tennis courts are not available for reservation by individuals for private use, including private lessons, picnics and individual play. No person shall provide or offer tennis lessons for compensation on City-owned tennis courts except as part of and approved as a City-sponsored program. 5. Tennis courts are available for individual use on a first-come, first-served basis. Each court use is subject to a one-hour time limit whenever there are others waiting to use the court. 6. Tennis courts are for tennis play only. No rollerblades, skates, skateboards, or pets are Attachment B - Revised Policy 6 permitted on any tennis court. 7. No individual may solely occupy and use a court if other individuals are waiting to play on that court. 8. No person shall play a sport other than tennis on City-owned tennis courts unless expressly allowed via permit issued by the City Recreation and Golf Division. 9. All steel racquets must have guards. 10. Only tennis shoes and non-marking soled shoes are allowed on the tennis courts. A: Locations: Tennis courts are available at the following locations: o Cubberley Community Center (6) o Mitchell Park (7) o Rinconada Park (9) o Hoover Park (2) o Peers Park (2) o Terman Park (2) o Weisshaar Park (2) o Gunn High School (7) o Palo Alto High School (7) o JLS Middle School (6) o Jordan Middle School (4) B: Tennis Court Fees: Residents: $5.00-$10.00 per court per hour Non-residents: $7.00- $20.00 per court per hour XIII. Permit Rules & Regulations 1 Permits cannot be transferred or assigned to any other person, group or organization for any reason. 2 Users must pick up and remove any trash generated by their activity. 3 The misuse of City or District facilities or the failure to conform to facility regulations, established policies (including the Wet Field Policy) and procedures or any other Federal, State, or local law, rule regulation or ordinance shall be sufficient grounds for the immediate revocation of the permit and/or the denial of any future applications. No refund will be granted. 4 Permit holders shall restrict their use to only those fields or courts specifically reserved and paid for, as designated in their permit. Other fields or courts may be scheduled by other groups and may not be available. Permit holders must be in possession of their Field Use Permit in case there is a need to address the question of who has priority use or reservation for the field or court in question. If the permit holder cannot use a field or court due to unauthorized use by another party, the permit holder should contact the Palo Alto Police Department at 650-329-2413. 5 Complaints from surrounding neighborhood residents as to the permittee’s activity noise level, litter and debris, and/or disregard of parking regulations could lead to the cancellation of the permit or reservation, the forfeiture of the security deposit, and the denial of facility use in the future. See Good Neighbor Policy XIV. General Rules & Regulations Attachment B - Revised Policy 7 All City of Palo Alto Municipal Codes/Regulations apply to all City and PAUSD fields. 1. No activity other than softball is permitted at the El Camino Park and Baylands Athletic Center softball fields, unless such activity is expressly allowed by permit. 2. The City reserves the right to cancel an approved reservation due to maintenance needs, overuse of facility, unsafe conditions, or due to a conflict with a City or District event. In these cases, all attempts will be made to provide a minimum of 15 days advance notice and to provide an alternate location for the group’s scheduled practice, game or activity. In the event of an emergency, when only short or no notice can be provided, groups must cooperate with the request to not use the facility or risk loss of current permit and denial of future use. If there are no alternate facilities available, the City is not obligated to provide an alternate facility. In case of such event, a full refund will be given. 3. No person shall use an athletic field which is posted as being closed, whether the closure is for excess rainfall or for field maintenance or other reason. 4. All motor vehicles must park in marked stalls in the parking lots or legally on side streets, or be subject to citation. No unauthorized vehicles shall enter park premises, drive on turf, grounds, playfields, or paved walkways. 5. All dogs must be on a leash and owners must clean up after their dogs. 6. For guidelines regarding facility hours of operations, see Appendix B. 7. No portable BBQ’s are permitted at any time in any facility. 8. No golf is permitted at any park or sports complex, with the exception of the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course. 9. Baylands Athletic Center is closed on Mondays for maintenance. 10. No alcohol or tobacco products are allowed on any District property at any time. 11. Athletic fields may be lined prior to a group use. Water soluble spray paint is the only permitted means of lining a field. No fields are permitted to be lined by means of Round Up, Dolomite or other herbicide, which can permanently burn lines into the field. Different color lines should be used for different sports. Soccer shall use white, rugby shall use blue and lacrosse shall use yellow. 12. Vending at a field is permitted only if the vendor is associated with the activity and has received the prior approval of the City’s representative. 13. Gambling is prohibited at all City and District property. 14. Soccer goals must be anchored at all times when they are located on the playing fields. When goals are not being utilized for play, they must be secured off the playing fields in a manner which will not permit tipping or create any hazardous condition that could cause injury to any person. The City of Palo Alto and District are not liable for accidents, injuries or loss of or damage to individuals or property. Should any goal left on site be found not secured and locked up properly, the permittee will be subject to a fine of $250.00. A subsequent violation will result in revocation of the current field user’s permit. 15. The City of Palo Alto encourages partnerships and volunteerism to improve field quality and maintenance; however, in the absence of a written agreement, donations and/or contributions of time does not give any organization priority at any facility. Groups wishing to make alterations to facilities must submit these improvement requests in advance to the City. No groups will be allowed to make any alteration to any facility without first obtaining the City’s approval. XV. Field and court releases Field and court releases and refunds shall follow guidelines below. Attachment B - Revised Policy 8 Weekday Slots:  Field releases done before the start of the permit will receive a full refund.  Field releases done after the start of the permit must be done by the 7th of each month and will receive a 50% refund  All refunds done after the 7th will receive no refund Weekend Slots:  Weekend slots can be released up to 3 weeks after the publication of the league game schedule for a full refund.  Releases after 3 weeks of the publication of the league game schedule can be done by the 7th of each month for a 50% refund.  All releases done after the 7th will receive no refund. Users who are found to not be using the field and court space and not releasing can be subject to losing field space for the following brokering period.  XVI. Wet Field Policy No refunds will be given for field closures due to rain. Field slots can be rescheduled. Athletic use of wet or saturated fields may cause extensive damage resulting in field closure and costly renovations. Groups shall abide by the Wet Field Policy and preserve the life and condition of the fields by not playing on them in wet conditions. The following policy applies to a period of rainfall, over-watered fields and/or irrigation breaks. The “rainout” condition hotline is 650-329-2697.  All grass fields are deemed closed to use during rainfall. Play will be allowed during a light mist if the ground is hard and relatively dry at the time field use is considered.  In the event of rainfall (any precipitation that is greater than a light drizzle on a dry field), the fields will be deemed closed after the cessation of precipitation. A failure to abide by this policy may result in the revocation of the permit and/or elimination for priority brokering for the following season. Individuals who violate this provision may also be subject to a $100 fine in accordance with the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Please see Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines for additional information XVII. Field Preservation: The City will aim to maintain fields uniformly and at the highest possible quality. Your cooperation is needed to preserve the fields on City and District fields by following these guidelines: 1. Limit the use of cleats. Cleats longer than one-quarter inch (¼”) are prohibited for use on any synthetic turf playing fields. 2. Field use, especially sports practices, should be conducted in a manner that play will take place on different sections of the turf, thus reducing excessive turf wear and damage to any one area. Attachment B - Revised Policy 9 3. Rotate use of areas (i.e.: use middle of turf area for drills one day and sides of the field the following day), and when possible, stay off of the fringe or bare areas to limit erosion and further damage. 3. Replace turf divots at the end of each day to help re-root the grass. 4. Do NOT use the fields during or after heavy rain, or when wet or muddy, for at least 48 hours 5. Soccer practices shall NOT be held on the infield area of a softball or baseball diamond. 6. Softball, baseball, and T-ball practices shall be held only on designated ball fields in order to prevent injuries to other park users. 7. Remove all equipment at the conclusion of use each day. This includes soccer goals. No equipment shall be allowed to be left unattended on City or District property without the prior approval of the Fields Coordinator. 8. Do not overcrowd fields by scheduling multiple games in areas reserved. Allow a safe distance between fields for safe passage of spectators and participants. 9. Water soluble spray paint is the only approved method of applying lines to the fields. Burning of lines with chemicals or cutting lines into turf areas is not allowed. 10. Report hazards on City property to the Parks Division office at 650-496-6962. 11. Report emergencies (e.g., broken water lines, gushing sprinkler heads, etc.) promptly to Palo Alto Communications at 650-329-2413 who will summon the appropriate personnel. When you make the call, be prepared to fully identify yourself, your location, and the specific nature of the emergency. 12. Do not drive or park cars, motorcycles, or other motorized vehicles on turf areas. 13. Bicycles are prohibited on all synthetic turf fields. 14. No food or beverages, with the exception of water, will be permitted on any synthetic turf field. XVIII. Good Neighbor Policy The purpose of this policy is to ensure that decisions regarding the use of City fields, parks and athletics complexes and District sites are used in the best interests of the neighborhoods, sports organizations, and citizens of Palo Alto. The City has established the following rules and regulations to govern the use of the City’s and the District’s facilities for the safe and pleasant enjoyment of participants and neighbors. Every person is expected to abide by these rules or be subject to forfeiture of the security deposit and/or loss of the privilege of future use of the facilities. 1 All litter and debris that may occur as a result of your event must be picked up and deposited into trash receptacles, where provided, or removed from the premises. 2 All groups are responsible for the condition in which they leave the facility. Any excessive clean-up required by City or District crews following your use will be cause for forfeiture of all or part of your damage deposit. 3 No amplified music, use of musical instruments, radios, or Public Address System testing or use allowed before 9:00 a.m. or after 8:00 p.m. and is allowed by permit only. In all parks, care shall be taken so that speakers are not directed at residences. 4 Complaints from surrounding neighborhood residents as to noise level, litter and debris, and disregard for use of parking regulations could result in cancellation of your reservation, forfeiture of security deposit, and denial of future facility use. 5 No person shall park a motor vehicle in such a place or manner as would block or obstruct any gate, entrance, or exit or resident driveway. Appendix A- Available Facilities and Park Amenities Site Softball BB Soccer Goals Lights Restrooms Hours of use Quality Comments Baylands 1 1 No No Yes Yes 8am-11pm Mon-Sun A Bol No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Boulware No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Cameron No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Cubberley 4 No 3 Yes No Yes 8am-Dusk Mon-Sun B 1 turf field El Camino 1 No 1 Yes Yes Yes Closed until 2015 Eleanor Pardee No No Youth No No No 8am-Dusk Mon-Sun C Greer 3 1 Jr.5 Yes No Yes 8am-Dusk Mon-Sun B soccer and softball fields over lap Hoover No 1 Youth No No Yes 8am-Dusk Mon-Sun B Soccer field is small when baseball fence is up Johnson No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Juana Briones No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Mitchell No No Youth No No Yes 8am-Dusk Mon-Sun C Peers No No Youth Yes No Yes 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun D Ramos No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Rinconada No No Youth No No Yes 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun D Robles No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Seale No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 10-4 Sat/Sun C parking is limited, neighbors boarder field Stanford-PA No No 2 Yes Yes Yes 8am-10pm Mon-Sun A Parking does fill, car pool encouraged Ventura No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 10-6 Sat/Sun E Weisshar No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 10-6 Sat/Sun E Werry No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 10-6 Sat/Sun E Schools Addison No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun C AmenitiesFields Barron No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Duveneck No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E El Carmelo No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Escondido No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Fairmeadow No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Greendell No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun E Gunn 1 1 1(2)No No No City does not reserve Hoover No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 9-6 Sat/Sun C JLS 1 No 4 Yes No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 8-8Sat/Sun C Jordan 1 No 3 Yes No No 3:30-6 M-F, 9-5 Sat C No Sunday Permits Juana Briones No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 8-6 Sat/Sun E Lucille Nixon No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 8-6 Sat/Sun E Ohlone No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 8-6 Sat/Sun E Palo Verde No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 8-6 Sat/Sun E PALY 1 1 2 No No No City does not reserve Terman 1 No 2 Yes No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 8-6 Sat/Sun C Walter Hays No No Youth No No No 3:30-dusk M-F, 8-6 Sat/Sun E Key "A" Faclity- High Quality turf, possibly with lights and few time restrictions "B" Faclity high quality turf, no nights and few time restrictions "C" Facility good quality turf, no lights, "D" Facility Fair turf quality, no lights, restriction on use time and close proximity to neighbors "E" Facility Low turf quality, no lights, no bathroom access and time restrictions Hours and field quality are only for reference and can change at any time ATTACHMENT B The Field and Tennis Use Guidelines provide additional information to support the Palo Alto Field Use Policy. Round Robin Procedures: Prior to the Round Robin brokering system, all participating organizations will have the opportunity to work out field usage through informal brokering. If the priority groups can reach an agreement, the Round Robin brokering system will not be required. In the event that groups cannot agree on field usage, a two-stage Round Robin brokering system will occur. The Round Robin brokering system is conducted in two rounds. The first round includes all the field selections for an individual organization based on their number of players that are Palo Alto residents. The total number of residents represented by the specific organization will be divided into “teams” using a pre-selected divisor (see Divisors below). For example, organization “A” is represented by 1400 residents / 14 = 100 teams in the first round of the Round Robin system. Organization “B” has 700 residents / 14 = 50 teams brokered in the first round. Each organization will broker slots based on the number of “teams” (residents divided by divisor). The Round Robin brokering process is conducted proportionately to the total number of residents in a given organization. For example, if there is an organization with 900 residents and a second organization with 100 residents, the first organization will be given 9 picks (10%) for every one pick (10%) of the second organization. The round robin continues until all residents within each organization have their needs met. Once each organization’s residents are accounted for, the second round of brokering will begin. Round 2 of the system then accounts for the remaining participants in each of the priority organizations. The second round works similarly, each organization accounts for its non- residents and creates teams based on the divisor. However, in this round the order is reversed, giving priority to the originations that needs the least amount of space. Field and Tennis Court Use Guidelines DRAFT Updated May 2013 ATTACHMENT B When choosing practice slots, each organization can pick four slots per turn, however no organization can select more then 20 percent of their needs in one turn so in the case that 4 slots is more then 20 percent then they select fewer slots per turn. When choosing practice slots, whole fields must be chosen, organizations may not select half fields unless authorized by the Fields Supervisor. When choosing game slots organizations will choose 1 slot at a time. The round robin process will take place for fields in each of the three different categories, Small, Medium and Large. Divisors Palo Alto playing fields are allocated in three sizes; small, medium and large. Fields are brokered based on size to insure age- appropriate field use. If organizations can show a set roster sizes then those roster sizes will be used as the divisor. If no set roster is available or a large roster range is used, the Fields Supervisor will use the following divisors for each field size. The divisor for small fields will be teams of 12 players; the divisor for medium fields will be teams of 14 players; and the divisor for large fields will be 16 players. FIELD RESERVE Once all priority brokering groups have reserved their allocated field space, staff will create a small reserve of fields that will be used for make-up games, substituting fields to accommodate field closures, and overflow for weekends with heavy use. Staff will use discretion in allocating these fields to users and will only reserve fields for the general public within a two week window. FEES Effective August 19, 2013 All fees for field rental are due and payable prior to the issuance of a permit. Any subsequent changes will be billed or refunded following the final rental date of the brokering period. If an organization fails to make payment in full prior to the following brokering period, they will not be allowed to participate in that season’s priority brokering. 1. Grass Field fees are as follows: Youth, non-profit, priority groups $5/hr Resident Rate $46/hr Non-Resident Rate $83/hr Non-Profit Rate $25/hr 2. Synthetic Turf fees are as follows: Youth, non-profit, priority groups $33/hr Resident Rate $61/hr ATTACHMENT B Non-Resident Rate $138/hr Non-Profit Rate $44/hr FIELD RELEASES Field releases by priority brokering groups will comply with the following guidelines: Weekday Slots:  Field releases received prior to the start of the permit will receive a full refund. Staff will give groups at least 3 full weeks before the start of the permit to give organizations enough time to make their schedules. Field releases received after the start date of the permit but prior to the 7th of the month in which the release occurs will receive a 50% refund. All releases received after the 7th of the month in which the release occurs will not be entitled to a refund. Weekend Slots:  Weekend slots may be released 3 weeks after the publication of the league game schedule for a full refund.  Releases received after 3 weeks of the publication of the league game schedule but prior to the 7th of the month in which the release occurs will be entitled to a 50% refund.  All releases received after the 7th of the month in which the release occurs will not be entitled to a refund. Users who are found to not be using the field and court space and not releasing can be subject to losing field space for the following brokering period. *One time rentals must release space two weeks in advance or no refund will be given. TOURNAMENTS Each priority organization may host one tournament per calendar year that will be eligible for priority use of fields. In order to limit impact on other organizations, the following standards must be followed. Tournaments can only be two days (Saturday, Sunday) and dates for the tournament must be provided to the Fields Supervisor prior to brokering for that season. Additional tournaments may be scheduled but fields must be obtained through brokered space, or negotiated among organizations and the Fields Supervisor. The Fields Supervisor will attempt to avoid scheduling two tournaments in the same month. If two tournaments are requested for the same month, tournaments that have run in prior years will receive priority. If two new tournaments are requested, the tournament with the least impact on other groups will be selected. Organizations not participating in tournament play may request alternate space if available. ATTACHMENT B WET FIELD POLICY Rain Hotline 650-329-2697 1. Grass fields will be closed only when play on the fields would result in significant damage due to water saturation. In general, closure will not be based solely on weather reports, but rather on the actual presence of saturated fields and/or significant precipitation in Palo Alto. Users must decide if the field is safe for its participants when the field remains open during the beginning of rainfall. 2. When rain is anticipated on weekends or during school breaks, staff will attempt to update the rainout hotline message before 7:00am and subsequently as needed. During the work week, staff will attempt to make updates by 2:00pm. 3. Once a field is closed for the day, it will not be reopened the same day. 4. If a field is closed during the day, staff will attempt to provide an hour of lead time so groups may complete any play currently on the field and provide advance warning to teams and referees scheduled to use the fields. However, if staff are unable to provide advanced notice, organizations must comply with the Wet Field Policy and leave the field as soon as the field closes. 5. Organizations are responsible for checking the rain hotline during inclement weather or rain. 6. The City of Palo Alto expects field user organizations will take the field condition and preservation into account regardless of field closure status. 1 Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the Proposed Changes to the Field Use Policy 1. What is the Field Use Policy? The Field Use Policy defines how field resources are used. It affects all organized sports (soccer, softball, lacrosse, etc.) and covers many issues including the eligibility criteria and guidelines for "priority brokering" of the City's athletic field resources. "Brokering" is a systematic process of assigning athletic resources to users, and "priority brokering" is the process of brokering athletic field resources to a set of users that meet certain eligibility criteria giving them preferential resource access. 2. Why was the policy reviewed and how was use input solicited? The Parks and Recreation Commission committed to reviewing the policy routinely when it was adopted in 2009. This year, at the urging of some members of sports organizations who participate in the field brokering process, the Parks and Recreation Commission decided to review the policy and reach out to all Palo Alto sports organizations to learn how the policy is working, and if it could be improved upon. Feedback was received by staff and Commission members that the policy could be improved in several areas. As a result, staff and a Ad-Hoc Committee of the Commission worked with a wide range of Palo Alto based sports organizations and solicited public comment before and during the process of drafting a revised policy. 3. What changes were made to the policy? There are several recommended changes to the policy, most of which are agreeable among all users:  Field brokering by age  Practice and game slot definition  Defining rules for day light savings.  Tournaments for priority organizations  Adjustments to adult play  Eligibility for priority brokering 4. What suggested policy change has caused AYSO to be so concerned? The significant policy change that most troubles AYSO (American Youth Soccer Organization) is the elimination of exclusive priority brokering to their organization. The current Field Use Policy states that the top field brokering priority goes to all non-profit organizations with "non-select" or "open"; (no try-outs for recreational teams) registration and greater than 75% residents within their organization. These organizations currently choose fields and time-slots for all of their field needs ahead of all other organizations. In response to concerns that Palo Alto residents were disenfranchised by allowing a “super-priority” category (particularly as applied to youth soccer), the recommended 2 policy changes the eligibility criteria for priority field assignment, by eliminating the "open" or "non-select" priority category. Instead, it bundles all non-profit organizations that are at 51% or above residency into a single category for priority brokering that distributes priority field selection based on pure resident numbers. The policy recommendation is intended to put Palo Alto residents first, independent of the player’s organizational affiliation. The policy change is further intended to provide stronger incentive for organizations to increase the number of residents than in the past; the more residents an organization has, the more priority field space they get. 5. What does it mean to broker fields based on pure resident numbers first? An example of how this would work is below (numbers are for illustration only): Organization “A” – 2000 participants, 100% residents Organization “B” – 600 participants 51% residents These two groups come to the round one priority brokering table with the ability to reserve fields for residents only. The number of residents will be broken down into teams of equal size based on age group. This example uses team size for older youth and adult divisions. Organization “A” would broker for 2000 participants, all residents Organization “B” would broker for 306 participants (51% of 600), all residents Organization “A” has 2000 residents divided by 16 = 125 teams brokered in the first phase. Organization “B” has 306 residents divided by 16 = 19 teams brokered in the first phase. Each resident team will receive two practice slots a week and 0.55 game slots per weekend. The round robin brokering process is conducted proportionate to the total number of residents in a given organization. For example, if there is an organization with 900 residents and a second organization with 100 residents, the first organization will be given 9 picks (10%) for every one pick (10%) of the second organization. The round robin continues until all resident needs are filled. Only after all Palo Alto residents are provided for will a second round robin brokering take place to accommodate non-resident participants, for organizations that have at least less than 100% residents and more than 51% residents. 3 6. Does an organization with 51% residency receive the same priority as an organization with 100% residency under the proposed policy? No, priority is not determined by organization. The proposed eligibility system is designed to give equal priority to residents. Any group with non-residents that meets the 51% threshold of residents would not be able to accommodate the need for non- residents until all resident needs are met. 7. How was the 51% threshold decided on? The 51% minimum for Palo Alto residents was intended to ensure that any organization using the fields has a majority of Palo Alto residents. The City has been able to meet the field needs for organizations that meet that threshold for the past three years with the current inventory of fields. However, under the old policy, residents playing in an organization with less than 75% residents have not had access to preferred fields and time slots, resulting in a 2-tiered treatment of resident players. 8. How will the new policy affect current priority organization groups? The Parks and Recreation sub-committee that worked on this policy change believes there is sufficient field inventory to implement this policy with minimal disruptions. Organizations will need to make some concessions on first choices of fields for the benefit of other residents with different sporting preferences. Additionally, the proposed new policy establishes that the City holds some fields in a reserve so that priority organizations can exchange field slots due to unanticipated scheduling needs or obtain additional inventory within policy guidelines. 9. Does this policy value one organization over another? The recommended changes to the policy are not intended to favor any organization. The proposed field brokering process is based on actual number of residents being served in any organization 10. Why does the Field Use Policy provide access to fields for organizations with less than 100% residents? Palo Alto residents have different sporting preferences for them-selves and for their children, from highly competitive to community based recreational interests. Allocating field space in a balanced and fair manner appreciating the different interests of Palo Alto residents is primary objective of the field use policy. 1 COMMENTS FROM COMMUNITY MEETING PROPOSED FIELDS USE POLICY March 12, 2013 Below are the themes heard at the Community Meeting, along with the notes taken representing specific comments shared by those in attendance. General Themes:  AYSO and Club soccer are both highly valued by Palo Alto residents. Many who spoke at the community meeting indicated that they have at least one child playing with AYSO  while another child plays for a club team.  Participants regard AYSO as a great organization with which they have had a great experience.  Need to insure that AYSO is not weakened as an organization.  Most people in attendance believed the new policy would have minimal impacts to AYSO.  Participants felt Club soccer offered unique opportunities for children not provided by AYSO.  The proposed policy appears to be a reasonable and fair approach to allocate fields among Palo Alto based sports groups.  Participants felt there should be compromise on the part of all organizations, including AYSO, and a willingness to work together. Concern with policy (AYSO specific):  We need to listen to AYSO and be concerned about whether the current policy is a detriment to AYSO.  If changes occur quickly, then AYSO may have a problem.  If the policy affects AYSO, it will eventually affect club teams since AYSO is the gateway into club teams.  When AYSO goes first it does not take highest quality fields (turf fields). If AYSO is forced to come to the table with the Clubs it is going to take more turf fields than it really needs.  Most important concerns for AYSO are distribution of fields and predictability in scheduling. AYSO wants neighborhood fields and the same fields year after year.  The proposed policy does not work, staff and the sports organizations attempted a mock brokering using last year’s registration numbers and AYSO chose fields that the clubs typically want, that in fact AYSO does not typically need or want, but we did so anyway so we can trade with the clubs later – nobody wins with this this proposed policy.  The proposed policy looks like Sunnyvale in which AYSO has been decimated. 2  AYSO leaves the best fields on the table.  AYSO has used the same brokering form for years, and has used the same fields.  The proposed policy may be suitable for other clubs, but is not suitable for AYSO.  Two groups are under-represented; groups with less than 51% residents and residents who play in organizations outside of the City.  Not all advanced players go on to club play.  Higher end players want to play on higher end fields, but other kids want that opportunity too.  Numbers don’t tell the whole story; using pure numbers a club team that gets a high quality field might only have 20% residents on the field. Support for the policy:  Didn’t like the old/current policy because it gave special treatment to one group; the proposed policy is much better.  Adult soccer leagues want to support the new proposal even though it is not perfect, it is better than the current policy.  The proposed policy gives preference based on residency, and is not based on the philosophy of the specific club.  Some things need to be worked out, and that can be done at brokering meetings.  Stanford Soccer Club allows teams to stay together over time, which would not happen in AYSO.  Likes the competitive nature of the other clubs.  Higher level players want to play more competitively, but need to include players from other cities to put together teams.  Supports using the population to disburse fields fairly.  The 51% threshold is good, because how do you make a distinction between 60% or 70%, etc?  If teams have less than 50% Palo Alto players there is no rational way to segregate them further. Why should a team with 70% residents have priority over a team with 60% Palo Alto residents?  The current policy is untenable.  Supports the new policy and thinks it is fair.  Child wanted to play club soccer while parents preferred AYSO and Club soccer turned out to be the best choice for their child.  All organizations should be nourished; we should accommodate predictability for AYSO but at the same time make brokering fair for kids in Club soccer.  Feared club soccer would not use positive coaching techniques, but their fears turned out to be completely unfounded.  AYSO did not used to go first in choosing fields. Once AYSO got to go first, they stopped working with the clubs and clubs could not get what they needed. The new policy puts AYSO and Club residents back on equal footing; they need to be 3 at the brokering table to work together which is what they used to do. Let's all get what we want. Only when things run out is there a problem.  Every child should be able to play soccer at whatever level they prefer.  Love AYSO but appreciate the opportunity to play for other clubs.  1,600 AYSO players are under 8-years-old and are not using fields used by competitive clubs.  Palo Alto is a soccer community.  Availability of good coaches and fields determine kids’ ability to play, either in AYSO or with club teams.  Often once kids reach 8-9 years or more, they move to club play.  Want a fair system and don’t see the anticipated negative effects on AYSO.  AYSO and clubs don’t want the same fields.  Desire expressed that they want everyone to get along together.  The clubs offer a higher level of soccer.  AYSO and clubs have different audiences.  Clubs are also non-profits; this is not exclusive to AYSO.  Youth should be able to play whatever type of soccer they prefer.  All parents volunteer, in both AYSO and club teams.  Parents don’t complain about the location of practices.  The unpleasant communications (from AYSO) need to end, as well as questioning the integrity of club soccer.  Palo Alto Soccer Club is a great organization as well as AYSO, and has provided children with a positive experience in every way.  If children don’t have the opportunity to have different club experiences, they do not grow in the sport.  Youth deserve the chance to select their playing experience; kids are entitled to the right fit on the right team.  Youth thrive in both AYSO and club teams.  Palo Alto residents in clubs need fair representation for the brokering process.  One of the unexpected outcomes of this process has been improved communication between the various soccer organizations.  There are enough fields for everyone.  We need to distribute the fields fairly.  Important for adults to get along.  We need AYSO and clubs and the exchange between them, such as kids who play AYSO, go on to club play and then come back to help coach AYSO.  After the first year of the new policy, evaluate what worked and what did not. Comments on scarcity of some field resources:  Palo Alto has grown, and the need to be more efficient with fields has become a necessity.  5:30pm time slot is in high demand, and there are not enough of those slots. 4  Older players are looking for quality fields.  The needs of youth players and adult volunteers should be looked at separately.  Club soccer sometimes pays coaches who prefer back-to-back slots because this is what they do for a living; and in winter can only do this on lighted fields. Direct quotes from Comment Cards:  “All my kids learned soccer with AYSO and at some point moved to club soccer. Both organizations can coexist peacefully. The new policy seems very fair.”  “Optimism is warranted.”  “I have four girls and they all started with AYSO and played AYSO for many years. Now three of my girls play PASC, one of those three also plays AYSO and one only plays AYSO. We would love for the field choice to be equal among the clubs – and my husband plays in the adult league.”  “My two kids both played AYSO and enjoyed it. Now, one child has continued at a more competitive level on a club team. I’d love to just make sure that our club team has good access to field selection. So many Palo Alto kids who want to pursue playing soccer as they get older will be playing on a club team.”  “I’ve been a teacher in the district for 10 years, and have had students that participated in both AYSO and club soccer. Kids have equally positive experiences. I’m also a parent of two boys – one has played AYSO and now plays club soccer. I think both programs have value and should be given equal consideration. I do feel that emails from one side, that question the integrity and value of the other [side] should stop.”  “AYSO is a unique organization versus ability for club teams to find spaces to play.”  “Competition in sports isn’t defined by a city line; it’s a regional-community environment.”  “The proportionate representation policy seems fair and reasonable. I commend the City of Palo Alto for making the change – a step in the right direction.”  “We should keep developmental assets in mind when brokering and ensure that we make soccer accessible to as many kids as possible so that the kids in our community thrive. I would like to see younger kids placed on fields closer to home – this is in line with Palo Alto’s desire to be green. Davis made changes years back to achieve this. I’m supportive of the proposed policy to give priority access to fields based on the percentage of residents.” City of Palo Alto (ID # 5798) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Adoption of a Resolution Proposing the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2016 Title: Adoption of a Resolution Determining the Proposed Calculation of the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2016 From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services Recommendation Staff recommends that Council adopt the attached Resolution determining the Proposition 4 (GANN) Appropriations Limit calculation for Fiscal Year 2016. The City's Fiscal Year 2016 appropriations are estimated to be $41.31 million under the limit based on the Fiscal Year 2016 Adopted Budget. Background California voters approved an initiative on November 6, 1979 that added Article XIIIB to the State Constitution as amended with Proposition 98 in 1988 and Proposition 111 in 1990. The provisions of this article place limits on the amount of revenue that can be appropriated by all entities of government. The Appropriation Limit is based on actual appropriations during the 1978-1979 fiscal year, as increased each year using specified population and inflationary growth factors. The original legislation implementing the provisions of Article XIIIB became effective January 1, 1981. In accordance with that legislation, the governing body of each government jurisdiction must, by resolution, establish its annual Appropriation Limit for the coming year (prior to July 1) at a regularly scheduled meeting or noticed special meeting. Based on Article XIIIB, the City of Palo Alto can use the larger of two measurements of population growth, (county or city population growth) in the Appropriations Limit calculation. For Fiscal Year 2016, the City is using the Santa Clara County population factor, which is greater than the population factor for the City of Palo Alto. The City typically uses the highest factor in order to provide maximum appropriation flexibility. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Discussion The Appropriations Limit is adjusted annually on the basis of population and per capita income changes. This updated information is received from the California Department of Finance in May, after the City's proposed budget has been submitted to Council. Attached is the final Appropriations Limit calculation, based on the updated information as well as allowable appropriation limit adjustment factors such as voter-approved debt and capital outlay expenditures. The Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2016 is $141.92 million. The City's Fiscal Year 2016 budgeted appropriations are estimated to be $41.31 million under the limit. As required by state law, documentation used to compute the Appropriations Limit has been made available to the public at least fifteen days prior to the Council meeting at which the Appropriations Limit is being adopted, and notice was published of the availability of these materials. Resource Impact The adoption of the Fiscal Year 2016 Appropriations Limit has no impact on City resources. Policy Implications This recommendation is consistent with existing City policies. Environmental Review This is not a project under section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act. Attachments:  Attachment A: Appropriations Limit Resolution (DOC)  Attachment A, Exhibit 1: Appropriations Limit Calculation (PDF) 1 RESOLUTION NO.XXXX RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO DETERMINING THE CALCULATION OF THE APPROPRIATIONS LIMIT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 WHEREAS, under Article XIIIB of the Constitution of the State of California, the City of Palo Alto (City) may not appropriate any proceeds of taxes in excess of its appropriations limit (Limit); and WHEREAS, since fiscal year 1991, the City is permitted to annually adjust its Limit in accordance with inflation and population adjustment factors; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 37200, the calculation of the Limit and the total appropriations subject to the limit were set forth in the annual budget of the City for Fiscal Year 2016, which was adopted by ordinance of the Council on June 15, 2015; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code sections 7901 and 7910, the final calculation of the Limit has been determined, and the adjustment factors on which the calculation is based are a 3.82% percent change in California per capita income and a 1.13% percent change in the population growth for Santa Clara County; and WHEREAS, the documentation used in the determination of the Limit has been made available to the general public for fifteen (15) days prior to the date of adoption of this resolution; and WHEREAS, according to the final calculation, the City’s net appropriations subject to limitation are approximately $100.60 million. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby finds that, for Fiscal Year 2016, the final calculation of the Appropriations Limit of the City of Palo Alto has been determined in accordance with the adjustment factors referred to above, the documentation used in the determination of the calculation has been made available to the general public for the period of fifteen days as required by law, and the City’s appropriations subject to limitation are under the Limit by approximately $41.31 million. SECTION 2. The Council hereby adopts the final calculation of the Appropriations Limit of the City for Fiscal Year 2016, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A. ATTACHMENT A 2 ATTACHMENT A SECTION 3. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute a project under the California Environmental Quality Act, and, therefore, no environmental assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: ___________________________ _______________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ City Manager ___________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney _______________________________ Administrative Services Director Attachment A, Exhibit 1 FY 2016 Adopted Budget 185.67$ 47.54$ 9.85$ 4.90$ 247.96$ Less: Interfund Transfers (22.71)$ -$ (5.75)$ -$ (28.47)$ Allocated Charges (16.43)$ -$ -$ -$ (16.43)$ Non-Proceeds (49.74)$ (47.54)$ (5.18)$ -$ (102.46)$ Net Appropriations Subject to Limit 96.79$ -$ (1.08)$ 4.90$ 100.60$ FY 2016 Per Capita Income Change (CA Department of Finance)3.82% Factor A 1.0382 FY 2016 Population Change (Santa Clara County)1.13% Factor B 1.0113 135.17$ 1.0499 FY 2016 Adopted Appropriations Limit 141.92$ Net Appropriations Subject to Limit 100.60$ Amount Under the Limit 41.31$ 0.9977 1.0150 1.0127 135.17$ 82.93$ 52.24$ 1.0512 1.0157 1.0677 133.48$ 90.28$ 43.20$ 1.0377 1.0124 1.0506 125.01$ 96.73$ 28.28$ 1.0251 1.0089 1.0342 119.00$ 89.00$ 30.00$ 0.9746 1.0144 0.9886 115.06$ 78.94$ 36.12$ 1.0062 1.0220 1.0283 116.38$ 72.00$ 44.38$ 1.0429 1.0172 1.0608 113.17$ 78.64$ 34.53$ 1.0442 1.0152 1.0601 106.68$ 73.30$ 33.38$ 1.0396 1.0118 1.0519 100.64$ 70.45$ 30.19$ 1.0526 1.0182 1.0718 95.68$ 65.87$ 29.80$ On November 6, 1979, California voters approved Proposition 4, an initiative that added Article XIIIB to the state Constitution. The provisions of this article place limits on the amount of revenue that can be appropriated by all entities of government. The Appropriations Limit is based on actual appropriations during the 1978-1979 fiscal year, as increased each year using specified population and inflationary growth factors. 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 APPROPRIATIONS LIMITATION COMPLIANCE CALCULATION FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 ADOPTED BUDGET ($ IN MILLIONS) Total Budgeted Appropriations General Fund Capital Projects Funds Special Revenue Funds Combined Funds FY 2015 Adopted Appropriations Limit Per Capita Income Factor Population Change Factor Total Adjustment Factor Appropriations Subject to Limit Factor A x Factor B Amount Under the LimitAppropriations Limit Debt Service Fund The City of Palo Alto remains well within its appropriations limit in FY 2016. Future year limit trends can be made based on the average change in regional population and income growth. The appropriations subject to limitation includes proceeds of taxes from the General Fund, Capital Projects Fund, and Special Revenue Funds. Fiscal Year City of Palo Alto (ID # 5843) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of an Agreement with Van Scoyoc Associates Inc. Title: Approval of Contract Amendment No. 3 With Van Scoyoc Associates Inc. for a One-Year Extension in an Amount Not to Exceed a Total of $101,000 for Federal Legislative Representation From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation Staff recommends that the Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute the attached contract amendment number 3 with Van Scoyoc Associates Inc. (Attachment A) in the amount of $101,000 for a one-year term extending from August 1, 2015 to July 31, 2016. Background For many years, the City has contracted for federal legislative advocacy services. This representation is important for the City in several ways. Most importantly, it allows Palo Alto to have a presence and voice with our federal representatives when they are in Washington, DC. Having someone physically present in Washington, DC who can track issues that might impact Palo Alto and build relationships with key legislators and their staff members is crucial to the success of the City’s legislative program. In 2009, the City conducted its most recent request for proposals for federal legislative services and selected Van Scoyoc Associates Inc. (VSA), who the City has used since. For the five years prior to that, the City contracted with The Ferguson Group to provide federal legislative advocacy services. VSA was established in 1990 and is one of the largest independent lobbying firms in Washington, D.C. VSA's current clients include a wide range of public and private interests, such as city and county governments, water and flood control districts, public transportation agencies, major research universities, hospitals, health care and research consortia, economic development authorities, and Fortune 500 companies. Analysis City of Palo Alto Page 2 Staff is requesting that the City Council approve this agreement with Van Scoyoc Associates Inc. (VSA) so that the firm can continue providing representation for the City in Washington, DC on federal legislative issues. Staff recommends continuing with VSA’s services to maintain the continuity of the City’s representation and the relationships with legislative and agency staff in Washington. VSA has provided valuable services to Palo Alto since 2009. Examples of success VSA has had representing the City’s interests include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority Project: Additional funds were provided for the feasibility study in FY 2010, the last year that congressional earmarks were allowed in appropriations bills. Since that time VSA has worked with the SFCJPA to secure Corps of Engineers workplan funds, seek a revision to Corps policy on advance work conducted by the local sponsor, secure authorization and policy revisions in the Water Resources Development Act, and expedite replacement of a PG&E gas pipeline to accommodate project construction. 2. National Flood Insurance Program: VSA led the effort to remove a provision in the NFIP reauthorization legislation that would have required property owners protected by levees to purchase flood insurance and be subject to permanent building restrictions. Flood insurance premiums would have cost Palo Alto residents an estimated six million dollars per year and would have imposed more costly building restrictions for renovations and new development. The insurance mandate would have been a major disincentive for property owners to pay for flood control improvements when insurance would be required nonetheless. 3. Hamilton Avenue Post Office: VSA has met with senior officials of the United States Postal Service and congressional staff about the process of acquiring the Hamilton Avenue facility and to help answer questions from the City about that acquisition process. 4. Transient Occupancy Taxes: VSA has worked with the City to rebuff repeated efforts by the online travel industry to preempt local governments from collecting transient occupancy taxes on temporary lodging. The collective effort of concerned cities has thwarted, but not eliminated, the prospect of halting this important revenue source for municipalities, already compromised by the online travel industry practice of withholding a portion of the taxes they collect. Provisions in VSA’s scope of work agreement with the City include: 1. Conducting an assessment of City needs and opportunities and helping develop the City’s federal legislative priorities and strategic initiatives; 2. Conducting regular meetings with City staff on legislative needs; City of Palo Alto Page 3 3. Providing information on grant funding opportunities; 4. Providing more targeted monthly reports to the City on the status of the City’s legislative priorities, including accomplishments, status, and next steps. If approved, this agreement will authorize the City Manager to enter into a one year agreement with VSA for federal legislative representation. The City's points of contact for VSA would continue to be Thane Young and Steve Palmer. Future Action It has been recommended by our Purchasing Department that after this contract expires we go through a request for proposals process for federal legislative advocacy services since the City has not done so since 2009; however, this recommendation is not based on VSA’s performance of services. Resources Impact Funding for this contract is included in the Fiscal Year 2016 Adopted Budget of the City Manager’s Office. Attachments:  A - C12146667 CONTRACT AMENDMENT NO 3 (PDF) 1of 1 Revision April 28, 2014 AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO CONTRACT NO. C12146667 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES, INC. This Amendment No. 3 to Contract No C12146667 (“Contract”) is entered into July 30, 2015 by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES, INC., a District of Columbia Corporation, located at 101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Suite 600 West, Washington, D.C. 20001 (PH) 202-638- 1950,("CONSULTANT"). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for the provision of Federal Legislative Representation. B. CITY intends to extend the contract term to July 31, 2016. C. The parties wish to amend the Contract. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 2 TERM is hereby amended to read as follows: “The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through July 31, 2016 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement.” SECTION 2. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Amendment on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN SCOYOC ASSOCIATES, INC. DocuSign Envelope ID: 300E3B98-3D52-4472-95BD-D44E3B1F0795 Vice President City of Palo Alto (ID # 5890) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Council Priority: Land Use and Transportation Planning Summary Title: Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Future FAA and DOT Grants Title: Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Future Grant Agreements Offered to the City by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and/or the California Department of Transportation (DOT) for the Preparation of Planning Documents and the Study, Design and Construction of Safety, Security and Maintenance Improvements at the Palo Alto Airport and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Supporting Documents Associated with the Application and Acceptance of Said Grant Funds From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute in the future one or more grant agreements offered to the City by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the California Department of Transportation (DOT) to be used for the preparation of planning documents and the study, design and construction of safety, security and maintenance improvements at the Palo Alto Airport with the understanding that the City Manager is authorized to apply for the maximum of FAA and DOT funds available, subject to the review and recommendation of the Director of Public Works and City Office of Management and Budget; and authorizing the City Manager to execute any other documents associated with the application and acceptance of grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration and California Department of Transportation. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Background The Council has authorized a similar agreement with the FAA on August 18, 2014 that provided for federal funding to finance improvements at the Palo Alto Airport. Public Works will submit one or more applications to the FAA requesting funding for eligible projects at the Palo Alto Airport including but not limited to the preparation of planning documents and the study, design and construction of safety, security and airport infrastructure improvement projects. The FAA will make airport improvement grants available to local airport sponsors for ninety percent (90%) of the total costs of eligible projects. The DOT also provides funding to finance improvements at the Palo Alto Airport and currently provides State matching grants equivalent to two and one-half percent (2.5%) of the FAA grants, which is equivalent to two and one-quarter percent (2.25%) of the projects’ total costs. The FAA requires that the City, as a condition of receiving these grant funds, enter into a grant agreement which establishes the conditions governing the use of the grant funds and the obligations for the City to operate the airport in compliance with FAA requirements. Discussion Changes in the way the FAA is now awarding airport improvement grants requires that the City must be able to execute and return the grant agreements to the FAA within very tight timelines in order to qualify for the grant funds; at times this could occur within days of receiving the grant offer. To ensure the City is able to accept the maximum of FAA and State DOT grant funds available, staff is recommending that the Council authorize the City Manager to execute future airport improvement grant agreements offered by the FAA and DOT for the Palo Alto Airport, and to sign any other documents associated with the application and acceptance of said grant funds from the FAA and DOT. Grants accepted by the City Manager do not obligate the City for the City’s share of funding. All new projects and contract awards would be brought to Council for funding approval. If the Council denied approval, the grant funding would then be returned to the awarding agency with a letter of explanation of why the grant will not be executed. These grants are the main source of funding for maintenance activities for the Palo Alto Airport. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Resource Impact Staff will bring forward to Council for approval all new projects not previously funded and approved as included in the FY 2016 Capital Improvement Program for the Airport Enterprise Fund or in any subsequent year. FAA and DOT grant funds are received on a reimbursable basis. The Airport Enterprise Fund will ensure that it has sufficient funds available to manage the cash flow requirements of projects while grant reimbursements are being requested of the FAA and DOT. Policy Implications This grant program is consistent with two of the City Council’s 2014 top 3 priorities: 1) Comprehensive planning and action on land use and transportation; and 2)Infrastructure Strategy and Funding. Environmental Review City will conform to state and federal statutes, regulations, and procedures, as required by the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) and/or the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: ·A -00710635 RESO FAA Grant Agreement for PAO Planning Documentation (PDF) NOT YET APPROVED 150603 jb 00710635 Page 1 RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE GRANT AGREEMENTS OFFERED TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO BY THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO BE USED FOR THE PREPARATION OF PLANNING DOCUMENTS AND THE STUDY, DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF SAFETY, SECURITY AND MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE PALO ALTO AIRPORT; AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE APPLICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF GRANT FUNDS FROM THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION AND THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; AND CERTIFYING THAT THE AIRPORT ENTERPRISE FUND HAS SUFFICIENT LOCAL MATCHING FUNDS TO FINANCE ONE HUNDRED PERCENT (100%) OF THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINSTRATION AND CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION GRANT FUNDED PROJECTS R E C I T A L S A. The Federal Aviation Administration (the “FAA”) makes airport improvement grants available to local airport sponsors for approximately nine-five percent (95%) of the total costs for the preparation of planning documents and the study, design and construction of eligible safety, security and maintenance projects. B. The FAA requires the City as a condition of receiving these grant funds to enter into a grant agreement which provides the conditions governing the use of said grant funds and the obligations for the City to comply with the FAA’s grant assurances. C. The California Department of Transportation (“DOT”), pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 21683.1, is authorized to provide Airport Improvement Program (“AIP”) matching grants of up to five percent (5%) of FAA grant amounts. D. The DOT pursuant to the Public Utilities Code and California Aid to Airports Program is authorized to provide Acquisition and Development (“A&D”) grants to local airport sponsors for approximately ninety percent (90%) of the project costs for eligible planning, environmental and capital improvement projects. E. The DOT requires a local agency, as a condition of receiving these AIP matching grant and A&D grant funds, to adopt a resolution authorizing the submittal of an application and the execution of grant agreement for the acceptance of said grant funds and to certify the availability of the local matching funds for A&D grants. NOT YET APPROVED 150603 jb 00710635 Page 2 F. The Council wishes to authorize the City to receive the maximum of available FAA and DOT grants to be used for the preparation of planning documents and the study, design and construction of eligible safety, security and maintenance projects for the Palo Alto Airport. G. The Council has recommended that grant agreements offered to the City by the FAA and DOT for the Palo Alto Airport be executed by the City Manager or his designee on behalf of the City. H. This Council has considered the recommendation of the City Manager. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto does hereby RESOLVE, as follows: SECTION 1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute grant agreements offered to the City by the Federal Aviation Administration and the California Department of Transportation to be used for the preparation of planning documents and the study, design and construction of safety, security and maintenance improvements for Palo Alto Airport; and. SECTION 2. Authorizes the City Manager or his designee to execute on behalf of the City any other documents associated with the application and acceptance of the grant funds from the Federal Aviation Administration and the Calfironia Department of Transportation. SECTION 3. Certifies that the Airport Enterprise Fund has sufficient local matching funds to finance one hundred percent (100%) of the Federal Aviation Administration and California Department of Transportation grant funded projects. SECTION 4. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute a ‘project’ under Section 21065 of the California Public Resources Code and // // // // // // NOT YET APPROVED 150603 jb 00710635 Page 3 Sections 15378(b)(4) and 9b)(5) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA Guidelines, and therefore, no environmental assessment is required. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: ___________________________ ___________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ___________________________ ____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager APPROVED: ____________________________ Director of Public Works CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK June 29, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Staff Recommendation to Initiate a Special Recruitment to Fill One Unscheduled Vacancy on the Utilities Advisory Commission, ending on April 30, 2018 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council direct the City Clerk to initiate a special recruitment to fill an unexpired term on the Utilities Advisory Commission. DISCUSSION On June 4, 2015 the City Clerk’s Department was notified that Lisa Van Dusen had resigned from the Utilities Advisory Commission. Her term would have ended on April 30, 2018. The City Council on August 12, 2013 approved revisions to the Board and Commission Recruitment Program to allow two scheduled recruitments per year (spring and fall). Any resignation that occurred during the year was to be brought to the City Council for a determination on whether to hold a special recruitment to fill the vacancy or wait until the next scheduled recruitment (see Municipal Code Section 2.16.010 excerpted below). The City Clerk’s Office is scheduled to conduct a recruitment this fall, which would include three terms on the Architectural Review Board, three terms on the Parks and Recreation Commission and one term on the Planning and Transportation Commission. Appointments for the scheduled fall recruitment will not take place until October. Conducting a special recruitment would allow for an appointment to this unexpired term on the Utilities Advisory Commission in August. MUNICIPAL CODE EXCERPT 2.16.010 Vacancies Any vacancy occurring in the membership of any board or commission may remain vacant until the next regularly scheduled recruitment for that board or commission or may be filled at any time by special recruitment, at the discretion of the City Council. (Ord. 5208 § 1, 2013: Ord. 2146 (part), 1963: prior code § 2.250.1 Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 City of Palo Alto (ID # 5921) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of a Contract with SAP Consultant for Human Resources Software Improvements Title: Approval of a Contract with Global Learning Solution Inc. in the Amount of $250,000 for the Support of Human Resources SAP Modules and Business Processes Improvements From: City Manager Lead Department: Human Resources Recommendation Staff recommends that City Council approve a Contract between the City of Palo Alto and Global Learning Solutions Inc. in the amount not to exceed of $250,000. Background On January 20, 2015 City Council approved Contract Amendment No. 4 with Sierra Infosys Inc. (C10135998) to allow the Human Resources Department to increase staff knowledge, skills and department processes for SAP, the City’s Enterprise Resources Planning (ERP) software. As the City transitions to Fiscal Year 2016, staff intends to continue the SAP work through a different vendor, Global Learning Solutions. Funding for this activity was approved on June 15, 2015 as part of the Fiscal Year 2016 budget. The new vendor, Global Learning Solutions, will allow the City to keep the same consultant used through Sierra Infosys Inc., consequently retaining continuity and organizational knowledge and at a lower rate. Discussion During Fiscal Year 2015, through the work of the consultant provided by the Sierra Infosys, the department completed a thorough assessment of SAP processes and work flows. This included workshops with staff in Human Resources and the Administrative Services Department. The consultant re-designed and developed new business processes eliminating redundant or inefficient steps. Implementation of the new procedures is scheduled to be completed by June 30, 2015. SAP, in use at the City since 2003, is highly configurable with processes integrated via interlinked configuration rules in various modules. But the software requires a high degree of City of Palo Alto Page 2 specialized expertise to provide effective ongoing maintenance and support. Human Resources staff are responsible for accurately entering, maintaining and sharing the data with other City departments as well as external partners such as CalPERS. The value of continuing the SAP enhancement work is that it will improve operations, reduce the risk of error, increase staff effectiveness, and allow for interdepartmental and interagency data sharing. Additionally, the IT Department’s SAP Steering Committee is currently developing its strategic plan for the ERP system. Implementation of this contract is aligned with the committee’s work and will provide the City with additional data and documentation for a more informed ERP strategic plan. Resource Impact Funding for this contract in the amount of $250,000 is available in the Human Resources department budget for Fiscal Year 2015 and 2016. As part of the adoption of the Fiscal Year 2016 budget, $214,000 was approved for this effort. The remaining amount ($36,000) represents funds not used in Fiscal Year 2015. Attachments:  Attachment15.a: C15159245 Global Learning Solutions Contract (PDF)  Attachment15.b: January 20, 2015 Staff Report (PDF) Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C15159245 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND GLOBAL LEARNING SOLUTIONS INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this 1st day of July, 2015, (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and GLOBAL LEARNING SOLUTIONS INC., a California corporation, located at 319 Harvard Common, Fremont, California, 94539 ("CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to design and implement SAP interface for the Human Resources Department (“Project”) and desires to engage a consultant to provide services in connection with the Project (“Services”). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit “A”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described at Exhibit “A” in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through June, 30, 2016 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set forth in Exhibit “B”, attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 2 SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out at Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described at Exhibit “A”. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT’s billing rates (set forth in Exhibit “C- 1”). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives notice to CONSULTANT. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 3 any and all errors, omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project. This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES. If this Agreement pertains to the design of a public works project, CONSULTANT shall submit estimates of probable construction costs at each phase of design submittal. If the total estimated construction cost at any submittal exceeds ten percent (10%) of CITY’s stated construction budget, CONSULTANT shall make recommendations to CITY for aligning the PROJECT design with the budget, incorporate CITY approved recommendations, and revise the design to meet the Project budget, at no additional cost to CITY. SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the city manager. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the city manager will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Vinita Bhutoria as the Project Manager to have supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services and to represent CONSULTANT during the day-to-day work on the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY’s project manager. CONSULTANT, at CITY’s request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. CITY’s project manager is , Khashayar Alaee, Human Resources Department, 250, Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone:(650) 329-2230. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 4 Services. CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses of whatever nature including attorneys fees, experts fees, court costs and disbursements (“Claims”) resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement, regardless of whether or not it is caused in part by an Indemnified Party. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 5 SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Key Rating Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Chief Procurement Officer during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. 19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 6 City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Attention of the project director at the address of CONSULTANT recited above SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. 21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 7 as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the CITY’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of CITY’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, CONSULTANT shall comply with the following zero waste requirements:  All printed materials provided by CCONSULTANT to CITY generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by CITY’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post- consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks.  Goods purchased by CONSULTANT on behalf of CITY shall be purchased in accordance with CITY’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Division’s office.  Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by CONSULTANT, at no additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. CONSULTANT shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION 24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 8 SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, CITY shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City’s express written consent. 25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement. 25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. 25.11 This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 9 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVED AS TO FORM: GLOBAL LEARNING SOLUTIONS INC. Attachments: EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF WORK EXHIBIT “B”: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE EXHIBIT “C”: COMPENSATION EXHIBIT “C-1”: SCHEDULE OF RATES EXHIBIT “D”: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS EXHIBIT “E” SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE SECURITY AND PRIVACY TERMS AND CONDITIONS EXHIBIT “F” INFORMATION PRIVACY POLICY DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Vinita Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 10 EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT shall perform following tasks (contingent on priorities established):  Design the NeoGov Onboarding to SAP HR interface, including designing NeoGov interface to automate new hires, rehires, transfers, promotions into SAP  Implement updated process requirements, including any changes to position control entry how to create and archive job classifications, salary grades, title changes, etc.  Streamline CalPERS health enrollment and create SAP interface to eliminate entry duplication and create data dictionary or data index  Complete business process re-engineering workshops for MSS enhancement, create workflows and forms, then configure, test, train  Write specifications for ESS enhancements , including Benefits New Hire enrollment , Open Enrollment , life events enrollment and participation overview; enabling employees to complete address change online, update bank Information; and configure, test and train  Create various reports as needed such as how to audit CalPERS medical invoice for active employees compared to employee medical plan data in SAP and automate delivery and create audit tool; download data to create salary schedules and other compensation reports and automate employment verification data  Recommend industry best practice knowledge and experience Each task order with CONSULTANT will be reviewed by PSO project manager and SAP PMO, providing supporting documentation such as task scope; objectives, resource planning, and schedule. CONSULTANT shall accept and adhere to EXHIBIT “E”, SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE SECURITY AND PRIVACY TERMS AND CONDITIONS CONSULTANT shall accept and adhere to EXHIBIT “F”, INFORMATION PRIVACY POLICY DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 11 EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of receipt of the notice to proceed. Milestones Completion No. of Days/Weeks From NTP 1. Design the NeoGov Onboarding to TBD SAP HR interface 2. Implement updated process requirements TBD 3. Streamline CalPERS health enrollment and TBD create SAP interface 4. Complete business process re-engineering TBD workshops for MSS enhancement 5. Write specifications for ESS enhancements TBD 6. Create various reports as needed TBD DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 12 EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement based on the hourly rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $250,000.00. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: NONE All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense anticipated shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expenses, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 13 EXHIBIT “C-1” HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE CONSULTANT’S SERVICE RATE $120. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 14 EXHIBIT “D” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRE D TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY (30) DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Professional Services Rev. March 31, 2015 15 THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON- PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE ISSUING COMPANY SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE MAILED TO: PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Security Document Version: V2.5 [11/01/2012] Doc: InfoSec 110 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT “E” SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE SECURITY AND PRIVACY TERMS AND CONDITIONS This Exhibit shall be made a part of the City of Palo Alto’s Professional Services Agreement or any other contract entered into by and between the City of Palo Alto (the “City”) and GLOBAL LEARNING SOLUTIONS INC. (the “Consultant”) for the provision of Software as a Service to the City (the “Agreement”). In order to assure the privacy and security of the personal information of the City’s customers and people who do business with the City, including, without limitation, vendors, utility customers, library patrons and other individuals and businesses, who are required to share such information with the City, as a condition of receiving services from the City or selling goods and services to the City, including, without limitation, the Software as a Service services provider (the “Consultant”) and its subcontractors, if any, including, without limitation, any Information Technology (“IT”) infrastructure services provider, shall design, install, provide, and maintain a secure IT environment, described below, while it renders and performs the Services and furnishes goods, if any, described in the Statement of Work, Exhibit B, to the extent any scope of work implicates the confidentiality and privacy of the personal information of the City’s customers. The Consultant shall fulfill the data and information security requirements (the “Requirements”) set forth in Part A below. A “secure IT environment” includes: (a) the IT infrastructure, by which the Services are provided to the City, including connection to the City's IT systems; (b) the Consultant’s operations and maintenance processes needed to support the environment, including disaster recovery and business continuity planning; and (c) the IT infrastructure performance monitoring services to ensure a secure and reliable environment and service availability to the City. “IT infrastructure” refers to the integrated framework, including, without limitation, data centers, computers, and database management devices, upon which digital networks operate. In the event that, after the Effective Date, the Consultant reasonably determines that it cannot fulfill the Requirements, the Consultant shall promptly inform the City of its determination and submit, in writing, one or more alternate countermeasure options to the Requirements (the “Alternate Requirements” as set forth in Part B), which may be accepted or rejected in the reasonable satisfaction of the Information Security Manager (the “ISM”). Part A. Requirements: The Consultant shall at all times during the term of any contract between the City and the Consultant: (a) Appoint or designate an employee, preferably an executive officer, as the security liaison to DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Security Document Version: V2.5 [11/01/2012] Doc: InfoSec 110 Page 2 of 3 the City with respect to the Services to be performed under this Agreement. (b) Provide a full and complete response to the City’s Supplier Security and Privacy Assessment Questionnaire (the “Questionnaire”) to the ISM, and also report any major non-conformance to the Requirements, as and when requested. The response shall include a detailed implementation plan of required countermeasures, which the City requires the Consultant to adopt as countermeasures in the performance of the Services. In addition, as of the annual anniversary date of this Agreement the Consultant shall report to the City, in writing, any major changes to the IT infrastructure. (c) Have adopted and implemented information security and privacy policies that are documented, are accessible to the City and conform to ISO 27001/2 – Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) Standards. See the following: http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=42103 http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=50297 (d) Conduct routine data and information security compliance training of its personnel that is appropriate to their role. (e) Develop and maintain detailed documentation of the IT infrastructure, including software versions and patch levels. (f) Develop an independently verifiable process, consistent with industry standards, for performing professional and criminal background checks of its employees that (1) would permit verification of employees’ personal identity and employment status, and (2) would enable the immediate denial of access to the City's confidential data and information by any of its employees who no longer would require access to that information or who are terminated. (g) Provide a list of IT infrastructure components in order to verify whether the Consultant has met or has failed to meet any objective terms and conditions. (h) Implement access accountability (identification and authentication) architecture and support role-base access control (“RBAC”) and segregation of duties (“SoD”) mechanisms for all personnel, systems and software used to provide the Services. “RBAC” refers to a computer systems security approach to restricting access only to authorized users. “SoD” is an approach that would require more than one individual to complete a security task in order to promote the detection and prevention of fraud and errors. (i) Assist the City in undertaking annually an assessment to assure that: (1) all elements of the Services’ environment design and deployment are known to the City, and (2) it has implemented measures in accordance with industry best practices applicable to secure coding and secure IT architecture. (j) Provide and maintain secure intersystem communication paths that would ensure the confidentiality, integrity and availability of the City's information. (k) Deploy and maintain IT system upgrades, patches and configurations conforming to current patch and/or release levels by not later than one (1) week after its date of release. Emergency security patches must be installed within 24 hours after its date of release. (l) Provide for the timely detection of, response to, and the reporting of security incidents, including on-going incident monitoring with logging. (m) Notify the City within one (1) hour of detecting a security incident that results in the unauthorized access to or the misuse of the City's confidential data and information. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Security Document Version: V2.5 [11/01/2012] Doc: InfoSec 110 Page 3 of 3 (n) Inform the City that any third party service provider(s) meet(s) all of the Requirements. (o) Perform security self-audits on a regular basis and not less frequently than on a quarterly basis, and provide the required summary reports of those self-audits to the ISM on the annual anniversary date or any other date agreed to by the Parties. (p) Accommodate, as practicable, and upon reasonable prior notice by the City, the City’s performance of random site security audits at the Consultant’s site(s), including the site(s) of a third party service provider(s), as applicable. The scope of these audits will extend to the Consultant’s and its third party service provider(s)’ awareness of security policies and practices, systems configurations, access authentication and authorization, and incident detection and response. (q) Cooperate with the City to ensure that to the extent required by applicable laws, rules and regulations, the Confidential Information will be accessible only by the Consultant and any authorized third party service provider’s personnel. (r) Perform regular, reliable secured backups of all data needed to maximize availability of the Services. (s) Maintain records relating to the Services for a period of three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement and in a mutually agreeable storage medium. Within thirty (30) days after the effective date of expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement, all of those records relating to the performance of the Services shall be provided to the ISM. (t) Maintain the Confidential Information in accordance with applicable federal, state and local data and information privacy laws, rules and regulations. (u) Encrypt the Confidential Information before delivering the same by electronic mail to the City and or any authorized recipient. (v) Unless otherwise addressed in the Agreement, shall not hold the City liable for any direct, indirect or punitive damages whatsoever including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profits, arising out of or in any way connected with the City’s IT environment, including, without limitation, IT infrastructure communications. Part B. Alternate Requirements: DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 Information Privacy Policy Release and Version: 1st Release, Version 2.2 Release Date: 31 January, 2013 Document Classification: Need to Know EXHIBIT "F" DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Technology Information Security Services Information Privacy Policy Page 1 of 8 Version 2.2 31 January, 2013 CONTENTS DOCUMENT CONTROLS........................................................................................................................................... 2 CHANGE RECORD .................................................................................................................................................. 2 APPROVAL ............................................................................................................................................................. 2 DISTRIBUTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 1. OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................................................... 3 A) INTENT .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 B) SCOPE .......................................................................................................................................................... 3 C) CONSEQUENCES............................................................................................................................................ 3 D) EXCEPTIONS.................................................................................................................................................. 3 E) MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE .................................................................................................................................. 4 2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY STAFF ................................................................................................................. 4 A) RESPONSIBILITY OF CIO AND ISM .................................................................................................................. 4 B) RESPONSIBILITY OF INFORMATION SECURITY STEERING COMMITTEE ............................................................... 4 C) RESPONSIBILITY OF USERS ............................................................................................................................ 4 D) RESPONSIBILITY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) MANAGERS .................................................................... 5 E) RESPONSIBILITY OF AUTHORIZATION COORDINATION ...................................................................................... 5 3. PRIVACY POLICY .......................................................................................................................................... 5 A) OVERVIEW..................................................................................................................................................... 5 B) PERSONAL INFORMATION AND CHOICE ............................................................................................................ 5 C) METHODS OF COLLECTION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION .................................................................................. 5 D) UTILITIES SERVICE ......................................................................................................................................... 6 E) PUBLIC DISCLOSURE ...................................................................................................................................... 6 F) ACCESS TO PERSONAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................................. 6 G) SECURITY, CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON-DISCLOSURE ...................................................................................... 6 H) DATA RETENTION / INFORMATION RETENTION ................................................................................................. 7 I) SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE (SAAS) OVERSIGHT ................................................................................................ 7 J) FAIR AND ACCURATE CREDIT TRANSACTION ACT OF 2003 (FACT) .................................................................. 7 4. CONTACTS ................................................................................................................................................... 8 DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Technology Information Security Services Information Privacy Policy Page 2 of 8 Version 2.2 31 January, 2013 DOCUMENT CONTROLS Document Title Information Privacy Policy Location City of Palo Alto Website and SharePoint Document Author Raj Patel Document Manager Raj Patel Contributors Jonathan Reichental, Shiva Swaminathan, Tom Auzenne, Joe Blackwell, Grant Kolling CHANGE RECORD Date Author Version Change Reference 12-Jul-12 Raj Patel 0.01 First draft developed 26-Sep-12 Raj Patel 1.0 First draft released for review 09-Nov-12 Raj Patel 1.5 Updated first draft for review 19-Nov-12 Raj Patel 1.6 Additional updates as identified 22-Nov-12 Raj Patel 1.7 Revised table of content 26-Nov-12 Raj Patel 1.8 Revised followed by review from Jonathan Reichental and Tom Auzenne 6-Dec-12 Raj Patel 1.92 Revised according to comments from Jonathan Reichental 14-Jan-13 Raj Patel 2.0 Revised according to comments from Grant Kolling 31-Jan-13 Raj Patel 2.2 Revised according to recommendations from Information Security Steering Committee APPROVAL Date Name Role Comments 06-Dec-12 Raj Patel Information Security Manager; Information Technology Department Approved 06-Dec-12 Jonathan Reichental CIO; Information Technology Department Approved 06-Dec-12 Tom Auzenne Assistant Director, Utilities Department Approved 14-Jan-13 Grant Kolling Senior Assistant City Attorney; City Attorney’s Office Approved 31-Jan-13 Information Security Steering Committee Sponsor Approved DISTRIBUTION Name Location City of Palo Alto Employees, Service Providers, Residents and Businesses City of Palo Alto Website and SharePoint DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Technology Information Security Services Information Privacy Policy Page 3 of 8 Version 2.2 31 January, 2013 1. Objective The City of Palo Alto (the “City”) strives to promote and sustain a superior quality of life for persons in Palo Alto. In promoting the quality of life of these persons, it is the policy of the City, consistent with the provisions of the California Public Records Act, California Government Code §§ 6250 – 6270, to take appropriate measures to safeguard the security and privacy of the personal (including, without limitation, financial) information of persons, collected in the ordinary course and scope of conducting the City’s business as a local government agency. These measures are generally observed by federal, state and local authorities and reflected in federal and California laws, the City’s rules and regulations, and industry best practices, including, without limitation, the provisions of California Civil Code §§ 1798.3(a), 1798.24, 1798.79.8(b), 1798.80(e), 1798.81.5, 1798.82(e), 1798.83(e)(7), and 1798.92(c). Though some of these provisions do not apply to local government agencies like the City, the City will conduct business in a manner which promotes the privacy of personal information, as reflected in federal and California laws. The objective of this Policy is to describe the City’s data security goals and objectives, to ensure the ongoing protection of the Personal Information, Personally Identifiable Information, Protected Critical Infrastructure Informationand Personally Identifying Information of persons doing business with the City and receiving services from the City or a third party under contract to the City to provide services. The terms “Personal Information,” “Protected Critical Infrastructure Information”, “Personally Identifiable Information” and “Personally Identifying Information” (collectively, the “Information”) are defined in the California Civil Code sections, referred to above, and are incorporated in this Policy by reference. A) INTENT The City, acting in its governmental and proprietary capacities, collects the Information pertaining to persons who do business with or receive services from the City. The Information is collected by a variety of means, including, without limitation, from persons applying to receive services provided by the City, persons accessing the City’s website, and persons who access other information portals maintained by the City’s staff and/or authorized third-party contractors. The City is committed to protecting the privacy and security of the Information collected by the City. The City acknowledges federal and California laws, policies, rules, regulations and procedures, and industry best practices are dedicated to ensuring the Information is collected, stored and utilized in compliance with applicable laws. The goals and objectives of the Policy are: (a) a safe, productive, and inoffensive work environment for all users having access to the City’s applications and databases; (b) the appropriate maintenance and security of database information assets owned by, or entrusted to, the City; (c) the controlled access and security of the Information provided to the City’s staff and third party contractors; and (d) faithful compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. B) SCOPE The Policy will guide the City’s staff and, indirectly, third party contractors, which are by contract required to protect the confidentiality and privacy of the Information of the persons whose personal information data are intended to be covered by the Policy and which will be advised by City staff to conform their performances to the Policy should they enjoy conditional access to that information. C) CONSEQUENCES The City’s employees shall comply with the Policy in the execution of their official duties to the extent their work implicates access to the Information referred to in this Policy. A failure to comply may result in DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Technology Information Security Services Information Privacy Policy Page 4 of 8 Version 2.2 31 January, 2013 employment and/or legal consequences. D) EXCEPTIONS In the event that a City employee cannot fully comply with one or more element(s) described in this Policy, the employee may request an exception from the application of the Policy. The request form will be developed, reviewed and administered by the City’s Information Security Manager (the “ISM”). The employee, with the approval of his or her supervisor, will provide any additional information as may be requested by the ISM. The ISM will conduct a risk assessment of the requested exception in accordance with guidelines approved by the City’s Chief Information Officer (“CIO”) and approved as to form by the City Attorney. The Policy’s guidelines will include at a minimum: purpose, source, collection, storage, access, retention, usage, and protection of the Information identified in the request. The ISM will consult with the CIO to approve or deny the exception request. After due consideration is given to the request, the exception request disposition will be communicated, in writing, to the City employee and his or her supervisor. The approval of any request may be subject to countermeasures established by the CIO, acting by the ISM. E) MUNICIPAL ORDINANCE This Policy will supersede any City policy, rule, regulation or procedure regarding information privacy. 2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY STAFF A) RESPONSIBILITY OF CIO AND ISM The CIO, acting by the ISM, will establish an information security management framework to initiate and coordinate the implementation of information security measures by the City’s government. The City’s employees, in particular, software application users and database users, and, indirectly, third party contractors under contract to the City to provide services, shall by guided by this Policy in the performance of their job responsibilities. The ISM will be responsible for: (a) developing and updating the Policy, (b) enforcing compliance with and the effectiveness of the Policy; (c) the development of privacy standards that will manifest the Policy in detailed, auditable technical requirements, which will be designed and maintained by the persons responsible for the City’s IT environments; (d) assisting the City’s staff in evaluating security and privacy incidents that arise in regard to potential violations of the Policy; (e) reviewing and approving department-specific policies and procedures which fall under the purview of this Policy; and (f) reviewing Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) signed by third party contractors, which will provide services, including, without limitation, local or ‘cloud-based’ software services to the City. B) RESPONSIBILITY OF INFORMATION SECURITY STEERING COMMITTEE The Information Security Steering Committee (the “ISSC”), which is comprised of the City’s employees, drawn from the various City departments, will provide the primary direction, prioritization and approval for all information security efforts, including key information security and privacy risks, programs, initiatives and activities. The ISSC will provide input to the information security and privacy strategic planning processes to ensure that information security risks are adequately considered, assessed and addressed at the appropriate City department level. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Technology Information Security Services Information Privacy Policy Page 5 of 8 Version 2.2 31 January, 2013 C) RESPONSIBILITY OF USERS All authorized users of the Information will be responsible for complying with information privacy processes and technologies within the scope of responsibility of each user. D) RESPONSIBILITY OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT) MANAGERS The City’s IT Managers, who are responsible for internal, external, direct and indirect connections to the City’s networks, will be responsible for configuring, maintaining and securing the City’s IT networks in compliance with the City’s information security and privacy policies. They are also responsible for timely internal reporting of events that may have compromised network, system or data security. E) RESPONSIBILITY OF AUTHORIZATION COORDINATION The ISM will ensure that the City’s employees secure the execution of Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDA), whenever access to the Information will be granted to third party contractors, in conjunction with the Software as a Service (SaaS) Security and Privacy Terms and Conditions. An NDA must be executed prior to the sharing of the Information of persons covered by this Policy with third party contractors. The City’s approach to managing information security and its implementation (i.e. objectives, policies, processes, and procedures for information security) will be reviewed independently by the ISM at planned intervals, or whenever significant changes to security implementation have occurred. The CIO, acting by the ISM, will review and recommend changes to the Policy annually, or as appropriate, commencing from the date of its adoption. 3. PRIVACY POLICY A) OVERVIEW The Policy applies to activities that involve the use of the City’s information assets, namely, the Information of persons doing business with the City or receiving services from the City, which are owned by, or entrusted to, the City and will be made available to the City’s employees and third party contractors under contract to the City to provide Software as a Service consulting services. These activities include, without limitation, accessing the Internet, using e-mail, accessing the City’s intranet or other networks, systems, or devices. The term “information assets” also includes the personal information of the City’s employees and any other related organizations while those assets are under the City’s control. Security measures will be designed, implemented, and maintained to ensure that only authorized persons will enjoy access to the information assets. The City’s staff will act to protect its information assets from theft, damage, loss, compromise, and inappropriate disclosure or alteration. The City will plan, design, implement and maintain information management systems, networks and processes in order to assure the appropriate confidentiality, integrity, and availability of its information assets to the City’s employees and authorized third parties. B) PERSONAL INFORMATION AND CHOICE Except as permitted or provided by applicable laws, the City will not share the Information of any person doing business with the City, or receiving services from the City, in violation of this Policy, unless that person has consented to the City’s sharing of such information during the conduct of the City’s business as a local government agency with third parties under contract to the City to provide services. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Technology Information Security Services Information Privacy Policy Page 6 of 8 Version 2.2 31 January, 2013 C) METHODS OF COLLECTION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION The City may gather the Information from a variety of sources and resources, provided that the collection of such information is both necessary and appropriate in order for the City to conduct business as a local government agency in its governmental and proprietary capacities. That information may be gathered at service windows and contact centers as well as at web sites, by mobile applications, and with other technologies, wherever the City may interact with persons who need to share such formation in order to secure the City’s services. The City’s staff will inform the persons whose Information are covered by this Policy that the City’s web site may use “cookies” to customize the browsing experience with the City of Palo Alto web site. The City will note that a cookie contains unique information that a web site can use to track, among others, the Internet Protocol address of the computer used to access the City’s web sites, the identification of the browser software and operating systems used, the date and time a user accessed the site, and the Internet address of the website from which the user linked to the City’s web sites. Cookies created on the user’s computer by using the City’s web site do not contain the Information, and thus do not compromise the user’s privacy or security. Users can refuse the cookies or delete the cookie files from their computers by using any of the widely available methods. If the user chooses not to accept a cookie on his or her computer, it will not prevent or prohibit the user from gaining access to or using the City’s sites. D) UTILITIES SERVICE In the provision of utility services to persons located within Palo Alto, the City of Palo Alto Utilities Department (“CPAU”) will collect the Information in order to initiate and manage utility services to customers. To the extent the management of that information is not specifically addressed in the Utilities Rules and Regulations or other ordinances, rules, regulations or procedures, this Policy will apply; provided, however, any such Rules and Regulations must conform to this Policy, unless otherwise directed or approved by the Council. This includes the sharing of CPAU-collected Information with other City departments except as may be required by law. Businesses and residents with standard utility meters and/or having non-metered monthly services will have secure access through a CPAU website to their Information, including, without limitation, their monthly utility usage and billing data. In addition to their regular monthly utilities billing, businesses and residents with non-standard or experimental electric, water or natural gas meters may have their usage and/or billing data provided to them through non-City electronic portals at different intervals than with the standard monthly billing. Businesses and residents with such non-standard or experimental metering will have their Information covered by the same privacy protections and personal information exchange rules applicable to Information under applicable federal and California laws. E) PUBLIC DISCLOSURE The Information that is collected by the City in the ordinary course and scope of conducting its business could be incorporated in a public record that may be subject to inspection and copying by the public, unless such information is exempt from disclosure to the public by California law. F) ACCESS TO PERSONAL INFORMATION The City will take reasonable steps to verify a person’s identity before the City will grant anyone online access to that person’s Information. Each City department that collects Information will afford access to affected persons who can review and update that information at reasonable times. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Technology Information Security Services Information Privacy Policy Page 7 of 8 Version 2.2 31 January, 2013 G) SECURITY, CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON-DISCLOSURE Except as otherwise provided by applicable law or this Policy, the City will treat the Information of persons covered by this Policy as confidential and will not disclose it, or permit it to be disclosed, to third parties without the express written consent of the person affected. The City will develop and maintain reasonable controls that are designed to protect the confidentiality and security of the Information of persons covered by this Policy. The City may authorize the City’s employee and or third party contractors to access and/or use the Information of persons who do business with the City or receive services from the City. In those instances, the City will require the City’s employee and/or the third party contractors to agree to use such Information only in furtherance of City-related business and in accordance with the Policy. If the City becomes aware of a breach, or has reasonable grounds to believe that a security breach has occurred, with respect to the Information of a person, the City will notify the affected person of such breach in accordance with applicable laws. The notice of breach will include the date(s) or estimated date(s) of the known or suspected breach, the nature of the Information that is the subject of the breach, and the proposed action to be taken or the responsive action taken by the City. H) DATA RETENTION / INFORMATION RETENTION The City will store and secure all Information for a period of time as may be required by law, or if no period is established by law, for seven (7) years, and thereafter such information will be scheduled for destruction. I) SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE (SAAS) OVERSIGHT The City may engage third party contractors and vendors to provide software application and database services, commonly known as Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). In order to assure the privacy and security of the Information of those who do business with the City and those who received services from the City, as a condition of selling goods and/or services to the City, the SaaS services provider and its subcontractors, if any, including any IT infrastructure services provider, shall design, install, provide, and maintain a secure IT environment, while it performs such services and/or furnishes goods to the City, to the extent any scope of work or services implicates the confidentiality and privacy of the Information. These requirements include information security directives pertaining to: (a) the IT infrastructure, by which the services are provided to the City, including connection to the City's IT systems; (b) the SaaS services provider’s operations and maintenance processes needed to support the IT environment, including disaster recovery and business continuity planning; and (c) the IT infrastructure performance monitoring services to ensure a secure and reliable environment and service availability to the City. The term “IT infrastructure” refers to the integrated framework, including, without limitation, data centers, computers, and database management devices, upon which digital networks operate. Prior to entering into an agreement to provide services to the City, the City’s staff will require the SaaS services provider to complete and submit an Information Security and Privacy Questionnaire. In the event that the SaaS services provider reasonably determines that it cannot fulfill the information security requirements during the course of providing services, the City will require the SaaS services provider to promptly inform the ISM. J) FAIR AND ACCURATE CREDIT TRANSACTION ACT OF 2003 CPAU will require utility customers to provide their Information in order for the City to initiate and manage utility services to them. DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto Information Technology Information Security Services Information Privacy Policy Page 8 of 8 Version 2.2 31 January, 2013 Federal regulations, implementing the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-159), including the Red Flag Rules, require that CPAU, as a “covered financial institution or creditor” which provides services in advance of payment and which can affect consumer credit, develop and implement procedures for an identity theft program for new and existing accounts to detect, prevent, respond and mitigate potential identity theft of its customers’ Information. CPAU procedures for potential identity theft will be reviewed independently by the ISM annually or whenever significant changes to security implementation have occurred. The ISM will recommend changes to CPAU identity theft procedures, or as appropriate, so as to conform to this Policy. There are California laws which are applicable to identity theft; they are set forth in California Civil Code § 1798.92. 4. CONTACTS Information Security Manager: Patel, Raj <Raj.Patel@CityofPaloAlto.org> Chief Information Officer: Reichental, Jonathan <Jonathan.Reichental@CityofPaloAlto.org> Utilities Department: Auzenne, Tom <Tom.Auzenne@CityofPaloAlto.org City Attorney’s Office: Kolling, Grant <Grant.Kolling@CityofPaloAlto.org> DocuSign Envelope ID: 3E14704B-AA3E-4E91-97AC-6AC6E3411649 City of Palo Alto (ID # 5321) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 1/20/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of a Contract Amendment to the Sierra Infosys Inc. for SAP Consultant for Human Resources Title: Approval of a Contract Amendment to Sierra Infosys Inc. (C10135998) in the Amount of $120,000 for the Support and Maintenance of SAP Industry- Specific Solution for Human Resources Modules, Business Mapping and Reporting. From: City Manager Lead Department: Human Resources RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council approve Amendment No. 4 to Contract No. C10135998 between the City of Palo Alto and Sierra Infosys Inc. to increase compensation by $120,000 from $1,334,000 to a total not to exceed amount of $1,454,000. BACKGROUND On July 12, 2010, City Council approved a three-year contract with Sierra Infosys Inc. in the amount of $750,000 ($250,000/year) for support and maintenance of SAP industry-specific solutions for Utilities, SAP Financials, Customer Relationship Management System, Business Intelligence System and Utilities Customer Electronic Services (Attachment B). On June 20, 2011, City Council approved an amendment to the contract in the amount of $84,000 for a one- time SAP basis support package (Attachment C). These actions increased the total contract authority $834,000. On May 6, 2013 City Council approved Amendment No. 2 to extend the contract for an additional year in the amount of $250,000 with the option to renew for another year for an additional $250,000 (Attachment D). Staff exercised the option to renew the contract (Amendment No. 3) for the additional year which has brought the total not to exceed to $1,334,000 for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2015. DISCUSSION During the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget process, City Council approved $156,000 within the People Strategy & Operations Department (Human Resources) to hire an SAP consultant to focus on City of Palo Alto Page 2 data entry review and data analysis of city-wide salaries and benefits. Staff conducted a market analysis of vendors and concluded that an existing City vendor, Sierra Infosys Inc., has the best capability of sourcing a consultant with the needed expertise. Staff is returning to City Council for authorization to begin work. The scope of services for this contract specifically includes the following: • Review specific SAP system configuration setup for HR modules and recommend improvements • Provide assistance with technical troubleshooting in our various SAP modules, with reports such as administration of leave of absences and health benefit employee contributions so that Payroll process is not disrupted, troubleshoot “FMLA buckets”; and fixing dental eligibility report • Document process requirements and data mapping, for example to streamline CalPERS health enrollment, create an SAP interface to eliminate entry duplication, and create a data dictionary or data index • Review and draft business process documentation and recommend improvements such as how to enhance and use Employee Self Service/Management Self Service, and how to create and archive job classifications, salary grades, and title changes. • Create needed reports such as auditing CalPERS medical invoices for active employees compared to the employee medical plan data in SAP and automate delivery, downloading data to create salary schedules and creating other employee compensation reports • Provide assistance troubleshooting specific business operational issues to improve consistency, accuracy, and efficiency such as how to hide Infotypes not relevant to PSO (HR) users • Recommend best practices for human resource operations based on industry knowledge and experience As mentioned in the attached staff reports, the City has been utilizing SAP since 2003. As the City’s Enterprise Resources Planning (ERP) system SAP is highly configurable with processes integrated via interlinked configuration rules in various modules. The software requires a high degree of specialized expertise to provide effective ongoing maintenance and support. City staff in the People Strategy & Operations Department do not have the level of SAP expertise required, yet they are responsible for accurately entering, maintaining and sharing the data with other City departments as well as external partners such as CalPERS. Sierra Infosys Inc., through its consultants, has proven to be an effective resource for staff in other City City of Palo Alto Page 3 departments. The People Strategy & Operations department believes that an SAP consultant will be able to map and improve processes, reduce the risk of error, increase staff effectiveness through training, and allow for interdepartmental and interagency data sharing. Overall this will improve the department’s operations and allow for City staff to focus on more strategic human resources initiatives such as recruiting, succession planning, employee engagement, and health and wellness. Furthermore, the IT Department’s SAP Steering Committee is currently conducting an assessment of the SAP environment, including business processes and support resource requirements, and it is developing a strategic plan for the ERP system. Implementation of this contract is aligned with the committee’s work and will provide the City with additional data and information for a more informed ERP strategic plan. RESOURCE IMPACT One-time General Fund funding for this contract was approved as part as part of the adoption of the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Approval of the recommended Contract amendment is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act and thus no environmental review under is required. Attachments:  Attachment A - C10135998 Amendment No 4 (PDF)  Attachment B - July 12, 2010 Staff Report (PDF)  Attachment C - June 20, 2011 Staff Report (PDF)  Attachment D - May 6, 2013 Staff Report (PDF) City of Palo Alto (ID # 5933) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Contract Amendment for Val Security, Inc. Title: Approval of Amendment No. 5 to Add the Amount of $250,000 to Contract No. S12141479 with Val Security, Inc. and Extend Term of Agreement by Six Months to December 31, 2015 From: City Manager Lead Department: Police Recommendation Staff recommends that Council Approve Amendment No. 5 to Add the Amount of $250,000 to Contract Number S12141479 with Val Security, Inc. and Extend Term of Agreement by Six Months to December 31, 2015. Background and Discussion Since 2009, the City has used the services of contract security guards in response to the teen deaths that have occurred along the rail line. From November 2009 – October 2014 a guard has been stationed at the Charleston and East Meadow crossings from 6:15 pm to 1:15 am. This resulted in a monthly cost for security services of approximately $5,000 per month. In October 2014, the City increased track security coverage to include the Churchill crossing and subsequently added coverage at the California Avenue Caltrain Station in November 2014 (in addition to the East Meadow and Charleston crossings) and requested security guards on duty all hours the Caltrain and freight trains are in operation: 4:15 am –2:30 am (or until the last freight train passes through Palo Alto, which may occur at an earlier time). These changes resulted in a monthly cost for security services of approximately $40,500 per month. The current agreement with Val Security is set to expire on June 30, 2015. City Council recently directed staff to work with our Project Safety Net partners to develop an ongoing and sustainable funding strategy. The City did not issue a formal Request for Proposals (RFP) for rail crossing security guard services but instead relied on Requests for Quotations (RFQ). RFQs do not typically allow for the City to evaluate factors such as prior experience delivering similar services, quality of proposed solutions, and other qualitative factors, but instead rely almost exclusively on cost as an award determinant. Staff feels that transitioning to a formal RFP process, allowing the City to City of Palo Alto Page 2 holistically evaluate each proposal, will ensure the best possible award outcome and is therefore proceeding with an RFP concurrently with the recommended contract extension. In order to allow adequate time to prepare and complete a sufficient RFP process, staff is proposing extending the current contract with Val Security for a period of six months, expiring December 31, 2015. Additional funds of up to $250,000 will be needed to cover the additional time period. As the planned RFP will be issued in early July 2015 working toward City Council approval in August 2015, it is possible that additional funds will not be fully expended within the current contract. However, the recommended extension will ensure that there is no lapse in guard services. Resource Impact As part of the approval of the Fiscal Year 2016 Adopted Budget, Council approved funding for an enhanced level of track watch services for six months in the Stanford Development Agreement Fund. Policy Implications The provision of rail security guards is consistent with existing City policy. Environmental Review This is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments:  ATTACHMENT A-Amendment 5 Contract No. S12141479 (PDF) AMENDMENT FIVE TO CONTRACT NO. S12141479 BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND VAL SECURITY, INC. This Amendment Five (“Fifth Amendment”) to Contract No. S12141479 (“Contract”) is entered into June 29, 2015, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and VAL SECURITY INC., a California corporation, located at 100 Admiral Calliaghan Drive, Suite 6493, Vallejo, CA 94591 (“CONSULTANT”). R E C I T A L S A. The Contract was entered into between the parties for Consultant to provide security guard services at railway crossings for Project “Track Watch” for the City. B. The parties wish to amend the Contract to extend the Contract’s Term through December 31, 2015. C. The parties wish to amend the Contract to increase Compensation to Seven Hundred Seventy Three Thousand dollars ($773,000.00) . NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of this Amendment, the parties agree: SECTION 1. Section 3. TERM is hereby amended to read as follows: “The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through December 31, 2015 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement.” SECTION 2. Section5. COMPENSATION is hereby amended to read as follows: “The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including payment for general services, shall not exceed Seven Hundred Seventy Three Thousand Dollars ($773,000.00).” SECTION 3. Except as herein modified, all other provisions of the Contract, including any exhibits and subsequent amendments thereto, shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Fifth Amendment on the date first above written. 1 Revision April 28, 2014 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1B0A28F0-16EA-4AD4-B9C9-1AAEBD299BBF CITY OF PALO ALTO ____________________________ City Manager APPROVED AS TO FORM: _____________________________ Assistant City Attorney VAL SECURITY, INC. By:___________________________ Name:_________________________ Title:________________________ 2 Revision April 28, 2014 DocuSign Envelope ID: 1B0A28F0-16EA-4AD4-B9C9-1AAEBD299BBF Theresa Hasan CEO Certificate of Completion Envelope Number: 1B0A28F016EA4AD4B9C91AAEBD299BBF Status: Completed Subject: Please DocuSign AMENDMENT FIVE Val Security.pdf Source Envelope: Document Pages: 2 Signatures: 1 Envelope Originator: Certificate Pages: 5 Initials: 0 Carolynn Bissett AutoNav: Enabled EnvelopeId Stamping: Enabled 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto , CA 94301 carolynn.bissett@cityofpaloalto.org IP Address: 199.33.32.254 Record Tracking Status: Original 6/18/2015 3:42:01 PM PT Holder: Carolynn Bissett carolynn.bissett@cityofpaloalto.org Location: DocuSign Signer Events Signature Timestamp Theresa Hasan colemanspatrol@yahoo.com CEO Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None)Using IP Address: 99.48.44.160 Sent: 6/18/2015 3:45:28 PM PT Viewed: 6/18/2015 4:02:17 PM PT Signed: 6/18/2015 4:04:24 PM PT Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Accepted: 6/18/2015 4:02:17 PM PT ID: d040fb4a-a24f-496a-8890-d025cc59cf28 In Person Signer Events Signature Timestamp Editor Delivery Events Status Timestamp Agent Delivery Events Status Timestamp Intermediary Delivery Events Status Timestamp Certified Delivery Events Status Timestamp Carbon Copy Events Status Timestamp Barbara Teixeira Barbara.Teixeira@cityofpaloalto.org Barbara Teixeira Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 6/18/2015 4:04:25 PM PT Viewed: 6/18/2015 7:10:25 PM PT Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered ID: Ian Hagerman ian.hagerman@cityofpaloalto.org Senior Management Analyst City of Palo Alto Security Level: Email, Account Authentication (None) Sent: 6/18/2015 4:04:26 PM PT Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure: Not Offered ID: Notary Events Timestamp Envelope Summary Events Status Timestamps Envelope Sent Hashed/Encrypted 6/18/2015 4:04:26 PM PT Certified Delivered Security Checked 6/18/2015 4:04:26 PM PT Signing Complete Security Checked 6/18/2015 4:04:26 PM PT Completed Security Checked 6/18/2015 4:04:26 PM PT Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure CONSUMER DISCLOSURE From time to time, City of Palo Alto (we, us or Company) may be required by law to provide to you certain written notices or disclosures. Described below are the terms and conditions for providing to you such notices and disclosures electronically through your DocuSign, Inc. (DocuSign) Express user account. Please read the information below carefully and thoroughly, and if you can access this information electronically to your satisfaction and agree to these terms and conditions, please confirm your agreement by clicking the 'I agree' button at the bottom of this document. Getting paper copies At any time, you may request from us a paper copy of any record provided or made available electronically to you by us. For such copies, as long as you are an authorized user of the DocuSign system you will have the ability to download and print any documents we send to you through your DocuSign user account for a limited period of time (usually 30 days) after such documents are first sent to you. After such time, if you wish for us to send you paper copies of any such documents from our office to you, you will be charged a $0.00 per-page fee. You may request delivery of such paper copies from us by following the procedure described below. Withdrawing your consent If you decide to receive notices and disclosures from us electronically, you may at any time change your mind and tell us that thereafter you want to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format. How you must inform us of your decision to receive future notices and disclosure in paper format and withdraw your consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically is described below. Consequences of changing your mind If you elect to receive required notices and disclosures only in paper format, it will slow the speed at which we can complete certain steps in transactions with you and delivering services to you because we will need first to send the required notices or disclosures to you in paper format, and then wait until we receive back from you your acknowledgment of your receipt of such paper notices or disclosures. To indicate to us that you are changing your mind, you must withdraw your consent using the DocuSign 'Withdraw Consent' form on the signing page of your DocuSign account. This will indicate to us that you have withdrawn your consent to receive required notices and disclosures electronically from us and you will no longer be able to use your DocuSign Express user account to receive required notices and consents electronically from us or to sign electronically documents from us. All notices and disclosures will be sent to you electronically Unless you tell us otherwise in accordance with the procedures described herein, we will provide electronically to you through your DocuSign user account all required notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to you during the course of our relationship with you. To reduce the chance of you inadvertently not receiving any notice or disclosure, we prefer to provide all of the required notices and disclosures to you by the same method and to the same address that you have given us. Thus, you can receive all the disclosures and notices electronically or in paper format through the paper mail delivery system. If you do not agree with this process, please let us know as described below. Please also see the paragraph immediately above that describes the consequences of your electing not to receive delivery of the notices and disclosures electronically from us. Electronic Record and Signature Disclosure created on: 10/1/2013 3:33:53 PM Parties agreed to: Theresa Hasan How to contact City of Palo Alto: You may contact us to let us know of your changes as to how we may contact you electronically, to request paper copies of certain information from us, and to withdraw your prior consent to receive notices and disclosures electronically as follows: To contact us by email send messages to: david.ramberg@cityofpaloalto.org To advise City of Palo Alto of your new e-mail address To let us know of a change in your e-mail address where we should send notices and disclosures electronically to you, you must send an email message to us at david.ramberg@cityofpaloalto.org and in the body of such request you must state: your previous e-mail address, your new e-mail address. We do not require any other information from you to change your email address.. In addition, you must notify DocuSign, Inc to arrange for your new email address to be reflected in your DocuSign account by following the process for changing e-mail in DocuSign. To request paper copies from City of Palo Alto To request delivery from us of paper copies of the notices and disclosures previously provided by us to you electronically, you must send us an e-mail to david.ramberg@cityofpaloalto.org and in the body of such request you must state your e-mail address, full name, US Postal address, and telephone number. We will bill you for any fees at that time, if any. To withdraw your consent with City of Palo Alto To inform us that you no longer want to receive future notices and disclosures in electronic format you may: i. decline to sign a document from within your DocuSign account, and on the subsequent page, select the check-box indicating you wish to withdraw your consent, or you may; ii. send us an e-mail to david.ramberg@cityofpaloalto.org and in the body of such request you must state your e-mail, full name, IS Postal Address, telephone number, and account number. We do not need any other information from you to withdraw consent.. The consequences of your withdrawing consent for online documents will be that transactions may take a longer time to process.. Required hardware and software Operating Systems: Windows2000? or WindowsXP? Browsers (for SENDERS): Internet Explorer 6.0? or above Browsers (for SIGNERS): Internet Explorer 6.0?, Mozilla FireFox 1.0, NetScape 7.2 (or above) Email: Access to a valid email account Screen Resolution: 800 x 600 minimum Enabled Security Settings: •Allow per session cookies •Users accessing the internet behind a Proxy Server must enable HTTP 1.1 settings via proxy connection ** These minimum requirements are subject to change. If these requirements change, we will provide you with an email message at the email address we have on file for you at that time providing you with the revised hardware and software requirements, at which time you will have the right to withdraw your consent. Acknowledging your access and consent to receive materials electronically To confirm to us that you can access this information electronically, which will be similar to other electronic notices and disclosures that we will provide to you, please verify that you were able to read this electronic disclosure and that you also were able to print on paper or electronically save this page for your future reference and access or that you were able to e-mail this disclosure and consent to an address where you will be able to print on paper or save it for your future reference and access. Further, if you consent to receiving notices and disclosures exclusively in electronic format on the terms and conditions described above, please let us know by clicking the 'I agree' button below. By checking the 'I Agree' box, I confirm that: • I can access and read this Electronic CONSENT TO ELECTRONIC RECEIPT OF ELECTRONIC CONSUMER DISCLOSURES document; and • I can print on paper the disclosure or save or send the disclosure to a place where I can print it, for future reference and access; and • Until or unless I notify City of Palo Alto as described above, I consent to receive from exclusively through electronic means all notices, disclosures, authorizations, acknowledgements, and other documents that are required to be provided or made available to me by City of Palo Alto during the course of my relationship with you. CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT June 29, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Buena Vista Mobile Home Park: Update and Possible Direction Regarding Affordable Housing Funds Recommendation Direct the City Manager to identify and set aside $8 million plus an additional $6.5 million in affordable housing funds to match County funds made available for the purpose of preserving affordable housing at Buena Vista Mobilehome Park. Or provide alternative direction as proposed by the City Council. Background The Buena Vista Mobilehome Park is a privately-held property containing 104 mobile homes, 12 studio apartments, and one single family residence on approximately 4.5 acres. The site is within the Barron Park neighborhood of Palo Alto and is home to about 400 people, including many families with children who attend local public schools. In 2012, the Buena Vista Park owner filed an application with the City to close the Mobilehome Park. State and local law gives mobilehome park owners the right to close those businesses, provided they mitigate the impact on mobile home owners who are tenants in the park. In May of this year, the Council fulfilled its obligation to address the closure application by approving Park owner’s closure plan with mitigation measures and conditions. The Park owner now may accept the approval and conditions, and begin the closure process. At this time, the City has not yet received formal notice that the owner has accepted the closure approval and mitigations. During the many months that the closure application was pending with the City, the City Council was obligated to refrain from taking up any policy matters related to the Park, so that all parties in the closure proceeding were ensured of fair process. Nonetheless, the ity’s adopted Housing Element has long recognized the mobile home park as providing low- and moderate-income housing opportunities and indicates that to the extent feasible, the City will seek appropriate local, State and federal funding to assist in the preservation and maintenance of the existing units (Housing Element Program H3.1.8). In the fall of 2014, Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian initiated an effort to find ways to preserve affordable housing at Buena Vista. In January 2015, the County Board of Supervisors voted to set aside $8 million in County affordable housing funds, generated by development on the Stanford campus, for the purpose of acquiring and providing affordable housing at the Buena Vista site. In February, City Manager Keene set aside $8 million of City affordable housing funds for later determination by the Council regarding use for Buena Vista affordable housing. In April, the County entered into a contract with housing non-profit Caritas Corporation for the purpose of developing an offer to purchase the Buena Vista site and a plan to maintain it as a mobilehome park with deed-restricted affordable rents. On Tuesday, June 23, 2015, the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors voted to set aside an additional $6.5 million in County affordable housing funds. The County’s intention is to work in partnership with the City of Palo Alto and Caritas Corporation to put together a market-rate offer to purchase the Park, plan for needed improvements, and maintain it as a source of deed- restricted affordable housing. The key components of funding, as identified by the County, are matching County and City affordable housing funds, tax-exempt revenue bonds issued against the rental income stream, and potentially private philanthropic funds. Discussion Now that the Council has approved the owner’s closure application, it may turn to policy matters relating to the Park, including the ouncil’s interest in providing and preserving affordable housing in Palo Alto. The City of Palo Alto maintains two primary funds to support development, acquisition, and rehabilitation of affordable housing. The Residential Housing Fund consists of residential in lieu fees paid by developers of market rate housing and the Commercial Housing Fund consists of housing impact fees paid by commercial developers. These funds have existed since the1970s and their intended uses are established by guidelines most recently adopted by the City Council in 2003 (City Council Resolution 8352 adopted October 27, 2003).1 urrently, the ity’s guidelines state that the Commercial Housing Fund may only be used for new construction “consistent with longstanding ity policy.” The Residential Housing Fund may be used for acquisition, rehabilitation, and other activities related to the preservation and development of affordable units. The ity’s legal expert on housing matters has reviewed the guidelines and the nexus studies they were based upon and determined that the City Council may amend the guidelines to permit use of the Commercial Housing Fund for purchasing existing units and converting them to deed-restricted affordable units, including necessary rehabilitation. !t the ity Manager’s direction, the ity has set aside $6.8 million in the Residential Housing Fund and $1.2 million in the Commercial Housing Fund (for a total of $8 million) in the event that the City Council elects to provide these funds to support acquisition and preservation of the Buena Vista mobile home park. After this set aside, the Residential Housing fund was fully committed as of mid-May, and the Commercial Housing fund had a remaining balance of about $8 million. The available balance in both funds will change over time as new fees are paid to the City (and as affordable housing projects are funded) and the City is in the process of preparing an 1 There are three other, smaller housing funds for specific purposes discussed in the Guidelines. Page 2 updated nexus study that will support modification to the existing fee program. In addition, the City is beginning negotiations with the owner of an existing affordable housing development who may be willing to provide a substantial sum to buy-out the ity’s option to purchase that property. Also, the County of Santa Clara or the City of Palo Alto may pursue additional State and federal funds that could be made available to preserve and rehabilitate affordable units, although these funding sources are limited and highly competitive. If the Council directs the City Manager to identify and set aside affordable housing funds to match the ounty’s funding for a potential uena Vista transaction, those funds will be held for that purpose and will not be available for other affordable housing projects. Actual expenditure of funds will require future ouncil action, including amendment of the ity’s Housing Fund Guidelines, and review and approval of the terms of any transaction. Grants or loans require approval of detailed transaction documents including agreements to ensure the preservation of units as affordable to specific income categories (for example, low income households). If so directed by Council, these future actions will be agendized for the ouncil’s consideration on August 17, 2015. In the interim, the City Manager will take the necessary steps to communicate the ouncil’s decision/direction, and can work with the ity lerk to schedule a special meeting of the City Council before August 17th in the event that one is needed before then. Environmental Assessment Reservation of affordable housing funds for a possible future transaction is not a project subject to environmental review. Future action to expend the funds will have to consider the potential that such action will result in direct or indirect physical impacts consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Policy Implications !s noted in the ackground section above, the ity’s adopted Housing Element (Program H3.1.8) recognizes the Buena Vista mobile home park as providing low- and moderate-income housing opportunities and indicates that to the extent feasible, the City will seek appropriate local, State and federal funding to assist in the preservation and maintenance of the existing units. The ity’s Housing Element contains policies both supporting the preservation and rehabilitation of existing units (Policy H1.1 and H1.2), and policies supporting actions to increase the supply of affordable housing (Policy H2.1 and H2.2). The Housing Element also documents at length some of the housing challenges facing Palo Alto and the region, and articulates quantified objectives for the 2015-2023 planning period for rehabilitation (600 below market rate units), preservation (334 below market rate units), and new development (1,401 below market rate units), indicating the need for investments in all of these activities. Page 3 ATTACHMENTS:  Attachment A: Correspondence Received (PDF) Department Head: Hillary Gitelman, Director Page 4 Page 5 City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 6/24/2015 12:26 PM Carnahan, David From: G Mori <palo217@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 9:09 PM To: Council, City Subject: Buena Vista Mobile Home Park Funding Dear Palo Alto City Council Members, I am writing you to register my strong opposition for any public funding for the purchase of the Buena Visa Mobile Home Park in order to provide subsidized housing. While it may be nice to not have to move, there is lower cost land not very far away and it would less expensive to provide transportation for children presently in Palo Alto schools rather than buy the mobile home park at fair market value. While it is too bad that the owner is allowed to sell his/her property at the market rate rather than have the person’s property rights violated so the city could and current residents could effectively steal the land, we should keep a stiff upper lip and live with decision. The 8,000,000 dollars currently allocated may actually be a fair price given the apx. 900,000 to 1M annual gross. The 30+M the property is likely sell for would at least triple (back of an envelope estimate) the current rents. Since the City will not do that, other residents will have to foot the bill and this will be forever because the City will now be in the mobile home rental business at a big annual loss. The City will not effectively manage it and every rent increase will be fought at City Hall. And what is the plan when the mobile homes need repair and the resident can’t afford it - MORE SUBSIDIES. Finally, this is NOT your money. The City has no incentive to operate the facility effectively because all losses are passed to the residents of Palo Alto. Well here’s a news flash - not all Palo Alto residents are rolling in cash looking for a foundation to start. Most residents are just lucky to have purchased a house in a town where the paper value of their home is rising. When you raise their taxes, they’re the ones that have to make the sacrifices and, when they can no long afford this type of nonsense, they’re the ones that will have to move. Will you even care? Stay out of the real estate business and try to keep the City in the black. It works better that way. Sincerely, John Mori Garland Drive Palo Alto City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 6/24/2015 12:26 PM Carnahan, David From: Winter Dellenbach <wintergery@earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 2:42 PM To: Council, City Subject: 2nd transmission - letter - Buena Vista I heard that the attachment with the letter did not go thru. Here it is in text - sorry. Below is a letter for City Council members written by Debra Satz of Palo Alto. She asked me to email it as she now out of email connectivity in the Sierra. Thank you. - winter dellenbach - 650 269 1917 June 23, 2015 To the members of the Palo Alto City Council, I am a 15 year resident of Palo Alto and have been on the Stanford faculty for 25 years where I teach political philosophy and ethics. A quote that I have always liked from the British politician William Gladstone is this: budgets are not only matters of arithmetic, they are records of our values. I am writing to you to express your values –for a diverse and fair community --in designating part of the city’s budget to help purchase the site of the Buena Vista mobile home park. I urge you to match the additional funding of $6.5 million that the county has newly pledged for this effort. There are few opportunities to take a stand for affordable housing. As our country continues to re-segregate along class and racial lines, I hope that we will hold ourselves out as providing a different and better model. Respectfully, Debra Satz City of Palo Alto (ID # 5874) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: BID Re-Authorization Title: PUBLIC HEARING: to Hear Objections to the Levy of Proposed Assessments on the Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District and Adoption of a Resolution Confirming the Report of the Advisory Board and Levying Assessment for Fiscal Year 2016 on the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District and Approve a Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Business Improvement District Fund From: City Manager Lead Department: City Manager Recommendation 1. Hold a public hearing on the levy of proposed assessments in Fiscal Year 2016 in connection with the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District; and 2. Approve a resolution confirming the report of the Advisory Board and levying an assessment for Fiscal Year 2016 on the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District (Attachment B). 3. Approve a Budget Amendment Ordinance for Fiscal Year 2016 reducing the revenue estimate by $40,000 from $140,000 to $100,000 and reducing the expenditure budget by $11,800 from $148,000 to $136,200 for the Business Improvement District (Attachment C) offset with a reduction of the projected ending fund balance by $28,200. Background The Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District (BID) was established by the City Council in 2004 pursuant to the California Parking and Business Improvement Area Law to promote the economic revitalization and physical maintenance of the Palo Alto Downtown business district. The Council appointed the Board of Directors of the Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association (PADBPA), a non-profit corporation, as the Advisory Board for the BID. The Board’s purpose is to advise the Council on the method and basis for levy of assessments in the BID and the expenditure of revenues derived from the assessments. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Pursuant to BID law, the Advisory Board must annually submit to the Council a report that proposes a budget for the upcoming Fiscal Year for the BID. The report must: 1) propose any boundary changes in the BID; 2) list the improvements and activities to be provided in the Fiscal Year; 3) estimate the cost to provide the improvements and activities; 4) set forth the method and basis for levy of assessments; 5) identify surplus or deficit revenues carried over from the prior Fiscal Year; and 6) identify amounts of contributions from sources other than assessments. The City Council is required to annually hold a public hearing, approve the Advisory Board Annual report, and determine whether or not to levy the annual assessment for the Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District (BID). The BID is required by state law to be authorized annually. As such, it is not possible under state BID law to implement capital projects that extend longer than one year. Traditionally, funds generated from Business Improvement Districts are used for marketing, promotions, maintenance, and beautification of business districts. Although the BID is an active participant in many issues related to downtown businesses (i.e. transportation, parking, improvements), their legal limitations and budget restrict their ability to fund infrastructure such as parking structures or streetscape improvements. The assessments levied on businesses in the BID are based on the size, type, and location of downtown businesses. Based on a cost-benefit analysis, retailers and restaurants pay a larger assessment because they receive more benefit from the activities undertaken in the business district. For example, a small-large retailer/ restaurant would pay $225 to $450, while a small-large professional business (architect, accountant, etc) pay in the $50 to $225 range. Professional businesses pay the least since they receive less benefit from the BID. On April 27, 2015, the City Council Adopted a resolution preliminarily approving the report filed by the Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District Advisory Board for the Fiscal Year 2016; Adopted a resolution of intention to levy the annual assessment for 2015-2016; and Set May 18, 2015 at 7:00pm, or soon thereafter, as the date and time for the public hearing on the levy of the proposed assessments. The staff report for April 27 and related documents are available at: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/46875 On May 18, the Council voted to continue the public hearing to a date certain of June 29th, 2015, to allow for corrections to be made to the Annual Report for Fiscal Year City of Palo Alto Page 3 2016. Discussion Absent a majority protest at the public hearing, the Council may adopt a resolution approving the report for Fiscal Year 2016 as filed or as modified by the Council at the conclusion of the public hearing. The adoption of the resolution constitutes the levying of the BID assessments for Fiscal Year 2016. The updated Annual Report for Fiscal Year 2016 by the Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association (PADBPA) to the City Council (Attachment A) contains a list of improvements, activities, and associated costs proposed in the BID for Fiscal Year 2016. The Council Resolution approving the BID for Fiscal Year 2016 is attached including required exhibits (Attachment B). As per the agreement that the City and PADBPA have entered, the City has certain responsibilities as it pertains to the invoicing and collection of BID revenues. In prior years, staff from the Planning & Community Environment and Administrative Services departments have been involved in the collection of BID assessments by setting fees, creating and sending invoices, and managing payment collections for the first 60 days of the billing cycle. Staff from ASD has also managed aspects of the customer information and accounting of late payments received and uncollected assessments. During the last billing cycle (as Council was informed last summer), a clerical error occurred that affected a number of invoices. This error resulted in additional staff work involved in corrective action and negatively affected the billing/ collection cycle. Staff has since worked to create a better process for this invoicing and collection activity in order to reduce the staff time involved, and minimize the accounting complexity for the City. The new process will also simplify the transfer of information to the PADBPA related to the collections activity, which they have agreed to improve upon. Upon re-authorization of the BID in Fiscal Year 2016, staff recommends that the City enter an agreement with an outside firm that can handle all aspects of the City’s responsibilities to the BID in terms of invoicing, billing, and collections. The costs of these activities will largely be borne by the BID and are reflected in the attached Annual Report. As staff delved further into the financial aspects of the BID administration, it became clear that significant improvements can also be made to the City/ PADBPA annual budget development process. Due to scheduling conflicts, after the release of the Fiscal Year 2016 Proposed Budget, staff worked with the PADBPA to evaluate certain assumptions related to potential assessment income and to set the BID budget based upon realistic expectations of the BID’s revenue generation performance. As a result of City of Palo Alto Page 4 this effort, staff is proposing to amend the BID budget for Fiscal Year 2016 to align BID revenue and expenditures. The resulting amended budget for Fiscal Year 2016 reflects a budget based on conservative estimates of assessments and allowances for uncollectible assessments. If the new billing/ collections activities do result in additional BID revenue, they will increase the unrestricted fund balance of the Business Improvement District Fund, which is projected to be zero by the end of Fiscal Year 2016. As a result of staff’s review and in coordination with the BID, the budget for Fiscal Year 2016 includes the use of one-time surplus carryover funds to balance the Fiscal Year 2016 BID budget. In other words, expenses for the BID are expected to exceed income related to the assessments for Fiscal Year 2016. While staff and the BID acknowledge that this is not a sustainable approach for the long-term, the BID anticipates that enhanced revenue collection efforts will help alleviate fiscal pressures in the BID fund. Additional revenues in the form of sponsorships and other income are managed separately by the PADBPA. In recent years, the increased fundraising efforts by PADBPA have borne fruit. This has increased their capacity to provide benefits to the downtown business district. Resource Impacts BID assessments are restricted for use exclusively by the BID. It is anticipated that a healthy BID will encourage vitality in the retail community and consequently result in additional sales tax revenue for the City. On June 15, 2015, the City Council approved the Fiscal Year 2016 budget which included revenue and expenditures estimates for the BID fund based on a preliminary analysis. Upon further review and in coordination with the BID, staff is proposing to amend the Fiscal Year 2016 budget for the BID fund to align revenue and expenses based on past experience. As a result, the revenue estimates in the BID are being reduced by $40,000 from $141,800 to $101,800 and the expenditures are being reduced by $11,800 from $148,000 to $136,200. Due to the difference in revenues and expenditures, the BID is requesting the use of one-time surplus funds in the amount of $28,200 to balance the BID budget for Fiscal Year 2016 which will result that the Fiscal Year 2016 ending fund balance is projected to be zero. While staff and the BID acknowledge that this is not a sustainable approach for the long-term, the BID anticipates that enhanced revenue collection efforts will help alleviate fiscal pressures in the BID fund. Throughout Fiscal Year 2016, staff will monitor the status of this fund and based on collection activity may adjust the budget as part of the Fiscal Year 2016 Midyear Budget Review. The revised Fiscal Year 2016 BID budget includes $8,500 for a contract with Muni City of Palo Alto Page 5 Services, LLC to support billing and collections activities for the BID. The cost and collection of BID assessments past 60 days is also borne by the BID. The Attorney's Office will continue to provide legal oversight to the BID during the annual reauthorization process. The Economic Development Manager will continue to provide oversight to the BID and will prepare the annual reauthorization. Environmental Review This action by the City Council does not meet the definition of a project under Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act, and therefore no environmental assessment is necessary. Attachments:  Attachment A: PAD Annual report 2016_Final (PDF)  Attachment B: Resolution Confirming Report of BID For FY 2016 (PDF)  Attachment C: BAO XXXX - FY 16 BID Budget (DOCX) 0 EATSGREAT THINGSIDEAS! FIND OUT WHAT’S BLOOMIN’ IN DOWNTOWN PALO ALTO THIS SPRING There are dozens of great places to shop and eat and thousands of great ideas being generated every day. Only in downtown Palo Alto. Palo Alto Downtown Business Improvement District 2015-16 Annual Report Prepared  for:  Palo  Alto  City  Council               Prepared  by:  Russ  Cohen,  Executive  Director,   Palo  Alto  Downtown  Business  and  Professional  Association     1 Introduction This report from the Advisory Board of the Palo Alto Downtown Business & Professional Association (“PAd”) was prepared for City Council to review for the annual reauthorization of the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District (“BID”) pursuant to Section 36533 of the Parking and Business Improvement Law of 1989 (Section 36500 and following of the California Streets and Highways code) (the “Law”). This report is for the proposed fiscal year for the BID commencing July 1, 2015 and ending June 30, 2016. (“Fiscal Year 2016-16”). As required by the Law, this report contains the following information: I. Any proposed changes in BID boundaries and benefit zones within the BID; II. The improvements and activities to be provided for Fiscal Year 2015-16; III. An estimate of the cost of providing the improvements and the activities for Fiscal Year 2015-16; IV. The method and basis of levying the assessment in sufficient detail to allow each business owner to estimate the amount of the assessment to be levied against his or her business for Fiscal Year 2015-16. V. The amount of any surplus or deficit revenues to be carried over from a previous fiscal year. VI. The amount of any contributions to be made from sources other than assessments levied pursuant to the Law. Submitted by Brad Ehikian, Chair, and Russ Cohen, Executive Director on behalf of the Advisory Board (“Advisory Board”) of the Palo Alto Downtown Business & Professional Association (“PAd”). The Advisory Board approved this report on 0D\, 2015. Received on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of Palo Alto on -XQH, 2015. 2 Section I: BID boundaries and Benefit Zones There have been no changes in the BID boundaries or benefit zones within the BID and no changes are proposed. The current boundaries are depicted on the map below. The area of the BID is referred to as “Downtown.” 934- 9 4 4 927 932 233 281 933 - 9 3 7 943 327 1001 942 469 475 744 459 832 801 A P T 1 - 5 427-453 920912 362 370 900 838 846 471 459 835 - 8 5 5 460 815 840836 834 845 400 803 928930 931933 835 - 8 3 7 831- 8 3 3 451453 802800 810 - 8 1 6 818 - 8 2 0 828 - 8 3 0 817- 8 1 9 823 - 8 2 5 567-569 559563 536 526 100 1 101 1 - 540 483 904 912 468 918 926 537 965-971505-507 519-521 939-945 931-935 923-925518-520 539541543 515-517 809811 420 1001 1011 1010 376 370 980960 990 34 354 326 426 4 1000 448 944 471 483948952 959947925 915 933 935 425-443 451449 463-465 936-940 458 460 440 428426 527-533 543 551 510520 558-560 903 825 837 581 575940934 813-823 501-509 511-519 521-529 531-539 541-547 556 596 904 926 561-567 569 845 580 574 566 991- 997 136 610 116-122 150 535529525 542516140 102 116124 163 145 566556 167 528 643635 635 645- 685 660- 666 620 180 164 158156 624628632636 640644 617621 151-165 171-195 203 642640636 200 151 115 125 135 514 101 440 444 436432 427 425 117119 630616 208 228220 240-248 575 530- 534536540 552 177 156 201209215225 595 229231 611-623 180 508500 625-631 170 172-174 542544 538-542 552548546 541-547 230-238 734 723 721 702- 730220-244 744 701 731 755757 771 200 160 728-732 762-776740-746 250 275 270 255741 265 724 730 651 221-225227 668 707 205 201203451449 209 219 221 233235450460470 442444 400 420 430 411 425 429 185 165 181 412 250 420 245 171-169 441- 445 435-439 346344 333335 342 344 431 460 450 235530 220 220 B 222 240 514278 274270 250 545 540 251485255 271 281 300310301 581 259-267 533535537 261267 518-526 532- 536 520-526 530-536 271 281 252 270 240-248202-216 228226234238 244242 210- 216 228- 234 223-229 209215 247-259 240 232230 311-317 251 344 326 340 337339 323317 400 420 332330 314 353 355 367 305 347 265272-278 418 319 321- 341 328 330 300- 310 431401 366 436 426 #1-7 369 335 319 390 301 315 375 307-311 325330 332 1&2330 1-3 324 326316 318 373-377 416- 424 361 338 340 560 345 321325 315 529 285 555 650636 628 1-12 628 A-E 385 365 375380 345 664 325650-654 661635300 690 675 555541-549533 535-539 318-324326 352 425 439-441 435429425 415-419 405403453 461 383460 502 510 526 520 540 499 467 459 439 425 555 400 436-452 456 379 370-374376380-382 384-396 550-552 364 360 431 440-444 423 499 475 421-423 431-433 432428 460-476 450 635 446 430 400 745 720706 385744734 724-730 720712704 360 351 315737 332 300 653-681 683685 512 501619 609605 518 482486496 610 630 455 400 651-687 543-545 532534 542544 550 552 554556 558560562564 635-6 643-6 470 313 334 333 325326 342 303301 229 336 308 310 312 316 318 311 331 315 319 317 321 335 228220 356-360 347-367 351 357 369-379360 258-296 350 210 204 302- 316 379310 320 328 332 340 437 412 311 A-B 404 313 325 327 333 407 401385 411 452 378-390 360 - 1A - 1C360 - 2A - 2C360 - 3A - 3C360 - 4A - 4C360 - 5A - 5C360 - 6A 344-348 418420 482 328 456 321 325 330204218 236 240 250-252 477 475 467 457 453249235225221 201 60 275 505-509 239-243209-213 210-214 513-519 460 474472228- 230 535 558 201 1612 20 209 215 223 231 521 80 239-245 530-540 544-554 212- 216 218-222 333 335-337 351 457451 465463 489-499360 530 480 420 430 480 463 451443437411405 419405401 441 480-498 347 351 355 359 525 430 473 332- 342 425415 400 570568 556 550 543 327321315305 343 515 525 551 555 328 309-311 518-528 536-540 552-554 558-562 573 A-E 591-599 557-571 330-332 318-320 406-418 417 542548568 524 550 500-528 578 564 550 546 540 530 531-535 541 505 525 537 555 565 571530 619-6 520 440-446 579 567 523610 600 555 581 420-438 437 566 224 228 A-F 244 579 575 565 559 251 355 A-J 335329604 576 566 345-347 243245 25725920921922723502 505 610-616 727 678 676 674672 642 636-638 567 555 711 701705 725 525 759 730718 734 738-740 760 746-750 701 721-7 600 827 835 899 850 530 609 759 7517537737-62611 601 600 1013 10041000 1006 1001 623 137 145 700 780 790 744 111700 753100 825805 33 51 75 63 841 44 675 49 41 711 799 703 100 101 139654 625 160 1001 1005 1009 1010 1004 930 975945929931 948 181 940 960 145900 955 999875 853 925 81 855 901-907 909 87 98 917 921 925 735 849 707 847 842828 820248 230-232 212 825 829833 839 800 812818 882 165831 801 815 809801 841 791153 718 774 761 795745 201 209 834836 845 895 926 190 934 942 948 203 209 219 225 929200 240 904 910 926 270 935 904 909909A 217 222 148 171 421 130 312 318 324 317 301 186 192 323 329 151 325 329 334 131 129 355301 235 258 212 163 115 291247 210 201 207 64 202 235 251249 252 247 244250 177220 261 251-257 205245 231225213205 70 2206 234240 183 251 270 241-247 215- 237 210-216 219 235 62 202 245 54 52 50 203 215 221 313-317318 220- 224 238 542-550 531-539 532 759 223-239 905 911-917907 188190 251- 293 202206208 210 212 216 220 1008 275 539 201 400 27 168 865857 302 324 340 795 848 918 903903A 408412 440 483A - F 435 751 735 745 532 210 727 733 335 328 330 345 214 350 800 806 441 441A 230302306308312316 301 303 305 307 309 325 251 807 821 829 801 818-824 420 424 430 832A 832 842A 842 852A 852 862A 862 872A 872 351A 351 355A 355 359A 359 363A 363 367A 367 425 911 943 951 918 936 940 944 271 253 241 301 319 919A919 935 949 928 936 940-946 353 264 367 361 310 1005 1010 423425413 - 419 457-467 469-471473-481 454 729 A-D 733-743 734-740 724-732 936 824-828 920 949 943941 715 95 445 324 328 545 590 425447 827 565585595 904 315 507 561 706 536 200 100 280-290 150 158164 276 516 698 161 159 157777 132 127 180 528 120 247 372 524 548550 538 152 345 336 515 658 227 27 29 539 115 135 321 558 #200-202 558 #C & D 965 140 350 808 915 461 435433 945 1012 421 727 A-C 218 255 206 739 260 840 650 642 351 451 551 375 530 643 415 12 700 802 99 89 87 901 560564568572576580584588592594 906908 910912914 916918920 922924 548 423 668 901 305 -313 423 405 352354 611 320322 346 323 471 484 528 426 264 430 1001 508 756 -760 940 930 544546 515 7 745 7 549 211213 151 160 257 433-457 482 330 349 401 539 440 691 755 67 312 202 651 443445 447 716 218 398 998 262 335 218 640-646506 327 469 303 401 403 254 401 91 40 101 819 301 725 595 705 541 Qu arry Road Home r Avenue Lane 8 West Medical Foundation Way Lane 7 West Lane 7 East Encina Avenue El Camino Real Urban Lane Wells Avenue Forest Avenue High Street Emerson Street Ch a n n i n g A v e n u e Alma Street El Camino Real Mitchell Lane Everett Avenue Lytton Avenue Lane 15 E High Street Alma Street Bryant Street Lane 6 E Lane 11 W La n e 21 High Street Gilman Street Hamilt on Avenue Univ ersity Avenue Bryant Court Lane 30 Florence Street Kipling Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Everett Avenue Waverley Street Cowper Street Webster Street Everett Court Lytton Avenue Lane A West L L La Addis on Avenue Forest A venue Downing Lane Homer Avenue La Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilt on A venue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant Street Ramona Street Addis on Avenue Scott Street Webster Street Cowper Street Addison Avenue Channing Avenue Ramona Street Pa ulsen Ln Lane 15 E Lane 20 W Lane 20 E Univ ersity Avenue CalTrain ROW Emerson Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant Street Ramona Street Palo Road ay Pear Lane Lane 12 W Lane 5 E Everett Avenue Ho mer Av enue Emerson Street talm Dr iv e Alma Street Lytton Avenue This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend abc Zone A (Ground Floor) - Zone B (Upper Floors) abc Zone B 0'500' Downtown Palo AltoBusiness ImprovementDistrictArea Map CITY O F PALO A L TO INC OR P ORATE D C ALIFORN I A P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f AP RIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2012 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2012-04-30 16:57:54CPA BID (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\rrivera.mdb) 3 Downtown Palo Alto: A snapshot Methodology: Ratio estimates based on one time data collection through quick probability samplings considered a “windshield survey.” Margin of error is estimated to be 10-15%. At a glance, there are approximately 88 restaurants and 72 retail establishments. 13 national chain restaurants or franchises exist amongst 75 privately owned restaurants. Amongst retail, there are approximately 21 national retailers and 51 independently owned stores. Summary of findings: Many perceive that there is a preponderance of restaurants vs. retail, but in reality the mix is quite balanced. That is also true for the number of chains vs. the number of independently owned businesses—it’s clear that there is much more in the way of independently owned businesses than chain or franchised businesses—thus breaking the commonly held perception of downtown being dominated by chains and restaurants.  Section II: 2014-15 Year in Review and Planned Activites for Fiscal Year 2015-2016 “Keeping Downtown Palo Alto Safe, Spotless and Successful. Creating a spotless downtown. The sidewalks downtown are steam cleaned once per month with powerful equipment that helps remove stubborn stains like chewing gum. (For the record, individual businesses can sweep but are prohibited from using water to “hose down” the sidewalks, as that debris will flow directly to the bay. Steam cleaning is the most effective and the most environmentally responsible method.) These methods are an improvement over years past. These increases in frequency along with better equipment and the help of the Downtown Streets Team, (founded by The Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association in 2004) help to keep downtown Palo Alto “spotless.” Working in conjucntion with the city fo Palo Alto Public Works Division, other projects, like the repainting of the University Avenue tunnels, for example, ( photos below) has served as a great improvement for those entering the downtown from, in particular, Caltrain.  Creating a safe downtown. The Palo Alto Downtown Business and Improvement Association also administers the standing committee known as the Downtown Parking Committee, a committee charged with oversight of the funds and activities associated with the garages. As a reminder, in addition to the association fees, many merchants in the downtown district also contribute fees to the downtown parking district which helped fund the building of the parking garages downtown (an ongoing cost) and fund the ongoing maintenance of the garages at an approximate cost of $1million each year. The garages are patrolled by the Palo Alto Police Department and outreach efforts by the Downtown Streets Team—both are currently funded by these fees. The return of dedicated patrols downtown with two officers assigned to the beat also ensure a presence downtown that helps deter crime and provides rapid response to downtown incidents was initiated two years ago and this year, the number of dedicated officers was increased to four.  Creating a destination. Keeping downtown a great place to do business, whether you are a retailer, restaurant, start-up or a one- person office is our mission. There was a time before the existence of the business association that downtown was not a thriving, vibrant place to do business. Today, it is abuzz with activity due in some part to the efforts of the Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association. Making certain that downtown is its own unique brand, one that differentiates itself from any other downtown, is an area of focus for The Association. Creating this brand comes from not only ensuring an attractive downtown, but one that doesn’t mind tooting its own horn.   Creating an environment that is business friendly. The Palo Alto Downtown Business and Professional Association provides a conduit to leaders and staff at city hall. We don’t work for the city of Palo Alto; we work with it on behalf of all the business located downtown. From helping to develop public policy regarding public parking to smoking in downtown parks to noise ordinances to issues surrounding outdoor dining, we are a stakeholder with a voice that can be heard amongst other stakeholders and Palo Alto’s civic leaders. The “Downtown Crown” as presented to each business that chooses to open downtown.  Section III. Budget for 2015-16 The total funds available for activities for this fiscal year are estimated to be $100. The budget for providing the activities is set forth as follows: BID 2015/16 Budget INCOME Total Non-Assessment Sources Assessments $125,000 Allowance for Uncollectible Assessments ($25,000) Other Revenue $57,000 $57,000 12-13 Surplus Carryover $36,200 TOTAL INCOME $193,200 $193,200 EXPENSES Operating Expenses Staff Salaries Executive Director Salary & Benefits $72,600 Payroll taxes and expense $7,260 Office Supplies & Expenses $150 Internet/Website Maintenance $500 Rent $7,200 Reauthorization Advertising $2,650 Audit-Tax Returns $5,700 Legal $1,000 $1,000 Insurance - Liability $2,300 Workman's Comp $800 Nominating $1,500 Invoicing $8,500 Contingencies $2,000 Subtotal -- Operating Expenses $112,160 $1,000 Programs, Marketing and Events Banners $24,000 $16,000 Location Specific Banners $6,000 Summer Concert Series $40,000 $40,000 Events $3,500 Outreach & Communication $1,250 Downtown Streets Team $5,000 District Opportunity Reserve $1,290 Subtotal --Programs, Marketing & Events $81,040 $56,000 TOTAL EXPENSES $193,200 10 Section IV: Method and Basis of Levying the Assessment Cost Benefit Analysis / Bid Assessments The method and basis of levying the assessment is provided in sufficient detail to allow each business owner to estimate the amount of the assessment to be levied against his or her business for Fiscal Year 2015-16 and is not changed from the FY 2014-15 assessment. There have been no changes made to the Cost-Benefit Analysis or to the BID Assessments since they were approved by City Council on February 2, 2004. The method of calculation used to determine the cost and benefit to each business located in the BID is described below. The BID assessments are based on three criteria: the type of business, the location of the business and the size of the business. It has been consistently demonstrated that the typical BID program places a higher priority on activities such as commercial marketing. As a result, the retail and restaurant establishments in the BID are assessed more than service and professional businesses in the district. While service-oriented businesses benefit from a BID less than retailers and restaurateurs, they benefit more than professional businesses such as medical, dental, architectural, consultant and legal offices with their minimal advertising and promotion needs. For these reasons, various business types are assessed according to the benefit that they receive from the BID, as follows: ! Retail and Restaurant 100% of base amount ! Service 75% of base amount ! Professional 50% of base amount Exceptions to this rule include financial institutions that are traditionally charged a flat rate regardless of location or size and lodging businesses that are typically charged by total rooms. The location of a business also determines the degree of benefit that accrues to that business. Centrally located businesses tend to benefit more, as do businesses located on the ground floor. For this reason, A and B benefit zones have been identified for the BID. In Palo Alto, Zone A benefit businesses are assessed 100% of the base benefit assessment while Zone B businesses are assessed 75%. A third criterion is used in the BID to determine benefit. This criterion, the size of the business, takes into consideration the number of full time employees employed by the business. Please refer to Attachment 1 for a more complete understanding of the application of these three variables to establish BID benefit. Attachment 2 is the BID assessment for each business located within the BID boundaries. Applying the criteria identified in Attachment 1, a summary of the assessment that applies to each business by size, 11 type and location is outlined. In addition to the Cost-Benefit Analysis, the assessments include the following criteria: ! An exemption for “single person professional businesses” that have 25% or fewer full time equivalent (“FTE”), including the business owner. This covers employees who work less than 10 hours a week (based on a 40 hour work week; an FTE equals approximately 2000 hours annually) ! An assessment specifically for “single person businesses” that have 26% FTE to 1 FTE in the professional business category of the BID (An FTE equals approximately 2000 hours annually) ! The tiering of other professional businesses by size based (according to benefit) on the “single person business” criteria This outline provides information by which a business can determine its annual assessment based on objective criteria. Except where otherwise defined, all terms shall have the meanings identified below: Definitions of Business Types in the Downtown Business Improvement District Retailers and Restaurants: Businesses that buy or resell goods such as clothing stores, shoe stores, office supplies as well as businesses that sell prepared food and drink. Service Businesses: Businesses that sell services such as beauty or barber shops, repair shops, most automotive businesses, dry cleaners, art and dance studios, printing firms, film processing companies, travel agencies, entertainment businesses such as theatres, etc. Hotel and Lodging: These include businesses that have as their main business the lodging of customers. This is restricted to residential businesses that provide lodging services to customers for less than 30 days. Professional Businesses: Businesses that require advanced and/or specialized licenses or academic degrees such as architects, engineers, attorneys, chiropractors, dentists, doctors, accountants, optometrists, realtors, insurance brokers, venture capital firms, consultants, advertising and marketing professionals and mortgage brokers and similar professions. Financial Institutions: Includes banking, savings and loan institutions and credit unions. Additional clarification on business definitions will be defined according to Section 18.04.030 (Definitions) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. The Advisory Board recommends that the following businesses be exempt from the BID assessment: ! New businesses established in the BID area following the annual assessment for the year in which they locate in the BID area ! Non-profit organizations ! Newspapers ! “Single person professional businesses” that have 25% or less FTE, including the business owner 12 The Assessment calculated shall be paid to the City no later 30 days after receipt of the invoice with the amount of the annual assessment sent by the City. A second notice will be mailed as a reminder to businesses that have not remitted payment by that date. Late payment will be subject to a 10% late fee. Section V: Revenue Surplus or Deficit Based on the revenue balance on 5/15/15 of $98,200, the PAd expects a surplus carryover of $36,200. Expected expenses for the remainder of FY 15-16 are as follows: Current Revenue Balance $98,200 Expected expenses for remaining FYE6/30/2015 Staff Salaries $33,000 Payroll Taxes $3,300 Phone $420 Banners $8,000 Downtown Streets Team $2,500 Rent $3,600 Workers Comp $1,000 Audit & Tax Return $5,700 District Opportunity Reserve $4,480 Total Expected Expense $62,000 Expected Carryover $36,200 Section VI: Non-assessment Income It is estimated that $57,000.00 will be raised in fundraising, and sponsor support. Additionally, we anticipate in kind contribution towards expenses for Fiscal Year 2015-16. Projected Income for Fiscal Year 2015-16 Legal (donation) $1,000 Banners $16,000 Summer Concert Series $40,000 Total $57,000 13 Section VI: PAd Board of Directors by Business Type Retailers and Restaurants   Georgie Gleim, Gleim the Jeweler Alex Giovanotto, Joya Travis Nichols, Keen Garage Susan Graf, Susan Graf Service Businesses Robert Peterson, Peterson Architects Hospitality Barbara Gross, Garden Court Hotel Financial Institutions Ali Agah, Boston Private Bank & Trust Company Katie Seedman, Presidio Private Bank and Trust Professional Organizations Brad Ehikian, Premier Properties Patty McGuigan, Cornish & Carey Commercial Sheila Liskar, Palo Alto Laser Skin Care Non Profit Organizations Chris Richardson, Downtown Streets Team Phil Carter, Palo Alto Farmer’s Market COMMUNITY PARTNERS Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce Judy Kleinberg, President & CEO Downtown Streets Team Eileen Richardson, Executive Director City Of Palo Alto Eric Filseth, Palo Alto City Council Thomas Fehrenbach, Manager of Economic Development Attachment 1 ATTACHMENT 1 A General Statement Regarding Cost-Benefit Analysis For BID Businesses Using The Traditional Three Criteria Formula Criteria 1) Type of Business: Statement Concerning Cost-Benefit Formula For BID Businesses Regarding Type Of Business: In a review of 200 California Business Improvement Districts, it is consistently demonstrated that the typical BID Program places a higher priority on Commercial Marketing Programs than on Civic Beautification and Commercial Recruitment Programs. With that trend in mind, retail and restaurant businesses, with their emphasis on, and need for, commercial marketing, are traditionally assessed more than less marketing-sensitive service-oriented or professional-oriented businesses. However, while service-oriented businesses benefit from a BID less than retailers and restaurateurs, they benefit more, (from commercial marketing programs), than professional businesses such as medical, dental and legal offices with their minimal advertising and promotion needs. Therefore, set forth below, is an example of how various business types might be considered regarding the computation of the annual benefit assessment. • Retail and Restaurant: 100% of base amount • Service: 75% of base amount • Professional: 50% of base amount Exceptions to this rule include financial institutions that are traditionally charged a flat rate regardless of location or size and lodging businesses that are typically charged by total rooms. Lodging businesses are assessed based on the total number of rooms because it is a more equitable manner of determining size. Many lodging businesses have many part time employees, but revenues are based on the room occupancies of the hotel, not the goods sold or serviced provided by employees. Criteria 2) Location of Business: Statement Concerning Cost-Benefit Formula For BID Businesses Regarding Location of Business: It has also been consistently demonstrated that the more centrally located businesses tend to benefit from BID activities and services to a greater degree than businesses located toward the periphery of the proposed BID boundaries. Events and activities tend to originate in the central core of the Downtown area and spread benefit to the outer areas with diminishing energy and impact, much like the ripple effect of a stone tossed into a body of calm water. Furthermore, ground floor businesses tend to benefit to a greater degree than businesses located in upper floors. Therefore, in some cases, a new BID's annual benefit assessment formula also takes these street level criteria into account. As mentioned above, special events, fairs, festivals and other activities tend to take place within, or along, the Main Street core rather than in the areas at the periphery of the Downtown core. Additionally, BID-sponsored seasonal decorations, public art projects, street banners and street furniture tend to be located within the immediate core area. Therefore, businesses located within the most central area of the proposed BID are considered to be within "Zone A" which should be considered the primary benefit zone. There is typically a "secondary zone" or "Zone B" within most proposed BID areas. This area receives less benefit than Zone A and should be assessed accordingly. An example of how different zones might be treated regarding the computation of the annual benefit assessment is as follows. • Zone A: 100% of base benefit assessment • Zone B: 75% of base benefit assessment In the case of Downtown Palo Alto, it is recommended that all Zone A upper floor businesses, as well as any other businesses located at the periphery of the proposed BID, be considered as Zone B businesses. Please refer to the map in Attachment I. Criteria 3) Size of Business: Statement Concerning Cost-Benefit Formula For BID Businesses Regarding Size of Business: In approximately 50% of newly established BIDs, a third assessment criterion is used. This criterion involves the size of each individual business that is based upon the businesses’ total number of full-time employees. Full-time employees are those working a total of 2,000 hours per year. Part-time employees are grouped into full-time job positions, i.e., two half-time employees total one full-time. Fractions are rounded down to the nearest whole number with no less than one person as a minimum for business. An example of how various business sizes might be treated regarding the computation of the annual benefit assessment is as follows: Retail/Restaurants Service Businesses Small 50% of base amount Under 6 FTE* Under 4 FTE Medium 75% of base amount 6 to under 11 FTE 4 to under 7 FTE Large 100% of base amount 11 or more FTE 7 or more FTE * FTE = full time employees Additionally, an exemption was established for “single person professional businesses” that have 25% or less FTE, including the business owner. This covers employees who work less 10 hours a week (based on a 40 hour work week) Since “single person businesses” that have 26% FTE to 1 FTE in the professional business category of the BID benefit the very least from the assessment, their assessments have been tiered by size based (according to benefit) on the new “single person business” criteria. ATTACHMENT 2 Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District Annual BID Assessments ZONE A ZONE B (75% of Zone A amount) Attachment 2 Restaurants & Retailers Under 6 FTE (50% of base amount) $225 $170 6 to under 11 FTE (75% of base amount) $340 $260 11 or more FTE (100% of base amount) $450 $340 Service Businesses Under 4 FTE (50% of base amount) $170 $130 4 to under 7 FTE (75% of base amount) $260 $200 Over 7 FTE (100% of base amount) $340 $260 Professional Businesses 25% or fewer FTE, including owner (0% of base amount) Exempt Exempt 26% FTE to under 1 FTE (25% of base amount) $60 $50 2 to 4 FTE (50% of base amount) $110 $90 5 to 9 FTE (75% of base amount) $170 $130 10+ FTE (100% of base amount) $225 $170 Lodging Businesses Up to 20 rooms (50% of base amount) $2258 $170 21 to 40 rooms (75% of base amount) $340 $260 41+ rooms (100% of base amount) $450 $340 Financial Institutions $500 $500 Note 1: For retail, restaurant, service, and professional businesses, size will be determined by number of employees either full-time or equivalent (FTE) made up of multiples of part-time employees. A full FTE equals approximately 2000 hours annually. Lodging facilities will be charged by number of rooms available and financial institutions will be charged a flat fee. Note 2: Second floor (and higher) businesses located within Zone A will be assessed the same as similar street-level businesses located within Zone B. Note 3: Assessment amounts are rounded to the nearest ten dollars. The minimum assessment will be $50.00. Not Yet Approved 150501 jb 0131337 1 Resolution No. ______ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Confirming the Report of the Advisory Board and Levying an Assessment for Fiscal Year 2016 on the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO HEREBY FINDS, DECLARES, AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Parking and Business Improvement Area Law of 1989, California Streets and Highways Code Sections 36500 et seq. (the “Law”), authorizes the City Council to levy an assessment against businesses within a parking and business improvement area which is in addition to any assessments, fees, charges, or taxes imposed in the City. SECTION 2. Pursuant to the Law, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 4819 establishing the Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District (the "District") in the City of Palo Alto. SECTION 3. The City Council, by Resolution No. 8416, appointed the Board of Directors of the Palo Alto Downtown Business & Professional Association, a California nonprofit mutual benefit corporation, to serve as the Advisory Board for the District (the "Advisory Board"). SECTION 4. In accordance with Section 36533 of the law, the Advisory Board prepared and filed with the City Clerk a report entitled "Downtown Palo Alto Business Improvement District, Annual Report 2015-2016” (the "Report”), and, by previous resolution, the City Council preliminarily approved such report as filed. SECTION 5. The boundaries of the District are within the City limits of the City of Palo Alto (the "City") and encompass the greater downtown area of the City, generally extending from El Camino Real to the West, Webster Street to the East, Lytton Avenue to the North and Addison Avenue to the South (east of Emerson Street, the boundaries extend only to Forest Avenue to the South). Reference is hereby made to the map of the District attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference for a complete description of the boundaries of the District. SECTION 6. The City Council has adopted a Resolution of Intention, Resolution No. 9505 declaring its intention to levy and collect an assessment for fiscal year 2016 against the businesses in the District. SECTION 7. Following notice duly given pursuant to law, the City Council has held a full and fair public hearing regarding the levy and collection of an assessment within the District for fiscal year 2016. All interested persons were afforded the opportunity to hear and be heard regarding protests and objections to the levy and Not Yet Approved 150501 jb 0131337 2 collection of the assessment for fiscal year 2016. The City Council finds that there was no majority protest within the meaning of the Law. All protests and objections to the levy and collection of the assessment and any and all protests and objections are hereby overruled by the City Council. SECTION 8. Based on its review of the Report, a copy of which has been presented to the City Council and has been filed with the City Clerk, and other reports and information, the City Council hereby finds and determines that (i) the businesses in the District will be benefited by the expenditure of funds raised by the assessment (ii) the District includes all of the businesses so benefited; and (iii) the net amount of the assessment levied within the district for the 2016 fiscal year in accordance with the Report is apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the net amount in proportion to the estimated benefits to be received by each such business. SECTION 9. The City Council hereby confirms the Report as filed by the Advisory Board. New businesses established in the District after the beginning of any fiscal year shall be exempt from the levy of the assessment for that fiscal year. In addition, non- profit organizations, newspapers and professional "single-person businesses," defined as those businesses which have 25% or less full time equivalent employees, including the business owner, shall be exempt from the assessment. SECTION 10. The Adoption of this resolution constitutes a levy of an assessment for the fiscal year 2016 (commencing July 1, 2015, and ending June 30, 2016). The assessment formula, including the method and basis of levying the assessment, is set forth Exhibit “B” attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. New businesses established in the District after the beginning of any fiscal year shall be exempt from the levy of the assessment for that fiscal year. In addition, non-profit organizations, newspapers and professional "single-person businesses," defined as those businesses which have 25% or less full time equivalent employees, including the business owner, shall be exempt from the assessment. SECTION 11. The City Council hereby declares that the proposed uses of the revenues derived from the assessments levied against the businesses in the District are for the following facilities and activities: The types of improvements to be funded by the levy of an assessment against businesses within the District are the acquisition, construction, installation or maintenance of any tangible property with an estimated useful life of five years or more. The types of activities to be funded by the levy of an assessment against businesses within the District are the promotion of public events which benefit businesses in the area and which take place on or in public places within the District; the furnishings of music in any public place in the District; and activities which benefit businesses locating and operating in the District. // // Not Yet Approved 150501 jb 0131337 3 SECTION 12. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not meet the definition of a project under Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Director of Administrative Services 1 Revised December 22, 2014 5874/mb Ordinance No. XXXX ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 FOR THE BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISCTIRCT FUND TO REDUCE REVENUE ESTIMATES FOR ASSESSMENTS BY $40,000 AND REDUCE EXPENDITURES BY $11,800. The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and determines as follows: A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 15, 2015 did adopt a budget for fiscal year 2016; and B. The Fiscal Year 2016 Adopted Budget assumed a revenue estimate in the amount of $140,000 and expenditures in the amount of $148,000. C. Due to scheduling conflicts, after the release of the Fiscal Year 2016 Proposed Budget, staff worked with the PADBPA to evaluate certain assumptions related to potential assessment income and to set the BID budget based upon realistic expectations of the BID's performance. As a result of this effort, staff is proposing to amend the BID budget for Fiscal Year 2016 to align BID revenue and expenditures with prior performance; and D. City Council authorization is needed to amend the 2016 budget as hereinafter set forth. SECTION 2. The revenue estimates for assessments in the Business Improvement District Fund is hereby reduced by Forty Thousand ($40,000). SECTION 3. The Business Improvement District Fund budget is hereby reduced by Eleven Thousand Eight Hundred Dollars ($11,800), and the ending fund balance in the BID fund is reduced by Twenty Eight Thousand Two Hundred Dollars ($28,200) with the Fiscal Year 2016 ending fund balance projected to be zero. SECTION 4. As specified in Section 2.28.080(a) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, a two-thirds vote of the City Council is required to adopt this ordinance. SECTION 5. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. SECTION 6. The actions taken in this ordinance do not constitute a project requiring environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). // 2 Revised December 22, 2014 5874/mb INTRODUCED AND PASSED: Enter Date Here AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY June 29, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Adoption of an Ordinance Deleting Section 18.42.110 of Chapter 18.42 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Adding a New Section 18.42.110 Pertaining to the Siting and Permitting of Wireless Communications Facilities; Exempt from California Environmental Quality Act under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b) and 15301, 15302 and 15305 RECOMMENDATION Staff and the Planning and Transportation Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the Ordinance Deleting Section 18.42.110 of Chapter 18.42 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Adopting a New Section 18.42.110 Pertaining to the Siting and Permitting of Wireless Communications Facilities (Attachment A). Staff also recommends that the Council direct the City Manager or designee to suspend the Anthem Telecomm contract to study construction of a large standalone tower in light of the changed legal and technological landscape. BACKGROUND The tremendous growth in personal wireless services has created an increased demand for new wireless antennas and equipment. It is expected that carriers will continue to roll out new facilities in Palo Alto to accommodate the rapidly growing need for increased capacity and speed. Wireless telecommunications facilities (WCF) are regulated by federal, state and local laws. Federal law significantly limits the City’s ability to regulate WCFs. Under federal law, a local agency’s decisions cannot have the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless service or unreasonably discriminating among wireless service providers. Also, under federal law, the City may not regulate the placement, construction or modification of wireless communications facilities on the basis of radio frequency (RF) emissions, so long as the facilities comply with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations concerning such emissions. Despite federal limitations, cities historically have retained ability to regulate the aesthetic of WCFs, including factors such as height and property line setbacks. However, federal law developments continue to erode that ability. The Spectrum Act The latest federal law governing WCFs was adopted in 2012 as part of the 2012 Middle Class Tax Act. This federal legislation contained Section 6409, now referred to as the Spectrum Act, Page 2 and codified at 47 U.S.C. § 1455. The Spectrum Act was intended to facilitate the telecommunication industry’s rapid deployment of wireless infrastructure by requiring local governments to approve any application that seeks to modify an existing wireless telecommunication facility that does not “substantially change” the existing facility. As the Spectrum Act did not contain specific definitions, the implementation of this Section initially was open to interpretation by each local government. Furthermore, while the Act states that a local government cannot deny and shall approve an eligible facility request, it provides no guidance as to the required process or time limits in which a local government has to act. To bridge this gap, the FCC recently promulgated rules which include necessary definitions, processing requirements, timelines and remedies for applications that seek to modify an existing wireless telecommunication facility in accordance with the Spectrum Act. The FCC’s procedural rules went into effect on April 9, 2015. The FCC rules are subject to several legal challenges, though it appears they will remain in effect during the litigation. These FCC rules are binding on local governments, unless and until a court orders otherwise. DISCUSSION Section 6409 of the Spectrum Act provides that the City “may not deny, and shall approve any eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station.” (47 U.S.C. § 1455(a)(1).) Section 6409 defines “eligible facilities request” as “any request for modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that involves – (a) collocation of new transmission equipment; (b) removal of transmission equipment; or (c) replacement of transmission equipment.” (47 U.S.C. § 1455 (a)(2).) The statute does not define any of the other terms, most importantly “substantially change”, nor does it explain the process the City may use to evaluate whether an application qualifies for federal protection under this section. On December 17, 2014, the FCC adopted regulations implementing Section 6409, codified at 47 C.F.R. § 1.40001, which took effect on April 9, 2015. The regulations were intended to clarify which types of WCF projects are covered by the Spectrum Act. The regulations define terms that were used but not defined in the Spectrum Act, including “eligible support structure”, “existing”, “substantial change” and “wireless tower”. The regulations give applicants the right to assert in writing that a project is covered by the Spectrum Act. If the project falls within the definition of an eligible facilities request, the City must act on it within 60 days from the date an application is submitted, unless the City determines the request is not covered by the Spectrum Act. The 60 day time frame may be tolled by the City for incomplete applications, provided the City notifies applicant within 30 days of submittal. Failure of the City to act on the application within the allowed timeframe results in the automatic approval of such application. Page 3 To implement the Spectrum Act and the FCC rules, the City has prepared an updated ordinance. The ordinance establishes a straightforward permitting process for WCF modification requests covered under the Spectrum Act. The new ordinance also codifies other processing time rules (commonly known as the “Shot Clock”) that have been adopted since the City adopted its original ordinance, clarifies its applicability to Distributed Antenna Systems (DAS) facilities and establishes a tiered permitting system than favors collocations over new towers. Summary of Proposed Ordinance The City’s proposed ordinance divides wireless permits into three categories: Tiers 1, 2 and 3. To meet the strict timelines established by the new rules, the ordinance would create a new Tier 1 WCF permit. This permit would only apply to collocations that meet the definition of “eligible facilities” under the Spectrum Act and would provide a streamlined review by the Director. The Director’s purview would be limited to ensuring that the project meets the definition of an existing “eligible facility” and that it does not defeat existing camouflage mitigations. Under federal law, the City has limited discretion to deny these types of requests. The Tier 2 WCF permit would apply to collocations that do not fit within the Spectrum Act. These types of WCF projects would typically involve towers on private property where the height of the tower is proposed to increase by more than ten percent, towers in the public right of way proposed to be increased by ten feet or more or projects that will be adding more than four cabinets. The City’s current Code expresses a preference for collocations. The new Code continues this by creating a Tier 2 permit applicable only to collocations. Such projects would still require architectural review and are appealable like other architectural review permits. The Tier 3 WCF permit would apply to all new WCF applications. The ordinance grants the City the most discretion over applications for new facilities by requiring both architectural review and conditional use permit findings. While the old ordinance only required CUPs for certain new facilities, the new ordinance recommends this more robust review for all new facilities. The reason for this is that once a facility is permitted it gains “eligible facility” status and will be permitted to increase by right under the Spectrum Act. Also having a consistent process for all new facilities is easier to administer. Tier 3 permits may be appealed pursuant to the process used for architectural review and conditional use permits. The proposed ordinance also codifies the processing time for the three different permit types, establishes application requirements, incorporates development standards, imposes key conditions of approval and mandates removal of abandoned equipment. Table 1 below summarizes the key process changes proposed by the Ordinance. Page 4 Table 1: Wireless Facility Permit Process (Proposed) Type of Wireless Facility Timeline for City Decision (Prescribed by Federal Law) Deemed Granted Remedy (Prescribed by Federal Law) Type of Permit Required / Findings Collocations or modifications/replacements of wireless transmission equipment at an existing wireless tower or base station that do not “substantially change the physical dimensions of the existing wireless tower or base station.” (Section 6409(a) Facilities) • 60 days after application is submitted • Can extend by mutual agreement Yes; applicant must provide notice (city may challenge in court) Tier 1 WCF Permit – Director review; non-appealable Findings: 1.The applicant proposes an Eligible Facilities Request; 2.The proposed collocation or modification does not defeat any existing concealment elements of the support structure; and Other collocations that “substantially change the physical dimensions of the existing wireless tower or base station.” •90 days after application submitted No Tier 2 WCF Permit – Director review; appealable per PAMC 18.77.070 Findings = Compliance with WCF Development Standards and Architectural review findings in Section 18.76.020(d) New pole/building facade/roof mounted WCF’s • 150 days after application submitted No Tier 3 WCF Permit – Director review; appealable pursuant to PAMC 18.77.070 and 18.77.060 Required findings: 1.Compliance with WCF Development Standards 2.Architectural review findings in Section 18.76.020(d) and 3.Conditional use permit findings in Section 18.76.010(c) Planning and Transportation Commission Review The Planning and Transportation Commission reviewed this item on May 13, 2015. Their review focused on four main issues. First, they were in favor of transitioning from a locational approach to a tiered approach based on type of facility. This tiered approach is more in line with current federal telecommunications law and favors wireless collocations. Second, they discussed permitting requirements. They suggested that the ordinance be modified to clarify that if the applicant did not meet the findings, the permit would not be issued. This clarification has been added. Also, the Commission recommended that the ordinance put some reasonable parameters on the time, location, and noticing requirement (600ft) of the required community hearing for Tier 2 and 3 permits. This has also been added to the ordinance. Third, the Commission reviewed the development standards and conditions of approval. Based on public comment, they recommended including a condition of approval verifying that the RF emissions of the WCF complied with FCC regulations. This has been added to the ordinance. Fourth, the Page 5 Commission reviewed the appeal process and found it to be in line with other land use appeals. Finally, the Commission noted that many residents no longer have land lines and that adopting a clear process for installing WCF’s, and establishing a citywide level of service, is an important residential safety issue. See Attachment B for the PTC’s verbatim minutes. Connection to Wireless Master Plan In response to residents’ concerns about the AT&T DAS project (2012), the City Council directed staff to retain the services of a qualified wireless communications firm to assess the City’s wireless communication needs, propose a system to meet those needs, and develop a strategy and incentives to encourage the use of this system and collocation over other alternatives. An RFP was issued in October 2012, and the selected consultant, Anthem Telecom, is currently in the early data collection phase of the work. At this juncture, staff sees little benefit in moving forward with this work effort at this point. Given the legal landscape it would be challenging at best to require carriers to all locate in a particular location. Further, any tower that would be of sufficient size to house all carriers’ needs well into the future would have to be well over 50 feet and it would be extremely challenging to come up with a public site that would have no visual impacts. Finally, given the aesthetic impacts of large standalone towers, in urban locations such as Palo Alto, carriers have begun utilizing smaller DAS systems which do not pose the same aesthetic issues as the older generation facilities. For these reasons, staff recommends suspending the Anthem Telecom contract until next fiscal year to better assess whether it would be worthwhile to pursue a single stand alone tower. Policy Implications In recognition of the growing reliance on WCFs to provide personal wireless services to residences and businesses, Policy B-13 states “Support the development of technologically- advanced communication infrastructure and other improvements that will facilitate the growth of emerging telecommunications industries.” On the other hand, Policies L-7 and L-12 of the City’s existing Comprehensive Plan recognizes the need to evaluate changes in land use in the context of regional needs, overall City welfare and objectives as well as desires of neighbors and the preservation of neighborhood character. This ordinance attempts to strike a balance between these important policies by encouraging collocations over new installations and by requiring camouflaging and other stealth siting. Resource Impact These Zoning Code changes can be implemented with existing resources. Cost recovery fees for processing Tiered WCF permits will be included in the Municipal Fee Schedule. Environmental Review Page 6 This ordinance is exempt for the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 15061, 15301, 15302 and 15305 in that it simply establishes a comprehensive permitting scheme. ATTACHMENTS:  A: Wireless Communications Facility Ordinance (PDF)  B: P&TC Excerpt Minutes from May 13, 2015 (PDF) Department Head: Molly Stump, City Attorney Page 7 NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 1 June 12, 2015 Ordinance No. ___ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Deleting Section 18.42.110 of Chapter 18.42 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Adding a New Section 18.42.110 Pertaining to the Siting and Permitting of Wireless Communications Facilities The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Section 18.42.110 of Chapter 18.42 of Title 18 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is hereby deleted and a new Section 18.42.110 added to read, as follows: 18.42.110 Wireless Communication Facilities (a) Purpose and Interpretation The purpose of this section is two-fold: (A) to implement within the jurisdictional boundaries of the City the applicable zoning, land use and other laws, rules, regulations and policies and procedures applicable to siting applications filed with the City by wireless communications facilities infrastructure owners and operators and Wireless Communications Service providers, which seek to install or attach their facilities at locations in Palo Alto; and (B) to accommodate new wireless technologies and continued improvements to existing wireless communications facilities while minimizing their adverse visual and structural health and safety impacts. Consistent with that purpose, the provisions of this Section are to be construed in a manner that is consistent with (1) the interest of consumers in receiving the benefits of the deployment of ultra- high-speed and -capacity broadband wireless communication facilities technology and innovations and the delivery of ultra-high-speed and -capacity broadband wireless communications facilities services, (2) the interest in safeguarding the environment, preserving historic properties, and addressing aesthetics and other local values, and (3) the interest in promoting the public health, safety and welfare in Palo Alto. A Wireless Communications Facility is permitted to be sited in Palo Alto subject to applicable requirements imposed by this Chapter, which may include an architectural review process, a conditional use permit application process, or both. These processes are intended to permit Wireless Communications Facilities that blend with their existing surroundings and do not negatively impact the environment, historic properties, or public safety. The procedures prescribed by this Chapter are tailored to the type of Wireless Communication Facility that is sought. Building-mounted wireless communications facilities and Collocation of facilities are preferred and encouraged, subject to all other provisions of this Section. (b) Definitions NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 2 June 12, 2015 The following abbreviations, phrases, terms and words shall have the meanings assigned in this Section or, as appropriate, in Section 18.04.030 and Section 1.04.050 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, as may be amended from time to time, unless the context indicates otherwise. Words that are not defined in this Section or other Chapters or Sections of the Palo Alto Municipal Code shall have the meanings as set forth in Chapter 6 of Title 47 of the United States Code, Part 1 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and, if not defined therein, their common and ordinary meaning. (1) “Antenna” means a wireless Antenna and its associated equipment. The term includes a macrocell Antenna and a microcell Antenna. (2) “Associated equipment” means any and all on-site equipment, including, without limitation, back-up generators and power supply units, cabinets, coaxial and fiber optic cables, connections, shelters, radio transceivers, regular power supply units, and wiring, to which a wireless antenna is attached in order to facilitate mobile broadband service and personal wireless service delivered on mobile broadband devices. (3) “Base Station” means a structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables FCC-licensed or authorized wireless communications between user equipment and a communications network. The term does not encompass a tower as defined herein or any equipment associated with a tower. Base Station includes, without limitation: (i) Equipment associated with wireless communications services such as private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul. (ii) Radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and comparable equipment, regardless of technological configuration (including Distributed Antenna Systems (“DAS”) and small-cell networks). (iii) Any structure other than a tower that, at the time the relevant application is filed with the City under this section, supports or houses equipment described in paragraphs (i)-(ii) above and has been previously reviewed and approved by the City. (4) “Collocation” means the mounting or installation of Transmission Equipment on an Eligible Support Structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes. (5) “Eligible Facilities Request” means any request for modification of an existing Tower or Base Station that, within the meaning of the Spectrum Act, does not substantially change the physical dimensions of that Tower or Base Station, and involves (a) the Collocation of new Transmission Equipment, (b) the removal of Transmission Equipment, or (c) the replacement of Transmission Equipment. NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 3 June 12, 2015 (6) “Eligible Support Structure” means any existing Tower or Base Station that exists at the time the application is filed with the City. (7) “Existing” for a constructed Tower or Base Station, means that the Tower or Base Station has been previously reviewed and approved under the applicable City zoning or siting process, or under another applicable State or local regulatory review process, provided that a Tower that has not been reviewed and approved because it was not in a zoned area when it was built, but was lawfully constructed, is “Existing” for purposes of this definition. (8) “FCC” means the Federal Communications Commission or successor agency. (9) “Project” means a WCF to be located in Palo Alto for which a permit is required by the City. (10) “RF” means radio frequency on the radio spectrum. (11) “Spectrum Act” means Section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief Act and Job Creation Act of 2012, 47 U.S.C. § 1455(a) (providing, in part, “… a State or local government may not deny, and shall approve, any Eligible Facilities Request for a modification of any existing wireless Tower or Base Station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such Tower or Base Station.”). (12) “Substantially Changes” means, in the context of an Eligible Support Structure, a modification of an existing Tower or Base Station where any of the following criteria is met: (i) For a Tower not located in the public rights-of-way: (a) The height of the Tower is increased by (I) more than ten (10) percent, or (II) by the height of one additional Antenna array with separation from the nearest existing Antenna not to exceed twenty (20) feet, whichever is greater; or (b) There is added an appurtenance to the body of the Tower that would protrude from the edge of the Tower by (I) more than twenty (20) feet, or (II) more than the width of the Tower at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater. (ii) For a Tower located in the public rights-of-way and for all Base Stations: (a) The height of the Tower or Base Station is increased by more than ten (10) percent or ten (10) feet, whichever is greater; or (b) There is added an appurtenance to the body of that structure that would protrude from the edge of that structure by more than six (6) feet; or NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 4 June 12, 2015 (c) It involves the installation of ground cabinets that are more than ten (10) percent larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure; or (d) It involves the installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there is no pre-existing ground cabinet associated with that structure. (iii) For any Eligible Support Structure: (a) It involves the installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed four (4) cabinets; or (b) There is entailed in the proposed modification any excavation or deployment outside of the current site of the Tower or Base Station; or (c) The proposed modification would cause the concealment/camouflage elements of the Tower or Base Station to be defeated; or (d) The proposed modification would not comply with the conditions associated with the prior siting approval of construction or modification of the Tower or Base Station, unless the non-compliance is due to an increase in height, increase in width, addition of cabinets, or new excavation that does not exceed the corresponding thresholds in this section. (iv) To measure changes in height for the purposes of this section, the baseline is: (a) For deployments that are or will be separated horizontally, measured from the original Support Structure; (b) For all others, measured from the dimensions of the Tower or Base Station, inclusive of originally approved appurtenances and any modifications that were approved by the City prior to February 22, 2012. (v) To measure changes for the purposes of this section, the baseline is the dimensions that were approved by the City prior to February 22, 2012. (13) “Tower” means any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any FCC-licensed or -authorized Antenna, including any structure that is constructed for Wireless Communications Service. This term does not include a Base Station. (14) “Transmission Equipment” means equipment that facilitates transmission of any FCC-licensed or authorized Wireless Communication Service. (15) “Wireless Communications Facility” or “WCF” means any Antenna, associated equipment, Base Station, small cell system, Tower, and/or Transmission Equipment located in Palo Alto. NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 5 June 12, 2015 (16) “Wireless Communications Service” means, without limitation, all FCC- licensed back-haul and other fixed wireless services, broadcast, private, and public safety communication services, and unlicensed wireless services. (c) Types of WCF Permits Required (1) A Tier 1 WCF Permit shall be required for an Eligible Facilities Request, as defined in this Section. (2) A Tier 2 WCF Permit shall be required for: (i) Any modification of an Eligible Support Structure, including the Collocation of new equipment, that Substantially Changes the physical dimensions of the Eligible Support Structure on which it is mounted, or (ii) Any Collocation not eligible for a Tier 1 WCF Permit (3) A Tier 3 WCF Permit shall be required for the siting of any WCF that is not a Collocation subject to a Tier 1 or 2 WCF Permit. (d) WCF Application Requirements All applications for a WCF Permit shall include the following items: (1) Any applicant for a WCF Permit shall participate in an intake meeting with the Planning and Community Environment Department to file an application; (2) The applicant must specify in writing whether the applicant believes the application is for an Eligible Facilities Request subject to the Spectrum Act, and if so, provide a detailed written explanation as to why the applicant believes that the application qualifies as an Eligible Facilities Request; (3) The applicant shall complete the City’s standard application form, as may be amended from time to time; (4) The applicant shall include a completed and signed application checklist available from the City, including all information required by the application checklist; (5) Payment of the fee prescribed by the Municipal Fee Schedule; (6) The application must be accompanied by all permit applications with all required application materials for each separate permit required by the City for the proposed WCF, including a building permit, an encroachment permit (if applicable) and an electrical permit (if applicable); NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 6 June 12, 2015 (7) For Tier 2 and 3 WCF Permits, the applicant must host a community meeting at a time and location designed to maximize attendance by persons receiving notice under this subparagraph to provide outreach to the neighborhood around the Project site. The applicant shall give notice of the community meeting to all residents and property owners within 600 feet of the Project site at least 14 days in advance of the community meeting. The applicant shall provide a proof of notice affidavit to the City that contains: (i) Proof that the applicant noticed and hosted the community meeting before filing the application; (ii) A summary of comments received at the community meeting and what, if any, changes were made to the application as a result of the meeting; (8) For Tier 3 WCF Permits, the plans shall include a scaled depiction of the maximum permitted increase in the physical dimensions of the proposed Project that would be permitted by the Spectrum Act, using the proposed Project as a baseline; and (9) Satisfy other such requirements as may be, from time to time, required by the Planning and Community Environment Department Director (“Director”), as publically stated in the application checklist. (e) Permit Review (“Shot Clock”) Time Periods (1) City Review of Application Materials. The timeframe for review of an application shall begin to run when the application is submitted, but shall be tolled if the City finds the application incomplete and requests that the applicant submit additional information to complete the application. Such requests shall be made within 30 days of submission of the application. After submission of additional information, the City will notify the applicant within 10 days of this submission if the additional information failed to complete the application. (2) Tier 1 Processing Time. For Tier 1 WCF Permit applications, the City will act on the WCF application, together with any other City permits required for a proposed WCF modification, within 60 days, adjusted for any tolling due to requests for additional information or mutually agreed upon extensions of time. (i) If the City determines that the application does not qualify as a Tier 1 Eligible Facilities Request, the City will notify the applicant of that determination in writing and will process the application as a Tier 2 or Tier 3 WCF Permit application, as applicable. (ii) To the extent federal law provides a “deemed granted” remedy for Tier 1 WCF Permit applications not timely acted upon by the City, no such application shall be deemed granted until the Applicant provides notice to the City, in writing, that the application has been deemed granted after the time period provided in Section (e)(2) above has expired. NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 7 June 12, 2015 (iii) Any Tier 1 WCF Permit application that the City grants or that is deemed granted by operation of federal law shall be subject to all requirements of Section 18.42.110(i)(3), (5), (6) and (7) and 18.42.110(j)(1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6). (3) Tier 2 Processing Time. For Tier 2 WCF Permit applications, the City will act on the application within 90 days, adjusted for any tolling due to requests for additional information or mutually agreed upon extensions of time. (4) Tier 3 Processing Time. For Tier 3 WCF Permit applications, the City will act on the application within 150 days, adjusted for any tolling due to requests for additional information or mutually agreed upon extensions of time. (5) Denial of Application. If the City denies a WCF application, the City will notify the applicant of the denial in writing of the reasons for the denial. (f) Tier 1 WCF Permit Process and Findings (1) A Tier 1 WCF Permit shall be reviewed by the Director. The Director’s decision shall be final and shall not be appealable pursuant to the procedures set forth in Sections 18.77 or 18.78. (2) The Director shall grant a Tier 1 WCF Permit provided that the Director finds that the applicant proposes an Eligible Facilities Request; (3) The Director shall impose the following conditions on the grant of a Tier 1 WCF Permit: (i) The proposed Collocation or modification shall not defeat any existing concealment elements of the Support Structure; and (ii) The proposed WCF shall comply with the Development Standards in Section 18.42.110(i)(3), (5), (6) and (7), and the Conditions of Approval in Section 18.42.110(j). (g) Tier 2 WCF Permit Process and Findings (1) A Tier 2 WCF Permit shall be reviewed by the Director. The Director’s decision shall be appealable pursuant to the process for architectural review set forth in Section 18.77.070. NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 8 June 12, 2015 (2) The Director, or Council on appeal, shall grant a Tier 2 WCF Permit provided the proposed WCF complies with the Development Standards in Section 18.42.110(i) and the conditions of approval in Section 18.42.110(j), and all of the architectural review findings in Section 18.76.020(d) can be made. (3) The Director, or Council on appeal, shall deny a Tier 2 WCF Permit if the above findings cannot be made. (h) Tier 3 WCF Permit Process and Findings (1) A Tier 3 WCF Permit shall be reviewed by the Director. The Director’s decision shall be appealable pursuant to the process for architectural review set forth in Section 18.77.070 and the process for conditional use permits set forth in Section 18.77.060. (2) The Director or Council on appeal shall grant a Tier 3 WCF Permit provided the proposed WCF complies with the Development Standards in Section 18.42.110(i) and the conditions of approval in Section 18.42.110(j), and all of the architectural review findings in Section 18.76.020(d) and the conditional use permit findings in Section 18.76.010(c) can be made. (3) The Director, or Council on appeal, shall deny a Tier 3 WCF Permit if the above findings cannot be made. (i) Development Standards Except as otherwise provided in this Section, a proposed WCF Project shall comply with the following standards: (1) Shall utilize the smallest footprint possible; (2) Shall be designed to minimize the overall height, mass, and size of the cabinet and enclosure structure; (3) Shall be screened from public view; (4) Shall be architecturally compatible with the existing site; (5) Shall be placed at a location that would not require the removal of any required landscaping or would reduce the quantity of landscaping to a level of noncompliance with the Zoning Code; NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 9 June 12, 2015 (6) An Antenna, Base Station, or Tower shall be designed to minimize its visibility from off-site locations and shall be of a “camouflaged” or “stealth” design, including concealment, screening, and other techniques to hide or blend the Antenna, Base Station, or Tower into the surrounding area; (7) A building-mounted Antenna, Base Station, or Tower shall be architecturally compatible with the existing building on which the Antenna, Base Station, or Tower is attached; (8) For any Tier 2 or Tier 3 WCF proposed to be attached on an historic structure/site, as designated by Chapter 16.49, historic review shall also be required; (9) Except as otherwise permitted by the Spectrum Act, a building-mounted WCF may extend fifteen (15) feet beyond the permitted height of the building in the zone district; (10) Except as otherwise permitted by the Spectrum Act, a tower or other stand-alone Tier 3 WCF Project shall not exceed sixty-five (65) feet in height; and (11) A tower or other stand-alone Tier 3 WCF may encroach into the interior/street side and rear setback. (j) Conditions of Approval In addition to any other conditions of approval permitted under federal and state law and this Code that the Director deems appropriate or required under this Code, all WCF Projects approved under this Chapter, whether approved by the Director or deemed granted by operation of law, shall be subject to the following conditions of approval: (1) Permit conditions. The grant or approval of a WCF Tier 1 Permit shall be subject to the conditions of approval of the underlying permit, except as may be preempted by the Spectrum Act. (2) As-built plans. The applicant shall submit to the Director an as-built set of plans and photographs depicting the entire WCF as modified, including all Transmission Equipment and all utilities, within ninety (90) days after the completion of construction. (3) Applicant shall hire a radio engineer licensed by the State of California to measure the actual radio frequency emission of the WCF and determine if it meets FCC's standards. A report, certified by the engineer, of all calculations, required measurements, and the engineer’s findings with respect to compliance with the FCC’s radio frequency emission standards NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 10 June 12, 2015 shall be submitted to the Planning Division within one year of commencement of operation. (4) Indemnification. To the extent permitted by law, the applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the City, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside or void, any permit or approval authorized hereby for the Project, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City for its actual attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion and at Applicant’s expense, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. (5) Compliance with applicable laws. The applicant shall comply with all applicable provisions of the Code, any permit issued under this Code, and all other applicable federal, state and local laws (including without limitation all building code, electrical code and other public safety requirements). Any failure by the City to enforce compliance with any applicable laws shall not relieve any applicant of its obligations under this code, any permit issued under this code, or all other applicable laws and regulations. (6) Compliance with approved plans. The proposed Project shall be built in compliance with the approved plans on file with the Planning Division. (k) Removal of Abandoned Equipment A WCF (Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3) or a component of that WCF that ceases to be in use for more than ninety (90) days shall be removed by the applicant, Wireless Communications Service provider, or property owner within ninety (90) days of the cessation of use of that WCF. A new conditional use permit shall not be issued to an owner or operator of a WCF or a Wireless Communications Service provider until the abandoned WCF or its component is removed. (l) Revocation The Director may revoke any WCF permit if the permit holder fails to comply with any condition of the permit. The Director’s decision to revoke a permit shall be appealable pursuant to the process for architectural review set forth in Section 18.77.070 and the process for conditional use permits set forth in Section 18.77.060. NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 11 June 12, 2015 SECTION 2. Any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this Ordinance. SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 4. The Council finds that the adoption of this ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline sections 15061(b) and 15301, 15302 and 15305 because it simply provides a comprehensive permitting scheme. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first date after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ NOT YET APPROVED 150615 cs 0131334 12 June 12, 2015 Senior Asst. City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Planning & Community Environment City of Palo Alto Page 1 Planning and Transportation Commission 1 Verbatim Minutes 2 May 13, 2015 3 4 EXCERPT 5 6 7 Public Hearing 8 9 FCC Telecommunications: Recommendation to the City Council Repealing PAMC Section 18.42.110 of 10 Chapter 18.42 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and Adopting a New Section 18.42.110 Pertaining to Siting 11 and Permitting of Wireless Communications Facilities. Environmental Determination: Exempt Pursuant to 12 CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and Section 15301 (Class 1). CONTINUED FROM APRIL 29, 2015 13 14 Chair Tanaka: Ok, so I’m going to call the meeting back to order. We’re going to begin Item 2, which is 15 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Telecommunications. So it’s a recommendation to the 16 City Council repealing the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.42.110 of the Chapter 18.42 of the 17 PAMC and adopting a new Section 18.42.110. Does staff have a presentation like to review? 18 19 Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney: Thank you, Chair Tanaka and Commission; Cara Silver, Senior 20 Assistant City Attorney. What you have before you is a proposed amendment to the City’s Wireless 21 Telecommunications Ordinance. We have an existing ordinance on the books; however, that ordinance 22 has not been refreshed lately and there have been some amendments to a federal law which require us 23 to take a look at that ordinance and make some, make some modifications. So the telecommunications 24 field is one that it has been evolving over the years and historically there have been limitations on cities’ 25 abilities to regulate on this area. Cities are preempted by a broad range of federal laws that are designed 26 to promote the installation of telecommunications and encourage the proliferation and use of wireless 27 devices. Also there is an overlay of state law that also limits somewhat the city’s ability to regulate these 28 facilities and also grants extra rights to carriers to locate facilities primarily in the right of way without 29 much local control. So it’s been a frustrating area of law for many, many cities. That being said there is 30 some discretion that the City has; traditionally we’ve been able to regulate the aesthetic impacts of 31 towers and cell sites. However, even that area of local control is starting to be eroded. 32 33 So the latest federal action in this area is known as the Spectrum Act. And that was adopted in 2012 as 34 a rider to a tax bill. And what that law does is it requires local governments to approve applications 35 modifying an existing wireless communications facility that do not substantially alter the existing facility. 36 The problem with that particular law was that there were no definitions attached to it so it’s been very 37 difficult for cities to implement. It also did not have time limits attached although it required that these 38 applications be processed expeditiously. So there’s been some confusion in this area for a while and 39 what has happened is the FCC stepped in and adopted a set of regulations. Those regulations were just 40 recently adopted. They went into effect April 9, 2015, and they actually are under legal challenge right 41 now. A group of cities have filed a federal court action challenging the ability of the FCC to adopt these 42 regulations. We don’t expect to get a decision on that case for quite some time and the regulations are 43 in effect until that litigation is resolved. So what those regulations do is they define critical terms that 44 are, that are used in the Spectrum Act. They provide guidance on which projects, which wireless 45 communication facility colocation projects are governed by the Spectrum Act, and they provide a sixty 46 day period to act on those covered projects. 47 48 We’ve attached an ordinance that implements the Spectrum Act and what we also have done is that 49 we’ve just taken a fresh look at our existing ordinance and what we’re proposing is that the existing 50 ordinance be restructured. And so restructured in a way where we have three different tiers of facilities. 51 So the first tier will be the colocations that are governed by the Spectrum Act. And that would, those 52 would be the projects that are, are required to be processed in 60 days and given that short time frame, 53 what we are essentially recommending is a ministerial type of permit. That that be issued by the 54 Planning staff at a staff level. There not be any appeals for that type of permit, but that there be 55 City of Palo Alto Page 2 conditions in the ordinance that require these facilities to comply with various laws and be camouflaged 1 and be appropriately screened and that type of thing. So that would be tier one level of review. 2 3 Tier two would apply to other colocations that do not fall under the tier one. The tier one covered 4 colocations are and let me back up, colocation is an existing facility that can either be a separate pole 5 that where the only purpose for that pole is to house an antenna or it can be some other kind of a like a 6 building with an antenna on it and if another carrier or another antenna wants to locate on those two 7 facilities that’s a colocation. So it’s two different antennas on housed on one base station or facility. So 8 the tier one colocations are permitted if the facility does not grow essentially by 10 percent or more. So 9 then the tier two would be anything that would be greater than the 10 percent increase. And those 10 would require more review. They would require both architectural review or they would require an 11 architectural review and they would go through a more developed process. There would be Architectural 12 Review Board (ARB) review and then they could be appealed to the Council as well. 13 14 Then finally we have the tier three facilities which are everything else. And these will most likely be 15 actually new facilities. And what we want to do with these new facilities is give them extra scrutiny 16 because under the Spectrum Act they then receive this special status and will be allowed to grow by an 17 extra 10 percent if they are not or by an extra 10 percent by right under the Spectrum Act. And so we 18 want to make sure they are located in an appropriate area and that they are screened and architecturally 19 designed and all of that. So those will be given the highest level of review. They’ll go through 20 architectural review. They’ll also go through a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) and then they will be 21 reviewed by the Planning Commission and by the Council on appeal. 22 23 So what we would like from you is a couple of things. First of all we’d like your input on this tiered 24 approach. Do you find that it’s straightforward? Is it something that’s understandable by carriers and 25 can it be easily implemented? We would also like your input on the development standards and 26 conditions of approval that are contained in the ordinance and again these development standards and 27 conditions of approval will apply to all, all projects, all wireless facilities. And then also we’d like your 28 input on the appeal process that we have outlined. So with that that concludes my presentation and I’m 29 happy to answer questions. 30 31 Chair Tanaka: Thank you. So we’re now going to go to the public comment on this item. Vice-Chair I 32 think we have a couple of cards, do you want to read the names? Each speaker would have five 33 minutes. 34 35 Vice-Chair Fine: Our first speaker, I’m not sure what order we got these; our first speaker is Arthur Keller. 36 Ah, thanks. Herb Borock. 37 38 Herb Borock: Good evening, Chair Tanaka and Commissioners. I want to speak a little bit about the 39 process regarding the regulation issued by the FCC. The mention of that in this staff report to my 40 recollection is the first time there’s been anything written about it advising any legislative body in this City 41 about that regulation whether there was a draft regulation promulgated for people to comment upon and 42 to give the City Council and its boards and commissions an opportunity to make comments so the Council 43 on behalf of the City could comment upon it. And this is the first evidence that there’s been litigation 44 about the regulation that was issued as a final regulation and as happened in the past when cities have 45 challenged something in court the Council has often given opportunity to decide whether to participate in 46 that litigation. 47 48 The issue of wireless communication facilities has been a controversial one in the community on two 49 occasions that I can remember the City Council decided to hear appeals of proposed wireless facilities, 50 one at the President Hotel on University Avenue and the other at the Little League field on Middlefield 51 Road in South Palo Alto. At the time of the previous Planning Director Curtis Williams the Council had 52 given direction to the Planning staff to study the siting of wireless facilities on the City’s utility 53 substations. I don’t recall anything coming of that in the form of a final staff report about that. And 54 currently under the Utilities Department although being implemented by the Information Technology (IT) 55 Chief Information Officer (CIO) with the team from both departments there’s a Wireless Master Plan 56 City of Palo Alto Page 3 being developed. So there clearly is a lot of interest of the City Council on the issue and that’s why I’m 1 surprised I don’t recall the issue of potential regulations and how they would affect the City coming 2 before the Council on a timely basis so they could work, participate in the development of those 3 regulations. 4 5 Once before on another issue the staff did not see fit to place on the Council’s agenda a particular issue 6 of concern to the community and that was high speed rail. The first Environmental Impact Report (EIR) 7 on the high speed rail connection between the San Francisco Peninsula and the Central Valley was never 8 placed on the Council’s agenda and nobody on the staff or the Council made comments on that Draft 9 Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) and as you know from the EIR process that means the City could 10 not be a litigant to challenge anything in the EIR. They eventually the Council attempted to file a friend 11 of the court brief in that litigation, but under the previous City Attorney Gary Baum the court ruled that it 12 was not an appropriate use of the friend of the court process, that it was not the appropriate type of 13 brief. 14 15 So from my point of view I believe that it’s difficult at this stage to go back and change what was done or 16 not done before, but certainly the Council should be made aware of what the text of the regulation is and 17 what the litigation is that’s going on so that you can make a decision as to what we can or cannot do and 18 what it wants to do or not want to do. I would think that the various departments involved in this not 19 just the City Attorney’s Office, but the Utilities Department, IT Department have an obligation to keep the 20 City Council informed about this issue considering the extent to which the Council has been involved in 21 the wireless issues and considering also the fact that it’s been an area of controversy in the City. Thank 22 you. 23 24 Vice-Chair Fine: Mr. Arthur Keller. 25 26 Arthur Keller: Thank you. So there are three, three comments that I have. Thank you, Chair Tanaka and 27 Commissioners. The first thing is that the ordinance should spell out a notice requirement indicating the 28 radius of the project that should be noticed when there is a wireless communication facility either added 29 or expanded. And that notice may vary depending on whether it’s tier one, tier two, or tier three, but 30 that notice requirement should be spelled out in the ordinance. 31 32 The second thing is that if the wireless communication facility is built on top of or on the façade of a 33 occupied building that the permit should not be finalized with respect to the wireless communication 34 facility unless there’s independent measurement of the wireless communication facilities as installed and 35 operating as to ensure that the emissions meet FCC regulations with respect to the adjacent occupied 36 space. That actually that somebody is actually a reason to measure. Somebody goes in there, measures 37 that it meets the allowed amount of emissions. And I’m not sure whether that should also be in terms of 38 open, elsewhere in the facility where people are walking underneath, but certainly where it’s occupied 39 space, office building or residential or a church or the like that’s occupied for long periods that’s 40 important. 41 42 The third thing is really minor. I always thought that colocation was spelt with one L and that’s why it’s 43 spelt with a, pronounced with a long O as opposed to collocation, that’s how I would pronounce it if it 44 were two L’s. Thank you. 45 46 Chair Tanaka: Seeing that we have no other cards we’re going to close the public hearing for this item 47 and bring it to the Commission for questions. And so the way we’re going to try to do this meeting is 48 we’re going to start with just general Questions and Answers (Q&A) to make sure everyone’s on the 49 same page. We have a list of four issues that staff would like us to address and what I’d like to do in a 50 similar format to last meeting is we’ll add to this list of specific issues that the Commission wants to talk 51 about beyond the four that staff has brought up and so we’ll add this to the list. So want to start off first 52 with if there are any questions that Commissioners have for staff. So you hit your lights and I see two 53 lights so the first one is Commissioner Rosenblum. 54 55 City of Palo Alto Page 4 Commissioner Rosenblum: Yes, I apologize in advance because I’m going to have to run to catch a plane. 1 So I’ll ask, I’ll stay for the next 10 minutes or so. Was there input that you received from experts on 2 either side of this issue? So to me the people on one side are those who install cellular facilities. So 3 understanding if the nose requirements, timing, the shot clock, etcetera, if this adheres to their normal, 4 their normal need for implementation notice, revisions, etcetera. And on the other side of the issue there 5 are consumer etcetera advocates and environmental advocates who need time to review and understand 6 the implications of the project, etcetera. So what research or data was collected to create not the tiers, 7 but more the shot clock and notice requirements? 8 9 Ms. Silver: Thank you, Commissioner Rosenblum. So the, we didn’t do a community outreach meeting 10 for this particular ordinance. Sometimes we do do that. We thought that since this ordinance went, is 11 required to go to the Planning Commission that that would be a good starting point for some outreach 12 and we may do additional outreach following this meeting. With respect to noticing we have, we’re 13 suggesting a 600 foot radius which is our common noticing procedures and I believe that’s what we have 14 followed for other facilities and so we’ve in our old ordinance so we’ve carried that forward. And then 15 your third question? 16 17 Commissioner Rosenblum: It’s the timings. 18 19 Ms. Silver: Yes, the (interrupted) 20 21 Commissioner Rosenblum: Times for submission and appeal. 22 23 Ms. Silver: Right, so that comes from what we call the shot clock rules which are in several different sets 24 of regulations, but they are in the 60 day time period that we’re most concerned with is in the latest FCC 25 order that I referenced. 26 27 Chair Tanaka: Commissioner Michael. 28 29 Commissioner Michael: So Mr. Borock said a number of interesting things, one of which was to make 30 reference to the Wireless Master Plan. so one question I have since I haven’t reviewed that recently or I 31 can’t even remember what the contents are in specific, but to the extent that there’s this new ordinance 32 how would you propose to cross reference into the Wireless Master Plan the, the key elements of the 33 proposed ordinance or in the alternative would you want to formulate some of the provisions of the 34 ordinance to make use of the Wireless Master Plan to suggest that you would qualify for a certain tier 35 one, two, or three based on how it’s addressed and the policies in the Wireless Master Plan? So that’s 36 one question. 37 38 Then the other question is again going back to I think Herb Borock was very helpful in asking whether, 39 what are the lessoned learned from some of these two prior experiences. And I wasn’t involved with the 40 first one, but the Little League tower was one that generated considerable public interest. We had a full 41 house that evening and it’s kind of as an example of there’s a lot of sometimes controversy around a 42 specific item, but very little attention is paid to the planning that would sort of determine the disposition 43 of the specific items in the future. And so the public isn’t kind of engaged when the plans are proposed, 44 but it may affect them much more powerfully than the specific item does where they come out and tell us 45 what they think. 46 47 But what I noted with the huge outpouring of public engagement which I thought was wonderful, was 48 part of the group was opposed and another part was in favor. And the part that was opposed kind of 49 raised issues about the height of the tower, which would get you into tier two or tier three under this 50 thing. They also thought that the appearance, the aesthetic aspect was subject [unintelligible] but that 51 was sort of an ARB issue not so much Planning Commission. And then they raised questions about safety 52 and [unintelligible] of emissions and what have you that I don’t feel qualified to, to determine. But the 53 other group raised some other issues about safety and they said a lot of people don’t have landlines and 54 if they need to make a 911 call or if you’ve got a minor child and a contact or needing to contact a parent 55 or vice-versa or you’ve got various day to day practical things that you’ve got to get done how do you get 56 City of Palo Alto Page 5 them done? You get them done with your wireless connectivity and if you can’t do that then you’re 1 unable to do them in this modern society. So there’s issues of safety on both sides, there’s issues of the 2 aesthetics and height limit are clearly something which requires review, but my question was in the 3 controversies in the past we have are those factored into this ordinance in such a way that those people 4 would be happier with this ordinance in effect than if it weren’t? 5 6 Ms. Silver: Thank you, Commissioner Michael. We, we have certainly attempted to take those previous 7 cases into account when fashioning the ordinance. That’s one of the reasons why we have tiered the 8 permits. We thought that it makes sense to try to limit public or hurdles and regulatory hurdles and try 9 to expedite facilities that comply with the, that are well, first of all that are required by law and also that 10 comply with our standard procedures for screening and camouflaging and various aesthetic concerns. 11 And so typically facilities that are co-located in a light standard or in a utility pole tend to be more 12 acceptable to the community. The ball field example was an exception to that, but there have been 13 hundreds of these facilities rolled out in this area and generally the aesthetic concerns are minimized 14 when the facility is integrated into a light standard or a utility pole. So those are the tier one facilities. 15 On the other hand, on the other end of the spectrum the stand alone facilities sometimes they are 16 camouflaged trees, those types of facilities tend to be more controversial and that’s why of course they, 17 we thought that it would be better for those to go through a higher level of review both architectural and 18 CUP review. 19 20 Then with respect to the Wireless Master Plan I know that we have hired a consultant to take a look at 21 siting a large tower where many different multiple carriers can co-locate. And I think that in connection 22 with this ordinance when we bring this ordinance to the Council assuming it moves forward that we will 23 talk to the Council about whether they want to continue along that plan in light of the recent change in 24 law and in light of what we have seen as the favored practice of carriers wanting to roll out smaller sites 25 and the Distributed Antenna Sites (DAS) sites. We’ve been seeing more DAS located rather than these 26 big stand-alone facilities. So we will certainly have that conversation at the Council level and we’ll see 27 what comes of it. 28 29 Chair Tanaka: Ok, I see no other lights for questions so let’s move on to the discussion issues. So we 30 have four listed by staff. That’s currently listed on the screen right now. I haven’t heard of any specific 31 issues that from Commissioners that want to be discussed. If there are please hit your lights and I’ll add 32 it to the list here. Commissioner Michael. 33 34 Commissioner Michael: So I’ve had the experience from time to time of being in a place where there isn’t 35 very good cell coverage or your cell phone gets dropped and for example, once I was in a city which in 36 Central California, Cambria, and they had a local ordinance that basically prohibited the wireless antenna 37 and so it was just a big dead zone. There’s no cell phone coverage at all in a significant area. So that 38 was a, and that was a problem because I had to meet somebody and I couldn’t find that person and they 39 couldn’t find me and I’d just ridden my bicycle 100 miles and it was kind of poignant. 40 41 But anyway so my question is and maybe this is a Comp Plan issue, which is currently being updated and 42 revised and would there be a policy in the Comp Plan that would make sense to suggest that we have as 43 a goal that there be a certain level of potential connectivity or signal strength, wireless signal strength 44 throughout the City or that there would be not less than a certain quality of connectivity or access in any 45 of the residential or commercial areas. There might be sort of a different standard. Because for many 46 people this is of critical importance and certainly want to respect the aesthetics and other issues, but I 47 think that increasingly we live in a world where if you need to communicate or to connect it may be of 48 practical or other significant urgency and so should there be a policy that suggests that the City commits 49 to a certain level of service to facilitate that and maybe that could be part of the Wireless Master Plan or 50 whatever. 51 52 Chair Tanaka: Ok, so I added that to the list. Are there any other issues? Hit your lights. Ok. So we 53 only have five issues then; so one is the signal strength of the City by Commissioner Michael and then 54 the four from staff. Since Commissioner Michael just talked about the signal strength issue anyone that 55 wishes to speak on that please hit your lights. Commissioner Downing. 56 City of Palo Alto Page 6 1 Commissioner Downing: I strongly support those comments and I do feel that it is a little bit odd, I mean 2 I understand that there’s a lot of things that we can’t foresee and we’d want to give discretion on, but I 3 am a little bit troubled that as far as I can tell I mean it just says that approval for these tier three 4 projects is just up to the Director. And there’s, that seems difficult for the Director because there’s 5 nothing in here to give guidance on when he should or shouldn’t approve. And I mean I think it would 6 be useful (interrupted) 7 8 Chair Tanaka: Commissioner Downing maybe can you save those comments for the second when we talk 9 about the tiered approach? We’re talking about the first one which is signal strength throughout the City. 10 11 Commissioner Downing: Well but that’s what I mean. 12 13 Chair Tanaka: Ok. 14 15 Commissioner Downing: I’m saying that it shall be reviewed by the Director and then there should be 16 something here which says if this improves signal strength in a place that really needs it, if this is a safety 17 issue, then that’s a reason to approve. So I’m supportive of those comments. 18 19 Chair Tanaka: Thank you. Any other Commissioner that wants to weigh in on this topic that 20 Commissioner Michael brought up? Ok, seeing no lights I’m going to comment on it myself. So actually 21 I, I think this is actually a really good idea. I think cellular coverage is kind of moved from a luxury item 22 to a must have, to something that has many benefits besides just entertainment; there’s safety and 23 emergency reasons why we want to have it. So I think that makes sense. I think it actually makes sense 24 also to have this as part of the Comp Plan. It’s kind of a modern update of the Comp Plan back when the 25 Comp Plan was looked at extensively this wasn’t something that was probably at the top of the line, but 26 today it is and people really want this kind of signal strength. So I do support that Commissioner 27 Michael’s comments on this. 28 29 Seeing no other Commissioners weighing in on this let’s move on to the second topic. And maybe before 30 we start maybe if staff can just frame it up for us and then we’ll talk about the [unintelligible] tiered 31 approach. If there’s any specific, I mean you kind of talked about it, but anything specific about that 32 issue that you want us to address? 33 34 Ms. Silver: Yeah, so in the previous version of the ordinance or actually the current version of the 35 ordinance the level of review is based on locations. And what we are doing now is transitioning over to a 36 tiered approach where it would be based on really the type of facility that is being proposed. And so 37 what we’re asking from you is whether that approach makes sense. 38 39 Chair Tanaka: Ok Commissioners, hit your lights if you have any comments on this tiered approach. In 40 favor, not in favor? Staff wants to know. Commissioner Michael. 41 42 Commissioner Michael: I think the tiered approach makes perfect sense. 43 44 Chair Tanaka: Commissioner Alcheck. 45 46 Commissioner Alcheck: I agree. 47 48 Chair Tanaka: I also agree with that. Ok, any other comments? Otherwise we’ll move on. Ok, input on 49 permitting requirements; can staff frame that up for us? 50 51 Ms. Silver: So the permitting requirements are contained in Section D of the ordinance. That includes all 52 of the application materials that are requested and we want to just make sure that we have a 53 comprehensive list. I did make a note of Mr. Keller’s comments about the a notice requirement and there 54 is a notice requirement for tiers two and three that neighbors within 600 feet be given notice and that 55 the applicant provide a or preform a public meeting. We’re not recommending a public meeting for the 56 City of Palo Alto Page 7 tier one because those are essentially ministerial permits and so we don’t want to give the community a 1 false expectation that there’s some discretion involved in those permits. So we do have a notice 2 requirement for tiers two and three. 3 Also Mr. Keller suggested that for wireless facilities built on top of occupied facilities that a report be 4 issued that the Radio Frequency (RF) emissions comply with FCC requirements following the installation 5 of the facility. And I personally think that’s a great idea and I would recommend incorporating that also 6 into the requirements. 7 8 Chair Tanaka: Ok Commissioners, does anyone want to comment on this item, this topic? Commissioner 9 Downing. 10 11 Commissioner Downing: I think kind of to my previous point so I mean there are quite a few 12 development standards here. There are a lot of conditions that you need to meet. My concern is though 13 that you could meet all these conditions, but it still seems like you could get rejected anyway, right? 14 That’s kind of the way I read this. And so for me personally like I don’t know how we want to do that 15 whether or not that says and there’s a favorable finding if there’s a safety issue I don’t know how to put 16 this in, but in some way like I don’t I would like to avoid another situation like the ballpark where that 17 had been going on for years and years because even though they were doing everything they were 18 supposed to do people were complaining. Like I would like that, I would like this process to be more 19 expedient, right? And it is a safety concern. More and more of us don’t have landlines. So. 20 21 Chair Tanaka: Commissioner Michael. 22 23 Commissioner Michael: So in general I think the application requirements, the permitting requirements 24 are pretty straightforward. The one question that I would have is where you probably expect the most 25 controversy is for the tier two and tier three permits and this issue of the community meeting it isn’t 26 defined as to time of day or place of holding such meeting and that may be something that you want to 27 clarify so that there’s no dispute as to the convenience. You know you could do it at 7:00 in the morning 28 and no one would be awake or you could do it late at night and or during working hours or does it have 29 to be convenient to the neighborhood to which the location in which the proposed installation might be or 30 would it be in a public facility? So you might do something to make that more clear. 31 32 Chair Tanaka: Ok, seeing no other lights on this topic, oh, actually Commissioner Gardias. 33 34 Commissioner Gardias: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m thinking what to add, what sort of value. So 35 pretty much just going back to the tiers, right, and just listening to my colleagues and some comments 36 that were made here, right? So current tiers are based pretty much on the physical dimensions of the 37 change, but then just there are some other dimensions of change: safety, strength of the emissions, we 38 talked about this, right, strength of the signal. So pretty much within the same, within the same physical 39 structure giving technology there could be a number of other changes that public or engineering may be 40 concern and would like to just have more strict review than just pretty much simple review and approval 41 process. So for this reason when I’m just looking at the tiers that they’re lack certain, certain other 42 aspects beyond the physical dimensions. Just thinking about this I would just make a recommendation to 43 enhance the tiers, the definition of the tiers with the change in some, in some in nonphysical aspects. 44 Thank you. 45 46 Chair Tanaka: Ok. So Commissioner Gardias has made a interesting suggestion. I don’t know if anyone 47 has any comments on that. If so hit your lights otherwise we’ll move on. Ok, so we’re going to move on. 48 So let’s go to the third item which is input on development standards and conditions of approval. Does 49 staff want to just frame that up? 50 51 Ms. Silver: Yes, thank you. Those sections of the ordinance are contained in I and J and similar to the 52 application requirements these are requirements that would apply to all applications and in particular we 53 have set it up this way to apply to tier one facilities which because of the short timeframe for review 54 there is a concern that these could be deemed approved under the new legislation in a 60 day period and 55 City of Palo Alto Page 8 so we wanted to have some codified requirements that would apply to those facilities in particular that 1 run the risk of being deemed approved if they’re not acted on in that short time period. 2 3 Chair Tanaka: Ok. Anyone want to comment on this item as framed up by staff? I see no lights so it 4 looks like the Commission has no input on this item. Ok, let’s go to the last item which is input on appeal 5 process. Staff can you frame that up? 6 7 Ms. Silver: Yes, thank you. So the appeal process again is as we mentioned before the tier one we’re not 8 recommending an appeal process. Tier two we are recommending that that go through the standard 9 ARB process which ultimately can be appealed to the Council. And then tier three which are for the new 10 facilities and those are for the facilities that we don’t necessarily want to encourage, those go through a 11 more robust process with ARB, Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC), and then Council on 12 appeal. 13 14 Chair Tanaka: Ok, do any Commissioners have any comments on this? Hit your lights. Commissioner 15 Downing. 16 17 Commissioner Downing: I don’t have an issue with this appeal process. I think the appeal process makes 18 sense. I think though what I would like to again it’s the same point. What I’d like to see is what are 19 these commissions supposed to find, right? Because like this came to PTC and it was just like well… you 20 know, you could come up with anything as a reason to approve or not approve it and there is nothing in 21 the text to go take us one way or the other. I don’t know. 22 23 Ms. Silver: So let me respond to that. The findings that need to be made are the standard architectural 24 review findings and the standard CUP findings. And so those are contained in other sections of the code. 25 And so we’ve referenced the code sections but we haven’t imported those particular findings into this 26 ordinance. We’ve just referenced that process. And that’s the way we typically write these types of 27 ordinances. If there’s an existing permitting scheme in process or in the code already we just reference 28 it. 29 30 Commissioner Downing: Ok, so in those sections is it clear that if you meet the outlined requirements 31 then you will be approved? 32 33 Ms. Silver: Yes. 34 35 Commissioner Downing: Ok. 36 37 Ms. Silver: So those are those the 18 or so ARB findings all of those findings have to be made or the 38 project will be denied. 39 40 Commissioner Downing: That I understand, but what I want information on is the reverse. If we find 41 that everything is in compliance, right? Like all these conditions are met, do we still have a right to 42 refuse? That’s the question. 43 44 Ms. Silver: No. You don’t. 45 46 Commissioner Downing: Ok. 47 48 Ms. Silver: You have to approve it. And so that’s a good point, maybe the language can be clarified to 49 reflect that. 50 51 Commissioner Downing: Right and I just bring that up because I see things here like shall comply with 52 the following standards, right? Or the application process you will deliver like the following including, 53 right? But none of this is, none of this makes clear that this is sufficient. It just says it’s necessary. You 54 know what I’m saying? So that’s the clarity I’m going for because otherwise I think it’s really hard for the 55 Director to make any sort of reasoned response to a lot of angry neighbors. I think it’s just really hard if 56 City of Palo Alto Page 9 you don’t have solid things to point to and say it’s met all the requirements, we thought really hard about 1 these requirements, this is it. And to that extent I’m happy with these requirements being more strict, 2 but I would just like it to be clear that if you do meet them you’re good to go. 3 Chair Tanaka: Do Commissioners have comments on this? Any other comments on this item? Ok, I have 4 actually, I’m going to go backwards a bit because I there’s one item I saw on Page 9. This is for the 5 third item, input on development standards and commissions approval. So this is commission’s approval 6 section, which is Part 3. It’s more of a question for staff. So we’re probably ok here. It’s the 7 indemnification section and so this section is saying indemnify the City, its City Council, its officers, 8 employees, and agents. And I’m just curious so does that also include like the Planning Commission and 9 ARB? I’m just, it probably is, but I want to make sure. 10 11 Ms. Silver: Yes, it does, although typically the Planning Commission and ARB members are not 12 individually sued in these types of lawsuits. Generally it’s just the City that’s sued, but if they were, yes, 13 the carrier would have to take on the defense. 14 15 Chair Tanaka: Ok, I just want to make sure. Ok, so guys I think we’ve kind of weighed in on this topic 16 and it’s the time in the meeting now to decide on what to do. We had some good suggestions about 17 signal strength throughout the City by Commissioner Michael. Both Commissioner Downing and myself 18 also thought that was good. I think that on the tiered approach most folks that was a good, good idea. 19 Gardias thought that maybe perhaps we could do something around just some of the nonphysical 20 aspects. On the permitting requirements I don’t think there was any specific things although I think 21 Downing, Commissioner Downing and Commissioner Michael also just thought that was good. Nothing, 22 we didn’t have much input on the development standards. And appeal process actually I do want to 23 comment on that as well. Commissioner Downing said it should be clear and I agree. It should, we 24 should try to make the process to provide our residents and visitors with reliable quality cellular service 25 makes a lot of sense. So I do also support that comment. Does anyone want to make a Motion at this 26 point? Commissioner Michael 27 28 Commissioner Michael: I have a question and that is I think some ideas have been suggested that might 29 perhaps sort of improve the language. Would you prefer to just reflect on those comments and then 30 come back with something that would be revised and then we would vote on that or do you want us to 31 try to craft a Motion that reflects some specific input? 32 33 Ms. Silver: Yeah, I think we can I’ve been taking notes and I think that your guidance has been really 34 helpful. I don’t know that we necessarily need to come back with a revised ordinance. None of the 35 comments that you’ve made so far concern me. I think they’re all good comments and we can just 36 incorporate them into the ordinance that we pass on to Council if that’s acceptable to the Commission. 37 38 MOTION 39 40 Commissioner Michael: So I would make a Motion to recommend that the City Council adopt the 41 ordinance deleting the old section and adding the new section subject to the staff making whatever 42 revisions it deems appropriate to the language that we’ve seen tonight. 43 44 Chair Tanaka: Do we have a second? 45 46 SECOND 47 48 Commissioner Gardias: Second. 49 50 Chair Tanaka: Ok, Commissioner Gardias. Does the maker of the Motion wish to speak to the Motion? 51 Does the seconder? Ok. Anyone want to have any discussion topics on this amendment, revisions, 52 substitute motions? Ok. If not I see no lights so we’re going to take a vote then. So all in favor raise 53 your hand. Ok, all not in favor? Unanimous. Ok guys we’re done with this item. We’ll close this item 54 and move on to the next part. 55 56 City of Palo Alto Page 10 MOTION PASSED (6-0-1, Commissioner Rosenblum absent) 1 2 Commission Action: Commissioner Michael moved that to approve the wireless ordinance, 3 Commissioner Gardias seconded. Commissioner Rosenblum left before we voted, and the vote was 6-0-1 4 in favor. 5 City of Palo Alto (ID # 5819) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 4261 ECR (Wilkie Way) Path Site and Design and CUP Title: Approval of a Record of Land Use Action for a Site and Design Permit and a Conditional Use Permit to Implement a Public Bicycle/Pedestrian Path Connecting Wilkie Way to the Redwood Gate Neighborhood, with Associated Site Improvements, on a 5,000 Square-Foot Site Fronting Wilkie Way, Zoned CS-L-D (Service Commercial with Landscape and Site and Design Combining Districts) located at 4261 El Camino Real. Environmental Assessment: Exempt from CEQA Pursuant to Sections 15303 and 15304 (New Construction of Small Structures and Minor Alterations to Land) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council approve the Record of Land Use Action approving the Site and Design Review and Conditional Use Permit applications for construction of a path providing public access from Wilkie Way to the Redwood Gate neighborhood, as recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) and the Architectural Review Board (ARB). The attached Record of Land Use Action (RLUA, Attachment A) provides the draft findings and approval conditions. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In April 2008, the City Council directed staff to study ways to obtain access and connect a pathway from Wilkie Way to the residential development by Summer Hill (Redwood Gate). The City obtained a public access easement to use approximately 5,000 square feet of a vacant portion of the Dinah’s Hotel parcel. The City subsequently initiated a project that improves the parcel with a pedestrian and bicycle pathway to complete the linkage. Other improvements include landscaping, seating boulders, a bench, and lighted bollards so that the path can be used between dusk and dawn. Because the site is zoned ‘Service Commercial’ with ‘Landscape and Site and Design Combining Districts’, the project requires Site and Design Review and a Conditional Use Permit. The Commission reviewed the applications at their March 25, 2015 meeting and City of Palo Alto Page 2 recommended that the City Council approve the project. The ARB reviewed the Site and Design Review application at their May 7, 2015 meeting and recommended that the City Council approve the project. Both recommendations are to be forwarded to the City Council for final action. BACKGROUND The project site was a part of a City-initiated rezoning in 2009 (reflected in a September 19, 2009 report), viewable at this link: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=16985. The site is a small “pan-handle” portion of a 139,010 square foot parcel of land (Dinah's Hotel property) having two zone districts: RM-15 (Multiple-Family), and CS(H) (Service Commercial with Hotel Combining District). The vacant and unimproved 13,200 square foot pan-handle portion of the parcel (Site) was rezoned to the CS(L)(D) Service Commercial zone with Landscape and Site and Design Review Combining Districts. This pan-handle strip has 40 feet of frontage approximately) on Wilkie Way, and a depth of approximately 330 feet. Less than half of this area would be improved for the proposed pathway. In April of 2008, the Council directed staff to study ways to obtain access rights on the subject site to connect to a pedestrian/bicycle path easement across Summer Hill Homes’ Redwood Gate residential development. Summer Hill Homes agreed to dedicate a public path from the property line shared with the Dinah's Hotel site to the public park on the Redwood Gate site, provided that the City obtained access rights. The intent is to allow more direct pedestrian and bicycle connection to the public park on the Redwood Gate site. The easement was agreed to and recorded subsequent to the rezoning on October 8, 2009. The April 7, 2008 City Council Meeting Minutes are viewable at this link: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=12466. Staff initiated the improvement project by conducting a community meeting on April 17, 2012. The project design was presented and neighbors provided feedback and also expressed concerns about the potential for increased residential parking. Staff committed to preparing a parking occupancy study. A second community meeting, conducted on August 17, 2013, revealed the results of a parking occupancy study, which concluded that the proposed pathway would not change existing parking conditions. This study is discussed further in the report and attached for reference. Site Information The subject site consists of a vacant portion of a larger parcel that includes Dinah’s Hotel. Approximately 5,000 square feet of the “pan-handle” would be improved for the pathway (shown in attached photographs of the site as taken from Wilkie Way). Surrounding the site is residential development of varying intensity, with the lower density single-family located to the north of the site and higher density (RM-15 and RM-30) to the south with medium density (RM- 15 and CS[H]) to west (Redwood Gate and DR Horton development). Wilkie Way is a two- City of Palo Alto Page 3 lane, local street that dead-ends into a high density residential development. At the end of Wilkie Way is a pedestrian bridge over a creek to connect to Miller Avenue. Project Description The proposed pedestrian and bicycle path would be approximately 105 feet in length, starting at Wilkie Way and terminating at the Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) residential neighborhood access point (Pratt Lane walkway). Approximately 5,000 sq. ft. of the 13,200 sq. ft. site would be graded and improved with the pathway and associated landscaping and amenities. The maximum width of the path would be 10 feet at Wilkie Way; the width would decrease to five feet when the path reaches the access point to the Redwood Gate neighborhood’s entrance (a walkway). A small, centralized area would be improved with a decomposed granite surface, a bench, and large boulders. Drought-tolerant trees and shrubs are proposed for the balance of the site. Since the path would be available between dusk and dawn, bollard lighting is proposed. Ultimately, the pathway would improve connectivity between the residential neighborhoods, the El Camino Real commercial district, and open spaces. BOARD AND COMMISSION REVIEW Because the project is located in the CS(L)(D) Service Commercial zone with Landscape and Site and Design Review Combining Districts and the project includes a bicycle/pedestrian pathway, two concurrent entitlements must be processed in order to implement the project: Site and Design Review and Conditional Use Permit. As part of the Site and Design Review process, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) makes a recommendation on the project. Since the Site and Design Review application must be reviewed in a public hearing by the Commission, the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) was bundled with the Site and Design Review in the same hearing. The Council is requested to take into consideration the recommendations by the Commission and the ARB for action on the project. Pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.30(G).010, the Site and Design Review process is intended to ensure the development in environmentally and ecologically sensitive areas will be harmonious with other uses in the general vicinity, compatible with environmental and ecological objectives and in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. According to PAMC Section 18.76.010 (a), Purpose, the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process is to provide for uses and accessory uses that are necessary or desirable for the development of the community or region but cannot readily be classified as permitted uses in individual districts by reason of uniqueness of size, scope, or possible effect on public facilities or surrounding uses. Commission Review On March 25, 2015, the Commission reviewed the Site and Design Review and Conditional Use Permit applications, and voted 7-0 to recommend project approval as recommended in the City of Palo Alto Page 4 staff report. The excerpt minutes from the March 25, 2015 Commission hearing are available as Attachment J. The Commission staff report can be found on the City’s website at the following link: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=46524. As part of the Draft Record of Land Use Action, the Commission recommended approval with specific findings in accordance with PAMC 18.76.010 (C) for the City Council to consider. In summary, the Commission recommended approval to the City Council stating the project accomplishes the following objectives: (1) Ensure construction and operation of the use in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites, (2) Ensure the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas, (3) Ensure that sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance shall be observed and (4) Ensure that the use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. ARB Review On May 7, 2015, the ARB reviewed the Site and Design Review application and voted 4-0 to recommend project approval with added conditions described in the “Discussion” section. Information regarding the Comprehensive Plan Designation, Zoning Designation and Site and Design Review Combining and Landscaping Combining Districts can be found within the ARB report, which can be found on the City’s website at the following link: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/47172. In addition to the Site and Design Review Objectives, PAMC Section 18.76.020(d), Findings, sets forth 16 Architectural Review (AR) findings the ARB must make to recommend approval of the project. DISCUSSION Since its early inception, the project has been the subject of public comments regarding aesthetics and compatibility, parking, and the existing storm drain within the site. Aesthetics and Compatibility One of the key considerations for new projects in the Landscape (L) district is to provide landscaped open space as a physical and visual separation between uses where desirable. The site is intended to be a buffer between the residential uses along Wilkie Way and the commercial uses along El Camino Real, and prohibit any vehicular access from Wilkie Way to the adjacent hotel site. The site is very small and the inclusion of the pathway and landscape improvements will frame the site in such a way that complements the residential streetscape character and transitions the site from the lower-density single-family residences to the higher-density Redwood Gate residential neighborhood and adjacent commercial uses. Design The project includes features and amenities that are based on City Standards, such as the bench, bollards and concrete color. The plantings meet all sustainability requirements. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Central to the project is the design of the pathway. The concrete pathway at the Wilkie Way sidewalk is 10 feet wide and the path tapers to five feet as it meets its connection point with the existing path within Redwood Gate residential neighborhood. The pathway will be designed to be consistent with the Americans with Disabilities Act requirements, including slope considerations, width, and a ramp with truncated domes at the pathway entry at the Wilkie Way sidewalk. Various safety markings, including signs where necessary will be included on the path as indicators to slow, dismount from a bicycle or stop. The ARB recommends as a condition of approval that the markings be shifted closer towards the street entry of the path to provide more advanced warning. In addition, the ARB recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant consider an alternative treatment to the boulder placed in a landscaped island near the street. The landscaping palette (reflected in the attached plans) includes trees, such as Western Redbud (four 24” box), Coast Live Oak (three 36” box), and Valley Oak trees (one 48” box) and various drought-tolerant shrubs and plantings. Shrubbery is proposed to obscure the existing backflow preventer device that will remain on-site near the Wilkie Way sidewalk. The rear boundary of the site would include a wood fence that would be consistent with the neighboring fencing. California Wild Grape vines are proposed at the base of the new fence that at maturity will grow to cover the fence and complement the landscape theme and deter vandalism. These plantings are combined with passive recreation features and amenities, such as decomposed granite surface areas that soften the concrete path boundaries, five seating boulders and a bench. The ARB recommends, as a condition of approval, that two additional benches be added. Since the pathway is to be open during the day and between dusk and dawn, nine bollards with LED lighting will ensure that the path is safely lit, while limiting the light source to the path and not spilling over to adjacent properties. The ARB recommends as a condition of approval that the bollards be replaced with standard overhead lighting fixtures with cut-offs to limit light spill. The choice of plantings, materials and LED lighting will lower the maintenance of the site over time. In addition, all of these features will improve the aesthetics of the vacant site and its compatibility with its surrounding. Site photographs and context photos are included as an attachment to this report. Parking During the rezoning process for the site, several public comments centered on potential parking impacts on Wilkie Way that could result from construction of the pathway. The concern was that people may park on Wilkie Way and use the pathway to access the residences at Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) and the commercial uses along El Camino Real. City of Palo Alto Page 6 In response to these comments, a parking occupancy report was prepared by the City’s transportation consultant analyzing the effects of providing the bicycle and pedestrian connection. Staff presented the results of the report at a community meeting on August 7, 2013. The report concluded that (1) there was heavy bicycle and pedestrian use on Wilkie Way (580 bicyclists and 142 pedestrians), (2) there was adequate on-street parking available within the Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) neighborhood, and (3) the construction of the pathway will not change the existing parking conditions. The study is attached to this report (Attachment G). Storm Drain An existing six-inch, underground storm water drainage pipe, depicted in the project plans, will be repaired by the property owner. This pipe would connect to existing curb drains in Wilkie Way. POLICY IMPLICATIONS The proposed project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan as set forth in the Draft Record of Land Use Action. The proposal substantially complies with the objectives and findings for the Site and Design Review and Conditional Use Permit requests, as noted in the RLUA. A bicycle and pedestrian pathway is conditionally permitted within the Service Commercial with Landscape and Site and Design Combining Districts (CS[L][D]). A full description of the project’s conformance with the Comprehensive Plan is included in Attachment C. Public Outreach The Zoning Code requires publication in the local newspaper, and mailing of notices of the City Council, Commission and Board hearings to owners and residents of property within 600 feet. Correspondence in support of the project submitted to the Commission and ARB are included as Attachment I. City of Palo Alto Page 7 TIMELINE Application submittal: December 18, 2014 Planning and Transportation Commission Review: March 25, 2015 Architectural Review Board Review: May 7, 2015 City Council Consideration: June 29, 2015 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Considering the scope and scale of the project, staff anticipates that there would be no impacts to the physical environment and the project would be consistent with the determinations for a categorical exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (new construction of small structures) and 15304 (minor alterations to land), the project is determined to be exempt because the project includes a limited public access extension in an urbanized environment and no substantial vegetation would be displaced and minor grading would be involved for the construction on a site less than 6,000 square feet. Attachments:  Attachment A: Wilkie Way Path Draft RLUA (DOCX)  Attachment B: Project Location Map (PDF)  Attachment C: Comprehensive Plan compliance (DOCX)  Attachment D: Wilkie Way Path Project Description (PDF)  Attachment E: Dinah's Hotel Letter (PDF)  Attachment F: Site Photographs (PDF)  Attachment G: Parking Occupancy Study by Hexagon May 2013 (PDF)  Attachment H: Planning Transportation Commission Minutes of March 25, 2015 (DOC)  Attachment I: Letters in support of project (PDF)  Attachment J: Architectural Review Board Minutes of May 7, 2015 (DOC)  Project Plans: Councilmembers Only (PDF) Attachments:  Attachment A: Record of Land Use Action (DOCX)  Attachment B: Project Location Map (PDF)  Attachment C: Comprehensive Plan Table (DOCX)  Attachment D: Project Desciption Letter (DOCX)  Attachment E: Dinah's Hotel Letter (PDF)  Attachment F: Photographs (DOCX)  Attachment G: Parking Occupancy Study May 2013 (PDF)  Attachment H: PTC meeting Minutes (PDF)  Attachment I: Public Correspondence (PDF)  Attachment J: ARB Meeting Minutes of May 7, 2015 (PDF) ATTACHMENT A ACTION NO. 2015 -5 RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION FOR 4261 EL CAMINO REAL: SITE AND DESIGN REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (14PLN- 00508) On June 29, 2015, the Council of the City of Palo Alto approved the Site and Design Review application for the construction of a bicycle/pedestrian path on a public access easement on the pan-handle parcel at the rear of Dinah's Hotel property to provide access from Wilkie Way to Summer Hill homes (Redwood Gate) neighborhood within the Service Commercial with Landscape and Site and Design Combining District, making the following findings, determination and declarations: SECTION 1. Background. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto (“City Council”) finds, determines, and declares as follows: A. The City of Palo Alto on behalf of Dinah’s Garden Hotel, property owner, has requested the City’s approval to allow construction of an approximate 105-foot bicycle/pedestrian pathway connecting Wilkie Way with the Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) residential neighborhood on an approximate 5,000 square foot site. (“The Project”). B. The project site is an approximate 5,000 square foot portion of a single parcel (APN 148-01-005). The site is undeveloped, containing an underground storm drain utility. The site is designated on the Comprehensive Plan land use map as Commercial Hotel within the Service Commercial with Landscape and Site and Design Combining (CS[L][D]) zoning district. The project includes the construction of a bicycle/pedestrian path on a public access easement on the pan-handle parcel at the rear of Dinah's Hotel property to provide access from Wilkie Way to Summer Hill homes development site. Improvements would include a 10-foot wide pathway, with a centralized area with passive amenities such as a bench and sitting boulders. The balance of the site will include drought-tolerant landscaping including trees and shrubs. Because the pathway will be in use between dusk and dawn, lighted bollards will be operated. C. The Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) reviewed and recommended approval of the Project on March 25, 2015. The Commission’s recommendations are contained in CMR 5594 and the attachments to it. D. The Architectural Review Board (Board) reviewed and recommended approval of the Project on May 7, 2015. The Board’s recommendations are contained in CMR 5722 and the attachments to it. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City as the lead agency for the Project has determined that the project is categorically exempt from environmental review under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Guideline sections 15303 (new construction of small structures) and 15304 (minor alterations to land). The project is determined to be exempt because no substantial vegetation would be displaced and minor grading would be involved for the construction on a site less than 6,000 square feet. SECTION 3. Site and Design Review Findings 1. The use will be constructed and operated in a manner that will be orderly, harmonious, and compatible with existing or potential uses of adjoining or nearby sites. The project is located on an approximate 5,000 square foot portion of a larger parcel with approximately 40 feet of frontage along Wilkie Way. One of the key considerations for new projects in the Landscape (L) district is to provide landscaped open space as a physical and visual separation between uses where desirable. The site is intended to be a buffer between the residential uses along Wilkie Way and the commercial uses along El Camino Real and prohibit any vehicular access from Wilkie Way to the adjacent hotel site. The site is very small and the inclusion of the pathway and landscape improvements will frame the site in such a way that complements the residential streetscape character and transitions the site from the lower-density single-family residences to the higher-density Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) residential neighborhood and adjacent commercial uses. The landscaping palette includes Western Redbud, Coast Live Oak and Valley Oak trees and various drought-tolerant shrubbery and plantings. These plantings combined with the passive elements of the bench and sitting boulders and the active pathway will improve the aesthetics of the vacant site that exists currently. 2. The project is consistent with the goal of ensuring the desirability of investment, or the conduct of business, research, or educational activities, or other authorized occupations, in the same or adjacent areas. The project will facilitate the connectivity between residential neighborhoods and will be designed in such a way to complement the streetscape character of the neighborhood. 3. Sound principles of environmental design and ecological balance are observed in the project. The project site does not include any existing substantial vegetation besides ruderal grasses. The proposed project will include a 10-foot wide bicycle/pedestrian pathway flanked with drought-tolerant plantings (trees and shrubbery) and include passive areas for sitting boulders and bench. Because the pathway will be use between dusk and dawn, bollard lighting will be used. These design elements will respect the terrain and site area. 4. The use will be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. The project proposal complies with the policies of the Land Use and Community Design and Transportation Elements, including: Policy L-6: The Comprehensive Plan states that where possible, avoid abrupt changes in scale and density between residential and non-residential areas and between residential areas of different densities. To promote compatibility and gradual transitions between land uses, place zoning district boundaries at mid-block locations rather than along streets wherever possible. The project proposes a transitional use (bicycle/pedestrian pathway) between residential and non-residential land use areas and between residential areas of different densities. Policy L-15: The Comprehensive Plan states to preserve and enhance the public gathering spaces within walking distance of residential neighborhoods. Ensure that each residential neighborhood has such spaces. The project serves to facilitate the connection between residential uses and public gathering places within the Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) residential neighborhood. Policy L-67: The Comprehensive Plan states to balance traffic circulation needs with the goal of creating walkable neighborhoods that are designed and oriented towards pedestrians. The project will connect residential neighborhoods and offer another more direct alternative to Wilkie Way. Policy L-68: The Comprehensive Plan states to integrate creeks and green spaces with the street and pedestrian/bicycle path system. The project links existing publicly accessible green spaces with existing neighborhoods. Policy T-14: The Comprehensive Plan states to improve pedestrian and bicycle access to and between local destinations, including public facilities, schools, parks, open space, employment districts, shopping centers, and multi-modal transit stations. The project will improve connectivity between existing residential neighborhoods and publicly accessible open space areas. Policy T-15: The Comprehensive Plan states to encourage the acquisition of easements for bicycle and pedestrian paths through new private developments. The project implements the City’s action of obtaining an easement to facilitate the pathway. Policy T-16: The Comprehensive Plan states to create connecting paths for pedestrians and bicycles where dead-end streets prevent through circulation in new developments and in existing neighborhoods. The project will alleviate the dead-end conditions for pedestrians and bicycles trying to access the bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Wilkie Way. SECTION 4. Architectural Review Board Findings The design and architecture of the proposed project, as conditioned, complies with the Findings for Architectural Review as required in PAMC Chapter 18.76. 1. The design is consistent and compatible with applicable elements of the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan. This finding can be made in the affirmative since the project will be consistent with Policies L-6, L-15, L-67, and L-68 of the Land Use and Community Design Element and Policies T-14, T-15, and T-16 of the Elements as describe in Section 3 above. 2. The design is compatible with the immediate environment of the site. This finding can be made in the affirmative since the project will incorporate design elements that will include an active pathway for bicyclists and pedestrians and passive areas such as sitting boulders and bench with the objective of connecting two neighborhoods and providing access to the open space amenities within the Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) residential neighborhood. The landscape plantings will complement the streetscape character of Wilkie Way. The proposed lighting will be sufficient to provide safety considerations, however, at the same time will not spill over onto neighboring properties. 3. The design is appropriate to the function of the project. This finding can be made in the affirmative since the objective of the project is to connect two residential neighborhoods and provide access to open space amenities. The design of the proposed pathway will include active and passive elements on a small site taking into consideration its surroundings. 4. In areas considered by the board as having a unified design character or historical character, the design is compatible with such character. This finding can be made in the affirmative since the project’s design will complement the surrounding streetscape. 5. The design promotes harmonious transitions in scale and character in areas between different designated land uses. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The project site is located on a Landscape (L) combining district. The purpose of the district is to provide adequate buffer and transition between adjacent land uses. The project includes a pathway on a small site that will provide the transition between residential and commercial land uses. 6. The design is compatible with approved improvements both on and off the site. This finding can be made in the affirmative since the proposed pathway will provide a seamless transition between Wilkie Way and the Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) residential neighborhood. 7. The planning and siting of the various functions and buildings on the site create an internal sense of order and provide a desirable environment for occupants, visitors and the general community. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The proposed project includes both active and passive areas, which are designed to complement each other and surrounding developments. 8. The amount and arrangement of open space are appropriate to the design and the function of the structures. This finding can be made in the affirmative. The design of the pathway is complemented by landscaping and passive areas such as sitting boulders and a bench. 9. Sufficient ancillary functions are provided to support the main functions of the project and the same are compatible with the project's design concept. This finding can be made in the affirmative since the landscaping and passive areas support the design and purpose of the pathway of the project. The proposed lighted bollards serve to provide safety considerations and are designed to complement the other components of the project. 10. Access to the property and circulation thereon are safe and convenient for pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. This finding can be made in the affirmative, since the purpose of the pathway is to provide a safe connection for bicyclist and pedestrians only to publicly accessible areas within the Summer Hill neighborhood and the existing bicycle facilities along Wilkie Way. Since the pathway will be open between dusk and dawn, the project includes lighted bollards, which will provide for a safe condition. 11. Natural features are appropriately preserved and integrated with the project. This finding can be made in the affirmative since minor grading is necessary to implement the project. 12. The materials, textures, colors and details of construction and plant material are appropriate expression to the design and function and whether the same are compatible with the adjacent and neighboring structures, landscape elements and functions. This finding can be made in the affirmative since the project would incorporate drought- tolerant plantings, decomposed granite and concrete surfaces, and subtle elements such as sitting boulders, a bench and lighted bollards. 13. The landscape design concept for the site, as shown by the relationship of plant masses, open space, scale, plant forms and foliage textures and colors create a desirable and functional environment and whether the landscape concept depicts an appropriate unity with the various buildings on the site. This finding can be made in the affirmative since while there are no existing buildings onsite, the project’s design elements complement well with the surrounding residential developments. 14. Plant material is suitable and adaptable to the site, capable of being properly maintained on the site, and is of a variety which would tend to be drought- resistant and to reduce consumption of water in its installation and maintenance. This finding can be made in the affirmative since the plant palette includes a variety of drought-resistant and native plantings intended to reduce consumption of water. 15. The design is energy efficient and incorporates renewable energy design elements. This finding can be made in the affirmative since the bollard lighting will be LED, which will reduce the consumption of energy over the lifetime of the project. 16. The design is consistent and compatible with the purpose of architectural review as set forth in subsection 18.76.020(a). This finding can be made in the affirmative since the findings herein describe a project that supports the purpose of the architectural review. SECTION 5. Conditional Use Permit Findings 1. The project not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. The project as demonstrated will complement the surrounding developments with the inclusion of appropriate landscaping, and enhance the general welfare and convenience by providing a safe connection between Wilkie Way and Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) residences and publicly assessable spaces. 2. Be located and conducted in a manner in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of Zoning. The project is consistent with the following policies: Policy L-6: The Comprehensive Plan states that where possible, avoid abrupt changes in scale and density between residential and non-residential areas and between residential areas of different densities. To promote compatibility and gradual transitions between land uses, place zoning district boundaries at mid-block locations rather than along streets wherever possible. The project proposes a transitional use (bicycle/pedestrian pathway) between residential and non-residential land use areas and between residential areas of different densities. Policy L-15: The Comprehensive Plan states to preserve and enhance the public gathering spaces within walking distance of residential neighborhoods. Ensure that each residential neighborhood has such spaces. The project serves to facilitate the connection between residential uses and public gathering places within the Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) residential neighborhood. Policy L-67: The Comprehensive Plan states to balance traffic circulation needs with the goal of creating walkable neighborhoods that are designed and oriented towards pedestrians. The project will connect residential neighborhoods and offer another more direct alternative to Wilkie Way. Policy L-68: The Comprehensive Plan states to integrate creeks and green spaces with the street and pedestrian/bicycle path system. The project links existing publicly accessible green spaces with existing neighborhoods. Policy T-14: The Comprehensive Plan states to improve pedestrian and bicycle access to and between local destinations, including public facilities, schools, parks, open space, employment districts, shopping centers, and multi-modal transit stations. The project will improve connectivity between existing residential neighborhoods and publicly accessible open space areas. Policy T-15: The Comprehensive Plan states to encourage the acquisition of easements for bicycle and pedestrian paths through new private developments. The project implements the City’s action of obtaining a public access easement (Recorded Santa Clara County Document 20462073, recorded October 8, 2009) to facilitate the pathway. Policy T-16: The Comprehensive Plan states to create connecting paths for pedestrians and bicycles where dead-end streets prevent through circulation in new developments and in existing neighborhoods. The project will alleviate the dead-end conditions for pedestrians and bicycles trying to access the bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Wilkie Way. SECTION 6. Site and Design and Conditional Use Permit Approvals Granted. Site and Design and Conditional Use Permit Approval is granted by the City Council under Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.77 for application 14PLN-0508, subject to the conditions of approval in Section 7 of the Record. SECTION 7. Conditions of Approval. Electric Engineering Division 1. The project shall comply with all the Electric Utility Engineering Department service requirements noted during plan review. 2. The project shall be responsible for identification and location of all utilities, both public and private, within the work area. Prior to any excavation work at the site, the applicant shall contact Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600, at least 48 hours prior to beginning work. 3. The project shall submit a request to disconnect all existing utility services and/or meters including a signed affidavit of vacancy, on the form provided by the Building Inspection Division. Utilities will be disconnected or removed within 10 working days after receipt of request. The demolition permit will be issued after all utility services and/or meters have been disconnected and removed. THE FOLLOWING SHALL BE INCORPORATED IN SUBMITTALS FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE 4. A completed Electric Load Sheet and a full set of plans must be included with all applications involving electrical work. The load sheet must be included with the preliminary submittal. 5. Only one electric service lateral is permitted per parcel. Utilities Rule & Regulation #18. 6. If this project requires pad-mount transformers, the location of the transformers shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Utilities Department and the Architectural Review Board. Utilities Rule & Regulations #3 & #16 (see detail comments below). 7. The developer/owner shall provide space for installing pad-mount equipment (i.e. transformers, switches, and interrupters) and associated substructure as required by the City. 8. The customer shall install all electrical substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required from the service point to the customer’s switchgear. The design and installation shall be according to the City standards and shown on plans. Utilities Rule & Regulations #16 & #18. 9. Location of the electric panel/switchboard shall be shown on the site plan and approved by the Architectural Review Board and Utilities Department. 10. All utility meters, lines, transformers, backflow preventers, and any other required equipment shall be shown on the landscape and irrigation plans and shall show that no conflict will occur between the utilities and landscape materials. In addition, all aboveground equipment shall be screened in a manner that is consistent with the building design and setback requirements. 11. For services larger than 1600 amps, the customer will be required to provide a transition cabinet as the interconnection point between the utility’s pad-mount transformer and the customer’s main switchgear. The cabinet design drawings must be submitted to the Electric Utility Engineering Department for review and approval. 12. For underground services, no more than four (4) 750 MCM conductors per phase can be connected to the transformer secondary terminals; otherwise, bus duct must be used for connections to pad-mount transformers. If customer installs a bus duct directly between the transformer secondary terminals and the main switchgear, the installation of a transition cabinet will not be required. 13. The customer is responsible for sizing the service conductors and other required equipment according to the National Electric Code requirements and the City standards. Utilities Rule & Regulation #18. 14. If the customer’s total load exceeds 2500 kVA, service shall be provided at the primary voltage of 12,470 volts and the customer shall provide the high voltage switchgear and transformers. 15. For primary services, the standard service protection is a pad-mount fault interrupter owned and maintained by the City, installed at the customer’s expense. The customer must provide and install the pad and associated substructure required for the fault interrupter. 16. Any additional facilities and services requested by the Applicant that are beyond what the utility deems standard facilities will be subject to Special Facilities charges. The Special Facilities charges include the cost of installing the additional facilities as well as the cost of ownership. Utilities Rule & Regulation #20. 17. Projects that require the extension of high voltage primary distribution lines or reinforcement of offsite electric facilities will be at the customer’s expense and must be coordinated with the Electric Utility. DURING CONSTRUCTION 18. Contractors and developers shall obtain permit from the Department of Public Works before digging in the street right-of-way. This includes sidewalks, driveways and planter strips. 19. At least 48 hours prior to starting any excavation, the customer must call Underground Service Alert (USA) at 1-800-227-2600 to have existing underground utilities located and marked. The areas to be check by USA shall be delineated with white paint. All USA markings shall be removed by the customer or contractor when construction is complete. 20. The customer is responsible for installing all on-site substructures (conduits, boxes and pads) required for the electric service. No more than 270 degrees of bends are allowed in a secondary conduit run. All conduits must be sized according to National Electric Code requirements and no 1/2 – inch size conduits are permitted. All off-site substructure work will be constructed by the City at the customer’s expense. Where mutually agreed upon by the City and the Applicant, all or part of the off-site substructure work may be constructed by the Applicant. 21. All primary electric conduits shall be concrete encased with the top of the encasement at the depth of 30 inches. No more than 180 degrees of bends are allowed in a primary conduit run. Conduit runs over 500 feet in length require additional pull boxes. 22. All new underground conduits and substructures shall be installed per City standards and shall be inspected by the Electrical Underground Inspector before backfilling. 23. The customer is responsible for installing all underground electric service conductors, bus duct, transition cabinets, and other required equipment. The installation shall meet the National Electric Code and the City Standards. 24. Meter and switchboard requirements shall be in accordance with Electric Utility Service Equipment Requirements Committee (EUSERC) drawings accepted by Utility and CPA standards for meter installations. 25. Shop/factory drawings for switchboards (400A and greater) and associated hardware must be submitted for review and approval prior to installing the switchgear to: Gopal Jagannath, P.E. Supervising Electric Project Engineer Utilities Engineering (Electrical) 1007 Elwell Court Palo Alto, CA 94303 26. Catalog cut sheets may not be substituted for factory drawing submittal. 27. All new underground electric services shall be inspected and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector before energizing. AFTER CONSTRUCTION & PRIOR TO FINALIZATION 28. The customer shall provide as-built drawings showing the location of all switchboards, conduits (number and size), conductors (number and size), splice boxes, vaults and switch/transformer pads. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING OCCUPANCY PERMIT 29. The applicant shall secure a Public Utilities Easement for facilities installed on private property for City use. 30. All required inspections have been completed and approved by both the Building Inspection Division and the Electrical Underground Inspector. 31. All fees must be paid. 32. All Special Facilities contracts or other agreements need to be signed by the City and applicant. Water, Gas, and Wastewater Utilities Department FOR BUILDING PERMIT 33. The contractor shall contact underground service alert (800) 227-2600 one week in advance of starting excavation to provide for marking of underground utilities. 34. The applicant shall provide protection for utility lines subject to damage. Utility lines within a pit or trench shall be adequately supported. All exposed water, gas, and sewer lines shall be inspected by the WGW Utilities Inspector prior to backfilling. 35. When trenching: For crossing utilities the contractor shall maintain 12 inches clear, above and below, from the existing utilities to new underground facilities. For parallel utilities maintain minimum three (3) feet clear horizontal (not diagonal) separation. 36. No water or gas valves or other facilities owned by Utilities Department shall be operated for any purpose by the applicant's contractor. All required operation will only be performed by authorized utilities department personnel. The applicant's contractor shall notify the Utilities Department not less than forty-eight (48) hours in advance of the time that such operation is required. 37. The contractor shall not disconnect any part of the existing water, gas, or wastewater mains except by expressed permission of the WGW utilities inspector and shall submit a schedule of the estimated shutdown time to obtain said permission. 38. The applicant must show on the site plan the existence of any auxiliary water supply, (i.e. water well, gray water, recycled water, rain catchment, water storage tank, etc). 39. Utility vaults, transformers, utility cabinets, concrete bases, or other structures cannot be placed over existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services. Maintain one (1) foot horizontal clear separation from the vault/cabinet/concrete base to existing utilities as found in the field. If there is a conflict with existing utilities, Cabinets/vaults/bases shall be relocated from the plan location as needed to meet field conditions. Trees may not be planted within 10 feet of existing water, gas or wastewater mains/services or meters. New water, gas or wastewater services/meters may not be installed within 10 feet or existing trees. Maintain 10 feet between new trees and new water, gas and wastewater services/mains/meters. 40. All utility installations to be in accordance with the City of Palo Alto current utility standards for water, gas & wastewater. 41. For any utility work in Caltrans right-of-way, the applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans for all utility work in the El Camino Real right-of-way. The applicant must provide a copy of the permit to the WGW engineering section. Architectural Review Board 42. Prior to issuance of any permits for construction, the plans shall be revised and demonstrate the addition of two benches. 43. Prior to issuance of any permits for construction, the plans shall be revised and demonstrate that the light bollards be replaced with overhead head fixtures that include cut-offs. 44. Prior to issuance of any permits for construction, the plans shall be revised to demonstrate an alternative to the boulder used in the landscaped island within the pathway. SECTION 8. Term of Approval. Site and Design Approval and Conditional Use Permit Approval. In the event actual construction of the project is not commenced within two years of the date of council approval, the approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect, pursuant to Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.30(G).080. PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: APPROVED: City Clerk Director of Planning and Community Environment APPROVED AS TO FORM: Senior Asst. City Attorney Attachment B ATTACHMENT C COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE 4261 El Camino Real/File No. 14PLN-00508 Goal/Policy Description Project’s Compliance Policy L-6: Where possible, avoid abrupt changes in scale and density between residential and non-residential areas and between residential areas of different densities. To promote compatibility and gradual transitions between land uses, place zoning district boundaries at mid-block locations rather than along streets wherever possible. The project proposes a transitional use (bicycle/pedestrian pathway) between residential and non-residential land use areas and between residential areas of different densities. Policy L-15: Preserve and enhance the public gathering spaces within walking distance of residential neighborhoods. Ensure that each residential neighborhood has such spaces. The project serves to facilitate the connection between residential uses and public gathering places within the Summer Hill (Redwood Gate) residential neighborhood. Policy L-67: Balance traffic circulation needs with the goal of creating walkable neighborhoods that are designed and oriented towards pedestrians. The project will connect residential neighborhoods and offer another more direct alternative to Wilkie Way. Policy L-68: Integrate creeks and green spaces with the street and pedestrian/bicycle path system. The project links existing publicly accessible green spaces with existing neighborhoods. Policy T-14: Improve pedestrian and bicycle access to and between local destinations, including public facilities, schools, parks, open space, employment districts, shopping centers, and multi-modal transit stations. The project will improve connectivity between existing residential neighborhoods and publicly accessible open space areas. Policy T-15: Encourage the acquisition of easements for bicycle and pedestrian paths through new private developments. The project implements the City’s action of obtaining a public access easement (Recorded Santa Clara County Document 20462073, recorded October 8, 2009) to facilitate the pathway. Policy T-16: Create connecting paths for pedestrians and bicycles where dead-end streets prevent through circulation in new developments and in existing neighborhoods. The project will alleviate the dead-end conditions for pedestrians and bicycles trying to access the bicycle and pedestrian facilities along Wilkie Way. ATTACHMENT D Wilkie Way Path Connection Project July 23, 2014 Background: City Council directed staff to design and construct a pedestrian/bicycle pathway on a public easement on the pan handle parcel of the Dinah's Hotel property in 2009 when the property was rezoned to allow use of the parcel for public access. Project Description: This project includes construction of pedestrian/bicycle path that would provide access from Wilkie Way to adjacent Summer Hill Homes Residential Development for connectivity to the public park. The project also includes fencing, various landscaping treatments and decorative elements with outdoor seating areas and lighting for both pedestrian and bicycle use. Timeline: Staff kicked off the project by holding a community meeting on April 17th, 2012 and presenting the design plans for the project. Residents provided some feedback on the design plans but they also expressed concerns about residential parking. Residents believed that Summer Hill development lacks parking and construction of path will encourage those residents to park on Wilkie and walk to Summer Hill homes. Staff committed to complete a Parking Occupancy study and present the findings to residents. Another Community Meeting was held on August 7th, 2013 and the following results of the study were presented to the residents. • High bicycle and pedestrian use on Wilkie Way: 580 bicyclists and 142 pedestrians • Adequate on-street parking available within Summer Hill development • Construction of this project will not change existing parking conditions Next steps of the project were discussed as City Departmental design review process, completing final design and bidding the project for construction. There were no objections to these steps from the residents present at the meeting. Staff has also been working with Dinah's Hotel to address an existing storm drain pipe issue that runs through the project site and spills onto Wilkie Way. Dinah's have submitted a request for Encroachment Permit for the connection of the Storm Drain to the existing thru curb drains on Wilkie Way. dtamale 2015-04-06 20:16:57 ------------------------------------------- - ATTACHMENT D Attachment E ATTACHMENT F Aerial View of Area Summer Hill Homes (Redwood Gate) park Summer Hill Homes (Redwood Gate) park Memorandum Date: May 16, 2013 To: Shahla Yazdy, City of Palo Alto From: Gary Black and Trisha Dudala Subject: Wilkie Way Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Analysis Introduction This memorandum has been prepared to summarize the effects of providing a bicycle and pedestrian connection between the park located within the Summerhill development at El Camino Real and Deodar Street and Wilkie Way, in Palo Alto, California (see Figure 1). The purpose of the analysis is two-fold: First, to estimate the increase/diversion in bicycle and pedestrian travel due to the proposed connection and second, to determine any change in parking demand as a result of the proposed connection and its impact on the Wilkie Way neighborhood. The study area includes Wilkie Way between Charleston Road and the Wilkie Way bicycle bridge. Wilkie Way is a designated Class III bicycle route and the Wilkie Way bicycle/pedestrian bridge is a creek crossing that provides a connection between Wilkie Way and Monroe Drive. Existing bicycle and pedestrian activity and travel patterns were observed in the field, and bicycle and pedestrian counts were collected to estimate the increase/diversion in bicycle and pedestrian travel due to the proposed connection. On-street parking availability and parking occupancy surveys were conducted on Wilkie Way and on the nearby neighborhood streets Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel Hexagon conducted bicycle and pedestrian counts at the intersection of Charleston Road and Wilkie Way to determine existing bicycle and pedestrian activity and travel patterns in the study area. The counts were conducted during the daylight hours (7:00 AM to 8:00 PM) on one weekday and one Saturday. Existing bicycle counts on a weekday are summarized in Table 1 and Saturday counts are summarized in Table 2. Weekday pedestrian counts are summarized in Table 3 and Saturday pedestrian counts are summarized in Table 4. Based on the existing bicycle travel patterns, it was observed that more than 90% of the bicycle traffic on Wilkie Way came from the Wilkie Way bicycle/pedestrian bridge and most of this bicycle traffic was observed to stay on Wilkie Way past Charleston Road in both the northbound and southbound directions. Wilkie Way provides a good bicycle connection to the California Avenue Caltrain station, via bicycle facilities located along Maclane Street and Park Boulevard located north of Charleston Road. As indicated in Tables 1 and 2, during the daylight hours between 7 AM and 8 PM, a total of 578 bicycles were counted on a weekday and a total of 348 bicycles were counted on a Saturday on Wilkie Way between Charleston Road and Wilkie Way Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge. The higher weekday count indicates the presence of a lot of bicycle commuters. The pedestrian volume at the Wilkie Way/Charleston Road intersection was relatively low throughout the day. With the proposed bicycle/pedestrian connection through the Summerhill development, it is expected that some of the bicycle and pedestrian traffic along Wilkie Way would likely divert through the Summerhill development. The traffic that is likely to divert is the bicycle/pedestrian traffic that currently turns left from northbound Wilkie Way onto westbound Charleston Road and the traffic that currently turns right onto southbound Wilkie Way from eastbound Charleston Road. Bicycle/Pedestrian traffic on all other approaches from/to Charleston Road/Wilkie Way intersection would not be affected by the proposed bicycle/pedestrian Attachment G Wilkie Way Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Analysis May 1 Page | 2 connection. The proposed bicycle/pedestrian connection would connect to El Camino Real. Although bikes are not restricted on El Camino Real, El Camino Real is not a designated bike route, and bicyclists are expected to ride with extreme caution due to the high traffic volumes and high speeds on El Camino Real. Only experienced riders are likely to use El Camino Real. Therefore, only a portion of the bicycle traffic on Wilkie Way to/from Charleston Road is expected to divert through the Summerhill development. This bicycle traffic would consist of bicyclists heading towards El Camino Real. For bicycle traffic heading on Charleston Road past El Camino Real, there is no added advantage to using the proposed connection. Since Charleston Road, which transitions to Arastradero Road west of El Camino Real, is a designated bicycle route with separate bike lanes, bicyclists heading west of El Camino Real would stay on Wilkie Way to Charleston Road instead of the proposed connection. During the daylight hours on a weekday, a total of 50 bicycles and 26 pedestrians were observed to turn left from northbound Wilkie Way onto westbound Charleston Road and 55 bicycles and 24 pedestrians were observed to turn right from eastbound Charleston Road onto southbound Wilkie Way. During the daylight hours on a Saturday, a total of 18 bicycles and 10 pedestrians were observed to turn left from northbound Wilkie Way onto westbound Charleston Road and 30 bicycles and 7 pedestrians were observed to turn right from eastbound Charleston Road onto southbound Wilkie Way. Assuming that 50% of this bicycle/pedestrian traffic would divert through the Summerhill development, during the daylight hours a maximum of 53 bicycles and 25 pedestrians are expected to divert through the Summerhill development using the proposed connection. Wilkie Way Bicycle / Pedestrian Connection Figure 1 Project Vicinity Whitclem Dr Wil k i e W a y = Summerhill Park LEGEND = Proposed Bicycle / Pedestrian Connection Wilkie Way Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Analysis May 16, 2013 Page | 4 Table 1 Existing Conditions – Weekday Bicycle Data L T R Total L T R Total L T R Total L T R Total 7 AM - 8 AM 28 41 6 75 1 8 9 18 2 15 5 22 0 28 9 37 8 AM to 9 AM 4 55 5 64 0 9 1 10 1 7 3 11 1 15 0 16 9 AM to 10 AM 4 30 2 36 0 8 1 9 5 8 1 14 1 10 0 11 10 AM to 11 AM 2 15 3 20 0 9 1 10 1 2 0 3 0 5 0 5 11 AM to 12 PM 1 20 1 22 0 3 0 3 0 2 1 3 0 4 0 4 12 PM to 1 PM 0 4 1 5 0 6 1 7 0 3 3 6 2 6 0 8 1 PM to 2 PM 0 4 1 5 1 2 2 5 1 4 2 7 2 3 0 5 2 PM to 3 PM 4 2 1 7 4 17 0 21 1 5 4 10 0 0 0 0 3 PM to 4 PM 1 12 1 14 3 21 2 26 12 21 9 42 1 7 0 8 4 PM to 5 PM 3 15 1 19 2 10 1 13 2 8 8 18 3 6 0 9 5 PM to 6 PM 1 17 2 20 1 37 2 40 7 12 6 25 5 18 2 25 6 PM to 7 PM 1 15 2 18 3 39 5 47 2 14 8 24 5 9 1 15 7 PM to 8 PM 1 6 0 7 1 20 0 21 1 14 5 20 2 7 1 10 Total 50 236 26 312 16 189 25 230 35 115 55 205 22 118 13 153 Time Interval Wilkie Way (NB)Wilkie Way (SB)Charleston Rd (EB)Charleston Rd (WB) Wilkie Way Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Analysis May 16, 2013 Page | 5 Table 2 Existing Conditions – Saturday Bicycle Data L T R Total L T R Total L T R Total L T R Total 7 AM to 8 AM 1 5 0 6 0 1 0 1 2 1 0 3 1 6 0 7 8 AM to 9 AM 3 7 0 10 0 3 0 3 0 7 0 7 0 10 2 12 9 AM to 10 AM 4 15 3 22 0 4 0 4 2 5 1 8 1 13 0 14 10 AM to 11 AM 2 7 1 10 2 5 2 9 0 23 1 24 1 16 0 17 11 AM to 12 PM 1 8 1 10 2 9 1 12 1 16 3 20 3 10 0 13 12 PM to 1 PM 2 7 2 11 1 10 2 13 3 11 2 16 3 3 3 9 1 PM to 2 PM 0 25 9 34 0 10 1 11 1 12 3 16 0 8 0 8 2 PM to 3 PM 3 12 2 17 0 17 0 17 3 4 5 12 4 10 0 14 3 PM to 4 PM 0 15 3 18 1 20 4 25 1 15 2 18 2 12 4 18 4 PM to 5 PM 0 15 4 19 0 6 1 7 0 9 4 13 3 5 0 8 5 PM to 6 PM 0 10 1 11 0 13 0 13 0 6 1 7 1 6 0 7 6 PM to 7 PM 0 11 1 12 2 8 3 13 1 10 6 17 0 8 1 9 7 PM to 8 PM 2 7 0 9 0 4 0 4 0 4 2 6 0 5 0 5 Total 18 144 27 189 8 110 14 132 14 123 30 167 19 112 10 141 Time Interval Wilkie Way (NB) Wilkie Way (SB) Charleston Rd (EB) Charleston Rd (WB) Wilkie Way Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Analysis May 16, 2013 Page | 6 Table 3 Existing Conditions – Weekday Pedestrian Data L T R Total L T R Total L T R Total L T R Total 7 AM to 8 AM 3 6 0 9 0 2 3 5 1 0 2 3 0 6 0 6 8 AM to 9 AM 2 7 1 10 2 2 0 4 0 5 1 6 0 2 0 2 9 AM to 10 AM 0 2 0 2 1 6 0 7 0 2 0 2 2 2 0 4 10 AM to 11 AM 1 3 1 5 0 2 0 2 3 2 0 5 0 1 1 2 11 AM to 12 PM 0 3 1 4 1 6 3 10 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 0 12 PM to 1 PM 2 5 0 7 1 0 2 3 1 2 2 5 2 0 1 3 1 PM to 2 PM 4 0 0 4 1 3 3 7 0 2 0 2 0 3 0 3 2 PM to 3 PM 1 2 0 3 0 3 4 7 0 3 1 4 4 5 2 11 3 PM to 4 PM 1 2 0 3 1 2 2 5 4 3 0 7 0 7 1 8 4 PM to 5 PM 4 2 1 7 3 2 6 11 6 3 2 11 4 2 2 8 5 PM to 6 PM 3 4 0 7 0 4 5 9 3 8 6 17 2 6 2 10 6 PM to 7 PM 1 3 0 3 3 0 2 5 1 4 4 9 0 2 1 3 7 PM to 8 PM 4 2 0 6 0 1 0 1 7 1 6 14 0 6 4 10 Total 26 41 4 70 13 33 30 76 28 39 24 91 14 42 14 70 Time Interval Wilkie Way (NB) Wilkie Way (SB) Charleston Rd (EB) Charleston Rd (WB) Wilkie Way Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Analysis May 16, 2013 Page | 7 Table 4 Existing Conditions – Saturday Pedestrian Data L T R Total L T R Total L T R Total L T R Total 7 AM to 8 AM 0 5 0 5 0 2 0 2 0 4 0 4 0 5 0 5 8 AM to 9 AM 1 1 1 1 1 7 0 7 1 7 0 7 2 7 1 7 9 AM to 10 AM 0 1 0 1 1 11 1 11 0 14 1 14 0 12 2 12 10 AM to 11 AM 1 2 0 2 0 2 2 2 0 5 0 5 1 3 0 3 11 AM to 12 PM 0 1 0 1 1 5 3 5 2 6 0 6 0 3 1 3 12 PM to 1 PM 0 2 0 2 1 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 2 8 0 8 1 PM to 2 PM 2 1 0 1 1 4 1 4 0 4 0 4 0 11 1 11 2 PM to 3 PM 3 7 1 7 0 1 2 1 0 7 0 7 0 8 0 8 3 PM to 4 PM 0 3 0 3 2 7 1 7 2 1 2 1 0 11 1 11 4 PM to 5 PM 2 2 1 2 0 4 4 4 3 7 1 7 0 3 3 3 5 PM to 6 PM 1 7 0 7 0 7 0 7 0 1 1 1 0 7 0 7 6 PM to 7 PM 0 9 0 9 0 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 0 8 0 8 7 PM to 8 PM 0 8 0 8 0 10 0 10 0 13 0 13 0 5 0 5 Total 10 49 3 49 7 66 14 66 9 75 7 75 5 91 9 91 Time Interval Wilkie Way (NB) Wilkie Way (SB) Charleston Rd (EB) Charleston Rd (WB) Wilkie Way Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Analysis May 16, 2013 Page | 8 Parking Demand on Wilkie Way On Street parking occupancy surveys were conducted along Wilkie Way between Charleston Road and the Wilkie Way bicycle bridge and within the Summerhill development. Parking is allowed along both sides of Wilkie Way except where the curb is painted red. On-street parking capacity on Wilkie Way was calculated based on a required space of approximately 20-22 feet per vehicle. The homes within the Summerhill development have attached garages that can accommodate at least two cars per garage. In addition the Summerhill development has a total of 21 open parking spaces, out of which 11 spaces are designated for visitor parking. Parking occupancy surveys were also conducted along the cross streets of Georgehood Circle, Duluth Circle, Edlee Avenue up to Ruthelma Avenue, and Whitclem Drive up to Whitclem Place. These count locations are identified on Figure 2. The parking occupancy counts were conducted during the Midday (12:00 PM - 2:00 PM), evening (5:00 PM – 7:00 PM), and late night (10:00 PM – 12:00 AM) peak periods. The parking occupancy data are shown in Table 5. The data shown in Table 5 indicate that adequate parking is available during midday and evening hours along Wilkie Way south of Charleston Road, along the cross streets on Wilkie Way, and within the Summerhill development. During late night, the parking occupancy survey shows that the segments on Wiklie Way between the Wilkie Way bicycle bridge and Whitclem Drive and between Charleston Road and Georgehood Lane have close to a 100% occupancy rate. This parking demand is likely generated by the high-density residential development located to the south of Wilkie Way and by the residential development on the south side of Charleston Road, west of Wilkie Way, which has walkways that connect to the sidewalk along Charleston Road. Parking occupancy on the segment of Wilkie Way between Whitclem Drive and Edlee Avenue is 12%, between Edlee Avenue and Duluth Circle is 20%, and between Duluth Circle and Georgehood Circle is 42%. The cross streets on Wilkie Way have an average occupancy of approximately 25% during the midday, 35% during evening and 57% during late night. The Summehill development has a parking occupancy of 62% during the midday, 62% during the evening and 52% during the late night. The proposed bicycle/pedestrian connection would be constructed on the segment of Wilkie Way between the Wilkie Way bicycle bridge and Whitclem Drive, close to the Wilkie Way bicycle bridge. Since this segment of Wilkie Way has close to 100% occupancy during the evening and late night hours, it is an indication that the proposed bicycle/pedestrian connection would generate very little additional parking demand along Wilkie Way. Although parking would be available along Wilkie Way between Whitclem Drive and Duluth Circle, it is unlikely that the residents of the Summerhill development would park at these locations, given the distance that they would have to walk to their homes. Based on these observations, it appears that there would be little Summerhill demand to park on Wilkie Way because the Summerhill development has vacant spaces during all times. Wilkie Way Bicycle / Pedestrian Connection Figure 2 Parking Count Locations W Charleston Rd Rickeys W a y Spruce Ln Edlee Ave Whitclem Dr Duluth Cir George Hood Ln Wil k i e W a y Deodar St Dinah’s Court Pratt Ln Hettinger Ln No b l e S t Ca s h e l S t Rickey’s L n El C a m i n o R e a l = Proposed Bicycle / Pedestrian Connection = Wilkie Way Neighborhood Parking Count Locations = Summerhill Development Parking Count Locations LEGEND = Summerhill Park Wilkie Way Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Analysis May 16, 2013 Page | 10 Table 5 Existing Conditions Parking Survey Spaces Occupied Occupancy   Rate Spaces Occupied Occupancy   Rate Spaces Occupied Occupancy   Rate Spaces Occupied Occupancy   Rate Spaces Occupied Occupancy   Rate Spaces Occupied Occupancy   Rate Wilkie Way ‐ SB Charleston Rd to Georgehood Lane 6 4 67%3 50%5 83%5 83% 5 83%5 83% Georgehood Lane to Duluth Circle 8 2 25%2 25%2 25%2 25% 4 50%4 50% Duluth Circle to Edlee Avenue 9 2 22%3 33%3 33%3 33% 3 33%2 22% Edlee Avenue to Whitclem Drive 9 1 11%2 22%1 11%1 11% 1 11%1 11% Whitclem Drive to Wilkie Way Bike Path 12 5 42%7 58%9 75%12 100% 12 100%11 92% Wilkie Way ‐ NB Charleston Rd to Georgehood Lane 3 1 33%1 33%2 67%2 67% 3 100%3 100% Georgehood Lane to Duluth Circle 6 1 17%1 17%1 17%1 17% 2 33%2 33% Duluth Circle to Edlee Avenue 6 0 0%0 0%0 0%0 0%0 0%1 17% Edlee Avenue to Whitclem Drive 8 2 25%1 13%1 13%1 13% 1 13%1 13% Whitclem Drive to Wilkie Way Bike Path 12 8 67%7 58%8 67%9 75% 9 75%11 92% Georgehood Lane 11 1 9%1 9%4 36%3 27% 7 64%9 82% Duluth Circle 14 5 36%3 21%4 29%5 36% 7 50%7 50% Edlee Avenue upto Ruthelma Ave 22 5 23%5 23%5 23%7 32% 10 45%9 41% Whitclem Drive upto Whitclem Place 9 3 33%3 33%3 33%4 44% 5 56%5 56% Summerhill Development 21 13 62%13 62%13 62%12 57% 11 52%11 52% Location 11PM to 12AM12PM to 1PM 1PM to 2PM 5PM to 6PM 6PM to 7PM 10PM to 11PMAvailable  Parking  (Spaces) Wilkie Way Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Analysis May 16, 2013 Page | 11 Conclusion Based on the bicycle/pedestrian counts conducted during the day light hours between 7 AM and 8 PM, a total of 578 bicyclists and 142 pedestrians currently use Wilkie Way on a weekday, and a total of 348 bicyclists and 140 pedestrians currently use Wilkie Way on a Saturday. Most of the bicycle traffic was observed to continue on Wilkie Way, past Charleston Road. Wilkie Way is a designated Class III bicycle route that provides a connection to the California Caltrain Station via designated bicycle facilities along Maclane Street and Park Boulevard. The proposed bicycle/pedestrian connection would connect Wilkie Way to El Camino Real, which is not a designated bicycle route. Based on the existing bicycle and pedestrian patterns observed in the study area, during the day light hours, less than 53 bicycles per day are likely to divert to the proposed bicycle/pedestrian connection through the Summerhill development. The parking survey showed that during late hours, parking occupancy on Wilkie Way between the Wilkie Way bicycle bridge and Whitclem Drive was close to 100% occupancy on both sides of Wilkie Way. Since the proposed bicycle/pedestrian connection is planned on this segment of Wilkie Way, it is likely that the proposed connection would generate very little additional demand for parking along Wilkie Way. The parking survey also showed that adequate parking is available in the Summerhill development during all times of the day. Since the Summerhill development has parking available on site, it is unlikely that the residents or visitors to the Summerhill development would park along Wilkie Way and walk to their homes via the proposed bike/pedestrian connection. City of Palo Alto March 11, 2015 Page 1 1 ===============MEETINGS ARE CABLECAST LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 26================= This agenda is posted in accordance with Government Code Section 54954.2(a) or section 54956. 2 3 Wednesday, March 25, 2015 Meeting 4 6:00 PM, Council Chambers 5 6 7 8 Public Hearing9 1. 4261 El Camino Real [14PLN-00508]: **CITY PROJECT** Site and Design Review and10 Conditional Use Permit for the construction of a bicycle/pedestrian path on a public access easement 11 on the pan-handle parcel at the rear of Dinah's Hotel property to provide access from Wilkie Way to 12 Summer Hill homes neighborhood. The project includes various landscaping treatments and 13 decorative elements with outdoor seating areas and lighting for both pedestrian and bicycle use. 14 Zone District: Service Commercial with Landscape and Site and Design Combining Districts 15 (CS[L][D]). Environmental Determination: Exempt from CEQA pursuant to Sections 15303 and 15304 16 (New Construction of Small Structures and Minor Alterations to Land). For more information contact 17 Sheldon Ah Sing, Contract Planner at sheldon@mplanninggroup.com. 18 19 Chair Tanaka: So Jonathan do you want to kick off the public hearing for 4261 El Camino? And also if20 there’s members of the public who wish to speak on this item just fill out a card in back and hand it to21 someone in the front. Thanks.22 23 Sheldon Ah Sing, Contract Planner: Thank you and good evening. I’m Sheldon Ah Sing, Consultant24 Planner, and the public hearing item is a City sponsored project as a Site and Design Review and25 Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for the construction of a bicycle/pedestrian path on a public access26 easement on a pan-handle parcel at the rear of Dinah's Hotel property to provide access from Wilkie Way27 to Summer Hill homes/Redwood Gate neighborhood. The project includes various landscaping28 treatments and decorative elements with outdoor seating areas and lighting for both pedestrian and29 bicycle use.30 31 So just a little bit on the project overview. The project’s been a subject of a lot of dialogue over the past32 few years. It started with the Redwood Gate development acknowledging the need for a connection33 between the Charleston Meadows neighborhood and the Redwood Gate neighborhood; the rezoning of a34 hotel site via City obtaining a public access easement over the project site and evolved into including two35 community meetings regarding the project and design of the project. As a result the City’s prepared to36 obtain approvals to implement the project.37 38 The project site was rezoned to Service Commercial Landscape and Site and Design Combining District in39 2009. This was done to allow opportunities for the public to get involved with the public review process40 for the project. The Site and Design Review requires recommendations from the Commission and the41 Architectural Review Board (ARB) to the City Council. The Pedestrian/Bicycle pathways within42 Landscaping Combining Districts require a CUP which is a concurrent application with the Site and Design43 Review this also requires recommendation from the Commission to the Council. And the ARB will look at44 the details of the architectural components and make their recommendation to the Council. So ultimately45 this will float to the City Council for their final decision.46 47 PLANNING & TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION EXCERPT MINUTES Attachment H City of Palo Alto March 11, 2015 Page 2 More specifically about the Site and Design Review as it includes findings that need to be made. These 1 findings indicate that the project will be compatible with the surrounding uses, will not cause harm or 2 disruptions, will be designed with the environment in mind, and will be consistent with the goals and 3 policies of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Staff has indicated that these findings can be made in the 4 affirmative. As with the Site and Design Review findings need to also be made for the CUP. The project 5 will not be detrimental to the public health and general welfare and will be consistent with the City’s 6 Comprehensive Plan and zoning code. Staff has also indicated that these findings can be made in the 7 affirmative. 8 9 The project is located along Wilkie Way, which is a proposed bicycle corridor. The path would connect 10 with the Charleston Meadows neighborhood to the Redwood Gate neighborhood which includes some 11 small open space areas that are open to the public and is adjacent to the El Camino Real commercial 12 corridor. The site plan includes approximately 100 foot path that is 10 feet in width and narrows down to 13 5 feet as it connects with the Redwood Gate community. The site will include trees and drought tolerant 14 plantings along with sitting boulders and a bench and the path will be lit with bollard lighting. 15 16 There are two key issues with this project. One is aesthetics and compatibility and the other is with 17 parking. So regarding aesthetics and compatibility at present the site is unimproved and in some ways is 18 given its surroundings is kind of out of place. So what this project does is it proposes to frame the site in 19 a way that creates transitions between the densities and connects the two neighborhoods. The project 20 will also improve the aesthetics of the site with drought tolerant plantings existent with the surrounding 21 and a lighted pathway that will not be intrusive. Regarding parking the City conducted two neighborhood 22 meetings and from the feedback that staff got at those a parking occupancy study was prepared. The 23 report concluded that there was heavy bicycle and pedestrian use on Wilkie way, there was adequate on 24 street parking within the Redwood Gate community and the construction of the path will not change the 25 existing parking conditions. 26 27 Thus far we’ve received two written comments regarding the project and those were very positive. So 28 with that the recommended Motion is to recommend the City Council approve the Site and Design Review 29 and the CUP to allow the construction of the proposed pedestrian/bicycle pathway and associated site 30 improvements upon findings and conditions of approval contained in the record of land use action. With 31 that that concludes my presentation. We do also have some other staff members from Transportation 32 here that can answer questions. Thank you. 33 34 Chair Tanaka: Ok, thank you. So I’d like to first open this up to the public. I think we have one speaker 35 card. Does Vice-Chair want to read off the name? 36 37 Vice-Chair Fine: Yes, we have one speaker, Linnea Wickstrom. 38 39 Chair Tanaka: You have three minutes. 40 41 Linnea Wickstrom: Thank you. I’m here to urge your approval of this. I’m here to urge that you approve 42 this permit. I think the staff has pretty well covered it. This has been planning since Summer Hill was in 43 development, now called Redwood Gate I understand. It’s a nice park that Summer Hill provided. They, 44 with the City decided to make this a public park and they built the sidewalk for it that connects through 45 to this proposed pan-handle development. The City has done all the studies and held some additional 46 meetings just on planning and design as well for what they were going to put there. Looks like very nice 47 landscaping design. 48 49 I just, the Monroe Park Neighborhood Association that I represent is, would love to have public access to 50 this public park. The only access now is up El Camino and in on a private street that has a public overlay 51 through the Redwood Gate development. So we would very much like to be able to walk through our 52 neighborhood, Charleston Meadows, and access the City, this City of Palo Alto public park. Thank you. 53 54 Chair Tanaka: Thank you. If there’s any other members of the public that want to speak you should 55 submit a card otherwise I will be closing the public hearing. Seeing no other cards I’m going, I’ll close 56 City of Palo Alto March 11, 2015 Page 3 the public hearing and I’d like to move it back to the Commission. And what we’re going to do is 1 basically give every one person a chance to talk about any questions/issues and kind of what I’d like to 2 try to do is rather than having just one shot to talk I think what we’re going to try to do is do it so that 3 we can respond to each other’s questions and issues. So we’re going to set the clock for one minute 4 each. You don’t have to take up the whole minute, but if there’s a question you have you could ask that 5 question and there’s going to be multiple chances to speak. So if you wish to speak hit your lights. The 6 first light I see is Commissioner Michael. Oh, ok. Sorry. So are there any Commissioners that have a 7 question or wish to speak? Vice-Chair. 8 9 Vice-Chair Fine: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to staff for that report. I really appreciated 10 how there were the recommendations and the findings we need to meet for the CUP and the land use 11 change. But just one question more procedural than anything, one of the requirements is that we ensure 12 that it’s this permit is in accord with the Comp Plan. I was just wondering does it have to be in accord 13 with some certain number of policies or goals or all of them or is there some requirement or threshold 14 there? 15 16 Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney: Thank you, Cara Silver, Senior Assistant City Attorney. This is 17 a fairly common type of finding that you see in land use issues. Generally what you’re looking for is 18 some general consistency with relevant Comp Plan policies. So in this case you would look at the 19 recreational aspects of the Comprehensive Plan and perhaps elements of bicycle connection and that type 20 of thing and make a determination as to whether this particular project is compatible. 21 22 Vice-Chair Fine: Thank you. 23 24 Chair Tanaka: Before I have Commissioner Alcheck I just want to acknowledge that Commissioner 25 Gardias is also here. He came I think halfway through the report, I think. Commissioner Alcheck. 26 27 Commissioner Alcheck: Is staff aware of any objections to this proposal? Particularly if the answer is yes 28 could you summarize the objection since we didn’t hear from anybody in the community objecting to the 29 proposal? 30 31 Mr. Ah Sing: So the project was noticed in accordance with Palo Alto requirements. There have been no 32 negative comments, they’ve all been positive. All the comments that regard issues were prior to this 33 application coming forward and were addressed with this current application. 34 35 Chair Tanaka: Ok, are there any other questions or issues that we should discuss or should we entertain 36 a Motion? Commissioner Gardias. 37 38 Commissioner Gardias: Just a quick question. So this is, has been recorded as a public access. Is there 39 some time limit or what is the legal status of this access? Can it change later on if there will be a 40 development on this lot or the status will be permanent from now on? 41 42 Mr. Ah Sing: So the City did obtain a access, public access easement over the property and the property 43 owner consented to that. And so it’s for the life of that easement. 44 45 Commissioner Gardias: Ok, thank you. 46 Chair Tanaka: Commissioner Michael. 47 48 MOTION 49 50 Commissioner Michael: So if this is the right time I’d be willing to make a Motion. I move that we 51 recommend City Council approval of the Site and Design Review and CUP to allow the construction of the 52 proposed pedestrian and bicycle pathway and associated site improvements based upon the findings and 53 the conditions of approval contained in the record of land use action. 54 55 Chair Tanaka: Do we have a second? 56 City of Palo Alto March 11, 2015 Page 4 1 SECOND 2 3 Commissioner Rosenblum: Second. 4 5 VOTE 6 7 Chair Tanaka: Ok, the Motion has been made by Commissioner Michael and seconded by Commissioner 8 Rosenblum. Does anyone have any discussion points? If so hit your lights otherwise we would take a 9 vote. Ok, let’s take a vote. All in favor say aye (Aye). Ok, it’s unanimous. So let’s see so let’s close this 10 item and move to the next item. 11 12 MOTION PASSED (7-0) 13 14 Letter 1 From: Robert Neff [mailto:rmrneff@sonic.net] Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 11:29 PM To: Planning Commission Subject: Move forward with Wilkie Way Path Dear Planning Commission Members, I'm writing in support of the Wilkie Way Path project you are considering on Wednesday, March 25. This project has been moving very slowly for a long time, and I'm glad to see it moving on to PTC this week. I strongly support this path because it will improve connectivity for bicycling and walking from the SummerHill Homes community towards Mountain View via Wilkie, the Wilkie Bridge over Adobe Creek, and Monroe street. From there the connectivity to shops at San Antonio Shopping center, and into Los Altos via Los Altos Ave. is excellent for walking and biking. This will shorten the total walking or riding distance by 1/2 mile for some residents, and make the neighborhood street route shorter and more attractive than the El Camino Real sidewalk alternative. I must admit I was initially surprised to see the consultant study finding that there would be no parking impact to Wilkie Way from this development, but reading the report, it looks like a sensible conclusion due to the existing conditions at either end of the proposed path. Please move this project on to city council so that it may be completed in a timely way. Thank you for your service to the city of Palo Alto. Robert Neff 3150 Emerson Street, Palo Alto robert@neffs.net Letter 2 From: William Robinson [mailto:williamrobinson@goldenworld.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2015 12:56 PM To: Planning Commission Cc: Robert Neff Subject: March 25 item 1. support and justification for Mini-Park access to Wilkie Please see the attached pdf file that supports and justifies mini-park access to Wilkie Way at the south end of the multi-family development at corner of Charleston and El Camino. The city mini-park was warranted by the density of the development. Con: Objections to the path are largely over parking which should be controlled by parking restrictions and enforcement. Pro: Access by foot or bike to and from the mini-park reduces distance to the Wilkie bike/ped bridge by a mile for residents near the park. PABAC has discussed the proposed path and endorsed the path design to calm speed. This is a very worthy addition to the residents and citizens of Palo Alto. I live in the 4100 block of Wilkie 46 years. William’Rob’ Robinson, CPA resident and member PABAC (Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee), Palo Alto since 2005 From: Linnea Wickstrom [mailto:ljwickstrom@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 05, 2015 7:37 PM To: Architectural Review Board Cc: Linnea Wickstrom Subject: Approve: 4261 El Camino Real (14PLN-00508) ARB members, I hope that you will approve the Site and Design Review and the Conditional Use Permit for the bicycle/pedestrian path from Wilkie Way to the public park in the Summerhill neighborhood. The design has been reviewed at last twice in City meetings with the Wilkie Way and Monroe Drive neighborhoods and it will please the community a lot to finally have a close and realistic access (rather than a private road off ECR) to the very nice little public park at Summerhill. Thank you for moving this project along with your approval, Linnea Wickstrom MPNA 1 Letter 3 4261 El Camino Real Page 1 1 2 3 Thursday, May 7, 2015, Meeting 4 8:30 AM, Council Chambers 5 6 PUBLIC HEARING: 7 8 1.4261 El Camino Real [14PLN-00508]: Request for Site and Design Review for the9 construction of a bicycle/pedestrian path on a public access easement on the panhandle parcel at10 the rear of Dinah's Hotel property to provide access from Wilkie Way to Summer Hill homes11 neighborhood. The project includes various landscaping treatments and decorative elements12 with outdoor seating areas and lighting for both pedestrian and bicycle use, and requires13 Conditional Use Permit approval. Zone District: Service Commercial with Landscape and Site and14 Design Combining Districts (CS [L][D]). Environmental Assessment: Exempt from CEQA15 pursuant to Sections 15303 and 15304 (New Construction of Small Structures and Minor16 Alterations to Land).17 18 Sheldon Ah Sing: Thank you. I'm Sheldon Ah Sing, Contract Planner. I've prepared a PowerPoint, a 19 brief one to get through. We also have some other staff members that have been involved with the 20 design of the project. Just a little bit of background overview. The project site is a vacant, unimproved 21 site, very small, a 13,200-square-foot portion of a larger site that contains a Dinah's Hotel. This is a City-22 initiated effort to design and construct a pathway between Wilkie Way and Summer Hill homes, Redwood 23 Gate neighborhood. The project has been the subject of a lot of dialog over the past few years. We 24 initiated with the Planning Commission and Council-level, started with the Redwood Gate Elks Lodge 25 development acknowledging a need for a connection between these communities, a rezoning of a hotel 26 site. The City obtained a public access easement over the project site. It involved two community 27 meetings prior to actually this application being filed regarding the project and the design. As a result, 28 the City is prepared now to go forward with this project and implement it. The project was seen by the 29 Planning Commission and recommended approval of the project to the City Council on March 25th. 30 You're probably wondering why is this project here before the ARB. It's, on the face of it, a minor project 31 but, as I mentioned, it has had a lot of public dialog and there was a lot of concerted effort to have the 32 site zoned in such a way that would provide for maximum amount of public input, therefore, also limiting 33 the types of uses that could be used on the site. In the end, what we have is a connection that required 34 review by the Planning Commission, including a Conditional Use Permit, as well as looking at the design 35 of some of the elements by the ARB. All of these recommendations will go to the City Council as the final 36 decision authority. As part of the architectural review, as you know, there's 16 findings that need to be 37 made. More specifically, those findings would indicate that the project design is compatible with its 38 surrounding, considers its function and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff has indicated 39 that these findings can be made in the affirmative. The project's located along Wilkie Way, which is a 40 proposed bicycle corridor. The path will connect Charleston Meadows to the Redwood Gate 41 neighborhood, which includes a small open space and other open space elements, and adjacent to El 42 Camino Real commercial corridor. Otherwise, someone on a bicycle would have to do a round-about way 43 on Charleston to get to those open spaces. This is a very safe and unique opportunity for the City to 44 implement this. The site plan itself includes approximately 100-foot pathway. It's 10 feet in width at 45 Wilkie Way, and it narrows down to 5 feet to get through the gate there at Redwood Gate. The site will 46 include a landscape palette of trees with taller plantings along with seating boulders and a bench. The 47 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD DRAFT EXCEPT MINUTES Attachment J 4261 El Camino Real Page 2 path will be lit with bollard lighting to provide safe travel at night. All these elements are City standard 1 elements. What we're seeking today is some concurrence on the overall design, perhaps not necessarily 2 design of the bollard or the bench, but maybe the situation of it, the location of it or maybe if additional 3 amenities, if you think things like that may be warranted. A couple of key issues regarding the project. 4 One is aesthetics and compatibility, and the other is parking. Regarding aesthetics and compatibility, at 5 present the site is unimproved; in some ways, given its surrounding, kind of out of place. What this 6 project, it really does bring together all the elements of the surrounding and frame the site in such a way 7 it transitions the densities in the surrounding neighborhoods. The project will improve the aesthetics of 8 the site with the drought-tolerant plantings and consistent with the surroundings. The lighted pathway 9 also will not be intrusive, the way the bollards are placed. The City, as I mentioned before, did conduct 10 two neighborhood meetings. There was some concern about parking, so a parking occupancy study was 11 prepared to resolve those comments. The report of that concluded that there was heavy bicycle and 12 pedestrian use of Wilkie Way; that there was adequate on-street parking within the Redwood Gate 13 community; and the construction of the path would not change the existing parking conditions. Since 14 that time, we've gotten really all positive feedback from the community regarding the project. We did 15 include those letters to you. People have spoke at the Planning Commission meeting that was in favor of 16 the project. Everybody is eager to get the project going. I think that, in part, having this public outreach 17 and this process did help this project along, and then also having the two community meetings prior to 18 the application submittal was also very helpful. With that, we do recommend the City Council approval of 19 the Site and Design Review and to allow the construction of this project. With that, I conclude my 20 recitation. Again, we have some people from staff involved with the design of the project. That 21 concludes my presentation. Thank you. 22 23 Chair Popp: All right, thank you very much. We'll go to the Board for any technical questions. Board 24 Member Lew, if we could start with you today. 25 26 Board Member Lew: Thank you for the presentation. I have a couple of questions. One is just about 27 the tapered width. It starts like 10 feet wide and then it narrows down. I was wondering if there is any 28 way to make that more uniform. It's a little unusual to do that dramatic of a change within such a short 29 length. I mean it sets up like an expectation that it's going to be, like if you're entering it and it's 10 feet 30 wide, you sort of expect it to continue at that width, and then all of a sudden you have to go through this 31 tight radius and, yeah. 32 33 Ruchika Aggarwal: Thank you. My name is Ruchika Aggarwal. I'm Associate Engineer with the 34 Transportation Division. To respond to your question, we are matching it with the existing sidewalk 35 which is within the community, and there is a fence along that, and we'll have to do the cutout. The 36 tapering is so we can match it to the existing sidewalk at that point. At the other point, we have a 10 37 feet wide path. 38 39 Board Member Lew: I didn't get a chance to go back into the Redwood Gate. That sidewalk on the other 40 side in the Redwood Gate section, it's a 5-foot wide pathway and that's it? There's like landscaping or a 41 front fence or anything, what is sort of on that side? I mean like 5 feet is just like a sidewalk, right. 42 43 Ms. Aggarwal: That's correct; that is the sidewalk. Yeah. 44 45 Board Member Lew: Okay. At the Wilkie Way end of the path, I think you have something labeled like a 46 stop at the sidewalk and the bike path junction. I think like elsewhere in Palo Alto usually sometimes we 47 have gates there, not physical closed gates, but it sort of forces the bicyclist to do like a little "S" turn. 48 Otherwise, they'll just blow through it. I mean they're not going to stop there. I was wondering if there 49 was any thought about that. We have them in like Bol Park, at the new Monroe Park, bike path behind 50 the Palo Alto Bowl subdivision. I think there's like a similar gate there as well. Anyway I was wondering 51 if that was a consideration or if the pedestrian and bicycle committee had reviewed the plans. 52 53 Ms. Aggarwal: Yes, the Palo Alto Bike Advisory Committee, they reviewed the plans and they provided 54 their comments. They didn't talk about the gate, but they talked about having a stop sign. The initial 55 4261 El Camino Real Page 3 design had a bollard, and they were not in favor of the bollard, so that was removed. The gates were 1 not considered at that point. 2 3 Board Member Lew: Okay, thank you. My last question is does the homeowner directly adjacent to this 4 property, have they reviewed all of the plans, because I mean I think that they'd be most affected by 5 noise or light or anything that might happen in the panhandle park. 6 7 Ms. Aggarwal: They have been notified of all the meetings, and the plans were sent to them. We 8 haven't targeted, we haven't done a personal meeting with them. During one of the site visits, I know 9 he's anxious to get this built, because right now it's (inaudible) and it's not aesthetically appealing. To 10 respond to your question, no, we haven't made a formal meeting with that particular resident owner, but 11 they were invited to all the Commission meetings and the community meetings. 12 13 Board Member Lew: I think my comment on that is that the other times when we've had like a bike path 14 going right by somebody's backyard or something like that, the concern is usually like light and noise 15 right against their, you know, right against their property line, especially if it's a backyard. In this case, 16 it's just a side yard. Okay. That's all the questions I have. Thank you. 17 18 Chair Popp: Thank you. Board Member Kim. 19 20 Board Member Kim: No technical questions. 21 22 Vice Chair Gooyer: I have no questions. 23 24 Chair Popp: I just have a couple of things that I wanted to ask about. One of them was a meeting with 25 the adjacent neighbor and whether that had occurred. I think it's critical that you reach out to that 26 person and make sure that a meeting does occur, because that could sideline the entire process here if 27 he comes out with some really serious concerns and the project has to stop because of that. So make 28 sure we get to them before that happens. I know that the path into the neighborhood is this narrow, it's 29 essentially just a walkway that connects a series of front doors, and so it's very narrow. I'm wondering 30 about the same question that Board Member Lew had having to do with the width of the walkway and 31 how that was designed and the intent of having this wider entry point that encourages people to start on 32 their bikes and then a sign deeper into it that says "time to get off your bike and walk." You know, the 33 path is almost the distance from me to you. You know, it's just not that big an area, and so I'm 34 wondering why don't we, just narrow it up at the throat where you enter this, and make it a walking 35 path. If you want it to bulge out and have more space inside there and the landscape island, do some of 36 that. Was there other design evaluated for this and why did it come to this? 37 38 Ms. Aggarwal: Wilkie Way being the bike corridor and the site being adjacent to the Wilkie Bridge which 39 connects to Mountain View area, the study found that there is a large number of bicyclists on this 40 corridor. The idea was to provide a path that is going to be workable for both pedestrians and bicyclists. 41 There was another design element which was a little bit wider closest to the Wilkie Way, but we also 42 want to restrict any vehicular movement into this path or into this property, so that's why the limit was to 43 have it 10-feet wide and then have a boulder kind of right after that so it restricts vehicular movement. 44 There is no opportunity to widen the sidewalk within the development. The intent was to kind of match 45 it with the, kind of taper it down so it matches with the existing sidewalk. 46 47 Chair Popp: Thank you. One last question for Shelton. You mentioned the parking concerns that were 48 brought up during the discussions. Were those localized to construction issues or was it a broader 49 discussion of parking? 50 51 Mr. Ah Sing: It was a broader discussion of parking. At the time, Redwood Gate was not a built-out 52 community; it was just a concept plan that was approved. 53 54 Chair Popp: This was prior to the construction? 55 4261 El Camino Real Page 4 1 Mr. Ah Sing: That was prior to (crosstalk) so that they had to do some assumptions in that. 2 3 Chair Popp: Got it, okay. That's right. All right, so that's all I had. We don't have anyone here from the 4 public to speak on this. I have no cards, so we'll just move right back to the Board for discussion very 5 quickly. Back to you, Alex. 6 7 Board Member Lew: I just also had a comment on the Hexagon report on the traffic, on the parking. It 8 attributed like 100 percent utilization of the parking like solely on the high-density housing which I would 9 call medium-density housing. I just wanted to add a note that there's no street parking on Charleston or 10 parts of Arastradero as well, so any of the homeowners who live right on there, if they have an extra car 11 or whatever, they're also going to be parking like on Wilkie Way, so it's not just the Arbor Real or 12 Redwood Gate. If there are extra cars on the street, it's not only because of that. I go by there all the 13 time by bike, and I do understand that there are more cars at both ends of the street. I know that just 14 by passing through there a couple of times a week. I wanted to add that it's not, just in general there 15 are not more cars on Wilkie Way than on any of the other neighboring streets, because I cut through 16 there all the time on all of those streets, and there's nothing really that unusual in general, in the overall 17 pattern of that. I think also the Hexagon report sort of suggested that maybe as many as like half of the 18 people who go down Wilkie Way and turn left on Charleston, right, headed west, like up to half of them 19 are going to use this path to go through Redwood Gate and Arbor Real, and I think that's high. I mean if 20 they're trying to sort of estimate a maximum, I think that's fine to use that as a maximum. Once you go 21 through there, it doesn't connect to anything else. It seems to me to assume like half of the bicyclists 22 and pedestrians are going to go through there, it seems kind of like a bit of a stretch to me. Then I think 23 my other comment is ideally you wouldn't have to make the turn at the end of the path to get into 24 Redwood Gate. Like just in pure design, I would rather you be able to see all the way through the 25 connection from Wilkie Way to whatever street is in Redwood Gate. It's a security thing, like people want 26 to get a clear shot and they want to see if there's anybody in there. So in a way it's disappointing, but I 27 think this is a very important connector and I wish like a connector had been planned sort of in a role 28 within all of the Arbor Real, Redwood Gate thing from the very beginning. I think all of the landscaping is 29 appropriate. All of the native plants and stuff seem all perfectly fine and acceptable. I think I do 30 understand the boulder in the middle of the path; I do understand that to try to restrict cars from 31 entering the path. Normally I would not want to put something like that in the middle of a bike path, but 32 I think in this case it's perfectly acceptable, and I think it's better than having a the metal post right in 33 the middle of the bike path. On the lighting, I do like the bollards. Normally, you know, with Public 34 Works I think we've usually had like a pole-mounted fixture with the light shining down. I mean we 35 haven't normally looked at like bollards, but I think in the past Public Works hasn't been willing to do 36 them is my understanding. I don't know; I could be wrong about that. I mean I think normally you're 37 trying to like limit the number of different types of light fixtures that have to be maintained within the 38 City. Anyway I think the light fixtures look fine. I think my last comment was on the decomposed 39 granite. Sometimes, you know, it can whatever, spread onto the paved parts of the sidewalk. There is a 40 maintenance issue with having the DG right next to the concrete. If you're walking on the DG, you know, 41 you'll track it onto the concrete. Otherwise, I think this is all good, and I think I can support the findings 42 for this project. Thank you. 43 44 Chair Popp: Board Member Lew. Excuse me. Board Member Kim. 45 46 Board Member Kim: Thank you for your presentation. Just a couple of quick comments. Personally I 47 think the path reduction marking is actually more appropriate before the path actually narrows, so that 48 somebody on their bicycle is actually aware that the path is going to narrow rather than having the sign 49 saying "get off your bike" and then having markings showing that the path is narrowing. I've been going 50 back and forth between the width of the path. I think currently the way that it is, if the path is really 51 only leading to the park, I don't know if it's appropriate that this become an actual bicycle path. I think, 52 you know, bicyclists, if they're going to go from one point to another, they wouldn't really go through the 53 park; they'd just go the existing route down Wilkie and over on Charleston. So it seems a little bit 54 strange that we would have to have this width to accommodate bicyclists when they're, you know, going 55 4261 El Camino Real Page 5 to have to immediately get off their bikes. I mean I think it's pretty common sense that if you're going to 1 go on a narrower path, if the path were narrow all along this park, that you get off your bike and walk it. 2 That's kind of the other way around too is, you know, for instance I live very close to the 101 pedestrian 3 bridge, and that's a route where you're not supposed to ride your bike, but everybody does anyway. 4 Even if it narrows down and there's a sign that says "get off your bike," I'm sure there's going to be a lot 5 of people that are going to continue to ride their bikes. To kind of be wishy-washy and say, "Well, you 6 shouldn't ride your bike because it's too narrow, but we're going to give you the option to stay on your 7 bike as you come in," it seems a little bit difficult to navigate for me. However, realizing that in the 8 Hexagon transportation report that there really aren't bicyclists allowed on El Camino currently, I think in 9 the future as El Camino develops and perhaps there's an opportunity for a bicycle path that maybe then 10 this becomes an even more important route. There maybe ought to be a full bicycle path through the 11 community, but it's very difficult, you know, to think on that route, you know, in the future and what do 12 we do then. Those are kind of my comments. Some other minor comments that I had. I think the 13 ridges might even be appropriate as you approach Wilkie from the park, so that bicyclists are aware that 14 there's kind of a stop or that they should be careful rather than kind of speed straight on to Wilkie. I 15 think that's it as far as my comments. Thanks again. 16 17 Chair Popp: Board Member Gooyer. 18 19 Vice Chair Gooyer: I guess I don't have as many concerns as some of my other committee members. It 20 just seems, I guess, an awfully elaborate 100 feet, give or take, to just connect a small walking path to 21 the street. I don't have a problem with the way the transition works. I think it makes sense doing it at 22 the corner there, where you're going to slow down hopefully when you start to make the corner. Either if 23 you don't get off your bike, you're still going to slow down before you hit the 5-foot path. I'm fine with 24 approving it the way it is. 25 26 Chair Popp: All right, thank you. I'll just state very briefly. I live in Monroe Park, just on the other side 27 of the Wilkie bike bridge. I'm far enough away that I don't need to recuse myself from the discussion 28 here. But I do walk up and down this street, you know, four days of the week probably as we're walking 29 around, so I'm very familiar with this area. I want to just go back to the path that was built behind the 30 new housing at the Palo Alto Bowl site. There was a very nice agreement between the neighbors and the 31 developer and a path was put in that connects Monroe with Cesano. Almost immediately after that was 32 built, there were homeless that took up residence on that path, literally sleeping on the path, couldn't get 33 them moved. It became enough of a problem that my children, who ride to school using that path, 34 would not use the path. I'm concerned about that and how that might occur on this particular site. I 35 think that the comments that Alex made about the bollards are really appropriate here. I think I'd like to 36 ask that you take a look at some really high-tech lighting that has very carefully controlled cutoff and will 37 create pools of light right on the pathway that would be unpleasant enough to stay under, that you 38 wouldn't want to sleep there at night or hang out there. You know, controlled in a way that it won't 39 bother the neighbor is what I'm trying to say. Sorry I'm mucking around with that a little bit. In addition 40 to that, I think that the other issue that I'm quite concerned with is sight lines up the path. That's the 41 other issue on the Monroe-Cesano path is that it's got a bend in the middle of it which everyone felt was 42 important to slow people down a little bit and to control the movement. What ended up happening is 43 you can't see up the path, so you don't know the guy's there until you're already on the path. While I 44 very much like the idea of the boulder and the little island, I think what it does is it makes it so that you 45 can't see into the site. It's not very long and it's not far to see, but I think it's something that I would ask 46 you to potentially reconsider. Although it's a nice design element, I think it will decrease the safety of 47 the site, because what occurred on the Cesano corridor is this guy would just lay flat on the path and he 48 was hard to see. He was hard to see. I'd just like you to think about reevaluating that potentially. Did 49 you have something you wanted to add? 50 51 Peter Jensen: Well, I was just going to speak to the boulder and then the planting in that area. The idea 52 was that the boulder and the planting got no higher than a foot and a half tall, so it is fairly, fairly low. 53 Basically that boulder is there to stop any vehicles from driving up that pathway, so we could use some 54 other type of obstacle there. I think the boulder is a more organic and aesthetically pleasing element 55 4261 El Camino Real Page 6 than just a pole. Definitely the sight lines were a big consideration in the design of the planting. As far 1 as the planting along the pathway and definitely the sight line back to where the link to the community 2 where it narrows down to 5 feet, so you could from Wilkie Way get a clear visual of the full sight line of 3 that, so there was nothing hiding in those areas or on the path. 4 5 Chair Popp: Okay. You know, my experience has been that 18 inches high is enough for someone like 6 that to lay behind, so I'd like to suggest that there might be a different option for how that works. All 7 right. Honestly, I wouldn't mind a bollard, you know, something that's a dark-color bollard and it's just 8 simple and clean and allow the rest of it to stay low. I also agree with Board Member, I think it was 9 Board Member Kim's comments about the placement of the marker that says to get off your bike. I think 10 that by the time you get to that marker, it's too late. Are the ribs that you're showing across the 11 sidewalk actually texture that will, you know, you go over that and it's sort of the speed bumps like you 12 have headed towards the Bay Bridge or how will that work? 13 14 Ms. Aggarwal: The proposal was to have it only striped and not have any deflection. 15 16 Chair Popp: Okay. 17 18 Ms. Aggarwal: Just different colored stripes. 19 20 Chair Popp: Great, okay. I'm not in favor of having deflection at all, but I think that perhaps, you know, 21 in light of the fact that it's unlikely people are really going to get off their bikes, I think we should just 22 recognize that it's also unlikely that the sign really matters. We should put it there, and it's the right 23 thing to do. People who are paying attention will get off their bikes and walk, but maybe it's better to 24 move it back to this area where it's in the lane of traffic for people that are headed that direction, and it 25 fully covers that portion of the path, and it's far enough away that you'd slow down and get off your bike 26 before you get to the spot where it narrows. I like that the path has a tight turn to it. You know, I think 27 just we're connecting to an existing path and you could have swept that farther back and had the bigger 28 turn. I think it's better that it be shorter. Then I think the only other comment that I have is that I think 29 that one bench is not enough. I think, you know, the goal is to make this a place that is really beautiful. 30 You're spending a lot of time and effort designing it and approving it, and it will be nicely maintained I'm 31 sure, and I'd very much like to suggest that if you have one bench, all it takes is one person to sit there 32 and nobody else will use the entire park. I think that you probably need three. I think it's, you know, it's 33 nice to have them in odd numbers just for how aesthetics work, and so I'd like to suggest that whatever 34 needs to be done be done in order to accommodate more seating in that area, so that other people can 35 enjoy it as well. With that, I think we're looking for a motion. Anyone prepared to do that? Or shall I? 36 Go ahead. 37 38 Board Member Lew: Yes. I guess the question is if we want revisions, then do we want it to come back 39 to the Board or do we want it to come back to the subcommittee? 40 41 Vice Chair Gooyer: I don't think the revisions are that drastic that we need to come back. Do you? I 42 mean ... 43 44 Chair Popp: I don't. 45 46 Vice Chair Gooyer: ... I'm assuming, let's say, moving the indicator back and possibly adding a couple of 47 benches, but I mean other than that. 48 49 Chair Popp: Yeah, I mean I think we've provided some recommendations about lighting and some 50 benches and moving the indicator, but other than that it seems like there was pretty unilateral support 51 for the project. 52 53 4261 El Camino Real Page 7 Board Member Lew: Okay. Then I will make a motion that we approve the project with the following 1 conditions: that an alternate light pole be considered with a down light, what do we call that? 2 Restrictors? I forgot what they call that. 3 4 Chair Popp: With a cutoff feature. 5 6 Board Member Lew: Yes, thank you for that. That the height of the boulder be reconsidered to be lower 7 than what? Lower than 18 inches; that the number of benches be reconsidered to three, or at least 8 three, and then the placement of the bicycle dismount sign be relocated. 9 10 Board Member Kim: I'll second that. 11 12 MOTION: Board Member Lew moved, seconded by Board Member Kim that the Architectural Review 13 Board recommend approval of the Project with the following conditions: 1) an alternate light pole be 14 considered with a cutoff; 2) the height of the boulder be less than 18 inches; 3) the number of benches 15 be reconsidered to at least three; and, 4) the bicycle dismount sign be relocated. 16 17 Chair Popp: Great. So any discussion? 18 19 Vice Chair Gooyer: Well, the only thing being I can see the rationale behind the height of the boulder 20 and everything else. Maybe if we're increasing the lighting in that area, maybe it's eliminating your 21 concern of seeing someone behind that little island, if you want to call it. Because I think if you make 22 that too flat, it's sort of useless even having it there. 23 24 Chair Popp: It sounds to me like that purpose of the boulder was really just to slow people down and 25 create an element there ... 26 27 Vice Chair Gooyer: And to prevent a car from going down it. 28 29 Chair Popp: That would divide the walkway. 30 31 Vice Chair Gooyer: But I'm saying if you make the thing 6 inches, I got plenty of friends with trucks 32 that'll say, you know, "What boulder?" 33 34 Chair Popp: Okay. 35 36 Vice Chair Gooyer: I'd rather see it, if that's the case, you said put light, you know, increase the lighting 37 a little bit so that when you're even approaching it close, you can see anything in that area. Because 38 that's your main concern, right, is the fact that, as you said, somebody laying back there. 39 40 Chair Popp: It is but, you know, a bollard closer to the entry point (crosstalk). 41 42 Vice Chair Gooyer: That's true. That's fine too, but I meant either one way or the other. I don't know 43 lowering the, you know, only lowering the boulder would really do what it's intended to do. 44 45 Chair Popp: I think what I was suggesting was that they look at some other methodology 46 47 Vice Chair Gooyer: Okay. 48 49 Chair Popp: (crosstalk). 50 51 Board Member Lew: I mean I think the conventional thing that's in all other bike paths is the bollard in 52 the middle of the path. I think you had mentioned like a dark color, and my only comment is there's a 53 certain point at like twilight, where if it's ... 54 55 4261 El Camino Real Page 8 Chair Popp: You don't see it. 1 2 Board Member Lew: They're actually invisible at a certain time, especially if it's in like a concrete or 3 asphalt path. 4 5 Chair Popp: You're absolutely right about that. 6 7 Board Member Lew: So usually there's some reflective stripe or whatever added to it. Why don't we 8 revise the boulder just to say that like an alternate ... 9 10 Chair Popp: All right. 11 12 Board Member Lew: .An alternate traffic barrier. 13 14 Chair Popp: Board Member Kim, is that acceptable? 15 16 Board Member Kim: I think it's acceptable, but if I recall originally a bollard was there but the Palo Alto 17 Bicycle Advisory Committee advised against it. Could you give us a little bit more information on why 18 that was? 19 20 Ms. Aggarwal: That's right. There are some instances where they're not very comfortable with having 3 21 feet, the proposal was to have a 3 feet bollard to restrict the vehicular movement inside the path, and 22 they preferred a boulder kind of integrated with the landscape to be a better choice. They're not in favor 23 of the 3-feet high bollards. 24 25 Chair Popp: I respect their opinion about that, but I think that security is an overriding concern, and we 26 do have plenty of precedent where there are bollards on paths all over Palo Alto, and I have to say I'm 27 not in favor of the recommendation that they have made, and I think we should reevaluate this for a 28 bollard. 29 30 Vice Chair Gooyer: Yeah, I agree mainly because also, I mean two fold. First of all I think it's a security 31 or I should say almost a comfort level that when you go on a path and you see a big bollard, you're 32 figuring you're not going to run into a truck or a vehicle that was behind you. Also, if you lower that 33 boulder which is supposedly a seating boulder to, let's say, 12 inches, that's going to become a rather 34 uncomfortable seat for the average person. I mean it's defeating the purpose of what it is was there in 35 the first place. 36 37 Board Member Kim: Okay, yeah. I'm fine. I just wanted to get a little bit of additional information on 38 why their decision was such. 39 40 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION with the consent of the maker and seconder to revise the 41 boulder to an alternate traffic barrier. 42 43 Chair Popp: It's just not a big bicycling path. If it was a significant bicycling path, I'd say, "Fine, I'll 44 agree with their concerns." But the fact is 40 feet down the path you've got to get off your bike anyway. 45 46 Vice Chair Gooyer: Right, I agree. 47 48 Chair Popp: So what's the difference? All right. With that, let's vote. All in favor, great. That passes. 49 Thank you very much for your time and the nice design work. Really appreciate it. 50 51 MOTION PASSED: 4-0-0-0 52 53 City of Palo Alto (ID # 5624) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Consideration of Factfinding Recommendation; Award Contract to Serco, Inc. for RPP Enforcement; BAO Title: Consideration of Impasse and Factfinding Recommendation Regarding RPP Enforcement Staffing, Approval of Three-Year Contract to Serco, Inc. For $1,509,630 For Contract Enforcement for the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program, Approval of a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Amount of $378,000 To Appropriate Funds for the First Year of the Contract, and Adoption of Resolution Amending the Administrative Penalty Schedule for Violation of the RPP Program From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council: 1. Hold a public hearing (as required by State law) regarding the impasse in negotiations with Service Employees’ International Union, Local 521 (SEIU) regarding contracting out for the Downtown RPP Parking Enforcement services, including consideration of the factfinding panel recommendation. 2. Implement the City’s last, best, and final offer to SEIU by: a. Authorizing the City Manager or designee to award a three-year contract in the amount of $1,509,630 to Serco, Inc. for enforcement of the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program, b. Approving a Budget Amendment Ordinance (BAO) in the amount of $378,000 to cover contract costs for the first year, transferring funds from the General Fund to the Residential Parking Permit Fund offset with a reduction in the Budget Stabilization Reserve, and 3. Adopt the attached Resolution amending the administrative penalty schedule to include a penalty amount for violation of the Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program. Executive Summary On December 2, 2014, Council directed staff to proceed with implementation of the first Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) program, designed to regulate parking in the City of Palo Alto Page 2 neighborhoods north and south of Downtown. The program will limit non-permit holder parking to two hours during regular business hours (see staff reports 5304 and 5305 for background). The Downtown RPP program was the result of 10 months of business and resident stakeholder engagement with city staff on the development of the program, including deliberations on hours of enforcement, program boundaries, price of permits and allocation of permits to employees, and represents a significant effort to begin managing neighborhood parking supply. Consistent with Council direction, staff is in the process of awarding contracts necessary to move the program forward, including parking regulatory signage, online permit sales, and citation processing. This report provides an overview of the recommended enforcement strategy and vendor selection process. In December 2014, staff contacted SEIU to discuss staff’s proposal to contract with a third party vendor for parking enforcement services for the Downtown RPP program. Over the course of four months, staff met with SEIU numerous times to discuss alternative proposals, but the parties were unable to reach agreement. SEIU demanded that the parties engage in factfinding under State law, and the parties held a factfinding hearing on May 29, 2015. The factfinding panel issued its recommendation to the parties on June 15, 2015. As discussed in this report, staff recommends that Council hold a public hearing regarding the impasse with SEIU and award downtown RPP enforcement to Serco, Inc. Background Prior to the City’s posting of the RPP enforcement solicitation, the police department analyzed the program design and staffing requirements and time associated with enforcement of the proposed new Downtown RPP district. Based on this analysis, the police department estimated that, based on a program design of permit parking for residents and area employees combined with 2-hour time regulated parking, 4 community service officers, one supervisor, and one administrative support staff would be required, at a minimum, to provide an appropriate level of enforcement for the proposed RPP district. Based on the complexities of the Downtown RPP permit structure and the timed parking in the area, the police department recommended that enforcement officers would use chalking as the main methodology for performing the enforcement activity, similar to how parking enforcement is currently performed in the existing 2-hour zones. Based upon the unique complexities of the new program and the need to implement quickly in order to meet the community’s needs it was determined that contracting with an experienced contractor would likely be the best option in implementing the desired program. Staff developed an RFP to determine the feasibility of a contractor implementing the desired program in a timely manner. The RFP developed by the City did not specify the number of enforcement officers being requested; rather, the City invited proposers to visit the RPP District and make a proposal based on their experience with similar programs. City of Palo Alto Page 3 Staff posted an RFP on October 9, 2014 for enforcement services for the RPP program and received three proposals. The firms that provided proposals are listed in the table below: City of Palo Alto Page 4 Figure 1: Contract Enforcement Proposals Received Name of Firm Proposal Cost per Year Data Ticket, Inc. $263,250 SP Plus $234,866 Serco, Inc. $503,210 Staff interviewed each firm and found that Serco, Inc. demonstrated the most complete understanding of the Downtown RPP program intricacies based on an evaluation of relevant experience, proposed staffing approach, and proposed technologies, despite the higher cost to the City, as discussed further below. Discussion The city interviewed the three firms who responded to the RFP – Data Ticket, SP Plus and Serco. During the interviews, City staff questioned all proposers on the method of enforcement being proposed as well as the staffing approach to the work. Both Data Ticket and SP Plus stated that they would staff the area with 2 enforcement officers, while the Serco proposal proposed 4 team members and one supervisor, which was consistent with the police department’s estimates. Serco demonstrated the most complete understanding of the Downtown RPP program design and experience enforcing similar parking programs in other cities, while responses from the other two proposers demonstrated that they did not understand the complexity of the permitting system in the RPP in developing their staffing estimates. In addition, Data Ticket and SP Plus maintained that the method of enforcement would be license-plate recognition (LPR) technology. City staff are concerned that relying on LPR technology for enforcement is not sufficient for adequate enforcement. The City has not used LPR enforcement before and the technology works best when mounted to a vehicle which has adequate access to vehicle license plates. Currently, cars within the RPP District park so closely together that it is unclear whether LPR technology would be effective. Additionally, LPR technology typically requires “geo-fencing” a zone or an area in order to track whether a particular vehicle has violated a parking regulation by moving a vehicle. Phase 2 of the RPP program requires that employees park on a designated block, or a very small number of blocks, and in the interviews it was clear that neither Data Ticket nor SP Plus accounted for challenges associated with geo-fencing such small areas within their proposal. It is questionable whether the geo-fencing technology would be able to identify areas as small as an individual block. Based on Serco’s understanding of the program requirements, level of service proposed and experience enforcing similar programs, the proposal review team felt that Serco’s proposal would be the most effective at yielding the type of enforcement required by the City. City of Palo Alto Page 5 As part of their services, Serco will be responsible for recruitment of enforcement personnel, background checks and screening, final selection, and initial and on-going training of personnel. Training will include permit enforcement, issuance of citations, marking vehicles, customer service, information about Palo Alto’s Downtown, and codes and ordinances related to parking enforcement in the area. Additionally, Serco will provide all personnel with uniforms, badges, ID tags, and vehicles. Selected personnel may be interviewed by City staff prior to approval, and uniforms and vehicle markings will be approved by the City’s Chief Communications Officer or designee. Following City Council’s direction to proceed with implementation of the Downtown RPP, the City also met with SEIU regarding contracting the additional enforcement required for the RPP. Although no existing staff members or current work will be impacted by contract enforcement for Downtown RPP program, SEIU opposes the City’s recommended approach to contract the RPP work. City staff met with SEIU six times from December through March to discuss the union’s concerns about the City’s strategy to enforce the program. The Union made proposals which focused on enforcement by two full time City staff members in the Downtown RPP district and City purchase of LPR technology. Staff believes these proposals are not responsive to the City’s concerns and cannot recommend SEIU’s proposed alternatives for two main reasons. First, two enforcement officers do not provide an adequate level of staffing for the work, and second, as discussed above, staff does not support reliance on LPR (license plate recognition) technology for RPP enforcement. When SEIU continued to make no substantial movement from its position on these issues after several meetings, the City declared impasse by letter on March 23, 2015 and informed SEIU of the City’s intent to move forward with the contract award to Serco. On April 22, 2015, SEIU requested that the parties engage in factfinding under State law as an impasse resolution procedure. On April 29, 2015 the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) rejected the City’s objections to this request and ordered the parties to factfinding. The City and SEIU participated in a factfinding hearing chaired by neutral factfinder Paul Roose on May 29, 2015 and the factfinding panel issued its recommendations on June 15, 2015. Under State law, after factfinding procedures have been completed, but no earlier than 10 days after the factfinding panel issues its recommendation, a public agency may, after holding a public hearing regarding the impasse, implement its last, best, and final offer. The requested actions would conclude the process described above and execute the vendor contract necessary for parking enforcement in the Downtown RPP district. In addition, the requested actions would modify the City’s administrative penalty schedule to include a penalty for violation of the RPP program. Staff proposes that the penalty for violation be set initially at $53, to match the existing penalty under Section 10.46.110 for violation of the College Terrace RPP program. Timeline Once the contract is awarded , the Serco team will need at least 60 days to mobilize and train City of Palo Alto Page 6 the officers before enforcement can begin. Other vendors are also mobilizing to install signs and provide for online permit sales and citation processing. The current schedule anticipates permit sales beginning in August, with enforcement of the RPP program in September. Phase One of the Downtown RPP pilot program will be 6 months, directly followed by Phase Two, with a duration of one year or more. During the pilot phases of the program City staff will work with downtown residents, businesses and the contractor to fine-tune the program to assure it is responsive to stakeholders’ interests. The City Council will be asked to set parameters of Phase Two based on data collected during the first several months of Phase One. Resource Impact The enforcement contract with Serco, Inc. amounts to $503,210 annually and staff is requesting approval of the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance to transfer $378,000 from the General Fund to the Residential Parking Permit Fund offset with a reduction to the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve to partially fund the first year of the parking enforcement contract. The Fiscal Year 2016 RPP Adopted Budget included $125,000 for parking enforcement. A $378,000 transfer from the General Fund to the Residential Parking Permit Fund is necessary to increase the budget to cover the first year of costs under this contract. The RPP budget conservatively assumes approximately $230,000 in revenue from permit sales and parking citation revenue. Staff will monitor revenues and expenses in this fund during Fiscal Year 2016. Based on actual experience, staff may bring forward budget adjustments as part of the Fiscal Year 2016 Midyear Budget review. During Fiscal Year 2016, staff will evaluate revenue and expenditure data related to the RPP district and provide recommendations to Council for future funding of contract enforcement effort as part of the Fiscal Year 2017 budget process. Policy Implications Implementation of a Downtown RPP program is consistent with the City’s three-pronged parking approach, and is also consistent with the following comprehensive plan goals: 1. Goal T-8, Program T-49: Implement a comprehensive program of parking supply and demand management strategies for Downtown Palo Alto 2. Policy T-47: Protect residential areas from the parking impacts of nearby business districts Environmental Review Contract enforcement of the Downtown RPP district is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations since it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that this program may have a significant effect on the environment and Section 15301 in that this program will have a minor impact on existing facilities. City of Palo Alto Page 7 Attachments:  Attachment A: Budget Amendment Ordinance (DOCX)  Attachment B: Resolution Adding Penalty for Violation of Residential Preferred Parking (PDF)  Attachment C: Contract with Serco (PDF)  Attachment D: Downtown RPP Factfinding Report and City Dissent (PDF) 1 Revised December 22, 2014 5624/mb ATTACHMENT A Ordinance No. XXXX ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 TO PROVIDE A TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND IN THE AMOUNT OF $378,000 TO THE DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMIT FUND OFFSET WITH A REDUCTION IN THE BUDGET STABILIZATION RESERVE FOR PARKING PERMIT ENFORCEMENT SERVICES IN THE DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL PREFERRED PARKING (RPP) DISTRICT The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. The Council of the City of Palo Alto finds and determines as follows: A. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 12 of Article III of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto, the Council on June 15, 2015 did adopt a budget for fiscal year 2016; and B. In December 2014, the City Council adopted a resolution approving the establishment of Residential Preferred Parking (RPP) District in Downtown neighborhoods; and C. The RPP program is part of a multi-pronged strategy to ensure that parking facilities are efficiently utilized and that the available parking is prioritized for the appropriate use; and D. Staff recommends that the City Council approve a parking enforcement contract in the amount of $503,210 for parking enforcement efforts in the RPP district which will include vendor provided recruitment of enforcement officers, background checks and screening, final selection, and initial and on-going training of personnel. Training will include permit enforcement, issuance of citations, marking vehicles, customer service, information about Palo Alto’s Downtown, and codes and ordinances related to parking enforcement in the area. Additionally, the vendor will provide all personnel with uniforms, badges, ID tags, and vehicles. E. The total contract amount of $503,210 is recommended to be funded in Fiscal Year 2016 with $125,210 in RPP permit revenue and $378,000 with a transfer from the General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve. SECTION 2. Therefore, the sum of Three Hundred Seventy Eight Thousand Dollars ($378,000) is hereby transferred from the General Fund to the Downtown Residential Parking Permit Fund offset with a reduction to the Budget Stabilization Reserve and appropriated in the Residential Parking Permit Fund for parking enforcement efforts. SECTION 3. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. 2 Revised December 22, 2014 5624/mb SECTION 4. The actions taken in this ordinance do not constitute a project requiring environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). INTRODUCED AND PASSED: Enter Date Here AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: NOT PARTICIPATING: ATTEST: ____________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ____________________________ ____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services ____________________________ Director of Planning and Community Environment NOT YET APPROVED Resolution No. ______ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Civil Penalty Schedule for Violations of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Add a Penalty for Violations of Chapter 10.50 (Residential Preferred Parking Districts) The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. Municipal Code Civil Penalties. The civil penalty schedule for violations of the Palo Alto Municipal Code established by Resolution No. 9410 is hereby amended to add the following*: 10.50.100(a) Violation of Posted RPP Permit Sign $53 *All penalties include state-mandated assessments pursuant to Gov’t. Code 76000, S.B 1407(2008), and Government Code 76000.3 (S.B. 857, 2008) totaling $12.50. All other penalties shall remain the same. SECTION 2. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act, and, therefore, no environmental assessment is required. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: APPROVED: __________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ____________________________ City Manager __________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney ____________________________ Police Chief 150417 jb 0131332 1 DocuSlgn Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-OE87D1DA9455 ATTACHMENT C CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. Cl5156763 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND SERCO INC. FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is entered into on this I'' day of June, 2015, ("Agreement") by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation ("CITY"), and SERCO INC., a New Jersey corporation, located at 1818 Library Street, Suite l 000, Reston, Virginia 20190 (''CONSULTANT"). RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive portion of this Agreement. A. CITY intends to provide parking enforcement services for the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) district ("Project") and desires to engage a consultant to provide services in connection with the Project ("Services"). B. CONSULTANT has represented that it has the necessary professional expertise, qualifications, and capability, and all required licenses and/or certifications to provide the Services. C. CITY in reliance on these representations desires to engage CONSULTANT to provide the Services as more fully described in Exhibit "A", attached to and made a part of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the recitals, covenants, terms, and conditions, in this Agreement, the parties agree: AGREEMENT SECTION 1. SCOPE OF SERVICES. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services described in Exhibit "A" in accordance with the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement. The performance of all Services shall be to the reasonable satisfaction of CITY. SECTION 2. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through May 31 , 2018 unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 of this Agreement. SECTION 3. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. Time is of the essence in the performance of Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement and in accordance with the schedule set fo1th in Exhibit "B", attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Any Services for which times for performance are not specified in this Agreement shall be commenced and completed by CONSULTANT in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to the Professional Services Rev. Feb. 2014 DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     CONSULTANT. CITY’s agreement to extend the term or the schedule for performance shall not preclude recovery of damages for delay if the extension is required due to the fault of CONSULTANT. SECTION 4. NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services described in Exhibit “A”, including both payment for professional services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Five Hundred Three Thousand Two Hundred Ten Dollars ($503,210.00) per year. Total contract compensation shall not exceed One Million Five Hundred Nine Thousand Six Hundred Thirty Dollars ($1,509,630.00). The applicable rates and schedule of payment are set out in Exhibit “C-1”, entitled “HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE,” which is attached to and made a part of this Agreement. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized in accordance with and subject to the provisions of Exhibit “C”. CONSULTANT shall not receive any compensation for Additional Services performed without the prior written authorization of CITY. Additional Services shall mean any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described in Exhibit “A”. SECTION 5. INVOICES. In order to request payment, CONSULTANT shall submit monthly invoices to the CITY describing the services performed and the applicable charges (including an identification of personnel who performed the services, hours worked, hourly rates, and reimbursable expenses), based upon the CONSULTANT’s billing rates (set forth in Exhibit “C- 1”). If applicable, the invoice shall also describe the percentage of completion of each task. The information in CONSULTANT’s payment requests shall be subject to verification by CITY. CONSULTANT shall send all invoices to the City’s project manager at the address specified in Section 13 below. The City will generally process and pay invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. SECTION 6. QUALIFICATIONS/STANDARD OF CARE. All of the Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under CONSULTANT’s supervision. CONSULTANT represents that it possesses the professional and technical personnel necessary to perform the Services required by this Agreement and that the personnel have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants, if permitted, have and shall maintain during the term of this Agreement all licenses, permits, qualifications, insurance and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services. All of the services to be furnished by CONSULTANT under this agreement shall meet the professional standard and quality that prevail among professionals in the same discipline and of similar knowledge and skill engaged in related work throughout California under the same or similar circumstances. SECTION 7. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of and in compliance with all federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders that may affect in any manner the Project or the performance of the Services or those engaged to perform Services under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall procure all permits and licenses, DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     pay all charges and fees, and give all notices required by law in the performance of the Services. SECTION 8. ERRORS/OMISSIONS. CONSULTANT shall correct, at no cost to CITY, any and all errors, omissions, or ambiguities in the work product submitted to CITY, provided CITY gives written notice to CONSULTANT and CONSULTANT has an opportunity to review and accept or dispute the errors, omissions, or ambiguities of the work product defined within such notice. If CONSULTANT has prepared plans and specifications or other design documents to construct the Project, CONSULTANT shall be obligated to correct any and all errors, omissions or ambiguities discovered prior to and during the course of construction of the Project. This obligation shall survive termination of the Agreement. SECTION 9. COST ESTIMATES (Not Applicable) SECTION 10. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in performing the Services under this Agreement CONSULTANT, and any person employed by or contracted with CONSULTANT to furnish labor and/or materials under this Agreement, shall act as and be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of the CITY. SECTION 11. ASSIGNMENT. The parties agree that the expertise and experience of CONSULTANT are material considerations for this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not assign or transfer any interest in this Agreement nor the performance of any of CONSULTANT’s obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed if such assignment will not impact the schedule or quality of the Services. Consent to one assignment will not be deemed to be consent to any subsequent assignment. Any assignment made without the approval of the other party will be void. SECTION 12. SUBCONTRACTING. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the work to be performed under this Agreement without the prior written authorization of the city manager or designee. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for directing the work of any subconsultants and for any compensation due to subconsultants. CITY assumes no responsibility whatsoever concerning compensation. CONSULTANT shall be fully responsible to CITY for all acts and omissions of a subconsultant. CONSULTANT shall change or add subconsultants only with the prior approval of the city manager or his designee. SECTION 13. PROJECT MANAGEMENT. CONSULTANT will assign Muhammad Mansoor as the Regional Manager to have overall supervisory responsibility for the performance, progress, and execution of the Services. The Regional Manager position provides high level program support which is not conducted on site or in a day to day capacity. A Project Manager position will represent CONSULTANT during the normal operations for the Project. If circumstances cause the substitution of the project director, project coordinator, or any other key personnel for any reason, the appointment of a substitute project director and the assignment of any key new or replacement personnel will be subject to the prior written approval of the CITY’s project manager, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed if the substituted project manager has comparable experience and qualifications. CONSULTANT, DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     at CITY’s request, shall promptly remove personnel who CITY finds do not perform the Services in an acceptable manner, are uncooperative, or present a threat to the adequate or timely completion of the Project or a threat to the safety of persons or property. The City’s project manager is Jessica Sullivan, Planning & Community Environment Department, Transportation Division, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94303, Telephone: (650) 329-2453. The project manager will be CONSULTANT’s point of contact with respect to performance, progress and execution of the Services. The CITY may designate an alternate project manager from time to time. SECTION 14. OWNERSHIP OF MATERIALS. Upon delivery, all work product, including without limitation, all writings, drawings, plans, reports, specifications, calculations, documents, other materials and copyright interests developed under this Agreement shall be and remain the exclusive property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use. CONSULTANT agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the work pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in CITY, and CONSULTANT waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the CITY. Neither CONSULTANT nor its contractors, if any, shall make any of such materials available to any individual or organization without the prior written approval of the City Manager or designee. CONSULTANT makes no representation of the suitability of the work product for use in or application to circumstances not contemplated by the scope of work. SECTION 15. AUDITS. CONSULTANT will permit CITY to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years thereafter, CONSULTANT’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONSULTANT further agrees to maintain and retain such records for at least three (3) years after the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement. SECTION 16. INDEMNITY. 16.1. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall protect, indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents (each an “Indemnified Party”) from and against any and all demands, actual third party claims, or liability of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss, including all costs and expenses including reasonable attorney’s fees, experts fees, and court costs (“Claims”) resulting from, arising out of or in any manner related to performance or nonperformance by CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents or contractors under this Agreement. 16.2. Notwithstanding the above, nothing in this Section 16 shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify an Indemnified Party from Claims arising from the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of an Indemnified Party. 16.3. The acceptance of CONSULTANT’s services and duties by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section 16 shall survive the expiration or early termination of this Agreement. DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     SECTION 17. WAIVERS. The waiver by either party of any breach or violation of any covenant, term, condition or provision of this Agreement, or of the provisions of any ordinance or law, will not be deemed to be a waiver of any other term, covenant, condition, provisions, ordinance or law, or of any subsequent breach or violation of the same or of any other term, covenant, condition, provision, ordinance or law. SECTION 18. INSURANCE. 18.1. CONSULTANT, at its sole cost and expense, shall obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described in Exhibit "D". CONSULTANT and its contractors, if any, shall obtain a policy endorsement naming CITY as an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy or policies. 18.2. All insurance coverage required hereunder shall be provided through carriers with AM Best’s Ke y Ratin g Guide ratings of A-:VII or higher which are licensed or authorized to transact insurance business in the State of California. Any and all contractors of CONSULTANT retained to perform Services under this Agreement will obtain and maintain, in full force and effect during the term of this Agreement, identical insurance coverage, naming CITY as an additional insured under such policies as required above. 18.3. Certificates evidencing such insurance shall be filed with CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement. The certificates will be subject to the approval of CITY’s Risk Manager and will contain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled, or materially reduced in coverage or limits, by the insurer except after filing with the Purchasing Manager thirty (30) days' prior written notice of the cancellation or modification. If the insurer cancels or modifies the insurance and provides less than thirty (30) days’ notice to CONSULTANT, CONSULTANT shall provide the Purchasing Manager written notice of the cancellation or modification within two (2) business days of the CONSULTANT’s receipt of such notice. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for ensuring that current certificates evidencing the insurance are provided to CITY’s Purchasing Manager during the entire term of this Agreement. 18.4. The procuring of such required policy or policies of insurance will not be construed to limit CONSULTANT's liability hereunder nor to fulfill the indemnification provisions of this Agreement. Notwithstanding the policy or policies of insurance, CONSULTANT will be obligated for the full and total amount of any damage, injury, or loss caused by or directly arising as a result of the Services performed under this Agreement, including such damage, injury, or loss arising after the Agreement is terminated or the term has expired. SECTION 19. TERMINATION OR SUSPENSION OF AGREEMENT OR SERVICES. 19.1. The City Manager may suspend the performance of the Services, in whole or in part, or terminate this Agreement, with or without cause, by giving ten (10) days prior written notice thereof to CONSULTANT. Upon receipt of such notice, CONSULTANT will immediately discontinue its performance of the Services. DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     19.2. CONSULTANT may terminate this Agreement or suspend its performance of the Services by giving thirty (30) days prior written notice thereof to CITY, but only in the event of a substantial failure of performance by CITY. 19.3. Upon such suspension or termination, CONSULTANT shall deliver to the City Manager immediately any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other data, whether or not completed, prepared by CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, or given to CONSULTANT or its contractors, if any, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials will become the property of CITY. 19.4. Upon such suspension or termination by CITY, CONSULTANT will be paid for the Services rendered or materials delivered to CITY in accordance with the scope of services on or before the effective date (i.e., 10 days after giving notice) of suspension or termination; provided, however, if this Agreement is suspended or terminated on account of a default by CONSULTANT, CITY will be obligated to compensate CONSULTANT only for that portion of CONSULTANT’s services which are of direct and immediate benefit to CITY as such determination may be made by the City Manager acting in the reasonable exercise of his/her discretion. The following Sections will survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement: 14, 15, 16, 19.4, 20, and 25. 19.5. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY will operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. SECTION 20. NOTICES. All notices hereunder will be given in writing and mailed, postage prepaid, by certified mail, addressed as follows: To CITY: Office of the City Clerk City of Palo Alto Post Office Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 With a copy to the Purchasing Manager To CONSULTANT: Serco Inc. Attention: David Allen Gitlin, Jr 1818 Library Street, Suite 1000 Reston, VA 20190 SECTION 21. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. 21.1. In accepting this Agreement, CONSULTANT covenants that it presently has no interest, and will not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of the Services. DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     21.2. CONSULTANT further covenants that, in the performance of this Agreement, it will not employ subconsultants, contractors or persons having such an interest. CONSULTANT certifies that no person who has or will have any financial interest under this Agreement is an officer or employee of CITY; this provision will be interpreted in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Government Code of the State of California. 21.3. If the Project Manager determines that CONSULTANT is a “Consultant” as that term is defined by the Regulations of the Fair Political Practices Commission, CONSULTANT shall be required and agrees to file the appropriate financial disclosure documents required by the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the Political Reform Act. SECTION 22. NONDISCRIMINATION. As set forth in Palo Alto Municipal Code section 2.30.510, CONSULTANT certifies that in the performance of this Agreement, it shall not discriminate in the employment of any person because of the race, skin color, gender, age, religion, disability, national origin, ancestry, sexual orientation, housing status, marital status, familial status, weight or height of such person. CONSULTANT acknowledges that it has read and understands the provisions of Section 2.30.510 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Nondiscrimination Requirements and the penalties for violation thereof, and agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. SECTION 23. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONSULTANT shall comply with the City’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at the City’s Purchasing Department, incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONSULTANT shall comply with waste reduction, reuse, recycling and disposal requirements of the City’s Zero Waste Program. Zero Waste best practices include first minimizing and reducing waste; second, reusing waste and third, recycling or composting waste. In particular, Consultant shall comply with the following zero waste requirements:  All printed materials provided by Consultant to City generated from a personal computer and printer including but not limited to, proposals, quotes, invoices, reports, and public education materials, shall be double-sided and printed on a minimum of 30% or greater post-consumer content paper, unless otherwise approved by the City’s Project Manager. Any submitted materials printed by a professional printing company shall be a minimum of 30% or greater post- consumer material and printed with vegetable based inks.  Goods purchased by Consultant on behalf of the City shall be purchased in accordance with the City’s Environmental Purchasing Policy including but not limited to Extended Producer Responsibility requirements for products and packaging. A copy of this policy is on file at the Purchasing Office.  Reusable/returnable pallets shall be taken back by the Consultant, at no additional cost to the City, for reuse or recycling. Consultant shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. SECTION 24. NON-APPROPRIATION DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     24.1. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty given that CITY has provided CONSULTANT with thirty (30) days written notice (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not appropriated for the following fiscal year, or (b) at any time within a fiscal year in the event that funds are only appropriated for a portion of the fiscal year and funds for this Agreement are no longer available. This section shall take precedence in the event of a conflict with any other covenant, term, condition, or provision of this Agreement. SECTION 25. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS. 25.1. This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California. 25.2. In the event that an action is brought, the parties agree that trial of such action will be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Santa Clara, State of California. 25.3. The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the provisions of this Agreement may recover its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with that action. The prevailing party shall be entitled to recover an amount equal to the fair market value of legal services provided by attorneys employed by it as well as any attorneys’ fees paid to third parties. 25.4. This document represents the entire and integrated agreement between the parties and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, and contracts, either written or oral. This document may be amended only by a written instrument, which is signed by the parties. 25.5. The covenants, terms, conditions and provisions of this Agreement will apply to, and will bind, the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assignees, and consultants of the parties. 25.6. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement or any amendment thereto is void or unenforceable, the unaffected provisions of this Agreement and any amendments thereto will remain in full force and effect. 25.7. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and any addenda, appendices, attachments, and schedules to this Agreement which, from time to time, may be referred to in any duly executed amendment hereto are by such reference incorporated in this Agreement and will be deemed to be a part of this Agreement. 25.8 If, pursuant to this contract with CONSULTANT, City shares with CONSULTANT personal information as defined in California Civil Code section 1798.81.5(d) about a California resident (“Personal Information”), CONSULTANT shall maintain reasonable and appropriate security procedures to protect that Personal Information, and shall inform City immediately upon learning that there has been a breach in the security of the system or in the security of the Personal Information. CONSULTANT shall not use Personal Information for direct marketing purposes without City’s express written consent. DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     25.9 All unchecked boxes do not apply to this agreement.(Not Applicable) 25.10 The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. 25.11 This Agreement may be signed in multiple counterparts, which shall, when executed by all the parties, constitute a single binding agreement. 25.12 Non-Solicitation. During the term of the Agreement and for a period of 1 year thereafter, the City shall not give any preferential treatment in its hiring practices to any of Consultant’s employees working or involved with the Agreement or proposed to work under the Agreement by either party. DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have by their duly authorized representatives executed this Agreement on the date first above written. CITY OF PALO ALTO APPROVED AS TO FORM: SERCO INC. Manager Contracts Attachments: EXHIBIT “A”: SCOPE OF WORK (Includes Attachment “A”) EXHIBIT “B”: SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE EXHIBIT “C”: COMPENSATION EXHIBIT “C-1”: SCHEDULE OF RATES EXHIBIT “D”: INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201410     EXHIBIT “A” SCOPE OF SERVICES CONSULTANT will provide enforcement services for the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) district, issuing parking citations to violators for a period of up to 3 years. Information on the design of the Downtown RPP district is found in Attachment A. TASK 1: ONBOARDING AND STARTUP – 60 DAYS CONSULTANT will provide the appropriate and necessary training to employees who work for the CITY, relevant to their respective job duties. CONSULTANT shall maintain complete training records for each employee, as well as any other records prescribed by law or CITY policy as appropriate. The CITY’s Police Department will provide all materials related to enforcement rules and regulations currently in place; all other training materials are to be provided by CONSULTANT. Training topics include, but are not limited to, to the following topics: a. Design of the Downtown RPP District, including information on employee and resident permits and history of the program development b. Enforcing parking permit violations and other parking regulations c. Marking and tagging of vehicles using Consultant-provided handheld devices d. Palo Alto Municipal Codes, California Vehicle Code, state statutes, and ordinances related to parking enforcement e. Chain of command and authority levels f. Marking, tagging, towing, and impoundment of vehicles g. Job procedures and emergency protocol h. Responding to calls for service i. Customer service delivery and expectations j. Courtroom procedures and testimony k. Workplace safety l. Civil rights law and procedures m. Information on history of Palo Alto, City Downtown, and City Attractions The training program should provide the CONSULTANT’s personnel with sufficient understanding of the RPP District as well as operation of required equipment and enforcement protocol. All personnel are to complete and pass the training course prior to starting service, and the training procedures must be approved by the CITY. The time period from CITY’s notice to proceed to start of enforcement shall not be less than sixty (60) days. CONSULTANT will also train staff to appear in court in a professional manner with related documentation and evidence to support the case. CONSULTANT’s Project Manager will represent the company on most court appearances unless an enforcement officer is specifically DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201411     required to be present, in which case the Project Manager will accompany the enforcement officer or Supervisor to the hearing. Deliverable: CONSULTANT will provide a training plan upon receiving notice to proceed from the CITY. The training plan will include all training activities planned for enforcement officers and include information from the CITY required to complete the training, as well as a detailed schedule. PERSONNEL CONSULTANT will ensure that all new employees meet all CITY of Palo Alto and CONSULTANT employment requirements as listed below. CONSULTANT will comply with all existing Government code and CITY non-discrimination policies. All candidates must complete a job application and provide a DMV printout. To be offered a position, candidates must pass a pre-screening at CONSULTANT’s expense. The pre-screening includes the following: a. Pre-employment drug and alcohol testing b. Criminal history background check c. DMV record check d. Social Security Number verification e. Eligibility to work in the United States f. Ability to speak and write in English g. LiveScan/Fingerprinting h. California Department of Justice background check Drivers will undergo further screening: a. Comply with USDOT/Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and California DMV regulations b. DMV nationwide records check c. Pass the Smith Systems Defensive Driver Safety Training d. 40 hours on-the-job training CONSULTANT shall select and hire only persons who are well-qualified to perform the duties for their respective job positions, and should provide classifications of all employee positions within their proposal, including a job description. Classifications might include, but are not limited to:  Parking Enforcement Supervisor/Manager: Assist the parking enforcement staff with day-to-day operations and staffing issues. Supervisor shall be responsible to report with the on a bi-monthly basis and provide updates on the enforcement process, any feedback from the public, incidents and number of citations issued. A supervisor should possess DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201412     sufficient IT knowledge to be able to handle employee equipment issues in the field, and the capability of working with the citation processing agency for any citation issues.  Parking Enforcement Staff: Responsible for the day-to-day management, supervision, and operation of parking enforcement services. These individuals must have the capacity to act as “Ambassadors” for the CITY, providing information about parking enforcement practices and other information on Palo Alto’s Downtown.  CONSULTANT should provide performance metrics for each position so that performance evaluations may take place. CONSULTANT will provide eleven (11) shirts and eleven (11) pants to full-time employees. CONSULTANT will issue staff jackets, hats, and rain attire for inclement weather, all bearing the company logo. CONSULTANT and uniform company will be responsible for cleaning of uniforms. Cleaning of uniforms is not the responsibility of the CITY. CONSULTANT will provide sample uniforms for CITY review prior to any issuance of uniforms. Employees will wear CONSULTANT-issued photo ID at all times while on duty. CONSULTANT will be expected to purchase parking permits for any employees driving to Palo Alto. CONSULTANT will be responsible for all personnel supervision, discipline, and termination actions. However, the CITY may require the removal of any CONSULTANT’s personnel, when it is determined to be in the best interest of the CITY, at any time. CONSULTANT will address temporary vacancies due to vacations, illness, leaves of absence, or termination and provide continuous staffing. Deliverables: a. CONSULTANT will supply an updated organization chart and complete list of employees and roles at the CITY’s request and annually on contract anniversary date. b. CONSULTANT will provide draft design of enforcement uniforms for approval during transition phase. c. At the request of the CITY, Consultant will allow CITY to participate in employee interviews. TASK 2: Enforcement of Phase 1 and Phase 2 of RPP Program (18 Months) CONSULTANT will be responsible for issuing citations for parking permit violations within the Downtown RPP District, in accordance with the rules specified in Attachment A. Citations must include the make, model, color, and style of vehicle, license tag number or Vehicle Identification DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201413     Number (VIN), violation code number and description, base fine amount and additional fine amount in the event there is a failure to respond timely, badge number, the location of the parking offense, type of offense (e.g. permit incorrectly displayed, no valid permit, not parked in the right location) and the time and date of the offense. CONSULTANT staff will be fully trained on Consultant-furbished handheld devices. Staff will also be trained on how to capture digital images of vehicle license plates, and how to issue manual paper citations. Consultant will work with CITY’s existing citation processing vendor to ensure that citations associated with the RPP district may be recorded and tracked separately from existing parking enforcement. CONSULTANT will be trained on proper placement of citations on the windshield, how to complete and issue citations for drive offs and covered VIN numbers, missing license plates, and other unusual occurrences. In the event the driver drives away, the citation will be mailed as required by the California Vehicle Code. CONSULTANT will furnish two (2) hybrid vehicles for parking enforcement services and will be responsible for all on-going operating expenses including insurance, fuel, maintenance, and repairs. The vehicles will be equipped with GPS tracking units and LPR technology as necessary. CONSULTANT’s vehicles shall be clearly identifiable as performing parking enforcement and parking meter maintenance and collection operations for the CITY. CONSULTANT’s staff shall operate all vehicles at all times in compliance with all state and local motor vehicle and emissions laws. Vehicles shall not have missing parts or dents, and the rear of all patrol vehicles shall have a sign warning of frequent vehicle stops. All vehicles used by CONSULTANT shall have blinking flasher lights installed on each vehicle's roof. CONSULTANT will obtain approval by the CITY Manager and the Chief Communications Officers or his/her designee prior to ordering decals for the marking of vehicles. CONSULTANT will also provide officers with four (4) Trek Marlin 6 bicycles, anticipating that some enforcement officers may be able to use this method of enforcement for either Phase 1 or Phase 2. Deliverable: CONSULTANT will provide draft design for vehicle marking. Consultant will provide a an enforcement strategy document for Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the program, including anticipating beats, schedule, and personnel assigned to each phase of the project. Consultant will work with CITY to identify opportunities for improving and modifying enforcement strategy at periodic intervals during Phase 2 of the program, especially opportunities which could be afforded by the introduction of technology (e.g. LPR). The Consultant will use mark-moding and chalking as the main forms of enforcement during Phase 1, but will work with the CITY to identify other modes of enforcement as the program moves forward. DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201414     CONSULTANT will provide a schedule of estimated patrol routes and frequency recommendations. The CITY seeks to ensure that coverage is adequate, fair, regular, and consistent, although it is also expected that CONSULTANT will alternate the patrol routes on a regular basis to eliminate predictability. CONSULTANT can propose changes to routes and schedules to the CITY as part of their performance reporting meetings and documentation. CONSULTANT will be responsible for maintaining records of employment and, upon request, provide the CITY with personnel and training information for each employee. CONSULTANT will require Parking Enforcement Officers to submit daily reports regarding issues such as: a. Missing or damaged or conflicting parking signs, or traffic control signs, or curb markings b. Obstructed parking signs, stop signs, yield signs or any safety hazard c. Parking abnormalities or abnormal parking patterns d. Beat analysis and beat enforcement e. Incidents/accidents CONSULTANT will update and meet with CITY staff regularly, including the following: a. Weekly status reports with Parking Operations Lead and other staff as necessary b. Monthly progress meetings c. Quarterly evaluation and status report d. Annual performance review CONSULTANT will seek CITY approval on operational changes including but not limited to: a. Schedules b. Routes c. Operations ATTACHMENT A The proposed Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) Program is being introduced as part of a suite of parking management strategies aimed at improving parking and traffic conditions in Downtown Palo Alto. The program will restrict commuter parking during hours of operation, although limited numbers of commuter-employee permits will also be sold. Over time, the number of employee permits will be reduced as additional parking supply is provided within the Downtown area. The proposed RPP District includes a geographic area surrounding Palo Alto’s Downtown commercial zone and bounded by the City of Menlo Park to the Northwest. Currently, the only existing parking restrictions within this boundary include the Downtown Business District color zone and the SOFA business District: DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201415      The SOFA business district has 2-hour parking along streets which house mainly local businesses. Customers may re-park after two hours in any of the spaces.  The Downtown color zone has 2-hour parking which is limited to a specific color zone – Blue, Coral, Lime or Purple. Parking twice within the same color zone during the time period 8:00 to 5:00 is not permitted. The physical boundaries of the new Downtown RPP District will not include the existing SOFA and Downtown areas, which are currently enforced by the Palo Alto Police Department using mark-moding and chalking. The area within the dotted blue line will be included in the new parking District (see below). The program as currently proposed has two distinct phases, where parking restrictions will differ: DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201416     Phase 1: 6 Months For the first phase of the program, the CITY will sell RPP permits to residents and to employees who live or work within the boundaries of the District. Permits will be sold online using an online issuance system by T2 Systems. It is expected that guest permits will be hangtags and that individual permits will be stickers on vehicles. There will be several types of valid permits:  Resident Permit (sold to individuals living at residential addresses within the blue line area).  Standard Commuter Employee Permit: This is a permit that will be sold to employee commuters who work within the RPP District Boundary.  Residential Annual Guest Permits / Visitor Permits All permits shall be valid anywhere within the District during this phase. Although the CITY recognizes that license plate recognition (LPR) equipment could be used for enforcement and physical permits may not be necessary for Phase 1 enforcement, the CITY wishes to use Phase 1 of the program to collect needed parking occupancy data, and therefore will require physical permits during Phase 1. This phase of the program will be used to determine the appropriate “permit cap” for employee permit sales in future phases of the program. The CITY is proposing that Phase 1 of the program last for 6 months only. All permits sold within Phase 1 will expire at the end of 6 month period, which will be identified on the permit. Phase 2: 12+ Months After Phase 1, the CITY will begin to limit the number of employee permits which will be sold for the program. Rather than allowing employees with permits to park anywhere within the District, employee permits will be allocated in one of the following ways: 1. Employee permits may be sold specific to a block face or faces, e.g. the “900-1000 Block of Ramona”, which would be visible on the permit, or; 2. Employees with permits can only park during enforcement hours at specific “employee” spots within the District, which would be allocated along block faces within the residential area. Residential permits, Annual Guest Permits and Visitor permits will be valid anywhere within the District. Anyone without a valid permit will be allowed to park for two (2) hours, at which point they would need to move their car to a different parking space. The hours of enforcement of the program are expected to be Monday through Friday, 8:00am – 5:00pm. DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 201417     EXHIBIT “B” SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or decreased by mutual written agreement of the project managers for CONSULTANT and CITY so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement.  Milestones Completion   No. of Days/Weeks 1. Onboarding and Startup From NTP 60 DAYS 2. Enforcement of Phase 1 6 Months 3. Enforcement of Phase 2 12 + Months DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional ServicesRev. Feb. 201416 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\PLANNING - CHRIS\BLUEFOLDERS\156763 RPP Parking Enforcement\3 Contract\Contract\C15156763 SERCO Parking Enforcement - Final 04282015.docx     EXHIBIT “C” COMPENSATION The CITY agrees to compensate the CONSULTANT for professional services performed in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below. Compensation shall be calculated based on the hourly rate schedule attached as exhibit C-1 up to the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below. The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT under this Agreement for all services described in Exhibit “A” (“Basic Services”) and reimbursable expenses shall not exceed $503,227.00 per year. Total contract compensation shall not exceed $1,509,681.00. CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, within this amount. Any work performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to the CITY. CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks and categories of work as outlined and budgeted below. The CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of the tasks or categories listed below provided the total compensation for Basic Services, including reimbursable expenses, does not exceed $503,210.00 per year. Total contract compensation shall not exceed $1,509,630.00. BUDGET SCHEDULE Task 1 NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT $141,446.00 (Project Manager per year)   Task 2 (Parking Enforcement Officer per year) $242,304.00 Task 3 (ODC’s & Materials per year) $119,460.00 Sub-total Basic Services Per Year $503,210.00 Sub-total Basic Services For Three Year Term $1,509,630.00 Reimbursable Expenses None Total Basic Services and Reimbursable expenses $1,509,630.00 Maximum Total Compensation $1,509,630.00 DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional ServicesRev. Feb. 201417 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\PLANNING - CHRIS\BLUEFOLDERS\156763 RPP Parking Enforcement\3 Contract\Contract\C15156763 SERCO Parking Enforcement - Final 04282015.docx     REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES The administrative, overhead, secretarial time or secretarial overtime, word processing, photocopying, in-house printing, insurance and other ordinary business expenses are included within the scope of payment for services and are not reimbursable expenses. CITY shall reimburse CONSULTANT for the following reimbursable expenses at cost. Expenses for which CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed are: None All requests for payment of expenses shall be accompanied by appropriate backup information. Any expense shall be approved in advance by the CITY’s project manager. ADDITIONAL SERVICES The CONSULTANT shall provide additional services only by advanced, written authorization from the CITY. The CONSULTANT, at the CITY’s project manager’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONSULTANT’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services based on the rates set forth in Exhibit C-1. The additional services scope, schedule and maximum compensation shall be negotiated and agreed to in writing by the CITY’s Project Manager and CONSULTANT prior to commencement of the services. Payment for additional services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement     DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 EXHIBIT “C-1” HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Scope Labor Categories (e.g., Consultant, Sr. Consultant, etc.) Est Hours Hourly Rate Extended Rate Task 1 Project Manager – Direct Labor Rate 1,920 $ 40.87 $ 78,470  Overhead Rate (including Fringe, G&A and Fee) 1,920 $ 32.80 $ 62,976 Total not to exceed, Task 1 Project Manager (fully burdened) 1,920 $ 73.67 $ 141,446 Task 2 Parking Enforcement Officer (5 FT PEO) – Direct Labor Rate 9,600 $ 14.00 $ 134,400  Overhead Rate (including Fringe, G&A and Fee) 9,600 $ 11.24 $ 107,904 Total not to exceed, Task 2 Parking Enforcement Officer (fully burdened) 9,600 $ 25.24 $ 242,304 Task 3 ODCs / Materials to include: bicycles / vehicles, uniforms, ticket writers, cell phones, and other misc. supplies N/A  $ 97,033  Burdens and Fee G& N/A N/A   $ 22,427 Total not to exceed, Task 3 ODCs and Materials (fully burdened) N/A  $ 119,460 Total not to exceed (Tasks 1 – 3) Project Manager (1), Parking Enforcement Officers (5) and ODCs / Materials (allfullyburdened) N/A  AnnualNTE $ 503,210 TOTAL NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT FOR TERM 3 YEARS @ $503,210. 00 per year = 1,509,630.00 Professional Services Rev. Feb. 2014 16 S:\ASD\PURCH\SOLICITATIONS\CURRENT BUYER-CM FOLDERS\PLANNING - CHRIS\BLUEFOLDERS\156763 RPP Parking Enforcement\3 Contract\Contract\C15156763 SERCO Parking Enforcement - Final 04282015.docx DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev Sep. 201418     EXHIBIT “D” INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS CONTRACTORS TO THE CITY OF PALO ALTO (CITY), AT THEIR SOLE EXPENSE, SHALL FOR THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN INSURANCE IN THE AMOUNTS FOR THE COVERAGE SPECIFIED BELOW, AFFORDED BY COMPANIES WITH AM BEST’S KEY RATING OF A-:VII, OR HIGHER, LICENSED OR AUTHORIZED TO TRANSACT INSURANCE BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AWARD IS CONTINGENT ON COMPLIANCE WITH CITY’S INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS, AS SPECIFIED, BELOW: REQUIRE D TYPE OF COVERAGE REQUIREMENT MINIMUM LIMITS EACH OCCURRENCE AGGREGATE YES WORKER’S COMPENSATION YES EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY STATUTORY STATUTORY    YES GENERAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING PERSONAL INJURY, BROAD FORM PROPERTY DAMAGE BLANKET CONTRACTUAL, AND FIRE LEGAL LIABILITY BODILY INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY & PROPERTY DAMAGE COMBINED. $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY, INCLUDING ALL OWNED, HIRED, NON-OWNED BODILY INJURY - EACH PERSON - EACH OCCURRENCE PROPERTY DAMAGE BODILY INJURY AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, COMBINED $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 YES PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST ANDEXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITSSUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY ANDPROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS,AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY (30) DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” A. PRIMARY COVERAGE WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE NAMED INSURED, INSURANCE AS AFFORDED BY THIS POLICY IS PRIMARY AND IS NOT ADDITIONAL TO OR CONTRIBUTING WITH ANY OTHER DocuSign Envelope ID: D57A7DFC-3D2A-44E6-A9FE-0E87D1DA9455 Professional Services Rev Sep. 201419     INSURANCE CARRIED BY OR FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE ADDITIONAL INSUREDS. B. CROSS LIABILITY THE NAMING OF MORE THAN ONE PERSON, FIRM, OR CORPORATION AS INSUREDS UNDER THE POLICY SHALL NOT, FOR THAT REASON ALONE, EXTINGUISH ANY RIGHTS OF THE INSURED AGAINST ANOTHER, BUT THIS ENDORSEMENT, AND THE NAMING OF MULTIPLE INSUREDS, SHALL NOT INCREASE THE TOTAL LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY UNDER THIS POLICY. C. NOTICE OF CANCELLATION 1. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR ANY REASON OTHER THAN THE NON-PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A THIRTY (30) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. 2. IF THE POLICY IS CANCELED BEFORE ITS EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE NON- PAYMENT OF PREMIUM, THE CONSULTANT SHALL PROVIDE CITY AT LEAST A TEN (10) DAY WRITTEN NOTICE BEFORE THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF CANCELLATION. NOTICES SHALL BE EMAILED OR MAILED TO: EMAIL: InsuranceCerts@CityofPaloAlto.org PURCHASING AND CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION CITY OF PALO ALTO P.O. BOX 10250 PALO ALTO, CA 94303. City of Palo Alto (ID # 5907) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 6/29/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Single Story Overlay District Fees and Policy Direction on Alternatives Title: Consideration of Capping the Fee for Establishment of Single Story Overlay Districts and Referral of a Policy Discussion Regarding Single Story Overlay Districts and Alternative Neighborhood Protections From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Direct staff to continue the past practice of treating Single Story Overlay District requests as re-zonings initiated by the Planning & Transportation Commission so that no fee would be required – or -- establish a flat fee for neighborhoods wishing to establish such districts in Fiscal Year 2016 by amending the Fiscal Year 2016 Adopted Municipal Fee Schedule; and 2. Consider referring policy matters that relate to SSO and other neighborhood overlays that could provide neighborhood protections to the Policy and Services Committee or the Planning & Transportation Commission for discussion at a later date. Executive Summary During its June 8, 2015 discussion of the Fiscal Year 2016 (FY16) Proposed Budget, the City Council adopted two motions, among others, requesting staff to evaluate capping the fee for establishment of Single Story Overlay (SSO) applications for FY161 and to agendize consideration of referral of policy matters that relate to SSOs and other neighborhood overlays that could provide neighborhood protections. Council requested Staff return to Council on June 29, 2015. As part of the Finance Committee budget hearings in May, the Finance Committee requested information about SSOs and referred the item to a future Finance Committee meeting. 1 There is not currently a separate fee for single story overlay applications, so the fee for re-zoning would apply. This is a cost-recovery fee which requires an initial deposit or “base fee” of approximately $8,000 against which staff charges their time. Actual costs may be more than the base fee. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Staff’s research indicates that neighborhoods have not paid a fee to cover staff time associated with establishment of SSOs in the past, and have instead relied on the City itself to “initiate” the rezoning upon receipt of a neighborhood request. The City Council could direct staff to continue this practice, or could establish a fixed fee that is lower than the base fee for other types of rezoning applications (approximately $8,000). If the Council is interested in referring a policy review of neighborhood overlays and similar tools used in other communities to preserve residential neighborhood character to the Policy & Services Committee or the Planning & Transportation Commission, staff can provide a summary and analysis of these alternatives as time permits. Alternatively the Council could request this policy review be included as an implementation program in the Comprehensive Plan Update. Background & Discussion On July 13, 1992, the City Council adopted a single story height combining district (Ordinances 4100 and 4101) as part of the Zoning Ordinance and applied the overlay to the Walnut Grove neighborhood. The single story regulations effectively preclude construction of two story homes with the established boundaries. The City Council established criteria to guide the consideration of zone change requests for application of the Single Story Height Combining District and in 2005, Municipal Code Chapter 18.12 was modified (Ordinance 4869) to include criteria for creating a single-story overlay district (see Section 18.12.100 within Attachment B, Chapter 18.12). These criteria address: • Level of support • Presence of existing single story deed restrictions • Appropriate boundaries • Prevailing single story character Applications for Single Story Overlay (SSO) districts have been submitted by thirteen neighborhoods and the City has adopted twelve single story overlay zones (some are contiguous, resulting in the nine areas shown on the map in Attachment A). The Fairmeadow SSO application affecting a small portion of one of the circles within the tract was the only SSO application that was not approved. Staff identified discrepancies in previous staff reports regarding the number of lots within each single story overlay. Based on thorough research, the list below shows the number of lots as they exist today resulting in a total of 846 SSO lots: • Walnut Grove (96 lots), Ordinance 4100 • Green Meadows I and II (249 lots), Ordinance 4146 • Green Meadows III (27 lots), Ordinance 4147 • Charleston Meadows Tract 795 (96 lots), Ordinance 4398 City of Palo Alto Page 3 • Charleston Meadows Tract 840 (61 lots), Ordinance 4450 • Blossom Park Tract 709 (16 lots), Ordinance 4466 • Barron Park Tract 714 and portions of 4738 (20 lots), Ordinance 4535 • Meadow Park Tract 1722 and portions of 1977 (76 lots), Ordinance 4541 • Channing Park I and II (57 lots), Ordinance 4657 • Garland (Elsinore Drive) (68 lots), Ordinance 4721 • Greer Park Tract 796/Van Auken Cir (58 lots), Ordinance 4759 • Allen Court Tract 1137 (22 lots), Ordinance 4849 SSO Fees The City Council and staff have received inquiries about potentially waiving the fees for SSO application(s) as part of the Council’s approval of the Fiscal Year 2016 Budget and Municipal Fee Schedule. The fee schedule currently includes a fee for processing rezoning requests and SSO applications fall in this category. The fee schedule requires an initial deposit of $5,905.00 to offset the cost of staff time involved in processing the application. This initial deposit is the base fee against which staff’s time is charged and applicants may be billed for time once the initial deposit has been depleted. This fee has been based on cost recovery since at least the late 1990s. In addition, a legal review fee of $1,352.00 is charged as well as miscellaneous fees for noticing, record management and records retention bringing the total initial deposit to $7,930. Staff reports from the SSOs established in the past (see the list above) indicate that although neighborhoods submitted requests for the SSO, including the required signatures, the City treated these requests as if they were initiated by the City and did not charge a fee. Municipal Code 18.80.040 provides that the City Council or the Planning Commission may initiate application and proceedings for a change in district boundaries by motion. Municipal Code Chapter 18.80 is provided as Attachment C. The motion may include any public or private property, is to be accompanied maps or descriptions defining existing and proposed boundaries of districts, and by a statement describing the reasons for consideration of a change. The motion is directed to the Director, who is to process the application without a fee. The historical practice of the City taking on the role of initiator has meant that the costs associated with staff time, noticing, and etc. associated with single story overlays have been general fund supported. The City Council could direct staff to continue the practice of treating SSO applications as City- initiated re-zonings or amend the fee schedule to establish a fixed fee for SSO applications submitted in FY16 that is lower than the base fee for other types of rezoning applications. Other Overlay Zones and Neighborhood Preservation Strategies The Zoning Code does not include language regarding establishment of conservation districts or other alternative combining districts for single family residential neighborhoods. If the Council is interested in referring a policy review of neighborhood overlays and similar tools used in other communities to preserve residential neighborhood character to the Policy & Services City of Palo Alto Page 4 Committee or the Planning & Transportation Commission, staff can provide a summary and analysis of these other strategies as time permits. At this stage, staff is not in a good position to assess the resource impact and demands. Suffice it to say, the Planning staff already has more than a full load of work in it’s work plan for CY 2015. Alternatively the Council could request this policy review be included in the Comprehensive Plan Update as an implementation program. Resource Impact Processing SSO applications takes staff time and involves the expenses associated with noticing, conducting public hearings, and etc. The amount of staff time involved depends on the level of controversy which can vary, depending on the level of community support/opposition to eliminating the potential for two story homes. Currently, the municipal fee schedule requires an initial deposit of $5,905.00 to offset the cost of staff time involved in processing the application. This initial deposit is the base fee against which staff’s time is charged and applicants may be billed for time once the initial deposit has been depleted. This fee has been based on cost recovery since at least the late 1990s. In addition, a legal review fee of $1,352.00 is charged as well as miscellaneous fees for noticing, record management and records retention bringing the total initial deposit to $7,930. Policy Implications The Department of Planning & Community Environment has an extensive work program and will likely require assistance from the City Council in prioritizing work on single story overlay zones if multiple requests are received concurrently as anticipated. Attachments:  Attachment A: Single Story Overlays_and_Single Family Zoning Districts (PDF)  Attachment B: Chapter 18.12 (R-1) Single-Family Residential District (PDF)  Attachment C: Chapter 18.80 Amendments to Zoning Map and Zoning Regulations (PDF) E m ba rc a d e ro El C a mi n o R eal University Oregon Page Mill Alma Arastradero E M e a d o w Foothill Middlefield San Antonio R-1(S) R-1 (S) R-1(S)R-1(S) R-1(S) R-1(S) R-1 (S) R-1(8000)(S) R-1(7000)(S) R-1(8000)(S) Wallis Ct Donald Drive Encina Grande Drive Cereza Drive Los Robles Avenue Villa Vera Verdosa DriveCampana DriveSolana Drive Georgia Ave Ynigo Way Driscoll Ct ngArthur' Maybell Way Maybell Avenue Frandon Ct Florales Drive Georgia AvenueAmaranta Avenue Amaranta Ct Ki sCourt Terman Drive Baker Avenue Vista Avenue Wisteria Ln Pena Ct Coulombe DriveCherry Oaks Pl Pomona Avenue Arastradero Road Abel Avenue Clemo Avenue Villa Real El Camino Way Curtner Avenue Ventura Avenue Maclane Emerson Street Ventura Ct Park Boulevard Magnolia Dr South El Camino Real Cypress Lane GlenbrookD Fairmede Avenue Arastradero RoadIrven Court Los Palos CirLosPalosPl Maybell Avenue Alta Mesa Ave Kelly Way Los Palos Avenue Suzanne Drive Suzanne Drive rive El Camino Real S uzanne CtLorabelle Ct McKellar Lane El Cam ino Way James Road Maclane Second Street Wilkie Way Camino CtWest Meadow Drive Thain Way Barclay CtVictoria Place Interdale Way West Charleston RoadTennessee LaneWilkie Way Carolina Lane Tennessee Lane Park Boulevard Wilkie Ct Davenport Way Alma Street Roosev Monroe Drive Wilkie Way Whitclem Pl Whitclem Drive Duluth Circle Edlee Avenue Dinah's Court Cesano Court Monroe Drive Miller Avenue Whitclem Wy Whitclem Ct Ferne Avenue Ben Lomond Drive Fairfield Court Ferne Avenue Ponce Drive HemlockCourt Ferne Court Alma Street Monroe Drive San Antonio Avenue NitaAvenue Ruthelma Avenue Darlington Ct Charleston Road LundyLane Newberry Ct Park Boulevard George Hood Ln Alma Street eltCircle LinderoDrive Wright Place StarrKingCircle Shasta Drive Mackay Drive Diablo Court Scripps Avenue Scripps Court Nelson Drive Tioga Court Creekside Drive Greenmeadow Way Ben Lomond Drive Parkside Drive Dixon Place Ely Place Dake Avenue Ferne Avenue San Antonio Court (Private) ChristopherCourt CalcaterraPlace Ely Place Ely Place Adobe Place Nelson Court ByronStreet Keats Court Middlefield Road Duncan Place Carlson Court Duncan Place Mumford Place Charleston Road San Antonio Avenue East Meadow Drive Emerson Street CourtBryantStreet RooseveltCircle RamonaStreet CarlsonCircle RedwoodCircle South Leghorn Street Montrose Avenue Maple wood Charleston Ct Charleston Road Seminole Way Sutherland Drive Nelson DriveEl Capitan Place Fabian Street Loma Verde Avenue Bryson Avenue Midtown Court Cowper Street Gary Court Waverley StreetSouth CourtBryant StreetRamona Street Alma Street Coastland Drive Colorado AvenueByron Street Middlefield Road Gaspar Court Moreno Avenue Coastland Drive El Carmelo Avenue RosewoodD Campesino Avenue Dymond Ct Martinsen Ct Ramona Street Bryant Street Towle Way Towle Place Wellsbury Ct AvalonCourt FlowersLane Mackall Way Loma Verde Avenue KiplingStreet Cowper Street South Court Waverley StreetEl Verano Avenue Wellsbury Way La Middlefield Road St Claire Drive Alger Drive Ashton Avenue St Michael DriveSt Michael Drive Maureen Avenue Cowper Court Rambow Drive East Meadow Drive Ashton Court Murdoch DriveCowperStreet Murdoch Ct St Michael Court MayCourt Mayview Avenue Middlefield RoadEnsign Way Bibbits Drive Gailen CtGailen Avenue Grove Avenue San Antonio Avenue Commercial Street Industrial Avenue Bibbits Drive Charleston Road Fabian Way T East Meado w Drive Grove Avenue Christine Drive Corina Way Ross Road Corina W ay Louis Road Nathan Way Transport Street Ortega Court East Meadow Drive yneCourt alisman Loma Verde Avenue Allen Court Ross Court Loma Verde Pl Ames Avenue Richardson Court Holly Oak Drive Ames Avenue CorkOakWay Middlefield Road Ames Ct Ames Avenue Ross Road Rorke Way RorkeWay Stone LaneToyon PlaceTorreya Court Lupine Avenue Thornwood Drive DriftwoodDrive Talisman Drive Arbutus Avenue Ross Road Louis Road Aspen WayEvergreen Drive East Meadow Drive Corporation WayElwell Court Janice Way East Meadow CircleEast Meadow Circle GreerRoad Bayshore Freeway rive Ellsworth Place San Carlos Court Wintergreen WaySutterAvenue Sutter Avenue Clara Drive Price CourtStern Avenue Colorado Avenue Randers Ct Ross Road Sycamore Drive Sevyson Ct Stelling DriveRoss Road David Avenue MurrayWay Stelling DriveStelling Ct ManchesterCourt Kenneth Drive ThomasDriveGreerRoad Stockton Place Vernon Terrace Louis Road Janice Way Thomas DriveKenneth Drive Loma Verde Avenue CliftonCourtElbridgeWay Clara Drive BautistaCourt Stockton Place Morris Drive Maddux Drive Piers Ct Louis Road Moraga Ct Old Page Mill Road CoyoteHillRoad Hillview Avenue Porter Drive Hillview Avenue Hanover Street Foothill Expressway Miranda Avenue Stanford Avenue Amherst Street Columbia StreetBowdoin Street Dartmouth Street Hanover Street College Avenue California Avenue Hanover Street Ramos Way (Private) Page Mill Road Hansen Way Hanover Street stradero Road Miranda Avenue ue Miranda Avenue Laguna Ct Barron Avenue Josina Avenue Kendall Avenue Tippawingo St Julie CtMatadero Avenue Ilima Way Ilima Court Laguna Oaks Pl Carlitos CtLa CalleLaguna Avenue ElCerrit Paradise Way Roble Ridge (Private) LaMataWay Chimalus Drive Matadero Avenue oRoad Paul Avenue Kendall Avenue Whitsell Avenue Barron Avenue Los Robles Avenue Laguna Way ShaunaLane La Para Avenue San Jude Avenue El Centro Street TimlottLa Jennifer Way Magnolia Dr North La Donna Avenue LosRobles Avenue Rinc Manzana Lane onCircle Crosby Pl Georgia Avenue Hubbartt Drive Willmar Drive Donald Drive Arastradero Road F La Para AvenueSan Jude Avenue Magnolia Drive Military Way Arbol Drive Orme Street Fernando Avenue Matadero Avenue Lambert Avenue Hansen Way El Camino Real Margarita Avenue Matadero Avenue Wilton Avenue Oxford Avenue Harvard Street California Avenue Wellesley StreetPrinceton StreetOberlin Street Cornell Street Cambridge Avenue College AvenueWilliams Street Yale Street Staunton CourtOxford AvenueEl Camino Real Churchill Avenue Park Boulevard Park Avenue Escobita Avenue Churchill Avenue Sequoia Avenue Mariposa Avenue Castilleja Avenue Miramonte Avenue Madrono Avenue Portola Avenue Manzanita Avenue Coleridge Avenue Leland Avenue Stanford AvenueBirch Street Ash Street Lowell Avenue Alma Street Tennyson Avenue Grant Avenue Sheridan AvenueJacaranda Lane El Camino Real Sherman Avenue Ash Street Page Mill Road Mimosa Lane Chestnut Avenue Portage AvenuePepper Avenue Olive Avenue Acacia Avenue Emerson Street Park Boulevard Orinda Street Birch Street Ash Street Page Mill Road Ash Street Park Boulevard College Avenue Cambridge Avenue New Mayfield LaneBirch Street California Avenue Park Boulevard Nogal Lane Rinconada Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Park Boulevard Seale Avenue Washington Avenue Santa Rita Avenue WaverleyStree Bryant Street High Street Emerson Street Colorado AvenueStreet Emerson Street Ramona Street Bryant Street South Court El Dorado AvenueAlma Street Alma Street HighStreet t Emerson Waverley Oaks Washington Avenue Bryant Street South Court Waverley Street Emerson StreetNevada Avenue North California Avenue Santa Rita Avenue Ramona Street High Street North California Avenue Oregon Expressway Marion Avenue Ramona Street Colorado Avenue Waverley Street Kipling Street South Court Cowper Street Anton CourtNevada Avenue Tasso Street Tasso Street Oregon Avenue Marion Pl Webster Street Middlefield Road Ross Road Warren Way El Cajon Way Embarcadero Road Primrose Way Iris Way Tulip Lane Tulip Lane Garland Drive Louis Road Greer Road MortonStreet Greer Road Hamilton Avenue Hilbar LaneAlannah Ct Edge Rhodes Drive Marshall Drive FieldinMoreno AvenueMarshallDrive Dennis Drive Agnes Way Oregon AvenueBlair Court Santa Ana Street Elsinore DriveElsinore CourtEl Cajon Way Greer RoadCalifornia Avenue gDrive Colorado Avenue Sycamore Drive Amarillo Avenue VanAukenCircle Bruce Drive Colonial Lane Moreno Avenue Celia Drive Burnham Way Greer Road Indian Drive Elmdale Pl C Tanland Drive Moreno Avenue Amarillo Avenue West Bayshore Road Sandra Place Clara DriveColorado Avenue Greer Road Colorado AvenueSimkins CourtOtterson CtHiggins PlaceLawrence Lane Maddux Drive Genevieve Ct MetroCircle MoffettCircleGreer Road East Bayshore Road ardinalWay Santa Catalina Street ArrowheadWayAztec Way Chabot Terrace Oregon Avenue Carmel Drive SierraCourt StFrancisDrive West Bayshore RoadTanland Drive East Bayshore Road woodDrive Edgewood Drive WildwoodLane Ivy Lane East Bayshore Ro ad St Francis Drive Wildwood Lane Watson Court Laura Lane Sandalwood Ct O'Brine Lane (Private) Embarcadero Road FaberPlace Embarcadero Road Geng Road Embarcadero Way er Avenue Lane 8 West st 7 East Embarcadero Road enue High Street Emerson Street Channing Avenue Alma Street Alma Street W 1 Gilman Street University Avenue 30 Tasso Street Cowper Street Court ytton Avenue reet Fulton Streetlefield Road Churchill Avenue Lowell Avenue Seale AvenueTennyson AvenueMelville Avenue Cowper Street Tasso Street Webster Street Byron Street North California Avenue Coleridge Avenue Waverley Street Bryant Street Emerson Street Kellogg Avenue Alma Street Kingsley Avenue Portal Place Ross Road Oregon Avenue Garland Drive Lane A WestLane B West Lane B East Lane D West Lane 59 East Whitman Court Kellogg AvenueEmbarcadero RoadKingsley Avenue Lincoln AvenueAddison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Forest Avenue Downing Lane Homer Avenue Lane D East Lane 39 Lane 56 Hamilton Avenue Webster Street Waverley Street Kipling Street Bryant StreetRamona Street Addison AvenueScott Street Byron Street Palo Hale Street Seneca Street Lytton Avenue Guinda Street PaloAltoAvenue Fulton Street Middlefield Road Forest Avenue Webster Street Kellogg Avenue Middlefield Road Byron Street Webster Street Cowper Street Tasso Street Cowper Street Addison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Boyce Avenue Forest AvenueHamilton Avenue Homer AvenueGuinda Street Middlefield Road Channing Avenue A treetChaucer Street University Avenue Channing AvenueAddison Avenue Lincoln Avenue Regent Pl Guinda StreetLincoln Avenue Fulton Street Melville Avenue Byron Street Kingsley Avenue Melville Avenue Hamilton AvenueHamilton Court Forest AvenueForest Ct M Pa Somerset Pl Pitman AvenueFife Avenue Forest Avenue Dana Avenue Lincoln Avenue University Avenue Coleridge Avenue Lowell Avenue Fulton StreetCowper Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Northampton Drive West Greenwich Pl Middlefield Road Newell RoadGuinda Street East Greenwich Pl Southampton Drive Webster Street Kirby Pl Kent Place Tevis Pl Martin Avenue Center Drive Harriet Street Wils o n S t r e e t Cedar Street Harker Avenue Greenwood Avenue Hutchinson Avenue Channing Avenue Hopkins Avenue Embarcadero Road Ashby Drive Dana Avenue Hamilton Avenue Pitman Avenue Southwood DriveWest CrescentDrive nter Drive Arcadia Place Louisa CourtNewell Pl Shar on Ct Erstwild Court Walter Hays Drive Walnut Drive Newell Road Parkinson AvenuePine Street Mark Twain Street Louis RoadBarbara Drive Primrose Way Iris Way Embarcadero RoadWalter Hays DriveLois Lane Jordan Pl Lois Lane Heather Lane Bret Harte Street Stanley Way De Soto DriveDe Soto Drive Alester Avenue Walter Hays Drive Channing Avenue Iris Way Drive Dana Avenue Hamilton AvenueNewell RoadKings Lane EdgewoodDrive Island Drive Jefferson Drive JacksonDrive Patricia Lane Madison Way EdgewoodDrive Addison AvenueChanning Avenue Waverley Street Tennyson Avenue Seale Avenue Middlefield Road Byron StreetWebster Street Marion Avenue Sedro Lane Peral Lane McGregor Way Monroe Drive Silva Avenue Silva Court Miller Court Briarwood Way Driscoll Place Community Lane Court Madeline Ct David Ct Green Ct Oregon Expressway Oregon Expressway Sheridan Avenue Page Mill Road Page Mill Road Foothill Expressway Miranda AvenueFoothill Expressway Cerrito Way Emerson Street Miranda Avenue Oregon Expressway Jacob's Ct CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW CalTrain ROW rley Street Street Lane 66 West Charleston Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway West Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road West Bayshore Road East Bayshore Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway West Bayshore Road Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Lane 66 La Selva Drive Grove Ct Stanford Avenue Olmstead Road Serra Street OlmsteadRoad Phillips Road El Dorado Avenue Clara Drive Bellview Dr Homer Avenue La Calle SAN ANTONIO AVENUE Matadero Ave Colorado Pl Los Robles Avenue Timlott Ct Vista Villa oAven Lane La Donna Avenue Cass Way Kenneth Drive Fabian Way Page Mill Road Middlefield RoadChristine Drive Louis Road Charleston Roa Bayshore Freeway Bayshore Freeway Chimalus Drive Hanover Street Commuity Lane Greenwood Avenue Harker Avenue Parkinson Avenue Avenue Maplewood Pl Mackay Drive Alma Village Circle Alma Village Lane Matadero Creek Charleston Slough Matadero Creek Matadero Creek Barron Creek Barron Creek Barron Creek Adobe Creek Adobe Creek Adobe Cr e e k Adobe Creek Adobe Creek E m i l y R e n z e l W e t l a n d s o k s I s l a n d Ad ob e C re ek Coast Casey Forebay b e Cr ee k k atadero Creek Matadero Creek A d o b e C r e e k Dry Creek D r y C r e e k Creek Francisquito Creek This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend City Jurisdictional Limits Zoned for Single-Family Residential Use Single Story Overlay Zone Districts 0'2500' Single Story Overlays and Single Family Zoning Districts CITY O F PALO A L TO I N C O R P O R ATE D C ALIFOR N IA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f A P RIL 16 1894 The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors ©1989 to 2015 City of Palo Alto rrivera, 2015-06-08 12:55:21SingleStoryOverlay (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\Planning.mdb) ATTACHMENT A 18.12.010 Purposes Ch. 18.12 – Page 1 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) Chapter 18.12 R-1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT* Sections: 18.12.010 Purposes 18.12.020 Applicable Regulations 18.12.030 Land Uses 18.12.040 Development Standards 18.12.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions 18.12.060 Parking 18.12.070 Second Dwelling Units 18.12.080 Accessory Uses and Facilities 18.12.090 Basements 18.12.100 Regulations for the Single Story Overlay (S) Combining District 18.12.110 Single Family Individual Review 18.12.120 Home Improvement Exceptions 18.12.130 Architectural Review 18.12.140 Historical Review 18.12.150 Grandfathered Uses *Editor’s Note: This chapter was revised in its entirety by Ordinance 4869. Ordinances formerly codified in this chapter, and not specifically repealed by adoption of Ordinance 4869, include Ords. 3048, 3064, 3070, 3130, 3255, 3291, 3345, 3378, 3465, 3475, 3489, 3536, 3577, 3583, 3662, 3683, 3735, 3741, 3850, 3861, 3905, 4016, 4043, 4081, 4140, 4642, 4643, 4716, 4794 and 4826. 18.12.010 Purposes Provisions related to the single-family residential (R-1) district, four residential R-1 subdistricts, and the single-story (S) combining district are outlined in this chapter. Requirements for the RE, R-2 and RMD are included in Chapter 18.10. The specific purposes of each residential district are stated below: (a) Single Family Residential District [R-1] The R-1 single family residential district is intended to create, preserve, and enhance areas suitable for detached dwellings with a strong presence of nature and with open area affording maximum privacy and opportunities for outdoor living and children’s play. Minimum site area requirements are established to create and preserve variety among neighborhoods, to provide adequate open area, and to encourage quality design. Second dwelling units and accessory structures or buildings are appropriate where consistent with the site and neighborhood character. Community uses and facilities, such as churches and schools, should be limited unless no net loss of housing would result. (b) Special Residential Building Site R-1 Subdistricts (7,000), (8,000), (10,000), (20,000) The special residential building site R-1 subdistricts are intended to modify the site development regulations of the R-1 single family residence district, where applied in Attachment B 18.12.020 Applicable Regulations (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 2 combination with the R-1 district, to create and maintain single-family living areas of varying site size and development characteristics, to reflect and preserve the character of existing neighborhoods. (c) Single-Story Combining District (S) The single-story height combining district is intended to modify the site development regulations of the R-1 single-family residence district, to preserve and maintain single-family living areas of predominantly single-story character. An area proposed for a single story combining district should be of a prevailing single story character, thus limiting the number of structures rendered noncomplying by the (S) combining district. It is intended that neighborhoods currently subject to single story deed restrictions be developed in a manner consistent with those deed restrictions. Furthermore, it is desirable that homes be similar in age, design and character, ensuring that residents of an area proposed for rezoning possess like desires for neighborhood preservation and face common home remodeling constraints. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.020 Applicable Regulations The specific regulations of this chapter and the additional regulations and procedures established by Chapters 18.52 to 18.80 inclusive shall apply to the R-1 district including the R-1 subdistricts. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.030 Land Uses The permitted and conditionally permitted uses for the single family residential districts are shown in Table 1: TABLE 1 PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL R-1 RESIDENTIAL USES [P = Permitted Use • CUP =Conditional Use Permit Required] R-1 and all R-1 Subdistricts Subject to Regulations for: ACCESSORY AND SUPPORT USES Accessory facilities and uses customarily incidental to permitted uses with no more than two plumbing fixtures and no kitchen facility, or of a size less than or equal to 200 square feet P 18.04.030(a)(3) 18.12.080 Accessory facilities and uses customarily incidental to permitted uses with more than two plumbing fixtures (but with no kitchen), and in excess of 200 square feet in size, but excluding second dwelling units CUP 18.12.080 Home occupations, when accessory to permitted residential uses P 18.42.060 Horticulture, gardening, and growing of food products for consumption by occupants of the site P Second Dwelling Units P 18.12.070 EDUCATIONAL, RELIGIOUS AND ASSEMBLY USES Private Educational Facilities CUP Churches and Religious Institutions CUP [Table Continues on Next Page] 18.12.040 Site Development Standards Ch. 18.12 – Page 3 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) R-1 and all R-1 Subdistricts Subject to Regulations for: PUBLIC/QUASI PUBLIC USES Community Centers CUP Utility Facilities essential to provision of utility services to the neighborhood, but excluding business offices, construction or storage yards, maintenance facilities, or corporation yards CUP RECREATION USES Outdoor Recreation Services CUP RESIDENTIAL USES Single-Family P Mobile Homes P 18.42.100 Residential Care Homes P SERVICE USES Day Care Centers CUP Small Adult Day Care Homes P Large Adult Day Care Homes CUP Small Family Day Care Homes P Large Family Day Care Homes P P = Permitted Use CUP = Conditional Use Permit Required (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.040 Site Development Standards (a) Site Specifications, Building Size, Height and Bulk, and Residential Density The development standards for the R-1 district and the R-1 subdistricts are shown in Table 2: TABLE 2 R-1 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS R-1 Subdistricts R-1 (7,000)* R-1 (8,000)* R-1 (10,000)* R-1 (20,000)*R-1 * Subdistricts based on minimum lot size (sq. ft.) Subject to Regulations in Chapter: 6,000 7,000 8,000 10,000 20,000 As established by Section 21.20.301 (Subdivision Ordinance) 60 Minimum Site Specifications Site area (sq. ft.) All lots except flag lots (1) Flag lots Site Width (ft) Site Depth (ft)100 Maximum Lot Size Lot area (sq. ft.)9,999 13,999 15,999 19,999 39,999 18.12.040(d) [Table Continues on Next Page] 18.12.040 Site Development Standards (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 4 R-1 Subdistricts R-1 (7,000)* R-1 (8,000)* R-1 (10,000)* R-1 (20,000)*R-1 * Subdistricts based on minimum lot size (sq. ft.) Subject to Regulations in Chapter: Setback lines imposed by a special setback map pursuant to Chapter 20. 08 of this code may also apply Contextual (2) 20 6 8 Minimum Setbacks Front Yard (ft.) Rear Yard (ft.) Interior Side Yard (ft.) Street Side Yard (ft.)16 18.12.040(e) 18.12.050 30 (3) 33 (3) 18.04.030(a)(67) 18.12.050 Maximum Height (as measured to the peak of the roof) (ft.) Standard Maximum Height for buildings with a roof pitch of 12:12 or greater With (S) Combining 17 feet; limited to one habitable floor (4, 5)18.12.100 10 feet at interior side lot line (6) Side Yard Daylight Plane (Excludes street side yards) Initial Height Angle (Degrees)45 (6) 18.04.030(44) 18.12.050 16 feet at rear setback line (6) Rear Yard Daylight Plane Initial Height Angle (Degrees)60 (6) 18.12.050 Equivalent to maximum allowable floor area ratio (7) Equivalent to maximum allowable floor area ratio (7) 35%(7) Maximum Site Coverage: Single story development With (S) Combining Multiple story development Additional area permitted to be covered by a patio or overhang 5% 18.04.030(a)(86A) .45 Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) First 5,000 sq. ft. of lot size Square footage of lot size in excess of 5,000 sq. ft..30 Table 3 18.04.030(a)(65C) 18.12.040(b) Maximum House Size (sq. ft.)6,000 (8) Residential Density One unit, except as provided in Section 18.12.070 Parking See Residential Parking, Section 18.12.060 Chs. 18.52, 18.54 (1)Minimum Lot Size: Any lot less than the minimum lot size may be used in accordance with the provisions of Section 18.40.080. (2)Contextual Front Setbacks: See Section 18.12.040(e) for application of contextual front setbacks. {3)R-1 Floodzone Heights: Provided, in a special flood hazard area as defined in Chapter 16.52, the maximum heights are increased by one-half of the increase in elevation required to reach base flood elevation, up to a maximum building height of 33 feet. (4)R-1 (S) Height Limitations: Habitable floors include lofts, mezzanines, and similar areas with interior heights of five feet (5') or more from the roof to the floor, but shall exclude finished basements and shall exclude attics that have no stairway or built-in access. (5)R-1 (S) Floodzone Heights: Provided, in a special flood hazard area as defined in Chapter 16.52, the maximum height is increased by one-half of the increase in elevation required to reach base flood elevations, up to a maximum building height of 20 feet. (6)R-1 Floodzone Daylight Plane: Provided, if the site is in a special flood hazard area and is entitled to an increase in the maximum height, the heights for the daylight planes shall be adjusted by the same amount. 18.12.040 Site Development Standards Ch. 18.12 – Page 5 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) (7) Site Coverage: The covering of a court is exempt from the calculation of site coverage provided that the court existed prior to July 20, 1978. (8)Maximum House Size: The gross floor area of attached garages and attached second dwelling units are included in the calculation of maximum house size. If there is no garage attached to the house, then the square footage of one detached covered parking space shall be included in the calculation. (b) Gross Floor Area Summary The following table summarizes how “gross floor area” is counted, for the purpose of compliance with floor area ratio limits outlined in Table 2. “Gross floor area” means the total covered area of all floors of a main structure and accessory structures greater than one hundred twenty square feet in area, including covered parking and stairways, measured to the outside surface of stud walls, subject to the following inclusions, conditions, and exclusions. For exact language, refer to Section 18.04.030(a)(65), Gross Floor Area definition. TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF GROSS FLOOR AREA FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Description Included in GFA Excluded from GFA Accessory structures greater than 120 sq. ft.a Second floor equivalent: areas with heights >17'a (counted twice) Third floor equivalent: areas with heights > 26'a (counted three times) Third floor equivalent, where roof pitch is > 4:12 a up to 200 sq. ft. of unusable space Garages and carports a Porte cocheres a Entry feature < 12' in height, if not substantially enclosed and not recessed a (counted once) Vaulted entry > 12' in height a (footprint counted twice) Fireplace footprint a(counted once) First floor roofed or unenclosed porches a First floor recessed porches <10' in depth and open on exterior side a Second floor roofed or enclosed porches, arcades, balconies, porticos, breeze- ways a Basements (complying with patio & lightwell requirements described in Section 18.12.070) a Areas on floors above the first floor where the height from the floor level to the underside of the rafter or finished roof surface is 5’ or greater a Bay windows (if at least 18" above interior floor, does not project more than 2', and more than 50% is covered by windows) a Basement area for Category 1 & 2 Historic Homes or contributing structure within a historic district (even if greater than 3') a Unusable attic space for Category 1 & 2 Historic Homes a(up to 500 sq. ft.) (c) Substandard and Flag Lots The following site development regulations shall apply to all new construction on substandard and flag lots in lieu of comparable provisions in subsection (a). 18.12.040 Site Development Standards (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 6 (1) Substandard Lots (A) For the purposes of this subsection (c), a substandard lot shall be a lot with a width of less than 50 feet or a depth of less than 83 feet and an area less than 83% of the minimum area required by the zoning of the parcel. (B) Development standards: (i) The maximum height shall be 17 feet, as measured to the peak of the roof. (ii) There shall be a limit of one habitable floor. Habitable floors include loft, mezzanines, and similar areas with interior heights of five feet (5') or more from the roof to the floor, but exclude basements and exclude attics that have no stairway or built-in access. The chief building official shall make the final determination as to whether a floor is habitable. (iii)For lots less than 50 feet in width, the required street side setback shall be 10 feet. (iv) Substandard lots shall not be subject to the R-1 contextual garage placement requirement. (C) Nothing in this subsection (c) shall affect or otherwise redefine the provisions of Section 18.40.080 as to whether a substandard lot may be used as a lot under this title. (2) Flag Lots (A) A flag lot shall be defined as set forth in Section 18.04.030(a)(84)(B). (B) Flag Lot Development Standards: (i) The maximum height shall be 17 feet, as measured to the peak of the roof. (ii)There shall be a limit of one habitable floor. Habitable floors include lofts, mezzanines, and similar areas with interior heights of five feet (5') or more from the roof to the floor, but exclude basements and exclude attics that have no stairway or built-in access. The chief building official shall make the final determination as to whether a floor is habitable. (iii)Front Setback: 10 feet. Flag lots are not subject to contextual front setback requirements. (iv) Flag lots are not subject to contextual front setback requirements. (d) Maximum Lot Sizes in R-1 District and R-1 Subdistricts This provision limits the potential for lot combinations with a net loss of housing stock and resultant homes that would be out of scale with homes in the surrounding neighborhood. In the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts, no new lot shall be created equal to or exceeding two times the minimum lot size prescribed for the district, except that where 6,000 minimum square foot lots are required in an R-1 district, no new lot shall exceed a maximum lot size of 9,999 square feet, as prescribed in Table 2. Lots larger than the prescribed maximum size are permitted only under the following circumstances: (i) where a village residential land use is approved concurrent with the new lot, resulting in no net loss of housing units on the site(s); (ii) where underlying lots must be merged to eliminate nonconformities and no net loss of housing units would result; (iii) where an adjacent substandard lot of less than 25 feet in width is combined 18.12.040 Site Development Standards Ch. 18.12 – Page 7 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) with another lot, resulting in no net loss of housing units on the site(s); or (iv) where the number of resultant lots increases or stays the same and results in no net loss of housing units. (e) Contextual Front Setbacks The minimum front yard (“setback”) shall be the greater of twenty feet (20') or the average setback, if the average front setback is 30 feet or more. “Average setback” means the average distance between the front property line and the first main structural element, including covered porches, on sites on the same side of the block, including existing structures on the subject parcel. This calculation shall exclude flag lots and existing multifamily developments of three units or more. For calculation purposes, if five (5) or more properties on the block are counted, the single greatest and the single least setbacks shall be excluded. The street sideyard setback of corner lots that have the front side of their parcel (the narrowest street- facing lot line) facing another street shall be excluded from the calculations. For blocks longer than 600 feet, the average setback shall be based on the ten sites located on the same side of the street and nearest to the subject property, plus the subject site, but for a distance no greater than 600 feet. Blocks with three (3) or fewer parcels are not subject to contextual setbacks. Structures on the site in no case may be located closer than twenty feet (20') from the front property line. (f) Contextual Garage Placement If the predominant neighborhood pattern is of garages or carports located within the rear half of the site, or with no garage or carport present, attached garages shall be located in the rear half of the house footprint. Otherwise, an attached garage may be located in the front half of the house footprint. “Predominant neighborhood pattern” means the existing garage placement pattern for more than half of the houses on the same side of the block, including the subject site. This calculation shall exclude flag lots, corner lots and existing multifamily developments of three or more units. For blocks longer than 600 feet, the calculations shall be based on the 10 homes located nearest to and on the same side of the block as the subject property, plus the subject site, but for a distance no greater than 600 feet. Detached garages shall be located in the rear half of the site and, if within a rear or side setback, at least 75 feet from the front property line. Detached garages on lots of less than 95 feet in depth, however, may be placed in a required interior side or rear yard if located in the rear half of the lot. Access shall be provided from a rear alley if the existing development pattern provides for alley access. For the calculation of corner lots, the “predominant pattern”shall be established for the street where the new garage fronts. (g) Garage Doors For garages located within 50 feet from a street frontage, on lots less than 75 feet in width, the total combined width of garage doors that are parallel to the street shall not exceed 20 feet. (h) Minimum Permeable Surface in Front Yard A minimum of 60% of the required front yard shall have a permeable surface that permits water absorption directly into the soil. Provided, all sites may have an impervious 16' x 20' driveway and an impervious 4' x 20' walkway within the front yard setback. 18.12.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 8 (i) Special Setbacks Where applicable, setback lines imposed by a special setback map pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of this code shall be followed for the purpose of determining legal setback requirements. (j) Certification of Daylight Plane Compliance Upon request by the building official, any person building or making improvements to a structure shall provide a certification that the structure, as built, complies with the daylight plane provisions in subsection (a). Such certification shall be prepared by a licensed engineer, architect, or surveyor, and shall be provided prior to frame inspection. (k) Lighting Recreational and security lighting shall be permitted only so long as the lighting is shielded so that the direct light does not extend beyond the property where it is located. Free-standing recreational and security lighting installed on or later than March 11, 1991 shall be restricted to twelve feet (12') in height. Direct light from outdoor fixtures shall only fall on the walls, eaves, and yard areas of the site on which it is located. Outdoor fixtures shall have lens covers or reflectors that direct the light away from the neighboring properties. (l) Location of Noise-Producing Equipment All noise-producing equipment, such as air conditioners, pool equipment, generators, commercial kitchen fans, and similar service equipment, shall be located outside of the front, rear and side yard setbacks. Such equipment may, however, be located up to six feet into a street sideyard setback. All such equipment shall be insulated and housed, except that the planning director may permit installation without housing and insulation, provided the equipment is located within the building envelope and where a combination of technical noise specifications, location of equipment, and/or other screening or buffering will assure compliance with the city’s Noise Ordinance at the nearest property line. Any replacement of such equipment shall conform to this section where feasible. All service equipment must meet the city’s Noise Ordinance in Chapter 9.10 of the Municipal Code. (Ord. 4964 §§ 11 – 13, 2007: Ord. 4891 § 4, 2006: Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions The following projections and encroachments into required yards, daylight plane and height are permitted, provided a projection shall not be permitted to encroach into a special setback, as established by the setback map pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, except as noted in subsection (a)(1)(D) below. (a) Setback/Yard Encroachments and Projections (1) Horizontal Additions Where a single-family dwelling legally constructed according to existing yard and setback regulations at the time of construction encroaches upon present required yards, one encroaching side (first floor wall) of the existing structure, at a height not to exceed 12 feet, may be extended in accord with this section. Only one such extension shall be permitted for the life of such building. This subsection shall not be 18.12.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions Ch. 18.12 – Page 9 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) construed to allow the further extension of an encroachment by any building that is the result of the granting of a variance, either before or after such property became part of the city. (A) Front Yard. In cases where the existing setback is less than 20 feet, but at least 14 feet, the existing encroachment may be extended for a distance of not more than 100% of the length of the encroaching wall to be extended; provided, that the total length of the existing encroaching wall and the additional wall shall together not exceed one-half the maximum existing width of such building. (B) Interior Side Yard. In cases where the existing setback is less than 8 feet, but at least 5 feet, the existing encroachment may be extended for a distance of not more than 100% of the length of the encroaching wall to be extended but not to exceed 20 additional feet. (C) Street Side Yard. In cases where the existing setback is less than 16 feet, but at least 10 feet, the existing encroachment may be extended for a distance of not more than 100% of the length of the encroaching wall to be extended, but not to exceed 20 feet. (D) Special Setbacks. In cases where a special setback is prescribed pursuant to Chapter 20.08 of the Municipal Code, and the existing setback is less than the special setback distance, and at least 14 feet for the front setback or at least 10 feet for the street side yard setback, the exiting encroachment may be extended for a distance of not more than 100% of the length of the encroaching wall to be extended, provided that the total length of the existing encroaching wall and the additional wall shall together not exceed one-half the maximum existing width of such building. (2) Rear Yard Encroachments for Portions of Homes A portion of a main building that is less than half the maximum width of the building may extend into the required rear yard no more than six feet and with a height of no more than one story, except that for a corner lot having a common rear property line with an adjoining corner lot, the building may extend into the required rear yard not more than ten feet with a height of no more than one story. (3) Allowed Projections (A) Cornices, Eaves, Fireplaces, and Similar Architectural Features For cornices, eaves, fireplaces, and similar architectural features, excluding flat or continuous walls or enclosures of usable interior space, the following projections are permitted: (i) A maximum of two feet into a required side yard. Fireplaces in a required side yard may not exceed five feet in width. Fireplaces not exceeding five feet in width may project into a required side yard no more than two feet. (ii) A maximum of four feet into a required front yard. (iii) A maximum of four feet into a required rear yard. (B) Window Surfaces (i) Window surfaces, such as bay windows or greenhouse windows, may extend into a required rear yard a distance not to exceed two feet, or into a required front yard a distance not to exceed three feet. 18.12.050 Permitted Encroachments, Projections and Exceptions (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 10 (ii) Window surfaces may not extend into required side yards, with the exception that one greenhouse window with a maximum width of six feet, framed into a wall, may project into the side yard no more than two feet. The window surface may not extend into any yard above a first story. (C) Storage Structures Storage structures not over six feet in height or twenty-five square feet in floor area may be located in interior side yards and rear yards according to the provisions of Section 18.12.080(b) for accessory structures. Where the provisions of Section 18.12.080(b) for front and/or street side yard setbacks are not met, the following projections are permitted for such structures: (i) A maximum of two feet into a required side yard. (ii) A maximum of four feet into a required front yard. (iii) A maximum of four feet into a required rear yard. (D) Patios, Decks, Stairways, Landings, Balconies, or Fire Escapes For uncovered porches (less than 30 inches above grade), patios, decks, stairways, landings, balconies, or fire escapes the following projections are permitted, provided these projections are not permitted above the first story: (i) A maximum of three feet into a required side yard. (ii) A maximum of six feet into a required front yard. (iii) A maximum of six feet into a required rear yard. (E) Canopy or Patio Cover A canopy or patio cover may be located in the required rear yard or that portion of the interior side yard, which is more than 75 feet from the street lot line measured along the common lot line. Such canopies shall be subject to the following conditions: (i) A canopy or patio cover shall not be more than 12 feet in height. (ii)The canopy or patio cover shall be included in the computation of building coverage. (iii)The canopy or patio cover and other structures shall not occupy more than fifty percent of the required rear yard. (iv) The canopy or patio cover shall not be enclosed on more than two sides. (F) Pools, Spas, and Hot Tubs (i) Pools, spas, and hot tubs may extend into a required rear yard a distance not to exceed fourteen feet, provided that a minimum setback of six feet from the property line shall be maintained. (ii) No swimming pool, hot tub, spa, or similar accessory facility shall be located in any portion of a required front or street side yard. 18.12.060 Parking Ch. 18.12 – Page 11 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) (b) Height and Daylight Plane Exceptions (1) Height Exceptions Flues, chimneys, and antennas may exceed the established height limit by not more than 15 feet. (2) Daylight Plane Exceptions The following features may extend beyond the daylight plane established by the applicable district, provided that such features do not exceed the height limit for the district unless permitted to do so by subsection (b)(1) above: (A) Television and radio antennas; (B) Chimneys and flues that do not exceed 5 feet in width, provided that chimneys do not extend past the required daylight plane a distance exceeding the minimum allowed pursuant to Chapter 16.04 of this code. (C) Dormers, roof decks, gables, or similar architectural features, provided that: (i) the sum of the horizontal lengths of all such features shall not exceed 15 feet on each side; (ii) the height of such features does not exceed 24 feet; (iii) no single feature exceeds 7.5 feet in length; and (iv) there is a minimum 5 foot separation between each feature. (D) Cornices, eaves, and similar architectural features, excluding flat or continuous walls or enclosures of usable interior space, provided such features do not extend past the daylight plane more than 2 feet. (Ord. 4964 § 14, 2007: Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.060 Parking Off-street parking and loading facilities shall be required for all permitted and conditional uses in accord with Chapters 18.52 and 18.54 of this title. The following parking requirements apply in the R-1 district. These requirements are included for reference purposes only, and in the event of a conflict between this Section 18.12.060 and any requirement of Chapters 18.52 and 18.54, Chapters 18.52 and 18.54 shall apply: (a) Parking Requirements for Specific Uses Table 4 shows the minimum off-street automobile parking requirements for specific uses within the R-1 district. TABLE 4 PARKINGREQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIFICR-1 USES Use Minimum Off-Street Parking Requirement Single-family residential use (excluding second dwelling units) 2 spaces per unit, of which one must be covered. Second dwelling unit, attached or detached 2 spaces per unit, of which one must be covered Other Uses See Chs. 18.52 and 18.54 18.12.070 Second Dwelling Units (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 12 (b) Parking and Driveway Surfaces Parking and driveway surfaces may have either permeable or impermeable paving. Materials shall be those acceptable to public works department standards. Gravel and similar loose materials shall not be used for driveway or parking surfaces within 10 feet of the public right of way. (c) Parking in Yards (1) No required parking space shall be located in a required front yard. (2) No required parking space shall be located in the first ten feet adjoining the property line of a required street side yard. (d) Tandem Parking Tandem parking shall be permitted for single-family uses and for single-family uses with a permitted second dwelling unit. (e) Underground Parking Underground parking is prohibited for single-family uses, except pursuant to a variance granted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 18.76, in which case the area of the underground garage shall be counted in determining the floor area ratio for the site. (f) Design of Parking Areas Parking facilities shall comply with all applicable regulations of Chapter 18.54 (Parking Facility Design Standards). (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.070 Second Dwelling Units The following regulations apply to second dwelling units in the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts. (a) Purpose The intent of this section is to provide regulations to accommodate second dwelling units, in order to provide for variety to the city’s housing stock and additional affordable housing opportunities. Second dwelling units shall be separate, self-contained living units, with separate entrances from the main residence, whether attached or detached. The standards below are provided to minimize the impacts of second dwelling units on nearby residents and throughout the city, and to assure that the size, location and design of such dwellings is compatible with the existing residence on the site and with other structures in the area. (b) Minimum Lot Sizes (1) In the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts, the minimum lot size for a second dwelling unit shall be 35% greater than the minimum lot size otherwise established for the district. Provided, for flag lots, the minimum lot size shall be 35% greater than the minimum lot size established by Section 21.20.301 of the Subdivision Ordinance. 18.12.070 Second Dwelling Units Ch. 18.12 – Page 13 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) (2) Table 5 shows the minimum lot size required for a second dwelling unit, provided, in the event of a conflict between subsection (1) and this subsection (2), subsection (1) shall control. TABLE 5 MINIMUM LOTSIZES FOR SECOND DWELLING UNITS District Minimum Lot Size (all lots except flag lots)Minimum Lot Size (flag lots)(1) R-1 8,100 square feet (“sf") 9,720 sf R-1 (7,000) 9,450 sf 11,340 sf R-1 (8,000) 10,800 sf 12,960 sf R-1 (10,000) 13,500 sf 16,200 sf R-1 (20,000) 27,000 sf 32,400 sf (1) Exclusive of any portion of the lot used for access to the street (c) Development Standards for Attached Second Dwelling Units Attached second dwelling units are those attached to the main dwelling. Attached unit size counts toward the calculation of maximum house size. All attached second dwelling units shall be subject to the following development requirements: (1) The minimum site area shall meet the requirements specified in subsection (b) above. (2) Maximum size of living area: 450 square feet. The second dwelling unit and covered parking shall be included in the total floor area for the site. Any basement space used as a second dwelling unit or portion thereof shall be counted as floor area for the purpose of calculating the maximum size of the second unit. (3) Maximum size of covered parking area for the second dwelling unit: 200 square feet. (4) Maximum height: one story and 17 feet. (5) Except on corner lots, the second dwelling unit may not have an entranceway facing the same lot line (property line) as the entranceway to the main dwelling unit, and exterior staircases to second floor units shall be located toward the interior side or rear yard of the property. (d) Development Standards for Detached Second Dwelling Units Detached second dwelling units are those detached from the main dwelling. All detached second dwelling units shall be subject to the following development requirements: (1) The minimum site area shall meet the requirements specified in subsection (b) above. (2) Minimum separation from the main dwelling: 12 feet. (3) Maximum size of living area: 900 square feet. The second dwelling unit and covered parking shall be included in the total floor area for the site. Any basement space used as a second dwelling unit or portion thereof shall be counted as floor area for the purpose of calculating the maximum size of the second unit. (4) Maximum size of covered parking for the second dwelling unit: 200 square feet. (5) Maximum height: one story and 17 feet. 18.12.080 Accessory Uses and Facilities (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 14 (6) The detached second dwelling shall be architecturally compatible with the main residence, with respect to style, roof pitch, color and materials. (e) Street Access The second dwelling unit shall have street access from a driveway in common with the main residence in order to prevent new curb cuts, excessive paving, and elimination of street trees. Separate driveway access may be permitted by the director upon a determination that separate access will result in fewer environmental impacts such as excessive paving, unnecessary grading or unnecessary tree removal, and that such separate access will not create the appearance, from the street, of a lot division or two-family use. (f) Parking The following parking criteria apply to both detached and attached second dwelling units: (1) Two parking spaces shall be provided for the second dwelling unit, with at least one of the spaces being covered. (2) Such parking shall be located out of required front setbacks and not closer than 10 feet from the street in a street side setback. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.080 Accessory Uses and Facilities Accessory uses and facilities, as allowed in Section 18.12.030, shall be permitted when incidental to and associated with a permitted use or facility in the R-1 district or R-1 subdistricts, or when incidental to and associated with an allowable and authorized conditional use therein, subject to the provisions of subsection (a), below (Types of Accessory Uses). (a) Types of Accessory Uses Accessory uses and facilities include, but are not limited to, the following list of examples; provided that each accessory use or facility shall comply with the provisions of this title: (1) Residential garages, carports, and parking facilities, together with access and circulation elements necessary thereto; (2) Facilities for storage incidental to a permitted use; and (3) Recreational uses and facilities for the use and convenience of occupants or employees, or guests thereof, of a principal use or facility. (b) Location and Development Standards Except as otherwise provided in this section, accessory buildings shall at all times be located in conformance with requirements for principal buildings, and shall not be located in any required front, side, or rear yard. See Section 18.12.050(a)(3)(C) for allowed encroachments for small storage structures. Accessory buildings may be located in a required interior yard subject to the following limitations: 18.12.090 Basements Ch. 18.12 – Page 15 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) (1) An accessory building shall not be used for living and/or sleeping purposes unless the building was legally constructed for or was legally converted to living and/or sleeping purposes prior to October 13, 1983. (2) An accessory building shall not be located in a required front yard, required street yard, or required rear yard of a through lot. (3) An accessory building shall not be located in a required interior side or rear yard unless the building is placed at least seventy-five feet from the front lot line and for corner lots at least twenty feet from the street side lot line. Additionally, on lots of less than 95 feet in depth, detached garages and carports may be located in a required interior side or rear yard if placed in the rear half of the lot. (4) Accessory buildings located within a required interior yard as permitted by this section shall be subject to a maximum height established by a daylight plane beginning at a height of eight feet at the property line and increasing at a slope of one foot for every three feet of distance from the property line, to a maximum height of twelve feet. (5) No such accessory building greater than 200 square feet in size shall have more than two plumbing fixtures. (6) Accessory buildings located within a required interior yard, as permitted by this section, shall not individually or cumulatively occupy an area exceeding fifty percent of the required rear yard. (7) The minimum distance between separate buildings located on the same site shall be as required by Title 16; provided, accessory buildings in the single-family residential (R-1) district shall be separated from the principal building by at least three feet. (8) A principal building and an accessory building, meeting the requirements of Title 16 and each located on a site as otherwise permitted for the principal building and accessory buildings, may be connected by a structure meeting the definition of a breezeway. Such structure, or breezeway, shall be a part of the accessory building. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.090 Basements Basements shall be permitted in areas that are not designated as special flood hazard areas as defined in Chapter 16.52, and are subject to the following regulations: (a) Permitted Basement Area Basements may not extend beyond the building footprint and basements are not allowed below any portion of a structure that extends into required setbacks, except to the extent that the main residence is permitted to extend into the rear yard setback by other provisions of this code. (b) Inclusion as Gross Floor Area Basements shall not be included in the calculation of gross floor area, provided that: (1) basement area is not deemed to be habitable space, such as crawlspace; or 18.12.090 Basements (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 16 (2) basement area is deemed to be habitable space but the finished level of the first floor is no more than three feet above the grade around the perimeter of the building foundation. Basement space used as a second dwelling unit or portion thereof shall be counted as floor area for the purpose of calculating the maximum size of the unit (but may be excluded from calculations of floor area for the total site). This provision is intended to assure that second units are subordinate in size to the main dwelling and to preclude the development of duplex zoning on the site. (c) Lightwells, Stairwells, Below Grade Patios and other Excavated Features (1) Lightwells, stairwells, and similar excavated features along the perimeter of the basement shall not affect the measurement of grade for the purposes of determining gross floor area, provided that the following criteria are met: (A) such features are not located in the front of the building; (B) such features shall not exceed 3 feet in width; (C) the cumulative length of all such features does not exceed 30% of the perimeter of the basement; (D) such features do not extend more than 3 feet into a required side yard nor more than 4 feet into a required rear yard, but where a side yard is less than 6 feet in width, the features shall not encroach closer than 3 feet from the adjacent side property line; (E) the cumulative length of any features or portions of features that extend into a required side or rear yard does not exceed 15 feet in length; (F) the owner provides satisfactory evidence to the planning division prior to issuance of a building permit that any features or portions of features that extend into a required side or rear yard will not be harmful to any mature trees on the subject property or on abutting properties; and (G) such features have either a drainage system that meets the requirements of the public works department or are substantially sheltered from the rain by a roof overhang or canopy of a permanent nature. (2) Below-grade patios, sunken gardens, or similar excavated areas along the perimeter of the basement that exceed the dimensions set forth in subsection (1), are permitted and shall not affect the measurement of grade for the purposes of determining gross floor area, provided that: (A) such areas are not located in the front of the building; (B) all such areas combined do not exceed 2% of the area of the lot or 200 square feet, whichever is greater; that each such area does not exceed 200 square feet; and that each such area is separated from another by a distance of at least 10 feet. Area devoted to required stairway access shall not be included in the 200 square foot limitation. (C) such features do not extend more than 2 feet into a required side yard nor more than 4 feet into a required rear yard; 18.12.100 Regulations for the Single Story Overlay (S) Combining District Ch. 18.12 – Page 17 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) (D) the cumulative length of any excavated area or portion thereof that extends into a required side or rear yard does not exceed 15 feet; (E) the owner provides satisfactory evidence to the planning director prior to issuance of a building permit that any features or portions of features that extend into a required side or rear yard will not be harmful to any mature trees on the subject property or on abutting properties; (F) such features have either a drainage system that meets the requirements of the public works department or are substantially sheltered from the rain by a roof overhang or canopy of a permanent nature; (G) any roof overhang or canopy installed pursuant to subsection (F) is within and is counted toward the site coverage requirements established in Section 18.12.040; (H) such areas are architecturally compatible with the residence; and (I) such areas are screened to off-site views by means of landscaping and/or fencing as determined appropriate by the planning director. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.100 Regulations for the Single Story Overlay (S) Combining District (a) Applicability of District The single-story height combining district may be combined with the R-1 single family residence district or with any R-1 subdistrict. Where so combined, the regulations established by this section shall apply in lieu of the comparable provisions established by Section 18.12.040. All applicable provisions of that section shall otherwise govern development in the combining district. (b) Site Development Regulations For sites within the single-story height combining district, the following site development regulations shall apply in lieu of the otherwise applicable site development regulations of Section 18.12.040: (1) The maximum height shall be 17 feet, as measured to the peak of the roof; provided, in a special flood hazard area as defined in Chapter 16.52, the maximum height is increased by one-half of the increase in elevation required to reach base flood elevation, up to a maximum building height of 20 feet. (2) There shall be a limit of one habitable floor. Habitable floors include lofts, mezzanines and similar areas but exclude basements and exclude attics that have no stairway or built-in access. Lofts and mezzanines include any space above the first floor in excess of five feet (5') from the floor to the roof above. (c) Application for a Single Story (S) Combining District (1) Application to create or remove a single-story overlay district may be made by an owner of record of property located in the single-story overlay district to be created or removed. 18.12.110 Single Family Individual Review (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 18 (2) Application shall be made to the director on a form prescribed by the director, and shall contain all of the following: (A) A written statement setting forth the reasons for the application and all facts relied upon by the applicant in support thereof. (B) A map of the district to be created or removed that includes the address location of those owners whose properties are subject to the zoning request. Boundaries shall correspond with certain natural or man-made features (including, but not limited to, roadways, waterways, tract boundaries and similar features) to define an identifiable neighborhood or development. For creation of a single-story overlay district, the area shall be of a prevailing single story character, such that a minimum of 80% of existing homes within the boundaries are single story. (C) For creating a single-story overlay district, a list of signatures evidencing support by: (i) 70% of included properties; or (ii) 60% of included properties where all included properties are subject to recorded deed restrictions intended to limit building height to a single story, whether or not such restrictions have been enforced. For the removal of a single-story overlay district, a list of signatures evidencing support by 70% of included properties, whether or not deed restrictions intended to limit the building height to single story apply. “Included properties” means all those properties inside the boundaries of the district proposed to be created or removed. The written statement or statements accompanying the signatures must state that the signer is indicating support for a zone map amendment that affects his or her property. One signature is permitted for each included property, and a signature evidencing support of an included property must be by an owner of record of that property. (D) A fee, as prescribed by the municipal fee schedule, no part of which shall be returnable to the applicant. (E) Such additional information as the director may deem pertinent and essential to the application. (3) An application for creation or removal of a single-story (S) overlay district made in accordance with this subsection (c) shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 18.80. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.110 Single Family Individual Review (a) Purpose The goals and purposes of this chapter are to: (1) Preserve the unique character of Palo Alto neighborhoods; (2) Promote new construction that is compatible with existing residential neighborhoods; (3) Encourage respect for the surrounding context in which residential construction and alteration takes place; (4) Foster consideration of neighbors’concerns with respect to privacy, scale and massing, and streetscape; and 18.12.110 Single Family Individual Review Ch. 18.12 – Page 19 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) (5) Enable the emergence of new neighborhood design patterns that reflect awareness of each property’s effect upon neighboring properties. This program is intended only to mitigate the effects of second story construction on neighboring homes, and should not be construed to prohibit second story construction when this title would otherwise permit it. (b) Applicability The provisions of this Section 18.12.110 apply to the construction of a new singly developed two-story structure; the construction of a new second story; or the expansion of an existing second story by more than 150 square feet in the R-1 single family residential district. All second-story additions on a site after November 19, 2001 shall be included in calculating whether an addition is over 150 square feet. (c) Individual Review Guidelines The director of planning and community environment shall issue guidelines to direct staff and project applicants in implementing the goals and purposes and other provisions of this chapter. Guidelines establishing substantive review standards for second story development shall be presented to the planning and transportation commission for their comment prior to adoption or amendment by the director. (d) Findings Neither the director, nor the city council on appeal, shall grant an individual review approval, unless it is found that the application is consistent with the individual review guidelines. (e) Conditions In granting individual review approvals, reasonable conditions or restrictions may be imposed if appropriate or necessary to protect the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience, and to secure the purposes of this title (Zoning). (f) Application Review and Action Applications for individual review approval shall be reviewed and acted upon as set forth in Section 18.77.075. (g) Preliminary Meeting with Planning Staff Project applicants are strongly encouraged, before applying for individual review of a project, to meet with planning staff to discuss designing a project that promotes the goals of this chapter and the individual review guidelines, and to discuss the proposed plans with their neighbors. (h) Changes to Approved Projects The director may approve changes to a previously approved individual review project without following the procedure set forth in Section 18.77.075 if those changes do not affect compliance with the individual review guidelines. Examples of such changes include: (1) Reductions in window or door size, or reductions in the number of windows. 18.12.120 Home Improvement Exceptions (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 20 (2) Changes to aspects of the project not reviewed under individual review, such as materials or non-street-facing first story windows. (3) Changes that do not affect privacy/streetscape. (4) Increases in setbacks. (5) Reductions in second floor mass that do not affect privacy or streetscape. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.120 Home Improvement Exceptions (a) Purpose A home improvement exception (“HIE”) enables a home improvement or minor addition to an existing single-family or two-family home, or accessory structure, or both, to be consistent with the existing architectural style of the house or neighborhood, to accommodate a significant or protected tree, or to protect the integrity of a historic structure in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. By enabling adaptive reuse of existing buildings, the home improvement exception promotes retention of existing houses within the city. (b) Applicability A home improvement exception may be granted as part of a proposed improvement or addition to an existing single-family or two-family structure, or accessory structure, or both, in the RE, R-1, RMD, or R-2 district, as limited in subsection (c). A home improvement exception may be granted as described in subsections (1) through (14) of subsection (c), but may not exceed the limits set forth in those subsections. In order to qualify for a home improvement exception, the project must retain at least 75% of the existing exterior walls. (c) Limits of the Home Improvement Exception A home improvement exception may be granted only for one or more of the following, not to exceed the specified limits: (1) To allow up to 100 square feet of floor area more than the maximum square footage allowed on the site by the applicable zoning district regulations except when an exception is granted under subsection (c)(10) for residences designated as historic structures. (2) To allow the primary building to encroach up to 4 feet into a required front yard setback. (3) To allow the primary building to encroach up to 3 feet into a required rear yard setback. (4) To allow the primary building to encroach up to 2 feet into a required interior side yard setback. (5) To allow the primary building to encroach up to 6 feet into a required street side yard setback (no closer than 10 feet to the property line). 18.12.120 Home Improvement Exceptions Ch. 18.12 – Page 21 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) (6) To allow a basement to encroach, along with above grade floor area, as set forth in items 2, 3, 4, or 5. (7) To allow an encroaching dormer, roof deck, gable, or similar architectural feature to exceed 24 feet in height by up to three feet. (8) To allow a single dormer, roof deck, gable, or similar architectural feature that encroaches into the rear daylight plane to exceed 7.5 feet in length. In no event shall the maximum length exceed 15 feet. (9) To permit a site with an existing two-story structure to exceed lot coverage requirements in order to locate remaining available FAR for the site on the first floor. (10) For any residence designated on the city’s Historic Inventory as a Category 1 or Category 2 historic structure as defined in Section 16.49.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code or any contributing structure within a locally designated historic district, to allow up to 250 square feet of floor area in excess of that allowed on the site, provided that any requested addition or exterior modifications associated with the HIE shall be in substantial conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. The property owner who is granted a home improvement exception under this subsection (10) shall be required to sign and record a covenant against the property, acceptable to the city attorney, which requires that the property be maintained in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Historic Rehabilitation. (11) To allow a legal non-conforming building wall that is between 3.5 and 5 feet from the side lot line to be extended up to one-quarter of the length of the existing wall or ten feet, whichever is shorter. (12) To allow a horizontal extension (pursuant to Section 18.12.050(a) (Setback/Yard Encroachments and Projections) of a portion of an existing legal nonconforming building wall that is more than twelve feet above grade. Such horizontal extensions must remain within the height and daylight plane limits for the district unless an HIE or variance for a height or daylight plane encroachment is granted. (13) To allow an increase in the height of an existing legally non-conforming building wall that encroaches into a setback. Such vertical extensions must remain within the height and daylight plane limits for the district unless an HIE or variance for a height or daylight plane encroachment is granted. (14) To allow, for single-story accessory structures within rear and/or side setbacks, one or more of the following: (A) On a corner lot, a detached accessory structure may be as close as ten feet from the street side property line. For detached garages and carports, the exception may be granted as long as a minimum dimension of 18 feet remains between the back of sidewalk and face of the garage or carport supports. (B) Four feet additional height above the twelve foot maximum height, as long as the side daylight plane is met. (C) A rear daylight plane encroachment of up to three feet. 18.12.130 Architectural Review (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 22 (15) To allow similar minor exceptions, when determined by the director to be similar in magnitude and scope to those listed in subsections (1) through (14) above. Provided, under no circumstances may such exceptions exceed the limits established in subsections (1) through (14) above. (d) Findings Neither the director, nor the city council on appeal, shall grant a home improvement exception unless it is found that: (1) The granting of the application is desirable for the preservation of an existing architectural style, neighborhood character, protected tree as defined in Chapter 8.10, or other significant tree, or of a residence that is designated on the city’s Historic Inventory as a Category 1 or Category 2 historic structure as defined in Section 16.49.020 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, or any contributing structure within a locally designated historic district, which would not otherwise be accomplished through the strict application of the regulations; and (2) The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience; and (3) The exception is being granted based on characteristics of the property and improvements on the property, rather than the personal circumstances of the applicant, and is the minimum exception necessary for the project to fulfill the purposes of subsection (a). (e) Conditions In granting home improvement exceptions, reasonable conditions or restrictions may be imposed if appropriate or necessary to protect the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience, and to secure the purposes of this title (Zoning). (f) Application Review and Action Applications for home improvement exceptions shall be reviewed and acted upon as set forth in Section 18.77.075. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.130 Architectural Review Architectural review, as required in Chapters 18.76 and 18.77 of the Zoning Ordinance, is required in the R-1 district and R-1 subdistricts whenever three or more adjacent single family residences or duplexes are intended to be developed concurrently, whether through subdivision or individual applications. In addition to the existing ARB findings contained in Chapters 18.76 and 18.77, the single family individual review guidelines shall be used by the ARB in its review of such applications. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.140 Historical Review and Incentives Ch. 18.12 – Page 23 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) 18.12.140 Historical Review and Incentives Historic home review, as required in Chapter 16.49 of Title 16 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, is required in the R-1 district and R-1 subdistricts for alterations or modifications to any residence designated on the city’s Historic Inventory as a Category 1 or Category 2 historic structure as defined in Section 16.49.020 of this code or any contributing structure located within a locally designated historic district. The Category 1 or Category 2 designation process for becoming a historic structure is contained in Chapter 16.49 of Title 16 of the Municipal Code. Exemptions to gross floor area requirements are available for historic homes pursuant to the definition of gross floor area in Section 18.04.030(65)(C)(ii). Home improvement exceptions provide for additional square footage and certain other exceptions for historic homes pursuant to Section 18.12.120. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 18.12.150 Grandfathered Uses (a) Applicability The uses specified in subsection (b) of this section may remain as grandfathered uses provided that those uses: (1) are located in the specified district; (2) existed on the specified date; (3) on that date, were lawful permitted uses or conditional uses operating subject to a conditional use permit; and (4) on that date were conforming uses. (b) Grandfathered Uses (1) Professional and medical office uses (except product testing and analysis, and prototype development), existing on July 20, 1978 or such uses which were, prior to July 20, 1978, located in an R-1 district which was imposed by reason of annexation of the property to the city without benefit of prezoning and which, prior to the date of annexation, were lawful conforming permitted uses or conditional uses operating subject to a conditional use permit. (2) Two family uses, except where one of the units is a legal nonconforming detached single-family dwelling on a substandard lot size, and multiple family uses existing on July 20, 1978 or such uses which were, prior to July 20, 1978, located in an R-1 district which was imposed by reason of annexation of the property to the city without benefit of prezoning and which, prior to the date of annexation, were lawful, conforming permitted uses or conditional uses operating subject to a conditional use permit. (c) Permitted Changes The following regulations shall apply to the grandfathered uses specified in subsection (b): 18.12.150 Grandfathered Uses (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007)Ch. 18.12 – Page 24 (1) Such uses shall be permitted to remodel, improve, or replace site improvements on the same site, for continual use and occupancy by the same use, provided that: (A) such remodeling, improvement or replacement shall not: (i) result in increased floor area; (ii)result in an increase in the number of offices, in the case of professional or medical office uses, or dwellings, in the case of residential uses; (iii)result in shifting of building footprint; (iv) increase the height, length, building envelope, or size of the improvement; and (v) increase the existing degree of noncompliance, except through the granting of a design enhancement exception pursuant to Chapter 18.76. (2) If a grandfathered use ceases and thereafter remains discontinued for twelve consecutive months, it shall be considered abandoned and may be replaced only by a conforming use. (3) A grandfathered use that is changed to or replaced by a conforming use shall not be reestablished, and any portion of a site or any portion of a building, the use of which changes from a grandfathered use to a conforming use, shall not thereafter be used except to accommodate a conforming use. (4) The following additional regulations shall apply to grandfathered professional or medical office uses: (A) Any remodeling, improvement, or replacement of any building designed and constructed for residential use shall be subject to the issuance of a conditional use permit in accord with Chapter 18.76. (B) In the event of redevelopment of all or a portion of the site for permitted residential uses, professional and medical office uses may not be incorporated in the redevelopment; except that (C) This provision shall not apply to permanent conversion to residential use of space within an existing structure now used for professional and medical office uses. (d) Existing Second Dwelling Units on Substandard Size Lots In the R-1 district, and all R-1 subdistricts, notwithstanding any provisions of Chapters 18.40 and 18.42 and/or 18.70, in the case of a legal and nonconforming second detached single- family dwelling existing prior to July 20, 1978 on a substandard size lot, such nonconforming use shall be permitted to remodel, improve, or replace site improvements on the same site without necessity to comply with site development regulations; provided, that any such remodeling, improvement or replacement shall not result in increased floor area, number of dwelling units, height, length, or any other increase in the size of the improvement. (e) Existing Homes on Substandard Lots. In the R-1 district and all R-1 subdistricts, single-family and two-family homes on substandard lots, as defined in subsection 18.12.040(c)(1), and flag lots existing on August 1, 1991 and which prior to that date were lawful, complying structures, may remain and be 18.12.150 Grandfathered Uses Ch. 18.12 – Page 25 (Supp. No 13 – 10/1/2007) remodeled, improved, or replaced without complying with the height and habitable floor limitations for substandard lots specified in Section 18.12.030, provided that: (1) any such remodeling, improvement, or replacement does not result in a height above seventeen feet or any additional habitable floor area above a first habitable floor, except that any structure damaged or destroyed by a natural disaster (such as fire, flood or earthquake) may be replaced to its previous size without regard to the height and habitable floor limitations imposed by this section; and (2) in the case of a conflict between the provisions of this section and the provisions of Chapter 18.70, this section shall control. (Ord. 4869 § 14 (Exh. A [part]), 2005) 6/12/2015 Chapter 18.80 AMENDMENTS TO ZONING MAP AND ZONING REGULATIONS http://www.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get­content.aspx 1/6 Print Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.80 AMENDMENTS TO ZONING MAP AND ZONING REGULATIONS Sections:  18.80.010   Amendments  18.80.020   Changes in District Boundaries  18.80.030   Application by Property Owner  18.80.035   Application for Single­Story Overlay Districts  18.80.040   Initiation by City  18.80.050   Action by Director  18.80.060   Notice of Public Hearing  18.80.070   Action by Commission  18.80.080   Changes in Regulations  18.80.090   Recommendations by Planning Commission  18.80.100   Action by City Council  18.80.110   Resubmittal of Application  18.80.120   Prezoning 18.80.010   Amendments    This title may be amended by changing the boundaries of districts, or by changing the regulations applicable within one or more districts, or by changing any other provision of this title, whenever the public interest or general welfare may so require. (Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.020   Changes in District Boundaries    Changes in the boundaries of districts established by this title may be initiated by any one of the following actions:  (a)   By application of a property owner as provided by Section 18.80.030.    (b)   By motion of the city council, or by motion of the planning commission, as provided by Attachment C 6/12/2015 Chapter 18.80 AMENDMENTS TO ZONING MAP AND ZONING REGULATIONS http://www.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get­content.aspx 2/6 Section 18.80.040.    (c)   For creating or removing a single­story combining district (S), by application of an affected property owner as provided by Section 18.80.035, or by motion of the city council or planning commission, as provided by Section 18.80.040. (Ord. 4869 § 47, 2005: Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.030   Application by Property Owner    (a)   Application for a change in district boundaries may be made by the owner of record of property for which a change is sought, or by one of the following:       (1)   A purchaser of property for which a change is sought, when acting pursuant to a contract in writing duly executed and acknowledged by both the buyer and the owner of record;       (2)   A lessee in possession of property for which a change is sought, when acting with the written consent of the owner of record;       (3)   An agent of the owner of record of property for which a change is sought, when duly authorized by the owner in writing.    (b)   Application shall be made to the director on a form prescribed by the director, and shall contain the following:       (1)   A description and map showing the boundaries of existing and requested districts, and identifying the property for which a change of district is requested;       (2)   A written statement setting forth the reasons for the application and all facts relied upon by the applicant in support thereof;       (3)   Such additional information as the director may deem pertinent and essential to the application.    (c)   Application for a change in district boundaries shall be accompanied by the fee prescribed by the municipal fee schedule, no part of which shall be returnable to the applicant. (Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.035   Application for Single­Story Overlay Districts    An application for creation or removal of a single­story combining district may be made by an owner of record of property located in the single­story overlay district to be created or removed, in accordance with the requirements of 18.12.100 (Regulations for the Single Story Overlay (S) Combining District). Such applications shall be considered in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter 18.80. (Ord. 4869 § 48, 2005) 18.80.040   Initiation by City 6/12/2015 Chapter 18.80 AMENDMENTS TO ZONING MAP AND ZONING REGULATIONS http://www.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get­content.aspx 3/6    (a)   Upon its own initiative, either the city council or the planning commission may by motion initiate application and proceedings for a change in district boundaries.    (b)   A motion of the city council or the planning commission pursuant to this section may include any public or private property, and shall be accompanied by such maps or descriptions as may be necessary to define existing and proposed boundaries of districts, and by a statement, describing in general terms, the reasons for consideration of a change in district boundaries. The motion shall be directed to the director, who shall process the application, without fee, as otherwise prescribed in this chapter. (Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.050   Action by Director    (a)   Upon receipt of an application for change in boundaries, or upon receipt of the motion of the city council or the planning commission, or upon the expiration of a development schedule in a PC zone, the director shall notify the chairman of the planning commission.    (b)   Upon receipt of such notice, the chairman of the commission shall, on or before the fifteenth day of the month following the month in which the application or motion was filed, set a date for a public hearing upon the matter at either a regular or special meeting of the commission, unless the application is a minor change to a planned community district development plan diverted to minor architectural review under Section 18.76.020(b)(3)(D). Nothing contained in this section modifies any provision of or authority granted by Section 18.76.020(b)(3)(D). The hearing before the commission shall commence within ninety days of the date of filing. (Ord. 4826 § 136, 2004: Ord. 3345 § 22, 1982; Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.060   Notice of Public Hearing    (a)   The planning commission shall give a notice of hearing on a proposed change of district boundaries in the following manner:       (1)   Notice of the hearing shall be given by publication once in a local newspaper of general circulation not less than twelve days prior to the date of the hearing.       (2)   Additionally, excepting a city­wide change in the zoning map, the city shall mail written notice of such hearing at least twelve days prior to the date of the hearing to each owner of real property and to each residential occupant within 600 feet of the exterior boundary of the property for which classification is sought. Notice shall be provided as specified in Section 18.77.080. Compliance with the procedures set forth in this section shall constitute a good faith effort to provide notice, and the failure of any owner or occupant to receive notice shall not prevent the city from proceeding with the hearing or from taking any action nor affect the validity of any action.    (b)   The notice of public hearing shall contain the following:       (1)   The exact address of the property, if known, or the location of the property, if the exact address is not known, and the existing and requested district or districts applicable;       (2)   The time, place and purpose of the hearing; 6/12/2015 Chapter 18.80 AMENDMENTS TO ZONING MAP AND ZONING REGULATIONS http://www.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get­content.aspx 4/6       (3)   A brief description, the content of which shall be in the sole discretion of the city, of the change in district boundaries or regulations sought;       (4)   Reference to the application or motion on file for particulars; and       (5)   A statement that any interested person, or agent thereof may appear and be heard.    Typographical and/or publishing errors shall not invalidate the notice nor any city action. (Ord. 4964 § 22, 2007: Ord. 3536 § 40, 1984: Ord. 3465 § 60, 1983: Ord. 3273 § 4,1981: Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.070   Action by Commission    (a)   On the basis of evidence and testimony presented to the commission at the public hearing, the commission may determine that the public interest will be served either by revising the area being considered for reclassification to include properties not originally part of the application, or by giving consideration to district classifications not originally requested by the application. The commission may, solely at its option, consider additional properties or district classifications, or both.    (b)   If the area proposed for reclassification is enlarged, or the district proposed for any parcel is changed to a district of a less restrictive nature than originally cited in the notice of public hearing, additional notice shall be given in accord with Section 18.80.060, and the hearing shall be continued, allowing public consideration of and comment upon the enlarged or less restrictive proposal.    (c)   If the modifications, if any, considered by the commission involve the same or a reduced area, or involve alternative districts of a generally equivalent or more restrictive nature than originally cited in the notice of public hearing, no additional notice or hearings shall be required.    (d)   If, from the facts presented at the public hearing, including public testimony and reports and recommendations from the director of planning and community environment or other appropriate city staff, the commission finds that a change of district boundaries would be in accord with the purposes of this title and in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, the commission may recommend such change as it deems appropriate to the council.    (e)   If the commission finds that a change of district boundaries, either as requested by an application or as modified by the commission pursuant to this section, would not be in accord with the purposes of this title, or would not be in accord with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, the commission shall recommend against any such reclassification.    (f)   The decision of the commission shall be rendered within a reasonable time following the close of any public hearing or hearings and the written recommendation of the commission shall be forwarded to the council within thirty days thereof. The recommendation of the commission shall set forth fully the findings and determinations of the commission with respect to the application. (Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.080   Changes in Regulations 6/12/2015 Chapter 18.80 AMENDMENTS TO ZONING MAP AND ZONING REGULATIONS http://www.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get­content.aspx 5/6    Changes in the provision of this title other than the boundaries of districts may be initiated from time to time, by one of the following actions:    (a)   Changes in the provision of this title other than the boundaries of districts may be initiated from time to time, by one of the following actions:       (1)   By motion of the city council on its own initiative;       (2)   By motion of the planning commission on its own initiative; or       (3)   By application of the owner of property that would be subject to the proposed text amendment.    (b)   Changes initiated by motion of the council shall be forwarded to the commission, and may be supplemented by such explanatory material as the council may deem appropriate to facilitate review and recommendation by the commission. A request by a property owner shall be supplemented by an application, statement and explanatory material as required by the director under Section 18.80.030. Changes initiated by application of a property owner shall require consideration by the planning and transportation commission first as an initiation request to determine whether to proceed with the rezoning request and public hearing. If the commission so directs, the text revisions shall be reviewed pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.80.090. (Ord. 4964 § 23, 2007: Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.090   Recommendations by Planning Commission    The commission shall review any proposed change in the provisions of this title, whether initiated by the council or the commission. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing on any changes proposed to the zoning regulations. Notice of the time and place of such hearing and the purpose thereof shall be given by publication once in a local newspaper of general circulation not less than twelve days prior to the date of hearing.    In the case of proposed changes initiated by the council, the commission shall forward its recommendations to the council within a reasonable time period, but not to exceed one hundred eighty days in any event unless extended by the council.    In the case of proposed changes initiated by the commission, the commission shall forward its recommendations to the council at such time as it deems appropriate.    The written recommendation of the planning commission shall be submitted to the council, and shall set forth the findings and determinations of the commission with respect to the proposed change.    Nothing in this section shall prevent the city council from changing or suspending operation of any provision of this title for temporary periods when in the determination of the council such suspension or change is necessary for the public health, safety or welfare. In such case, planning commission review shall not be required. (Ord. 4181 § 5, 1993: Ord. 3465 § 61, 1983: Ord. 3273 § 5, 1981: Ord. 3130 § 21,1979: Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.100   Action by City Council 6/12/2015 Chapter 18.80 AMENDMENTS TO ZONING MAP AND ZONING REGULATIONS http://www.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get­content.aspx 6/6    Upon receipt of the recommendation of the planning commission on a change of district boundaries, or on a change to the provisions of this title other than a change in district boundaries, the council may, at its option, give notice of a hearing in the manner provided by Sections 18.80.060 or 18.80.090, whichever is applicable.    After consideration of the recommendation of the planning commission, and the completion of a public hearing, if any, the council may approve, modify, or disapprove the proposed change of­ district boundaries or change of any other provisions of this title. Should the council determine that a change of district boundaries or change of any other provisions of this title shall be appropriate, such change shall be accomplished by ordinance. (Ord. 4826 § 137, 2004: Ord. 3273 § 6, 1981: Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.110   Resubmittal of Application    When an application for change of district boundaries has been submitted by a property owner and subsequently denied by the council, no new application by a property owner for the same change, or for substantially the same change, either with respect to properties included within the proposed change or with respect to proposed district classifications, or both, shall be filed or accepted by the director within one year of the date of closing of the hearing before the commission, except upon a showing to the satisfaction of the director of a substantial change of circumstances. This provision shall not be construed to prevent the initiation of proceedings by either the planning commission or city council in accord with Section 18.80.040 at any time. (Ord. 3048 (part), 1978) 18.80.120   Prezoning    The determination of district classifications and district boundaries appropriate for property located outside the city, but potentially subject to annexation, may be made in the same manner as prescribed in this chapter for any property within the city; provided, that any ordinance duly passed by the city council establishing or changing such classification shall become effective only upon the effective date of annexation of such property to the city.    Upon passage of such an ordinance, the zoning map shall be revised to show the prezoned or potential classification to become effective upon annexation, and shall identify the district or districts applicable to such property with the label or nomenclature "PREZONED." (Ord. 3048 (part), 1978)