Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2015-11-16 City Council Agenda Packet
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL November 16, 2015 Special Meeting Council Chambers 5:00 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 November 16, 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 Closed Session 5:00-6:00 PM Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker. 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS Agency Negotiators: Mayor, CAO Chair or Other Council Members Unrepresented Employees: City Manager, City Attorney, City Auditor, City Clerk Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a) Study Session 6:00-7:00 PM 2. Potential List of Topics for the Study Session With Senator Jerry Hill 2 November 16, 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. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Comments 7:00-7:10 PM Oral Communications 7:10-7:25 PM Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes. Minutes Approval 7:25-7:30 PM 3.Approval of Action Minutes for the October 5, 13, 19, 26, andNovember 2, 2015 Council Meetings Consent Calendar 7:30-7:35 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members. 4.Approval of Change Order Number Three to Contract Number C15157253 With Daleo, Inc. Extending the Contract Term to January 6, 2016 and Adding $190,000 for a Total Not to Exceed Contract Amount of $4,599,031, to Provide Emergency Water Main Replacement Work on Kingsley Avenue 5.Adoption of a Resolution Approving the City of Palo Alto's Continued Participation in the Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Program Through the County of Santa Clara 6.Approval of Amendment Number One to Contract Number S14152214 With Toubar Equipment Company Inc. in the Amount of $600,000 for Closure Maintenance Assistant Services at the City of Palo Alto Landfill (Capital Improvement Project RF-11001, Landfill Closure) 7.Adoption of a Resolution Revising the Citywide Records Retention Schedule and Repealing Resolution No. 8688 8.Approval of a Record of Land Use Action for a Variance to Allow for a Reduction in the Required Front Setback (Contextual) From 37 Feet 1- 1/4 Inches to 32 Feet for a New Two-Story Single Family Residence Located at 224 Churchill Avenue 9.Approval of a Seven Month Contract With Cypress Security, Inc. Not to Exceed $439,441.84 for "Track Watch" Contract Security Services Drawings 3 November 16, 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. 10.SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.79 of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Regarding Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures (FIRST READING: October 26, 2015 PASSED: 9-0) 11.SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 2.28.080 (Amendments after Adoption) of Chapter 2.28 (Fiscal Procedures) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (FIRST READING: November 2, 2015 PASSED: 9-0) 12.Finance Committee Recommends Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance Authorizing the Reappropriation of Fiscal Year 2015 Funds to Fiscal Year 2016 13.PUBLIC HEARING - Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and Approval of the Record of Land Use Action to Allow Demolition of Four Existing Structures Totaling 265,895 Square Feet and Construction of Four Two-Story Office Buildings Totaling 265,895 Square Feet of Floor Area with Below and At-Grade Parking and Other Site Improvements Located at 1050 Page Mill Road. Zoning District: Research Park (RP). Environmental Assessment: An Environmental Impact Report has Been Prepared (Staff Requests This Item be Continued to December 7, 2015) Action Items Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters. 7:35-9:00 PM 14.Review and Direction Regarding a Draft Ordinance Regulating Hazardous Materials Users and Sensitive Receptors Such as Residences, Schools, Day Care Centers, Convalescent Homes and Similar Uses in Office, Research and Manufacturing Districts and Making Related Changes to Municipal Code Provisions Related to Non- Conforming Uses, as Well as a Draft Ordinance Regarding Amortization of Uses at Communications & Power Industries, LLC (CPI), 607-811 Hansen Way 9:00-9:45 PM 15.Adoption of a Resolution Establishing Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies for the Palo Alto Airport and Adoption of a Resolution Revising the Airport Schedule of Fees and Charges Attachment I 4 November 16, 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. 5 November 16, 2015 MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE. DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS. Additional Information Standing Committee Meetings Sp. City Council Meeting November 17, 2015 5:00 PM Sp. Finance Committee Meeting November 17, 2015 6:00 PM City/School Liaison Meeting Schedule of Meetings Schedule of Meetings Tentative Agenda Tentative Agenda Public Letters to Council Set 1 November 19, 2015 8:00 AM CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK November 16, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Potential List of Topics for the Study Session With Senator Jerry Hill 1. General 2015 legislative summary 2. California High Speed Rail on the Peninsula 3. Possible rail grade separation and/or trenching collaboration between the counties of San Mateo and Santa Clara 4. The proposed Santa Clara County transportation tax and, if approved, what percentage of those funds would go towards railroad grade separations 5. Implications of merging the Association of Bay Area Governments ( ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) 6. The prospective expansion of Cap & Trade legislation and how those funds would be allocated 7. State efforts to manage technology privacy and how local jurisdictions can help 8. How the state can help with the supply, cost, and protection of residents when it comes to housing in the Bay Area 9. Climate change and anticipated sea level rise 10. Property tax reform 11. State assistance to help local municipalities get permits more quickly such as those required for the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority project 12. General 2016 legislative forecast a. Challenges and opportunities Message of Appreciation The City of Palo Alto greatly appreciates the efforts made by Senator Hill and his office during this year’s legislative session, specifically as it relates to his commitment to carbon neutral energy portfolios. The City of Palo Alto looks forward to continuing to work with him and his office as both he and the City continue to lead on sustainability issues that show the value of early climate action and environmental stewardship. Finally, the City of Palo Alto would like to recognize Senator Hill’s attention to utility safety issues. The City of Palo Alto Utilities Department puts its highest priority on utility safety and reliability and appreciates that Senator Hill does the same. Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK November 16, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Approval of Action Minutes for the October 5, 13, 19, 26, and November 2, 2015 Council Meetings Staff is requesting Council review and approve the attached Action Minutes. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment: Attachment A: 10-05-15 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOC) Attachment: Attachment B: 10-13-15 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOC) Attachment: Attachment C: 10-19-15 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOC) Attachment: Attachment D: 10-26-15 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOC) Attachment: Attachment E: 11-02-15 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOC) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 8 Regular Meeting October 5, 2015 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 6:07 P.M. Present: Berman, Burt, DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Scharff, Schmid, Wolbach arrived at 6:28 P.M. Absent: Study Session 1. Council Input for the Public Art Master Plan. Special Orders of the Day 2. Resolution 9550 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Expressing Appreciation to Grant Kolling Upon His Retirement.” MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to approve the Resolution expressing appreciation to Grant Kolling upon his retirement. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 3. United Nations Association Film Festival (UNAFF) Proclamation. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions None. Minutes Approval 4. April 13, 2015, April 14, 2015, April 20, 2015, and April 27, 2015. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/5/15 MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Burt to approve the April 13, 14, 20, and 27, 2015 Minutes. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Consent Calendar Council Members DuBois and Kniss registered no votes on Agenda Item Number 10. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to approve Agenda Item Numbers 5-11, with direction to Staff to explore additional clarifying contract language to Agenda Item Number 9 providing additional privacy protection. 5. Approval of Amendment Number Three to Contract Number S13149314 With Truepoint Solutions, LLC in the Amount of $290,000 to Provide Support for Accela Software Applications and Blueprint Initiatives, for a Total Contract Amount Not to Exceed $942,800. 6. Approval of Amendment Number One to Contract Number C14153485 With Canopy, for an Additional Amount of $45,000 for the Second Year of a Three Year Term, for a Total Amount Not to Exceed $399,630 for Implementation of Urban Forest Master Plan Programs 1.D.i: 'Analysis of North-South Palo Alto Canopy Disparity', and 3.B.1: 'Recommendations for Reducing Tree and Sidewalk Conflicts'. 7. Resolutions 9552 and 9553 Entitled, “Resolutions of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Correcting Clerical Errors in Two Items Previously Approved as Part of the Fiscal Year 2016 Budget.” 8. Approval of a Contract with BKF Engineers for a Total Amount not to Exceed $538,547 for Design Services for the Embarcadero Road Corridor Improvements Project and Budget Amendment Ordinance 5348 Entitled, “Budget Amendment Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto for Fiscal Year 2016 to Provide an Additional Appropriation of $337,766 to the Embarcadero Road Corridor Improvements Project in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) PL- 15001.” DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/5/15 9. Approval of a Contract With VIMOC Technologies for a Total of $100,000 to Install Parking Occupancy Sensors and Bicycle/Pedestrian Video Counters. 10. Ordinance 5349 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 2.040.160 (City Council Minutes) of Chapter 2.04 (Council Organization and Procedure) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Require Action Minutes and a Verbatim Transcript of all Council and Council Standing Committee Meetings, and Delete the Requirement for Sense Minutes (FIRST READING: August 31, 2015 PASSED: 8-0 Kniss absent).” 11. Council Approval of Appointment of Terence Howzell to the Position of Principal Attorney. MOTION FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBERS 5-9, 11 PASSED: 9-0 MOTION FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10 PASSED: 7-2 DuBois, Kniss no Action Items 12. Comprehensive Plan Update: Comprehensive Plan Structure and Goals/Vision Statements for Each Element and Related Direction to Staff and the Citizens Advisory Committee (Part II: Community Services & Facilities and Land Use & Community Design Elements). MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to organize the Comprehensive Plan Update: For the Community Services Element, direct Staff to update the existing Vision Statement with minor revisions for City Council review and adopt the following organization of: A. C1 – Efficient service delivery (Current); and B. C2 – Customer service (Current); and C. C3 – Maintaining Parks and Public Facilities (PTC) – CAC to discuss policy to focus on planning and development of Cubberley Community Center; and DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/5/15 D. C4 – Planning for the Future (new); and E. C5 – Health and Well Being (new). INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “Retain Policy C-28.” (New Part F) INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “of Goals” after “the following organization.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion at the end of Part E, “adding, ‘Improved Quality, Quantity, and Affordability of Social Services, particularly for all community members including Children, Youth, Seniors, the Unhoused, and People with Disabilities.’” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to remove from the Motion Part C, “CAC to discuss policy to focus on planning and development of Cubberley Community Center” and add to the Motion, “Direct CAC to focus on the policy of planning and development of Cubberley Community Center.” (New Part G) AMENDMENT: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion Part F, “defer decision whether to.” AMENDMENT RESTATED AND INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part F at the beginning, “update” and at the end “based on Staff feedback and the Parks and Recreation Master Plan process.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part G, “direct CAC to focus on the policy of” with “CAC to discuss the.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part C, “C3” after “PTC.” DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/5/15 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part D, “new” with “PTC C4.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part E, “new” with “PTC C1.” AMENDMENT: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to return to Council for more substantive discussion of narratives supporting Goals.” AMENDMENT PASSED: 7-2 Kniss, Wolbach no INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “incorporate reference to the Urban Forest Master Plan in a policy.” AMENDMENT: Mayor Holman moved, seconded by Council Member XX to replace in the Motion Part C, “Customer Service” with “Service the Public or Community Service.” AMENDMENT RESTATED AND INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “Staff will address tension between customer service and public service.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part E, “particularly for” with “inclusive of.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part E, “including” with “particularly.” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 9-0 MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to continue the Land Use & Community Design Element to a date to be determined by City Staff and to continue public comment to those who have not spoken. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 6 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/5/15 MOTION PASSED: 9-0 13. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Making Permanent the Interim Measures to Eliminate Certain Parking Exemptions Within Downtown by Amending Municipal Code Chapters 18.18, Downtown Commercial (CD) District and 18.52, Parking and Loading Requirements; the Planning and Transportation Commission Recommended Adoption. Public Hearing opened at 10:39 P.M. Public Hearing closed at 10:45 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to adopt an Ordinance to amend PAMC Chapters 18.18, Downtown Commercial (CD) District, and 18.52 (Parking and Loading Requirements), to permanently eliminate certain parking exemptions within the downtown area previously adopted by Council via Interim Ordinance No. 5214 that will otherwise “sunset” on November 4, 2015 with the following modifications: A. Section 1, Subsection I. “Unless a new ordinance is adopted to permanently establish these provisions, these zoning code amendments shall ‘sunset’ on November 4, 2015;” and B. Section 4, Subsection (4), “however, square footage which was developed for nonresidential purposes or which has been used for nonresidential purposes but which is not used for such purposes due to vacancy at the time of the engineer's report shall be included in the amount of floor area qualifying for this exemption. No exemption from parking requirements shall be available where a residential use changes to a nonresidential use, except pursuant to subsection (2).” MOTION PASSED: 9-0 14. Resolution 9551 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Combating Human Trafficking, Including Staff Training, Assistance in Identifying Vulnerable Populations and Legislative Advocacy.” MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Mayor Holman to adopt a Resolution indicating our support for combatting human trafficking, DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 7 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/5/15 additional Staff training, and identifying vulnerable populations, as well as promoting legislative advocacy. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs Jim Keene, City Manager updated the Council on Assembly Bill 744 - Planning and Zoning: Density Bonuses which awaits the Governor’s signature. The legislation would obligate the City to reduce parking requirements to 0.5 spaces per unit for 100 percent affordable housing projects located within one half mile from transit. The City is drafting a letter for the Mayor to sign requesting the Governor veto this legislation. This legislation runs counter to the Council’s legislative guideline promoting local legislative control. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Council Member Kniss attended the California League of Cities Annual Conference and Expo. She felt the Conference as a whole was worthwhile and highlighted two keynote talks, one from Greg Lucas, State Librarian highlighting the continued importance of libraries and one from Cam Marston from Mobile, Alabama providing tips for working with employees from different generations. During an emergency preparedness session, it was stated that the quality of emergency preparedness in Palo Alto and Mountain View is exemplary. Palo Alto in particular utilizes social media effectively. She appreciated Council Member Burt’s attendance when she was elected as President of the Peninsula Division. Council Member Wolbach attended the League Conference session on drones and the City Attorney Conference on surveillance technology. He attended a session covering emerging issues in law enforcement. He appreciated prompt responses from Staff relating to Agenda Item Number 9. Numerous people praised the work of City Manager Jim Keene, City Attorney Molly Stump, Fire Chief Eric Nickel, and Police Chief Dennis Burns as experts in their fields. Vice Mayor Schmid attended a Bay Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) meeting. Member cities have conserved water at rates ranging from 24 percent to 31 percent. Data combining warmth and wetness around the Hetch Hechy Reservoir has been collected for 100 years. The last four years have been the worst over the past century. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 8 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/5/15 Council Member DuBois also attended the League Conference, including sessions on drones and labor negotiations. He will share information with the City Manager about two companies which specialize in attracting retail businesses. He would like to schedule a Council Study Session to discuss impacts of the 2016 Super Bowl, including opportunities for businesses and potential law enforcement and AirBnB challenges. Council Member Scharff reported on the potential for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to cease funding the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). ABAG may not have sufficient funding to continue without the support of MTC. ABAG is more representative of cities the size of Palo Alto than MTC. It is difficult for Council Members to gain appointment on MTC. Each city has an ABAG representative. He requested Council Members provide him with their thoughts. He requested Staff provide an update on infrastructure funding and planning in particular related to the increase in Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) this past November. Council Member Berman supports Staff further researching the ABAG/MTC issue. He also supports additional information regarding infrastructure. He highlighted the effort and initiative of Human Relations Commissioners Mehdi Alhassani and Greer Stone in organizing the Veterans Summit this past Friday. Santa Clara County has the largest percentage of unhoused veterans in the county. Mayor Holman highlighted the Senior Summit held by the Human Relations Commission last year and announced the Domestic Violence Summit next month, also held by the Human Relations Commission. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:19 P.M. CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 3 Special Meeting October 13, 2015 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 6:05 P.M. Present: Berman, Burt arrived at 6:20 P.M., DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Scharff, Schmid, Wolbach arrived at 6:11 P.M. Absent: Kniss Action Items 1. Discussion and Direction to Staff on: 1) The California High Speed Rail Authority's Plans to Proceed With Environmental Clearance for Their San Francisco to San Jose Segment; 2) Next Steps Regarding Rail Grade Separations in Palo Alto and Authorization for Staff to Pursue Outside Funding for Both Grade Separations and At-Grade Crossing Improvements; and 3) The City’s Interests and Strategies Regarding the Proposed Santa Clara County Transportation Sales Tax Measure, Including a Potential City of Palo Alto Transportation Funding Measure or Other Funding Strategy. Council Member Filseth advised that he will be recusing himself relating to Sections 1 and 2 of this Agenda Item because he lives within 500 feet of a grade crossing. Council Member Filseth left the meeting at 6:13 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to: A. Have the Mayor reappoint the City Council Rail Committee; and DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 3 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/13/15 B. Direct Staff to return in the near future with a preliminary plan for a Context Sensitive Solution (CSS) approach to address rail impacts and the future of rail in Palo Alto; and C. Direct Staff to return with a first phase Circulation Study; and D. Direct Staff and the Mayor representing the Council to convey, clearly to both the California High Speed Rail Authority and Caltrain: i. The full Context Sensitive Solutions approach should be retained for the process of High Speed Rail along the Peninsula; and ii. The timeline for the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) along the Peninsula should be adjusted to include adequate timing for the EIR and adjusted for time needed to fully integrate CSS in the process. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion at the end of Part B, “and the Mid-Peninsula.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to pursue interim grade crossing safety measures through U.S. Code Title 23, Section 130 (Railway-Highways Crossing Program) funding and through other means.” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-0 Kniss absent, Filseth not participating Council took a break from 8:24 P.M. to 8:33 P.M. Council Member Filseth returned to the meeting at 8:33 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to: A. Direct Staff to advocate for and support putting in the Countywide funding measure, funding for countywide Caltrain grade separation in the order of $750 million; and DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 3 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/13/15 B. To check in with Council when the Measure starts to take shape. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in Motion Part A, “$750 million” with “15 percent.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the end of Motion Part A, “separate from other Caltrain enhancements.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “that the criteria for allocating funds to specific grade separations be driven by need factors.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part A, “separate from other Caltrain enhancements” with “of funds raised by the ballot measure separate from and in addition to the funding already requested by Caltrain for other Caltrain improvements.” AMENDMENT: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion at the end of Part B, “primarily traffic and safety concerns; cities have until the end of 2018 to submit applications.” AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part A, “separate from and in addition to the funding already requested by Caltrain for other Caltrain improvements” with “and engage with Caltrain to determine what specific needs they have for the prospective County tax measure and return to Council with this information to make further determination of this tax measure.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to remove from the Motion Part A, “to make further determination of this tax measure.” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 8-0 Kniss absent Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 10:03 P.M. in memory of Former Mayor Richard Rosenbaum who passed away on October 11, 2015 CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 8 Special Meeting October 19, 2015 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 5:02 P.M. Present: Berman arrived at 5:05 P.M., DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Scharff, Schmid, Wolbach Absent: Burt Closed Session MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to go into Closed Session. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 Berman, Burt absent Council went into Closed Session at 5:03 P.M. 1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his designees pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Suzanne Mason, Kathy Shen, Dania Torres Wong, Molly Stump, Alison Hauk) Employee Organizations: Palo Alto Police Officers Association (PAPOA); Palo Alto Police Manager’s Association (PAPMA); Palo Alto Fire Chiefs’ Association (FCA); International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF), Local 1319; Service Employees International Union, (SEIU) Local 521; Management, Professional and Confidential Employees; Utilities Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA) Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a). Council returned from Closed Session at 6:17 P.M. Mayor Holman announced no reportable action. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/19/15 Special Orders of the Day 2. Recognition and Acknowledgement of Palo Alto Firefighters for Their Response to Numerous Wildland Fires in California During the 2015 Fire Season. Study Session 3. Potential List of Topics for the Study Session With Assembly Member Rich Gordon. 4. Council Update on Staff Actions in Preparation for 2015-16 Winter Storm Season. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions None. Minutes Approval 5. May 4, 2015, May 6, 2015, and May 11, 2015. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to approve the May 4, 6, and 11, 2015 Minutes. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Burt absent Consent Calendar MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Mayor Holman, Third by Council Member Kniss to remove Agenda Item Number 19- SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 4.62…Minimum Wage… from the Consent to be heard as the first Action Item. Council Member Kniss advised she would not be participating in Agenda Item Number 15- Approval of Annual Williamson Act Contracts… because she and her husband own property which falls under the Williamson Act. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/19/15 MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Mayor Holman to approve Agenda Item Numbers 6-18, including changes to the contract number outlined in the At Place Memorandum for Agenda Item Number 11- Approval of Change Order Number One to Construction Services… 6. Approval and Authorization for the City Manager to Execute an Electric Enterprise Fund Construction Contract With PAR Electrical Contractors, Inc. for a Total Not to Exceed Amount of $1,095,179 for the 2015 Pole Replacement Project 3, Which Involves Construction Maintenance Work on the City’s Electric Distribution System Throughout the City. 7. Approval of a Contract With Pierce Manufacturing Inc. in the Amount of $657,394 for the Purchase of a Triple Combination 1500 GPM Fire Pumper; and Budget Amendment Ordinance 5350 Entitled, “Budget Amendment Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto in the Amount of $289,265 to Fund the Purchase of a Fire Pumper Offset by a Transfer From the General Fund and Corresponding Reduction to the Budget Stabilization Reserve (Scheduled Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Capital Improvement Program CIP VR-15000).” 8. Approval of a Purchase Order With Leader Industries in an Amount Not to Exceed $500,471 for the Purchase of Two 2015 Chevrolet G4500 Type III Ambulances and Budget Amendment Ordinance 5351 Entitled, “Budget Amendment Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto for Fiscal Year 2016 in the Amount of $500,471 in the Vehicle Replacement Fund, Offset by a Transfer From the General Fund and Corresponding Reduction to the Budget Stabilization Reserve (Scheduled Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Capital Improvement Program CIP VR-15000).” 9. Approval of a Record of Land Use Action for a Site and Design Application of a One-Story 1,735 Sq. Ft. Single Family Home With an Attached One-Car Garage and Associated Site Improvements on a Vacant 11.04 Acre Parcel of Land in the Open Space (OS) Zoning District Located at 5061 Skyline Boulevard. Environmental Assessment: Exempt From the Provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15303. 10. Approval of the Purchase of Underground Cable From the Okonite Company in the Amount of $350,000 per Year for Five Years, for a Total Not to Exceed Amount of $1,750,000. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/19/15 11. Approval of Change Order Number One to Construction Services Contract Number C15155783 With Pacheco Line Builders, Inc. to Increase Not-to-Exceed Amount by $500,000 Annually to $1,500,000 Per Year, for a Total Not-to-Exceed Amount of $4,500,000 for Increased Costs Associated With Maintenance and Repair Work for the City’s Electric Overhead Distribution System, and Budget Amendment Ordinance 5352 Entitled, “Budget Amendment Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto for Fiscal Year 2016 Appropriating a Total of $1,000,000 From the Electric Distribution Fund Operations Reserve.” 12. Approval of Amendment Number Two to the Agreement Between the City of Palo Alto and the Purissima Hills Water District for a Limited Emergency Water Supply Intertie. 13. Approval of the Change in Direction by Friends of the Junior Museum & Zoo’s Regarding Operation of the New Building. 14. Approval of a Contract With TransPac Systems, LLC in the Amount of $106,590, Contract C16160857 for Consulting and Implementation Services for the City's Police Department's Information Technology Systems. 15. Approval of Annual Williamson Act Contracts Within the City of Palo Alto. 16. Resolution 9554 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending and Restating the Administrative Penalty Schedule and Civil Penalty Schedules for Certain Violations of the Palo Alto Municipal Code and the California Vehicle Code Established by Resolution Nos. 9410 and 9535.” 17. Ordinance 5353 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Section 16.63 to the Municipal Code Relating to Expedited Permitting Procedures for Small Residential Rooftop Solar Systems (FIRST READING: September 28, 2015 PASSED: 9-0).” 18. Ordinance 5354 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Changing the End of Term Date for Commissioners Serving on the Human Relations Commission, Library Advisory Commission, Public Art Commission and Utilities Advisory Commission From April 30 to May 31 of Various Years and Making Minor Non-substantive Language DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/19/15 Changes (FIRST READING: August 24, 2015 PASSED: 8-1 DuBois no).” 19. SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Adding Chapter 4.62 to Title 4 (Business Licenses and Regulations) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Adopt a Citywide Minimum Wage for Palo Alto Employees (FIRST READING: August 24, 2015, PASSED 9-0). MOTION FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBERS 6-14, 16-18 PASSED: 8-0 Burt absent MOTION FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 15 PASSED: 7-0 Kniss not participating, Burt absent Action Items 19. SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance 5355 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter 4.62 to Title 4 (Business Licenses and Regulations) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Adopt a Citywide Minimum Wage for Palo Alto Employees (FIRST READING: August 24, 2015, PASSED 9-0).” MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded Council Member Kniss to adopt the Ordinance and direct the Policy and Services Committee to discuss exploring the option of excluding tipped employees as soon as possible. AMENDMENT: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Berman to remove from the Motion, “and direct the Policy and Services Committee to discuss exploring the option of excluding tipped employees as soon as possible.” AMENDMENT FAILED: 3-5 Berman, Schmid, Wolbach yes, Burt absent AMENDMENT: Council Member Berman moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to replace in the Motion, “exploring the option of excluding tipped employees” with “potential exemptions to the Ordinance.” AMENDMENT FAILED: 2-6 Berman, Wolbach yes, Burt absent MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Burt absent DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 6 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/19/15 20. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution 9555 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Confirming Additional Weed Abatement Report and Ordering Cost of Abatement to be a Special Assessment on the Respective Properties Described Therein.” Public Hearing opened and closed without public comment at 9:28 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to adopt a Resolution confirming the Weed Abatement Report and ordering abatement costs to be a special assessment on the properties specified in the report. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Burt absent 21. Direction to Provide Financial Support of $5 Million for the Avenidas Construction Project That Will Expand the Capacity of Senior Programs and Services Provided by Avenidas at 450 Bryant Street, Pending Environmental Review and Approval of Final Project Design by City Boards, Commissions and Council. MOTION: Council Member Berman moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to hear Agenda Item Number 24- Colleagues Memo Regarding Studying Policy to Increase Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU's) before Agenda Item Number 23- PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 18.79…Development Project Preliminary Review… and make every effort to complete the Agenda this evening. MOTION PASSED: 7-1 Filseth no, Burt absent MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to contribute financial support of $5 million dollars from revenue sources to be determined by Staff towards the $18 million Avenidas capital campaign to make necessary seismic and other improvements to the existing building, the actual funding will occur in the next two Fiscal Years; the Avenidas plan will require subsequent environmental review and Approval of Final Project Design by City Boards, Commissions and Council. AMENDMENT: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Mayor Holman to replace in the Motion, “to be determined by Staff” with “which shall consist of Transferable Development Rights (TDRs) and Community Center Impact Fee Funds.” DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 7 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/19/15 AMENDMENT FAILED: 4-4 DuBois, Filseth, Kniss, Schmid no, Burt absent INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to remove from the Motion, “towards the $18 million Avenidas capital campaign.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion, “determined” with “identified.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion, “will require subsequent” with “pending.” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 8-0 Burt absent 22. Recommendation to Direct Staff to Develop and Plan for Election to Authorize Continuation of Storm Drain Fees to Fund Capital Improvements and Operations After Current Fees Sunset in 2017, Including Appointment of a Citizen Advisory Committee and a Potential 2016 Property Owner All-Mail Election. MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to: A. Direct Staff to work towards a Fall 2016 property owner vote-by-mail election to authorize imposition of property-related fees to fund the Storm Drainage Enterprise Fund beyond the funding term of the previous storm drain measure, which property owners approved in 2005 and which sunsets in June 2017; and B. Direct the City Manager to appoint a Citizen Advisory Committee to assist Staff with the development of the 2016 funding measure, including a list of operational programs and capital improvement projects to be funded by the fees. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Burt absent 24. Colleagues Memo Regarding Studying Policy to Increase Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU's). DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 8 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/19/15 MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to refer this matter to the Planning and Transportation Commission. AMENDMENT: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to add to the Motion, “the Policy and Services Committee prior to” after “refer this matter to.” AMENDMENT FAILED: 4-4 Berman, Scharff, Wolbach, Kniss no, Burt absent MOTION PASSED: 7-1 DuBois no, Burt absent MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Wolbach to continue Agenda Item Number 23- PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 18.79 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Related to Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures… to October 26, 2015. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Burt absent 23. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 18.79 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Related to Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures. Environmental Assessment: Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines (Continued from August 24, 2015). Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs None. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Council Member Wolbach voiced his support for the Study Session with the Planning and Transportation Commission on November 30, 2015. Council Member DuBois reported his attendance at the second Joint Recycled Water Advisory Committee Meeting. The Committee is exploring projects to potentially fund. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:50 P.M. CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 7 Special Meeting October 26, 2015 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 6:03 P.M. Present: Berman, Burt, DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Scharff, Schmid, Wolbach arrived at 6:08 P.M. Absent: Study Session 1. Study Session on Status of Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Program. Special Orders of the Day 2. Appointment of Candidates to the Architectural Review Board and the Planning and Transportation Commission. First Round of voting for three positions on the Architectural Review Board with terms ending December 15, 2018: Voting For Peter Baltay: Berman, Burt, DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Scharff, Schmid, Wolbach Voting For Robert Gooyer: Berman, Burt, DuBois, Holman, Kniss, Scharff, Wolbach Voting For Alexander Lew: Berman, Burt, DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Scharff, Schmid Voting For Flore Schmidt: Filseth, Schmid, Wolbach DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/26/15 Beth Minor, City Clerk announced Peter Baltay with nine votes, Robert Gooyer with seven votes and Alexander Lew with eight votes were appointed to the Architectural Review Board for three terms ending December 15, 2018. First Round of voting for one position on the Planning and Transportation Commission with a term ending December 15, 2019: Voting For Louis Fried: Voting For John Hamilton: Wolbach Voting For William Ross: Voting For Asher Waldfogel: Berman, Burt, DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Scharff, Schmid Ms. Minor announced Asher Waldfogel with eight votes was appointed to the Planning and Transportation Commission for a term ending December 15, 2019. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions None. Minutes Approval 3. Approval of Action Minutes for the May 18, 2015, May 26, 2015, May 27, 2015, June 1, 2015, and June 8, 2015 Council Meetings. MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to approve the Minutes for the May 18, 2015, May 26, 2015, May 27, 2015, June 1, 2015, and June 8, 2015. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/26/15 Consent Calendar MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-10. 4. Resolution 9556 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to Adopt the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) Design Guidelines.” 5. Approval of a Two-Year Contract With SZS Consulting Group for the ADA Transition Plan Update With Funding for the First Year Not to Exceed $164,923 and a Total Contract Amount Not to Exceed $251,141, Capital Improvement Program Project PF-93009. 6. Resolutions: (1) Resolution 9557 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Formally Adopt the Methodology for Calculating the City's Net Energy Metering (NEM) Cap,” and (2) Resolution 9558 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto to Amend Utilities Rule and Regulations 2 and 29; and Delegation of Authority to the City Manager to Update Associated NEM Agreements to Incorporate the NEM Cap Definition, as Needed.” 7. Approval of Comments on the Salt Pond Restoration Project Phase 2 Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement. 8. Ordinance 5356 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapters 18.18, Downtown Commercial (CD) District and 18.52, Parking and Loading Requirements, to Eliminate Certain Parking Exemptions within the Downtown Area (FIRST READING: October 5, 2015 PASSED: 9-0).” 9. Interim Ordinance 5357 Entitled, “Interim Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Section 18.85.200 (Annual Office Limit) to Chapter 18.85 Entitled “Interim Zoning Ordinances” Imposing an Office Annual Limit of 50,000 Net New Square Feet in Designated Areas of City (FIRST READING: September 21, 2015 PASSED: 9-0).” DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/26/15 10. Ordinance 5358 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapters 18.04, 18.08 and 18.30 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Amend Retail Zoning Regulations for the (CC2) California Avenue District (FIRST READING: September 12, 2015 PASSED: 9-0).” MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Action Items 10a. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 18.79 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Related to Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures. Environmental Assessment: Exempt From the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines (Continued from August 24, 2015 and October 19, 2015). MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to adopt an Ordinance to implement changes to the Development Project Preliminary Review procedures by amending Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Public Hearing opened at 7:59 P.M. Public Hearing closed at 8:02 P.M. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to Motion, “to add to Municipal Code Section 18.79.010 (a), ‘that preliminary review is intended to focus on purpose, scope, conceptual design and other similar matters and is not intended to involve review of complete drawings and documentation.’” AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Schmid moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion, “impacts” after “scope.” AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/26/15 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “direct Staff to return at the second reading with revised language to Municipal Code Section 18.79.030 (d)(3), ‘that applicants have the option to have a conceptual prescreening in addition to an architectural prescreening.’” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 9-0 11. Recommendation to Adopt a Healthy Cities, Healthy Communities Resolution to Define and Support the 2015 Council Priority Healthy Cities, Healthy Communities. MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Burt to refer the Resolution supporting Healthy Cities and Healthy Communities to the Policy and Services Committee. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to direct Staff to return with a revised Resolution incorporating revisions from Council to soften the language to be more aspirational. SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED: 2-7 Filseth, Scharff yes MOTION PASSED: 9-0 12. Council Direction on Selection of Voting Delegate for the National League of Cities Annual Business Meeting on Saturday, November 7, 2015. MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to designate Mayor Holman as the Voting Delegate for the National League of Cities (NLC) Annual Business Meeting. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “and Council Member Kniss as an Alternate Voting Delegate” after “Voting Delegate.” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 9-0 DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 6 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/26/15 Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs None. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Council Member DuBois reported his attendance and participation during the Make a Difference Day event at the Palo Alto Duck Pond. Mayor Holman appreciated Council Member DuBois’ participation and work during Make a Difference Day. Council Member Kniss reported her attendance at the Palo Alto High School (PALY) rally on Friday. She enjoyed the floats and wonders which float won the contest. Council Member Filseth attended the No Fly Day event at the San Francisco International Airport on Saturday. Elected officials from Portola Valley and Santa Cruz joined 100-200 participants in protest of airplane noise. Council Member Wolbach reported the efforts and his appreciation to several neighbors and Police Officers Marcus Barbour and Eric Figueroa in locating a missing child on Saturday. Closed Session MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to go into Closed Session. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Council went into Closed Session at 9:55 P.M. Council Member DuBois advised he would not be participating in this Agenda Item due to his wife’s employment at Stanford University. He left the meeting at 9:55 P.M. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 7 of 7 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 10/26/15 13. CONFERENCE WITH CITY ATTORNEY- ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Authority - Government Code section 54956.9(d)(2) Subject - Charges for Stanford Fire Protection Services. Council returned from Closed Session at 11:37 P.M. Mayor Holman announced no reportable action. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:37 P.M. CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 1 of 8 Regular Meeting November 2, 2015 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers at 6:06 P.M. Present: Berman, Burt, DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss arrived at 6:39 P.M., Scharff, Schmid, Wolbach Absent: Special Orders of the Day 1. Proclamation Welcoming the Delegation of Visitors From our Sister City, Enschede, the Netherlands, and Congratulating Onno van Veldhuizen on his Recent Inauguration as Mayor. 2. Selection of Applicants to Interview for the Parks and Recreation Commission. MOTION: Vice Mayor Schmid moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to interview all applicants for the Parks and Recreation Commission. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Kniss absent Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to hear Agenda Item Number 9- PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Title 5… before Agenda Item Number 8 Comprehensive Plan Update… MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Kniss absent DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 2 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 11/2/15 Minutes Approval 3. Approval of Action Minutes for the June 15, 22, 29, August 17 and August 24, 2015 Council Meetings. MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Schmid to approve the Action Minutes for the June 15, 22, 29, August 17 and August 24, 2015 Council Meetings. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 Consent Calendar MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Berman to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-7. 4. Approval of a 3-Year Contract Extension With SAP America for Maintenance and Support, Contract Number C14151181 in an Amount Not to Exceed $742,811. 5. Finance Committee Recommends Approval of Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriation Requests to be Carried Forward Into Fiscal Year 2016. 6. Finance Committee Recommends Amendment of Municipal Code Section 2.28.080 Regarding City Council Budget and Table of Organization Amendment Approvals. 7. Approve and Delegate Authority to the City Manager to Execute Amendment Four With Elster Solutions, LLC to Extend the Term of an Equipment and Fully Managed Services Agreement (EFMSA) Through December 31, 2017 at no Additional Cost; to Delegate Authority to the City Manager to Enter Into and Execute a Subsequent Extension of the EFMSA Term Through 2018 at no Additional Cost. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 3 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 11/2/15 Action Items 9. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Title 5 (Health and Sanitation) and Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Require All Businesses to Subscribe to Recycling and Compost Services and Comply with Refuse Sorting Requirements. Public Hearing opened at 7:17 P.M. Public Hearing closed at 7:20 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to refer this Ordinance to the Finance Committee. MOTION PASSED: 9-0 8. Comprehensive Plan Update: Comprehensive Plan Structure, Including Goals, Vision Statements, and Related Issues for Each Element (Part III: Land Use and Community Design). MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member Burt that for the Land Use and Community Design Element to: A. Direct Staff to update the existing Vision Statement with minor Staff initiated revisions for City Council review and use the existing Goals and organization with minor updates to include incorporation of climate protection, the two Concept Area Plans, the Airport, Baylands, and mixed use guidelines; and B. Evaluate modern job definitions for our commercial zoning districts. Suggest approaches Council can use to specify that large-scale commercial operations, development, manufacturing, etc. not suitable downtown or California Avenue. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “add a Goal to develop mechanisms that control the density of existing commercial uses.” (New Part C) DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 4 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 11/2/15 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part C, “mechanisms” with “policies and programs.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part C, “occupant” after “control the.” AMENDMENT: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion, “to retain the balance of traditional uses in the Stanford Research Park.” AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER AMENDMENT: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Mayor Holman to add to the Motion, “request Staff provide the Comprehensive Plan Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) comparative impacts of restaurants versus other retail on trip generation and parking.” AMENDMENT PASSED: 5-4 Berman, Kniss, Scharff, Wolbach no INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part B, “large scale” with “certain types.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part B, “certain” with “what.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part B, “not suitable” with “are suitable for.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part B, “job” with “use.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part B, “and scale” after “what types.” Council Member Kniss left the meeting at 10:27 P.M. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 5 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 11/2/15 AMENDMENT: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Burt to add to the Motion, “consider adding a Goal of making Coordinated Area Plans as a regular Planning tool.” AMENDMENT RESTATED: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Burt to add to the Motion, “direct the CAC to develop language providing for Coordinated Area Plans to become a regular Planning tool.” INCORPORATED INTO THE AMENDMENT WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Amendment, “regular” with “more frequently used.” AMENDMENT AS AMENDED PASSED: 8-0 Kniss absent INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part A, “climate adaptation and sea level rise” after “climate protection.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part C, “Goal” with “direct Staff and the Comprehensive Plan Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC).” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part C, “develop” with “evaluate.” AMENDMENT: Vice Mayor Schmid moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion, “to include in Programs and Policies, historical structures that capture historical moments in Palo Alto and Silicon Valley.” AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “direct Staff and the CAC to explore policies and programs to support more housing for seniors, particularly units in walkable communities that allow easy access to services.” AMENDMENT: Council Member Berman moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Motion,” direct Staff and the CAC to explore DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 6 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 11/2/15 policies and programs that can increase the allowable area for mixed use and affordable housing. AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part A, “Master Plan” after “Baylands.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to separate Part A in the Motion into two Parts after, “Council review and.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “direct Staff and the CAC to Develop policies and programs that provide greater incentives for mixed used retail and small unit residential in the University Avenue and California Avenue.” (New Part H) INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “direct Staff and the CAC to Maintain and strengthen the existing language supporting housing supply for diverse family sizes, ages, ability levels, and income levels.” INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part H, “residential in the” with “residential with particular emphasis on.” MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 8-0 Kniss absent MOTION: Vice Mayor Schmid moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to direct Staff to look at boundaries of growth of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) scenarios over the next 15 years, growth of 750,000 square feet of non-residential citywide to 1.3 million square feet. MOTION RESTATED: Vice Mayor Schmid moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois to direct the CAC to look at a pacing mechanism for non- residential growth citywide, similar to the Annual Growth Limit with a range of 50,000-115,000 square feet per year. DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 7 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 11/2/15 INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER OR SECONDER to replace in the Motion, “with a range of 50,000- 115,000 square feet per year” with “and direct Staff to return to Council in January with the DEIR.” SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Mayor Holman to direct the CAC to look at a pacing mechanism for non- residential, non-retail growth. INCORPORATED INTO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Substitute Motion, “a pacing mechanism for non-residential, non-retail growth” with “pacing mechanisms for office and R/D development and its impact on the jobs housing balance.” AMENDMENT TO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member XX to add to the Substitute Motion, “or mitigation” after “at pacing” and “and other community impacts” after “housing balance.” AMENDMENT TO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND INCORPORATED INTO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Substitute Motion, “medical office” after “for office.” CALL THE QUESTION: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to call the question. CALL THE QUESTION PASSED: 6-2 DuBois, Wolbach no, Kniss absent SUBSTITUTE MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 6-2 DuBois, Schmid no, Kniss absent MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member XX to direct the CAC to explore other methods of linking job and non- housing development to their impacts. MOTION WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER DRAFT ACTION MINUTES Page 8 of 8 City Council Meeting Draft Action Minutes: 11/2/15 MOTION: Mayor Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Scharff to ensure that Policy L-8 will apply citywide moving forward. MOTION WITHDRAWN BY THE SECONDER Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs None. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements None. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 12:13 P.M. City of Palo Alto (ID # 6232) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/16/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Water Main Replacement Contract Amendment for Emergency Repairs Title: Approval of Change Order Number Three to Contract C15157253 with Daleo, Inc. Extending the Contract Term to January 6, 2016 and Adding $190,000 for a Total Not to Exceed Contract Amount of $4,599,031, to Provide Emergency Water Main Replacement Work on Kingsley Avenue From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation Staff recommends that Councilapprove and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Change Order Number 3 (Attachment A) to Contract C15157253 with Daleo, Inc. (“Daleo”) extending the term for an additional 30 days, until January 6, 2016, and adding $190,000 for a total revised not to exceed amount of $4,599,031, for emergency water main replacement services on Kingsley Avenue. Background Since 1986, the City has been replacing existing cast iron and asbestos concrete (ACP) water mains throughout the City as part of the adopted Water Main Replacement Program. Staff prioritizes replacement of water mains within the distribution system based on a risk of failure analysis which includes the age and condition of the pipe and historical number of main breaks. Although the majority of the cast iron pipe has been replaced, there are still some small areas where it remains, mainly in the older parts of the City. These remaining pipes are scheduled for future replacement, but have not been replaced to date because the number of breaks in these areas is historically low. However, in some cases, pipe breaks can come on suddenly, requiring the City to analyze the reasons for failure and quickly determine if an emergency replacement is required. On February 23, 2015, Council approved Water Main Replacement Project 25 (WMR 25) Contract C15157253 with Daleo (Staff Report 3801). Daleo was selected through a competitive bid process (IFB). The scope of the original contract was to replace mains on Bret Harte Street (Embarcadero to Seale), Guinda Street (Middlefield to Seale), Homer Avenue (Webster to Boyce), Mark Twain Street (Embarcadero to Seale), North California (Webster to Middlefield), City of Palo Alto Page 2 and Seale Avenue (Middlefield to Embarcadero). The term of the original contract was 180 days. Upon issuance of the Project’s Notice to Proceed (NTP), the project started on June 6, 2015 and will expire on December 6, 2015. Discussion In 2014, while working on the block of Kingsley Avenue, between Alma Street and Emerson Street, as part of the Gas Main Replacement Project 19B/20/21, the contractor accidently struck the existing 6-inch cast iron water main located adjacent to the gas main. Staff responded and repaired the leak. While the leak was being repaired, a second leak opened up a few feet away. The second leak was also repaired, but staff noted that the pipe was in poor condition and should be considered for replacement. This block of Kingsley was added to a water main replacement capital improvement project (CIP) that is scheduled for construction in FY 2017. In September 2015, Staff responded and conducted repairs for a third time to a main break on the same block of Kingsley Avenue. While making the repairs, additional leaks opened up, requiring multiple repairs over a two night period. Because the main is located in the middle of Kingsley Avenue, this work required that the street be temporarily closed to through traffic. This portion of Kingsley Avenue serves as both the entrance and exit route to and from Embarcadero Road from Alma Street. Not only were the adjacent residents impacted by the work, but the surrounding residential side streets were affected as well due to detoured traffic. Once repair work was completed, staff received a sample of the existing pipe and observed extensive corrosion Due to the recent water main break events, the subsequent discovery of deteriorated 6-inch cast iron pipe along the entire block on Kingsley Avenue, between Alma Street and Emerson Street, and the total impacts on traffic in the vicinity, staff determined that emergency replacement of this portion of the main is needed as soon as possible to prevent additional main breaks and damage to public and private property, and to protect public health and safety in the area. Staff worked with the City’s Purchasing Department and City Manager’s Office, as required by Section 2.30.360 of the municipal code, to permit Daleo to complete this work on an emergency basis, without rebidding the project. Permitting Daleo to complete this work is also cost effective, as Daleo is already mobilized in the area as part of the WMR 25 project, Daleo agreed to add this work at a cost equivalent to their current contract prices, and the City currently does not have the labor resources available to do the work. The scope of the additional work includes installation of approximately 541-feet of new 8-inch HDPE water main, including two (2) new valves on Kingsley Avenue. The contractor will also install thirteen (13) new 2-inch HDPE water service lines and one (1) new 6-inch fire hydrant, along with tying into the existing water distribution system at both Alma Street and Emerson Street and removing the existing 6-inch cast iron main. Daleo will perform the work in accordance with the existing project standards and specifications. Sections 6.5 (Adjustments to Contract Time) and 7.3 (Compensation for Extra or Deleted Work) of the current contract permit these changes to be accomplished via a change order executed by the City and Daleo, to include both the additional cost ($190,000) and the additional time required to complete the City of Palo Alto Page 3 work (30 working days). The new contract end date is January 6, 2016. The remaining sections of 6-inch cast iron pipe on Kingsley Avenue are being analyzed and will most likely be included in an upcoming water main replacement project. Resource Impact Funds for this emergency repair work ($190,000) are available in Water Main Replacement (WMR) Project 25 (WBS WS-11000-501) budget. The contractor has agreed to perform the additional work at a cost equal to the unit prices provided in their original WMR 25 bid. Policy Implications The approval of this Amendment is consistent with existing City policies including the Council approved Utilities Strategic Plan – Strategic Objectives: BP1. Ensure a reliable supply of utility resources, BP2. Operate the utility systems safely, and BP3. Replace infrastructure before the end of its useful life. Environmental Review This project is categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, section 15301 (b) repair, maintenance of existing facilities, and 15302 (c) replacement or reconstruction of existing facilities. Attachments: Attachment A: WMR25_Change_Order_Kingsley (PDF) Contract Change Order City of Palo Alto Department: Utilities Contract Number: C15157253 CO #3 APPENDIX B – CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER PAGE 1 OF 4 Project Title: Water Main Replacement Project 25 (WMR 25) Project Number: CIP WS-11000 Contract Number: C15157253 Date: 10/8/2015 Contractor: Daleo, Inc. Change Order Number: 3 Description of Change Order Additional work to replace the existing water main on Kingsley Avenue as requested by the City. Staff recommends emergency replacement due to the condition of the pipe. The funds for the additional work is authorized by a Council approved amendment to the contract. Background Information: In 2014, there were two breaks on the block of Kingsley Avenue, between Alma Street and Emerson Street. As a result of the breaks, this portion of the water main was added to a water main replacement project scheduled for 2017. There have been two recent water main break on the same block of Kingsley Avenue. Staff received a sample of the existing 6-inch cast iron pipe and observed extensive corrosion. Daleo has agreed to add this block of Kingsley Avenue to WMR 25 project and will perform the work in accordance with the existing project specifications and all applicable bid prices. The City will add an additional 30 working days to the project duration of WMR 25. Change Order Justification: 1.The existing cast iron water pipe has been found severely corroded and must be replaced as soon as possible in order to prevent additional breaks. 2.The City currently does not have the labor resources to replace this 500-feet long water main. 3.Daleo has agreed to perform the work using the current contract prices. The City will not have to devote additional resources soliciting additional bids. ATTACHMENT A PAGE 2 OF 4 APPENDIX B –CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER Description of Work to be Performed: 1. Install approximately 541 feet of new 8-inch HDPE water main including two (2) new valves on Kingsley Avenue. 2. Tie into the existing water distribution system at Alma Street and at Emerson Street and abandon the existing 6-inch CI water main. 3. Install 13 new 2” HDPE water services. 4. Install one (1) new 6-in fire hydrant. 5. Install one (1) new 6” line stopper (optional). 6. Exchange 13 water meters 7. Install new meter boxes and modify house side plumbing (time and materials as necessary) 8. 8% contingency for the additional work Incorporates Field Order Number(s): See attached Kingsley Avenue Plan. Cost Time This change order will: Not change cost Increase cost by $190,000 Decrease cost by $_______________ This change order will: Not change time Increase time by 30 working days Decrease time by _________ days The date of completion as of this change order is January 6, 2016 Note G/L account number (s) here (see G/L #’s below): Transfer $190,000 from G/L 38790 to G/L 31651 Basis for change in cost: Unit price(s) Lump sum Cost plus __15% Other Additional cost: $190,000.00 See attached itemized estimate The undersigned Contractor approves this Change Order as to the changes, if any, in the contract price specified for each Line Item and as to the extension of time allowed, if any, for completion of the entire work on account of each Line Item, and agrees to furnish all labor and materials and perform all work necessary to complete any additional work specified therein, for the consideration stated therein. It is understood that the time and cost adjustments set forth in this Change Order include full compensation for any impacts or delays associated with the Line Items addressed in this Change Order. Accepted for Contractor: Accepted for City of Palo Alto: By: By: Title: Title: Date: Date: Contract Change Order City of Palo Alto Department: Utilities Contract Number: C15157253 CO #3 APPENDIX B – CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER PAGE 3 OF 4 Summary of All Change Orders Change Order #1 Additional compensation for extra work in Homer/Seneca area (Part I) $ 7,411.91 Change Order #2 Additional compensation for extra work in Homer/Seneca area (Part II) $ 7,352.22 Change Order #3 Additional compensation for Kingsley water main replacement $ 190,000.00 Total of All Change Orders $204,764.13 Summary of Amounts Payable Under Contract (For Internal Purposes Only) Amount of Original Contract $4,008,210.45 11,771,481 Amount of Current Change Order (CO#3) $190,000.00 Amount of all Previous Change Orders (CO#1-CO#2) $14,764.13 Net affect of all Change Orders $204,764.13 Revised Contract Total: $4,212,974.58 Remaining Contingency: $400,821 - 7,411.91 - $7,352.22 - $190,000.00 = $196,056.87* *From executed Field Orders, Field Orders in progress, and unit price quantity changes we anticipate that we have a total of about $114,589 remaining before this change order. We are asking for the additional $190,000 to be amended to the contract prior to executing this change order. Compare to: Original Contract Amount: $4,008,210.45 Add: Contingency, if any: $ 400,821.00 Total Authorized Funding: $4,409.031.50 Change orders shall not be initiated for Council-approved contracts if the revised contract total exceeds the total authorized funding amount. PAGE 4 OF 4 APPENDIX B –CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER Document Preparation By : An Le Title : Construction Engineer / acting Date : 9/22/2015 City Approval By : Title : Date : City of Palo Alto (ID # 6209) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/16/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Cooperative Agreement for Mortgage Credit Certificate Program Title: Adoption of a Resolution Approving the City of Palo Alto's Continued Participation in the Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Program through the County of Santa Clara From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and adopt the attached Resolution for the City’s continued participation in the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program through the County of Santa Clara. Background The Mortgage Credit Certificate (MCC) Program was authorized by Congress in the Tax Reform Act of 1986. MCCs provide financial assistance by giving federal income tax credits to first-time buyers of single-family homes, townhouses and condominiums. The City of Palo Alto has participated in the MCC program since its inception in 1988. The program is administered by the County of Santa Clara on behalf of the county jurisdictions. The County of Santa Clara intends to submit a County-wide application for a 2015 MCC Allocation from the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee (CDLAC) for a December 16, 2015 CDLAC Allocation Meeting. MCCs will be available to eligible first- time homebuyers countywide on a first-come, first served basis. Eligible buyers must be first time purchasers and cannot have had an ownership interest in their principal residence for the previous three years, from date of application. The home to be purchased utilizing the MCC program must be used as the borrower's principal residence and may not be used as a place of business or as a rental or vacation home. It may be either an attached (condominium/townhome) or detached single-family home. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Summary of Key Issues The MCC program is a Federal Income Tax Credit Program administered by the County of Santa Clara. The MCC program was originally created by Congress through the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The program provides assistance to first-time homebuyers in the purchase of owner- occupied residential units. The MCC program increases the loan amount offered to a qualifying homebuyer and reduces federal income taxes by 15% of the annual interest paid on a home mortgage. The tax credit allows the buyer to qualify more easily for a loan by increasing the effective income of the buyer. Since the borrower's taxes are being reduced by the amount of the credit, this increases the take-home pay by the amount of the credit, thus enabling the buyer to qualify for a larger loan than would otherwise be possible. The City entered into a Cooperative Agreement with the County of Santa Clara on August 10, 1993. The Cooperative Agreement is still in effect and includes provisions for the County to administer the MCC program for, and issue MCCs within, the City of Palo Alto. Other cities in the county which have existing Cooperative Agreements or will be adopting Cooperative Agreements are Campbell, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Milpitas, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, San Jose, Saratoga, and Sunnyvale. The Resolution will reinforce the City’s participation in the MCC program, which will enable residents of the City of Palo Alto to receive MCCs on or after December 16, 2015, if the County receives an allocation from the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee (CDLAC) in December as anticipated. Policy Implications The actions recommended in this report implement the City’s adopted Housing Element policies and programs supporting housing that is affordable to very-low, low and moderate income households. Policy H3.4 calls for pursuing funding for the acquisition, construction and rehabilitation of housing that is affordable to very low-, low- and moderate-income households. In addition, Program H3.4.2 supports local funding sources including the County of Santa Clara’s Mortgage Credit Certificate Program. Resource Impact There is no cost to the City to participate in the MCC program. The administrative costs for the MCC Program are paid for by the County’s receipt of a $500 application fee charged to each qualified applicant. Timeline The County will submit a County-wide application for a 2015 MCC Allocation from the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee (CDLAC) for a December 16, 2015 CDLAC Allocation Meeting. November 16, 2015 City Council consideration of proposed resolution City of Palo Alto Page 3 December 1, 2015 City to submit executed resolution to County December 16, 2015 County submits application to CDLAC Environmental Review For purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this action itself is not a project; therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. Attachments: Attachment A: Draft Mortgage Credit Certificate Resolution (PDF) Attachment B: Cooperative Agreement Between the County of Santa and the City of Palo Alto, August 10, 1993 (PDF) Resolution No. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving the City’s Continued Participation in the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program through the County of Santa Clara RECITALS WHEREAS, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 established the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program ("MCC Program") as a means of assisting qualified individuals with the acquisition of new and existing single family housing; and WHEREAS, the County of Santa Clara administers the County‐wide Mortgage Credit Certificate Program as a Federal Income Tax Credit program; and WHEREAS, the City of Palo Alto seeks to participate in the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program for 2015, 2016, and 2017 to assist persons and households of low to moderate income to purchase new and existing single‐family residences in the City of Palo Alto. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby resolves as follows: SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct. SECTION 2. The City entered into a Cooperative Agreement with the County of Santa Clara on August 10, 1993 to participate in the County of Santa Clara Mortgage Credit Certificate program. SECTION 3. The City Council states its intention to continue to participate with the County of Santa Clara in the Mortgage Credit Certificate Program for 2015, 2016, and 2017. SECTION 4. The officers of the City are hereby authorized and directed, jointly and severally, to do any and all things and to execute and deliver any and all documents which they deem necessary or advisable in order to carry out, give effect and comply with the terms and intent of this resolution and the participation in the Mortgage Credit Certificate approved hereby. SECTION 5. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. SECTION 6. For purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), this action itself is not a project; therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. ATTACHMENT A INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager or Designee Director of Planning and Community Environment ATTACHMENT B City of Palo Alto (ID # 6253) City Council Staff Report Meeting Date: 11/16/2015 Report Type: Consent Calendar City of Palo Alto Page 1 Title: Approval of Amendment Number One to Contract Number S14152214 with Toubar Equipment Company Inc. in the Amount of $600,000 for Closure Maintenance Assistant Services at the City of Palo Alto Landfill (Capital Improvement Project RF-11001, Landfill Closure) From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute Contract S14152214 Amendment No. 1 (Attachment A) with Toubar Equipment Company, Inc. in an amount of $600,000 for closure maintenance assistance services at the closed City of Palo Alto Landfill. (Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Project RF-11001, Landfill Closure). Background The 126-acre Palo Alto Landfill was filled to capacity and ceased waste acceptance in July, 2011. Approximately 75 acres of the landfill was capped in phases beginning in 1991. The final phase of the landfill, a 51-acre section designated as “Phase IIC”, (CIP project RF-11001) was originally designed to be a geosynthetic (plastic) cap estimated to cost approximately $6.7 million. In late 2013, staff proposed to the state a less costly and more environmentally friendly alternative cap design known as an evapo-transpirative (ET) cap. The ET cap is an engineered soil cap that acts like a sponge to absorb water then release it back into the air or provide moisture for plant uptake. The state approved the alternative cap design in January 2014. The ET cap required a large amount of imported soil to construct the cap (over 400,000 cubic yards). In December 2013, the City contracted the services of a soil broker Toubar Equipment Company (Toubar), who could broker with independent grading contractors in the area to supply the specified soils (CMR ID# 4347). In City of Palo Alto Page 2 addition to supplying the soil, the contract’s scope of work also required Toubar to place and compact the ET soil to proper specifications. Toubar also provides equipment, personnel and materials to complete and install the non-soil elements of the cap project as directed by City staff. A 29.7 acre section of the cap was completed in January 2015 and subsequently opened to the public as parkland in April 2015. Since then, the City has been working on capping the remainder of Phase IIC and the work is nearing completion. The City budgeted $907,000 in FY 2016 to complete the closure project. Discussion Remaining work, to be performed by Toubar under Contract Amendment Number 1, consists mainly of completing the final grading of the imported ET soil cap, installing drainage features, landfill gas and leachate piping modifications, pathway installations and hydroseeding of the final “bare” soil areas. Toubar shall provide these services as requested and directed by the City. With the forecast of a wet “El Nino” year, an on-call services subtask has been added to the amendment to address any stormwater erosion work needed during the season. All of the remaining clsoure work is scheduled to be completed by December 31, 2015. Resource Impact Funding for the ET cap installation and closure maintenance expense is included in CIP project RF-11001, established through the FY 2011 budget process. The project is not expected to exceed $5.6 million which is $1.1 million below the original estimate of $6.7 million as shown in the table below. The Toubar contract now being ammended will make up $2.6 million of the CIP project. The remainder of the CIP work consisted mainly of work performed within the last 3 years including design services and plan development, site preparation work and soil- compost admixing, modifications to and undergrounding of portions of the environmental control systems and QA/QC verfiication work. CIP RF-11001 Amount Prior Years Actuals $4.7 Million FY 16 Budget $0.9 Million Total Project Forecast $5.6 Million Original Budget Estimate $6.7 Million City of Palo Alto Page 3 Item Amount Original Agreement S14152214 (Toubar Equipment Company, Inc.) $2.0 Million Amendment Number 1 $0.6 Million Total $2.6 Million Policy Implications There are no new policy implications with the recommended actions in this staff report. Landfill closure is required by State and Federal law. Environmental Review An Intial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration was completed in August 2013 (Attachment D) by TRA Environmental Services. No further environmental review is needed. Attachments: • Attachment A - Amendment No. 1 Contract S14152214. Attachment A CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK November 16, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California Adoption of a Resolution Revising the Citywide Records Retention Schedule and Repealing Resolution No. 8688 Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council repeal Resolution No. 8688 and adopt a Resolution revising the Citywide Records Retention Schedule. Discussion The Records and Information Management (RIM) Program administered by the City Clerk’s Office ensures the protection and efficient administration of official records for the City of Palo Alto. The program assures the accessibility of information to the public, protects the City’s vital records, provides a methodology for the periodic disposal of obsolete records and provides for the availability of essential and critical information for the resumption of operation in the event of a major disaster. The Records Retention Schedules provide a description of the type of records each department maintains, indicates which department owns the various types of records retained, sets forth the length of time the records will be held, statutory reference, if any, and the final disposition of those records. Departments developed Records Retention Schedules in cooperation with the offices of the City Clerk and City Attorney to address the records held by each respective department. Owning departments have reviewed their responsive Schedules for administrative and fiscal value. The Office of the City Attorney has reviewed and approved the Retention Schedules for compliance with government records retention regulations. Policy Implications The Schedules are an integral part of the City of Palo Alto’s Records and Information Management (RIM) Program and require periodic updates to comply with State regulations and individual department needs. They provide a basic index to the City’s records and a guide to citywide records retention practices. Fiscal Impact None. Environmental Assessment Page 2 Adoption of the attached resolution updating records retention schedules is not a project for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and therefore no environmental assessment is required. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment: Attachment A: Records Retention Resolution (PDF) Attachment: Attachment B: Redline - DRAFT Revised Records Retention Schedule (PDF) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 3 ATTACHMENT A *NOT YET APPROVED* 151029 jjs 0160088 1 Resolution No. Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adopting a Citywide Records Retention Schedule and Repealing Resolution No. 8688 R E C I T A L S A. The destruction of certain public records is authorized by State law in Government Code sections 34090, et seq. B. A system for the retention and schedule for the destruction of records and working papers that are no longer needed for administrative, legal, fiscal, historical, or research purposes is deemed appropriate. C. The City Clerk has developed and is responsible for the City's Records and Information Management ("RIM") Program, including guidelines and procedures prepared pursuant to that Program. D. On April 22, 1996 pursuant to Resolution No. 7579, the Council adopted records retention schedules for the Police, Planning and Community Environment, Public Works, and Utilities Departments and amended records retention schedules for the offices of the City Attorney, City Auditor, City Clerk and City Manager, Administrative Services, Community Services, Fire and Human Resources Departments. E. On February 5, 2007 pursuant to Resolution No. 8688, the Council adopted revised citywide records retention schedules. F. It is now necessary and desirable to adopt revised citywide records retention schedules. G. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved the proposed records retention schedules. The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The Council hereby authorizes the head of each department to maintain and destroy records in accordance with their respective departmental retention schedules, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, subject to the written approval of the City Attorney prior to any proposed destruction, and subject further to the Records and Information Management Program and any guidelines or procedures the City Clerk may from time to time promulgate thereunder. ATTACHMENT A *NOT YET APPROVED* 151029 jjs 0160088 2 SECTION 2. Resolution No. 8688 is hereby repealed. SECTION 3. 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: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: Deputy City Attorney City Manager City Clerk READING THE RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: A "HOW TO" GUIDE Background The Records Retention Schedule, as approved by the City Council through Resolution, is a legal document. It identifies the types of records and information used and managed by a department, how long that information needs to be retained at the office and/or offsite, and when it may be destroyed. Each department is required to have a current Schedule. It is the responsibility of the department to notify the City Clerk’s Office of any business, organizational, functional, or legal changes which would impact their specific Schedule. The City Clerk’s Office coordinates with the Office of the City Attorney (who reviews them for compliance with all government codes and regulations) prior to approval by the City Council. The Schedules should be reviewed for accuracy every two to three years by the City Clerk’s and City Attorney’s Offices in conjunction with each respective department. Using Retention Schedules DESCRIPTION – This is the general description of a group of records with similar business functions and retention requirements. The description must coincide with file titles maintained by the department. TOTAL RETENTION – Refers to the length of time a record must be kept before it is eligible for destruction. CUR – Current refers to any record or file made within the current calendar year. The Retention period begins the first day of the following calendar year. (For example, Cur+2 means that any record created in 2015 is kept for the two following years, 2016 and 2017. The record would be eligible for destruction after December 31, 2017). SUP – Supersede indicates that old items are replaced by a more current version. STATUTORY REFERENCE - This field includes regulations and codes that govern the retention of a specific record type. REMARKS – This field includes general comments about the information in this row. When "Department Opinion" is noted in this column, it means that the Department has determined the retention period to extend beyond the legal or audit requirement. "Attorney Opinion" indicates that the retention requirement was established pursuant to the opinion of the City Attorney based on research, past litigation history, and/or the potential for future litigation on this topic. LEGEND – A legend is provided at the bottom of the Retention Schedule assisting the reader with retention terminology. City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Department Head: Lalo Perez RIM Coordinator: Allen Krever Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATION 001 Correspondence, Messages, Staff Meetings, Studies C+3 Auditors Opinions 002 OTHER DEPARTMENTS While useful Duplicate of City Manager, City Auditor and City Clerk. 003 Gifts to the City, Cash & Tangible Property C+6 Scanned list on CD Rom in Admin Svcs Dept files TREASURY 004 003 INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT-Security Purchases, Sales & Investment Reports C+7 Auditors Opinion 005 004 DEBT MANAGEMENT- (a) Deceased Insurance C+3 Department Opinion (b) Final Bond TER+4 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup (c) Covenant Compliance TER+7 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup (d) Bank Records C+7 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup 006 005 REVENUE COLLECTION (a) Deposit Documentation C+2 GC 34090 (b) Parking Permits C+4 GC 34090 (c) Collection Records – UUT, Parking Citations, Delinquent Accounts, Reconciliation, Transient Occupancy Tax C+5 Department Opinion (d) Utility Receipt Stubs C+2+2 months GC 34090 BUDGET 007 006 BUDGET (a) Final Budget, CIP Budgets, Fee Schedule TER+4 (b) Supporting Documents Change Requests, Amendment, Worksheets, Fee Schedules & Cost Plans C+2 Auditor Opinion (c) Long Range Plans Studies, Reports, Measurements, Forecasts & Projections C+3 Auditor Opinion REAL ESTATE 008 009 BINDING INSTRUMENTS (a) Land – Deeds, Easements While Useful Duplicate of City Clerk (b) Easement Vacations, Leases & Purchases Duplicate of City Clerk (c) Encroachments, Agreements & Conveyances Duplicate of City Clerk City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Department Head: Lalo Perez RIM Coordinator: Allen Krever Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE PURCHASING 009 010 (a) Council Approved Contracts, Solicitations & Documents All Open Council Approved Contracts, Solicitations & Documents +4 While Useful Duplicate of City Clerk (b) Service Contracts, Purchase Orders, Blanket Purchase Orders & Solicitations & Documents i. Purchase Orders/Blanket Orders ii. Service Order Contracts iii. Council Approved TER+3 TER+5 TER+7 While Useful All Open Service Contracts, Purchase Orders, Blanket Purchase Orders & Solicitations & Documents Duplicate of City Clerk (c) Bids Unawarded Solicitations & Documents C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion vital while orders are open 010 011 INTERNAL VENDORS - (Stores & Print Shop) Reports, Orders, Returns, Disposal Forms Journal & Requisitions C+4 Department and Auditors Opinion ACCOUNTING 011 012 YEAR-END REPORTS (a) Budget-to-Actual C+2 GC 34090 (b) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (C.A.F.R.) C+10 PER Department and Auditors Opinion (c) General Ledger, Encumbrance Report C+2 GC 34090 (d) Management Benefits Transactions, Accruals C+2 GC 34090 (e) Audit Work Papers & Journal Entries C+2 GC 34090 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE (A/P) 012 016 A/P + UTILITY CHECK REGISTERS (WARRANTS) C+7 C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion 013 017 CANCELLED/VOIDED WARRANTS. CHECK VOID FORMS + BACKUP C+4 C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion (VOIDED CHECKS) 014 018 VOUCHER PACKETS. GENERAL WARRANT COPIES WITH BACKUP FOR A/P, UTILITY REFUNDS, 3RD PARTY AND WIRE TRANSFERS. C+5 C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion 015 019 CAPITAL PROJECTS- Project Files, Street Reports, & Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Billings TER+7 Department and Auditors Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Department Head: Lalo Perez RIM Coordinator: Allen Krever Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ANNUAL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION-STATE CONTROLLERS REPORT C+7 CALIFORNIA AVENUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PARKING DISTRICT C+7 UNIVERSITY AVENUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PARKING DISTRICT C+7 ANNUAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURES REPORT C+7 ZFIR03 AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE COVER SHEETS. C+7 Cover sheet for batches of invoices from departments sent to A/P. Has list of invoices enclosed and department authorization to process the invoices. A/P JOURNAL LOG C+7 AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE FORMS C+7 TAX RECORDS – SALES TAX FILINGS, 1099 TAX FILINGS & REGISTERS C+7 GENERAL LEDGER- General Journal Entries 016 018 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE C+7 Federal & State Audit Requirements Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup Department Opinion (b) Invoices, Facility and Revenue Collections Cash Receipts, Cash Receipt Journals C+7 GC 34090, CCP 337 Federal & State Audit Requirements Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup Department Opinion 018 023 STATE REPORTS – City Reports, Transit Operators and Component Units C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion 019 024 UTILITIES- (a) Loan Reconciliation Work Papers, Bonds, Banking, Adjustments C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion (b) Receipts GC 34090 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Department Head: Lalo Perez RIM Coordinator: Allen Krever Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 020 025 FIXED ASSETS – Cost Reports, Reconciliation, Resume of Activity & Journal Entries TER 3 Department and Auditors Opinion 021 026 PAYROLL C+7 Public Employees Retirement System and Department Opinion - Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup Garnishment orders C+7 Direct Deposit/W4 changes C+7 Copies of PSO PAF C+7 CalPers Reporting C+7 Third Party Reporting C+7 Payroll Quarterly Tax Reports C+7 Payroll Masterfile C+7 Payroll Reconciliations C+7 Payroll Journals C+7 W2 Copies C+4 IRS Requirement Processing Reports by Paydate ENTERPRISE ACCOUNTING 022 Backup for invoices created (Airport, Avenidas, & Palo Alto Community Childcare) C+7 023 Loan reconciliations and backup C+7 024 Reconciliations of utility clearing accounts C+5 025 Receipts/stubs from the daily utility payments process (batch detail) C+2+2 months GC 34090 026 Audit backup & Journal entries backup C+2 GC 34090 027 Utility cash receipts C+7 028 Fixed assets backup of journal entries, capitalization, & reconciliations TER 3 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Department Head: Molly Stump RIM Coordinator: Stacy Lavelle Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 100 General Info/Subject Files C+9 GC 34090 Restricted access to any files may contain confidential documents. Keep files until subject matter is no longer active. Required to keep until reasonable threat of legal action has passed. 100-01 General Correspondence C+9 GC 34090 100-04 Chron File C+9 GC 34090 100-04 Newsletters C+2 GC 34090 SUBJECT FILES 202-01 Planning Reports As Needed Duplicate of Planning and Community Environment (PCE) 202-02 thru 202-11 Development Plan/Certificates of Compliance/Subdivision As Needed Duplicate of City Clerk, PCE & Public Works 202-12 thru 202-25 General Plan/Comprehensive Plan/State Mandated Planning As Needed Duplicate of PCE. Files to be reviewed for destruction on a file-by-file basis. 203-01 thru 203-10 Regional Planning As Needed Duplicate of PCE; review on a file by file basis 204-01 thru 204-04 Environmental Assessment C+4 Review on file-by-file basis for destruction 205-01 thru 205-13 Stanford University C+9 Review on file by file basis for destruction 206-01 thru 206-10 Building C+9 Review on file by file basis for destruction 207-01 thru 207-08 Transportation C+9 Duplicate of Transportation 301-01 thru 301-06 City Council C+11 Review on file by file basis for destruction 302-01 thru 302-11 Boards/Commissions/Committees C+11 303 American with Disabilities Act C+4 304 Records Management, Records Retention Schedule C+4 Duplicate of City Clerk 305 Management Studies/Surveys C+4 401-01 thru 401-14 Finance Administration C+4 Duplicate of Administrative Services, Public Works and Utilities 402-01 thru 402-07 Auditor Administration C+9 Duplicate of Auditor’s Files 403 General Audits C+9 500 Personnel Files C+9 GC 12946 & Title 29 Chpt XIV, Sections 1602.30; 32; 38. Some files may need to be retained until threat of legal action passed. Review on file by file basis for destruction City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Department Head: Molly Stump RIM Coordinator: Stacy Lavelle Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 600 Purchasing/Contracts C+10 Duplicate of Purchasing Division; Review on a file by file basis for destruction 700 Legislative/Legal C+14 Review on file by file basis for destruction 800 Public Works/Engineering/ Construction C+10 Review on file by file basis for destruction; 900 Litigation/claims C+10 Required to keep until reasonable threat of legal action has passed. On a file by file basis assign archive time 1000 Real Estate C+15 Duplication of Real Estate Division/CLK. Review on file by file basis for destruction 1100 Parks C+4 Duplicate of Community Services. Review on file by file basis for destruction 1200 Municipal Utilities C+4 Duplicate; review on file by file basis 1300 Police Administration C+9 GC 34090 Review on file by file basis for destruction 1400 Community Services C+4 GC 34090 Review on file by file basis for destruction 1500 Fire Administration C+9 GC 34090 Review on file by file basis for destruction 1600 Information Resources C+6 GC 34090 Review on file by file basis for destruction City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY AUDITOR’S OFFICE CAO: Harriet Richardson RIM Coordinator: Deniz Tunc Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 Office Budget and A/P C+5 Department Policy 002 Meeting Notes, Memo’s, Correspondence, Management Reports, Office Administrative files and Working files C+5 Department Policy 003 Contracts (All Open Council Approved Contracts, Service Contracts, Purchase Orders, Blanket Purchase Orders, Solicitations, and Documents) C+4 Duplicating of Purchasing and City Clerk SUBJECT FILES 004 Publications (Audit Reports), Status Reports, Revenue Reports, Council Reports PER Department Policy 005 Work Papers (supporting documentation for published reports) C+7 Department Policy 006 Revenue Audit Work Papers (Sales, TOT, UUT, Prop. Tax etc.) C+7 Department Policy (Confidential) 007 Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline documentation CL+5 Department Policy City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Beth Minor RIM Coordinator: David Carnahan Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS a) Budget b) Purchase Orders c) Domestic Partnership Affidavits & Statements C+2 C+2 PER GC 34090.7 Duplicate of Administrative Services Department Opinion General Correspondence C+2 GC 34090 PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS – Requests, responses and log. CL+2 GC 34090 CL = Resolution Date LEGISLATIVE HISTORY COUNCIL & STANDING COMMITTEES a) Agenda Packets – Docs. and information submitted to Council including questions and answers to Council agenda items. b) Minutes c) DVDs d) Proof of Agenda Posting C+2 PER C+1 C+2 GC 34090; GC 40801 54960.1(c)(1) GC 34090 Department Opinion Department Opinion 8/2014 Department Opinion 10/2014 STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS – DVD and Speech Hard Copy PER Department Opinion 8/2014 ORDINANCES PER GC 34090; PAMC 2.08.110 RESOLUTIONS PER GC 34090; PAMC 2.08.110 RECORDS & INFORMATION MANAGEMENT- a) Retention Schedules & Manuals b) Destruction Certificates c) Transfer Lists d) Inventory Database C+4 PER C+2 C+2 CCP 343 GC 34090 GC 34090 Department Opinion 8/2014 Department Opinion Record of on/off-site records SUBJECT FILES SUBJECT FILES – All subject files included, unless specifically set forth elsewhere. C+2 GC 34090 Confidential Legal Opinions are not public information and are restricted from public access. PROCLAMATIONS C+2 GC 34090 LEGAL ADVERTISING C+4 CCP 337; 54960.1(c)(1); GC 34090 Includes public hearing notices, legal publications EXTERNAL VENDORS – a) Contracts awarded by City Clerk Department b) Contracts awarded by City Council TER+4 TER+4 PAMC 2.08.110; CCP 337 PAMC 2.08.110; CCP 337 STANFORD (Including Sand Hill Road, Willow Rd. Extension) PER PAMC 2.08.110 City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 YACHT HARBOR PER PAMC 2.08.110 City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Beth Minor RIM Coordinator: David Carnahan Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY – Agreements including Transmission Agency of Northern California PER PAMC 2.08.110 City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 CABLE TELEVISION – Franchise & Licenses PER City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 FLOOD BASIN PER City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY C+2 PAMC 2.28.230 & 2.28.240 Duplicate of Attorney DIRECTOR’S HEARING APPEALS – Planning and Community Environment Director TER+2 TER = Project completion date Department Opinion 4/2015 POLICE AUDITOR REPORTS PER Department Opinion 4/2015 WATER RIGHTS – Agreements and Clean Up PER City Attorney Opinion 1995 PAC BELL/PG&E PER Department Opinion 1992 SISTER CITIES C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion 8/2014 ELECTIONS/POLITICAL REFORM ACT CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS- a) Elected Members & Log of Filers (paper) b) Non-elected members (paper) c) Others – Committees, Supporting/Opposing Measures (paper) d) Copies received (e.g. Form 410) (paper) e) Electronically filed PER C+5 C+7 C+4 C+10 PAMC 2.08.110 GC 81009(b)(g) GC 81009(b) GC 81009(c) GC 81009(f) GC 84615(i) CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE C+4 Code is Adopted by Resolution, Resolution is Permanent STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST – Form 700 (Designated Filers) & Log of Filers C+7 GC 81009(e)(g) Originals retained C+7 “Wet”, paper filed forms can be digitized after 2 years STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST – Form 700 (GC 87200 Filers) & Log of Filers C+4 GC 81009(d)(g) Originals forwarded to State. Copies retained C+4 GC 87200 Filers include City Council Members, the City Attorney, City Manager, Planning Commissioners, and the Administrative Services Director (CFO) City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Beth Minor RIM Coordinator: David Carnahan Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE FPPC AGENCY FORMS a) Gift to Agency Report – Form 801 b) Behested Payment Report – Form 803 b) 804 New Positions – Form 804 c) Consultants – Form 805 d) Public Official Appointments – From 806 C+7 C+7 C+4 C+4 C+2 FPPC 18944 GC 82015 FPPC 18734 FPPC 18734 FPPC 18705.5 GC 34090 Current on Agency Website Current on Agency Website NOMINATIONS/CANDIDATES a) Elected b) Non-elected PER TER+2 EC 17100 Department Opinion 6/2014 TER = Certif. of elections results date or failure date AB1234 ETHICS TRAINING – Proof of training attendance C+5 GC 53235.2(2)b OATHS OF OFFICE a) Elected Council Member TER+2 PER Department Opinion TER = Leaving Office date Department Opinion 8/2014 PETITIONS, INITIATIVES, REFERENDUM, RECALL & CHARTER AMENDMENTS TER+1 EC 17200 EC 17400 GC 6253.5 RESTRICTED ACCESS TER = Certif. of election results date or failure date Department Opinion 8/2014 BALLOTS TER+1 EC 17302, 17304, 17306; RESTRICTED ACCESS TER = date of election Department Opinion 8/2014 SAMPLE BALLOT PER GC 34090 BOARDS & COMMISSIONS a) Applications & Appointments I. Appointed II. Not Appointed b) Letters of Appointment c) Notices of Termination d) Recruitment Outreach e) General Correspondence TER+5 CL+2 TER+2 TER+2 C+2 C+2 GC 34090a; GC 40801 TER = Leaving Office date CL = Close of recruitment TER = Leaving Office date TER = Leaving Office date COUNCIL MEMBER – a) Individual Files b) Biographies c) Photos d) Emergency Standby Council Oaths of Office and Report TER+2 PER PER PER Department Opinion 10/2014 ROSTER PER Department Opinion Paper C+2 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Beth Minor RIM Coordinator: David Carnahan Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE REAL PROPERTY BINDING INSTRUMENTS a) Land – Deeds, Easement b) Easement Vacations, Leases & Purchases c) Encroachments, Agreements & Conveyance d) Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) i. Deeds of Trust ii. Promissory Notes PER TER TER GC 34090a Duplicate of County Recorder TER = paid in full TER = paid in full LIENS, CONDEMNATION PER GC 34090a ANNEXATIONS/ACQUISTIONS PER GC 34090a BONDS While Useful Duplicate of County Recorder ASSESSMENTS TER+2 Department Opinion SUBDIVIDOR AGREEMENTS PER GC 65864 & 65869.5 DEED OF TRUST TER+6 CCP 336a ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING RECORDS 001 Alarm Hearings C+2 GC 34090 001 Animal Bite Hearings C+15 GC 34090 001 Utility User Tax Hearings C+10 GC 34090 001 Parking Ticket Hearings C+2 GC 34090 Includes Initial Review document 001t Administrative Citation C+5 GC 34090 Noise, Animal City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY MANAGER’S DEPARTMENT Department Head: James Keene RIM Coordinator: Danille Rice Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 Personnel Information, Budget Information, Records Retention Schedule While useful Duplicate of other departments 002 Staff Reports CMRs (City Manager Reports) – including supporting documents PER GC34090.5 May be scanned after 5 years and paper copy offered to Palo Alto Historical Association 003 Economic Development Files for Projects throughout City of Palo Alto PER May be stored off-site Sister Cities C+2 GC 34090 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 004 Legislative Letters C+5 Consistent with State Legislation – Reviews and Changes SUBJECT FILES 005 Files established pertaining to various subjects, Project files, Chronological Files C + 2 GC 34090 POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 006 Official copies of all City Policies and procedures PER Each department should have a current copy of the Policies & Procedures City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Rob de Geus RIM Coordinator: Erin Solheim Perez Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 Personnel – Current Employees Performance Reviews & Work Schedules C+2 Performance reviews are duplicates of People Strategy and Operations 002 Security Documents, Work Orders, Correspondence Inventories, Logs & Reports C+2 GC 34090 003 Policy – Policies, Procedures & Forms C CA Opinion 004 Other Departments – Stores Requisition Purchase Orders, Contracts & Records Retention Schedule C Duplicate of Administrative Services (ASD) and City Clerk 005 Volunteer Records C+2 GC 34090 006 Accounting – Sales Receipts, Deposits, Sales Logs, Ledgers, Fees/Fines, Contracts Under $85,000, Bills & Transit Books C+1 Department Opinion Duplicate of ASD ARTS & SCIENCES DIVISION 007 Art Loan Program C+2 GC 34090 008 Theatre Records – Costume & Prop Loans and Booth Level Settings C+2 GC 34090 009 Art Collection C Community Services Opinion Public Art Commission a) Action Agenda b) Proof of Publication c) Minutes of all meetings d) General Correspondence e) Proof of Agenda Posting C+2 C+2 PER C+2 C+2 GC 34090 011 Exhibits – Junior Museum & Baylands Interpretive Center PER Department Opinion 012 Animal Permits – Junior Museum & Zoo TER+2 Fish & Game Sections 3200, 3204 HUMAN SERVICES & CUBBERLEY DIVISION Human Relations Commission a) Action Agenda b) Proof of Publication c) Minutes of all meetings d) General Correspondence e) Proof of Agenda Posting C+2 C+2 PER C+2 C+2 GC 34090 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Rob de Geus RIM Coordinator: Erin Solheim Perez Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE RECREATION & GOLF DIVISION 020 Use Permits – Fields, Parks, Courts, Certificates of Insurance, Facilities Applications & Logs and Group Agreements C+2 GC 34090 021 Waivers, Cancellation/Transfer Forms C+2 GC 34090 022 Recreation Foundation – Minutes, Correspondence & Financial Information C+1 Department Opinion Parks and Recreation Commission a) Action Agenda b) Proof of Publication c) Minutes of all meetings d) General Correspondence e) Proof of Agenda Posting C+2 C+2 PER C+2 C+2 GC 34090 Fee Reduction Program C+1 Department Opinion 4/2015 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Department Head: Peter Pirnejad RIM Coordinator: Lisa Green Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDES ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 OTHER DEPARTMENTS Personnel Records, Purchase Orders, Payment Claim, Vouchers, Legislation, Final Budget, Correspondence with Other Departments and Records Requests While Useful GC 34090 Duplicate of other Departments 002 DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATION Daily Deposit Copies, Department Procedures, Equipment, Inventories, Budget Preparation, Final Budget Correspondence, and Daily Counts & Wait Times. C+2 GC 34090 003 CONTRACTS a) Contracts under $85,000 plus all records associated b) Full Cost Recovery Contracts c) Contracts over $85,000 plus all records associated C+2 Until Completion C+2 PAMC 2.30.075 Duplicate of Administrative Services Duplicate of City Clerk SUBJECT FILES 004 PERMIT RECORDS Address changes, Permit applications, Building Use & Occupancy applications and certificates, Department correspondence. PER GC 34090 Electronically Stored in Geographic Information System (GIS) or Accela 005 INSPECTION RECORDS Survey letters, Special inspection – final inspection reports, SB407 certificate of compliance forms, Stop work correspondence. PER GC 34090 006 Plans PER H&S 19850 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Eric Nickel RIM Coordinator: James Henrikson Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR CL=COMPLETION OF INSPECTION/PROJECT COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT LOB=LIFE OF BUILDING TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 DEPTARTMENT MANAGEMENT C+2 GC 34090 General Order, Special Orders, Bulletins While Useful Policies and Procedures While Useful Memorandum of Agreements While Useful Duplicate of People Strategy and Operations (PSO) 001(a) Code Books, Ordinances PER GC 34090(e) California Fire Code, PAMC amendments, etc. 002 DEPARTMENT PLANS PER Department Opinion Strategic Plans/Master Planning Documents While Useful 003 GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE & REPORTS C+2 GC 34090 Correspondence, memos, emails, press releases While Useful Committee reports, minutes, public file review requests While Useful Special studies, community relations While Useful 004 BIDS-UNACCEPTED While Useful Duplicate of Purchasing 005 OTHER DEPARTMENTS While Useful Duplicate of other departments Staffing roster, timecards, leave reports While Useful Duplicate of Administrative Services (ASD) Contracts and accounting reports, purchase orders, deposits, receipts While Useful Duplicate of ASD and City Clerk Records retention schedule SUP Duplicate of City Clerk 006 EMPLOYEE FILES 006(a) Training records, certificates C+2 GC 34090 Duplicate of PSO 006(b) Employee records While Useful Duplicate of PSO 006(c) DMV Driver Tests and records C+2 GC 34090 Duplicate of PSO 007 EMPLOYEE INJURY/EXPOSURE While Useful Duplicate of PSO Employee accident and exposure reports PER Individual and summary statistics PER SUBJECT FILES FIRE PREVENTION 008 FIRE PREVENTION: Code Enforcement actions CL+5 CFC 104.6 Site Plans While Useful Requests for service, complaints. C+2 Sprinkler system & Fire Alarm periodic testing reports & inspections C+6 Electronic 5 Year tests: Keep C+6 Stored by 3rd Party Vendor 008(a) FIRE INVESTIGATION REPORTS & PHOTOS CL+6 CFC 104.3.2; PC 801 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Eric Nickel RIM Coordinator: James Henrikson Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR CL=COMPLETION OF INSPECTION/PROJECT COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT LOB=LIFE OF BUILDING TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 008(b) FIRE/HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION REPORTS & PHOTOS PER PC 799 C+6 onsite; PER offsite 008(c) ARSON /JUVENILE FIRESETTER SUSPECTS CL+6 CFC 104.3.2; PC 801 Include interviews, documentation and classroom materials for junior firesetters 009 ANNUAL FIRE (CFC) PERMITS C+2 GC 34090 010 STREET & NUMBER ASSIGNMENT While Useful Duplicate of Planning and Community Environment 011 FIRE INSPECTIONS (Bureau and Engine Company inspections) CL+6 CFC 103.3.4 Department Opinion CFC 103.3.4 requires CL +3. However, longer period desired due to 3 year inspection cycle for some facilities Records of Inspection; routine, special, new construction & tenant improvement related. PER Electronically stored in Accela Pre-Citation letters, Notice of Violation letters. While Useful 012 CERTIFICATIONS GC 34090 Flame Resistance PER Electronically stored in Accela Use and Occupancy Certificate PER Electronically stored in Accela 013 SPRINKLERS & FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS LoB GC 34090(a) Pertains to real property. May include blueprints, reports, inspection results, permits. C+2 onsite; PER offsite Design, Flow, Installation documents LoB Plan review comments LoB 014 BUILDING PROJECTS LoB GC 34090(a) Pertains to real property. May include blueprints, reports, inspection results, permits. C+2 onsite; PER offsite New Construction & Tenant Improvement Projects, including Underground tank installations and repairs PER Electronic Electronically stored in Accela Alternate means & methods PER 2007 CFC 104. 6.4 Electronically stored in Accela Plan review comments PER Electronically stored in Accela SUPPRESSION 015 INCIDENTS (fire, medical, hazmat, etc.) PER Electronically stored in RMS 015(a) Dispatch and daily logs C+2 GC 34090 Release to Union; do not destroy City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Eric Nickel RIM Coordinator: James Henrikson Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR CL=COMPLETION OF INSPECTION/PROJECT COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT LOB=LIFE OF BUILDING TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 015(b) Fire Incident Reports; all except arson related PER CFC 104.3.2; PC 801 Electronically stored in RMS 015(c) Fire Incident and other Field Reports; arson related PER CFC 104.3.2; PC 801 Electronically stored in RMS 015(d) Fire Incident and other Field Reports; arson with death involved PER PC 799 Electronically stored in RMS 015(e) Pre-Hospital Care Report (PCR) PER 45 CFR Part 164.530 Electronically stored in RMS 016 ENGINE/TRUCK EQUIPMENT 016(a) Daily & Monthly logs C+2 GC 34090 016(c) Maintenance Program. C+2 GC 34090 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 017 ANNUAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORAGE PERMIT C+2 GC 34090 018 CALCULATIONS- Seismic and secondary containment C+2 GC 34090 019 SITE CLEANUP Spill Reports & facility closure related information; related inspections. Does not include reports for activities regulated by California Regional Water Resources Control Board or California Dept. of Toxic Substances. PER GC 34090(a) Pertains to real property. Previous retention was 30 years-OHSA Guideline cited no specific document reference. Electronically stored in California Environmental Reporting Service (CERS) 020 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS & UNDERGROUND TANK INSPECTIONS, routine, special, and enforcement related CL+6 CCR 27. 15188 Department Opinion C+5 Required. Keep additional time for consistency with other inspection records. Electronically stored in CERS 021 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS BUSINESS PLANS C+2 GC 34090 Electronically stored in CERS 022 UNDERGROUND TANKS 022(a) UST closures and/or removals and related documentation. Does not include reports for activities regulated by California Regional Water Resources Control Board or California Dept. of Toxic Substances. P GC 34090(a) Pertains to real property. May include blueprints, reports, inspection results, permits Electronically stored in CERS 022(b) Periodic testing, monitoring and special reports C+2 GC 34090 Electronically stored in CERS 022(c) Reports, fact sheets and studies City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Eric Nickel RIM Coordinator: James Henrikson Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR CL=COMPLETION OF INSPECTION/PROJECT COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT LOB=LIFE OF BUILDING TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE PROGRAMS 023 SPECIAL PROGRAMS: Strike teams and mutual aid response C+12 GC 34090 Existing Department Opinion Is C+12. Note that GC 34090 requires only C+ 2 023 (a) Disaster Service Worker: All associated documents TER+30 CCR 19, 2573.2, GC 3105, 6250 Required for injury claims 024 PARAMEDICS: Training and testing C+4 CCR 22, Div 9, sec 100392 Retained by Human Resources? (TER+3, 29 CFR 1627.3) Patient Care Report-See Suppression Codes referenced that set retention times are listed below. Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1602 3 Years Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1627.3 3 Years Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1910.1020 30 Years Code of Federal Regulations 45 CFR 160-164 6 years California Government Code Section 3105, 6250 TER +30 Years California Government Code Section 34090 2 Years California Government Code Section 34090.5 Electronic retention California Penal Code Section 799 Permanent California Penal Code Section 800 6 Years California Fire Code Section 103.3.4 3 Years California Fire Code Section 104.3.2 3 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 19 Section 2573.2 TER + 30 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 22 Section 100170 5 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 22 Section 100392 4 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 27 Section 15188 5 Years Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 17.28.050 3 Years City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (I.T.) Department Head: Jonathan Reichental RIM Coordinator: Darren Numoto Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS a) Budget b) Purchase Orders C+2 C+2 GC 34090.7 Duplicate of Administrative Services (ASD) Duplicate of ASD SUBJECT FILES Phone Log Files C+2 GC 34090 Call records Service Desk Tickets C+2 GC 34090 IT Service Desk Tickets Financial System Data Backup C+7 SAP Database Backups Contracts a) Under $5,000 b) $5,000 and over c) $85,000 and over TER+3 TER+3 TER+3 Duplicate of ASD Duplicate of City Clerk City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule LIBRARY DEPARTMENT Department Head: Monique Ziesenhenne RIM Coordinator: Evelyn Cheng Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS - Department Administration Work Schedules, Volunteer Records, Budget Preparation, Surveys, Statistics, Projects, Staff Reports, Org Chart, Memberships, Legal Opinion, Staff Development and Training, Community Relations, Benchmark Data C+2 GC34090 Standards Department Policies and Procedures, Strategic Plan, Safety/Security Manual, Disaster Plan Until Superseded GC34090 General Correspondence & Reports Correspondence, Memos, Emails, Press Releases, Committee Reports, Meeting Notes, Working Files C+2 GC34090 E-mail messages related to a current project or a policy-making decision should be retained along with related records Other Departments Staffing Roster, Timecards, Leave Requests, Contracts, Amendments, Purchase Orders, Change Orders, Invoices, Travel, Final Budget, Fines and Fees Schedule, Library Bond Measures, Building Plans, Deposits, Cash Receipts, Information Technology Management Records, Records Retention Schedule While useful GC 34090 Duplicate of other departments Employee Files (Regular & Hourly) PAFs, Appraisals, Work Injury, Job Descriptions, Requests for Reclassification, Recruitment – applications, resumes, While Useful Duplicate of People Strategy and Operations LEGISLATIVE HISTORY Library Advisory Commission a)Agenda b)Proof of Publication c)Minutes of Meetings d)General Correspondence e) Proof of Agenda Posting PER C+2 PER C+2 C+2 GC34090 If posted by Library Staff City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Donna Rogers RIM Coordinator: Deanna Riding Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE SUBJECT FILES Library Databases Customers, Circulation and Inventory Subscriptions and Licenses C+2 Registration and circulation records are exempt from Public Records Act under certain conditions; GC6254, GC6254.5, GC6255, GC6267 Grants & Donations Applications Awards Non-Monetary Donations Reimbursements C+5 Capital Improvements Project Files, Specifications, Contracts, Agreements, Equipment, Maintenance, Licenses, Inventory Life of Building Publicity/Publications Promotional Materials C+2 GC34090 State Library Public Library Survey Reimbursements C+2 Operational Reports Daily Log, Cash Handling, Bank Deposits, Debt Collection Management Incident Reports C+2 C+5 Public Programming Development and Administration of Programs for the Public (children, students, adults) C+2 Collection Development Records Records documenting the selection and acquisition of new materials for the Library’s collections. C+2 Collection Movement Records Records documenting the physical movement of materials between the facilities and storage areas C+2 Historic Reference History of Palo Alto City Library PER Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Department Head: Kenneth Dueker RIM Coordinator: Nathan Rainey Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT C+2 GC 34090 General Order, Special Orders, Bulletins Policies and Procedures Memorandum of Agreements While Useful Duplicate of People Strategy and Operations (PSO) 002 DEPARTMENT PLANS PER Department Opinion Strategic Plans/Master Planning Documents 003 GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE & REPORTS C+2 GC 34090 Correspondence, memos, emails, press releases Committee reports, minutes, public file review requests Special studies, community relations 003c Budgets, PO’s Time Keeping, Correspondence, Surveys, Statistical Reports C+5 GC 34090 004h Equipment Records TER+2 GC 34090 Retained until termination of equipment’s use; Manuals, instructions, procedures, assignments, maintenance EMPLOYEE FILES 006(a) Training records, certificates C+2 GC 34090 Retained by PSO (TER+3, 29 CFR 1627.3) 006(b) Employee records While Useful Retained by PSO (TER+3, 29 CFR 1627.3) SPECIAL PROGRAMS 023 (a) Disaster Service Worker: Emergency Services Volunteers All associated documents TER+30 CCR 19, 2573.2, GC 3105, 6250 Required for injury claims City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Department Head: Kenneth Dueker RIM Coordinator: Nathan Rainey Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Codes referenced that set retention times are listed below. Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1602 3 Years Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1627.3 3 Years Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1910.1020 30 Years Code of Federal Regulations 45 CFR 160-164 6 years California Government Code Section 3105, 6250 TER +30 Years California Government Code Section 34090 2 Years California Government Code Section 34090.5 Electronic retention California Penal Code Section 799 Permanent California Penal Code Section 800 6 Years California Fire Code Section 103.3.4 3 Years California Fire Code Section 104.3.2 3 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 19 Section 2573.2 TER + 30 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 22 Section 100170 5 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 22 Section 100392 4 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 27 Section 15188 5 Years Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 17.28.050 3 Years City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PEOPLE STRATEGY AND OPERATIONS Department Head: Kathy Shen RIM Coordinator: Elizabeth Egli Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 GENERAL – Correspondence, Timecards, Contracts, Subject Files, Budgets, Projects, and Records Retention Schedule* C+2 GC 34090 Duplicate of City Clerk and Administrative Services *Note: Records Retention Schedules are only maintained while in effect (current/superseded) 002 STANDARDS – Policies, Rules, Bills, & Regulations C+2 GC 34090 EMPLOYMENT 004 RECRUITMENT – Applications, Resumes, Alternate Lists, Testing C+3 49 USC Sections 2000e-8; 2000e-12; 29 CFR Section 1602.12 and 1602.14 Restricted Access 005 PERSONNEL FILES (a) Regular Employees TER+15 29 CFR Section 1627.3 Labor Relations Section 1174 Access May digitally store after 2 years and shred Restricted Access PERSONNEL FILES (b) Water Quality Control Plant – Senior Chemist, Chemist, Laboratory Tech, Senior Industrial Waste Investigator, Industrial Waste Investigator, Senior Mechanic, Mechanic, Senior Operator, WQC Plant Operators I/II, Industrial Waste Inspectors, Electricians, Supervisor, WQCP Operations, Manager/Assistant Manager, WQCP, and Manager, Laboratory Services* TER+30 29 CFR 1910.1020; Cal OSHA 8 Cal Code Regs 3204 Access May digitally store after 2 years and shred Restricted Access *There may be other employees in safety-sensitive positions in other locations with same extended retention schedule 005 PERSONNEL FILES (c) Hourly Employees TER+5 29 CFR Section 1627.3 Labor Relations Section 1174 Access May digitally store after 2 years and shred Restricted Access 006 RETIREMENT – Public Employee Retirement System TER+4 29 USC Section 1001 – 1381 Restricted Access 007 CLASSIFICATION: Requests for reclassification, PDQ’s, Job Descriptions, Desk Audits C+2 Labor Code Section 1197.5(d) BENEFITS 008 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT FILES – DCCAP (dependent care), Deferred Compensation, Dental, EAP, Life, Medical, Vision/LTD Claim Applications, Leave Domestic Partner Reimbursement C+4 29 CFR Section 1627.3 Restricted Access EAP = Employee Assistance Program LTD = Long Term Disability City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PEOPLE STRATEGY AND OPERATIONS Department Head: Kathy Shen RIM Coordinator: Elizabeth Egli Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE FPPC AGENCY FORMS a) 804 New Positions – Form 804 b) Consultants – Form 805 C+4 C+4 FPPC 18734 FPPC 18734 Duplicate of City Clerk Duplicate of City Clerk RISK MANAGEMENT/WORKERS’ COMPENSATION 010 WORKERS COMPENSATION Claim Files, Timecards TER+5 (if claim is active) Labor Code Section 5410 Files are held at Administrator’s Office, City only keeps working file Restricted Access 011 ACCEL JPA Agenda Files C+3 Department Opinion 012 DMV – Pull Notices C+4 (only if employee has violation on record) Department Opinion Restricted Access 013 DRUG TESTING C+5 49 CFR Section 193-9 Restricted Access 014 SAFETY REPORTS: a) Investigation Reports b) Hearing Tests PER TERM+5 C+4 Department Opinion HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT 016 TRAINING – Program Lists, Instructor Lists, Class Rosters, & Evaluations C+4 Department Opinion EMPLOYEE RELATIONS 017 NEGOTIATIONS – Notes, Notebooks, Correspondence, Contracts, & Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) C+10 29 USC Sections 211 (c), 203 (m), 207 (g) Restricted Access 018 COMPENSATION – Mgmt. Salary History Sheets, Job Descriptions, Salary Surveys, Compensation Plans C+7 Department Opinion 019 GRIEVANCES – Arbitration, Grievances Reports, SEIU Window Period Requests, Sexual Harassment & Discrimination C+7 29 CFR Section 1602.21 (h) Restricted Access City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Department Head: Hillary Gitelman RIM Coordinator: Zariah Betten Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 OTHER DEPARTMENTS Personnel Records, Purchase Orders, Payment Claim Vouchers, Legislation, Final Budget, , Correspondence with Other Departments and Records Requests While Useful GC 34090 Duplicate of other Departments 002 DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATION Department Procedures, Equipment, Inventories, Budget Preparation, and Final Budget Correspondence C+2 GC 34090 003 CONTRACTS a) Contracts under 85,000 plus all records associated b) Full Cost Recovery Contracts C+2 Until Completion PAMC 2.30 Department Opinion 004 ADMINISTRATIVE REFERENCE Fee Schedules, Orgs. List, Ordinance Binder, Planning Ethics, Data Collection. While Useful plus online archives Department Opinion LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 005 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (PTC), ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD, HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD AND DIRECTOR’S HEARINGS a) Minutes - Online b) Agendas - Online c) Correspondence with Staff/Public – project based d) Proof of Publication e) Proof of Agenda Posting PER C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 GC 34090 Video and Audio Tapes are recycled after 90 days except for Director’s Hearing – 5 years of DVD/CD Hardcopy format, Boards – Summary. PTC – Verbatim SUBJECT FILES 006 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA While Useful Duplicate of Santa Clara County 007 PLANS a) Approved b) Superceded PER C+2 GC 34090 Digital Format Hardcopies 008 DISCRETIONARY PLANNING ENTITLEMENTS a) Applications b) Maps-Zoning, Tentative Subdivision, Preliminary Parcel, Comp Plan Land Use, et al c) Permit Extensions (currently a 2-year window with a 1-yr extension) d) Record of Land Use Actions e) CEQA-EIR-Negative Declarations PER C+2 PER GC 34090 Digital Format (stored offsite) Digital format Saved within Application files that are scanned into GIS/DOXview 010 HISTORIC INVENTORY PER GC 34090 Digital Format – Currently updated via GIST 011 ZONING ORDINANCES PER Duplicate of City Clerk City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Department Head: Hillary Gitelman RIM Coordinator: Zariah Betten Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 012 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND AMENDMENTS – Available Website reference only (Amendments acknowledged by Resolutions PER GC 34090 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup w/ Amendments Resolutions Duplicate of City Clerk 013 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS (CDBG) a) Project Files b) Deeds of Trust and Promissory Notes C+2 State of California Duplicate of City Clerk 014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS (CDBG) Program Reference Forms, Procedures and Brochures C+3 Human Relations Commission acts as Committee Department Opinion 015 HOUSING a) General Information and References-Outside Materials b) Housing Studies and Programs c) HOME Funding-General (If individual home loans keep permanently) d) Below Market Rate (BMR) Units, In Lieu Hosing Mitigation e) Below Market Rate Administration While Useful C+3 C+3 PER While Useful Department Opinion Federal regulation federally funded programs and labor standard compliance files Department Opinion 016 TRANSPORTATION-BICYCLES a) Bike Boulevard Final Studies and Plans, Specs & Est. b) Bike Counts c) Bike Facilities, Lockers and Racks d) Bike Locker Rental Program e) Bike Operations (signing/striping, signal detection), paths, Routes and Trails f) Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee PER C+5 C+5 C+5 PER C+2 GC 34090 GC 34090 GC 34090 Unique project, historical significance, model for other jurisdictions in and out of U.S. Department Opinion 017 FUNDING-Fuel Efficient Traffic Signal Management Program (FETSIM) Applications, Prop 116 Applications, Surface Transportation Program (STDP)/Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)Applications and Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Applications PER 018 NEIGHBORHOOD STUDIES C+2 Department Opinion 019 Parking a) Assessment Districts b) Carpool/Vanpool Program c) Facilities(garages/lots) d) Permit Policy/Management e) Residential Permit Parking f) Structures g) Surveys h) Zones i) Congestion Pricing PER C+2 PER C+2 C+5 PER C+2 C+2 C+5 GC 34090 GC 34090 Multiple Depts. Department Opinion Department Opinion Department Opinion Department Opinion Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Department Head: Hillary Gitelman RIM Coordinator: Zariah Betten Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 020 PERMITS/TRAFFIC CONTROL-Certificates of Insurance and Traffic Control Plans C+2 GC 34090 021 TRAFFIC REFERENCE a) Bike-correspondence, other jurisdiction bike plans, safety/education b) Demographic Data c) Traffic Flow Maps C+2 PER C+5 GC 34090 GC 34090 Department Opinion/Online Reference 022 REGIONAL AGENCIES C+2 GC 34090 023 SCHOOL SAFETY C+2 GC 34090 024 TRAFFIC STUDIES a) Traffic Calming b) Traffic Signals c) Other Traffic Studies C+5 GC 34090 Department Opinion 025 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS Accidents (high accident location/accident data and reports) C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion 028 Plans PER H&S 19850 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule POLICE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Chief Dennis Burns RIM Coordinator: Lisa Scheff Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 003 (a) Personnel Training SUP GC 34090 Bulletins 003 (a)(1) Lesson Plans C+15 GC 34090 Scope, content, time period of courses 003 (a)(2) Applicant Fingerprint Files TER+2 GC 34090 Includes paperwork authorizing fingerprinting and background checks for City employment applicants, all license and permit applicants and volunteer applicants 003 (a)(3) Personnel (copies) TER+7 GC 34090 Paperwork documenting officer & non-sworn internal and external training 003 (a)(b) Volunteer Files TER+2 GC 34090 Volunteer identification, contact information 003b Forms, Brochures TER+2 GC 34090 003c Budgets, PO’s, Time Keeping, Correspondence, Surveys, Statistical Reports C+5 GC 34090 003d Demographic Data Collection Cards C+2 GC 34090 Program ended 6-30-2010 003e Alarm Records C+2 GC 34090 Alarm packets, documents & correspondence 001q Administrative/Internal Affairs Investigations – Documents relating to complaints or investigations in response to citizen complaints regarding members of the Department. C+5 PC 832.5, EVC 1045, PC 801.5, PC 803(c), VC 2547 Provided documents are not evidence in any claim filed or pending litigation exists. 001k Press Releases C+2 GC 34090 001t Administrative Citations C+5 GC 34090 001r PAPD Policy Manual SUP GC 34090 Living Document ANIMAL SERVICES RECORDS 001p Nuisance Complaints, Animal Bite Reports, PAMC Violations and warnings issued. C+10 GC 34090 PAMC = Palo Alto Municipal Code 001s Veterinary Medical Records C+3 BP 4081 0010 Animal Licenses C+2 GC 34090 Dog – 3 years from expiration 001n Humane Officer – Activity records and logs C+2 GC 34090 001m Animal Control – All records relating to animal inventory and care C+2 GC 34090 COMMUNICATION RECORDS 001 (a) 911 Recordings (b) Other Phone Recordings, not on 911 lines 180 Days 180 Days GC 34090.6 PC 1054 Exception: Recordings used as evidence in a criminal prosecution or claim filed or litigation or potential claims and litigation shall be preserved for 100 days after conclusion of the court action City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule POLICE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Chief Dennis Burns RIM Coordinator: Lisa Scheff Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE 003f Mobile Audio Video Records (MAV) DAR – Digital Audio Recordings C+2 GC 34090.6 PC 1054 Exception: Recordings used as evidence in a criminal prosecution or claim filed or litigation or potential claims and litigation shall be preserved for 100 days after conclusion of the court action 003g Interior Video Recordings Booking/AIB or Investigative Services Division (ISD) when initiated C+1 GC 34090.6 PC 1054 Exception: Recordings used as evidence in a criminal prosecution or claim filed or litigation or potential claims and litigation shall be preserved for 100 days after conclusion of the court action 003h Routine Perimeter Security Video 100 Days GC 34090.6 Automated self-recycled/re-use technology INVESTIGATIVE RECORDS 001e Police Reports – ODI (Optical Document Imaging) System and supporting hard copy Reports PER GC 34090 PC 800 PC 801 PC 799 Reports scanned into the ODI system from 6-15-92 to 12-31-06 Unless report is a Permanent Record or ordered Sealed by Court Order 001f Non-Criminal Police Reports – Lost/Found Property, Injured or sick persons; missing persons where person has returned; traffic collision reports not used as the basis for criminal charges etc. C+20 GC 34090 Any CLETS entry must be canceled prior to purge if applicable. Applies to Police Reports taken prior to 6-15-1992, prior to Optical Imagining. 001e Traffic Collision Fatality Reports PER GC 34090 Regardless of the medium 001e (1) Police Reports/PDF Scanned – All Felonies, high Misdemeanor cases. PER PC 800 PC 801 PC 799 (Felony Capital Crimes punishable by Death, Life Imprisonment PC 1054 Starting 2007 Hard Copies will be kept in conjunction with PDF Prosecution for an offense punishable by imprisonment in state prison for 8 years or more must commence within 6 years after offense commission. Commencement of prosecution defined in PC 804. *Exception: PC 803 – Tolling/Extension of time periods; Appeals process and “Three Strikes” also considerations in assigning retention. 001f (1) Noncriminal Police Reports/PDF Scanned – Lost/Found Property, Injured or sick persons; missing persons where person has returned; traffic collision reports not used as the basis for criminal charges etc. C+15 GC 34090 Starting 2007 Reports will be scanned to PDF. Any CLETS entry must be canceled prior to purge if applicable. City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule POLICE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Chief Dennis Burns RIM Coordinator: Lisa Scheff Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE 001v Arrest/Conviction HS Section 11357 (b), (c), (d), (e) or H&S Section 11360 (b) violations – Occurring after January 1, 1996 Mandatory destruction from date of conviction or date of arrest with no conviction C+2 HS 11361.5 Applicable to convictions occurring after 1-1-1996 or arrests not followed by a conviction occurring after 1-1-1996; Exception: H&S 11357(e), the record shall be retained until a juvenile offender attains 18 years of age – then destroyed pursuant to 11361.5 001l FI Cards – Field interview Cards C+2 GC 34090 Includes photo if taken 001k (1) Daily Bulletins C+2 GC 34090 001e (2) Registrants – Sex, Arson, Narcotics PER DOJ Guidelines Fingerprint Card, Photo and info forwarded to DOJ 001e (3) Criminal Reports (Misdemeanor low Felony) and Domestic Violence Reports C+15 FC 6228(e) GC 34090 Remove property from CLETS, no suspect or open investigations pending MISC REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS 004a Court Board C+1 GC 34090 Court Notices 004b Court Liaison Tracking List C+2 GC 34090 Booking/Filing Lists and Logs, Informal Discovery requests and Correspondence 004c Subpoenas (Duplicate) C+2 GC 34090 Subpoena Duces Tecum (SDT) filed with case Report once completed 004d Statistical – Crime Analysis C+2 GC 34090 Internally generated information using activity logs, citizen calls, and current and past crime statistics. Reports created for a variety of purposes 004e Statistical – UCR (Uniform Crime Report) LEOKA, Homicide, Arson, DV, Hate, Arrest & Citation, Death in Custody, Crimes against Senior C+5 GC 34090 Originals to CA DOJ&FBI 004f Sealed – Adult/Factual Innocent Mandatory Destruction upon and pursuant to Court Order PC 851.8 Does not include letter of finding send to the defendant for grants/denials 001j Restraining Orders C or until SUP Destroy after law enforcement actions described in PC 273.5, 273.6, 646.9, 12028.5, 13700 and Family Code Sections 6380-6383 are fulfilled and effective date of Restraining Order has expired 001g Traffic Citations (copies) *Except Juvenile offender program graduates – those not forwarded to court of program successfully completed. C+2 GC 34090 Original is forwarded to court. Agency copy kept for processing. Parking Citations forwarded to Revenue Collections City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule POLICE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Chief Dennis Burns RIM Coordinator: Lisa Scheff Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE 004h Equipment Records – PAS Records and Radar Calibration Logs, Weapons TER+2 GC 34090 Retained until termination of equipment use; Manuals, instructions, procedures, assignments, maintenance 004i License/Permits C+2 GC 34090 Parade, Noise Exemption, Special Events, Block Party, Taxi, Masseuse, Second Hand Dealer. No Longer Interested forms to be sent to DOJ for expired applicant information. 004j Warrants: (1) Felony (2) Misdemeanor (3) Infraction Felony – 10 Misdemeanor – 7 Infraction 7 GC 34090 PC 799 PC 800/801 Warrants attaining purge date are sent to Santa Clara Co DA’s office for review of extension of warrant/Active case or purge. All CLETS/AWS systems must be updated or cancelled. 004k NCIC Validations C+2 GC 34090 Copies sent monthly to DOJ 004l Records requests, correspondence, no record C+2 GC 34090 ** The destruction of felony, misdemeanor, and infraction Crime/Supplemental Reports is permitted providing: (1) Not related to an un-adjudicated arrest except for eligible HS 11357 or HS 11360 violations; (2) Not related to un-served warrants; (3) They do not involve identifiable items which have not been recovered; (4) Not related to PC 290, PC 457.1, or HS 11590 Registrants; (5) Not related relate to violations listed in PC Sections 799 and PC 800; (6) The cases are not presently involved in either a known civil or criminal litigation/Evidence City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Head: Mike Sartor RIM Coordinator: Lisa Navarret Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATION 001 001 PERSONNEL Confidential Documents While useful Duplicate of People Strategy and Operations (PSO) AIRPORT AGREEMENTS/CONTRACTS While useful Duplicate of Administrative Services (ASD) and City Clerk (CLK) BUDGET Budget Change Requests PER Duplicate of Office of Management & Budget CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS a) Project Files, Work Orders, Schedules, Bidders List, Correspondence, Change Order b) Specifications, Reports Plans, Contracts and Subdivisions PER Life of Structure GENERAL Correspondence Membership Information Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) C+2 GC 34090 GRANTS Applications Awards PER OPERATIONAL REPORTS Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly and Annually C+4 GC 34090 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) PERMITS PER STAFF Evaluations Personnel Action Forms SUP Duplicate of PSO TENANT FILES Applications Payments/Receipts Log Leases PER ENGINEERING SERVICES 005 013 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Boundaries & Rolls PER GC 34090 006 020 BENCHMARK DATA Horizontal, Vertical & Control PER GC 34090 Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Head: Mike Sartor RIM Coordinator: Lisa Navarret Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 007 011 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS a) Project Files, Work Orders, Schedules, Bidders List, Correspondence, Change Order b) Specifications, Reports Plans, Contracts and Subdivisions c) Street Reports PER Life of Structure 008 014 CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE PER GC 34090 Duplicate of CLK 009 010 CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE SUP GC 34090 010 009 ENCROACHMENT PERMITS a) Permanent Encroachments b) Temporary Encroachments PER C+2 GC 34090 011 012 FLOOD ZONE Elevation Certificates & Letter of Map Amendments PER GC 34090 012 017 MAPS – Annexations, Park Dedication, Tract, & Block SUP GC 34090 Keep current map version only 013 PERSONNEL Evaluations Personnel Action Forms SUP Duplicate of PSO 014 018 PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS C+2 GC 34090 015 016 SOIL REPORTS PER Department Opinion 016 008 STREET WORK PERMITS PER GC 34090 017 015 SUBDIVISIONS a) Agreements b) Parcels and Subdivision Maps While Useful C GC 34090 Duplicate of CLK Keep current map version only 018 019 SURVEYS – Recording Data and Maps PER GC 34090 Department Opinion ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 019 022 ENVIRONMENTAL FILES PER Department Opinion Discharger permits and permit support documents Permit expiration or facility closure + 3 years 40CFR Federal Pretreatment Regulations 020 021 Other discharger data and records C+2 40CFR Federal Pretreatment Regulations City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Head: Mike Sartor RIM Coordinator: Lisa Navarret Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Water Quality Control Plant 035 033 FLOW Discharge Data & Reports PER Department Opinion 036 030 MAINTENANCE Flow Strip charts, Instrument Calibrations, Operations, Maintenance & Laboratory Records, & Crane Maintenance and Certification, State Certification C+4 Department Opinion 037 032 NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) – Permits and Reports PER Department Opinion 038 034 PERMITS Pressurized Vessels, Air & Industrial Waste C+4 GC 34090 039 031 SAFETY Training and accident reports Routine tailgate topics PER C+4 GC 34090 040 SEPTIC & RECLAIMED WATER Permits, Fees, Billings C+4 GC 34090 Department Opinion PERSONNEL Staff with accident report, accident investigation, or important disciplinary matter resulting in change of policy TER+30 Department Opinion Duplicate of PSO Zero Waste Landfill Daily Log Operator assignments and Maintenance activities C+5 Landfill reports & records PER Landfill tollbooth receipts C+5 Household Hazardous Waste Manifest & Reports PER SMaRT Station & Kirby contract data C+10 Department Opinion Waste Contractor data – GreenWaste of Palo Alto C+10 Department Opinion PUBLIC SERVICES Equipment Management 021 029 Transactions – Parts, Fuel, and Gas Tags C+2 GC 34090 022 028 Vehicles – Registrations & DMV Correspondence Life of Vehicle VC 4000 DMV Requirement City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Head: Mike Sartor RIM Coordinator: Lisa Navarret Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Facilities Management 023 BUILDING MAINTENANCE Custodial contract City Manager Reports Specifications Bidders List Change Orders Payment Files C+2 GC 34090 024 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS a) Project Files, Work Orders, schedules, Bidders List, Change Orders & Correspondence b) Specifications, Reports, Calculations, Plans, & Subdivision, Contracts PER PER CCP 337.15 Department Opinion 025 GENERAL - Correspondence Forms C+2 GC 34090 026 PERSONNEL Division Staff Schedules Personnel Action Forms Injury/Accident Reports TER Originals to PSO, copy kept in individual’s file until employee termination 027 REPORTS Quarterly Summary of maintenance labor and material costs for Parking Lots C+2 GC 34090 028 022 SUBJECT FILES Internal Working Files C+2 GC 34090 029 WORK REQUESTS Labor and Material Tracking Key Requests Service Calls C+2 GC 34090 Streets/Sidewalks/Storm Drain 030 026 DAILY REPORTS Operator assignments & equipment status C+5 032 025 Storm drain Work orders C+5 033 027 Tree line clearing, landscaping plans, pesticide spraying, inventory & irrigation plans C+2 034 WORK ORDERS Streets, sidewalk, signs, sweeping, trees C+5 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 Management books, CIP Budget, Working Files, Operating & Safety, Staff Meetings, Budget Change Requests, Journal Entries Shipping Receipts, Depreciation, Proof of Publication C+2 GC 34090 Master Plans PER Department Opinion WGW Ops Dailies WGW Ops Stand-by/Call Out Time Report Shipping records Internal vs. Outside Vendor C+2 C+2 C+2 Department Opinion SUBJECT FILES 002 Policies, Procedures, Processes, Marking Requirements, Engineering Standards, Electric Service Requirements, Cable Specs, Forms, Best Management Practices C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion 003 Drivers License Records While Useful Duplicate of DMV 004 Other Departments – City Manager Reports, Personnel, Purchase Orders, Time Cards, Claim Vouchers, Invoices, Abandonments, Annexations, Council Agendas, Unaccepted bids, Finance Reports, Encroachment Permits & Records Retention Schedule While Useful Duplicate records – originating department maintains official record CONTRACTS 005 Construction & Services/Products over $85,000 While Useful Duplicate of City Clerk 005 Services/Products under $85,000 TER+5 City Attorney Opinion 005 Unaccepted Bids C+2 GC 34090 Electric and Gas Meter SUP+7 Duplicate of City Clerk Purchase and Sales Agreements -EEI & NAESB SUP+7 Department Opinion for retention in Dept. files Renewable Energy Certificate Master Agreement SUP+7 Duplicate of City Clerk Dept. Opinion for retention in Dept. files Master Agreement – Transaction and/or Confirmation Agreements – including supporting documentation (deal sheet, shopping sheet, authorization etc.) TER+7 Retained in Utilities Dept. City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Bilateral Commodity and/or related service agreements TER+7 If within City Manager authority, then retained in Utilities Dept. If Council approved, retained in City Clerk’s Office PROJECT FILES 006 Internal working files PER Department opinion RATES 007 Rates – All Services PER Department opinion REPORTS 009 Statistical, sales, annual consumption analysis and various spreadsheets C+2 GC 34090 UTILITY ADVISORY COMMISSION 010 Agenda Proof of Publication Minutes of all meetings General Correspondence Proof of Agenda Posting PER C+2 PER C+2 C+2 Duplicate of City Clerk 010 Correspondence and Data Tapes C+2 GC 34090 TASK FORCE 011 City of Palo Alto and SCVWD Meetings C+2 GC 34090 SCVWD = Santa Clara Valley Water District 011 Any task force – internal and/or external C+2 GC 34090 REGULATIONS 013 National Gas Act Pipeline Safety Act Natural Gas Policy Act CVPIA While Useful Duplicate of Other Agency CVPIA = Central Valley Project Improvement Act 013 Correspondence w/ Agency C+2 GC 34090 STUDIES - SURVEYS 014 Gas System Study Distribution Electro Magnetic Field Survey and Energy Case Studies Commodity Resource C+2 GC 34090 CUSTOMER SERVICES Customer Correspondence Letters, faxes, emails C+2 Department Opinion Service: Residential Service Agreement Residential Service Application Commercial Service Agreement Commercial Service Application Utilities Account Change Make Change to Account Account Closure Request Close Utilities Account Revert to Owner Request Revert to Owner Application C+3 C+3 PER PER C+3 C+3 C+3 C+3 PER PER GC 34090 All listed will be scanned and retained electronically City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Demolition Request Demolition Application Temporary Power Temporary Power Application Hydrant Water Application Hydrant Meter Application NN C+3 C+3 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 Department Opinion Department Opinion Billing Consumption Adjustment Correct Misread and Billings Miscellaneous Adjustment Apply Credit or Debit Invoice Cancellation Cancel Rebill Invoice PV Statements Monthly PV Status C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 All are created and saved on electronic templates Bank drafts Bank Draft Confirmation Returned Items Bank Draft Applications C+2 C+2 C+2 Duplicate of Admin. Services Bank Items Credit & Collections Rate Assistance Annual Application Renewal Project Pledge One time Submission Bankruptcy LIHeap LIHeap send discs C+1 C+1 PER PER C+3 C+2 C+2 Department Opinion LIHeap = Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program Meter Reading Customer Read Cards Reads Submitted by Customers Customer Read Emails Electronic Read Submitted by Customers On/and Off Orders Electronic in SAP C+1 C+1 C+2 C+2 C+1 C+1 Department Opinion CONSTRUCTION 016 Acquisitions, Easement, Design, Drawings, Specifications, Photos, Permits, Soil Reports, Correspondence, Quotes, Payments & Schedules PER GC 34090 Historical CPAU Work Orders As-Built Maps Valve Cards PER Department of Transportation CPAU Work Orders of Abandoned Pipe As-Built Maps of Abandoned Pipe Valve Cards of Abandoned Valves PER Department Opinion ICOMMM Lateral Work Orders ACP Forms C+5 C+5 Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE REGULATORY AGENCIES 017 Reports to Federal Register U.S. Dept of Energy PG&E State Regulatory Agencies (e.g., Public Utilities Commission) California Energy Commission California Air Resource Board C+2 For reports required on a period basis, retain for two report cycles GC 34090 REGULATORY RECORDS Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) Reports C+5 RWQCB Water Discharge Form C+5 Annual Report for Public Works Storm Water Department Paradigm Data Sheets Cathodic Work Orders Cathodic Protection with Gas Distribution Map Exposed Pipe Reports Steel Pipeline Tapping Coupon Records Annual Report to DOT Emergency Response Plan Operations and Maintenance Manual PER PER PER PER TER+5 C+5 C+5 C+5 Department of Transportation EMPLOYEE TEST RECORDS Gas Operator Qualification C+5 Department of Transportation Employee Water Distribution Certification Employee Water Treatment Certification Employee Backflow Certification Employee Cross Connection Certification C+3 C+3 C+3 C+3 State Welding Record (form 225A) PER Department of Transportation TESTS / INSPECTIONS / SURVEYS Backflow Annual Certifications C+3 State FSR Gas Leak Investigations (818 Form) FSR Stop Card Database Gas Shop Stop Card Water Shop Stop Card C+7 PER PER PER Department of Transportation Gas Receiving Stations Odorant and Oil Drip Water Meter Test Results Gas Meter Test Results Meter Leak Tags Abnormal Operating Conditions (AOC) PER PER PER PER PER PER Department of Transportation Water Quality -Water Sources: Testing C+10 State City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Fluoride Summary Ground Water Elevation Bacteriologic Analysis Chemical Analysis Reservoirs, Wells & Rainfall Gauge Water Maintenance Records Water Discharge Form C+5 C+5 Title 22 CCR 66261.24(a)(7) CPAU Gas Pipeline Patrol Program CPAU WGW Operations Pre- Tested Pipe Tag (Form 503) CPAU WGW Operations Grade 1 Leak Re-Checks Gas Leakage Survey C+5 PER C+5 C+5 Department of Transportation PERMANENT RECORDS 019 Equipment Records Life of Equip+2 GC 34090 019 General Information Regulating Specifications & Testing Gas Leakage Survey Meter Leak Tag AOC CPAU/WGW Operations Pre-Tested Pipe Tag Gas/Water Shop Stop Card Odorant & Oil Dip Valve Cards Valve Cards of Abandoned Valve Welding Record Gas Receiving Station PER Form 503 Form 225A City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ELECTRIC UTILITY 052 048 Electric – Circuit Map, Electric Distribution, Street Light Block, EV Charger Maps Maps: Electric Distribution, Pole Test Block, Distribution Block, Street Light Block, Hardwire and Coax C+2 Current while active,+ 2 years off site GC 34090 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup 053 049 Underground District: Transmission Line Logs & Correspondence C+2 GC 34090 054 050 Work Orders: Pacific Bell, Cable Co-op, PG&E, and Intents PER Department Opinion 055 051 Acquisitions, Design, Drawings, Specs, Permits, Correspondence quotes, Payments & Schedules CIP/Construction PER Department Opinion - Historical Refer to CIP Construction Projects 056 Electric Vehicles: Power Delivery Records Life of Vehicle +2 off site GC 34090 057 Street Lights: Lighting, Program Materials C+2 GC 34090 058 Joint Pole Applications TER+5 Department Opinion Customer Service Projects C+2 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Applications Plans, Invoices ELECTRIC OPERATIONS 059 Compliance/Inspection/Locating *Field Switch/Man on Line Logs *Overhead/Underground Compliance Records *Underground Service Alert Notices a. Completed Tickets b. Original Email Notices PER PER C+6 C+1 C+1 on site C+1 on site On site 060 Customer Service – UCC *Dispatch Logs PER Electronic copy on S drive Safety/Security *Daily Worksite Safety Tailboard Check List C+6 Current year On site 061 Street Lights/Traffic Signal/Fiber *S.R.O – Street Lights *Notifications – SL & TS *Maintenance W.O. – TS ? SAP 062 055 Substations a) Equipment (transformers, switches, breakers, capacitors & relays Specifications Inspection Inventory Replacement Disposal Life of Equip +2 Department Opinion Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup 063 055 Substations b) Operations: troubleshooting, line logs, load reports, power factor, fences & cost data C+6 18 CFR Sections 125.3(23) & 125.3(26) Inspection records and equipment test records stored electronically on F:drive C+3 on site + 3 years off site 064 055 Substations c) Relay and fuse curves, fault current, calculations, supervisory control, automation and distribution automation (SCADA) and Control Information C+2 GC 34090 Duplicate stored offsite as vital backup copy MARKETING SERVICES Program Development PER Department Opinion 061 064 Customer Applications Smart Energy Program CAP PV Partners Program Solar Water Heating Program Solar Water Heating Loan Program 1970 – 1990 Palo Alto Green Program Palo Alto Green Gas/New PA Green C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion Department Opinion Department Opinion Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Fiber Program Customer Applications Rebate Application & agreement Rebate Applications Old Program – files at The State Old 10 yr program – Applications Customer Applications Signed agreements C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 Duplicate of City Clerk 062 065 Vendor contract invoices 3rd Party Programs Monthly/qrty/annual electronic records While contract is in effect Department Opinion Department Opinion 063 066 Key Account Engineering Audit Reports BI Reports Pcard receipts C+2 C+2 C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion 067 Public Outreach Program marketing materials Customer Workshops & Facility Manager Meetings C+6 C+2 Department Opinion SUPPLY RESOURCE GROUP 070 Settlement Date Commodity Invoices/payment records TER+2 PER Department Opinion Keep for two years past contractual limitation of invoice dispute. 071 Regulatory Reference reference materials (e.g. – laws, rulings, orders, court cases, settlements) While Useful Duplicate of Other Agency Risk Management FO and BO Transaction oversight Monthly BO reports FO and BO Quarterly reports FO Weekly Reports C+6 Department Opinion 078 Rates Documents Rates/Pricing Cost of Service Studies SUP+7 080 Resource Plans Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan, Gas Long-term Plan, Water Integrated Resource Plan SUP+2 Department Opinion Adopted plans duplicate of City Manager and City Clerk Electric Portfolio Models Commodity Costs Protections & Uncertainty Assessment load and resource balance supply costs transmission cost interconnection agency costs C+7 for annual budget models Maintained in electronic models – overwritten as necessary City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE hydrology plant operation and maintenance regulatory costs Electric Procurement Plan Procurement Plans – Needs Analysis Load/Resource Balance Targets Authorizations C+5 Department Opinion Voluntary Certification and Verification Reports to certifying and verifying agencies such as The Climate Registry for GHG inventory and for Carbon Neutral Plan (Electric Power Sector) Reports from certifying and verification agencies such as audit reports C+7 R&D Program PET Projects related documentation C+6 Policies Analysis of plans, programs and policies that become adopted by Council C+2 Department Opinion READING THE RECORDS RETENTION SCHEDULE: A "HOW TO" GUIDE Background The Records Retention Schedule, as approved by the City Council through Resolution, is a legal document. It identifies the types of records and information used and managed by a department, how long that information needs to be retained at the office and/or offsite, and when it may be destroyed. Each department is required to have a current Schedule. It is the responsibility of the department to notify the City Clerk’s Office of any business, organizational, functional, or legal changes which would impact their specific Schedule. The City Clerk’s Office coordinates with the Office of the City Attorney the approval of Retention Schedules by the City Attorney (who reviews them for compliance with all government codes and regulations) and prior to approval by the City Council. The Schedules should be reviewed for accuracy every two to three years by the City Clerk’s and City Attorney’s Offices in conjunction with each respective department. Using Retention Schedules SERIES – Series numbers are assigned consecutively to each series in a department. They aid the user in researching information and may be used as a tool to cross reference data in an active file database. Series numbers crossed out refer to a former number used prior to 2/5/07. DESCRIPTION – This is the general description of a group of records with similar business functions and retention requirements. The description must coincide with file titles maintained by the department. TOTAL RETENTION – Refers to the length of time a document record must be kept before it is eligible for destruction. CUR – Current refers to any record or file made within the current calendar year. The Retention period begins the first day of the following calendar year. (For example, Cur+2 means that any record created in 2007 2015 is kept for the two following years, 2008 2016 and 20092017. The record would be eligible for destruction after December 31, 20102017). SUP – Supersede indicates that old items are replaced by a more current version. STATUTORY REFERENCE - This field includes regulations and codes that govern the retention of a specific record type. REMARKS – This field includes regulations, codes, and general comments about the information in this row. When "Department Opinion" is noted in this column, it means that the Department has determined the retention period to extend beyond the legal or audit requirement. "Attorney Opinion" indicates that the retention requirement was established pursuant to the opinion of the City Attorney based on research, past litigation history, and/or the potential for future litigation on this topic. LEGEND – A legend is provided at the bottom of the Retention Schedule assisting the reader with retention terminology. City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Department Head: Carl YeatsLalo Perez RIM Coordinator: Janice AndersonAllen Krever Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATION 001 Correspondence, Messages, Timecards, Staff Meetings, Studies C+3 Auditors Opinions 002 OTHER DEPARTMENTS – Finance Committee-Agendas, Minutes, Records, Retention Schedule, Reports, Audit Work papers. While useful Duplicate of City Manager, City Auditor and City Clerk . 003 Gifts to the City, Cash & Tangible Property C+6 Scanned list on CD Rom in Admin Svcs Dept files TREASURY 004 003 INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT-Security Purchases, Sales & Investment Reports C+7 Auditors Opinion 005 004 DEBT MANAGEMENT- (a) Deceased Insurance C+3 Department Opinion (b) Final Bond TER+4 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup (c) Covenant Compliance TER+7 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup (d) Bank Records C+7 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup 006 005 REVENUE COLLECTION (a) Deposit Documentation C+2 GC 34090 (b) Parking Permits C+4 GC 34090 (c) Collection Records – UUT, Parking Citations, Delinquent Accounts, Reconciliation, Transient Occupancy Tax C+5 Department Opinion (d) Utility Receipt Stubs C+2+2 months GC 34090 BUDGET 007 006 BUDGET (b) Final Bond (a) Final Budget, CIP Budgets, Fee Schedule C+5 PER TER+4 Auditors Opinion Duplicate Stored Offsite (b) Supporting Documents Change Requests, Amendment, Worksheets, Fee Schedules & Cost Plans C+2 Auditors Opinion (c) Long Range Plans Studies, Reports, Measurements, Forecasts & Projections C+3 Auditors Opinion REAL ESTATE 008 009 BINDING INSTRUMENTS (a) Land – Deeds, Easements While Useful Duplicate of City Clerk (b) Easement Vacations, Leases & Purchases Duplicate of City Clerk (c) Encroachments, Agreements & Conveyances Duplicate of City Clerk City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Department Head: Carl YeatsLalo Perez RIM Coordinator: Janice AndersonAllen Krever Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE PURCHASING 009 010 (a) Council Approved Contracts, Solicitations & Documents All Open Council Approved Contracts, Solicitations & Documents +4 While Useful Duplicate of City Clerk (b) Service Contracts, Purchase Orders, Blanket Purchase Orders & Solicitations & Documents i. Purchase Orders/Blanket Orders ii. Service Order Contracts iii. Council Approved TER+3 TER+5 TER+7 While Useful All Open Service Contracts, Purchase Orders, Blanket Purchase Orders & Solicitations & Documents Duplicate of City Clerk (c) Bids Unawarded Solicitations & Documents C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion vital while orders are open 010 011 INTERNAL VENDORS - (Stores & Print Shop) Reports, Orders, Returns, Disposal Forms Journal & Requisitions C+4 Department and Auditors Opinion ACCOUNTING 011 012 YEAR-END REPORTS (a) Budget-to-Actual C+2 GC 34090 (b) Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (C.A.F.R.) C+10 PER Department and Auditors Opinion (c) General Ledger, Encumbrance Report C+2 GC 34090 (d) Management Benefits Transactions, Accruals C+2 GC 34090 (e) Audit Work Papers & Journal Entries C+2 GC 34090 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE (A/P) 012 016 A/P + UTILITY CHECK REGISTERS (WARRANTS) 6C+7 C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion 013 017 CANCELLED/VOIDED WARRANTS. CHECK VOID FORMS + BACKUP C+4 C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion (VOIDED CHECKS) 014 018 VOUCHER PACKETS. GENERAL WARRANT COPIES WITH BACKUP FOR A/P, UTILITY REFUNDS, 3RD PARTY AND WIRE TRANSFERS. C+5 C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Department Head: Carl YeatsLalo Perez RIM Coordinator: Janice AndersonAllen Krever Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 015 019 CAPITAL PROJECTS- Project Files, Street Reports, & Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Billings TER+7 Department and Auditors Opinion ANNUAL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CORPORATION-STATE CONTROLLERS REPORT C+7 CALIFORNIA AVENUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PARKING DISTRICT C+7 UNIVERSITY AVENUE SPECIAL ASSESSMENT PARKING DISTRICT C+7 ANNUAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL EXPENDITURES REPORT C+7 ZFIR03 AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE COVER SHEETS. C+7 Cover sheet for batches of invoices from departments sent to A/P. Has list of invoices enclosed and department authorization to process the invoices. A/P JOURNAL LOG C+7 AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE FORMS C+7 TAX RECORDS – SALES TAX FILINGS, 1099 TAX FILINGS & REGISTERS C+7 GENERAL LEDGER- General Journal Entries 016 018 ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE C+7 Federal & State Audit Requirements Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup Department Opinion (b) Invoices, Facility and Revenue Collections Cash Receipts, Cash Receipt Journals C+7 GC 34090, CCP 337 Federal & State Audit Requirements Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup Department Opinion 017 022 TAX RECORDS – Sales Tax Filings, 1099 Tax Filings & Registers C+4 MOVED TO ACCTS PAYABLE Department and Auditors Opinion 018 023 STATE REPORTS – City Reports, Transit Operators and Component Units C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Department Head: Carl YeatsLalo Perez RIM Coordinator: Janice AndersonAllen Krever Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 019 024 UTILITIES- (a) Loan Reconciliation Work Papers, Bonds, Banking, Adjustments C+7 Department and Auditors Opinion (b) Receipts GC 34090 020 025 FIXED ASSETS – Cost Reports, Reconciliation, Resume of Activity & Journal Entries TER 3 Department and Auditors Opinion 021 026 PAYROLL – Allowances, Auto Deposits, Deductions, Deferred Compensation, Payroll Reports, File Maintenance, Gross-to-Net & Hours-to-Gross C+7 Public Employees Retirement System and Department Opinion - Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup Garnishment orders C+7 Direct Deposit/W4 changes C+7 Copies of PSO PAF C+7 CalPers Reporting C+7 Third Party Reporting C+7 Payroll Quarterly Tax Reports C+7 Payroll Masterfile C+7 Payroll Reconciliations C+7 Payroll Journals C+7 W2 Copies C+4 IRS ReguirementRequirement Processing Reports by Paydate ENTERPRISE ACCOUNTING 022 Backup for invoices created (Airport, Aavenidas, & Palo Alto Community Childcare) C+7 023 Loan reconciliations and backup C+7 024 ReconiciliationsReconciliations of utility clearing accounts C+5 025 Receipts/stubs from the daily utility payments process (batch detail) C+2+2 months GC 34090 026 Audit backup & Journal entries backup C+2 GC 34090 027 Utility cash receipts C+7 028 Fixed assets backup of journal entries, capitalization, & reconciliations TER 3 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Department Head: Gary BaumMolly Stump RIM Coordinator: Stacy Lavelle Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 100 General Info/Subject Files C+9 GC 34090 Restricted access to any files may contain confidential documents. Keep files until subject matter is no longer active. Required to keep until reasonable threat of legal action has passed. 100-01 General Correspondence C+9 GC 34090 100-04 Chron File C+9 GC 34090 100-04 Newsletters C+2 GC 34090 SUBJECT FILES 202-01 Planning Reports As Needed Duplicate of Planning and Community Environment (PCE) 202-02 thru 202-11 Development Plan/Certificates of Compliance/Subdivision As Needed Duplicate of City Clerk, Planning PCE & Public Works 202-12 thru 202-25 General Plan/Comprehensive Plan/State Mandated Planning As Needed Duplicate of PlanningPCE. Files to be reviewed for destruction on a file-by-file basis. 203-01 thru 203-10 Regional Planning As Needed Duplicate of PlanningPCE; review on a file by file basis 204-01 thru 204-04 Environmental Assessment C+4 Review on file-by-file basis for destruction 205-01 thru 205-13 Stanford University C+9 Review on file by file basis for destruction 206-01 thru 206-10 Building C+9 Review on file by file basis for destruction 207-01 thru 207-08 Transportation C+9 Duplicate of Transportation 301-01 thru 301-06 City Council C+11 Review on file by file basis for destruction 302-01 thru 302-11 Boards/Commissions/Committees C+11 303 American with Disabilities Act C+4 304 Records Management, Records Retention Schedule C+48 Duplicate of City Clerk 305 Management Studies/Surveys C+4 401-01 thru 401-14 Finance Administration C+4 Duplicate of Administrative Services, Public Works and Utilities 402-01 thru 402-07 Auditor Administration C+9 Duplicate of Auditor’s Files 403 General Audits C+9 500 Personnel Files C+9 GC 12946 & Title 29 Chpt XIV, Sections 1602.30; 32; 38. Some files may need to be retained until threat of legal action passed. Review on file by file basis for destruction City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY Department Head: Gary BaumMolly Stump RIM Coordinator: Stacy Lavelle Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 600 Purchasing/Contracts C+10 Duplicate of Purchasing Division; Review on a file by file basis for destruction 700 Legislative/Legal C+14 Review on file by file basis for destruction 800 Public Works/Engineering/ Construction C+10 Review on file by file basis for destruction; 900 Litigation/claims C+10 Required to keep until reasonable threat of legal action has passed. On a file by file basis assign archive time 1000 Real Estate C+15 Duplication of Real Estate Division/CLK. Review on file by file basis for destruction 1100 Parks C+4 Duplicate of Community Services. Review on file by file basis for destruction 1200 Municipal Utilities C+4 Duplicate; review on file by file basis 1300 Police Administration C+9 GC 34090 Review on file by file basis for destruction 1400 Community Services C+4 GC 34090 Review on file by file basis for destruction 1500 Fire Administration C+9 GC 34090 Review on file by file basis for destruction 1600 Information Resources C+6 GC 34090 Review on file by file basis for destruction City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY AUDITOR’S OFFICE CAO: Harriet Richardson RIM Coordinator: Deniz Tunc Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 Office Budget and A/P C+5 Department Policy 002 Meeting Notes, Memo’s, Correspondence, Management Reports, Office Administrative files and Working files C+5 Department Policy 003 Contracts (All Open Council Approved Contracts, Service Contracts, Purchase Orders, Blanket Purchase Orders, Solicitations, and Documents) C+4 Duplicating of Purchasing and City Clerk Retention Schedule SUBJECT FILES 004 Publications (Audit Reports), Status Reports, Revenue Reports, Council Reports PER Department Policy 005 Work Papers (supporting documentation for published reports) C+7 Department Policy 006 Revenue Audit Work Papers (Sales, TOT, UUT, Prop. Tax etc.) C+7 Department Policy (Confidential) 007 Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline documentation CL+5 Department Policy City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Donna RogersBeth Minor RIM Coordinator: Deanna RidingDavid Carnahan Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 a) Timecards & Budget b) Purchase Orders c) Domestic Partnership Affidavits & Statements C+2 C+2 PER GC 34090.7 Duplicate of Administrative Services Department Opinion 002 General Correspondence C+2 GC 34090 PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS – Requests, responses and log. CL+2 GC 34090 CL = Resolution Date LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 004 COUNCIL & STANDING COMMITTEES a) Agenda Packets – Docs. and information submitted to Council including questions and answers to Council agenda items. ba) Minutes b) Questions and Answers to Council agenda items c) Audio/Video TapesDVDs d) Proof of Agenda Posting C+2 PER PER C+16 mos. C+2 GC 34090; GC 40801 54960.1(c)(1) GC 34090 Department Opinion. Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup Department Opinion 8/2014 Department Opinion 10/2014 005 STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS – DVD and Speech/Video Hard Copy PER Department Opinion 8/2014 006 005 ORDINANCES PER GC 34090; PAMC 2.08.110 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup. 007 006 RESOLUTIONS PER GC 34090; PAMC 2.08.110 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup. 008 007 RECORDS & INFORMATION MANAGEMENT- a) Retention Schedules & Manuals b) Destruction Certificates c) Transfer Lists d) Inventory Database/ Signature Authorization C+4 PER C+2 C+2 CCP 343 GC 34090 GC 34090 Department Opinion Department Opinion 8/2014 Department Opinion Record of on/off-site records SUBJECT FILES 009 008 SUBJECT FILES – Docs. and information submitted to Council including packets, address files and legal opinions rendered by the City Attorney. All subject files included, unless specifically set forth elsewhere. C+2 GC 34090 Confidential Legal Opinions are not public information and are restricted from public access. PROCLAMATIONS C+2 GC 34090 LEGAL ADVERTISING C+4 CCP 337; 54960.1(c)(1); GC 34090 Includes public hearing notices, legal publications City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Donna RogersBeth Minor RIM Coordinator: Deanna RidingDavid Carnahan Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSCEDE 010 009 EXTERNAL VENDORS – a) Indexes – Proposal Logs, P.O. & Contract List b) Awarded Proposals and Bids, Contracts & Agreements c) Bids – Unaccepted d) Order, Blanket, change, signature Authorizations & software Purchase Recordsa) Contracts awarded by City Clerk Department b) Contracts awarded by City Council TER+3 TER+94 TER+43 C+2 PAMC 2.08.110; CCP 337 PAMC 2.08.110; CCP 337 GC 34090 Department and Auditor’s Opinion Department Opinion vital while orders are open 013 012 STANFORD (Including Sand Hill Road, Willow Rd. Extension) PER PAMC 2.08.110 City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 014 013 YACHT HARBOR PER PAMC 2.08.110 City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 015 014 NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER AGENCY – Agreements including Transmission Agency of Northern California PER PAMC 2.08.110 City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 016 015 CABLE TELEVISION – MCMC, Franchise & Licenses PER City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup. 017 016 FLOOD BASIN PER City Attorney Opinion 9/1987 018 017 CLAIMS AGAINST THE CITY C+2 PAMC 2.28.230 & 2.28.240 Duplicate of Attorney DIRECTOR’S HEARING APPEALS – Planning and Community Environment Director TER+2 TER = Project completion date Department Opinion 4/2015 POLICE AUDITOR REPORTS PER Department Opinion 4/2015 019 018 WATER RIGHTS – Agreements and Clean Up PER City Attorney Opinion 1995 020 019 PAC BELL/PG&E PER Department Opinion 1992 021 020 SISTER CITIES – a) General Correspondence and Information b) Legal and Historical Document C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion 8/2014 ELECTIONS/POLITICAL REFORM ACT 022 021 CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS- a) Elected Members & Log of Filers (paper) b) Non-elected members (paper) c) Others – Committees, Supporting/Opposing Measures (paper) d) Copies received (e.g. Form 410) (paper) e) Electronically filed PER C+25 C+72 C+4 C+10 PAMC 2.08.110 GC 81009(b)(g) GC 81009(b) GC 81009 (c) GC 81009(f) GC 84615(i) City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Donna RogersBeth Minor RIM Coordinator: Deanna RidingDavid Carnahan Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSCEDE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE C+4 Code is Adopted by Resolution, Resolution is Permanent 023 022 STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST – Form 700 (Designated Filers) & Log of Filers C+7 GC 81009(e)(g) Originals retained C+7 “Wet”, paper filed forms can be digitized after 2 years 024 023 STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTEREST – Form 700 (GC 87200 Filers) & Log of Filers C+4 GC 81009(d)(g) Originals forwarded to State. Copies retained C+4 GC 87200 Filers include City Council Members, the City Attorney, City Manager, Planning Commissioners, and the Administrative Services Director (CFO) FPPC AGENCY FORMS a) Gift to Agency Report – Formrm 801 b) Behested Payment Report – Form 803 b) 804 New Positions – Form 804 c) Consultants – Form 805 d) Public Official Appointments – From 806 C+7 C+7 C+4 C+4 C+2 FPPC 18944 GC 82015 FPPC 18734 FPPC 18734 FPPC 18705.5 GC 34090 Current on Agency Website Current on Agency Website 025 024 NOMINATIONS/CANDIDATES a) Elected b) Non-elected PER TER+2 EC 17100 Department Opinion 6/2014 TER = Certif. of elections results date or failure date AB1234 ETHICS TRAINING – Proof of training attendance C+5 GC 53235.2(2)b 027 026 OATHS OF OFFICE a) Elected Council Member TER+2 PER Department Opinion TER = Leaving Office date Department Opinion 8/2014 028 PETITIONS, INITIATIVES, REFERENDUM, RECALL & CHARTER AMENDMENTS TER+8 months1 EC 17200 EC 17400 GC 6253.5 RESTRICTED ACCESS TER = Certif. of election results date or failure date Department Opinion 8/2014 029 BALLOTS AND PACKAGE MATERIALS TER+6 months1 EC 17302, 17304, 17306; RESTRICTED ACCESS TER = date of election Department Opinion 8/2014 SAMPLE BALLOT PER GC 34090 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Donna RogersBeth Minor RIM Coordinator: Deanna RidingDavid Carnahan Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSCEDE 033 031 BOARDS & COMMISSIONS a) Applications & Appointments I. Appointed II. Not Appointed b) Notices Letters of Appointment c) Notices of Termination d) Recruitment d) Action Agenda e) Proof of Publication f) Minutes of all meetingsOutreach e) General Correspondence TER+5 CLTER+2 TER+2 TER+2 C+1 C+2 PERC+2 GC 34090a; GC 40801 TER = Leaving Office date CL = Close of recruitment TER = Leaving Office date TER = Leaving Office date 036 COUNCIL MEMBER – a) Individual Files & b) Biographies cb) Photos dc) ProclamationsEmergency Standby Council Oaths of Office and Report TER+2 PER PER C+2PER Department Opinion 10/2014 037 COUNCIL DIRECTORY/ROSTER PER Department Opinion Paper C+2 REAL PROPERTY 038 BINDING INSTRUMENTS a) Land – Deeds, Easement b) Easement Vacations, Leases & Purchases c) Encroachments, Agreements & Conveyance d) Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) i. Deeds of Trust ii. Promissory Notes While UsefulPER TER TER GC 34090a DuplicatesDuplicate of County Recorder TER = paid in full TER = paid in full 039 LIENS, CONDEMNATION PER GC 34090a 041 ANNEXATIONS/ACQUISTIONS PER GC 34090a 042 BONDS While Useful Duplicate of ASDCounty Recorder 043 ASSESSMENTS TER+2 Department Opinion SUBDIVIDOR AGREEMENTS PER GC 65864 & 65869.5 DEED OF TRUST TER+6 CCP 336a ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING RECORDS 001 Alarm Hearings C+2 GC 34090 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Donna RogersBeth Minor RIM Coordinator: Deanna RidingDavid Carnahan Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSCEDE 001 Animal Bite Hearings C+15 GC 34090 001 Utility User Tax Hearings C+10 GC 34090 001 Parking Ticket Hearings C+2 GC 34090 Includes Initial Review document 001t Administrative Citation C+5 GC 34090 Noise, Animal City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY MANAGER’S DEPARTMENT Department Head: Frank BenestJames Keene RIM Coordinator: Margaret FlickDanille Rice Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 Personnel Information, Budget Information, Records Retention Schedule While useful Duplicate records of other departments 002 Staff Reports CMRs (City Manager Reports) – including supporting documents PER GC34090.5 May be scanned to CD after 5 years and paper copy offered to the Palo Alto Historical Society Association 003 Economic Development Files for Projects throughout City of Palo Alto PER May be stored off-site Sister Cities C+2 GC 34090 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 004 Legislative Letters C+5 Consistent with State Legislation – Reviews and Changes SUBJECT FILES 005 Files established pertaining to various subjects, Project files, Chronological Files Current C + 2 GC 34090 POLICIES AND PROCEDURES 006 Official copies of all City Policies and procedures PER Each department should have a current copy of the Policies & Procedures City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Richard JamesRob de Geus RIM Coordinator: Erin Solheim Perez Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 Personnel – Current Employees Performance Reviews & Work Schedules C+2 Performance reviews are duplicates of Human ResourcesPeople Strategy and Operations 002 Security Documents, Work Orders, Correspondence Inventories, Logs & Reports C+2 GC 34090 003 Policy – Policies, Procedures & Forms C CA Opinion 004 Other Departments – Stores Req,uisition Purchase Orders, Contracts & Records Retention Schedule C Duplicatieon of ASD Administrative Services (ASD) and City Clerk 005 Volunteer Records C+2 GC 34090 006 Accounting – Sales Receipts, Deposits, Sales Logs, Ledgers, Fees/Fines, Contracts Under $825,000, Bills & Transit Books C+1 Community Services Opinion Department Opinion Duplicate of ASD ARTS & SCIENCES DIVISION 007 Art Loan Program C+2 GC 34090 008 Theatre Records – Costume & Prop Loans and Booth Level Settings C+2 GC 34090 009 Art Collection C Community Services Opinion 010 Public Art Commission – Agendas & Minutes PER Community Services Opinion Public Art Commission a) Action Agenda b) Proof of Publication c) Minutes of all meetings d) General Correspondence e) Proof of Agenda Posting C+2 C+2 PER C+2 C+2 GC 34090 011 Exhibits – Junior Museum & Baylands Interpretive Center PER Community Services Opinion Department Opinion 012 Animal Permits – Junior Museum & Zoo TER+2 Fish & Game Sections 3200, 3204 HUMAN SERVICES & CUBBERLEY DIVISION 019 Human Relations Commission – Agendas & Minutes PER GC 34090 Human Relations Commission a) Action Agenda b) Proof of Publication c) Minutes of all meetings d) General Correspondence e) Proof of Agenda Posting C+2 C+2 PER C+2 C+2 GC 34090 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Rob de Geus RIM Coordinator: Erin Solheim Perez Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE RECREATION & GOLF DIVISION 020 Use Permits – Fields, Parks, Courts, Certificates of Insurance, Facilities Applications & Logs and Group Agreements C+2 GC 34090 021 Waivers, Cancellation/Transfer Forms C+2 GC 34090 022 Recreation Foundation – Minutes, Correspondence & Financial Information C+1 Community Services Opinion Department Opinion 023 Parks & Recreation Commission - Minutes PER GC 34090 Parks and Recreation Commission a) Action Agenda b) Proof of Publication c) Minutes of all meetings d) General Correspondence e) Proof of Agenda Posting C+2 C+2 PER C+2 C+2 GC 34090 Fee Reduction Program C+1 Department Opinion 4/2015 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Department Head: Peter Pirnejad RIM Coordinator: Lisa Green Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDES ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 OTHER DEPARTMENTS Personnel Records, Purchase Orders, Payment Claim, Vouchers, Legislation, Final Budget, , Correspondence with Other Departments and Records Requests While Useful GC 34090 Duplicate of other Departments 002 DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATION Daily Deposit Copies, Department Procedures, Equipment, Inventories, Budget Preparation, Final Budget Correspondence, and Daily Counts & Wait Times. C+2 GC 34090 003 CONTRACTS a) Contracts under $85,000 plus all records associated b) Full Cost Recovery Contracts c) Contracts over $85,000 plus all records associated C+2 Until Completion C+2 PAMC 2.30.075 Duplicate of ASDAdministrative Services Duplicate of CLKCity Clerk SUBJECT FILES 004 PERMIT RECORDS Address changes, Permit applications, Building Use & Occupancy applications and certificates, Department correspondence. PER GC 34090 In Electronically Stored in Geographic Information System (GIS) or Accela 005 INSPECTION RECORDS Survey letters, Special inspection – final inspection reports, SB407 certificate of compliance forms, Stop work correspondence. PER GC 34090 006 Plans PER H&S 19850 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Nick MarinaroEric Nickel RIM Coordinator: Gordon SimpkinsonJames Henrikson Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR CL=COMPLETION OF INSPECTION/PROJECT COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT LOB=LIFE OF BUILDING TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 DEPTARTMENT MANAGEMENT C+ 2 GC 34090 General Order, Special Orders, Bulletins While Useful Policies and Procedures While Useful Memorandum of Agreements While Useful Retained by Human Resources (C+2, GC 34090)Duplicate of People Strategy and Operations (PSO) 001(a) Code Books, Ordinances PER GC 34090(e) California Fire Code, PAMC amendments, etc. 002 DEPARTMENT PLANS PER Department Opinion Strategic Plans/Master Planning Documents While Useful 003 GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE & REPORTS C+ 2 GC 34090 Correspondence, memos, emails, press releases While Useful Committee reports, minutes, public file review requests While Useful Special studies, community relations While Useful 004 BIDS-UNACCEPTED While Useful Retained by Purchasing (C+2, GC 34090)Duplicate of Purchasing 005 OTHER DEPARTMENTS While Useful Retained by ASD and City Clerk (C+2, GC 34090)Duplicate of other departments Staffing roster, timecards, leave reports While Useful Duplicate of Administrative Services (ASD) Contracts and accounting reports, purchase orders, deposits, receipts While Useful Duplicate of ASD and City Clerk Records retention schedule C+2SUP Duplicate of City Clerk 006 EMPLOYEE FILES 006(a) Training records, certificates C+ 2 GC 34090 Retained by Human Resources (TER+3, 29 CFR 1627.3)Duplicate of PSO 006(b) Employee records While Useful Retained by Human Resources(TER+3, 29 CFR 1627.3)Duplicate of PSO 006(c) DMV Driver Tests and records C+ 2 GC 34090 Retained by Human Resources (TER+3, 29 CFR 1627.3)Duplicate of PSO 007 EMPLOYEE INJURY/EXPOSURE While Useful Retained by Human Resources Risk Management (TER +30, 29 CFR 1910.1020)Duplicate of PSO Employee accident and exposure reports PER City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Nick MarinaroEric Nickel RIM Coordinator: Gordon SimpkinsonJames Henrikson Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR CL=COMPLETION OF INSPECTION/PROJECT COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT LOB=LIFE OF BUUILDING TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Individual and summary statistics PER SUBJECT FILES FIRE PREVENTION 008 FIRE PREVENTION: Code Enforcement actions CL+5 CFC 104.6 Site Plans While Useful Requests for service, complaints. C+2 Sprinkler system & Fire Alarm periodic testing reports & inspections C+6 Electronic 5 Year tests: Keep C +6 Stored by 3rd Party Vendor 008(a) FIRE INVESTIGATION REPORTS & PHOTOS CL+ 6 CFC 104.3.2; PC 801 008(b) FIRE/HOMICIDE INVESTIGATION REPORTS & PHOTOS PER PC 799 Support prosecution resulting in homicide Keep 6 years onsite, permanent offsiteC+6 onsite; PER offsite 008(c) ARSON /JUVENILE FIRESETTER SUSPECTS CL+ 6 CFC 104.3.2; PC 801 Include interviews, documentation and classroom materials for junior firesetters 009 ANNUAL FIRE (CFC) PERMITS C+ 2 GC 34090 010 STREET & NUMBER ASSIGNMENT While Useful Duplicate of Planning. (P, GC 34090(a) and Community Environment 011 FIRE INSPECTIONS (Bureau and Engine Company inspections) CL+ 6 CFC 103.3.4 Department Opinion CFC 103.3.4 requires CL +3. However, longer period desired due to 3 year inspection cycle for some facilities Records of Inspection; routine, special, new construction & tenant improvement relatedimprovement related. PER Electronically stored in Accela Pre-Citation letters, Notice of Violation letters. While Useful 012 CERTIFICATIONS GC 34090 Flame Resistance PER Electronically stored in Accela Use and Occupancy Certificate PER Electronically stored in Accela Test & Flush 013 SPRINKLERS & FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS LoB GC 34090(a) Pertains to real property. May include blueprints, reports, inspection results, permits. Keep 2 years onsite, permanent offsiteC+2 onsite; PER offsite Design, Flow, Installation documents LoB Plan review comments LoB City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Nick MarinaroEric Nickel RIM Coordinator: Gordon SimpkinsonJames Henrikson Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR CL=COMPLETION OF INSPECTION/PROJECT COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT LOB=LIFE OF BUUILDING TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 014 BUILDING PROJECTS LoB GC 34090(a) Pertains to real property. May include blueprints, reports, inspection results, permits. C+2 onsite; PER offsiteKeep 2 years onsite, permanent offsite New Construction & Tenant Improvement Projects, including Underground tank installations and repairs PER Electronic Electronically stored in Accela Alternate means & methods PER 2007 CFC 104. 6.4 Electronically stored in Accela Plan review comments PER Electronically stored in Accela SUPPRESSION 015 INCIDENTS (fire, medical, hazmat, etc.) PER Electronically stored in RMS 015(a) Dispatch and daily logs C+ 2 GC 34090 Release to Union; do not destroy 015(b) Fire Incident Reports; all except arson related PER CFC 104.3.2; PC 801 Electronically stored in RMS 015(c) Fire Incident and other Field Reports; arson related PER CFC 104.3.2; PC 801 Electronically stored in RMS 015(d) Fire Incident and other Field Reports; arson with death involved PER PC 799 Electronically stored in RMS 015(e) Pre-Hospital Care Report (PCR) PER 45 CFR Part 164.530 Electronically stored in RMS 016 ENGINE/TRUCK EQUIPMENT 016(a) Daily & Monthly logs C+ 2 GC 34090 016(b) DMV Audit C+ 17 DMV Requirement per old schedule 016(c) Maintenance Program. C+ 2 GC 34090 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 017 ANNUAL HAZARDOUS MATERIALS STORAGE PERMIT C+ 2 GC 34090 018 CALCULATIONS- Seismic and secondary containment C+ 2 GC 34090 019 SITE CLEANUP Spill Reports & facility closure related information; related inspections. Does not include reports for activities regulated by California. Regional Water Resources Control Board or California Dept. of Toxic Substances. PER GC 34090(a) Pertains to real property. Previous retention was 30 years-OHSA Guideline cited,cited no specific document reference. Electronically stored in ???California Environmental Reporting Service (CERS) SCAN City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Nick MarinaroEric Nickel RIM Coordinator: Gordon SimpkinsonJames Henrikson Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR CL=COMPLETION OF INSPECTION/PROJECT COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT LOB=LIFE OF BUUILDING TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 020 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS & UNDERGROUND TANK INSPECTIONS, routine, special, and enforcement related CL + 6 CCR 27. 15188 Department Opinion Should be C+5 Required. Keep additional time for consistency with other inspection records. Electronically stored in CERS 021 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS BUSINESS PLANS C+ 2 GC 34090 Electronically stored in CERS 022 UNDERGROUND TANKS 022(a) UST closures and/or removals and related documentation. Does not include reports for activities regulated by California. Regional Water Resources Control Board or Califfornia. Dept. of Toxic Substances. P GC 34090(a) Pertains to real property. May include blueprints, reports, inspection results, permits Electronically stored in CERS???SCAN 022(b) Periodic testing, monitoring and special reports C+ 2 GC 34090 Electronically stored in CERS 022(c) Reports, fact sheets and studies Incorporated into 022(b) PROGRAMS 023 SPECIAL PROGRAMS: Strike teams and mutual aid response C+12 GC 34090 Existing Department Opinion Is C+12. Note that GC 34090 requires only C+ 2 023 (a) Disaster Service Worker: All associated documents TERer + 30 CCR 19, 2573.2, GC 3105, 6250 Required for injury claims 024 PARAMEDICS: Training and testing C+ 4 CCR 22, Div 9, sec 100392 Retained by Human Resources? (TER+3, 29 CFR 1627.3) Patient Care Report-See Suppression Codes referenced that set retention times are listed below. Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1602 3 Years Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1627.3 3 Years Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1910.1020 30 Years Code of Federal Regulations 45 CFR 160-164 6 years California Government Code Section 3105, 6250 Ter TER +30 Years California Government Code Section 34090 2 Years California Government Code Section 34090.5 Electronic retention California Penal Code Section 799 Permanent California Penal Code Section 800 6 Years California Fire Code Section 103.3.4 3 Years California Fire Code Section 104.3.2 3 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 19 Section 2573.2 Ter TER + 30 Years City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule FIRE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Nick MarinaroEric Nickel RIM Coordinator: Gordon SimpkinsonJames Henrikson Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR CL=COMPLETION OF INSPECTION/PROJECT COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT LOB=LIFE OF BUUILDING TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE California Code of Regulations, Title 22 Section 100170 5 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 22 Section 100392 4 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 27 Section 15188 5 Years Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 17.28.050 3 Years City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (I.T.) Department Head: Jonathan Reichental RIM Coordinator: Darren Numoto Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS a) Budget b) Purchase Orders C+2 C+2 GC 34090.7 Duplicate of Administrative Services (ASD) Duplicate of ASD SUBJECT FILES Phone Log Files C+2 GC 34090 Call records Service Desk Tickets C+2 GC 34090 IT Service Desk Tickets Financial System Data Backup C+7 SAP Database Backups Contracts a) Under $5,000 b) $5,000 and over c) $85,000 and over TER+3 TER+3 TER+3 Duplicate of ASD /Duplicate of City Clerk City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule LIBRARY DEPARTMENT Department Head: Monique Ziesenhenne RIM Coordinator: Evelyn Cheng Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS - 001 (a) INTERNAL OPERATIONS DOCS – Employee Reviews, Department Administration Work Schedules, Volunteer Records, Correspondence, Messages, Reports, Logs, Indexes, BudgetsBudget Preparation, Surveys, Policies, Procedures, Work Orders, News Clippings, NewslettersStatistics, Projects, Staff Reports, Org Chart, Memberships, Legal Opinion, Staff Development and Training, Community Relations, Benchmark Data C+2 GC34090 Employee reviews are duplicate of Human Resources Standards Department Policies and Procedures, Strategic Plan, Safety/Security Manual, Disaster Plan Until Superseded GC34090 General Correspondence & Reports Correspondence, Memos, Emails, Press Releases, Committee Reports, Meeting Notes, Working Files C+2 GC34090 E-mail messages related to a current project or a policy-making decision should be retained along with related records 001 (b) INTERNAL OPERATIONS DOCS –Other Departments Staffing Roster, Timecards, Leave Requests, Contracts, Amendments, Purchase Orders, Payment Claim Vouchers, Legal OpinionsChange Orders, Invoices, Travel, Final Budget, Fines and Fees Schedule, Library Bond Measures, Building Plans, Deposits, Cash Receipts, Information Technology Management Records, Records Retention Schedule While Usefuluseful GC 34090 Duplicate records of other departmentsof other departments 002 BIDS – UnacceptedEmployee Files (Regular & Hourly) PAFs, Appraisals, Work Injury, Job Descriptions, Requests for Reclassification, Recruitment – applications, resumes, While Useful C+2 GC34090 Duplicate of People Strategy and Operations LEGISLATIVE HISTORY City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Donna Rogers RIM Coordinator: Deanna Riding Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 003 COMMISSION: Library Advisory Commission – a)Agenda & b)Proof of Publication c)Minutes of Meetings d)General Correspondence e) Proof of Agenda Posting PER C+2 PER C+2 C+2 GC34090 If posted by Library Staff SUBJECT FILES 012 LIBRARY DATABASES – customers, circulation and inventoryLibrary Databases Customers, Circulation and Inventory Subscriptions and Licenses CC+2 Duplicate copies stored offsite as vital copy backup. Registration and circulation records are exempt from Public Records Act under certain conditions; GC 6254, GC 6254.5, GC 6255, GC 6267 013 GRANTSGrants & Donations Applications Awards Non-Monetary Donations Reimbursements Audit + 4 yearsC+5 Subject to audit by the granting agency 014 HISTORICAL DOCUMENTSCapital Improvements Project Files, Specifications, Contracts, Agreements, Equipment, Maintenance, Licenses, Inventory PERLife of Building Archivist Opinion 015 PUBLICITY/PUBLICATIONSPublicity/Publications Promotional Materials C+32 GC34090 Department Opinion 016 STATE LIBRARY - State Library Public Library Survey Reimbursements C+2 May be audited by State Operational Reports Daily Log, Cash Handling, Bank Deposits, Debt Collection Management Incident Reports C+2 C+5 Public Programming Development and Administration of Programs for the Public (children, students, adults) C+2 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule CITY CLERK’S OFFICE Department Head: Donna Rogers RIM Coordinator: Deanna Riding Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Collection Development Records Records documenting the selection and acquisition of new materials for the Library’s collections. C+2 Collection Movement Records Records documenting the physical movement of materials between the facilities and storage areas C+2 Historic Reference History of Palo Alto City Library PER Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Department Head: Kenneth Dueker RIM Coordinator: Nathan Rainey Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT C+ 2 GC 34090 General Order, Special Orders, Bulletins Policies and Procedures Memorandum of Agreements While Useful Duplicate of People Strategy and Operations (PSO) 002 DEPARTMENT PLANS PER Department Opinion Strategic Plans/Master Planning Documents 003 GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE & REPORTS C+ 2 GC 34090 Correspondence, memos, emails, press releases Committee reports, minutes, public file review requests Special studies, community relations 003c Budgets, PO’s Time Keeping, Correspondence, Surveys, Statistical Reports C+5 GC 34090 004h Equipment Records TERM+2 GC 34090 Retained until termination of equipmentsequipment’s use; Manuals, instructions, procedures, assignments, maintenance EMPLOYEE FILES LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 006(a) Training records, certificates C+ 2 GC 34090 Retained by Human ResourcesPSO (TER+3, 29 CFR 1627.3) 006(b) Employee records While Useful Retained by Human ResourcesPSO (TER+3, 29 CFR 1627.3) SSPECIAL PROGRAMSUBJECT FILES 023 (a) Disaster Service Worker: Emergency Services Volunteers All associated documents TER+30Ter + 30 CCR 19, 2573.2, GC 3105, 6250 CCR 19, 2573.2, Govt Code 3105, 6250 Required for injury claims City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule OFFICE OF EMERGENCY SERVICES Department Head: Kenneth Dueker RIM Coordinator: Nathan Rainey Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Codes referenced that set retention times are listed below. Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1602 3 Years Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1627.3 3 Years Code of Federal Regulations 29 CFR 1910.1020 30 Years Code of Federal Regulations 45 CFR 160-164 6 years California Government Code Section 3105, 6250 TER +30 Years California Government Code Section 34090 2 Years California Government Code Section 34090.5 Electronic retention California Penal Code Section 799 Permanent California Penal Code Section 800 6 Years California Fire Code Section 103.3.4 3 Years California Fire Code Section 104.3.2 3 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 19 Section 2573.2 TER + 30 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 22 Section 100170 5 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 22 Section 100392 4 Years California Code of Regulations, Title 27 Section 15188 5 Years Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 17.28.050 3 Years City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENTPEOPLE STRATEGY AND OPERATIONS Department Head: Russ CarlsenKathy Shen RIM Coordinator: Janet HanleyElizabeth Egli Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 GENERAL – Correspondence, Timecards, Contracts, Subject Files, Budgets, Projects, and Records Retention Schedule* C+2 GC 34090 Duplicate of City Clerk and Administrative Services *Note: Records Retention Schedules are only maintained while in effect (current/supercededsuperseded) 002 STANDARDS – Policies, Rules, Bills, & Regulations C+2 GC 34090 003 VMC’s – Awards PER Human Resources Opinion EMPLOYMENT 004 RECRUITMENT – Applications, Resumes, Alternate Lists, Testing C+3 49 USC Sections 2000e-8; 2000ce-12; 29 CFR Section 1602.12 and 1602.14 Restricted Access 005 PERSONNEL FILES (a) Regular Employees TER+15 29 CFR Section 1627.3 Labor Relations Section 1174 Access May microfilm digitally store after 2 years and throw shred paper away Restricted Access PERSONNEL FILES (b) Water Quality Control Plant – Senior Chemist, Chemist, Laboratory Tech, Senior Industrial Waste Investigator, Industrial Waste Investigator, Senior Mechanic, Mechanic, Senior Operator, WQC Plant Operators I/II, Industrial Waste Inspectors, Electricians, Supervisor, WQCP Operations, Manager/Assistant Manager, WQCP, and Manager, Laboratory Services* TER+30 29 CFR 1910.1020; Cal OSHA 8 Cal Code Regs 3204 Access May digitally store after 2 years and shred Restricted Access *There may be other employees in safety-sensitive positions in other locations with same extended retention schedule 005 PERSONNEL FILES (cb) Hourly Employees TER+5 29 CFR Section 1627.3 Labor Relations Section 1174 Access May microfilm digitally store after 2 years and throw shred paper away Restricted Access 006 RETIREMENT – Public Employee Retirement System TER+4 29 USC Section 1001 – 1381 Restricted Access 007 CLASSIFICATION: Requests for reclassification, PDQ’s, Job Descriptions, Desk Audits C+2 Labor Code Section 1197.5(d) BENEFITS City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PEOPLE STRATEGY AND OPERATIONS Department Head: Kathy Shen RIM Coordinator: Elizabeth Egli Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 008 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN FILES -– DECAPDCCAP (dependent care), Deferred Compensation, Dental, EAP, Life, Medical, Vision/ Travel LTD Claim Applications, Leave& Vision Domestic Partner Reimbursement C+4 29 CFR Section 1627.3 Restricted Access EAP = Employee Assistance Program LTD = Long Term Disability FPPC AGENCY FORMS a) 804 New Positions – Form 804 b) Consultants – Form 805 C+4 C+4 FPPC 18734 FPPC 18734 Duplicate of City Clerk Duplicate of City Clerk RISK MANAGEMENT/WORKERS’ COMPENSATION 010 WORKERS COMPENSATION Claim Files, Timecards TER+5 (if claim is active) Labor Code Section 5410 Files are held at Administrator’s Office, City only keeps working file Restricted Access 011 ACCEL JPA Agenda Files C+73 Human ResourcesDepartment Opinion 012 DMV – Pull Notices C+4 (only if employee has violation on record) Human ResourcesDepartment Opinion Restricted Access 013 DRUG TESTING C+5 49 CFR Section 193-9 Restricted Access 014 SAFETY REPORTS: a) Investigation Reports b) Hearing Tests PER TERM+5 C+4 Human ResourcesDepartment Opinion HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT 016 TRAINING – Program Lists, Instructor Lists, Class Rosters, & Evaluations C+4 Department Opinion EMPLOYEE RELATIONS 017 NEGOTIATIONS – Notes, Notebooks, Correspondence, Contracts, & Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) C+10 29 USC Sections 211 (c), 203 (m), 207 (g) Restricted Access 018 COMPENSATION – Mgmt. Salary History Sheets, Job Descriptions, Salary Surveys, Compensation Plans C+7 Department Opinion 019 GRIEVANCES – Arbitration, Grievances Reports, SEIU Window Period Requests, Sexual Harassment & Discrimination C+7 29 CFR Section 1602.21 (h) Restricted Access City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Department Head: Hillary Gitelman RIM Coordinator: Zariah Betten Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 OTHER DEPARTMENTS Personnel Records, Safety Files, Purchase Orders, Payment Claim Vouchers, City Manager’s Reports, Legislation, Litigation, Final Budget, Equipment and Facility Maintenance, Time Sheets, Correspondence with Other Departments and Retention Schedules and Records Requests While Useful GC 34090None Duplicate of other Departments 002 DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATION Department Procedures, Equipment, Inventories, Budget Preparation, and Final Budget Correspondence C+2 GC 34090 003 CONTRACTS a) Contracts under 85,000 plus all records associated b) Full Cost Recovery Contracts C+2 Until Completion PAMC 2.30.075 Department Opinion 004 ADMINISTRATIVE REFERENCE Special and Area Studies, Fee Schedules, Orgs. List, Ordinance Binder, Planning Ethics, Data Collection,. Hazardous Waste, Substance List and Toxics Log While Useful plus online archives Department Opinion LEGISLATIVE HISTORY 005 PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (PTC), ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD, AND HISTORIC RESOURCES BOARD AND DIRECTOR’S HEARINGS a) Minutes - Online b) Agendas - Online c) Correspondence with Staff/Public – project based d) Proof of Publication e) Proof of Agenda Posting PER C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 GC 34090 Video and Audio Tapes are recycled after 90 days except for Director’s Hearing – 5 years of DVD/CD Hardcopy and microfilm format, (need to determine type of mins. for Brds.)Boards – Summary. PTC –- Verbatim SUBJECT FILES 006 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA While Useful Duplicate of Santa Clara County 007 PLANS a) Approved b) DeniedWithdrawn (there is really no denied plans) Superceded ones incl. PER C+2 GC 34090 Department OpinionDigital Format Hardcopies City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Department Head: Hillary Gitelman RIM Coordinator: Zariah Betten Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 008 DISCRETIONARY PLANNING ENTITLEMENTS a) Applications b) Maps-Zoning, Tentative Subdivision, Preliminary Parcel, Comp Plan Land Use, et al c) Permit Extensions (currently a 2-year window with a 1-yr extension) d) Record of Land Use Actions e) CEQA-EIR-Negative Declarations PER C+2 PER? GC 34090 Digital Format (stored offsite) Digital format Saved within Application files that are scanned into GIS/DOXview 010 HISTORIC INVENTORY PER GC 34090 Digital Format – Currently updated via GIST 011 ZONING ORDINANCES While UsefulPER Duplicate of City Clerk(2-yr window) 012 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND AMENDMENTS – Available Website reference only (Amendments acknowledged by Resolutions PER GC 34090 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup w/ Amendments Clerk’s ofc keeps ResosResolutions Duplicate of City Clerk. 013 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS (CDBG) a) Project Files a) b) Deeds of Trust and Promissory NotesCitizen Committee Applications Plans-Citizen Participation, Community Develop. & consolidated pla C+2 State of California Duplicate of City Clerk 014 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS (CDBG) Program Reference Forms, Procedures and Brochures C+3 Department OpinionHRCuman Relations Commission acts as Committee Department Opinion Department Opinion 015 HOUSING a) General Information and References-Outside Materials b) Housing Studies and Programs c) HOME Funding-General (If individual home loans keep permanently) d) Below Market Rate (BMR) Units, In Lieu Hosing Mitigation e) Below Market Rate Administration While Useful C+3 C+3 C+3PER CWhile Useful Department Opinion Federal regulation federally funded programs and labor standard compliance files Department Opinion Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Department Head: Hillary Gitelman RIM Coordinator: Zariah Betten Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 016 TRANSPORTATION-BICYCLES a) Bike Boulevard Final Studies and Plans, Specs & Est. b) Bike Bridges Bike Counts c) Bike Facilities, Lockers and Racks d) Bike Locker Rental Program e) Bike Operations (signing/striping, signal detection), paths, Routes and Trails f) Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee PER PER C+52 C+52 C+52 C+2PER C+25 GC 34090 GC 34090 GC 34090 GC 34090 Unique project, historical significance, model for other jurisdictions in and out of U.S. Department Opinion 017 FUNDING-Fuel Efficient Traffic Signal Management Program (FETSIM) Applications, Prop 116 Applications, Surface Transportation Program (STDP)/Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ)Applications and Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 Applications PER 018 NEIGHBORHOOD STUDIES C+2 Department Opinion 019 Parking a) Assessment Districts b) Carpool/Vanpool Program c) Facilities(garages/lots) d) Permit Policy/Management e) Residential Permit Parking f) Structures g) Surveys h) Zones i) Congestion Pricing PER C+2 PER C+2 C+52 PER C+2 C+2 C+5 GC 34090 GC 34090 Multiple Depts. Department Opinion Department Opinion Department Opinion Department Opinion Department Opinion 020 PERMITS/TRAFFIC CONTROL-Certificates of Insurance and Traffic Control Plans C+2 GC 34090 021 TRAFFIC REFERENCE a) Aerial Photographs Americans with Disabilities Act Bike-correspondence, other jurisdiction bike plans, safety/education b) Congestion Pricing Demographic Data c) Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Traffic Control Devices Committee Traffic Flow Maps C+2 C+10 C+2 C+5 PERMElectronic C+2 C+5 GC 34090 GC 34090 GC 34090GC 34090 GC 34090 Department Opinion/Online Reference 022 REGIONAL AGENCIES C+2 GC 34090 023 SCHOOL SAFETY C+2 GC 34090 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PLANNING AND COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT Department Head: Hillary Gitelman RIM Coordinator: Zariah Betten Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 024 TRAFFIC STUDIES a) Sand hill Road Caltrain-General, Peninsula Corridor JPB, Operation Lifesaver, San Antonio Station, S.F.ExtensionTraffic Calming b) Traffic Signals c) Other Traffic Studies PERC+5 C+2 While Useful GC 34090 Department OpinionDepartment Opinion 025 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS Accidents (high accident location/accident data and reports)Caltrans-Project Development, Ramp Metering, Route Concept, Reports, Sound walls C+2C+2 GC 34090 Department OpinionDuplicate of Caltrans 028 Plans PER H&S 19850 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule POLICE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Chief Lynne JohnsonDennis Burns RIM Coordinator: Lisa Scheff Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 003 (a) Personnel Training SUP GC 34090 Bulletins 003 (a)(1) Lesson Plans C+15 GC 34090 Scope, content, time period of courses 003 (a)(2) Applicant Fingerprint Files TERM+2 GC 34090 Includes paperwork authorizing fingerprinting and background checks for City employment applicants, all license and permit applicants and volunteer applicants 003 (a)(3) Personnel (copies) TERM+7 GC 34090 Paperwork documenting officer & non-sworn internal and external training 003 (a)(b) Volunteer Files TERM+2 GC 34090 Volunteers’ identification, contact information 003b Policy, Forms, Brochures CTER+2 GC 34090 003c Budgets, PO’s, Time Keeping, Correspondence, Surveys, Statistical Reports C+5 GC 34090 003d Demographic Data Collection Cards C+2 GC 34090 Program ended 6-30-2010 003e Alarm Records C+2 GC 34090 Alarm packets, documents & correspondence 001q Administrative/Internal Affairs Investigations – Documents relating to complaints or investigations in responsees to citizens complaints regarding members of the Department. C+5 PC 832.5, EVC 1045, PC 801.5, PC 803©,(c), VC 2547 Provided documents are not evidence in any claim filed or pending litigation exists. 001k Press Releases C+2 GC 34090 001t Administrative Citationses C+5 GC 34090 001r PAPD Policy Manual SUP GC 34090 Living Document ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING RECORDS 001 (1) Alarm Hearings C+2 GC 34090 001 (u)(2) Animal Bite Hearings C+15 GC 34090 001 (u)(3) Utility User Tax Hearings C+10 GC 34090 001 (u)(4) Parking Ticket Hearings C+2 GC 34090 Includes Initial Review document 001t Administrative Citation C+5 GC 34090 Noise, Animal ANIMAL SERVICES RECORDS 001p Nuisance Complaints, Animal Bite Reports, PAMC Violations and warnings issued. C+10 GC 34090 PAMC = Palo Alto Municipal Code 001s Veterinary Medical Records C+3 BP 4081 0010 Animal Licenses C+2 GC 34090 Dog – 3 years from expiration 001n Humane Officer – Activity records and logs C+2 GC 34090 001m Animal Control – All records relating to animal inventory and care C+2 GC 34090 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule POLICE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Chief Dennis Burns RIM Coordinator: Lisa Scheff Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE COMMUNICATION RECORDS 001 (a) 911 Recordings (b) DAR – Digital AudioRecordingsOther Phone Recordings, not on 911 lines C+2 180 Days 180 Days GC 34090.6 PC 1054 Exception: Recordings used as evidence in a criminal prosecution or claim filed or litigation or potential claims and litigation shall be preserved for 100 days after conclusion of the court action 003f Mobile Audio Video Records (MAV) DAR – Digital Audio Recordings C+2 GC 34090.6 PC 1054 Exception: Recordings used as evidence in a criminal prosecution or claim filed or litigation or potential claims and litigation shall be preserved for 100 days after conclusion of the court action 003g Interior Video Recordings Booking/AIB or Investigative Services Division (ISD) when initiated C+1 GC 34090.6 PC 1054 Exception: Recordings used as evidence in a criminal prosecution or claim filed or litigation or potential claims and litigation shall be preserved for 100 days after conclusion of the court action 003h Routine Perimeter Security Video 100 Days GC 34090.6 Automated self-recycled/re-use technology INVESTIGATIVE RECORDS 001e Police Reports – ODI (Optical Document Imaging) System and supporting hard copy Reports PER GC 34090 PC 800 PC 801 PC 799 Reports scanned into the ODI system from 6-15-92 to 12-31-06 Unless report is a Permanent Record or ordered Sealed by Court Order 001f Non- Criminal Police Reports – Lost/Found Property, Injured or sick persons; missing persons where person has returned; traffic collision reports not used as the basis for criminal charges etc. C+20 GC 34090 Any CLETS entry must be canceled prior to purge if applicable. Applies to Police Reports taken prior to 6-15-1992, prior to Optical Imagining. 001e Traffic Collision Fatality Reports PER GC 34090 Regardless of the medium City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule POLICE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Chief Dennis Burns RIM Coordinator: Lisa Scheff Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE 001e (1) Police Reports/PDF Scanned – All Felonies, high Misdemeanor cases. PER PC 800 PC 801 PC 799 (Felony Capital Crimes punishable by Death, Life Imprisonment PC 1054 Starting 2007 Hard Copies will be kept in conjunction with PDF Prosecution for an offense punishable by imprisonment in state prison for 8 years or more must commence within 6 years after offense commission. Commencement of prosecution defined in PC 804. *Exception: PC 803 – Tolling/Extension of time periods; Appeals process and “Three Strikes” also considerations in assigning retention. 001f (1) Non CriminalNoncriminal Police Reports/PDF Scanned – Lost/Found Property, Injured or sick persons; missing persons where person has returned; traffic collision reports not used as the basis for criminal charges etc. C+15 GC 34090 Starting 2007 Reports will be scanned to PDF. Any CLETS entry must be canceled prior to purge if applicable. 001v Arrest/Conviction HS Section 11357 (b), (c), (d), (e) or H&S Section 11360 (b) violations – Occurring after January 1, 1996 Mandatory destruction from date of conviction or date of arrest with no conviction C+2 HS 11361.5 Applicable to convictions occurring after 1-1-1996 or arrests not followed by a conviction occurring after 1-1-1996; Exception: H&S 11357(e), the record shall be retained until a juvenile offender attains 18 years of age – then destroyed pursuant to 11361.5 001l FI Cards – Field interview Cards C+2 GC 34090 Includes photo if taken 001k (1) Daily Bulletins C+2 GC 34090 001e (2) Registrants – Sex, Arson, Narcotics PER DOJ Guidelines Fingerprint Card, Photo and info forwarded to DOJ 001e (3) Criminal Reports (Misdemeanor low Felony) and Domestic Violence Reports C+15 FC 6228(e) GC 34090 Remove property from CLETS, no suspect or open investigations pending MISC REPORTS AND DOCUMENTS 004a Court Board C+1 GC 34090 Court Notices 004b Court Liaison Tracking SystemsList C+2 GC 34090 Booking/Filing Lists and Logs, In/FormalInformal Discovery requests and Correspondence 004c Subpoenas (Duplicate) C+2 GC 34090 Subpoena Duces Tecum (SDT) filed with case Report once completed 004d Statistical – Crime Analysis C+2 GC 34090 Internally generated information using activity logs, citizen calls, and current and past crime statistics. Reports created for a variety of purposes City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule POLICE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Chief Dennis Burns RIM Coordinator: Lisa Scheff Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE 004e Statistical – UCR (Uniform Crime Report) LEOKA, Homicide, Arson, DV, Hate, Arrest & Citation, Death in Custody, Crimes against Senior C+5 GC 34090 Originals to CA DOJ/&FBI 004f Sealed – Adult /Factual Innocent Mandatory Destruction upon and pursuant to Court Order PC 851.8 Does not include letter of finding send to the defendant for grants/denials 004g Property Control Logs C+5 GC 34090 Tracking of items coming into and going out of Property Room not listed in RMS 001j Restraining Orders C or until SUP Destroy after law enforcement actions described in PC 273.5, 273.6, 646.9, 12028.5, 13700 and Family Code Sections 6380-6383 are fulfilled and effective date of Restraining Order has expired 001g Traffic Citations (copies) *Except Juvenile offender program graduates – those not forwarded to court of program successfully completed. C+2 GC 34090 Original is forwarded to court. Agency copy kept for processing. Parking Citations forwarded to Revenue Collections 004h Equipment Records – includes Drager Logs, PAS Records and Radar Calibration Logs, Weapons TERM+2 GC 34090 Retained until termination of equipments use; Manuals, instructions, procedures, assignments, maintenance 004i License/Permits C+2 GC 34090 Parade, Noise Exemption, Special Events, Block Party, Taxi, Masseuse., Second Hand Dealer. No lLonger Iinterested forms to be sent to DOJ for applicant expired applicant information. 004j Warrants: (1) Felony (2) Misdemeanor (3) Infraction Felony – 10 Misdemeanor – 7 Infraction 7 GC 34090 PC 799 PC 800/801 Warrants attaining purge date are sent to Santa Clara Co DA’s office for review of extension of warrant/Active case or purge. All CLETS/AWS systems must be updated or cancelled. 004k NCIC Validations C+2 GC 34090 Copies sent monthly to DOJ 004l Records requests, correspondence, no record C+2 GC 34090 ** The destruction of felony, misdemeanor, and infraction Crime/Supplemental Reports is permitted providing: (1) They do not relateNot related to an unadjudicatedun-adjudicated arrest except for eligible HS 11357 or HS 11360 violations; (2) They do not relateNot related to unservedun-served warrants; (3) They do not involve identifiable items which have not been recovered; (4) The do notNot related relate to PC 290, PC 457.1, or HS 11590 Registrants; City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule POLICE DEPARTMENT Department Head: Chief Dennis Burns RIM Coordinator: Lisa Scheff Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERSEDE (5) They do notNot related relate to violations listed in PC Sections 799 and PC 800; (6) The cases are not presently involved in either a known civil or criminal litigation./Evidence City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Head: Glenn RobertsMike Sartor RIM Coordinator: Karen DavisLisa Navarret Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATION 001 002 BUDGET Budget Change Requests Work Papers SUP Duplicate of Administrative Services 002 003 GENERAL Correspondence Customer Responses Division Head Meeting Agendas Membership Information C+2 GC 34090 003 004 OTHER DEPARTMENTS City Manager Reports Retention Schedule While useful Duplicate of City Manager’s Office City Clerk’s Office 004 001 001 PERSONNEL Confidential Documents Division Head Evaluations While useful Duplicate of Human ResourcesPeople Strategy and Operations (PSO) AIRPORT AGREEMENTS/CONTRACTS While usefulPER Duplicate of Administrative Services (ASD) and City Clerk (CLK) BUDGET Budget Change Requests PER Duplicate of Administrative Services Department: Office of Management & Budget CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS a) Project Files, Work Orders, Schedules, Bidders List, Correspondence, Change Order b) Specifications, Reports Plans, Contracts and Subdivisions PER Life of Structure CONTRACTS PER Duplicate of Administrative Services and City ClerkASD and CLK GENERAL Correspondence Membership Information Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) C+2 GC 34090 GRANTS Applications Awards PER OPERATIONAL REPORTS Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly and Annually C+4 GC 34090 Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) PERMITS PER STAFF Evaluations Personnel Action Forms SUP Duplicate of Human ResourcesPSO City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Head: Glenn RobertsMike Sartor RIM Coordinator: Karen DavisMitchellLisa Navarret Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE TENANT FILES Applications Payments/Receipts Log Leases PER ENGINEERING SERVICES 005 013 ASSESSMENT DISTRICT Boundaries & Rolls PER GC 34090 006 020 BENCHMARK DATA Horizontal, Vertical & Control PER GC 34090 Department Opinion 007 011 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS a) Project Files, Work Orders, Schedules, Bidders List, Correspondence, Change Order b) Specifications, Reports Plans, Contracts and Subdivisions c) Street Reports PER Life of Structure 008 014 CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE PER GC 34090 Duplicate of City ClerkCLK 009 010 CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE SUP GC 34090 010 009 ENCROACHMENT PERMITS a) Permanent Encroachments b) Temporary Encroachments PER C+2PER GC 34090 Temporary Encroachment Permits are kept for 2 years 011 012 FLOOD ZONE Elevation Certificates & Letter oOf Map Amendments PER GC 34090 012 017 MAPS – Annexations, Park Dedication, Tract, & Block SUP GC 34090 Keep current map version only 013 NEW PERSONNEL Evaluations Personnel Action Forms SUP Duplicate of Human ResourcesPSO 014 018 PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS C+2 GC 34090 015 016 SOIL REPORTS PER Department Opinion 016 008 STREET WORK PERMITS PER GC 34090 017 015 SUBDIVISIONS a) Agreements b) Parcels and Subdivision Maps PERWhile Useful C GC 34090 Duplicate of CLK Keep current map version only City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Head: Glenn RobertsMike Sartor RIM Coordinator: Karen DavisMitchellLisa Navarret Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 018 019 SURVEYS – Recording Data and Maps PER GC 34090 Department Opinion ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SERVICES Watershed Protection 019 022 ENVIRONMENTAL FILES PER Department Opinion Discharger pPermits and permit support documents Permit expiration or facility closure + 3 years 40CFR Federal Pretreatment Regulations 020 021 INDUSTRIAL WASTE PERMIT FILESOther discharger data and records PERC+2 40CFR Federal Pretreatment RegulationsDepartment Opinion Water Quality Control Plant 035 033 FLOW Discharge Data & Reports PER Department Opinion 036 030 MAINTENANCE Flow Strip charts, Instrument Calibrations, Operations, Maintenance & Laboratory Records, & Crane Maintenance and Certification, State Certification C+4 Department Opinion 037 032 NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) – Permits and Reports PER Department Opinion 038 034 PERMITS Pressurized Vessels, Air & Industrial Waste C+4 GC 34090 039 031 SAFETY Meetings and Training and accident reports Routine tailgate topics PER C+4 GC 34090 040 NEW SEPTIC & RECLAIMED WATER Permits, Fees, Billings C+4 GC 34090 Department Opinion NEW PERSONNEL Staff with accident report, accident investigation, or important disciplinary matter resulting in change of policy Duplicate of Human Resources on termination date + 10 years for inactive employeesTER+3010 Department Opinion Duplicate of PSO City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Head: Glenn RobertsMike Sartor RIM Coordinator: Karen DavisMitchellLisa Navarret Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Zero Waste Landfill Daily Logreports Operator assignments & equipment statusand Maintenance activities C+5 NEW Landfill reports & records monitoring records PER Need from CM NEW Landfill tollbooth receipts C+5 Need from CM NA NEW Household Hazardous Waste Manifest & Reports PER Need from CM NEW SMaRT Station & Kirby contract data C+10 Department Opinion Waste Contractor data – GreenWaste of Palo Alto C+10 Department Opinion PUBLIC SERVICES EQUIPMENT MANAGEMENTEquipment Management 021 029 Transactions – Parts, Fuel, and Gas Tags C+2 GC 34090 022 028 Vehicles – Registrations & DMV Correspondence Life of Vehicle VC 4000 DMV Requirement FACILITIESFacilities Management 023 BUILDING MAINTENANCE Custodial contract City Manager Reports Specifications Bidders List Change Orders Payment Files C+2 GC 34090 024 NEW CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS a) Project Files, Work Orders, schedules, Bidders List, Change Orders & Correspondence b) Specifications, Reports, Calculations, Plans, & Subdivision, Contracts PER PER CCP 337.15 Department Opinion 025 NEW GENERAL - Correspondence Forms C+2 GC 34090 026 NEW PERSONNEL Division Staff Schedules Personnel Action Forms Injury/Accident Reports TER Originals to HRPSO, copy kept in individual’s file until employee termination City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Department Head: Glenn RobertsMike Sartor RIM Coordinator: Karen DavisMitchellLisa Navarret Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 027 NEW REPORTS Quarterly Summary of maintenance labor and material costs for Parking Lots C+2 GC 34090 028 022 SUBJECT FILES Internal Working Files C+2 GC 34090 029 NEW WORK REQUESTS Labor and Material Tracking Key Requests Service Calls C+2 GC 34090 OPERATIONS/REFUSEUrban Forestry OperationsStreets/Sidewalks/Storm Drain 030 026 DAILY REPORTS Operator assignments & equipment status C+5 032 025 Storm drain Work orders C+5 033 027 Tree line clearing, landscaping plans, pesticide spraying, inventory & irrigation plans C + 2 034 NEW WORK ORDERS Streets, sidewalk, signs, sweeping, trees C+5 WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT 035 033 FLOW Discharge Data & Reports PER Department Opinion 036 030 MAINTENANCE Flow Strip charts, Instrument Calibrations, Operations, Maintenance & Laboratory Records, & Crane Maintenance and Certification, State Certification C+4 Department Opinion 037 032 NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination System) – Permits and Reports PER Department Opinion 038 034 PERMITS Pressurized Vessels, Air & Industrial Waste C+4 GC 34090 039 031 SAFETY Meetings and Training C+4 GC 34090 040 NEW SEPTIC & RECLAIMED WATER Permits, Fees, Billings C+4 GC 34090 Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORDS 001 a) a) Dailies b) Time Cards (?) c) WGW Stand-by/Call Out Time Report d) Vendor Invoice* e) Staff Minutes f) Correspondence g) Reservations** f) Shipping records Internal vs. Outside Vendor g) Management books, CIP Budget, Working Files, Operating & Safety, Staff Meetings, Correspondence, Budget Change Requests, Journal Entries Shipping Receipts, Depreciation, Proof of Publication C+2 GC 34090 Duplicate of Purchasing *Duplicate of Accounts Payable **Duplicate of Stores Warehouse b) Master Plans PER Department Opinion WGW Ops Dailies WGW Ops Stand-by/Call Out Time Report Shipping records Internal vs. Outside Vendor C+2 C+2 C+2 Department Opinion SUBJECT FILES 002 Policies, Procedures, Processes, Marking Requirements, Engineering Standards, Electric Service Requirements, Cable Specs, Forms, Best Management Practices C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion 003 Drivers License Records While Useful Duplicate of DMV 004 Other Departments – City Manager Reports, Personnel, Purchase osOrders, Time Cards, Claim Vouchers, Invoices, Abandonments, Annexations, Council Agendas, Unaccepted bids, Finance Reports, Encroachment Permits & Records Retention Schedule While Useful Duplicate records – originating department maintains official documentrecord CONTRACTS 005 Construction & Services/Products over $2585,000 While Useful Duplicate of City Clerk 005 Services/Products under $825,000 TER+5 City Attorney Opinion 005 Unaccepted Bids C+2 GC 34090 Electric and Gas Meter SUP + 7 Duplicate of City Clerk City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Purchase and Sales Agreements -EEI & NAESB SUP + 7 Department Opinion for retention in Dept. files Renewable Energy Certificate Master Agreement SUP + 7 Duplicate of City Clerk Dept. Opinion for retention in Dept. files Master Agreement – Transaction and/or Confirmation Agreements – including supporting documentation (deal sheet, shopping sheet, authorization etc.) Contract deliveryTER +7 Retained in Utilities Dept. Bilateral Commodity and/or related service agreements Contract deliveryTER + 7 If within City Manager authority, then retained in Utilities Dept. If Council approved, retained in City Clerk’s Office PROJECT FILES 006 Internal working files PER Department opinion RATES 007 Rates – All Services PER Department opinion REFERENCE MATERIALS 008 Weather data, benchmark files While Useful Records & Information produced and/or owned by another department or agency 008 WQCP General Information While Useful Records & Information produced and/or owned by another department or agency 008 Geographical Information System Files While Useful Records & Information produced and/or owned by another department or agency 008 Marketing Materials While Useful Records & Information produced and/or owned by another department or agency 008 Manuals While Useful Records & Information produced and/or owned by another department or agency 008 Vendor Files While Useful Records & Information produced and/or owned by another department or agency 008 US Forest Fire Prev Guide While Useful Records & Information produced and/or owned by another department or agency 008 Gas Research Institute While Useful Records & Information produced and/or owned by another department or agency REPORTS 009 Statistical, sales, annual consumption analysis and various spreadsheets C+2 GC 34090 UTILITY ADVISORY COMMISSION 010 Agenda PER Do not destroy City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Proof of Publication Minutes of all meetings General Correspondence Proof of Agenda Posting Minutes and Agendas C+2 PER C+2 C+2 Duplicate – clerk’s office has originalof City Clerk 010 Correspondence and Data Tapes C+2 GC 34090 TASK FORCE 011 City of Palo Alto and SCVWD Meetings C+2 GC 34090 SCVWD = Santa Clara Valley Water District 011 Any task force – internal and/or external C+2 GC 34090 METER READINGS 012 Customer Read Cards, Hand-held Readings, Dispatch Slips C+2 GC 34909 012 Hydrant Meter Histories Close of Account + 2 REGULATIONS 013 National Gas Act Pipeline Safety Act Natural Gas Policy Act CVPIA While Useful Duplicate of Other Agency CVPIA = Central Valley Project Improvement Act 013 Correspondence w/ Agency C+2 GC 34090 STUDIES - SURVEYS 014 Gas System Study Distribution Electro Magnetic Field Survey and Energy Case Studies Commodity Resource C+2 GC 34090 CUSTOMER SERVICES 015 Billing RegistersCustomer Correspondence Letters, faxes, emails C+31-C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion 015 Service Orders: On/Off Changes, Interruptions & Exchanges Service: 1. Residential Service Agreement 1. Residential Service Application 2. Commercial Service Agreement 2. Commercial Service Application 3. Utilities Account Change 3. Make Change to Account 4. Account Closure Request 4. Close Utilities Account 5. Revert to Owner Request 5. Revert to Owner Application 6. Demolition Request C+2 C+3 C+3 PER PER C+3 C+3 C+3PER C+31-C+3 PER PER2-PER C+3 C+3 C+23 3-C+23 PER PER4-C+3 GC 34090 All listed will be scanned and retained electronically 5 – Department Opinion Department Opinion - Keep City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 6. Demolition Application 7. Temporary Power 7. Temporary Power Application 8. Hydrant Water Application 8. Hydrant Meter Application NMN C+3 C+35-PER C+2 C+26-C+3 C+2 C+27-C+2 8-C+2 015 Claims Against City Billing 1. Consumption Adjustment 1. Correct Misread and Billings 2. Miscellaneous Adjustment 2. ApplyApply Credit or Debit 3. Invoice Cancellation 3. Cancel Rebill Invoice 4. PV Statements 4. Monthly PV Status While useful C+2 C+2 C+2 C+21-C+2 C+2 C+22-C+2 C+2 3-C+2 C+2 Duplicate record of City Attorney All are created and saved on electronic templates 015 Address files Bank drafts 1 WF Bank Draft Confirmation 2 WF Returned Items 3 Bank Draft Applications C+2 C+2 1-C+2 2-C+2 C+23-C+2C+2 C+2C+2 C+2 GC34090 Department Opinion ASD has copies of all previousDuplicate of Admin. Services WF Bbank Iitems 015 Customer Account Histories Credit & Collections 1-Rate Assistance 1-Annual Application Renewal 2-Project Pledge 2-One time Submission 3-Bankruptcy 4-LIHeap 4-LIHeap send discs Close of Account + 2 1-C+12 C+12 PER 2-PER PERPER 3-C+3C+3 4-C+2C+2 C+2C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion LIHeap = Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program Meter Reading 1-Customer Read Cards 1-Reads Submitted by Customers 2-Customer Read Emails 2-Electronic Read Submitted by Customers 3-On/and Off Orders 3-Electronic in SAP C+1 C+1 PER12 Months C+2 PER2-PER C+2C+1 C+1 C+1C+1 3-C+1 Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE CONSTRUCTION 016 Acquisitions, Easement, Design, Drawings, Specifications, Photos, Permits, Soil Reports, Correspondence, Quotes, Payments & Schedules PER GC 34090 Historical CPAU Work Orders As-Built Maps Valve Cards PER Department of Transportation CPAU Work Orders of Abandoned Pipe As-Built Maps of Abandoned Pipe Valve Cards of Abandoned Valves PER Department Opinion ICOMMM Lateral Work Orders ACP Forms C+5 C+5 Department Opinion REGULATORY AGENCIES 017 Reports to Federal Register U.S. Dept of Energy PG&E State Regulatory Agencies (e.g., Public Utilities Commission) California Energy Commission California Air Resource Board C+2 For repsorts required on a period basis, retain for two report cycles GC 34090 REGULATORY RECORDS Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO) Reports C+5 RWQCB Water Discharge Form C+5 Annual Report for Public Works Storm Water Department Paradigm Data Sheets Cathodic Work Orders Cathodic Protection with Gas Distribution Map Exposed Pipe Reports Steel Pipeline Tapping Coupon Records Annual Report to DOT Emergency Response Plan Operations and Maintenance Manual PER PER PER PER TER+5 C+5 C+5 C+5 Department of Transportation EMPLOYEE TEST RECORDS Gas Operator Qualification C+5 Department of Transportation Employee Water Distribution Certification Employee Water Treatment Certification Employee Backflow Certification Employee Cross Connection Certification C+3 C+3 C+3 C+3 State Welding Record (form 225A) PER Department of Transportation TESTS / INSPECTIONS / SURVEYS City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Backflow Annual Certifications C+3 State FSR Gas Leak Investigations (818 Form) FSR Stop Card Database Gas Shop Stop Card Water Shop Stop Card C+7 PER PER PER Department of Transportation Gas Receiving Stations Odorant and Oil Drip Water Meter Test Results Gas Meter Test Results Meter Leak Tags Abnormal Operating Conditions (AOC) PER PER PER PER PER PER Department of Transportation Water Quality -Water Sources: Testing Fluoride Summary Ground Water Elevation Bacteriologic Analysis Chemical Analysis Reservoirs, Wells & Rainfall Gauge Water Maintenance Records Water Discharge Form C+10 C+5 C+5 Title 22 CCR 66261.24(a)(7) State CPAU Gas Pipeline Patrol Program CPAU WGW Operations Pre- Tested Pipe Tag (Form 503) CPAU WGW Operations Grade 1 Leak Re-Checks Gas Leakage Survey C+5 PER C+5 C+5 Department of Transportation GAS UTILITY 018 Gas leaks: Investigations Reports Survey Specifications Control Programs Leak Surveys CPAU WGW Operations Grade 1 Leak Re-Checks CPAU Gas Pipeline Patrol Program Gas Leakage Survey C+5 Department Opinion and Department of Transportation PERMANENT RECORDS 019 Equipment Records Life of Equip + 2 GC 34090 019 General Information Regulating Specifications & Testing Gas Leakage Survey PER *Form 503 **Form 225A City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Meter Leak Tag AOC CPAU/WGW Operations Pre-Tested Pipe Tag* Gas/Water Shop Stop Card Odorant & Oil Dip Valve Cards Valve Cards of Abandoned Valve Welding Record ** Gas Receiving Station Form 503 Form 225A GAS OPERATIONAL REPORTS AND PLANS 020 Recording and gas measuring instrument charts – methane regulators Inspection Maintenance Emergency plans Periodic reports Logs & Surveys C+5 Department Opinion 021 Natural Gas Vehicle: Articles, Equipment, Maintenance and Legislation On site for life of vehicle + 2 GC 34090 022 Odorization Records: Gas Odorant C+2 GC 34090 023 Corrosion Program: Program Information, Correspondence and Golden Gate Committee C+5 Department Opinion 024 Soil: Reports, Measurements and Investigations PER Do Not Destroy 025 Gas Receiving Station: Pressure Charts C+5 026 Gas Main Replacement PER Department Opinion Refer to Series 016 retention requirements for Gas Main Replacement Construction Projects 027 Service Orders: Repairs, Replacement and Installation of Gas Mains and Service C+2 GC 34090 028 Valve Cards: Triangulated Location of Main Service Valves While Current SUP Department Opinion WATER Backflow Tests Emp. Backflow Certification Emp. Cross Connection Certification. Annual test certification Certification for Testing Backflow Devices Cross Connection Control C+3 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE Specialist Emp. Water Distribution Emp Water Treatment Operator Certification C+3 029 027 Water Reclamation Projects PER Department Opinion Refer to Series 016 retention requirements for Gas Main Replacement Construction Projects 030 028 Feasibility Study: Analysis and Design PER Department Opinion 031 028 Water Main Replacement PER Department Opinion Refer to Series 016 retention requirements for Gas Main Replacement Construction Projects 032 030 Soil Investigation: Reports, Measurements and Investigations PER Department Opinion Refer to Series 016 retention requirements for Gas Main Replacement Construction Projects 033 031 Water Quality -Water Sources: Testing Fluoride Summary Ground Water Elevation Bacteriologic Analysis Chemical Analysis Reservoirs, Wells & Rainfall Gauge PER Department Opinion Historical Data 034 032 Magnetic Field System Network: Technical Fiber Optic Conduit Program PER GC 34090 035 033 Water Production: Production Reports Pumping Stations Cross Connection Logs Inspection Reports Seismic Evaluations C+2 GC 34090 036 035 Specifications: Asbestos Cold Water Meter & Displacement Velocity Term of SPEC+2 GC 34090 037 036 San Francisco Water Department: Analysis & Contract Rates Public Utilities Commission: Analysis & Contract Rates While Useful Duplicate of San Francisco Water DepartmentPublic Utilities Commission 038 037 Water Quality San Francisco Bay Regional Board C+2 GC 34090 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 039 038 Water System Acquisition PER GC 34090 DO NOT DESTROY 040 039 Water Usage Reports C+10 GC 34090 5 years on site & 5 years off site 041 040 Lead & Copper Compliance C+12 Keep 5 years on site & 7 years off site 40 CFR 141.9 5 Years on site + 7 years off site 042 Service Orders: Repair, Replacement, Installation of Water Mains, Service and Related Facilities C+2 GC 34090 043 Valve Cards Valve Cards of Abandoned Valve: Triangulated Locations of Main and Service Valves Stock card form completed when a valve is installed/replaced in the infrastructure. It displays on the front the size, material, type, depth, etc. and on the back a drawing with measurements from other permanent landmarks, such as manhole, catch basin, other valves, etc. C+2 SUP Department Opinion Water Meter Test Results Meters tested in test/out test/QC PER WASTE WATER ENGINEERING 044 041 Sanitary Sewer Replacement PER Department Opinion Refer to Sanitary Sewer Replacement Construction Projects 045 042 Waste Water Master Plan PER Department Opinion 046 043 Water Discharge Form Treatment and Discharge Form to document the unplanned discharges to the Portable Water System. This form is used to complete the data sent to Joe Teresi in August of every year C+5 Title 22 CCR 66261.24(a)(7) 047 044 Inspection Records C+3 Department Opinion 048 045 Dewatering: Correspondence & Reports C+2 GC 34090 049 046 Analysis: Bacteriological & Chemical C+10 Keep 5 years on site & 5 years off Department Opinion 5 years on site + 5 years off site City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE site 050 047 Permits Life of Permit +2 GC 34090 051 Service Orders: Repair, Replacement and Installation of Mains, Laterals and Manholes C+2 GC 34090 ACP Form Form to document the disposal of Asbestos concreate pipe from the infrastructure C+2 Currently entered in SOGEN database WASTE WATER ENGINEERING As Built Maps/As built maps of Abandoned Pipe CPA Utilities Work Order CPA Utilities Work Order of Abandoned Pipe FSR Stop Card Database Plans document the utility pipe construction of major infrastructure projects Form to document the type of work performed/completed Daily Stops (Calls/Notification) PER Infrastructure/DOT ELECTRIC UTILITY 052 048 Electric – Circuit Map, Electric Distribution, Street Light Block, EV Charger Maps Maps: Electric Distribution, Pole Test Block, Distribution Block, Street Light Block, Hardwire and Coax C+2 Current while active,+ 2 years off site GC 34090 Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup 053 049 Underground District: Transmission Line Logs & Correspondence C+2 GC 34090 054 050 Work Orders: Pacific Bell, Cable Co-op, PG&E, and Intents PER Department Opinion 055 051 Acquisitions, Design, Drawings, Specs, Permits, Correspondence quotes, Payments & Schedules CIP/Construction PER Department Opinion - Historical Refer to CIP Construction Projects 056 052 Electric Vehicles: Power Delivery Records Life of Vehicle +2 off site GC 34090 057 053 Street Lights: Lighting, Program Materials C+2 GC 34090 058 Joint Pole Applications TER+5 Department Opinion City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 054 Customer Service Projects Applications Plans, Invoices C+2 ELECTRIC OPERATIONS 059 Compliance/Inspection/Locating *Field Switch/Man on Line Logs *Overhead/Underground Compliance Records *Underground Service Alert Notices a. Completed Tickets b. Original Email Notices PER PER C+6 C+1 C+1 oOn site C+1 on site On siteEmails – 1 year 060 Customer Service – UCC *Dispatch Logs PER Electronic copy on S drive Safety/Security *Daily Worksite Safety Tailboard Check List C+6 Current year On site 061 Street Lights/Traffic Signal/Fiber *S.R.O – Street Lights *Notifications – SL & TS *Maintenance W.O. – TS ? SAP 059062 055 Substations a) Equipment (transformers, switches, breakers, capacitors & relays Specifications Inspection Inventory Replacement Disposal Life of Equip +2 Department Opinion Duplicate stored offsite as vital copy backup 059063 055 Substations b) b). Operations: troubleshooting, line logs, load reports, power factor, fences & cost data C+6 (Current +3 on site & 3 offsite) 18 CFR Sections 125.3(23) & 125.3(26) Inspection records and equipment test records stored electronically on F:drive C+3 on site + 3 years off site 059064 055 Substations c) c). Relay and fuse curves, fault current, calculations, supervisory control, automation and distribution automation (SCADA) and Control Information C+2 GC 34090 Duplicate stored offsite as vital backup copy MARKETING SERVICES 060 063 Program Development PER Department Opinion 061 Customer ApplicationsCustomer C+2 GC 34090 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE 064 Files Smart Energy Program CAP PV Partners Program Solar Water Heating Program Solar Water Heating Loan Program 1970 – 1990 Palo Alto Green Program Palo Alto Green Gas/New PA Green Fiber Program Customer Applications Rebate Application & agreement Rebate Applications Old Program – files at The State Old 10 yr program – Applications Customer Applications Signed agreements C+2PER C+2PER C+2PER C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2 C+2PER Department Opinion – Keep Department Opinion – Keep Department Opinion – Keep Department Opinion – Keep Duplicate of City Clerk 062 065 Solar Energy – weather program files Vendor contract invoices 3rd Party Programs Monthly/qrty/annual electronic records While contract is in effect TER+6 Life of program + 3 onsite + 4 offsite Department Opinion Department Opinion 063 066 Insulation: Inspection records, Project cards, Addresses, Declaration of Service, Cellulose Test Report Key Account Engineering Audit Reports BI Reports Pcard receipts C+2 C+2 C+2 GC 34090 Department Opinion -Keep 064 067 Public Outreach Booklets, pProgram marketing materials (low flush, commercial lighting, resource conservation services methodology, fluorescent lighting & partners program) Customer Workshops & Facility Manager Meetings C+6 3 years onsite & 3 years offsite C+2 Department Opinion SUPPLY RESOURCE GROUP 065070 Settlement Date Commodity Financials: Billings, costs to city, comparisons Invoices/payment records C+6 3 years onsite & 3 years offsiteTIER+2 Electronic PER Department Opinion Keep for two years past contractual limitation of invoice dispute. Only destroy paper copies if electronic records exist. 066071 Regulatory Reference a). reference materials (e.g. – While Useful Duplicate of Other Agency City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE laws, rulings, orders, court cases, settlements, performance based rate making) 069 Risk Management Portfolio management Decision analysis Risk Oversight Committee New Models Standards of ConductFO and BO Transaction oversight Monthly BO reports FO and BO Quarterly reports FO Weekly Reports C+2+3 2 onsite/3 offsite C+6 Department Opinion 070078 Rates Documents Rates/Pricing RatesCost of Service Studies Rate Analysis Transition Cost Recovery Competition Transmission Charge C+3+2 (3 onsite 2 offsite) SUP+7 Department Opinion 072080 Supply AnalysisResource Plans Long-term Electric Acquisition Plan, Gas Long-term Plan, Water Integrated Resource Plan C+3+2 (3 onsite 2 offsite) SUP +2 Department Opinion Adopted plans are duplicate inof City Manager and City Clerk City Clerk’s office as well as staff reports and resolutions Electric Portfolio Models Commodity Costs Protections & Uncertainty Assessment load and resource balance supply costs transmission cost interconnection agency costs hydrology plant operation and maintenance regulatory costs C+7 for annual budget models Maintained in electronic models – overwritten as necessary Electric Procurement Plan Procurement Plans – Needs Analysis Load/Resource Balance Targets Authorizations C+5 Department Opinion Voluntary Certification and Verification Reports to certifying and verifying agencies such as The Climate Registry for GHG C+7 City of Palo Alto Records Retention Schedule UTILITIES DEPARTMENT Department Head: Val Fong RIM Coordinator: Jennie Castelino Series Description Total Retention Statutory Reference Remarks C= CURRENT CALENDAR YEAR COUNCIL APPROVAL: PER=PERMANENT TER=TERMINATION SUP=SUPERCEDE inventory and for Carbon Neutral Plan (Electric Power Sector) Reports from certifying and verification agencies such as audit reports R&D Program PET Projects related documentation C+6 years Policies Analysis of plans, programs and policies that become adopted by Council Minimum C+2 or while useful Department Opinion City of Palo Alto (ID # 6168) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/16/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 224 Churchill Setback Variance Title: Approval of a Record of Land Use Action for a Variance to Allow for a Reduction in the Required Front Setback (Contextual) from 37 Feet 1-1/4 Inches to 32 Feet for a New Two-Story Single Family Residence Located at 224 Churchill Avenue From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Adopt the findings and recommendation of the Planning and Transportation Commission to approve a variance for the property at 224 Churchill Avenue as documented in the attached Record of Land Use Action. Executive Summary This report transmits the Planning and Transportation Commission’s (PTC) recommendation supporting a variance to reduce the contextual front setback from approximately 37 feet to 32 feet. This decision is supported in part due to the substantial front yard setback on the neighboring property, which was used to calculate the contextual setback for the subject property. While staff did not initially support the requested variance, favoring instead a zoning text amendment, the granting of the variance is not detrimental to the neighborhood or in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Background The applicant proposes to construct a new 4,644 two story single family residence with an attached garage, carport and 1,723 square foot basement in the Seale Addition neighborhood. The project complies with all applicable code requirements, except for one notable provision, which is the reason for the subject variance. Properties on this block are subject to a front yard contextual setback. For the subject property, the setback is 37 feet 1-1/4 inches; the applicant proposes a 32 foot setback. Project Site The project site is located on Churchill Avenue near the Emerson Street intersection. The City of Palo Alto Page 2 property is a conforming 13,000 square feet rectangular interior lot, 100 foot wide by 130 foot deep. The site is currently developed with a 3,818 square foot single family residence and 1,500 square foot basement that is proposed to be demolished. The property is located within the R-1 (10,000) zone district and is subject to a special setback of 24 feet along Churchill Avenue as well as the contextual front setback. Conceptual Front Setback A front yard residential setback is the minimum distance a home may be placed in relation to its front property line. The standard setback in the residential district is 20 feet. However, in some areas, there are also special setbacks with a greater distance requirement. The subject property has a 24 foot special setback. The code also has a third front setback criteria called a conceptual front setback which is designed to protect neighborhoods which have developed over time with greater setbacks. For block faces with five or more qualifying properties, homes that have the greatest setback and the shortest setback are removed from the calculation eliminating the outlier properties. Certain properties are not included in the calculation, notably lots with three or more units, flag lots and corner lots. Based on an evaluation of the subject property relative to the three other (four total) qualifying parcels, the conceptual front setback back for the project is 37 feet 1-1/4 inches. Because there are only four qualifying parcels (including the subject property) the outlier properties are not excluded from the averaging calculation. On this block existing front yard setbacks range from approximately 22 – 69 feet. The larger setback is provided on a property with a deeper lot and a home that was constructed in 1927 with approximately 3,000 square feet of gross floor area. Director’s Determination The director reviewed a request for a variance to encroach into the required conceptual front setback by approximately 5 feet for a 32 foot setback from the front property line. When reviewing a request for a variance, the director, and City Council on appeal, must consider the following findings: 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including (but not limited to) size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the requirements and regulations prescribed in this title substantially deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property. Special circumstances that are expressly excluded from consideration are: a. The personal circumstances of the property owner, and b. Any changes in the size or shape of the subject property made by the property owner or his predecessors in interest while the property was subject to the same zoning designation. 2. The granting of the application shall not affect substantial compliance with the regulations or constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the City of Palo Alto Page 3 limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property, and 3. The granting of the application is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of this title (Zoning), and 4. The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. While able to support Findings 2, 3, 4 above, the Director was not able to support Finding 1. Specifically, the application of the conceptual setback did not appear to deprive the owner of privileges enjoyed by other property owners in the vicinity and that there was nothing about the lot that created a special circumstance. The additional five foot setback did reduce the amount of private rear yard space available, but it did not reduce the buildable potential of the lot. Moreover, the applicant submitted plans in compliance with the conceptual front setback that is being processed through development services department, in case the variance was denied. To staff, this underscored the perspective that the conceptual front yard setback was an inconvenience to the preferred design solution, but did not result in a special circumstance necessitating a variance. The director’s decision was made on May 18, 2015 and a request by the applicant for hearing followed on June 2, 2015. Planning & Transportation Commission The PTC unanimously supported (Chair Tanaka absent) the applicant’s request for the variance. The Commission noted that the adjacent parcel with the approximate 69 foot setback was an outlier that, consistent with the intent of the code, ought to be excluded from the calculation to determine the conceptual front setback. Commissioners cited the Comprehensive Plan and the desire to maintain neighborhood character as reasons to support the variance, noting that a 32 foot setback was more in keeping with the neighborhood. Commissioners commented that the objective of the special setback was not met as a result of the conceptual setback requirement and further observed that averaging all these parcels had the effect of pulling all front setback lines further away from the street. Commissioners noted the high cost of land values in the city and the desire for larger backyards and related the increased setback to the loss of enjoyment to this property owner. The absence of any neighborhood opposition was also noted by the Commission. Based on the PTCs deliberation, staff prepared variance findings, which are documented in the Record of Land Use Action and added a list of standard conditions that will apply to the project. The Record of Land Use Action is provided in Attachment B. Council Review Authority The Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) outlines that variances are generally approved or denied by the Director of Planning and Community Environment. The Code allows, however, for anyone to request a hearing before the PTC, as was made by the applicant in this case. PAMC Section 18.77.060(f) states the recommendation of the Planning and Transportation City of Palo Alto Page 4 Commission shall be placed on the Consent Calendar of the Council for final decision. The Council may: 1. adopt the findings and recommendation of the Planning and Transportation Commission; or 2. remove the recommendation from the consent calendar, which shall require three votes, and a. discuss the application and adopt findings and take action on the application based upon the evidence presented at the hearing of the Planning and Transportation Commission; or b. direct that the application be set for a new hearing before the City Council, following which the City Council shall adopt findings and take action on the application. The decision of the Council is final. Discussion This report transmits the PTC’s recommendation on the variance as required by the municipal code. While staff initially reached a different conclusion on the variance, this difference in perspective is rooted in process as opposed to outcome. Staff does not consider the applicant’s request detrimental to adjacent or surrounding properties or inconsistent with the General Plan. However, to affect this change, staff recommended a zoning text amendment that would modify the existing standard of excluding outlier properties from the contextual front setback determination. Because the results of a future text amendment could be similar to the PTCs recommendation, staff supports moving the project forward and not being pulled off consent. Policy Implications Each variance is evaluated on a case by case basis and staff does not anticipate any concerns about setting a precedent if the City Council were to support the PTC recommendation. While there may be other more appropriate pathways to effectuate the applicant’s request, the reduction in the contextual front yard setback from 37 to 32 feet is not significant and not detrimental to the neighborhood. Environmental Review The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Attachments: Attachment A: PTC Staff Report with attachments (PDF) Attachment B: Record of Land Use Action (DOC) Attachment C: Excerpt Minutes of September 9, 2015 P&TC Meeting (PDF) Attachment D: Map of Churchill Avenue Estimated Existing Front Setback (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 5 Attachment E: Project Plans (DOCX) City of Palo Alto (ID # 5904) Planning & Transportation Commission Staff Report Report Type: Meeting Date: 9/9/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: 224 Churchill Setback Variance Title: 224 Churchill Avenue [14PLN-00364]: Request for hearing and Planning and Transportation Commission recommendation regarding the Director of Planning and Community Environment’s denial of a Variance application to allow for a reduction in the required front setback (contextual) from 37 feet- 1 1/4 inches to 32 feet for a new, two story single family residence at 224 Churchill Avenue. From: Jodie Gerhardt, Interim Planning Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) recommend that the City Council uphold the Director’s decision to deny the Variance request for a 5 foot 1 ¼ inch encroachment into the required front (contextual) setback along Churchill Avenue for the construction of a new two story single family residence. Background Process History On September 18, 2014, the applicant, Geoff Campen of Klopf Architecture submitted an Individual Review application on behalf of Bogdan and Oana Cocosel for demolition of an existing single family residence with basement and the construction of a new two story single family residence with an attached garage, carport and expanded basement at 224 Churchill Avenue. The application included a variance request to locate the proposed residence 5 feet 1 ¼ inch closer to the front property line than allowed by the front (contextual) setback of 37 feet 1 ¼ inches required for this site. This proposal would result in a front setback of 32 feet. The application was reviewed for conformance with both the Individual Review and Variance regulations. During the review process, the applicant was informed the Individual Review component of the application may proceed forward subject to revisions in the location of the proposed building to meet the required front (contextual) setback and other applicable requirements of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) and the Individual Review Guidelines. In August, the applicant submitted a complete, revised plan set with a proposal that met the Attachment A City of Palo Alto Page 2 required front (contextual) setback in addition to other applicable requirements and was tentatively approved on September 8, 2015. The request for variance was denied by the Director of Planning and Community Environment (Director) on May 18, 2015 for non-conformance with the three required findings for variance approval set forth in the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 18.76.030(c) (Attachment A). This determination was based upon a review of all information contained in the project file and the review of the variance proposal in comparison with all applicable zoning and municipal code requirements. On June 2, 2015, the applicant filed an appeal of the Director’s decision to deny the variance and requests a public hearing by the PTC. Project Description The applicant proposes to demolish the existing 3,818 square foot (sf) single family residence with 1,500 square foot basement and construct a new 4,644 two story single family residence with an attached garage, carport and 1,723 sf basement in the Seale Addition neighborhood. The existing, minimal traditional style home was built in 1940 and later modified. The survey provided in the plan set: 1. Does not show a garage, 2. Shows the forward-most wall of the existing home located a distance of 34.9 feet from the front property line, and 3. Shows two posts supporting the covered landing for the entry placed approximately 28 feet from the front property line. The property is located within the R-1(10,000) zone district and is subject to a special setback of 24 feet along Churchill, as well as a contextual setback of 37 feet 1 ¼ inches from the front property line. The proposed home has a modern architectural language and use of materials. Roofs are flat with either parapets expressed or deep horizontal overhangs. Primary materials are fiber cement board panels, channel glass (vertically channeled panels), horizontal composite siding, smooth stucco, and painted wood (at fascias). The window frames are aluminum with clear glass and no divisions/muntins. PTC Purview The Variance request for this project was submitted in conjunction with an Individual Review application for the construction of a new, two story single family residence. The PTC's purview is limited to the Variance request for the house to encroach into the front (contextual) setback only. The Commissioners comments and recommendation on this application should be specifically related to the front (contextual) setback variance. Discussion The subject property is a 100 foot wide by 130 foot deep interior lot (13,000 square feet) located on Churchill Avenue near the Emerson Street intersection, in the Single Family City of Palo Alto Page 3 Residential zoning district (R-1, (10,000)). The site is currently developed with a single family residence with a covered porch in front that is setback approximately 28 feet 11 inches from the front property line. This building is proposed to be demolished for the construction of a new two story residence. The block in which the site is located has a wide variation of lot sizes, widths, and depths. Development standards for the R-1 (10,000) zoning district require a front setback of 20 feet. In addition, Churchill Avenue has a 24 foot “special setback” on both sides of the street, between Alma Street and Embarcadero Road. Lastly, Section 18.12.040(e) of the PAMC, states the minimum front setback shall be the greater of twenty feet (20') or the average setback, if the average front setback is 30 feet or more. This side of the block has an average front setback is 37 feet 1 ¼ inches. Hence, the minimum required front setback for this property is 37 feet 1 ¼ inches. The applicant must request a variance to encroach in this setback. Summary of Key Issues The issue for the PTC's consideration is the proposed front setback encroachment. In accordance with Section 18.14.040 (e) of the PAMC, the front contextual setback is calculated as follows: (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. In the case of this project, there are a total of six lot on the same side of the block. With the exclusion of the corner lots, which front other streets, there are four properties that factor into the average setback calculation. These properties include: Property Existing Front Setback 224 Churchill Avenue (subject property) 28’ 11 1/16” 236 Churchill Avenue 69 1 1/2” City of Palo Alto Page 4 250 Churchill Avenue 32’ 260 Churchill Avenue 21’ The average of these setbacks is 37 feet 1 ¼ inches which, according to the contextual setback regulations constitutes the minimum required setback for the proposed development at 224 Churchill Avenue. The applicant has contended that the deep setback of the adjacent lot (236 Churchill Avenue) is an “outlier” whose inclusion in calculating the average setback yields deeper front setback for the subject property than the properties in the vicinity and reduces backyard space on the subject lot as the basis of the argument in favor of the variance for a reduced front setback. (Attachment B and Attachment C) Section 18.76.030, Variance, of the PAMC outlines the purpose of a variance and the findings that shall be made for the granting of a Variance. The purpose of a variance in accordance with Section 18.76.030 is as follows: 1) Provide a way for a site with special physical constraints, resulting from natural or built features, to be used in ways similar to other sites in the same vicinity and zoning district; and 2) Provide a way to grant relief when strict application of the zoning regulations would subject development of a site to substantial hardships, constraints, or practical difficulties that do not normally arise on other sites in the same vicinity and zoning district. The subject property is a 13,000 square foot conforming lot. It is 3,000 square foot larger than the minimum lot size for the R-1 sub district in which it is located with no special natural or built physical constraints on site that would preclude the construction of a two family residence in conformance with the Site Development Standards applicable to all properties in the zoning district. The existing buildings including a single family residence and an accessory structure are proposed to be demolished. The trees on the site are not located in the building envelope. However, encroachment in the front (contextual) setback would bring the proposed development closer to a 42 inch diameter oak tree (protected tree) located in the front yard of the subject property. As such the development if a single family residence can occur on this lot in compliance with the development standards that would be applicable to all lots in the vicinity and in the R-1 zoning district. While the relatively deeper setback of the adjacent property impacts the average, the resulting setback is still much less than the set back of the neighboring lot at 236 Churchill Avenue. Regulations pertaining to contextual setback calculation include a provision for excluding lots with the greatest and least setback in the case of five or more lots, in this instance would mean including four lots in the average setback calculation to determine the front setback for the City of Palo Alto Page 5 subject lot. However, the strict application of this regulation does not constitute a substantial hardship, constraint, or practical difficulty for the development of the property as demonstrated by the development plans (Attachment D). It appears that the Variance request is a function of the applicant/owner’s desire for a larger backyard, which is understandable, but also a personal preference/circumstance. Personal circumstance is not a criterion for evaluating a variance request. Attachment A outlines staff recommended findings for denial of the Variance. Particularly staff believes that 1) there are no special circumstances that the strict application of requirements and regulations would deprive the subject property of the privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district, 2) the granting of the variance would be a grant of a special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and the applicable zoning district and that it would be 3) inconsistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan, the Individual Review Guidelines and the intent of the contextual setback requirements which direct site planning to take cues from adjacent properties. Alternatives If the Director’s decision to deny the variance is upheld, the applicant would have the following options: 1. Build the home as approved in the Individual Review application (14PLN-00364), which provides a front setback of 37 feet 1 ¼ inches, in conformacne with the required front (contextual) setback requirement. 2. Retain 75 percent of the exterior walls of the main dwelling, which would allow retention of the existing legal non-conforming front setback. Policy Implications The granting of the variance would not be consistent with the Site Development Standards in the applicable zoning district and Individual Review Guidelines that direct site planning to take cues from adjacent property conditions. It is noted that the adjacent property does have a substantial front yard setback that results in a greater setback for the subject property. The code contemplates these outlier conditions, but only when five or properties are being referenced. If the PTC agrees that the conditions create an unanticipated negative affect for the applicant, the proper remedy is to modify the zoning code to account for these circumstances. Granting a variance for this condition is, from staff’s perspective, not the proper path to address the issue. Environmental Review The project is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act per CEQA Guidelines Section 15303, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. Courtesy Copies: Geoff Campen City of Palo Alto Page 6 Oana Cocosel Attachments: Attachment A: Director's Denial Letter and Findings (PDF) Attachment B: Applicant's Variance Request Letter (PDF) Attachment C: Letter of Appeal (PDF) ATTACHMENT A ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT C ACTION NO. 2015-____ RECORD OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO LAND USE ACTION FOR 224 CHURCHILL AVENUE: VARIANCE APPLICATION (14PLN-00364) On November ___, 2015, the Council of the City of Palo Alto approved the Variance application for a 32 foot front setback, a 5 foot 1 ¼ inch encroachment into the required front (contextual) setback, along Churchill Avenue for the construction of a new two story single family residence in the R-1 (10,000) Residential Zoning 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. Request by Geoff Campen for a Variance to allow the construction of a new two story approximately 4,644 sq ft house with a 1,723 sq ft basement in the R-1(10000) Zoning District. The request includes a variance request for the contextual front setback. (“The Project”). B. The project site is located on Churchill Avenue near the Emerson Street intersection. The property is a conforming 13,000 square feet rectangular interior lot, 100 foot wide by 130 foot deep. The property is located within the R-1 (10,000) zoning district and is subject to a special setback of 24 feet along Churchill as well as a contextual setback of 37 feet 1 ¼ inches from the front property line. C. The Planning and Transportation Commission (Commission) reviewed and recommended approval of the Project on September 9, 2015. The Commission’s recommendations are contained in CMR # 6168 and the attachments to it. SECTION 2. Environmental Review. The City as the lead agency for the Project has determined that the project is exempt from environmental review under provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15303, New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures. SECTION 3. Variance Findings The decision to approve the Variance was based upon the following findings indicated under PAMC Section 18.76.030(c), and subject to Conditions of Approval, listed below: 1. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, including (but not limited to) size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, the strict application of the requirements and regulations prescribed in this title substantially deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property. Attachment B The subject parcel has a shallower lot depth (130 feet) compared to the other three parcels on the block (200 feet) that are considered in the evaluation of the contextual front yard setback. Contextual setbacks are derived from averaging the setback of the three other properties, including the adjacent property which has a residential structure set back approximately 69 feet. Other structures in this block are setback between 21 and 32 feet. The resulting contextual setback for the subject property is approximately 37 feet. This additional setback pushes the otherwise compliant residential structure further on the lot reducing the depth of the rear yard. The combination of the shallow lot depth and strict application of the zoning code deprives the owner privileges enjoyed by the three other, Churchill Avenue facing, properties on the block. 2. The granting of the application shall not affect substantial compliance with the regulations or constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district as the subject property. The variance does not convey a grant of special privilege. The existing structure on the subject property has a setback of 22 feet. The new setback authorized by the variance would require a 32 foot setback. Other Churchill Avenue facing properties on this block have setbacks that range from 25 to 31 feet, excluding the one outlier property with an approximate 69 foot setback. Accordingly, the subject property will be more in line with other structures on the block. Moreover the project with the variance remains compliant with other regulations and is compatible with the general character of the area. 3. The granting of the application is consistent with the Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan and the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance. The project is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan Policy L-12, which seeks to preserve the character of residential neighborhoods by encouraging new or remodeled structures to be compatible with the neighborhood and adjacent structures; 4. The granting of the application will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity, will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, general welfare, or convenience. The proposed improvements to the existing single-family home are compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood and will, subject to this variance approval, will be compliant with all the City’s regulations (Planning, Building, Fire, etc.) and, therefore, will not be detrimental to public health, safety, and welfare. Moreover, the reduced front yard setback is compatible with other front yard setbacks in the area. SECTION 5. Variance Approvals Granted. Variance Approval is granted by the City Council under Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 18.77.060 for application 14PLN-00364, subject to the conditions of approval in Section 6 of the Record. SECTION 6. Conditions of Approval. PLANNING DIVISION CONDITIONS: 1. CONFORMANCE WITH PLANS. Construction and development shall conform to the approved plans entitled, "Cocosel Residence 224 Churchill Avenue Palo Alto, California ,” stamped as received by the City on August 3, 2015 on file with the Planning Department, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. BUILDING PERMIT. Apply for a building permit and meet any and all conditions of the Planning, Fire, Public Works, and Building Departments. 3. BUILDING PERMIT PLAN SET. A copy of this cover letter and conditions of approval shall be printed on the second page of the plans submitted for building permit. 4. REQUIRED PARKING: All single family homes shall be provided with a minimum of one covered parking space (10 foot by 20 foot interior dimensions) and one uncovered parking space (8.5 feet by 17.5 feet). 5. UTILITY LOCATIONS: In no case shall utilities be placed in a location that requires equipment and/or bollards to encroach into a required parking space. 6. NOISE PRODUCING EQUIPMENT: All noise producing equipment shall be located outside of required setbacks, except they may project 6 feet into the required street side setbacks. 7. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. A minimum of 60 % of the required front yard shall have a permeable surface that permits water absorption directly into the soil (Section 18.12.040 (h)). 8. PRIVACY PANELS: The privacy panels shown at the side of upper floor balcony are required to ensure the project's conformance with the City's IR Guidelines and therefore are required as permanent features of the design and must remain for the life of the structure. 9. BALCONY: The upper floor balcony shall be open above as shown on the Square Footage Diagram, Second Level (Sheet A0.9). The openings above the balcony are required for compliance with the Floor Area requirements of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) and must remain open for the life of the structure. 10. REQUIRED LANDSCAPING/TREES. Additional landscaping shall be added near the left, rear corner of the lot to include two medium-sized evergreen screening trees (one to each side of the existing tree shown on Sheet A0.4, Neighborhood Privacy Diagram) to improve the privacy condition. The trees shall be 24-inch box planting size and be shown on the site plan filed for a building permit noted by botanical name. This landscaping is required to ensure the project's conformance with the City's IR Guidelines and therefore must remain for the life of the structure. 11. PROJECT ARBORIST. The project (certified) arborist shall ensure that the project conforms to all Planning and Urban Forestry conditions related to landscaping/trees. 12. TREE PROTECTION FENCING. Tree protection fencing shall be required as shown on the Site Plan (Sheet A0.2) 13. PLANNING FINAL INSPECTION. A Planning Division Final inspection will be required to determine substantial compliance with the approved plans prior to the scheduling of a Building Division final. Any revisions during the building process must be approved by Planning, including but not limited to; materials, fenestration and hard surface locations. Contact your Project Planner at the number below to schedule this inspection. 14. INDEMNITY: 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, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its own choice. 15. GREEN BUILDING & ENERGY REACH CODE REQUIREMENTS. NOTICE FOR PERMIT APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED ON OR AFTER 6/22/15.: Please be advised that the Palo Alto City Council has approved Energy Ordinance 5326 and Green Building Ordinance 5326 for all new permit applications with an effective date for June 22nd, 2015, as summarized below. To review the specific changes, visit the Development Services webpage .On the left hand side under “explore”, hover over “Green Building” and select “Compliance” You may also email Melanie Jacobson at Melanie.Jacobson@CityofPaloAlto.org for specific questions about your project. 1) GREEN BUILDING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL a) The project is a new construction residential building of any size and therefore must meet the California Green Building Code mandatory requirements outlined in Chapter 4, (with local amendments) plus Tier 2 minimum pre-requisites and electives outlined in Appendix A4* (with local amendments). The project must hire a Green Building Special Inspector for a pre-permit third-party design review and a third-party green building inspection process. The project must select a Green Building Special Inspector from the City’s list of approved inspectors. PAMC 16.14.080 (Ord. 5324 § 1 (part), 2015) *Note: Projects subject to Tier 1 or Tier 2 shall not be required to fulfill any requirements outlined in Appendix A4.2 Energy Efficiency. All energy efficiency measures are found in the 2013 California Energy Code and the Palo Alto Energy Reach Code PAMC 16.17 & 16.18 as described in the Energy Reach Code section below. b) EMERGENCY DROUGHT REGULATIONS: The project is a residential new construction project with a landscape of any size included in the project scope and therefore must comply with Potable water reduction Tier 2 in accordance with the Emergency Drought Regulations effective June 1st, 2015. Documentation is required to demonstrate that the Estimated Total Water Use (ETWU) falls within a Maximum Applied Water Allowance (MAWA) using the ET adjustment factor (ETAF) of 0.55 for landscaped areas. Vegetable gardens and other areas that qualify as Special Landscape Areas (SLA) will be given an ETAF of 1.0. (PAMC 16.14 (Ord. 5324 § 1 (part), 2015) and the Emergency Drought Regulations link below. The project applicant shall indicate the requirements on the Permit Plans. http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/2015TriCycle/BSC-Meetings/Emergency- Regs/HCD-EF-01-15-ET-Pt11.pdf c) The project is a residential construction project of any size and therefore must meet the enhanced construction waste reduction at tier 2 (75% construction waste reduction). PAMC 16.14.160 (Ord. 5324 § 1 (part), 2015) d) The project is a new detached single-family dwelling and therefore shall comply with the following requirements for electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) as shown in : (a) The property owner shall provide as minimum a panel capable to accommodate a dedicated branch circuit and service capacity to install at least a 208/240V, 50 amperes grounded AC outlet (Level 2 EVSE). The raceway shall terminate in close proximity to the proposed location of the charging system into a listed cabinet, box, enclosure, or receptacle. The raceway shall be installed so that minimal removal of materials is necessary to complete the final installation. The raceway shall have capacity to accommodate a 100-ampere circuit. (b) Design. The proposed location of a charging station may be internal or external to the dwelling, and shall be in close proximity to an on-site parking space. The proposed design must comply with all applicable design guidelines, setbacks and other code requirements. PAMC 16.14.420 (Ord. 5234 § 2, 2015) 2) LOCAL ENERGY REACH CODE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL a) The project includes new residential construction of any size and therefore triggers the Local Energy Efficiency Reach Code. For all new single-family residential, the performance approach specified within the 2013 California Energy Code shall be used to demonstrate that the TDV Energy of the proposed building is at least 15% less than the TDV Energy of the Standard Design. (Ord. 5324 § 1 (part), 2015) 3) Additional Green Building and Energy Reach Code information, ordinances and applications can be found at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/ds/green_building/default.asp. If you have any questions regarding Green Building requirements please call the Green Building Consultant at (650) 329-2179. PUBLIC WORKS URBAN FORESTRY CONDITIONS 1. WALKWAYS: Walkways must be constructed at grade using a base such as geo-grid or structural soil. No compaction or excavation is permitted within tree protection zones. 2. LANDSCAPING: Landscaping must be compatible with oaks growing on the property. 3. LANDSCAPE PLANS: Landscape plans, including but not limited to plants, lighting, and irrigation must be certified by the landscape architect and/or project arborist and then approved by the urban forestry group. 4. TREE PROTECTION FENCING. Tree #5 is required to be protected with Type I fencing. 5. TREE PROTECTION VERIFICATION. Prior to demolition, grading or building permit issuance, a written verification from the contractor that the required protective fencing is in place shall be submitted to the Building Inspections Division. The fencing shall contain required warning sign and remain in place until final inspection of the project. 6. EXCAVATION RESTRICTIONS APPLY (TTM, Sec. 2.20 C & D). Any approved grading, digging or trenching beneath a tree canopy shall be performed using ‘air-spade’ method as a preference, with manual hand shovel as a backup. For utility trenching, including sewer line, roots exposed with diameter of 1.5 inches and greater shall remain intact and not be damaged. If directional boring method is used to tunnel beneath roots, then Table 2-1, Trenching and Tunneling Distance, shall be printed on the final plans to be implemented by Contractor. 7. PLAN CHANGES. Revisions and/or changes to plans before or during construction shall be reviewed and responded to by the (a) project site arborist, (Kielty Arborist Services, 650-515-9783), or (b) landscape architect with written letter of acceptance before submitting the revision to the Building Department for review by Planning, PW or Urban Forestry. 8. TREE PROTECTION COMPLIANCE. The owner and contractor shall implement all protection and inspection schedule measures, design recommendations and construction scheduling as stated in the TPR & Sheet T-1, and is subject to code compliance action pursuant to PAMC 8.10.080. The required protective fencing shall remain in place until final landscaping and inspection of the project. Project arborist approval must be obtained and documented in the monthly activity report sent to the City. The mandatory Contractor and Arborist Monthly Tree Activity Report shall be sent monthly to the City (pwps@cityofpaloalto.org) beginning with the initial verification approval, using the template in the Tree Technical Manual, Addendum 11. 9. TREE DAMAGE. Tree Damage, Injury Mitigation and Inspections apply to Contractor. Reporting, injury mitigation measures and arborist inspection schedule (1-5) apply pursuant to TTM, Section 2.20-2.30. Contractor shall be responsible for the repair or replacement of any publicly owned or protected trees that are damaged during the course of construction, pursuant to Title 8 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and city Tree Technical Manual, Section 2.25. PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING CONDITIONS The following comments are required to be addressed prior to any future related permit application such as a Building Permit, Excavation and Grading Permit, Certificate of Compliance, Street Work Permit, Encroachment Permit, etc. These comments are provided as a courtesy and are not required to be addressed prior to the Planning entitlement approval: 1. SIDEWALK, CURB & GUTTER: As part of this project, the applicant must replace those portions of the existing sidewalks, curbs, gutters or driveway approaches in the public right-of-way along the frontage(s) of the property that are broken, badly cracked, displaced, or non-standard, and must remove any unpermitted pavement in the planter strip. Contact Public Works' inspector at 650-496-6929 to arrange a site visit so the inspector can determine the extent of replacement work. The site plan submitted with the building permit plan set must show the extent of the replacement work or include a note that Public Works' inspector has determined no work is required. The plan must note that any work in the right-of-way must be done per Public Works' standards by a licensed contractor who must first obtain a Street Work Permit from Public Works at the Development Center. 2. STREET TREES: As part of this project, the applicant is required to plant two new 24-in box Autumn Blaze Maple street trees in the public right of way adjacent to the property frontage. One tree shall replace the existing Black Locust and the second shall be planted 30-ft from the existing Magnolia (Tree T3) within the planter strip. Illustrate the tree on the architectural site plan and the grading and drainage plan with the following note: "New street tree required: Plant 24-in box Autumn Blaze Maple per Public Works Engineering detail #604 and install automatic irrigation per #513. Contact Public Works Urban Forestry at 650.496.5953 prior to planting to inspect tree stock and irrigation adequacy. 3. BASEMENT DRAINAGE: Due to high groundwater throughout much of the City and Public Works prohibiting the pumping and discharging of groundwater, perforated pipe drainage systems at the exterior of the basement walls or under the slab are not allowed for this site. A drainage system is, however, required for all exterior basement- level spaces, such as lightwells, patios or stairwells. This system consists of a sump, a sump pump, a backflow preventer, and a closed pipe from the pump to a dissipation device onsite at least 10 feet from the property line, such as a bubbler box in a landscaped area, so that water can percolate into the soil and/or sheet flow across the site. The device must not allow stagnant water that could become mosquito habitat. Additionally, the plans must show that exterior basement-level spaces are at least 7-3/4" below any adjacent windowsills or doorsills to minimize the potential for flooding the basement. Public Works recommends a waterproofing consultant be retained to design and inspect the vapor barrier and waterproofing systems for the basement. 4. BASEMENT SHORING: Shoring for the basement excavation, including tiebacks, must not extend onto adjacent private property or into the City right-of-way without having first obtained written permission from the private property owners and/or an encroachment permit from Public Works. Additionally, please be advised that slope-cut shoring will likely be infeasible for this project given proximity to the existing Oak tree in the front yard. The applicant shall include a shoring plan prepared by a licensed engineer which utilizes a method that minimizes soil disturbance associated with the excavation adjacent to the protected tree. Slope-cut shoring or other methods may be applied to other areas provided it won't encroach on neighboring properties, impact existing structures or disturb other protected trees 5. DEWATERING: Basement excavations may require dewatering during construction. Public Works only allows groundwater drawdown well dewatering. Open pit groundwater dewatering is disallowed. Dewatering is only allowed from April through October due to inadequate capacity in our storm drain system. The geotechnical report for this site must list the highest anticipated groundwater level. We recommend a piezometer to be installed in the soil boring. The contractor must determine the depth to groundwater immediately prior to excavation by using the piezometer or by drilling an exploratory hole if the deepest excavation will be within 3 feet of the highest anticipated groundwater level. If groundwater is found within 2 feet of the deepest excavation, a drawdown well dewatering system must be used, or alternatively, the contractor can excavate for the basement and hope not to hit groundwater, but if he does, he must immediately stop all work and install a drawdown well system before he continues to excavate. Public Works may require the water to be tested for contaminants prior to initial discharge and at intervals during dewatering. If testing is required, the contractor must retain an independent testing firm to test the discharge water for the contaminants Public Works specifies and submit the results to Public Works. Applicant shall install a water station for the reuse of dewatering water. This water station shall be constructed next to the right-of-way and shall be accessible 24 hours a day for the filling of water carrying vehicles (i.e. street sweepers, etc.). The water station shall also be sued for onsite dust control. Applicant shall meet with Public Works to coordinate the design details. Public Works reviews and approves dewatering plans as part of a Street Work Permit. The applicant can include a dewatering plan in the building permit plan set in order to obtain approval of the plan during the building permit review, but the contractor will still be required to obtain a street work permit prior to dewatering. Alternatively, the applicant must include the above dewatering requirements in a note on the site plan. Public Works has a sample dewatering plan sheet and dewatering guidelines available at the Development Center and on our website. 6. WATER FILLING STATION: Due to the California drought, applicant shall install a water station for the non-potable reuse of the dewatering water. This water station shall be constructed within private property, next to the right-of-way, (typically, behind the sidewalk). The station shall be accessible 24 hours a day for the filling of water carrying vehicles (i.e. street sweepers, etc.). The water station may also be used for onsite dust control. Before a discharge permit can be issued, the water supply station shall be installed, ready for operational and inspected by Public Works. The groundwater will also need to be tested for contaminants and chemical properties for the non-potable use. The discharge permit cannot be issued until the test results are received. Additional information regarding the station will be made available on the City's website under Public Works. 7. GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN: The plan set must include a grading & drainage plan prepared by a licensed professional that includes existing and proposed spot elevations and drainage flow arrows to demonstrate proper drainage of the site. Adjacent grades must slope away from the house a minimum of 2%. Downspouts and splashblocks should be shown on this plan, as well as any site drainage features such as swales. Grading will not be allowed that increases drainage onto, or blocks existing drainage from, neighboring properties. Public Works generally does not allow rainwater to be collected and discharged into the street gutter, but encourages the developer to keep rainwater onsite as much as feasible by directing runoff to landscaped and other pervious areas of the site. See the Grading & Drainage Plan Guidelines for New Single Family Residences: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2717 8. GRADING PERMIT: The site plan must include an earthworks table showing cut and fill volumes. If the total is more than 100 cubic yards, a grading permit will be required. An application and plans for a grading permit are submitted to Public Works separately from the building permit plan set. The application and guidelines are available at the Development Center and on our website. 9. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION: The City's full-sized "Pollution Prevention - It's Part of the Plan" sheet must be included in the plan set. The sheet is available here: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/2732 10. STREET TREES: Show all existing street trees in the public right-of-way. Any removal, relocation or planting of street trees; or excavation, trenching or pavement within 10 feet of street trees must be approved by Public Works' arborist (phone: 650- 496-5953). This approval shall appear on the plans. Show construction protection of the trees per City requirements. 11. WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY: The plans must clearly indicate any work that is proposed in the public right-of-way, such as sidewalk replacement, driveway approach, or utility laterals. The plans must include notes that the work must be done per City standards and that the contractor performing this work must first obtain a Street Work Permit from Public Works at the Development Center. If a new driveway is in a different location than the existing driveway, then the sidewalk associated with the new driveway must be replaced with a thickened (6" thick instead of the standard 4" thick) section. Additionally, curb cuts and driveway approaches for abandoned driveways must be replaced with new curb, gutter and planter strip. 12. IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA: The project will be creating or replacing 500 square feet or more of impervious surface. Accordingly, the applicant shall provide calculations of the existing and proposed impervious surface areas with the building permit application. The Impervious Area Worksheet for Land Developments form and instructions are available at the Development Center or on our website. 13. RESIDENTIAL STORM WATER TREATMENT: This project may trigger the California Regional Water Quality Control Board's revised provision C.3 for storm water regulations (incorporated into the Palo Alto Municipal Code, Section 16.11) that apply to residential land development projects that create or replace between 2,500 and 10,000 square feet of impervious surface area. The applicant must implement one or more of the following site design measures: Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse. Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas. Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas. Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas. Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces. Construct driveways, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable surfaces. SECTION 7. Term of Approval. Variance 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 City of Palo Alto Page 1 1 2 Planning and Transportation Commission Verbatim Minutes September 9, 2015 3 4 EXCERPT 5 6 Public Hearing7 1. 224 Churchill [14PLN-00364]: *Quasi-Judicial Request for hearing and Planning and8 Transportation Commission recommendation regarding the Director of Planning and Community 9 Environment’s denial of a Variance application to allow for a reduction in the required front setback 10 (contextual) from 37 feet-1 1/4 inches to 32 feet for a new, two story single family residence at 224 11 Churchill Avenue. For more information, contact Jodie Gerhardt at Jodie.gerhardt@cityofpaloalto.org 12 13 Acting Chair Fine: Item Number 2 is 224 Churchill. This is a quasi-judicial matter and a request for14 hearing and Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) recommendation regarding the Director of15 Planning and Community Environment’s denial of a variance application, deny a front setback. Are there16 any disclosures?17 18 Commissioner Downing: I’m not sure if this is exactly applicable, but I did look up this property on19 Google Maps. I did look up a satellite image of this just for your information (FYI) because I wasn’t quite20 getting a full picture of it just from the description.21 22 Acting Chair Fine: Thanks. Can we go with the presentation please.23 24 Jodie Gerhardt, Interim Planning Manager: Yes, thank you. My name is Jodie Gerhardt, Interim Current25 Planning Manager. The subject property in front of you is located at 224 Churchill Avenue and is a 10026 by 130 deep lot located on Churchill Avenue in the R-1 10,000 zoning district. The proposal would27 demolish an existing single family home and construct a new two-story home with an attached garage28 and a basement level. The individual review, this project does have two components and so the29 individual review component of the project, which is the two-story home which included a compliant30 setback was recently approved on September 8th and the variance would allow a 5 foot 1.25 inch31 encroachment into the front contextual setback was denied in May and the property owner has requested32 this hearing.33 34 So just to give a little bit of background about how we arrived at this front setback, this particular35 property does in a sense have three front setbacks. There is the standard 20 foot setback for any R-136 zoned property, there is also a special setback that is on Churchill Avenue and that is 24 feet in this case.37 Also contained in the code in the R-1 section of the code is the contextual front setback which in this38 case averages out to the 37 feet 1.1 inch and a fourth, one and a fourth inches. So hence given all of39 the different requirements the contextual front setback being the greatest is actually the front setback40 that needs to be applied on the property.41 42 So we do have a diagram that shows how that contextual front setback was arrived at. I believe the43 applicant will go into a little bit more detail about that, but we do take out the smallest and the largest44 property, we take out any corners that are facing another street and that sort of thing before we look at45 the average. Then just to give you an idea about how the existing house sits on the property there is an46 existing front porch that’s about 26 feet back and the main house is 34 feet back from the front property47 line. And then the proposal the IR proposal that was approved actually shows the house all the way back48 at the 37 feet; however, the proposal before you today with the variance is to have a 32 foot front49 setback.50 51 So in the attachments we do have the findings for the variance that further explain why the project was52 denied. There, we believe that there are no special circumstances related to this project and actually53 Attachment C City of Palo Alto Page 2 there is an oak tree that’s located in the front yard. So having the house set back further is actually 1 helpful to that oak tree giving it more room to breathe. The granting of the variance would be a special 2 privilege that would be inconsistent with other properties and it would be inconsistent with the 3 Comprehensive Plan, the individual review guidelines, and the intent of the contextual front setback. This 4 concludes staff presentation, thank you. 5 6 Jonathan Lait, Assistant Director: If I could just make one clarification, maybe ask Jodie to help me out 7 with this. I believe in the presentation there was a comment that the greatest setback and the 8 shallowest setback are thrown out in the discussion, but I think that’s when there’s five or more parcels 9 in play and here there are less than five. So those, those extremes are not removed in the consideration 10 of the subject proposal. 11 12 Acting Chair Fine: And I believe the applicant would like to make a presentation? 13 14 Bogdan Cocosel: Hi, I’m Bogdan Cocosel, my wife. Actually we own basically the property at 224 15 Churchill and so thank you very much for taking the time actually to listen to kind of our point of view 16 here. And we have been residents of Palo Alto for almost eight years now and this is our first house. We 17 had no idea what we were getting into. So now we know a lot more. So in interest of time, actually I’m 18 going to pass the microphone along actually to Richard which will explain basically some of the definitions 19 that are applicable kind of here and then John who’s our architect actually will present basically the 20 design implications and the contextual setback issues. 21 22 Richard McDonald, Hopkins & Carley: Good evening, Commissioners; my name is Richard McDonald. I’m 23 an attorney with Hopkins & Carley. I represent the applicant, the property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Cocosel. 24 25 My contribution tonight is very brief. I just wanted to point out to the Commission that the manner in 26 which we’re, we have tried to frame our appeal as well as the project itself would be to allow this 27 Commission to make the findings necessary under the code to find, to grant a variance and with 28 particular regard to the issue of substantial hardship. As a lawyer I look at case law and the cases that 29 have looked at and evaluated the issue of substantial hardship define it in a way that we are trying to 30 frame our appeal and it would allow the Commission to find the variance. A substantial hardship under 31 the cases and I’m citing now a case for the record and ready reference is the Committee to Save the 32 Hollywood Land Specific Plan versus City of Los Angeles in which the granting of a variance was upheld. 33 And the case cites the definition of unnecessary hardship as where the natural condition or topography of 34 the land places the land owner at a disadvantage vis-à-vis other land owners in the area such as 35 peculiarities of the size, shape, or grade of the parcel. The Zach Keysian case also discerned in the 36 hardship requirement an additional finding that the hardship be substantial and that the exception sought 37 must be in harmony with the intent of the zoning laws. I can provide the legal side of 161 Cal Ave. 38 fourth at Page 1168. So we’ve attempted to again frame this appeal in the context that would allow the 39 Commission to make the findings necessary in a manner consistent with the case law and that is indeed 40 in our view and I’ll let the architect describe the project on its merits in more detail and I thank you for 41 your time. 42 43 John Kluf, Kluf Architecture: The diagram that’s up or sorry, I’m sorry. My name is John Kluf of Kluf 44 Architecture, thank you for hearing our case. If you take a look at the diagram that’s up on the board 45 the block has a special setback of 24 feet which was mentioned and the subject house, our project, 37 46 foot setback. The purpose, the reason behind that setback is an oversized setback at the neighboring 47 property which is clearly an outlier on this block. And we’re asking for a still quite large setback of 32 48 feet, which is farther back than all the other houses on the block except for this outlying property. 49 50 You can see from the diagram the outlying lot is the largest on the block and it’s also much deeper than 51 our lot. So deep in fact that if we had to set our house back to match theirs for some reason on a 52 contextual basis our house would be deep into the rear setback and would not even be buildable. That’s 53 the difference in the lots. 54 55 City of Palo Alto Page 3 Also the tree was mentioned. We all love big oak trees and the arborist’s report indicates that the oak 1 tree on the lot will be protected with a setback of 32 feet. We’re not asking to go any farther forward 2 than what the arborist approved for the tree. Next slide. 3 4 This shows what the contextual setback would be if the outlying properties were excluded. The staff 5 report contains our variance application and on Page 2 of our letter we cite an excerpt from the 6 Committee of the Whole from June 18, 2001, and it indicates that the committee intended to exclude 7 outliers from the contextual setback calculations, but because the way the law was drafted this intention 8 to eliminate outliers is not always borne out in practice. For blocks with three or fewer houses not 9 applicable because there’s no contextual setback requirement. For blocks with four houses the 10 contextual setback applies, but outliers can’t ever be excluded. For blocks with five or six houses the 11 contextual setback applies, but it’s a crap shoot whether the outliers would or would not be excluded. 12 That’s our situation. 13 14 We lost the dice roll because both the corner lots have front doors that face the side street. Please note 15 that the garages of the front, of the corner lots face Churchill. So for all intents and purposes these 16 houses are part of the perceived street wall on Churchill, but because their front doors face the side 17 streets they don’t count in the calculation. So we’re left with four houses and the outliers may not be 18 eliminated. If one of these houses were remodeled so that the front door faced Churchill, but no other 19 changes were made we’d have five houses that count on this block and outliers would be excluded. 20 Furthermore, if there was one more house on this block for a total of seven the outliers would be 21 excluded. If the outliers were excluded we’d have a contextual setback calculated just under 32 feet and 22 we’re asking for 32 feet. So if one front door changed on this block or there were one more house on 23 the block our requested setback would comply with the contextual setback. Our proposal clearly 24 complies with the intent of the code which is to remove outliers and respond to context. Only the 25 technicalities of one front door happens to be facing on a corner lot or how many lots are on a block 26 determines that we need a larger setback. Next slide please. 27 28 This one further explores the intent of the committee on contextual setbacks. The committee excerpt 29 and our variance letter also states contextual setbacks should not be applied for blocks with special 30 setbacks. Clearly this did not make it into the law since our block has a special setback, but we’re still 31 subject to the contextual setback requirement. To explore this briefly without the contextual setback the 32 special setback of 24 feet would govern and so our 32 foot setback is far in excess of that. This diagram 33 also illustrates that our setback request of 32 feet exceeds the hypothetical contextual setback had say 34 both the corner houses had their front doors and not just their garages facing Churchill. Next slide 35 please. 36 37 The intent of contextual setbacks is to minimize the effects of outliers. This diagram shows that as each 38 property develops over time on this block each house would be pulled back farther and farther because 39 the contextual setback is increased each time. The effect over time of the outliers pulling back the other 40 houses on the block creates divots in the street wall and leaves void spaces. And pages five, the next 41 two slides show this is the larger block in the current situation and the next slide shows that over time as 42 contextual setbacks would be applied on these blocks that have five or six houses you’re creating divots 43 that pull these houses back from the street wall and are contrary to the idea of working into context. 44 45 So in conclusion, the conditions that disadvantage our client are that their block has one huge property 46 with a very deep front setback. This house is an outlier and pulls all the other houses back as the 47 contextual setback is currently calculated. Without this house the 32 foot setback we’re asking for would 48 fit nicely within the contextual setback on this block. The block also has six houses on it, not seven, and 49 of the six houses both front doors of both corner houses happen to face the side streets. If there were 50 just one more house or if just one more corner lot had a front door facing Churchill the outlying 51 properties would be eliminated and our requested setback would be in compliance technically as well as 52 with the intent of the code. 53 54 These conditions on the block disadvantage our clients forcing them to move their house further back on 55 the lot leaving a large unusable front yard and a smaller rear than their neighbors. Our request complies 56 City of Palo Alto Page 4 with the intent of the contextual setbacks which was to eliminate outliers and create a more uniform 1 street wall. Because the number of our houses on the block and because of the fact that both corners 2 happen to have front doors on the side streets the law taken literally means that our property would have 3 to be setback farther from the street wall than what would make sense for its contextuality. As Ms. 4 Gerhardt stated in her staff report, blocks with our number of houses are not well thought through in this 5 code. Her recommendation was to change the code, but variances are the vehicle for allowing projects 6 like ours that comply with the intent of the code on lots like ours that have hardships as defined in the 7 case law to be approved while the law is reconsidered. Therefore, we respectfully ask you to overturn 8 the denial of our variance and support our appeal. Thank you. 9 10 Acting Chair Fine: Thank you. I’d like to open up any public comments. Do we have any speaker cards 11 on this issue? None? Ok, then let’s turn it over to the Commission. Maybe let’s have five minutes for 12 questions. We’ll start that side. Commissioner Downing. 13 14 Commissioner Downing: Sure. So if I can get some clarity on the property is there a pool at the back of 15 the property in the backyard? 16 17 Mr. Cocosel: No. 18 19 Commissioner Downing: No pool, ok. And then have you had any conversations with your neighbors 20 about your intended designs? Have they expressed any concerns or issues? 21 22 Mr. Cocosel: We have, we had conversation with them. Their only concern was basically to postpone the 23 build for a year so that doesn’t affect the school schedule. 24 25 Commissioner Downing: Ok and then the last question I have is the difference, the difference here that’s 26 being asked between the 37 feet and the 32 feet it’s not a particularly large one. It’s five feet difference, 27 but I guess I’m wondering if there’s a particular significance there? Like if there’s something you’re 28 planning for that backyard that would, that this would get in the way of or is it just that it creates more 29 unusable space for you? 30 31 Mr. Cocosel: It’s basically the unusable space. If you look actually on the diagram actually the yard 32 actually is very small in the back because most of it is actually in the front. And the connectivity within 33 the city backyards that actually creates a view for all of these city properties actually like all our 34 neighbors actually have very low fences in order to kind of enjoy visiting each other’s back yards and if 35 we move the house basically [unintelligible] the, their view, right? And similarly for us of course, but it’s 36 also for them. 37 38 Commissioner Downing: Ok, thank you. 39 40 Acting Chair Fine: Commissioner Gardias. I’m just going to go down the line. 41 42 Commissioner Gardias: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So the question is to the staff. Could you please tell 43 us what is the history behind those parcels where those houses subject of that great outliers are? There 44 is couple of the properties here on this considered block and on the adjacent block where the middle 45 houses are pretty much set back farther and I was just passing by them yesterday and I thought that 46 maybe there was some historical reason that those houses maybe were developed earlier and then would 47 be a change in the habits or accommodations or the design style that was causing the properties just to 48 farther flow toward the street that was changing the, pretty much the nature of how the houses were 49 placed on the property. But this could have been just my thinking so if you could just put some historical 50 layer on top of this I would appreciate this. Thank you. 51 52 Mr. Lait: I appreciate your observation on that. Unfortunately we don’t have any historical knowledge 53 about the pattern of development in the block and why this property that we’re talking about was 54 setback further or on the other block why it was setback further. 55 56 City of Palo Alto Page 5 Commissioner Gardias: But the house in the middle is earlier? It’s much older? 1929, so it’s a earlier 1 property than the adjacent properties, right? 2 3 Mr. Cocosel: The property that is newer is actually the one next to the outlier the one to the right of the 4 outlier, which is 1988 I think so it’s a few years before contextual setback. So they were not subject to 5 contextual setback when they did it. They were subject to [unintelligible]. 6 7 Commissioner Gardias: Ok. So the observation I had could be right? Those houses in the middle of 8 those two blocks were developed earlier. 9 10 Mr. Cocosel: Pretty old. 1939 this one. 11 12 Commissioner Gardias: Ok. Thank you. 13 14 Acting Chair Fine: Acting Chair Rosenblum. Acting Vice-Chair. 15 16 Acting Vice-Chair Rosenblum: Hi, my question’s for staff. I found the argument by the applicant pretty 17 compelling, which is that the intent of the setback is to have uniformity in our neighborhoods. And it 18 does seem that there is a mathematical issue with only having a couple of houses to compare which 19 means that you have to have the outliers included and the technicality of the two corner lots happening 20 to have their doors on the other side, but if you look at not only this block, but the two adjacent blocks 21 the two blocks or the three blocks across from those blocks it’s much more uniform to comply with the 22 applicant’s wishes. They would put the neighborhood into much greater uniformity. So I’m curious in 23 your opinion is that not the spirit of the setback ruling? I understand and you stated very clearly that this 24 is in violation of the letter of the ruling and I agree with that. There’s a ruling that if there are five, if 25 there are fewer than five properties then the outlier shall not be included and therefore at least this 26 mathematical anomaly of having a major outlier included in the sample, but I’m curious if you also think 27 that this is in violation of the spirit of what’s trying to be achieved which is uniformity? 28 29 Mr. Lait: No, I don’t believe that it is in violation of the spirit of the contextual… I mean I think the fact 30 that you have an outlier is part of the context and that is repeated on this block and it’s on the adjacent 31 block and I don’t know that because you have an outlier that suddenly the argument of context is pushed 32 aside. At some point the drafters when they when this was adopted made a very deliberate decision to 33 make a distinction between four and five lots and the corner lots and the outliers. So I’m clearly 34 empathetic to the condition that the applicant that they find themselves in, but I don’t believe it 35 inconsistent with the intent to approach it the way that the staff’s approached it. I don’t think it’s 36 particularly inconsistent the way the applicant’s proposed it, but all things being equal what we have to 37 fall back on is how the code is drafted and how this particular project applies to that circumstance. 38 39 Acting Vice-Chair Rosenblum: Except that the code asks us to do a balancing test around the contextual 40 environment which is again I think any kind of plain reading of this is that what they’re proposing is much 41 more in line. If we took them the deviation of their lot versus the others you’re getting a higher deviation 42 by going with staff proposal than what they are doing, which would be a lower deviation and so I think 43 that that’s why you bring it in front of humans to help with that judgement. They’ve applied the 44 algorithm citywide and I think this is a weird circumstance that you happen to have two houses that don’t 45 count and then you get below the minimum so this kind of strange outlier does count and therefore I 46 mean I don’t think all these things can be made by machines. So anyway I think you’ve answered my 47 question and I get it. I think that’s my only question. So thank you. 48 49 Acting Chair Fine: I tend to agree with Acting Vice-Chair Rosenblum that the issue really is that the 50 outliers can’t be excluded and that the contextual setback may need an update as mentioned in the 51 report. So I think something I would comment on, so I’m questioning it. I guess my question is more 52 that in the Director’s opinion this variance doesn’t meet the findings, but I had some specific questions 53 about that. Finding Number 1 is about special circumstances for size, shape, topography, location, and 54 surroundings. Doesn’t this fit the definition of location and surroundings? 55 56 City of Palo Alto Page 6 Mr. Lait: I think you have to continue reading the [unintelligible] finding which talks about how those 1 conditions would deprive the property owner from the privileges enjoyed by the properties. And the fact 2 that they can build an otherwise good compliant structure and achieve the same floor areas that the 3 other properties in the area can achieve that the setbacks there’s nothing about the setback itself that 4 constrains the development. 5 6 Acting Chair Fine: So I guess maybe the privilege I’m speaking of then is the extra five feet in the private 7 backyard. I think it’s also laudable of them that they might want to share with their neighbors a little bit 8 in terms of sight lines and stuff. But everybody wants a little bit more space in the backyard and it 9 seems like this contextual setback in this issue is doing exactly that to make this five feet in front rather 10 than behind. Does that count as a privilege? 11 12 Mr. Lait: From staff’s perspective it does not. 13 14 Acting Chair Fine: Ok, why not? 15 16 Mr. Lait: Well we speak of privilege I think what we’re talking about is how other similarly zoned similarly 17 shaped properties enjoy and develop their property based on this, these standards that are set forth with 18 the height, the setbacks, the floor areas, and so forth and yeah there’s a greater setback that’s required 19 in front, but that’s not denying the property owner use or enjoyment of the property. And I guess I 20 mean again I’m very empathetic to the condition and I think where we find ourselves is that it’s the it’s 21 more of a process to how to get it’s a process of getting the applicant from where they are to where they 22 want to be and if it is the case that the finding cannot be met we don’t approve a finding a variance 23 when really what we need to do in this particular case is amend the code which we think is the solution. 24 I think if we, I appreciate the purpose section we’re trying to do and the interest in wanting to solve the 25 problem, but I think there’s the proper way to solve the problem and that’s kind of and that’s why we 26 landed on the decision point that we did with respect to the variance part of it. 27 28 Acting Chair Fine: So I’m not going have you repeat Commissioner Rosenblum’s question about the spirit 29 of variances and how they are meant to be a stop gap or escape valve. Hypothetically what happens if 30 the City approves a variance without meeting the findings? Is that even possible? Does it open loop 31 hole? 32 33 Mr. Lait: Well, so I think decision maker and I’ll let the attorney speak to the legal aspect of it, but this 34 body so the Director makes a decision based on a set of circumstances, the administrative record, so on 35 so forth. This body in its review of the administrative record may very well come to a different 36 conclusion and that’s perfectly fine. It would be based, I mean you would articulate your reasons why 37 you believe the finding could be made. And that information would be then moved forward to the City 38 Council for their deliberation. 39 40 Acting Chair Fine: Those are my questions. Commissioner Michael. 41 42 Commissioner Michael: So in no particular order, I’m inclined to think that the applicant’s case is 43 persuasive to me. I was particularly interested in the comments from the applicant’s architect and share 44 some of the thoughts expressed by Vice-Chair Rosenblum. I’m not certain that there’s this bar that has 45 to be crossed of amending the code. One of the words in the code might be something that we could 46 interpret in conjunction with findings and that’s the word average. When I went to this first of all 47 knowledge I did a Google search and it directed me to Wikipedia. It turns out that average has many 48 meanings and I think that the staff report clearly applies the arithmetic mean and by no means is it clear 49 to me that the arithmetic mean is an appropriate formula or methodology for average in this setting. So 50 without amending the code I mean the other most common applications of average are mean, median, 51 and mode. If there’s probably because the limitations of the small data set you really can’t use mode, 52 but if you had median it would be 32 feet with the three other parcels. So without amending the code 53 you should adopt the methodology of median rather than arithmetic mean and we’re done. 54 55 City of Palo Alto Page 7 I think that the anomalies that are created in the historic application of this code section I mean there’s 1 three or fewer parcels or five or more are indications of the requirement of a judgement. I think the 2 taking out the smallest and the largest when there’s five or more is application of the methodology of the 3 truncated mean. The truncated mean is probably a preferred or more accurate methodology when 4 determining an average. And so in that case you would without question take out the 236 Churchill 5 property and then and work the analysis from there. 6 7 On the substantial hardship question I really think that the issue of the usability of the backyard in 8 relationship to the overall lot size is a question of potential or actual substantial hardship and just as a 9 disclosure I have a property which has an unusable backyard because there’s a very small rear setback. 10 And we’ve had some problems with how we would use the site which we had to do sort of a planning 11 battle in that community until we get a solution, but I think that the forcing the house to be located 12 further back because of this I think stretched interpretation of contextual setback does in fact lead to a 13 finding of depriving a property owner of privileges owned by other adjacent properties and I would 14 support that as a finding. 15 16 And then I’m a retired lawyer and so the looking into the intent of the committee is something that I 17 think is of great importance with the issue of whether or not if there’s a special setback applicable to a 18 block then this would be carved out from the contextual setback applications. I think that may be a 19 finding that you come to looking at the committee proceedings and another justification for deciding in 20 favor of the applicant. I think that the whether or not to exclude the outlier is not really the right 21 question. I think the other questions that I raised earlier could be dispositive and that’s the basis on 22 which I would suggest that we at the appropriate time side with the applicant’s request. 23 24 Mr. Lait: There’s not a question to staff, but I just wanted to make two comments if that’s ok? So the 25 code sets forth the, what a required rear setback is and it’s 20 and in this case the applicant’s proposing 26 46. So from at least the code perspective that minimum number of yards is provided for amply. And 27 with the comment about the definition of average the code actually tells us what average is, there’s a 28 definition that says average means and it talks about the distance between the property line to the front. 29 So I don’t think there’s means for interpretation with the code that is, speaks to that, that definition. And 30 that’s in the contextual front setbacks portion of the code. 31 32 Commissioner Michael: I think in the Comprehensive Plan there’s some great deference given to the 33 character of existing, the existing character of neighborhoods. And I think the notion that there should 34 be sort of a cookie cutter 20 foot backyard setback isn’t in the character of this neighborhood. I think it’s 35 a more ample lot and in proportion the balance between the front and the rear that may in fact be a 36 substantial hardship so I would quibble with the application of a cookie cutter measurement in this 37 particular neighborhood. And what was the other comment? I didn’t… 38 39 Mr. Lait: Average. 40 41 Commissioner Michael: Oh, so I think your citation of the code still doesn’t address the question of 42 whether you use the arithmetic mean, the truncated mean, the median, or some other methodology that 43 might be appropriate. If in fact this code section should be revised that in Palo Alto will be sort of a 44 never ending process and we need to make a decision with this property sooner than that revision can 45 happen. 46 47 Commissioner Alcheck: Ok, thank you for your report. In my ongoing effort to be thorough and concise 48 I’ll start at the end. I would enthusiastically support recommending that City Council grant this variance 49 and there’s a little bit of irony here. Tonight we’re going to hear on Item 5 areas where we can create 50 greater clarity in our code because it’s not really precise and it doesn’t achieve all of its objectives on the 51 way we intended it to. And I think this is sort of a great example of how there was an intent that is not 52 being met in this particular block and unfortunately our code can’t really serve every possible scenario 53 well. And that’s why it’s and we have an ongoing process of editing it as we discover issues we try to 54 address them and sometimes we don’t and I think when we don’t do it as quickly as theoretically 55 humanly possible some people suffer as a result and I think that this could be interpreted as a hardship. 56 City of Palo Alto Page 8 1 There’s a lot of unique things going on on this site. The neighbor who has the enormous setback, I’m 2 guessing here, but I would be interested to know if that property is half an acre. It looks like it’s over 3 20,000 square feet (sf). And it’s very convenient for the largest parcel on this map or on this on the map 4 I have to have a huge setback because it doesn’t impact his ability to have a house the maximum size 5 home you can have in Palo Alto is 6,000 sf. If you have a 20,000 plus square foot lot 6,000 is your limit 6 even theoretically the equation to determine your square footage could get you higher, 6,000 is your cap. 7 I don’t know if the lot’s 20,000, but I’m guessing because of its width and depth. And so this individual 8 could theoretically put their lot anywhere within the setbacks and still have ample use of the space. So I 9 think that the fact that that particular home is set back so far suggesting that there is a disadvantage on 10 all the lots. 11 12 I also think that I am not a huge fan of contextual applications of our code because in this particular 13 instance there’s a special setback so 90 percent of our R-1 or maybe more is subject to the standard 14 setback of 20 and then we have certain streets where we have a special setback, in this case 24, which 15 means that there was an intent that the homes come within 24 feet as opposed to 20. Which I would 16 argue 20 is actually a very small setback in residential neighborhoods which then implies that we do have 17 a preference for homes being kind of close to our streets and a preference for larger backyards. And the 18 fact that in this particular street they set a special setback of 24 implies that they had this secondary 19 standard and I think you see that in many of the homes on both sides of the street and all along the rest 20 of the street past these, this block. 21 22 I think that I know the, I know that according to the letter of the law you can’t, you can’t not include this 23 parcel and I think that’s why the basis for the Director’s decision and for the Planning staff’s decision is 24 coming from. I think we’re in a position to determine whether or not there should be some flexibility 25 because of the hardship created by that calculation. I don’t think we need to sort of get too heavy into 26 the definition of average. I think we can accomplish this by suggesting that this outlier shouldn’t be 27 included. Again it’s extremely convenient for the, this size lot to have the largest setback and as a result 28 he’s affecting the parcels all around him. 29 30 I really think it’s a mistake to assume that our code is perfect. And I think there are always going to be 31 some technicalities that we, that should be considered at this level and I think that if we assume that the 32 implications of the code, I think it’s I also think it’s can be a dangerous game to sort of evaluate intent. I 33 feel much more comfortable looking at the street and saying look, maybe the, I’ll end here. Maybe the 34 definition of contextual setback is X, but when you think of the context of the actual street the suggested 35 36 foot setback is that what it is? 37 foot setback doesn’t seem contextual at all. It seems like it would 36 create another outlier, which I think would be unfortunate and for that reason I maintain my original 37 statement which is that I would enthusiastically support a Motion to recommend that the Council grant 38 this applicant a variance. 39 40 Acting Chair Fine: Thank you. Commissioner Downing, another question? 41 42 Commissioner Downing: Well, I’d like to make a comment. So in terms of whether or not this is 43 compliant with our Comprehensive Plan, there’s actually a policy in the Comprehensive Plan which 44 specifically says that you cannot build a tall fence in front of your property and which specifically says 45 that the view of the house should not be obstructed. The Comprehensive Plan itself says that we want 46 neighborhoods where you can walk down the street and you can actually see the houses. That’s one of 47 our aesthetic goals, it’s one of our preferences. The house that is the outlier and the house which now 48 this house is supposed to emulate actually doesn’t follow that policy, you can’t even see that house from 49 the street it’s so far back and so wooded in front of it. And so following the house that’s already not 50 compliant with the Comprehensive Plan I think is odd and I don’t think that’s really where we want to go. 51 52 And I agree that within this language without needing to go any further we can find, I think we can find 53 the things that we need. This talks about special physical constraints. I think the fact that this is the 54 only lot that’s so short on that, this entire street is a real physical constraint. That is weird. It is a 55 peculiarity for that particular street. I would also add that in terms of constraints I sort of hear well, they 56 City of Palo Alto Page 9 still get a big backyard, but this larger house has enough room that it has an accessory dwelling unit. I’m 1 not sure that if this setback were permitted as it were that it would actually still have room for an 2 accessory dwelling unit or if it did whether or not it would still look as nice and give as much space as 3 one would want. So I think that not being able to build such a unit or being able to build it with further 4 constraints really does impinge on this, these people’s enjoyment of their property. So I think there are 5 real physical constraints here. 6 7 And I think that it’s also, I do think that this rule qualifies for rule cleaning up because it’s a very odd 8 rule. Because it’s a rule that only applies in blocks of four. How odd. We have one rule for five and up 9 and we have one rule for three and under and then we have yet another rule for four. Really? Really 10 four deserved a special rule? So I would definitely put this on the list of things that we should go back 11 and we should look at and I agree with the applicants that I mean if you follow this rule to its logical 12 conclusion all the houses on this street end up being pulled back, all of them over time. Which again 13 runs counter to an explicit goal we actually have in the Comprehensive Plan and it makes this street less 14 walkable, it makes it less enjoyable, it makes it feel less safe when you can’t actually see any of the 15 houses. So that’s my thought. 16 17 Acting Chair Fine: Thank you. Commissioner Gardias. 18 19 Commissioner Gardias: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I’m going to offer a different perspective on this. I 20 believe that when I read the code and when I walk around this neighborhood it makes sense. It pretty 21 much reflects this was happening in this neighborhood a hundred years ago when this neighborhood was 22 created or maybe a little bit earlier. But nonetheless this is R-1 10,000 sf lots and then pretty much 23 when they were built back then that was pretty much the style and the setback as it is expressed in the 24 code it pretty much follows the style of this neighborhood and doesn’t allow just to create the uniform 25 line specifically just to preserve the way of life that the citizens of this neighborhood had decided to erect 26 many years ago. So I believe that this makes sense from this perspective, but then of course there is a 27 question on this specific property and approach to this four lot calculation of the property so just 28 agreeing with the specifics of this, of this code pronunciation I want to just go back to the property for a 29 moment. So because, because this property is truly affected by this one, one building and then by 30 building new house the owner loses the privilege of just having the house being closer to the street 31 where actually the house already is, right? We’re just because of this restrictions we’re just we’re forcing 32 the owner to set the house farther back because of this regulation. So giving that loss of right I would 33 support some, some ease on this property to allow this proposal as it was presented, but of course as I 34 just mentioned before I totally support the way that this neighborhood is zoned with the existing setback 35 because I think this reflects the historical nature of the and the intent of the zoners. Thank you. 36 37 Acting Chair Fine: Acting Vice-Chair Rosenblum. 38 39 MOTION 40 41 Acting Vice-Chair Rosenblum: Yes, I’d like to make a Motion that we accept the applicant’s call for an 42 approved variance. 43 44 SECOND 45 46 Commissioner Alcheck: Second. 47 48 Acting Chair Fine: Would you like to speak to your Motion? 49 50 Acting Vice-Chair Rosenblum: Sure. I’ll just repeat some of the points that have already been made. I 51 do believe that this represents a substantial hardship. Palo Alto land is scarce. We enjoy any bit of land 52 that allows us to sit in our backyard with slightly less obstructed views. Neighbors will also appreciate 53 that. That is I think the value to any of us living in Palo Alto we know that is significant. So I accept that 54 this is a substantial detriment to their life. At the same time I think that actually their application makes 55 the neighborhood more consistent, which is the intent of the setback, of our setback codes. So I think 56 City of Palo Alto Page 10 this both makes the neighborhood more consistent and does allow the applicant and their neighbors 1 something better. So I think sort of triumph of human logic over the algorithm. 2 3 Acting Chair Fine: Would you like to speak to your second? 4 5 Commissioner Alcheck: I’ll just add that I want to clarify that I support this Motion not because I think 6 that this we need to create equity among parcels that are different. I think that the underlying theme 7 here is: are we, is the intent of the special setback and more particularly the context of the neighborhood 8 being preserved here or not? And I want to add another point that I think is just really relevant. We are 9 very aware of how involved our community is in decisions like this and I think it’s very telling that allow 10 me to make an assumption here that the neighbors were notified about the meeting and the fact that we 11 don’t have a neighbor here suggesting otherwise I think speaks volumes about this. We didn’t get any 12 emails about this item from any neighbors suggesting they were opposed to this decision and or this the 13 potential for this decision and I think that that’s also very telling. So that’s it. 14 15 Acting Chair Fine: Any other comments from the Commission? I’ll just say I want to thank the applicant 16 and their team for coming. I especially found the diagrams extraordinarily helpful and I do want to echo 17 the issue that I think over time this does have a downhill effect on the neighborhood especially with 18 regard to the Comp Plan. That said I just want to put it out there does the Commission feel we could 19 provide the proper findings to accept this variance? A number of us have each touched on those various 20 three findings we need to make and then we’re going to focus one to explicitly address in our Motion. 21 Commissioner Downing. 22 23 Commissioner Downing: I feel that this Commission has made pretty good arguments for why we do see 24 this as a real constraint, why we see actual physical constraints on this property and the way that this 25 property is shaped as well as the lack of actual lack of enjoyment that this kind of hole makes. 26 27 MOTION 28 29 Acting Chair Fine: Anything else? Let’s take a vote. All those in favor? Great, so the Motion passes and 30 just for the record the Motion that we… we’re talking, the Motion passes unanimously. Thank you. And 31 we were using the staff recommendation, but instead of the word uphold we say reject. Great, thank 32 you so much. 33 34 MOTION PASSED (6-0-1, Chair Tanaka absent) 35 36 Mr. Cocosel: Thank you very much. 37 38 Commission Action: Motion by Acting Vice-chair Rosenblum, second by Commissioner Alcheck to 39 accept Applicants request for variance. Motion passes unanimously (6-0-1, Chair Tanaka absent) 40 15 1 0 160 180 14 9 2 159 8 14 2 0 215 227 14 8 5 14 2 9 14 2 1 0 240 242 244 14 4 4 14 4 0 256 70 14 0 4 14 3 6 231235 237 241 225 259 15 7 0 215 3 6 236 237 250 260 15 2 0 15 0 0 15 0 5 15 2 1 224 251 14 5 0 263 20 15 2 5 15 0 1 15 3 5 301305 15 5 1 14 4 5 215 15 2 0 15 3 6 15 6 4 15 7 0 159 1 EMERSON STREETEMERSON STREET CHURCHILL AVENUE BRYANT STREET BRYANT STREET This map is a product of the City of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. Legend Corner Lots (not included in setback analysis) Property Lines abc Building Roof Outline 24' Special Setback on Churchill Ave 0'100' 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, 2015-11-03 16:17:52Churchill Contextual FSetback Analysis (\\cc-maps\gis$\gis\admin\Personal\RRivera.mdb) ~37.2' ~32.7' ~24.7' ~33.6' ~37.9' 21' 32' 69' 1.5" 26' 3.375" 24' Special Setback on Churchill Ave Note: Analysis is average of 224-260 Churchill Avenue measured from front property line to front of existing structure 200 Block of Churchill Avenue Estimated Existing Front Setbacks Average Front Setback = 37' 1.25" Attachment E Hardcopies to Councilmembers and Libraries Only Plans for the project can be viewed by clicking the link below: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln/new_projects/residential_projects.asp#C PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 SECTION NUMBER SHEET NUMBERAX.X X SHEET NUMBER ELEVATION NUMBER AX.X X INT. ELEV. NUMBER SHEET NUMBERAX.X X X X DETAIL NUMBER SHEET NUMBERAX.X X WOOD BLOCKING CONTINUOUS WOOD FINISH WOOD PLYWOOD GYPSUM BOARD CONCRETE SAND GRAVEL BATT INSULATION RIGID INSULATION TILE STUCCO EARTH DOOR MARK WINDOW MARK X X WALL TYPE ELEVATION ABOVEREFERENCE LEVEL X X XX INT. ELEV. WALL NO. AX.X X INT. ELEV. NUMBER SHEET NUMBER BLOCK MASONRY CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 T0.0 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 1 of 32 SYMBOLS USED IN THE DRAWINGS GENERAL NOTES DRAWING INDEX VICINITY MAP (NTS)ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE DRAWINGS SUMMARY OF WORK COVER SHEET BUILDING AND SITE INFORMATION Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC ~ & @ A.F.F. ALT'D A.P.N. ARCH'L BD. BLKG. BOT. B.P. BTWN. CBC C.L./ CLG. CLOS. CMU CNTRL. CONSTR. D DR. DW DWG. (E) ELEV. ETC. EXT. FLASH. FLEX. FT. GALV. G.C. GSF GYP. H.R.V. I.C.F. INFO. INSUL. INT. LOC'N. M.E.P. MAX. MECH. MFGR. MIN. APPROXIMATELY AND AT ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR ALTERED ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER ARCHITECTURAL BOARD BLOCKING BOTTOM BUILDING PAPER BETWEEN CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE CENTERLINE CEILING CLOSET CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CONTROL(S) CONSTRUCTION CLOTHES DRYER DOOR DISHWASHER DRAWING EXISTING ELEVATION AND OTHERS EXTERIOR FLASHING FLEXIBLE FOOT, FEET GALVANIZED GENERAL CONTRACTOR GROSS SQUARE FEET GYPSUM HEAT RECOVERY VENTILATOR INSULATED CONCRETE FORM INFORMATION INSULATION INTERIOR LOCATION MECHANICAL, ELECTRCIAL, AND PLUMBING MAXIMUM MECHANICAL MANUFACTURER MINIMUM MISC. MTL. NEC'Y N.I.C. NO. N.T.S. O/ O.C. O.D. O.H. OPP. P.L. PL. PLY. P.T. (R) REF. REQ'D RG R.O. S.A.F.F. SEC. SEP. SF SHT. SIM. SQ. SLD. SSD. T T.B.D. THK. T.O. T&G TYP. U.O.N. VERT. V.I.F. HWH W W/ WDW. W/O W.O. W.P. WT. MISCELLANEOUS METAL NECESSARY NOT IN CONTRACT NUMBER NOT TO SCALE OVER ON CENTER OUTSIDE DIAMETER OPPOSITE HAND, OVERHANG OPPOSITE PROPERTY LINE PLATE PLYWOOD PRESSURE-TREATED REPLACEMENT REFRIGERATOR REQUIRED RANGE ROUGH OPENING SELF-ADHERING FLEXIBLE FLASHING SECTION SEPARATE SQUARE FOOT / SQUARE FEET SHEET SIMILAR SQUARE SEE LANDSCAPE ARCH'L DRAWINGS SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS TEMPERED TO BE DETERMINED THICK TOP OF TONGUE AND GROOVE TYPICAL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED VERTICAL VERIFY IN FIELD DOMESTIC HOT WATER HEATER CLOTHES WASHER WITH WINDOW WITHOUT WHERE OCCURS WATERPROOF/WATERPROOFING WEIGHT LC 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. DO NOT SCALE THESE DRAWINGS. ALL DIMENSIONS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS SHALL BE CHECKED AND VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR BEFORE STARTING THE WORK. IF THESE DRAWINGS ARE NOT 24" X 36" THEY HAVE BEEN REDUCED OR ENLARGED. (1X) INDICATES NOMINAL SIZE. (1") INDICATES ACTUAL SIZE. REFER TO STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR MORE INFORMATION. ALL DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CODES, WITH LOCAL AMENDMENTS, FOR OCCUPANCY GROUP(S) AND CONSTRUCTION TYPE(S) INDICATED IN "BUILDING AND SITE INFORMATION" ON THIS SHEET: 2013 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE, 2013 CALIFORNIA RESIDENTIAL CODE, 2013 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE, 2013 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE, 2013 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE, 2013 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE, 2013 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING CODE ("CALGREEN") AND 2013 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE. ALL OMISSIONS OR CONFLICTS BETWEEN DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND GOVERNING CODES SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ARCHITECT'S ATTENTION BEFORE STARTING THE WORK INVOLVED. TITLE 24 ENERGY REQUIREMENTS DESCRIBED IN THE REPORT ARE INCLUDED IN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, AND REPRESENT MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS. SEE ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS FOR INFO ON ITEMS REQUIRING STRUCTURAL/ FRAMING MEMBERS TO BE PLACED A CERTAIN WAY PRIOR TO PERFORMING ANY STRUCTURAL WORK COCOSEL RESIDENCE 6/26/15 PLANNING RE-SUBMITTAL - REVISION 3 CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 A.P.N. 124-16-058 224 CHURCHILL AVENUE PALO ALTO, CA 94306 ZONING A.P.N. OCCUPANCY GROUP(S) HISTORIC STATUS 124-16-058 R1 (10000) R-3/U NONE EXISTING NUMBER OF MAIN BUILDINGS ON LOT REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIRED REAR YARD SETBACK REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACK CONTEXTUAL-SEE A0.0. REQUIRED COVERED PARKING SPACES OTHER COVERED PARKING SPACES PROVIDED ARCHITECT BASED SITE PLAN ON SURVEY BY L. Wade Hammond, LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR, No. 6163, 3660 NEWARK BLVD., SUITE C, 510-579-6112, DATED 1/4/2013 LOT DIMENSIONS AREA OF LOT ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA ALLOWABLE FL. AREA RATIO HEIGHT LIMIT 20' 8' 13,000 SF 2 1 100' X 130' 4,650 GSF 45% OF FIRST 5000 SF + 30% >5000SF 1 MAIN BLDG: 30' / ACCESSORY BLDG: 14' CONSTRUCTION TYPE(S)V-B EXISTING NUMBER OF ACCESSORY BLDGS. ON LOT 1 GARAGE PARKING SPACES PROVIDED 1 TOTAL NUMBER OF (E) BUILDINGS ON LOT 2 PROPOSED NUMBER OF MAIN BUILDINGS ON LOT 1 PROPOSED NUMBER OF ACCESSORY BLDGS. ON LOT 0 PROPOSED TOTAL NUMBER OF BUILDINGS ON LOT 1 PROPOSED FAR 4,644.28 GSF PROPOSED GROSS UPPER FLOOR AREA PROPOSED GROSS GROUND FLOOR AREA TOTAL PROPOSED GROSS BUILDING AREA 2,136.99 GSF 6367.08 GSF 1,455.18 GSF MAIN BUILDING FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS PROPOSED GROSS BASEMENT FLOOR AREA 1,722.80 GSF PROPOSED GROSS GARAGE FLOOR AREA 435.24 GSF PROPOSED GROSS CARPORT FLOOR AREA 248.55 GSF FLOOD ZONE X ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE (35% OF LOT AREA) 4550 GSF PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE 3,194.97 GSF PROPOSED GROSS LIGHTWELL AREA 368.32 GSF TITLE SHEETS T0.0 T0.1 T0.2 T1.0 T1.1 COVER SHEET TREE PROTECTION TREE PROTECTION GREENPOINT RATED CHECKLIST GREENPOINT RATED CHECKLIST ARCHITECTURAL A0.0 A0.1 A0.2 A0.3 A0.4 A0.5 A0.6 A0.7 A0.8 A0.9 A0.10 A1.0 A1.1 A1.2 A1.3 A2.0 A2.1 A3.0 A3.1 CONTEXTUAL SETBACK PLAN EXISTING SITE PLAN PROPOSED SITE PLAN SITE / CONTEXT PHOTOS NEIGHBORHOOD PRIVACY DIAGRAM STREETSCAPE ELEVATION LOT COVERAGE DIAGRAM SQ. FOOTAGE DIAGRAM, BASEMENT SQ. FOOTAGE DIAGRAM. MAIN FLOOR SQ. FOOTAGE DIAGRAM, 2ND LEVEL 3D PERSPECTIVES BASEMENT PLAN MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN UPPER LEVEL PLAN ROOF PLAN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING SECTIONS BUILDING SECTIONS CIVIL SURVEY 3 3 3 N THE WORK CONSIST OF DEMOLISHING THE EXISTING RESIDENCE AND BUILDING A NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE INCLUDING BASEMENT AND 2 LEVELS, ATTACHED GARAGE AND CARPORT CONTRACTOR: THE ABOVE PARAGRAPH IS ONLY A SUMMARY OF THE WORK. CAREFULLY EXAMINE THE ENTIRE SET OF DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS TO DETERMINE THE ACTUAL WORK TO BE PERFORMED. PROJECT SITE PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 T0.1 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 2 of 32 TREEPROTECTION CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. otlA olaP fo ytiC !nalP eht fo traP s’tI - noitcetorP eerT !thgir boj eht od sbus dna swerc ruoy erus ekaM c morf raelc erutcurts gnihcnarb dna yponac egailof eht gnipeek yb meht tcetorp ot laitnesse era seert dnuora serusolcne decneF ,seitivitca dna slairetam ,tnempiuqe yb tcatno hw ni )ZPT( enoZ noitcetorP eerT eht gniyfitnedi dna ,etats detcapmoc-non dna tcatni na ni snoitidnoc lios dna stoor gnivreserp ,detcirtser era seitivitca dna dettimrep si ecnabrutsid lios on hci .devorppa esiwrehto sselnu .eert detaluger a fo ZPT eht nihtiw srucco ytivitca tcejorp nehw teehs siht ot dedda eb tsum troper noitcetorp eert devorppa nA eht weiver ,tnempoleved gnirud noitcetorp dna seert detaluger s'otlA olaP no noitamrofni deliated roF launaM lacinhceT eerT ytiC ./seert/gro.otlaolapfoytic.www ta dnuof )MTT( 1-TteehS noitcurtsnI noitcetorP eerT laicepS otlA olaP fo ytiC )dedeen sa gnidda( teehs siht no dedivorp ecaps eht ot dedda eb llahs stroper detaler-eert rehto llA .egaP dnegeL ro xednI teehS tcejorP no )s(teehs siht edulcnI ta dedaolnwod eb nac 1-T fo ypoc A Apply Tree Protection Report on sheet(s) T-2 Use addtional “T” sheets as needed TNEMETATS ERUSOLCSID EERT OTLAOLAP FO YTIC eunevA notlimaH 052 ,noisiviD gninnalP 10349AC,otlAolaP 1442-923 )056( gro.otlaolapfoytic.www//:ptth cilbup dna etavirp no detacol seert niatrec fo noitcetorp dna erusolcsid seriuqer ,040.01.8 retpahC ,edoC lapicinuM otlA olaP timrep gnidliub llaynapmocca tsum tnemetats erusolcsid detelpmoc A.snalp etis devorppa no nwohs ebyeht taht dna ,ytreporp .ytivitca tnempoleved rehto ro ,snoitacilppa timrep gnidarg ro noitilomed lla ,krowroiretxe edulcni taht snoitacilppa :SSERDDA YTREPORP ______________________________________________________________________ detalugeR ereht erA 1 ONSEY?ytreporp eht ot tnecajda ro no seert )4noitceS ot deecorp ,on fI( ].elbacilppa erehw kcehc ro/dna elcric esaelP .tnacilppaeht yb detelpmoc eb TSUM 4 -1 snoitceS[ .ylppa taht esoht kcehC ?seert eht era erehW .1 )seert retemaid ”4 revo gniwohs dettimbus eb tsum snalP( ytreporp eht nO etis tcejorp eht gnignahrevo ytreporp tnecajda nO )seerT teertS( enil ytreporp fo ’03 nihtiwtnemesae yaw-fo-thgir ro pirts retnalp ytiC eht nI * *seert teertS 1 erusolcne decnef a yb noitcetorp laiceps eriuqer edivorp tsumuoy ,timrep yna gniviecer ot roirP .snoitcurtsnidehcattaeht rep,t deriuqer fo noitcepsni rof 3595-394 ta snoitarepO skroW cilbuPgnillacyb mrofnoitacifireV noitcetorP eerT teertS dezirohtua na III ro II ,I epy.)506# liateD dehcatta ees( gnicnef detcetorP yna ereht erA .2 1 detangiseD ro 1 ?seerT SEY )elbacilppa erehwkcehC(ON )s( eerT detcetorP )s( eerTdetangiseD ytreporp eht gnignahrevo ro nO ?seert eseht fo )retemaid knurt eht semit 01 suidar(?enilpird eht nihtiwgnidarg ro ytivitca ereht sI .3 ONSEY a ,seY fI tropeRnoitavreserP eerT MTTees( weiver ffats rof dettimbus dna tsirobra deifitrec ASI na yb deraperp eb tsum 2 .)52.6 noitceS ,.stnemeriuqeR nalP etiS rep ,”!nalP eht fo traPsti ,noitcetorP eerT:,1-T teehS ot troper siht hcattA stnemeriuqeR nalP etiS eht erA .4 **?detelpmoc ON SEY yponacdnaretemaid knurt derusaem eht wohs tsum snalP )1(:gniwollof eht eriuqer tnempoleved gnirudseertdetalugeRfo noitcetorP**- 506# liateD dna1-TteehS rep ,enilpird eht ottuo aeraerusolcnedecnef a ,enil dehsad dlob a sa ,etoned tsum snalP )2( ;enilpird mth.smrof/seert/gro.otlaolapfoytic.www//:ptth MTT osla eeS(2 )decnef eb otaera rof 51.2 noitceS , .erusolcsid siht fo snoitidnoc eht ot eerga ,dengisrednueht ,I ro eslaf gnidivorp yltnegilgen roylgniwonk taht dnatsrednu I noitceSedoC lapicinuM otlA olaP eht fo noitaloiv a setutitsnoctnemeriuqer erusolcsid siht ot esnopser ni noitamrofni gnidaelsim .noitca lagel livic ro/dna lanimirc ot dael nac hcihw,040.01.8 ____________ :etaD______________________________ :tnirP __________________________ :erutangiS )tnegA ro renwO .porP( :ESU FFATS ROFgnicneF evitcetorP eb tsum 6-5 snoitceS ffats yb detelpmoc .)timrep gnidliub ro gnidarg ,noitilomed( timrep tnempoleved yna fo ecnaussi eht rof seerT detcetorP.5 taht gniyfirev dehcatta si tnemetats nettirw A .ecalp ni si gnicnef eert deificeps ehT .ecalp ni yltcerroc si gnicnef evitcetorp .seert detangised ro/dna detcetorp dnuora ONSEYereh kcehc ,seertdetcetorp on era ereht fi A/N() seerT teertS.6 .dehcatta si mrof noitacifireV noitcetorP eerT teertS skroW cilbuP dengis A .ONSEY ereh kcehc ,seert teerts on era ereht fi A/N(.)_____________________________1 5.11 era hcihw skaO yellaV ro skaO eviL tsaoC – seert detcetorP )b ;ytreporp cilbup no seert – seert teertS )a –seerT detalugeR tsaoC ,regral ro retemaid ni ”Cyb detangised seert era seert egatireH dna ;edarg larutan evoba ”45 derusaem nehw ,regral roretemaid ni ”81 era hcihw sdoowdeR )c dna ;licnuoC yti.nalp epacsdnal devorppa na fo trap era hcihw ,seert ytreporp laitnediser-non ro laicremmoc –seerT detangiseD2 ta elbaliava ,mrof siht no stnemeriuqer lla rof snoitcurtsni sniatnoc )MTT( launaM lacinhceTeerT otlA olaP lmth.launam-lacinhcet_eert/ytinummoc-gninnalp/gro.otlaolapfoytic.www//:ptth tnemetatSerusolcsiDeerT/ofnI noitcetorPeerT/tsirobrA/vidalP/nalP:S 60/80desiveR J XIDNEPPA snoitacificepS dna sgniwarD dradnatS 4002 otlA olaP fo ytiC 60/80desiveR 13 noitceS ,EWP ,noitcetorP fo noitacifireV eerT teertS PS- OTLA OLA SNOITCURTSNI NOITCETORP EERT TEERT --13 NOITCES- lareneG1-13 snoitcnufyramirpeerhtsah noitcetorp eerT.a raelc erutcurts gnihcnarbdna yponac egailof eht peekot )1,dna tcatni na ni snoitidnoc lios dna stoor evreserp ot )2 ;seitivitcadna slairetam ,tnempiuqe yb tcatnoc morf si ecnabrutsidlios onhcihwni )ZPT( enoZ noitcetorP eerT eht yfitnedi ot )3dna etats detcapmoc-non .devorppa esiwrehto sselnu,detcirtser era seitivitcadna dettimrep )ZPT(enoZ noitcetorP eerT ehT.b semit-net fo suidar a htiw eert ehtfoesab eht dnuora aera detcirtser a si .gnicnef ybdesolcne ,retaerg si revehcihw ;teefnet roknurt s'eert eht fo retemaid eht stnemucoD ecnerefeR 2-13 506 liateD.a .woleb debircsed snoitautis fo noitartsullI – smroF )MTT( launaM lacinhceTeerT.b ( /seert/gro.otlaolapfoytic.www//:ptth ).1 ( senoZ noitcirtseR gnihcnerT )C(02.2noitceS ,MTT ).2 ( locotorP gnitropeR tsirobrA 03.6noitceS ,MTT ).3 (stnemeriuqeR nalP etiS 53.6 noitceS ,MTT ).4 ( tnemetatS erusolcsiD eerT JxidneppA ,MTT ) mroF )VTS( noitacifireV eerT teertS.c ( smrof/seert/gro.otlaolapfoytic.www//:ptth ) noitucexE 3-13 :noitcetorP eerT I epyT.a eht tuohguorht detcetorpebot )s(eert eht fo ZPT eritne eht esolcne llahs ecnef ehT ,saera gnikrap emos nI .tcejorpnoitcurtsnoceht fo efil ton lliwtaht etercnoc rognivap nodetacol si gnicnef fi ybdevorppa fi ,esab etercnoc level edarg etairporppa na yb detroppus eb yamstsopeht neht ,dehsilomedeb .snoitarepO skroW cilbuP :noitcetorP eerT II epyT.b fo edis dray dna pirts gnitnalpeht ylno ,pirts gnitnalp a nihtiwdetautis seert roF dnaklawedis eht peekot redro nignicnef evitcetorpknil niahcderiuqer eht htiw desolcne eb llahs ZPT eht .esu cilbup rof nepo teerts :noitcetorP eerT III epyT.c ylnodesu eb oT a nidetautis seerT .snoitarepOskroWcilbuP folavorppa htiw ni-2htiw depparw ebllahs,tip retnalp klawedis ro lleweert ot dnuorg eht morfgnicnef citsalp egnarofosehc gidot dewolla eb ton llahs stals( yleruces dnuob stals nedoowkciht hcni-2htiwdialrevodna hcnarb tsrif eht yna gnigamad diova ot desu eb llahs noituac ,gnicnef citsalpeht fonoitallatsni gniruD.)krab eht otni .tsirobrA ytiCeht ybdetcerid sa gnicnef citsalperiuqer osla yam sbmil rojaM .sehcnarb .decnef eb otaera dna epyt ,eziS.d niahc hgihtoof )'6( xis htiwdetcetorp eb llahsdevreserpebot seert llA ot dnuorg eht otni nevird ,stsop nori dezinavlagretemaid hcni-owt nodetnuomeb ot era secneF.secnefknil sselnu,gnihcnarbretuoeht ot dnetxe llahs gnicneF.gnicaps toof-01 naht erom on ta teef-2 tsael ta fohtped a .mroFVTSeht no devorppa yllacificeps sngis ’gninraW‘.e toof-02taecnef hcae no deyalpsid yltnenimorp dna foorp rehtaew ebllahsngisgninraw A . :srettel llat hcni flah ni etats ylraelc dna sehcni-11xsehcni-5.8 muminim ebllahs ngisehT .slavretni ot gnidrocca enif aot tcejbus si dna devomerebton llahs ecnef sihT - enoZ noitcetorP eerT - GNINRAW“”.011.01.8 noitceS CMAP noitaruD.f itilomederofebdetcere ebllahs gnicnef eerT .niniamer dnasnigeb noitcurtsnocro gnidarg ;no lios rokroW.ZPT eht ni dewolla yllacificeps krow rof tpecxe ,tcejorp ehtfo noitcepsni lanif litnu ecalp dnuora krowfo esac eht ni( tsirobrA ytiC rotsirobra tcejorp ehtyb lavorppa seriuqer ZPT ehtni ecnabrutsid .skroW cilbuP morf timreP kroWteertS a eriuqer yaw fo thgircilbup eht nihtiw snoitavacxE.)seerT teertS noitcurtsnoc gniruD.g .1 .dnikyna fo tcapmi morfdetcetorpeb llahs etis tcejorpeht gnahrevotaht seert 'srobhgien llA.2 seert denwo ylcilbup yna fo ytlanepsulp tnemecalper ro riapereht rof elbisnopser eb llahs tnacilppa ehT otlAolaP ehtfo 070.40.8 noitceS ottnausrup ,noitcurtsnocfo esruocehtgnirud degamad erataht .edoC lapicinuM.3 :deniaterebot seert lla ot ylppa serusaem noitavreserp eertgniwollofehT.a .ZPT eht nihtiw dettimrepeb llahs tnempiuqe ro selcihev ,liospot ,lairetam fo egarots oN.b .deretla eb ton llahs aera yponac eert eht dnuora dna rednudnuorgehT.c .lavivrus erusne ot yrassecen sa deniatniam dnadetarea ,detagirri ebllahsdeniater ebot seerT NOITCES FO DNE otlA olaP fo ytiC tnemtrapeD eerT snoitarepO skroW cilbuP 30349 AC ,otlA olaP 05201 xoB OP 3595-694/056 9829-258/056 :XAF gro.otlAolaPfoytiC@noitcetorpeert fo noitacifireV noitcetorP eerT teertS eerT dengis htiw gnola mrof siht XAF ro liaM .mrof siht fo noitrop reppu etelpmoC :snoitcurtsnI tnacilppA .tnacilppa yfiton dna tcepsni lliw ffatS eerT skroWcilbuP .tpeD skroW cilbuP ot tnemetatS erusolcsiD :ETAD NOITACILPPA TEERTS FO NOITACOL/SSERDDA :DETCETORP EB OT SEERT :EMAN S’TNACILPPA :SSERDDA S’TNACILPPA ENOHPELET S’TNACILPPA :SREBMUN XAF & ffatSeerT ytiC yb tuo dellif eb ot noitcessihT evoba eht ta seerT teertS ehT .1 yletauqeda era )se(sserdda noitcetorp fo epyt ehT .detcetorp:si desu woleb 2# ot og ,ON fI * :yb detcepsnI :noitcepsnI fo etaD SEY *ON evoba eht ta seerT teertS ehT .2 era sserdda TON tcetorPeerT.tS/SD/eerT/SPO/DWP:S 6071/5 yletauqeda gniwollof ehT .detcetorp :deriuqer era snoitacifidom deriuqer ehtwoh etacidnI detacinummoc erewsnoitacifidom .tnacilppa eht ot noitcepsnI tneuqesbuS dnuof erewsserdda evoba ta seert teertS :detcetorp yletauqeda eb ot .esac fo noitisopsid eht woleb ”setoN“ ni etacidni ,ON fI * :yb detcespnI :noitcepsnI fo etaD SEY *ON :setoN ,seiceps yb seert teerts ytiC tsiL noitcetorp eert fo epyt dna noitidnoc ,etis erewserutcip fi eton oslA .dellatsni .yrassecen fi teehs fo kcab esU .nekat .ecnaussi timrep gnidliub ro noitilomed rof tnacilppA ot teehs devorppa nruteR itcetorPeerTotlAolaPfoytitCadetacolerasnoitcurtsnInosu.ac.otla-olap.ytic.www//:pttlhmth.launam-lacinhcet/seert/ ---GNINRAW--- enoZnoitcetorPeerT tuohtiwdevomerebtonllahsgnicnefsihT )3595-694-056(lavorppatsirobrAytiC sinoissimreptuohtiwlavomeR *yadrepenif005$aottcejbus 011.01.8noitceSedoClapicinuMotlAolaP* :hcraeS decnavdA cipoTyBesworB emoH tnemnorivnEytinummoC&gninnalP emoH ytiC-seerTdenwo yletavirP-seerTdenwo eerTehttuobAecnanidrO 01.8eltiT seerTegatireH smroF launaMlacinhceTeerT sQAF sUtcatnoC secruoseR launaMlacinhceTeerT oT esahcrup launaMlacinhceTeerTeht noitidEtsriF1002,enuJ :noitcesybweiV stnetnoCfoelbaT )BK78,FDP( esopruPdnatnetnI )BM50.1,FDP(noitcudortnI -launaMfoesU )BM50.1,FDP( 0.1noitceS -snoitinifeD )BK69,FDP( 0.2noitceS -noitcurtsnoCgniruDseerTfonoitcetorP )BK952,FDP(0.3noitceS -seerTfognitnalP&tnemecalpeR,lavomeR )BK711,FDP(0.4noitceS -seerTsuodrazaH )BK501,FDP( 0.5noitceS -senilediuGecnanetniaMeerT )BK011,FDP( 0.6noitceS -stropeReerT )BK48,FDP( :snoitcesLLAweiV launaMlacinhceTeerT -lluF )BM48.1,FDP( SECIDNEPPA tnemeganaM&noitavreserPeerT,01.8retpahCedoClapicinuMotlAolaP.A snoitalugeR ytiCeerT:B -ASU mroFnoitaulavEdrazaHASI:C )ecruosecnerefeR(seicepSdetceleSrofsnrettaPeruliaFtnerehnIfotsiL:D senilediuGgninurPeerTASI:E )BM58.1,FDP( 1.331ZISNA,sdradnatSytefaSeraCeerT:F -)ecruosecnerefeR(4991 003AISNA,sdradnatSecnamrofrePgninurP:G -)ecruosecnerefeR(5991 :H505&405margaiD,sliateDgnitnalPeerT tnemetatSerusolcsiDeerT:I snoitcurtsnInoitcetorPeerTdradnatSotlAolaP:J 1-T Pr o j e c t Da t a Type II Tree Protection Type I Tree Protection Type III Tree Protection Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) shown in gray (radius of TPZ equals 10-times the diameter of the tree or 10-feet, whichever is greater). Restricted activity area -- see Tree Technical Manual Sec 2.15(E). Restricted trenching area -- see Tree Technical Manual Sec 2.20(C-D), any proposed trench or form work within TPZ of a protected tree requires approval from Public Works Operations. Call 650-496-5953. TPZeither 10 x Tree Diameter or 10-feet, whichever is greater Any proposed trenchin TPZ requires approvalSee TTM 2.20 C-Dfor instructions 6-foot highchain link fence,typical (to be used only with approval of Public Works Operations) Tree fencing is required and shall be erected before demolition, grading or construction begins. Any inadvertant sidewalk or curb replacement or trenching requires approval Rev By Date City of Palo Alto Standard Dwg No. Approved by: Dave Dockter Date PE No. 2006 Scale: NTS 605 Tree Protection During Construction 1RWH 6WUHHW7UHHV,VVXDQFHRIDSHUPLWUHTXLUHV3XEOLF:RUNV2SHUDWLRQVLQVSHFWLRQDQGVLJQHGDSSURYDORQWKH6WUHHW7UHH9HULILFDWLRQ 679 IRUPSURYLGHG 1RWH 2UGLQDQFH3URWHFWHG 'HVLJQDWHG7UHHV,VVXDQFHRIDSHUPLWUHTXLUHVDSSOLFDQWಬVSURMHFWDUERULVWZULWWHQYHULILFDWLRQ7\SH,LVLQVWDOOHGFRUUHFWO\DFFRUGLQJWRWKHSODQVDQG7UHH3UHVHUYDWLRQ5HSRUW 2-inches of Orange Plastic Fencingoverlaid with2-inch Thick Wooden Slats Detailed specifications are found in the Palo Alto Tree Technical Manual (TTM) (www.cityofpaloalto.org/trees/) Warning Warning Warning 8.5x11-inch Warning Signs one each side Fencing must provide public passage while protecting all other land in TPZ. For written specifications associated with illustrations below, see Public Works Specifications Section 31 Fence distance to outer branches or TPZ 12/14/92 Restricted use fortrees in sidewalk cutout tree wells only For all Ordinance Protected and Designated trees, as detailed in the site specific tree preservation report (TPR) prepared by the applicant’s project arborist as diagramed on the plans. Yard Sidewalk Parkway Strip Street D.D.01 08/04/04 02 D.D.08/10/06 0 DWH Warning SPECIAL INSPECTIONS PLANNING DEPARTMENT TREE PROTECTION INSPECTIONS MANDATORY PAMC 8.10 PROTECTED TREES. CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE PROJECT SITE ARBORIST IS PERFORMING REQUIRED TREE INSPECTION AND SITE MONITORING. PROVIDE WRITTEN MONTHLY TREE ACTIVITY REPORTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT LANDSCAPE REVIEW STAFF BEGINNING 14 DAYS AFTER BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE. BUILDING PERMIT DATE: ______________________ _______ DATE OF 1ST TREE ACTIVITY REPORT: ___ _____________ CITY STAFF: ___________________________ ___________ REPORTING DETAILS OF THE MONTHLY TREE ACTIVITY REPORT SHALL CONFORM TO SHEET T-1 FORMAT, VERIFY THAT ALL TREE PROTECTION MEASURES ARE IMPLIMENTED AND WILL INCLUDE ALL CONTRACTOR ACTIVITY, SCHEDULED OR UNSCHEDULED, WITHIN A TREE PROTECTION ROOT ZONE. NON-COMPLIANCE IS SUBJECT TO VIOLATION OF PAMC 8.10.080. REFERENCE: PALO ALTO TREE TECHNICAL MANUAL, SECTION 2.00 AND ADDENDUM 11. http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=6460 224 CHURCHILL AVENUE 224 CHURCHILL AVENUE KLOPF ARCHITECTURE 2180 BRYANT ST. SUITE 203, SAN FRANCISCO 415-287-0242 PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 T0.2 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 3 of 32 TREEPROTECTION CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. otlA olaP fo ytiC !nalP eht fo traP s’tI - noitcetorP eerT !thgir boj eht od sbus dna swerc ruoy erus ekaM c morf raelc erutcurts gnihcnarb dna yponac egailof eht gnipeek yb meht tcetorp ot laitnesse era seert dnuora serusolcne decneF ,seitivitca dna slairetam ,tnempiuqe yb tcatno hw ni )ZPT( enoZ noitcetorP eerT eht gniyfitnedi dna ,etats detcapmoc-non dna tcatni na ni snoitidnoc lios dna stoor gnivreserp ,detcirtser era seitivitca dna dettimrep si ecnabrutsid lios on hci .devorppa esiwrehto sselnu .eert detaluger a fo ZPT eht nihtiw srucco ytivitca tcejorp nehw teehs siht ot dedda eb tsum troper noitcetorp eert devoppa nA eht weiver ,tnempoleved gnirud noitcetorp dna seert detaluger s'otlA olaP no noitamrofni deliated roF launaM lacinhceT eerT ytiC ./seert/gro.otlaolapfoytic.www ta dnuof )MTT( 2-TteehS noitcurtsnI noitcetorP eerT laicepS otlA olaP fo ytiC2-T )dedeen sa gnidda( teehs siht no dedivorp ecaps eht ot dedda eb llahs stroper detaler-eert rehto llA .egaP dnegeL ro xednI teehS tcejorP no )s(teehs siht edulcnI nloaded atwod eb nac 1-T fo ypoc A Pr o j e c t Da t a http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=6460 Apply Tree Protection Report on sheet(s) T-2 Use addtional “T” sheets as needed Kielty Arborist Services Certified Arborist WE#0476A P.O. Box 6187 San Mateo, CA 94403 650- 515-9783 January 19, 2014, Revised November 30, 2014 Oana Cocosel 224 Churchill, Palo Alto Palo Alto, CA 94306 Site: 224 Churchill, Palo Alto, CA Dear Oana, As requested on Friday, January 10, 2014, I visited the above site for the purpose of inspecting and commenting on the trees. A new home is planned for this site and your concern as to the future health and safety of the trees has prompted this visit. The latest site plan A0.2 dated September, 18, 2014 was reviewed to form my opinions as to possible tree damages. Method: All inspections were made from the ground; the tree was not climbed for this inspection. The tree in question was located on a site plan provided by you. The trees were then measured for diameter at 54 inches above ground level (DBH or diameter at breast height). Each tree was given a condition rating for form and vitality. The trees’ condition rating is based on 50 percent vitality and 50 percent form, using the following scale. 1 - 29 Very Poor 30 - 49 Poor 50 - 69 Fair 70 - 89 Good 90 - 100 Excellent The height of the trees were measured using a Nikon Forestry 550 Hypsometer. The spread was paced off. Comments and recommendations for future maintenance are provided. An Exploratory trench was dug on Monday, to help locate roots and help predict root loss. A Supersonic Air Knife was used for the trenching. The air knife uses compressed air to dig the trench. The use of the air knife reduces root damage when digging the trench. A sliding handled soil probe was also to attempt to locate roots below the depth of the trench. A drill test was performed on tree #4 to help assess the amount of sound wood in the lower trunk. A Resi 300 attached to a cordless drill was used to collect the data. A 12 inch long 1/16” diameter drill bit was used for the test. The concrete filled cavities on the trunk has made a mallet test impossible. 224 Churchill/1/19/14 (2) Survey: Tree#Species DBH CON HT/SPComments 1 Coast live oak 20.2 60 35/35 Fair vigor, fair form, codominant at 8 feet (Quercus agrifolia)with a fair crotch formation. Located in a 3’x8’ planting strip. 2 Black locust 5.4 60 35/20 Good vigor, fair form, upright form, scar (Robinia Pseudoacacia) on base. 3 Southern magnolia 8.0 65 30/30 Fair vigor, fair form, in landscape strip. (Magnolia grandiflora) 4 Coast live oak 40.1 55 40/55 Good vigor, fair form, cavity at base filled (Quercus agrifolia) with concrete. Heavy lateral limb over Street. 5 Coast live oak 21.3 65 50/35 Good vigor, fair form, multi leader at (Quercus agrifolia)20 feet, 1 foot from driveway. 6*Redwood 36est 70 70/40 Good vigor, good form, 3 feet from property (Sequoia sempervirens) line. *indicates neighboring trees Summary: The trees on site are a mix of protected trees and street trees. The street trees are protected as they are located in the public right of way. The street trees are in fair condition and can be retained with type 2 tree protection. The native oaks on the site are in fair to good condition with no exceptional trees. The neighbor’s redwood will not be affected by the proposed construction. Oak tree #4 in the front of the house. Construction of the new home will be within the dripline of this tree. 224 Churchill/1/19/14 (3) Oak Tree #5 is along the existing drive and impacts should be minor. Oak tree #4 is quite large for the small front yard and has a cavity at the base. Removal and replacement of this tree is an option. A permit would be required for removal of this tree. Drill Test Observations: The lower trunk of the tree was measured for diameter at 1 foot above ground level, the location of where the drill test was performed. The location for the test is in the center of the concrete filled cavity located on the southern side of the trunk. Four locations were drilled at the one foot level. The following depths of sound wood were observed. The inner trunk beyond the drilling depth is decayed. The following measurements are the depts. Of the sound wood: Concrete filled cavity at base of Tree #4. Filling cavities with concrete has not been an accepted practice since the 1970s. The drill test was carried out at this height (1 foot above ground level) The circumference of the trunk at 1 foot is 164 inches (50.2 inches diameter) with an 8 inch wide open cavity. The cavity is 19 inches tall with 17 inch wide woundwood developed on the edges. !Drill point #1 Street side has 4 inches of sound wood. !Drill point #2 Northeast side has 6 inches of sound wood. !Drill point #3 southeast side has 12 inches of sound wood (depth of drill) !Drill point #4 Southwest side has 7 inches of sound wood. A hand drawn diagram showing the cavity and the sound wood depth will be provided. Exploratory Trench Observations: A 12 foot long and 30 inch deep exploratory trench was dug using a supersonic air knife. The trench was located near where the over-excavation for the home foundation will be located. The foundation in this area will be of a spread footing type with the basement wall being several more feet from the trunk. The trench is located 6.5 feet from the trunk on the southeast (house) side. No significant roots were damaged during the digging of the trench. 224 Churchill/1/19/14 (4) The following roots were unearthed during the excavation: !No roots over 2 inches. !1 root 1.5 inches in diameter. !3 roots .5 inches-1 inch. !Several roots less than .5 inches. Summary of Testing: As expected the lower trunk of the tree has significant decay in its core. The drill testing results are evidence of this. The use of concrete to fill the cavity was carried out more than 40 years ago as cavity filling was discontinued in the early 1970s. The filling of the cavity has masked the decay but has not lessened the trees chance of failure or slowed the spread of the decay. The results of the drill test has exposed significant structural problems. Two options are available for this tree. Option #1 is to reduce the foliar canopy to help reduce the size of the tree. This method reduces wind sail and the chances of tree failure at the decayed trunk. Option #2 is to remove and replace the tree as removal is the only method that eliminates all hazards associated with the tree. The exploratory trench 6.5 feet from the trunk unearthed no significant roots. The planned home location will have little negative effect on the large oak. Root loss will be minimal and the trimming required will have no long term effect on the tree. Areas where the basement will be dug inside the dripline of the oak should utilize vertical shoring to reduce the over-excavation required by OSHA. The site arborist will be on site during the excavation process and future irrigation and fertilizing recommendations will be provided at that point. Pruning Specifications: To facilitate the construction of a two story house the following limb removal will be required: !1 limb 6 inches in diameter will be removed. !4 limbs 3 inches in diameter will be removed. !Several small insignificant limbs and branches will be removed. The entire canopy of the tree should be thinned using end-weight reduction to lessen the wind sail and reduce stress on the compromised trunk. The trimming should be carried out by a licensed tree care provider with experience in trimming trees of this size. No more than 25 percent of the total canopy should be removed. Timing of the trimming should be prior to the start of the proposed construction. 224 Churchill/1/19/14 (5) Tree Protection Plan: Tree protection zones should be established and maintained throughout the entire length of the project. Fencing for the protection zones should be 6 foot tall metal chain link supported by metal poles pounded into the ground (type one tree protection). The support poles should be spaced no more than 10 feet apart on center. The location for the protection fencing should be as close to the dripline as possible still allowing room for construction to safely continue. Signs should be placed on fencing signifying “Tree Protection Zone - Keep Out”. No materials or equipment should be stored or cleaned inside the tree protection zones. The following minimum distances for protective fencing should be maintained throughout the entire project: !Tree #1-#3 street trees the minimum distance for the fencing will be at the edge of the sidewalk and curb and extend to 10 feet when possible (Type 2 tree protection). !Coast live oak #4 (if retained) the fencing minimum distance should be 4 feet on the construction side and extend to 20 feet where possible. !Coast live oak #5 will have the trunk wrapped with wooden planks or straw wattle and wrapped with orange plastic fencing (Type 3 protection. !The neighbor’s redwood will be protected by the existing property line fence. Trenching for irrigation, electrical, drainage or any other reason should be hand dug when beneath the driplines of protected trees. Hand digging and carefully laying pipes below or beside protected roots will dramatically reduce root loss of desired trees thus reducing trauma to the entire tree. Trenches should be backfilled as soon as possible with native material and compacted to near its original level. Trenches that must be left exposed for a period of time should also be covered with layers of burlap or straw wattle and kept moist. Plywood over the top of the trench will also help protect exposed roots below. Normal irrigation should be maintained throughout the entire length of the project. The imported trees on this site will require irrigation during the warm season months. Some irrigation may be required during the winter months depending on the seasonal rainfall. During the summer months the trees on this site should receive heavy flood type irrigation 2 times a month. During the fall and winter 1 time a month should suffice. Mulching the root zone of protected trees will help the soil retain moisture, thus reducing water consumption. Due to the low rainfall in this calendar year the oaks also should receive regular irrigation. Monthly inspections are required for projects of this nature. Inspections will be made during the first week of each month and will continue until the project is complete. Reports will be sent to the owner each month. The information included in this report is believed to be true and based on sound arboricultural principles and practices. Sincerely, Kevin R. Kielty Certified Arborist WE#0476A 224 Churchill/1/19/14 (6) Drill Test Tree #4 at 1 Foot above Ground Level PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 T1.0 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 4 of 32 GREENPOINTRATEDCHECKLIST CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. Project OWNER Acknowledgement Signature Date Print Full Name Phone or Email RATER Acknowledgement The project will be verified by (choose only one): Build It Green TO APPLY:City of Palo Alto 34Min. required points, greater of: Project at time of permit issuance: A. Total percentage better than Title 24 (must be 20% above Title 24) : A.%Rater Signature Date B. Square footage of project: B. C. Total kilowatt Hour (kWh) savings*: C. D. Total therm savings*: D. Print Full Name Rater Number E.0 F. kWh rebate amount (C x E = F):F 0 G.0 H. Therm rebate amount (D x G = H) H.0 Phone or Email I. Total kWh and therm rebate (F + H = I)I.0 J.0 K. Total Rebate Amount (I + J = K)K.0 $3,000 limit Construction debris receipts from an approved facility. Terms & Conditions: I certify that: GreenPoint Rated inspections were performed throughout construction; I have read, understand and agree to the terms and conditions as listed on this application. Signature:______________________________Date:_________________ Project Address Permit # if known Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling 0 Signature (GreenPoint Rater) Estimated C&D Debris Tons:0.0 Enter total floor area (Sq Ft) Print Name Date GB-1Title 24, Part 11, California Green Building Code (CALGreen) City of Palo Alto Green Building Ordinance 5107 (PAMC 16.14) City of Palo Alto Green Building Program and Resources Build It Green, GreenPoint Rated Guidelines and Checklists R1 Rev. 05/07/2012 Include GreenPoint Rated Scorecard Here. Use the "Blueprint" option offered by the Rater for space convenience. Use multiple GB-1 sheets for high scoring projects. This project is required to comply with the State California Green Building Code (T24 Part 11) and the City of Palo Alto's local amendments (PAMC 16.14). I, the property owner / legal representative, acknowledge and understand the requirements and penalties for noncompliance ($50 per ton of waste not diverted from the landfill with a minimum of $1000, and $500 a day for noncompliance with the remaining green building measures). I am responsible for all activities performed by design team members, contractors and subcontractors in meeting the requirements. City of Palo Alto Utilities New Residential Construction Rebate Program The City of Palo Alto Utilities will give up to $3,000 for constructing a home that is more efficient than local building codes and ordinances†. 1. Complete the below rebate application before construction begins based on your Title 24 report. 2. Once construction is complete, notify the Utilities department to process your rebate within 90 days of completed construction/proof of final inspection date by contacting: or 70 I have reviewed the project plans and specifications, and they are in conformance with the GreenPoint Rated points claimed. I have reviewed and understand the after construction requirements below. UMS 3rd Floor 250 Hamilton Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94301 or cpauresidential@cityofpaloalto.org or (650) 329-2241 To qualify for this rebate your project must be 20% or above Title 24 requirements. sq.ft Rebate Amount Calculation: (Steps E - K will auto-populate if steps A - D are completed) E. Percentage better than Title 24 x 0.021 G. Percentage better than Title 24 x 0.1 Small House Incentive: (If square footage is larger than 2,500, enter zero for this step).SECTION TO BE COMPLETED AFTER CONSTRUCTIONJ. Total kWh and therm rebate x 0.25 (I x 0.25 = J): After construction is complete submit the following at the City Development Center to schedule your final inspection:† Please visit the City of Palo Alto Building and Permitting Offices for more information. * The kWh and therm savings information can be found on the ECON-1 page of your Title 24 report. If HERS testing was required per the homes energy report, attach the completed CF-4R (‘s). 1. CPAU reserves the right to change, modify and reduce rebate levels at any time without prior notice. Funding is on a first come, first serve basis, or until funds are depleted. 2. This rebate is only available to Palo Alto Utilities’ residential account holders. Limit: one rebate per project address. 3. Failure to provide appropriate documentation will result in rebate ineligibility. CPAU reserves the right to validate all information listed in application, including with on-site inspections, if necessary. 4. CPAU reserves the right to limit this rebate to a maximum of $3,000 per application. 5. Completed applications must be submitted no later than 90 days after completed construction/proof of final inspection. Failure to do so may result in rebate ineligibility. 6. CPAU disclaims any and all liability from taxes incurred or any property damage that may arise as a result of the applicant’s or contractor’s participation in this program. If there were alterations during construction that impacted the energy report (i.e. R values, U factors, Equipment Types) rerun the report and attach it. If the project was City of Palo Alto verified, call for an on-site inspection at 329.2189. The home has met the minimum required GreenPoint Rated points. Those required for landscaping may be excluded from this confirmation if verified within 6 months of final inspection; Through a combination of onsite inspections and confirmation from the Contractor there have been no alterations that impacted the energy report for the home, unless the new report is provided as an attachment; and that All construction and demolition debris in the City of Palo Alto must be made available for salvage, or be taken to an approved facility, or a facility approved by the City of San Francisco or San Jose. Approved facilities achieve diversion rates over 80%. A complete list of approved facilities is available at: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=28020 Within six months (6) from the date of final inspection I will provide the City with the final BIG Certificate, final GreenPoint Rated Checklist and BIG Climate Calculator inputs. The project Contractor is required to retain receipts, weight tags or other proof of salvage and/or diversion to an approved facility for submittal after construction. Estimate the amount of construction and demolition debris to be generated below. The conversion factor is based on a study performed by the U.S. EPA for similar projects. If you disagree with the estimate, submit an alternative for review and approval. Sign only after construction is completed. RESIDENTIAL GREEN BUILDING APPLICATION R1 http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/bsc/CALGreen/2010_CA_Green_Bldg.pdf City Sustainability Planner: 650-329-2189 greenbuilding@cityofpaloalto.org http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=25863 Application: This plan sheet is for use by residential new construction, additions and rebuilds over 1,250sf.http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/greenbuilding http://www.builditgreen.org/guidelines--checklists/ R1 Rev. 05/07/2012 R1 Green Building Instructions for R1 Residential Projects 1 Single Family or MultiFamily New Construction over 1,250 sf. 2 Single Family Additions Over 1,250 sf. 3 4 STEP 1 Hire a GreenPoint Rater STEP 2 Determine whether the project will be verified through Build It Green or the City of Palo Alto. STEP 3 Understand the minimum GreenPoint Rated requirements. 0Garage and other unconditioned Floor Area Minimum Required GreenPoint Rated Points:33.6 (or 70pts, whichever is greater) Additional Requirements: 1. The project must claim all mandatory CALGreen measures included on the scorecard. 3. The project must claim credit A. SITE 2.c. 80% waste diversion. STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 7 ALTERNATIVES GOT QUESTIONS? The following residential projects are required to comply with the California State Green Building Code (CALGreen) T24 Part 11 and the City's local amendments found in Palo Alto Municipal Code 16.14. Single Family Rebuilds over 1,250 sf: Rebuild means any remodeled building or structure where the remodel includes exposure of insulation, or the removal of exterior sheathing on 25% or more of the exterior walls of a residential project. Multifamily renovations or alterations ≥ 50% of the existing units sf, that that includes replacement or alteration of at least two of the following: HVAC, envelope, hot water system or lighting system. The City uses the Build It Green, GreenPoint Rated Program to comply with CALGreen and PAMC 16.14 referenced above. Every project must hire a GreenPoint Rater to verify the project. A directory of Raters is available here: http://www.builditgreen.org/en/directories/search.asp The costs and benefits of the two options are discussed at the website below. They should be discussed with the project Rater and the option identified on the GB-1 Plan Sheet. http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/pln/sustainability_green_building/green_building/faqs_and_resources/default.asp The project is required to meet the minimum qualifications to be certified as a GreenPoint Rated project and meet a minimum number of points required by the City. Calculate the minimum points required by the City below by entering answers into the grey cells, which are then populated on the GB-1 sheet. Conditioned Floor Area (Including Basements). For renovations and additions, this is only the floor area included in the scope of work. 2. For projects with landscapes over 5,000 sf at least 15 points must be claimed for outdoor water efficiency in the appropriate GPR section. Complete and incorporate the GB-1 Plan Sheet found at the second tab below into your building permit plan submittal. Respond to all grey cells. Make sure that your T24 Energy Efficiency Reports exceed performance by at least 15%, include the ECON-1 form, and if HERS Rater verification is required, register with CALCERTS per code. During construction, make sure that your GreenPoint Rater is notified to verify/document your selected points at the appropriate times, and at the end of construction when the Rater is to sign the GB-1 again. If not all GreenPoints are completed (e.g. irrigation points) at the time of Final Inspection of the Buildign Permit, the owner and Rater have up to 6 months to turn in the final GreenPoint Rated Certificate meeting all Palo Alto requriements (of Palo Alto's verification of same, when "City Verification" is chosen). Noncompliance will result in fines of $500 per day until compliance is reached. Any project may propose alternative methods of showing compliance to the Sustainability Planner for consideration as long as the method is equivalent in stringency and spirit. If after reviewing this workbook you have questions, review the City's Frequently Asked Questions website and/or contact the City Sustainability Planner at 650-329-2189. PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 T1.1 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 5 of 32 GREENPOINTRATEDCHECKLIST CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. © Build It Green GreenPoint Rated New Home Single Family Checklist Version 6.0 NEW HOME RATING SYSTEM, VERSION 6.0 SINGLE FAMILY CHECKLIST Points Achieved: 159 Certification Level: Platinum A home is only GreenPoint Rated if all features are verified by a Certified GreenPoint Rater through Build It Green. Single Family New Home Version 6.0.2 PROJECT NAME Co m m u n i t y En e r g y IA Q / H e a l t h Re s o u r c e s Wa t e r MEASURES Possible Points NOTES CALGreen Yes 4 1 1 1 1A. SITE Yes A1. Construction Footprint 1 1 A2. Job Site Construction Waste Diversion No 0 2 No 0 2 Yes A2.3 Recycling Rates from Third-Party Verified Mixed-Use Waste Facility 1 1 Yes A3. Recycled Content Base Material 1 1 No A4. Heat Island Effect Reduction (Non-Roof)0 1 Yes A5. Construction Environmental Quality Management Plan Including Flush-Out 1 1 No A6.1 Permeable Paving Material 0 1 No A6.2 Filtration and/or Bio-Retention Features 0 1 Yes A6.3 Non-Leaching Roofing Materials 1 1 No 0 1 No 0 3B. FOUNDATION Yes B1. Fly Ash and/or Slag in Concrete 1 1 No B2. Radon-Resistant Construction 0 2 Yes B3. Foundation Drainage System 2 2 No B4. Moisture Controlled Crawlspace 0 1 B5. Structural Pest Controls Yes B5.1 Termite Shields and Separated Exterior Wood-to-Concrete Connections 1 1 No B5.2 Plant Trunks, Bases, or Stems at Least 36 Inches from the Foundation 0 1C. LANDSCAPE Enter the landscape area percentage No 0 1 Yes C2. Three Inches of Mulch in Planting Beds 1 1 C3. Resource Efficient Landscapes Yes C3.1 No Invasive Species Listed by Cal-IPC 1 1 No C3.2 Plants Chosen and Located to Grow to Natural Size 0 1 Yes 3 3 C4. Minimal Turf in Landscape Yes 1 2 No C4.2 Turf on a Small Percentage of Landscaped Area 0 2 Yes C5. Trees to Moderate Building Temperature 0 1 1 1 No C6. High-Efficiency Irrigation System 0 2 No C7. One Inch of Compost in the Top Six to Twelve Inches of Soil 0 2 No C8. Rainwater Harvesting System 0 3 No C9. Recycled Wastewater Irrigation System 0 1 No 0 2 No C11. Landscape Meets Water Budget 0 2 C12. Environmentally Preferable Materials for Site Yes 1 1 No C13. Reduced Light Pollution 0 1 Yes C14. Large Stature Tree(s)1 1 No C15. Third Party Landscape Program Certification 0 1 No C16. Maintenance Contract with Certified Professional 0 1D. STRUCTURAL FRAME AND BUILDING ENVELOPE D1. Optimal Value Engineering No D1.1 Joists, Rafters, and Studs at 24 Inches on Center 0 1 2 Yes D1.2 Non-Load Bearing Door and Window Headers Sized for Load 1 1 Yes D1.3 Advanced Framing Measures 2 2 Yes D2. Construction Material Efficiencies 1 1 D3. Engineered Lumber Yes D3.1 Engineered Beams and Headers 1 1 Yes D3.2 Wood I-Joists or Web Trusses for Floors 1 1 Yes 1 1 No D3.4 Engineered or Finger-Jointed Studs for Vertical Applications 0 1 No D3.5 OSB for Subfloor 0 0.5 No D3.6 OSB for Wall and Roof Sheathing 0 0.5 No D4. Insulated Headers 0 1 D5. FSC-Certified Wood No D5.1 Dimensional Lumber, Studs, and Timber 0 6 No D5.2 Panel Products 0 3 D6. Solid Wall Systems No D6.1 At Least 90% of Floors 0 1 Yes D6.2 At Least 90% of Exterior Walls 2 1 1 No D6.3 At Least 90% of Roofs 0 1 1 No D7. Energy Heels on Roof Trusses 0 1 24 inches D8. Overhangs and Gutters 2 1 1 D9. Reduced Pollution Entering the Home from the Garage No D9.1 Detached Garage 0 2 Yes D9.2 Mitigation Strategies for Attached Garage 1 1 D10. Structural Pest and Rot Controls Yes D10.1 All Wood Located At Least 12 Inches Above the Soil 1 1 Yes 1 1 Yes 2 1 1 The GreenPoint Rated checklist tracks green features incorporated into the home. GreenPoint Rated is administered by Build It Green, a non-profit whose mission is to promote healthy, energy and resource efficient buildings in California. The minimum requirements of GreenPoint Rated are: verification of 50 or more points; Earn the following minimum points per category: Community (2), Energy (25), Indoor Air Quality/Health (6), Resources (6), and Water (6); and meet the prerequisites CALGreen Mandatory, H6.1, J5.1, O1, O7. The criteria for the green building practices listed below are described in the GreenPoint Rated Single Family Rating Manual. For more information please visit www.builditgreen.org/greenpointrated Build It Green is not a code enforcement agency. Po i n t s Ac h i e v e d CALGreen Res (REQUIRED) A2.1 65% C&D Waste Diversion(Including Alternative Daily Cover) A2.2 65% C&D Waste Diversion (Excluding Alternative Daily Cover) A6. Stormwater Control: Prescriptive Path A6.4 Smart Stormwater Street Design A7. Stormwater Control: Performance Path C1. Plants Grouped by Water Needs (Hydrozoning) C3.3 Drought Tolerant, California Native, Mediterranean Species, or Other Appropriate Species C4.1 No Turf on Slopes Exceeding 10% and No Overhead Sprinklers Installed in Areas Less Than Eight Feet Wide C10. Submeter or Dedicated Meter for Landscape Irrigation C12.1 Environmentally Preferable Materials for 70% of Non-Plant Landscape Elements and Fencing D3.3 Enginered Lumber for Roof Rafters D10.2 Wood Framing Treated With Borates or Factory-Impregnated, or Wall Materials Other Than Wood D11. Moisture-Resistant Materials in Wet Areas (such as Kitchen, Bathrooms, Utility Rooms, and Basements) 2 25 6 6 68.0 56.0 36.0 45.0 14.0 Row 237 Row 238 © Build It Green GreenPoint Rated New Home Single Family Checklist Version 6.0 Single Family New Home Version 6.0.2 2 25 6 6 68.0 56.0 36.0 45.0 14.0 Row 237 Row 238 E. EXTERIOR Yes E1. Environmentally Preferable Decking 1 1 Yes E2. Flashing Installation Third-Party Verified 2 2 Yes E3. Rain Screen Wall System 2 2 Yes E4. Durable and Non-Combustible Cladding Materials 1 1 E5. Durable Roofing Materials Yes E5.1 Durable and Fire Resistant Roofing Materials or Assembly 1 1 No E6. Vegetated Roof 0 2 2F. INSULATION F1. Insulation with 30% Post-Consumer or 60% Post-Industrial Recycled Content Yes F1.1 Walls and Floors 1 1 Yes F1.2 Ceilings 1 1 Yes F2.1 Walls and Floors 1 1 Yes F2.2 Ceilings 1 1 F3. Insulation That Does Not Contain Fire Retardants Yes F3.1 Cavity Walls and Floors 1 1 Yes F3.2 Ceilings 1 1 Yes F3.3 Interior and Exterior 1 1G. PLUMBING G1. Efficient Distribution of Domestic Hot Water Yes G1.1 Insulated Hot Water Pipes 1 1 Yes G1.2 WaterSense Volume Limit for Hot Water Distribution 1 1 Yes G1.3 Increased Efficiency in Hot Water Distribution 2 2 G2. Install Water-Efficient Fixtures No 0 2 No G2.2 WaterSense Bathroom Faucets 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 1 No 0 3H. HEATING, VENTILATION, AND AIR CONDITIONING H1. Sealed Combustion Units Yes H1.1 Sealed Combustion Furnace 1 1 TBD H1.2 Sealed Combustion Water Heater 2 Yes H2. High Performing Zoned Hydronic Radiant Heating System 2 1 1 H3. Effective Ductwork Yes H3.1 Duct Mastic on Duct Joints and Seams 1 1 Yes H3.2 Pressure Balance the Ductwork System 1 1 Yes H4. ENERGY STAR® Bathroom Fans Per HVI Standards with Air Flow Verified 1 1 H5. Advanced Practices for Cooling No H5.1 ENERGY STAR Ceiling Fans in Living Areas and Bedrooms 0 1 H6. Whole House Mechanical Ventilation Practices to Improve Indoor Air Quality Yes H6.1 Meet ASHRAE 62.2-2010 Ventilation Residential Standards Y R R R R R Yes H6.2 Advanced Ventilation Standards 1 1 Yes H6.3 Outdoor Air Ducted to Bedroom and Living Areas 2 2 H7. Effective Range Hood Design and Installation Yes H7.1 Effective Range Hood Ducting and Design 1 1 No H7.2 Automatic Range Hood Control 0 1 Yes H8. No Fireplace or Sealed Gas Fireplace 1 1 Yes H9. Humidity Control Systems 1 1 Yes H10. Register Design Per ACCA Manual T 1 1 Yes H11. High Efficiency HVAC Filter (MERV 8+)1 1 I. RENEWABLE ENERGY Yes I1. Pre-Plumbing for Solar Water Heating 1 1 Yes I2. Preparation for Future Photovoltaic Installation 1 1 I3. Onsite Renewable Generation (Solar PV, Solar Thermal, and Wind)25 I4. Net Zero Energy Home No I4.1 Near Zero Energy Home 0 2 No I4.2 Net Zero Electric 0 4J. BUILDING PERFORMANCE AND TESTING Yes J1. Third-Party Verification of Quality of Insulation Installation 1 1 Yes J2. Supply and Return Air Flow Testing 2 1 1 Yes J3. Mechanical Ventilation Testing and Low Leakage 1 1 Yes J4. Combustion Appliance Safety Testing 1 1 2013 J5. Building Performance Exceeds Title 24 Part 6 15.00% J5.1 Home Outperforms Title 24 Part 6 35 60 Yes J6. Title 24 Prepared and Signed by a CABEC Certified Energy Analyst 1 1 No J7. Participation in Utility Program with Third-Party Plan Review 0 1 Yes J8. ENERGY STAR for Homes 1 1 No J9. EPA Indoor airPlus Certification 0 1 No J10. Blower Door Testing 0 2K. FINISHES K1. Entryways Designed to Reduce Tracked-In Contaminants Yes K1.1 Individual Entryways 1 1 No K2. Zero-VOC Interior Wall and Ceiling Paints 0 2 Yes K3. Low-VOC Caulks and Adhesives 1 1 K4. Environmentally Preferable Materials for Interior Finish ≥50% K4.1 Cabinets 1 2 ≥80% K4.2 Interior Trim 2 2 ≥80% K4.3 Shelving 2 2 No K4.4 Doors 0 2 Yes K4.5 Countertops 1 1 K5. Formaldehyde Emissions in Interior Finish Exceed CARB Yes K5.1 Doors 1 1 Yes K5.2 Cabinets and Countertops 2 2 Yes K5.3 Interior Trim and Shelving 2 2 Yes K6. Products That Comply With the Health Product Declaration Open Standard 2 2 No K7. Indoor Air Formaldehyde Level Less Than 27 Parts Per Billion 0 2 No K8. Comprehensive Inclusion of Low Emitting Finishes 0 1L. FLOORING ≥75%L1. Environmentally Preferable Flooring 3 3 ≥75%3 3 Yes L3. Durable Flooring 1 1 Yes L4. Thermal Mass Flooring 1 1M. APPLIANCES AND LIGHTING Yes M1. ENERGY STAR® Dishwasher 1 1 CEE Tier 2 M2. CEE-Rated Clothes Washer 2 1 2 No M3. Size-Efficient ENERGY STAR Refrigerator 0 2 M4. Permanent Centers for Waste Reduction Strategies Yes M4.1 Built-In Recycling Center 1 1 No M4.2 Built-In Composting Center 0 1 M5. Lighting Efficiency Yes M5.1 High-Efficacy Lighting 2 2 Yes 2 2N. COMMUNITY N1. Smart Development Yes N1.1 Infill Site 2 1 1 No N1.2 Designated Brownfield Site 0 1 1 No N1.3 Conserve Resources by Increasing Density 0 2 2 No N1.4 Cluster Homes for Land Preservation 0 1 1 F2. Insulation that Meets the CDPH Standard Method—Residential for Low Emissions G2.1 WaterSense Showerheads with Matching Compensation Valve G2.3 WaterSense Toilets with a Maximum Performance (MaP) Threshold of No Less Than 500 Grams G3. Pre-Plumbing for Graywater System G4. Operational Graywater System L2. Low-Emitting Flooring Meets CDPH 2010 Standard Method—Residential M5.2 Lighting System Designed to IESNA Footcandle Standards or Designed by Lighting Consultant © Build It Green GreenPoint Rated New Home Single Family Checklist Version 6.0 Single Family New Home Version 6.0.2 2 25 6 6 68.0 56.0 36.0 45.0 14.0 Row 237 Row 238 N1.5 Home Size Efficiency 0 9 5500 Enter the area of the home, in square feet 4 Enter the number of bedrooms Yes N2. Home(s)/Development Located Within 1/2 Mile of a Major Transit Stop 2 2 N3. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access N3.1 Pedestrian Access to Services Within 1/2 Mile of Community Services 2 Enter the number of Tier 1 services Enter the number of Tier 2 services Yes N3.2 Connection to Pedestrian Pathways 1 1 Yes N3.3 Traffic Calming Strategies 2 2 N4. Outdoor Gathering Places No N4.1 Public or Semi-Public Outdoor Gathering Places for Residents 0 1 No 0 1 N5. Social Interaction No N5.1 Residence Entries with Views to Callers 0 1 Yes N5.2 Entrances Visible from Street and/or Other Front Doors 1 1 No N5.3 Porches Oriented to Street and Public Space 0 1 No N5.4 Social Gathering Space 0 1 N6. Passive Solar Design No N6.1 Heating Load 0 2 No N6.2 Cooling Load 0 2 N7. Adaptable Building No N7.1 Universal Design Principles in Units 0 1 1 No N7.2 Full-Function Independent Rental Unit 0 1O. OTHER Yes O1. GreenPoint Rated Checklist in Blueprints Y R R R R R Yes O2. Pre-Construction Kickoff Meeting with Rater and Subcontractors 2 0.5 1 0.5 Yes O3. Orientation and Training to Occupants—Conduct Educational Walkthroughs 2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Yes 2 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 No O5. Home System Monitors 0 1 1 O6. Green Building Education No O6.1 Marketing Green Building 0 2 Yes O6.2 Green Building Signage 1 0.5 0.5 Yes O7. Green Appraisal Addendum Y R R R R R No O8. Detailed Durability Plan and Third-Party Verification of Plan Implementation 0 1Summary Total Available Points in Specific Categories 342 26 131 54 83 48 Minimum Points Required in Specific Categories 50 2 25 6 6 6 Total Points Achieved 159.0 8.0 56.0 36.0 45.0 14.0 N4.2 Public Outdoor Gathering Places with Direct Access to Tier 1 Community Services O4. Builder's or Developer's Management Staff are Certified Green Building Professionals PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.0 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 7 of 32 CONTEXTUALSETBACK PLAN CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 0 8'16'32' 3A0.5 23 ' - 8 " 21 ' 32 ' 16 ' 69 ' - 1 1 / 2 " 26'-5 3/4" 20 ' 8' 8' 2'-6 1/8" 37 ' - 1 1 / 4 " 28 ' - 1 1 1 / 1 6 " CHURCHILL AVENUE 224 CHURCHILL AVE. 236 CHURCHILL AVE. 260 CHURCHILL AVE. 1500 BRYANT ST. 1521 EMERSON ST. 1505 EMERSON ST. 224 CHURCHILL1485 EMERSON ST.251 CHURCHILL AVE.227 CHURCHILL AVE.241 CHURCHILL AVE. 251 CHURCHILL AVE.263 CHURCHILL AVE.1450-1498 BRYANT ST. 250 CHURCHILL AVE. 1551 EMERSON ST. FR O N T O F H O U S E FR O N T O F H O U S E GARAGE GA R A G E (STREET SIDE YARD)(STREET SIDE YARD) EXCLUDED ASCORNER LOTFACING CROSSSTREET EXCLUDED ASCORNER LOTFACING CROSSSTREET CONTEXTUAL SETBACK CALCULATIONS 69'-1 1/2" 32' 21' 148'-4 7/8" / 4 =37'-1 1/4" LINE OFEXISTING HOUSE 26'- 3 3/8" (E) HOUSE SETBACK CONTEXTUALSETBACK SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" 1 CONTEXTUAL SETBACK PLAN A0.0 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.1 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 8 of 32 EXISTING SITEPLAN CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 0 4'8'16' 20 ' 13 0 ' 8' 7' - 3 / 1 6 " 8' 9'- 1 0 7 / 1 6 " 36 ' - 1 1 1 1 / 1 6 " 28 ' - 1 1 1 / 2 " Co n c . Co n c . Co n c . Di r t Di r t Di r t CO N C . A N D L A W N W A L K W A Y Gate Gr a v e l Gr a v e l Gr a v e l Gr a v e l Co n c . Co n c . Co n c . DIRT Ov e r h a n g A b o v e LAWN LAWN Dirt BW El = 3 9 . 7 6 FI N I S H F L O O R Wo o d P o s t Wo o d P o s t i REAR HOUSE SETBACK SIDE YARD SETBACK CONCRETE DRIVEWAY CONCRETE DRIVEWAY CONCRETE CURB CONCRETE CURB CONCRETE DRIVEWAY CONCRETE SIDEWALKCONCRETE SIDEWALK 170' FI R E H Y D R A N T REMOVE AIR CONDITIONER REMOVE GATE POOL REMOVE BRICK BORDER SH E D DIRT CONCRETE DIRT DIRT DIRT GRAVEL CONCRETE GRAVEL DIRT DIRT DIRT CONCRETE GATE DIRT DIRT DIRT GAS METER CHURCHILL AVE. SIDE YARD SETBACK REMOVE (E) FENCE EXISTING FENCING TO REMAIN DEMOLISH (E) POOL ANDRELATED HARDSCAPE. RETAIN AND PROTECT ALL TREES ASSHOWN ON A0.2 AND THE ARBORIST REPORT (T0.2) DEMOLISH (E) HOUSE AND ALLADJACENT HARDSCAPE. RETAIN AND PROTECT ALL TREES ASSHOWN ON A0.2 AND THEARBORIST REPORT (E) CURB AND DRIVEWAY TO BEREMOVED DEMOLISH (E) POOL/ STORAGE SHED AND RELATED HARDSCAPE LINE OF (E) BASEMENT (E) HOUSE LOCATION DIMENSION TO EXISTING HOUSE LOT AREA13,000 SQ.FT. CONC. AND LAWN WALKWAY DIMENSIONING LEGEND X'-X" X'-X" X'-X" FACE OF FRAMING CENTERLINE FACE OF FINISH, CLEAR DIMENSION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1 EXISTING SITE PLAN A0.1 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.2 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 9 of 32 PROPOSED SITEPLAN CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. DIMENSIONING LEGEND X'-X" X'-X" X'-X" FACE OF FRAMING CENTERLINE FACE OF FINISH, CLEAR DIMENSION 79.12 sq ft 0 4'8'16' 20 ' 13 0 ' 8' 7' - 3 / 1 6 " 4' - 1 1 / 8 " 3' 1' 2' 11'-7 7/8" 3' 20' 4' 8' 9'- 1 0 7 / 1 6 " 28 ' - 1 1 1 / 2 " 46 ' - 5 3 / 1 6 " 50 ' - 6 5 / 1 6 " 3' 222.20 sq ft 435.24 SQ.FT. 240.56 SQ.FT. 80.47 sq ft 112.09 sq ft 185.41 sq ft 14" MAGNOLIA 64" REDWOOD TREE TO BE PROTECTED BYNEIGHBORS FENCE, SEE SHEET T0.2 - TREE T6 REAR HOUSE SETBACK SIDE YARD SETBACK CONCRETE DRIVEWAY CONCRETE CURB CONCRETE CURB CONCRETE DRIVEWAY CONCRETE SIDEWALKCONCRETE SIDEWALK 170' FI R E H Y D R A N T 6" BIRCH DIRT DIRT DIRT FENCE CHURCHILL AVE. PROPOSEDHOUSECOVEREDPARKING #1 CONTEXTUAL SETBACK - SEEA0.0 FOR CALCULATION COVEREDPARKING #2 NEW CURB GRASS CRETEDRIVEWAY MATCH DRIVEWAYWIDTH W/ (E) CURB CUTTHIS SIDE EXTEND PLANTER AT DEMOLISHEDDRIVEWAY PROPOSEDGARAGE NEIGHBORINGBUILDING NEIGHBORINGBUILDING NEIGHBORINGBUILDING SIDE YARD SETBACK CONCRETE WALKWAY CONCRETE PATIO BELOWGRADE PATIO 16" COAST LIVE OAK PROTECTED TREE, TYPE #2PROTECTION - SEE SHEET T0.2 - TREE T1 8" MAGNOLIAPROTECTED TREE, TYPE #2PROTECTION - SEE SHEET T0.2 -TREE T3 18" OAK PROTECTED TREE, TYPE#3 PROTECTION - SEE SHEET T0.2 - TREE T5 4" BLACK LOCUST, PROTECTED TREE, TYPE#2 PROTECTION, SEE SHEET T0.2 - TREE T2 SLOPE GRADE AWAY FROM THEBUILDING, TYP. SLOPE GRADE AWAYFROM THE BUILDING,TYP. -6 1/2" -1/2" SITE WALL EXISTING FENCING TO REMAIN PROPOSEDCARPORT BASEMENT SQ.FT. 1,722.80GROUND FLOOR SQ.FT. 2,136.99UPPER FLOOR SQ.FT. 1455.18 6 FOOT HIGH CHAINLINK FENCE TYPICAL FENCE DISTANCE TOOUTER BRANCHES OF TPZ, TYP. OF (3)WARNING SIGN, TYP. NOTE:ARBORIST TO INSPECTTREE PROTECTION ANDREVIEW EXCAVATION FORHOUSE, PER REPORT WRAP TRUNK WITH WOODEN PLANKSOR STRAW WATTLE AND ORANGE PLASTIC FENCING WATER METER NOTE: NO TREES WILL BEREMOVED AS PART OFTHIS PROJECT (N) 6' FENCE/ GATE AIR CONDITIONING CONDENSOR ALIGN NEW 6' FENCE/ GATE LADDERACCESS 42" OAKPROTECTED TREE, TYPE #1PROTECTION SEE SHEET T0.2 - TREE T4,EXISTING DRIPLINE TO BEREDUCED AT STRUCTURE ANDAT FULL PERIMETER ROOF OVERHANG, TYP. NEW 6' FENCE ENTRY MIN. 2% SLOPETO DRAIN MIN. 2%SLOPE TODRAIN A/C SCREENING SITE WALL CONTEXTUAL SETBACK - SEEA0.0 FOR CALCULATION SETBACK FOR EXISTING HOUSE 3' SQUARE CONCRETE PAVERS MAIN LEVEL BUILIDNG OUTLINE 2ND LEVEL BUILIDNG OUTLINE MAIN LEVEL ROOF OVERHANG OUTLINE 2ND LEVEL ROOF OVERHANG OUTLINE 38.1 38.3 38.6 38.5 38.5 38.5 38.7 38.7 38.7 38.4 39.75 39.75 39.70 39.70 38.438.638.738.6 LOCATION OF DAYLIGHT PLANE LOCATION OF DAYLIGHT PLANE LOCATION OF DAYLIGHT PLANE NOTE:AVERAGE GRADE HEIGHT:38.56. THERE IS NO ANTICIPATEDREGRADING OUTSIDE OF BUILDINGENVELOPE 38.738.938.739.038.8 38.9 38.8 39.0 38.9 39.15 38.2 38.538.638.8 39.0 39.038.8 38.9 -6 1/2"-39.15 39.25 LOT AREA13,000 SQ.FT. 37 ' - 1 1 / 4 " 3 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1 SITE PLAN A0.2 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.3 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 10 of 32 SITE / CONTEXTPHOTOS CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 3A0.5 CHURCHILL AVENUE 2 3 4 5 7 8 6 9 NOT TO SCALE 8 P1000688 A0.3 SCALE: 1/64" = 1'-0" 1 PHOTO MAP A0.3NOT TO SCALE 2 P1000690 A0.3NOT TO SCALE 3 P1000689 A0.3 NOT TO SCALE 4 P1000693 A0.3 NOT TO SCALE 9 P1000705 A0.3 NOT TO SCALE 5 P1000702 A0.3NOT TO SCALE 6 P1000704 A0.3 NOT TO SCALE 7 P1000687 A0.3 PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.4 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 11 of 32 NEIGHBORHOODPRIVACYDIAGRAM CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 0 4'8'16' 30'30' 30 ' +9'+18' 18'27' +26' +15' +24' 8' +10' 5' 13' 7' - 3 1 / 2 " 4' - 1 5 / 8 " 2' 1'1' 8"8" 3' 3' DN 20' HIGH20' WIDECANOPY 30' HIGH20' WIDECANOPY BALCONY/DECK 50' HIGH35' WIDECANOPY 6' HIGH FENCE 10' TALLSHRUBS SINGLE STORYSHED 30' HIGH20' WIDECANOPY 2 - STORYSINGLE FAMILYRESIDENCE 2 - STORYSINGLE FAMILYRESIDENCE ATTACHEDGARAGESTRUCTURE 70' HIGH40' WIDECANOPY 40' HIGH55' WIDECANOPY LOWERLOWSLOPEROOF 12' HIGH15' WIDECANOPY 30' HIGH32' WIDECANOPY 15' HIGH12' WIDECANOPY 2 - STORYSINGLE FAMILYRESIDENCE 3'-5" TALLSHRUBS 25' HIGH25' WIDECANOPY25' HIGH25' WIDECANOPY 6'-6" TALLSHRUBS 10' TALLSHRUBS 6'-6" FENCE BALCONY 10' HIGH10' WIDE CANOPY(ORANGE TREE) LOWERLOWSLOPEROOF APPROXIMATEHT. OF ROOFPEAK, TYP. DH WINDOW,FIRST FLOORW=2-6H=3-6 SINGLE STORYRESIDENCE DOUBLE CASEMENT WINDOW,W=3'H=3'-6" DOUBLE HUNGWINDOW @ SECONDLEVEL,W=30"H=44" FIXED WINDOW@ MAIN LEVEL,W=5'H=6' GROUNDLEVEL PATIO MASTERBEDROOM BEDROOM BEDROOM CL. BATH BATH 20' HIGH20' WIDE CANOPY 30' HIGH30' WIDECANOPY35' HIGH20' WIDECANOPY 35' HIGH35' WIDECANOPY GLASS DOOR AT FIRSTLEVEL FIXED WINDOWW=2'-6"H=2'-0" ALL PLANTING SHOWNON THIS PLAN ISEXISTING, U.O.N. -1/2" +0'-0" METAL GUARDRAIL -1/2" EAVE OVERHANG NEW TREES LINE OF ROOF OVERHANGABOVE (TO BE TRIMMED ATHOUSE AND ATPERIMETER) 6' HIGH METAL GUARDRAIL/ SCREEN 6' HIGH METAL GUARDRAILSCREEN ROOF OPENINGS ABOVE,TYP. 12' +21' SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1 PRIVACY DIAGRAM A0.4 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.5 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 12 of 32 STREETSCAPEELEVATION CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 0 8'16'24' 26' 24' 12' 24'-2 1/4" 22'-5 7/8" 1505 EMERSON ST.236 CHURCHILL ST.224 CHURCHILL ST. PROPERTY LINE,TYP. APPROX. APPROX. APPROX. F.F. F.F. 0 8'16'24' 80. 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 80. 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 50. 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 50. 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 50 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 50 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 75.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 75.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 75.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 75.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 90.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 90.0 ' 20 0 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 20 0 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 20 0 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 20 0 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 72. 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 72. 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 78 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 78. 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 20 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 20 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 20 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 20 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 150 . 0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 150 . 0 ' 50. 0 ' 25.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 125 . 0 ' 20 0 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 50. 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 50 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 13 0 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 13 0 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 200 . 0 ' 50 . 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 50. 0 ' 100 . 0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 15 0 . 0 ' 50.0 ' 200 . 0 ' 200 . 0 ' 200 . 0 ' 50. 0 ' 70 . 0 ' 70. 0 ' 151 0 18 0 21 5 22 7 23 1 23 5 24 1 22 5 23 6 25 0 26 0 150 5 152 1 22 4 155 1 21 5 152 0 E M E R S O N S T R E E T CHU R C H I L L A V E N U E Parcel Report for APN: Net Lot Size: Max Floor Area : Max LotCoverage : Zone: Zone %: Minimum Setbacks: Front: Rear: Interior Side(s): Street Side: SpecialSetbacks: Substandard: Flag Lot: Distance between sidewalk and pl: (as measured on map) Easements: UnderlyingLot Lines: Land Use Designation: Land Use Designation %: Parking District: Flood Zone: LOMA: Homer/EmersonCorridor Frontage: Historic Status: Cottage: Max Heightto Ridge: Near CreekFeature: Airport Influence Area: Easements: Underlying Lot Lines: Trees: Sidewalks: Creek or Waterway: This map is a product of theCity of Palo Alto GIS This document is a graphic representation only of best available sources. 0'50' 22 4 C h u r c h i l l A v e CITY O F PALO A L TO IN C O RP ORATE D C ALIFOR NIA P a l o A l t oT h e C i t y o f AP RIL 16 1894 124-16-058 13,000 sf 4,650 sf If single story, 4,650 sfIf two story, 4,550 sf R-1 (10000) 100 24' along Churchill Ave SF 100 none X no If no special setback, 20', or,if avg. contextual setback > 30', the avg. contextual setback. 20' 8 If no special setback, 16' 22 4 C h u r c h i l l A v e If roof slope < 12:12, 30'If roof slope >= 12:12, 33' none no no Yes, see Public Works forpossible requirements. no no Not eligible, lot size too small. no The City of Palo Alto assumes no responsibility for any errors. ©1989 to 2014 City of Palo Alto no jthayer, 2014-06-16 16:03:02Parcel Report Online () SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0" 3 STREETSCAPE ELEVATION A0.5 SCALE: 1' = 1'-0" 2 BLOCK MAP A0.5 NOT TO SCALE 4 EXISTING SCREETSCAPE A0.5 NOT TO SCALE 1 TOP VIEW A0.5 1505 EMERSON ST.236 CHURCHILL ST.224 CHURCHILL ST. PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.6 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 13 of 32 LOT COVERAGEDIAGRAM CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 248.55 sq ft 109.52 sq ft 205.68 sq ft 15.16 sq ft 10.85 sq ft 96.48 sq ft 69.30 sq ft 5.56 sq ft 10.17 sq ft 12.33 sq ft 55.09 sq ft 55.09 sq ft 35.99 sq ft 50.05 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 20 ' - 1 1 3 / 1 6 " 22'-6" 12'-6" 8' - 4 3 / 4 " 13 ' - 7 3 / 8 " 21'-4 1/4" 9'-11 7/16" 25 ' - 1 0 3 / 4 " 15'-1/2" 4' - 5 3 / 4 " 10 ' - 1 1 3 / 4 " 28'-10 1/4" 11'-1 3/4" 8'-10 1/4" 12 ' - 1 1 1 / 4 " 7' - 4 1 3 / 1 6 " 1'-8" 1'-8" 9' - 1 1 / 8 " 2' - 1 1 1 / 1 6 " 4' - 1 1 3 / 4 " 7' - 1 7 / 1 6 " 1' 3' - 4 " 1'-8" 14'-10 1/4" 7' - 2 1 5 / 1 6 " 9'-10 3/4"6'-6" 7' - 7 3 / 4 " 7' - 2 5 / 1 6 " 10'-10 1/4" 1' 10'-2 1/4" 1' 7' - 3 / 4 " 8'-4 3/4" 13'-6 5/8" 13'-11" 8'-10 1/4" 5' - 1 5 / 1 6 " 21 ' - 3 / 1 6 " 4' 4' 4' 4' 71.19 sq ft 747.20 sq ft 95.62 sq ft 59.30 sq ft 45.11 sq ft 114.55 sq ft UP DN SITE WALL 234.67 sq ft 104.95 sq ft 471.01 sq ft 49.71 sq ft 29.02 sq ft 14.85 sq ft 92.32 sq ft90.65 sq ft G1 G2 G3 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15 B16 B17C1 B18 L1L2 2ND LEVELPROJECTION - O1 OVERHANGPORTION - O2 OVERHANGPORTION - O3 OVERHANGPORTION - O4 B1 B2 O1 MAIN LEVEL O3 G1 G2 O2 OVERHANGS DEEPER THAN 4'-0" GARAGE 114.55 SQ.FT. 205.68 SQ.FT. 55.09 SQ.FT. 50.05 SQ.FT. 50.09 SQ.FT. 95.62 SQ.FT. 234.67 SQ.FT. 104.95 SQ.FT. 191.22 SQ.FT. 8'-10 1/4"x12'-10 1/8" 11'-1 3/4"X18'-4 4/16" 21'-4 1/4"X10'-11 3/4" 21'-4 1/4"X4'-5 3/4" C1 248.55 SQ.FT. CARPORT O4 35.99 SQ.FT. 2136.99 SQ.FT. B3 B4 B5 28'-10 1/4"X25'-11 3/16" 15'-1/2"X7'-2 15/16" 9-10 3/4"X7'-2 5/16" LOT COVERAGE CALCULATION: B6 B7 49.71 SQ.FT. 10.85 SQ.FT.10-10 1/4"X1'-0" B8 B9 B10 1'-8"X3'-4" 13'-10 1/4"X1'-0" 13'-11"X4'-11 3/4" B11 B12 96.48 SQ.FT. 29.02 SQ.FT.9'-11 7/16"X2'-11 1/16" B13 B14 B15 22'-6"X20'-11 3/16" 1'-8"X9-1 1/8" 10'-2 1/4"X1'-0" B16 8'-10 1/4"X5'-15/16" B17 8-3 5/8"X7'-1 7/8" 13'-6 5/8"X7'-1 7/16" B18 1'-8"X7'-4 13/16" 6'-6"X7'-7 3/4" 435.24 SQ.FT. G3 12'-6"X8'-4 3/4" L1 L2 92.32 SQ.FT. 90.65 SQ.FT. 182.97 SQ.FT. LIGHTWELLS TOTAL: 248.55 SQ.FT. 3194.97 SQ.FT. ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE (35% OF LOTAREA) = 4,550 SQ.FT. 747.20 SQ.FT. 12'-6"X20'-0" 109.52 SQ.FT. 71.19 SQ.FT. 5.56 SQ.FT. 14.85 SQ.FT. 69.30 SQ.FT. 471.01 SQ.FT. 15.16 SQ.FT. 10.17 SQ.FT. 45.11 SQ.FT. 59.30 SQ.FT. 12.33 SQ.FT. SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 LOT COVERAGE DIAGRAM A0.6 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.7 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 14 of 32 SQ. FOOTAGEDIAGRAM,BASEMENT CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 48'-8 7/8" 26 ' - 3 3 / 8 " 16'-3"8'-8 7/8" 5' - 1 1 5 / 1 6 " 6' - 1 0 7 / 8 " 28'-10 7/8" 7' - 6 1 1 / 1 6 " 8'-9" UP 1,280.94 sq ft 45.09 sq ft 112.23 sq ft 218.42 sq ft66.12 sq ft A1 A2 A3 A4A5 66.12 SQ.FT.A5 A1 B1 BASEMENT B3 G2 B2 A2 UPPER LEVEL GARAGE 1,280.94 SQ.FT. 45.09 SQ.FT. 499.60 SQ.FT. 643.85 SQ.FT. 24.84 SQ.FT. A3 112.23 SQ.FT. 48'-8 7/8"X26'-3 3/8" 8-8 7/8"X5'-1 15/16" 16'-3"X6'-10 7/8" 21'-4 1/4"X23'-4 3/4" 35'-0"X18'-4 3/4" 8'-4 3/4"X2'-11 1/2" BA1 BALCONY B4 36.33 SQ.FT.6'-7 1/4"X5'-6" 1722.8 SQ.FT. A4 AREA CALCULATIONS: G3 B5 B7 B6 B8 B9 59.29 SQ.FT. 65.93 SQ.FT. 59.30 SQ.FT. 44.97 SQ.FT. 10.19 SQ.FT. 8'-4 3/4"X7'-4 15/16" 8'-10 3/4"X7'-3/4" 8'-4 3/4"X7'-3/4" 8'-10 1/4"X5'-15/16" 10'-2 5/16"X1'-0" 1455.18 SQ.FT. B10 10.88 SQ.FT.10'-10 9/16"X1'-0" B1 B2 MAIN LEVEL B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15 B16 B17 B18 L1 L2 LIGHTWELLS L3 L4 368.32 SQ.FT. 92.32 SQ.FT. 90.65 SQ.FT. 90.40 SQ.FT. 94.95 SQ.FT. C1 CARPORT TOTAL PROPOSED FL. AREA: 1722.8 SQ.FT. DOES NOT COUNT TOWARDS BUILDING FL.AREA ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA = 4,650 SQ.FT. G1 95.62 SQ.FT. 234.67 SQ.FT. 104.95 SQ.FT. 21'-4 1/4"X10'-11 3/4" 21'-4 1/4"X4'-5 3/4" 12'-6"X8'-4 3/4" 114.55 SQ.FT. 205.68 SQ.FT. 8'-10 1/4"x12'-10 1/8" 11'-1 3/4"X18'-4 4/16" 2136.99 SQ.FT. 28'-10 1/4"X25'-11 3/16" 15'-1/2"X7'-2 15/16" 9-10 3/4"X7'-2 5/16" 49.71 SQ.FT. 10.85 SQ.FT.10-10 1/4"X1'-0" 1'-8"X3'-4" 13'-10 1/4"X1'-0" 13'-11"X4'-11 3/4" 96.48 SQ.FT. 29.02 SQ.FT.9'-11 7/16"X2'-11 1/16" 22'-6"X20'-11 3/16" 1'-8"X9-1 1/8" 10'-2 1/4"X1'-0" 8'-10 1/4"X5'-15/16" 8-3 5/8"X7'-1 7/8" 13'-6 5/8"X7'-1 7/16" 1'-8"X7'-4 13/16" 6'-6"X7'-7 3/4" 248.55 SQ.FT. 248.55 SQ.FT. 435.24 SQ.FT. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 263.25 SQ.FT. 263.25 SQ.FT. N/A N/A PROPOSED FLOOR AREA = 4,644.28 SQ.FT. 218.42 SQ.FT.28'-10 7/8"X7'-6 11/16" 8'-9"X7'-6 11/16" 747.20 SQ.FT. 109.52 SQ.FT. 71.19 SQ.FT. 5.56 SQ.FT. 14.85 SQ.FT. 69.30 SQ.FT. 471.01 SQ.FT. 15.16 SQ.FT. 10.17 SQ.FT. 45.11 SQ.FT. 59.30 SQ.FT. 12.33 SQ.FT. 12'-6"X21'-0" 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 BASEMENT AREA DIAGRAM A0.7 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.8 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 15 of 32 SQ. FOOTAGEDIAGRAM. MAINFLOOR CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 248.55 sq ft 109.52 sq ft 205.68 sq ft 15.16 sq ft 10.85 sq ft 96.48 sq ft 69.30 sq ft 5.56 sq ft 10.17 sq ft 12.33 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 20 ' - 1 1 3 / 1 6 " 22'-6" 12'-6" 8' - 4 3 / 4 " 13 ' - 7 3 / 8 " 21'-4 1/4" 9'-11 7/16" 25 ' - 1 0 3 / 4 " 15'-1/2" 4' - 5 3 / 4 " 10 ' - 1 1 3 / 4 " 28'-10 1/4" 11'-1 3/4" 8'-10 1/4" 12 ' - 1 1 1 / 4 " 7' - 4 1 3 / 1 6 " 1'-8" 1'-8" 9' - 1 1 / 8 " 2' - 1 1 1 / 1 6 " 4' - 1 1 3 / 4 " 7' - 1 7 / 1 6 " 1' 3' - 4 " 1'-8" 14'-10 1/4" 7' - 2 1 5 / 1 6 " 9'-10 3/4"6'-6" 7' - 7 3 / 4 " 7' - 2 5 / 1 6 " 10'-10 1/4" 1' 10'-2 1/4" 1' 7' - 3 / 4 " 8'-4 3/4" 13'-6 5/8" 13'-11" 8'-10 1/4" 5' - 1 5 / 1 6 " 21 ' - 3 / 1 6 " 4' 4' 4' 4' 71.19 sq ft 747.20 sq ft 95.62 sq ft 59.30 sq ft 45.11 sq ft 114.55 sq ft UP DN SITE WALL 234.67 sq ft 104.95 sq ft 471.01 sq ft 49.71 sq ft 29.02 sq ft 14.85 sq ft 92.32 sq ft90.65 sq ft G1 G2 G3 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15 B16 B17C1 B18 L1L2 66.12 SQ.FT.A5 A1 B1 BASEMENT B3 G1 G2 B2 A2 UPPER LEVEL GARAGE 1,280.94 SQ.FT. 45.09 SQ.FT. 499.60 SQ.FT. 643.85 SQ.FT. 24.84 SQ.FT. A3 112.23 SQ.FT. 48'-8 7/8"X26'-3 3/8" 8-8 7/8"X5'-1 15/16" 16'-3"X6'-10 7/8" 21'-4 1/4"X23'-4 3/4" 35'-0"X18'-4 3/4" 8'-4 3/4"X2'-11 1/2" BA1 BALCONY B4 36.33 SQ.FT.6'-7 1/4"X5'-6" 1722.8 SQ.FT. A4 AREA CALCULATIONS: G3 B7 B6 B8 B9 59.29 SQ.FT. 65.93 SQ.FT. 59.30 SQ.FT. 44.97 SQ.FT. 10.19 SQ.FT. 8'-4 3/4"X7'-4 15/16" 8'-10 3/4"X7'-3/4" 8'-4 3/4"X7'-3/4" 8'-10 1/4"X5'-15/16" 10'-2 5/16"X1'-0" 1455.18 SQ.FT. B10 10.88 SQ.FT.10'-10 9/16"X1'-0" B1 B2 MAIN LEVEL B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15 B16 B17 B18 B5 L1 L2 LIGHTWELLS L3 L4 368.32 SQ.FT. 92.32 SQ.FT. 90.65 SQ.FT. 90.40 SQ.FT. 94.95 SQ.FT. C1 CARPORT TOTAL PROPOSED FL. AREA: 3003.75 SQ.FT. ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA = 4,650 SQ.FT. 95.62 SQ.FT. 234.67 SQ.FT. 104.95 SQ.FT. 21'-4 1/4"X10'-11 3/4" 21'-4 1/4"X4'-5 3/4" 12'-6"X8'-4 3/4" 248.55 SQ.FT. 248.55 SQ.FT. B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B18 B17 B16 B15 B14 B13 B12 B11 B10 B9 B8 B7 B6 114.55 SQ.FT. 205.68 SQ.FT. 8'-10 1/4"x12'-10 1/8" 11'-1 3/4"X18'-4 4/16" 2136.99 SQ.FT. 28'-10 1/4"X25'-11 3/16" 15'-1/2"X7'-2 15/16" 9-10 3/4"X7'-2 5/16" 49.71 SQ.FT. 10.85 SQ.FT.10-10 1/4"X1'-0" 1'-8"X3'-4" 13'-10 1/4"X1'-0" 13'-11"X4'-11 3/4" 96.48 SQ.FT. 29.02 SQ.FT.9'-11 7/16"X2'-11 1/16" 22'-6"X20'-11 3/16" 1'-8"X9-1 1/8" 10'-2 1/4"X1'-0" 8'-10 1/4"X5'-15/16" 8-3 5/8"X7'-1 7/8" 13'-6 5/8"X7'-1 7/16" 1'-8"X7'-4 13/16" 6'-6"X7'-7 3/4" 435.24 SQ.FT. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 263.25 SQ.FT. 263.25 SQ.FT. N/A N/A PROPOSED FLOOR AREA = 4,644.28 SQ.FT. 218.42 SQ.FT.28'-10 7/8"X7'-6 11/16" 8'-9"X7'-6 11/16" 12'-6"X21'-0" 747.20 SQ.FT. 109.52 SQ.FT. 71.19 SQ.FT. 5.56 SQ.FT. 14.85 SQ.FT. 69.30 SQ.FT. 471.01 SQ.FT. 15.16 SQ.FT. 10.17 SQ.FT. 45.11 SQ.FT. 59.30 SQ.FT. 12.33 SQ.FT. 28'-10 7/8"X7'-6 11/16" 8'-9"X7'-6 11/16" 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 MAIN LEVEL AREA DIAGRAM A0.8 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.9 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 16 of 32 SQ. FOOTAGEDIAGRAM, 2NDLEVEL CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 44.97 sq ft 59.30 sq ft 10.19 sq ft 263.25 sq ft 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 8'-10 1/4" 8'-4 3/4" 2' - 1 1 1 / 2 " 18 ' - 4 3 / 4 " 35' 5' - 6 " 5' - 1 5 / 1 6 " 21'-4 1/4" 7' - 4 1 5 / 1 6 " 7' - 3 / 4 " 23 ' - 4 3 / 4 " 35' 7' - 3 / 4 " 8'-4 3/4" 1' 10'-10 9/16" 8'-10 3/4" 6'-7 1/4" 10'-2 5/16" 8'-4 3/4" 7' - 5 1 / 2 " 3' 3' 3' 3' DN ROOFING AREA MATCHES ADJACENTOVERHANG DEPTHS REMAINING AREA DOES NOT COUNT AS ITIS SUBSTANTIALLY OPEN (ARBOR/TRELLIS) 1' 499.60 sq ft 65.93 sq ft 643.85 sq ft 24.84 sq ft 36.33 sq ft59.29 sq ft 10.88 sq ft 94.95 sq ft90.40 sq ft B1 B2 B3B4B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 L3 L4 B10 BA1 OPENABOVE OPENABOVE OPENABOVE OPENABOVEOPENABOVEOPENABOVE 66.12 SQ.FT.A5 A1 B1 BASEMENT B3 G1 G2 B2 A2 UPPER LEVEL GARAGE 1,280.94 SQ.FT. 45.09 SQ.FT. 499.60 SQ.FT. 643.85 SQ.FT. 24.84 SQ.FT. A3 112.23 SQ.FT. 48'-8 7/8"X26'-3 3/8" 8-8 7/8"X5'-1 15/16" 16'-3"X6'-10 7/8" 21'-4 1/4"X23'-4 3/4" 35'-0"X18'-4 3/4" 8'-4 3/4"X2'-11 1/2" BA1 BALCONY B4 36.33 SQ.FT.6'-7 1/4"X5'-6" 1722.8 SQ.FT. A4 AREA CALCULATIONS: G3 B7 B6 B8 B9 59.29 SQ.FT. 65.93 SQ.FT. 59.30 SQ.FT. 44.97 SQ.FT. 10.19 SQ.FT. 8'-4 3/4"X7'-4 15/16" 8'-10 3/4"X7'-3/4" 8'-4 3/4"X7'-3/4" 8'-10 1/4"X5'-15/16" 10'-2 5/16"X1'-0" 1455.18 SQ.FT. B10 10.88 SQ.FT.10'-10 9/16"X1'-0" B5 L1 L2 LIGHTWELLS L3 L4 368.32 SQ.FT. 92.32 SQ.FT. 90.65 SQ.FT. 90.40 SQ.FT. 94.95 SQ.FT. C1 CARPORT TOTAL PROPOSED FL. AREA: 1640.53 SQ.FT. ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA = 4,650 SQ.FT. 263.25 SQ.FT. 95.62 SQ.FT. 234.67 SQ.FT. 104.95 SQ.FT. 21'-4 1/4"X10'-11 3/4" 21'-4 1/4"X4'-5 3/4" 12'-6"X8'-4 3/4" B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B18 B17 B16 B15 B14 B13 B12 B11 B10 B9 B8 B7 B6 114.55 SQ.FT. 205.68 SQ.FT. 8'-10 1/4"x12'-10 1/8" 11'-1 3/4"X18'-4 4/16" 2136.99 SQ.FT. 28'-10 1/4"X25'-11 3/16" 15'-1/2"X7'-2 15/16" 9-10 3/4"X7'-2 5/16" 49.71 SQ.FT. 10.85 SQ.FT.10-10 1/4"X1'-0" 1'-8"X3'-4" 13'-10 1/4"X1'-0" 13'-11"X4'-11 3/4" 96.48 SQ.FT. 29.02 SQ.FT.9'-11 7/16"X2'-11 1/16" 22'-6"X20'-11 3/16" 1'-8"X9-1 1/8" 10'-2 1/4"X1'-0" 8'-10 1/4"X5'-15/16" 8-3 5/8"X7'-1 7/8" 13'-6 5/8"X7'-1 7/16" 1'-8"X7'-4 13/16" 6'-6"X7'-7 3/4" 435.24 SQ.FT. 263.25 SQ.FT. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A PROPOSED FLOOR AREA = 4,644.28 SQ.FT. 248.55 SQ.FT. 248.55 SQ.FT. 218.42 SQ.FT.28'-10 7/8"X7'-6 11/16" 8'-9"X7'-6 11/16" 747.20 SQ.FT. 109.52 SQ.FT. 71.19 SQ.FT. 5.56 SQ.FT. 14.85 SQ.FT. 69.30 SQ.FT. 471.01 SQ.FT. 15.16 SQ.FT. 10.17 SQ.FT. 45.11 SQ.FT. 59.30 SQ.FT. 12.33 SQ.FT. 12'-6"X21'-0" 3 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 SECOND LEVEL AREA DIAGRAM A0.9 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A0.10 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 17 of 32 3DPERSPECTIVES CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. SCALE: 1' = 1'-0" 1 SIDE VIEW 1 A0.10SCALE: 1' = 1'-0" 2 SIDE VIEW 2 A0.10 SCALE: 1' = 1'-0" 4 FRONT VIEW A0.10 SCALE: 1' = 1'-0" 3 REAR VIEW A0.10 PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A1.0 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 18 of 32 BASEMENT PLAN CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 01 03 04 02 05 06 01 W D 0 2'4'8' 2 2 4 4 5 5 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 19 KK JJ II HH GG FF EE DD CC BB AA 1 1 3 3 BB 5'5'5' 5'5'5'5'10'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5' 2' - 6 " 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' 2'- 8 " 3' - 1 0 5 / 1 6 " 48'-8 7/8" 1'- 8 1 5 / 1 6 " 40 ' - 8 1 5 / 1 6 " UPOPEN TO ABOVE OPEN TO ABOVE SLAB ON GRADE/ FLOOR ABOVE SLAB ON GRADE/FLOOR ABOVE ESCAPE LADDER TO REAR YARD OUTLINE OF GARAGE ABOVE +0'-0" -6" OUTLINE OFHOUSE ABOVE OUTLINE OF SITE WALL ABOVE FACE OF SLAB ABOVE ALIGN STEEL POSTLINE OF (E)BASEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED OAK TREE TRUNK LOCATION ALL AREASADJACENT TO OAK TREE ROOTS TOUSE VERTICALSHORING TO REDUCE OVEREXCAVATION. CONCRETE WALLSTO BECONSTRUCTED WITH SHOTCRETE,CREATED AND FORMED INSECTIONS PER THESTRUCTURAL ENGINEERSREQUIREMENTS LIGHTWELL BELOW GRADE PATIO OPEN BASEMENT AREA MECHANICAL POWDER RM.LAUNDRY RM. STORAGE EQUIPMENT 3A3.1 1A3.1 2A3.11A2.0 3A3.0 2A3.0 2A2.0 2A2.1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 BASEMENT PLAN A1.0 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A1.1 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 19 of 32 MAIN LEVELFLOOR PLAN CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 9 10 9 8 5 7 11 10 12 11 12 13 1 2 4 5 6 4 11 14 6 3 8 3 2 2 2 4 4 5 5 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 19 KK JJ II HH GG FF EE DD CC BB AA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 W DR RE F 0 2'4'8' DW 1 1 3 3 BB 3A3.1 1A3.1 2A3.11A2.0 5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5' 2' - 6 " 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' 2'- 8 " 3' - 1 0 5 / 1 6 " 22'-6"26'-10 1/2" 11 ' - 1 1 5 / 8 " 24 ' - 8 1 / 4 " 3'-3 7/8" 1' 8" 1' 1' 1' 1' 3' 2' 3' 23 ' - 1 0 1 / 4 " 10 ' - 2 3 / 1 6 " 3' - 4 " 8' - 7 1 / 8 " 9'14'-10 1/4"28'-6 1/4"19'-8"11'-11 3/4" 84' 21 ' - 4 1 / 4 " 16 ' - 1 3 / 8 " 7' - 4 1 3 / 1 6 " 44 ' - 1 0 7 / 1 6 " 3A3.0 2A3.0 2A2.0 2A2.1 1A2.1 -1/2"+0'-0" -1/2" -6"ALIGN LEDGE UP CONCRETE PATIO CONCRETE PATIO/LANDING CONCRETE WALKWAY -6" OPEN TO BELOW ANDABOVE OPEN TO BELOW ESCAPE LADDER TOBACKYARD METAL GUARDRAIL DN ROOF FASCIA ABOVE,TYP. SITE WALL AL I G N LINE OF ROOF FASCIAABOVE OFFICE CLOSET 2CLOSET 1 LIGHTWELL KITCHEN PANTRY LAUNDRY BATHROOM #1 GARAGE CLOSET POWDER ENTRY LIGHTWELL LIVING ROOM BELOW GRADE PATIO CARPORT A: 277.90 sq ft SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 MAIN LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A1.1 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A1.2 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 20 of 32 UPPER LEVELPLAN CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. 210 212 205 213204 205 202 203 206 208 201 202 206 201 206 207 208209 204 203 2 2 4 4 5 5 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 19 KK JJ II HH GG FF EE DD CC BB AA 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718 1 1 3 3 BB 0 2'4'8' 3A3.1 1A3.1 2A3.11A2.0 3A3.0 2A3.0 2A2.0 2A2.1 1A2.1 13'-9 3/8" 11'-11 5/8" 11 ' - 1 1 5 / 8 " 21 ' - 1 1 5 / 8 " 4'- 6 3 / 4 " 5'-9 3/4" 5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5'5' 2' - 6 " 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' 5' 2'- 8 " 3' - 1 0 5 / 1 6 " 19'-6 3/4" 2'-3/8" 19 ' - 4 1 / 2 " 2' 1'1' 8"8" 3' 3' 3' - 1 1 3 / 4 " 4'-6" 7' - 1 1 / 2 " 4' - 1 5 / 8 " DN -1/2" +0'-0" METAL GUARDRAIL LIGHTWELL OPEN TO ABOVE& BELOW LOWER LOWSLOPE ROOF LOWER LOWSLOPE ROOF -1/2" EAVE OVERHANG LINE OF ROOFOVERHANGABOVE 6' HIGH METAL GUARDRAIL/SCREEN 6' HIGH METALGUARDRAIL/ SCREEN ROOF OPENINGS ABOVE,TYP. BEDROOM #3 BATH #2 CLOSET MASTER BEDROOM MASTER BATH BEDROOM #2 BALCONY SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 SECOND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN A1.2 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A1.3 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 21 of 32 ROOF PLAN CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. DIMENSIONING LEGEND X'-X" X'-X" X'-X" FACE OF FRAMING CENTERLINE FACE OF FINISH, CLEAR DIMENSION 2 2 4 4 5 5 7 7 8 8 9 9 10 10 11 11 12 12 13 13 14 14 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 19 KK JJ II HH GG FF EE DD CC BB AA 1 1 3 3 BB 0 2'4'8' 1'8"8" 1'1' 2' 3' 3' 3' 3' 10 1 / 1 6 " KITCHEN HOOD EXHAUST BATHROOM FAN, TYP. LINE OF BUILDINGBELOW, TYP. LOWER LOW SLOPEROOF, TYP.HIGHER LOW SLOPEROOF, TYP. LIGHTWELL ROOF, TYP.LIGHTWELL ROOF, TYP. BALCONY ROOF EAVE/OVERHANG ROOF OPENINGS, TYP. SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 ROOF PLAN A1.3 N PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A2.0 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 22 of 32 EXTERIORELEVATIONS CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. DIMENSIONING LEGEND X'-X" X'-X" X'-X" FACE OF FRAMING CENTERLINE FACE OF FINISH, CLEAR DIMENSION -1/2" 24'-2 1/4" 0'-0" 22'-4 3/8" 11'-8 3/8" 6' 10 ' 30 ' 45° LANDING T.O. PARAPET LINE OF SIDESETBACK DAYLIGHTPLANE MAX. ALLOWABLE HEIGHT IF SLOPE <1 IN 12 PAINTED METAILGUARDRAIL, TYP. SMOOTH CEMENTPLASTER WALL/ EAVE FINISH FLOOR EGRESS FOR BEDROOM #3 EGRESS FOR BEDROOM #2 TTT TTT TT TT WINDOWS SHOWN @ CEILING AREFLUSH TO CEILING, TYP. - SEEDETAILS. 6' SCREEN WALL 6' SCREEN WALL 2ND FLOOR T.O. FASCIA 39.75 39.70 LINE OF AVERAGEGRADE FROMAVERAGEGRADE38.56 38.56ALUMINUM WINDOWS ANDSLIDING DOORS, TYP.FIBER CEMENT PANELS,TYP.CONC. CURB CONC. CURBSPACE FOR LADDERACCESS LINE OFGRADE 24'-2 1/4" 11'-2" 0'-0" 1' - 2 3 / 1 6 " -6" 10 ' 10 ' 30 ' 45° FIBER CEMENT PANELS, TYP. ALIGN SMOOTH CEMENTPLASTER T.O. PARAPET CHANNEL GLASS, TYP. COMPOSITE WOODSIDING, TYP. MAX. ALLOWABLE HEIGHT IF SLOPE <1 IN 12 ALUMINUMWINDOWS, TYP. PAINTED COMPOSITE WOODFASCIA, TYP. ALIGN 224 6" MIN. SEPARATIONBETWEENSIDING AND GRADE F.F. T.O. FASCIA 39.75 39.25 LINE OF AVERAGEGRADE FROMAVERAGE GRADE38.56 FROMAVERAGE GRADE38.56 38.56 GARAGE F.F. COLORED CONCRETE ENTRY/ LANDING CONCRETE WALKWAY LINE OFGRADE 3 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 REAR ELEVATION A2.0 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 STREET ELEVATION A2.0 PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A2.1 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 23 of 32 EXTERIORELEVATIONS CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. DIMENSIONING LEGEND X'-X" X'-X" X'-X" FACE OF FRAMING CENTERLINE FACE OF FINISH, CLEAR DIMENSION -6 1/2" 0'-0" 24'-2 1/4" 22'-4 3/8" 11'-2" EXTERIORLANDING T.O. FASCIA T.O. PARAPET ALIGN FINISH FLOOR SMOOTH CEMENT PLASTER SITE WALL CHANNEL GLASS EGRESS FORMASTER BEDROOM T ALIGN T.O. FASCIA 6' PAINTEDMETAL SCREENWALL -6 1/2" 0'-0" 24'-2 1/4" 22'-4 3/8" 11'-2" 10 ' ALIGN EXTERIOR LANDING T.O. FASCIA T.O. FASCIA T.O. PARAPET FINISH FLOOR COMPOSITEWOOD EAVE SMOOTH CEMENTPLASTER EAVE COMPOSITEWOOD SIDING, TYP. FIBER CEMENTSPANELS SMOOTH CEMENTPLASTER T 6' PAINTEDMETAL SCREENWALL DAYLIGHTPLANE LINE OFAVERAGE GRADE 39.75 39.15 FROM AVERAGEGRADE 38.56 38.56 3 3 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 BEDROOM SIDE ELEVATION A2.1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 GARAGE SIDE ELEVATION A2.1 PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A3.0 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 24 of 32 BUILDINGSECTIONS CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. DIMENSIONING LEGEND X'-X" X'-X" X'-X" FACE OF FRAMING CENTERLINE FACE OF FINISH, CLEAR DIMENSION 0" 24'-2 1/4" -5 3/8" 11'-2" 9' - 5 3 / 8 " 22'-4 3/8" 45° 45° STORAGE GARAGE LIVING / DININGROOM OFFICE MASTERBEDROOM BASEMENT KITCHEN CL.BEDROOM BEDROOMBATH T.O. PARAPET T.O. FASCIA T.O. FASCIA -11'-2 3/8" F.F. BASEMENT F.F. 24'-2 1/4" 0" -11'-8 3/8" -6" 22'-4 3/8" 11'-2" 45° 45° LIVING / DININGROOM LIGHTWELL LIGHTWELL BASEMENT OPENAREA BATHROOM CLOSET CARPORT CLOSET HALLTOILETRM. CLOSET T.O. PARAPET T.O. FASCIA T.O. FASCIA F.F. CL.CL. 2X4 METAL STUD FRAMEDWALL W/ INSULATION RIGID INSULATION 3/4" COMPOSITE SIDING ALUMINUM WINDOW OPEN WEBBED METAL TRUSS JOIST W/ INSULATION 5/8" GYP. BD. 5/8" GYP. BD. SLAB ON GRADE RIGID INSULATIONUNDERSLAB UNDERSLABCONDITIONS PERFUTURE SOILSREPORT 17" METAL FRAMING TAPERED RIGID INULATION SIPS SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 3 LONGITUDUNAL SECTION A3.0 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 LONGITUDNAL SECTION @ STAIR A3.0 SCALE: 1 1/2"= 1'-0" 1 ENLARGED SECTION A3.0 PLANNING REVIEW PLANNING-REV. #1 PLANNING-REV. #3 ---------- ---------- DESCRIPTIONDATE --/--/-- 1/23/15 6/25/15 --/--/-- --/--/-- # -- Drawing Record / Revisions 1 3 -- -- PLANNING-REV. #25/26/152 CONTRACTORFlegel's Construction Co., Inc.Mr. Scott Flegel5546 Amby Dr., San Jose, CA 95124Phone: 650.793.0509Fax: 408.269.1101 SURVEYORMr. L. Wade Hammond36660 Newark Blvd. Suite CNewark, CA Phone: 510.579.6112Fax: 510.991.8054 OWNERMr. & Ms. Bogdan & OanaCocosel 224 Churchill Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94306Phone: 650-838-9152 ARBORIST Mr. Kevin R. KieltyCertified Arborist WE#0476AP.O.Box 6187San Mateo, CA 94403Phone: 650.515.9783 A3.1 Accepted For Owner By: Sheet No. 25 of 32 BUILDINGSECTIONS CO C O S E L R E S I D E N C E Checked by:Drawn by: 1405 Issue Date:Project No: 6/26/15 JCK AT, GHC 22 4 C H U R C H I L L A V E N U E PA L O A L T O , CA 94 3 0 6 A. P . N . 12 4 - 1 6 - 0 5 8 ©2014 by Klopf Architecture, a CA Corp. DIMENSIONING LEGEND X'-X" X'-X" X'-X" FACE OF FRAMING CENTERLINE FACE OF FINISH, CLEAR DIMENSION 0" -11'-2 3/8" 9' 22'-4 3/8" 9' - 6 " 9' 24'-2 1/4" KITCHEN BASEMENT MASTERBEDROOMLIGHTWELL F.F. T.O. FASCIAUPPER ROOF T.O. FASCIALOWER ROOF T.O. PARAPET F.F. BASEMENT 0" 22'-4 3/8" 11'-2" 9' 9' 9' - 6 " OFFICELAUNDRY CL.SHOWER BATHROOM F.F. T.O. FASCIALOWER ROOF T.O. FASCIAUPPER ROOF -11'-2 3/8" 10 ' 40 ' 0" 37'-1 1/4" 22'-4 3/8" 11'-2" 9' 9' - 6 " 9' 24'-2 1/4" 3'-6" 28'-11 1/16" LIVING ROOM BASEMENT OPENAREA BEDROOM #3 TRUNK EXISTING HOUSE SETBACK CALCULATED CONTEXTUALSETBACK LINE OF EXISTINGBASEMENT T.O. FASCIA UPPER ROOF T.O. FASCIA LOWER ROOF T.O. PARAPET F.F. F.F. BASEMENT SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 3 CROSS SECTION A3.1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 2 CROSS SECTION 3 A3.1 SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" 1 CROSS SECTION 2 A3.1 City of Palo Alto (ID # 6313) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/16/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of a Contract with Cypress Security, Inc. for Track Watch Services Title: Approval of a Seven Month Contract with Cypress Security, Inc. in an Amount not to Exceed $439,441 for "Track Watch" Contract Security Services and Adoption of a Related Budget Amendment Ordinance From: City Manager Lead Department: Police Recommendation Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager, or his designee, to execute the attached contract (Attachment A) with Cypress Security, LLC (Cypress) in the amount of $439,442 (inclusive of contingency) for seven months (December 1, 2015 – June 30, 2016) for Track Watch contract security services and adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance in the Stanford Medical Center Development Agreement Fund (Health Services) for the Project Safety Net program in the amount of $328,715 (Attachment B). Background Since 2009, the City of Palo Alto has used the services of contract security guards in response to teen fatalities that have occurred along the Caltrain corridor in Palo Alto. This program is commonly referred to as Track Watch. From November 2009 to October 2014 guards were stationed at both the Charleston and Meadow crossings from 6:15 PM to 1:15 AM (seven hours). This evening only level of service resulted in a monthly cost for rail security services of approximately $5,000 per month. To address additional teen fatality incidents, in October 2014 the City increased its rail security services to include the Churchill crossing and in November 2014 the City increased its rail security services to include California Avenue Station. This resulted in the City of Palo Alto having contract security guards at a total of four locations. City of Palo Alto Page 2 Additionally, the City increased the original scope by hiring rail security guards to be present from approximately 4:30 AM to 2:30 AM (or 22 hours per day) to help further mitigate the risk of incidents involving both Caltrain and freight trains. Discussion The City has utilized Val Security for contract security guard services since the City started using hired Track Watch guards. Previously, the City issued Requests for Quotations (RFQs) for contract security guards, not Request for Proposals (RFPs). The significance of this is that RFQs rely almost exclusively on cost as the award determinant versus RFPs which take cost into account but place a stronger emphasis on factors such as prior experience delivering similar services and the quality of the proposed solutions. In July 2015, the City issued a formal RFP for contract security services for four locations along the Caltrain corridor in Palo Alto. Through that process, the City received three proposals for these services. Val Security did not submit a bid in response to the RFP. Staff reviewed, evaluated, and scored the proposals based on an established set of criteria and determined that Cypress was the most favorable proposer as reflected in their training and program management, data collection and digital record keeping, and experience in the field. In addition, the updated scope would provide a much higher level of service than what currently exists. City staff hopes that the improved level of service and data collection that would be provided by Cypress will help the City make more informed decisions about the future of the Track Watch program and rail security in general. If the contract is approved, Cypress will begin providing contract security guard services on December 1, 2015. In addition to the City’s efforts to improve the Track Watch program, the City is also in the process of implementing an Intrusion Detection System (IDS) pilot project in cooperation with Caltrain at the Meadow crossing. This system is intended to provide an additional layer of protection along the corridor and the efficiency of the technology will be evaluated throughout the pilot project period to determine in what capacity, if any, it should be used going forward. Depending on the results of the IDS pilot, the City may be able to reduce the use of contract security guards in the future; however, regardless of the success of the IDS pilot, there will need to be some overlap between full implementation of an IDS system and the current Track Watch program. Under the terms of the proposed Cypress contract, the hourly rate that would be paid by the City of Palo Alto to Cypress would be $22.53 per hour per guard for work done City of Palo Alto Page 3 on weekdays and weekend days and $30.42 for work done on holidays. Below is a table that outlines the level of service and proposed contract costs on a monthly basis. Please note that December 2015 would have 24 hour per day coverage, not 22 hour per day coverage, because Caltrain is operating trains on the corridor 24 hours per day through the end of 2015 in order to test their positive train control system (caltrain.com/projectsplans/CaltrainModernization/Modernization/CBOSS-PTC- Project.html). The total contract amount staff recommends Council authorize the City Manager to execute is $439,441.84. This is the cost of seven months of service at the level outlined below plus a $10,000 contingency (approximately 2.3% of the total contract amount) in the event that additional service is needed. Month Coverage Cost December 2015 30 Regular Days 1 Holiday 24 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $67,806.72 January 2016 29 Regular Days 2 Holidays 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $62,850.48 February 2016 27 Regular Days 1 Holiday 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $56,208.24 March 2016 31 Regular Days 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $61,461.84 April 2016 30 Regular Days 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $59,479.20 May 2016 30 Regular Days 1 Holiday 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $62,156.16 City of Palo Alto Page 4 June 2016 30 Regular Days 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $59,479.20 Total Cost $429,441.84 Also, staff has begun investigating a remotely monitored camera approach. This could have the benefit of reduced operating costs but the City would lose the value of a human presence at each location that currently has one. There would be questions to work through with such remotely monitored cameras. Resource Impact The Stanford Medical Center Development Agreement set aside $4 million for health and safety, of which $2 million has been dedicated to Project Safety Net with a remaining balance of $328,715. This remaining balance coupled with anticipated savings from other elements of Project Safety Net such as temporary fencing, the current contract with Val Security and use of some of the contingency funds are sufficient to pay for the Cypress contract through FY 2016 in the amount of $439,442. In order to fund this contract, staff recommends adoption of the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance in the amount of $328,715. Since further City funding for Project Safety Net, or funding for additional means restrictions, should be anticipated, we will need to revisit using additional Stanford Medical Center Development Agreement health and safety funds, or the some other funding source, which should be discussed during the FY 2017 Budget process. Policy Implications Utilizing contract security guards to provide rail security services is consistent with existing City policy. Environmental Review This is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Attachments: ATTACHMENT A - C16160138A Track Watch Contract (PDF) ATTACHMENT B - BAO XXX- Track Watch Contract (PDF) 1 Rev. April 20, 2015 CITY OF PALO ALTO CONTRACT NO. C16160138A GENERAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into on the 1st day of December, 2015, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and CYPRESS SECURITY, LLC, a limited liability company, located at 1762 Technology Drive, San Jose, CA 95110, Telephone Number: (408)946-4102 (“CONTRACTOR”). In consideration of their mutual covenants, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. SERVICES. CONTRACTOR shall provide or furnish the services (the “Services”) described in the Scope of Services, attached at Exhibit A. 2. EXHIBITS. The following exhibits are attached to and made a part of this Agreement: “A” - Scope of Services “B” - Schedule of Performance “C” - Compensation “D” - Insurance Requirements “E” - Performance and/or Payment Bond “F” - Liquidated Damages CONTRACT IS NOT COMPLETE UNLESS ALL EXHIBITS ARE ATTACHED. 3. TERM. The term of this Agreement is from December 1, 2015 to June 30, 2016 inclusive, subject to the provisions of Sections Q and V of the General Terms and Conditions. 4. SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE. CONTRACTOR shall complete the Services within the term of this Agreement in a reasonably prompt and timely manner based upon the circumstances and direction communicated to CONTRACTOR, and if applicable, in accordance with the schedule set forth in the Schedule of Performance, attached at Exhibit B. Time is of the essence in this Agreement. 5. COMPENSATION FOR ORIGINAL TERM. CITY shall pay and CONTRACTOR agrees to accept as not-to-exceed compensation for the full performance of the Services and reimbursable expenses, if any: The total maximum lump sum compensation of dollars ($ ); OR The sum of dollars ($ ) per hour, not to exceed a total maximum compensation amount of dollars ($ ); OR DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 2 Rev. April 20, 2015 General Services Agreement X A sum calculated in accordance with the fee schedule set forth at Exhibit C, not to exceed a total maximum compensation amount of Four Hundred Twenty Nine Thousand Four Hundred Forty One dollars and eighty four cents ($429,441.84). CONTRACTOR agrees that it can perform the Services for an amount not to exceed the total maximum compensation set forth above. Any hours worked or services performed by CONTRACTOR for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth above for performance of the Services shall be at no cost to CITY. X CITY has set aside the sum of Ten Thousand dollars ($10,000) for Additional Services. CONTRACTOR shall provide Additional Services only by advanced, written authorization from the City Manager or designee. CONTRACTOR, at the CITY’s request, shall submit a detailed written proposal including a description of the scope of services, schedule, level of effort, and CONTRACTOR’s proposed maximum compensation, including reimbursable expense, for such services. Compensation shall be based on the hourly rates set forth above or in Exhibit C (whichever is applicable), or if such rates are not applicable, a negotiated lump sum. CITY shall not authorize and CONTRACTOR shall not perform any Additional Services for which payment would exceed the amount set forth above for Additional Services. Payment for Additional Services is subject to all requirements and restrictions in this Agreement. 6. COMPENSATION DURING ADDITIONAL TERMS. X CONTRACTOR’S compensation rates for each additional term shall be the same as the original term; OR CONTRACTOR’s compensation rates shall be adjusted effective on the commencement of each Additional Term. The lump sum compensation amount, hourly rates, or fees, whichever is applicable as set forth in section 5 above, shall be adjusted by a percentage equal to the change in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers for the San Francisco-Oakland- San Jose area, published by the United States Department of Labor Statistics (CPI) which is published most immediately preceding the commencement of the applicable Additional Term, which shall be compared with the CPI published most immediately preceding the commencement date of the then expiring term. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event shall CONTRACTOR’s compensation rates be increased by an amount exceeding five percent of the rates effective during the immediately preceding term. Any adjustment to CONTRACTOR’s compensation rates shall be reflected in a written amendment to this Agreement. 7. INVOICING. Send all invoices to CITY, Attention: Project Manager. The Project Manager is: Ian Hagerman, Dept.: Police, Telephone: (650)329-2346. Invoices shall be submitted DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 3 Rev. April 20, 2015 General Services Agreement in arrears for Services performed. Invoices shall not be submitted more frequently than monthly. Invoices shall provide a detailed statement of Services performed during the invoice period and are subject to verification by CITY. CITY shall pay the undisputed amount of invoices within 30 days of receipt. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. ACCEPTANCE. CONTRACTOR accepts and agrees to all terms and conditions of this Agreement. This Agreement includes and is limited to the terms and conditions set forth in sections 1 through 6 above, these general terms and conditions and the attached exhibits. B. QUALIFICATIONS. CONTRACTOR represents and warrants that it has the expertise and qualifications to complete the services described in Section 1 of this Agreement, entitled “SERVICES,” and that every individual charged with the performance of the services under this Agreement has sufficient skill and experience and is duly licensed or certified, to the extent such licensing or certification is required by law, to perform the Services. CITY expressly relies on CONTRACTOR’s representations regarding its skills, knowledge, and certifications. CONTRACTOR shall perform all work in accordance with generally accepted business practices and performance standards of the industry, including all federal, state, and local operation and safety regulations. C. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR. It is understood and agreed that in the performance of this Agreement, CONTRACTOR and any person employed by CONTRACTOR shall at all times be considered an independent CONTRACTOR and not an agent or employee of CITY. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for employing or engaging all persons necessary to complete the work required under this Agreement. D. SUBCONTRACTORS. CONTRACTOR may not use subcontractors to perform any Services under this Agreement unless CONTRACTOR obtains prior written consent of CITY. CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for directing the work of approved subcontractors and for any compensation due to subcontractors. E. TAXES AND CHARGES. CONTRACTOR shall be responsible for payment of all taxes, fees, contributions or charges applicable to the conduct of CONTRACTOR’s business. F. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. CONTRACTOR shall in the performance of the Services comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and orders. G. DAMAGE TO PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROPERTY. CONTRACTOR shall, at its sole expense, repair in kind, or as the City Manager or designee shall direct, any damage to public or private property that occurs in connection with CONTRACTOR’s performance of the Services. CITY may decline to approve and may withhold payment in whole or in part to such extent as may be necessary to protect CITY from loss because of defective work not remedied or other damage to the CITY occurring in connection with CONTRACTOR’s DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 4 Rev. April 20, 2015 General Services Agreement performance of the Services. CITY shall submit written documentation in support of such withholding upon CONTRACTOR’s request. When the grounds described above are removed, payment shall be made for amounts withheld because of them. H. WARRANTIES. CONTRACTOR expressly warrants that all services provided under this Agreement shall be performed in a professional and workmanlike manner in accordance with generally accepted business practices and performance standards of the industry and the requirements of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR expressly warrants that all materials, goods and equipment provided by CONTRACTOR under this Agreement shall be fit for the particular purpose intended, shall be free from defects, and shall conform to the requirements of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR agrees to promptly replace or correct any material or service not in compliance with these warranties, including incomplete, inaccurate, or defective material or service, at no further cost to CITY. The warranties set forth in this section shall be in effect for a period of one year from completion of the Services and shall survive the completion of the Services or termination of this Agreement. I. MONITORING OF SERVICES. CITY may monitor the Services performed under this Agreement to determine whether CONTRACTOR’s work is completed in a satisfactory manner and complies with the provisions of this Agreement. J. CITY’S PROPERTY. Any reports, information, data or other material (including copyright interests) developed, collected, assembled, prepared, or caused to be prepared under this Agreement will become the property of CITY without restriction or limitation upon their use and will not be made available to any individual or organization by CONTRACTOR or its subcontractors, if any, without the prior written approval of the City Manager. K. AUDITS. CONTRACTOR agrees to permit CITY and its authorized representatives to audit, at any reasonable time during the term of this Agreement and for three (3) years from the date of final payment, CONTRACTOR’s records pertaining to matters covered by this Agreement. CONTRACTOR agrees to maintain accurate books and records in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for at least three (3) following the terms of this Agreement. L. NO IMPLIED WAIVER. No payment, partial payment, acceptance, or partial acceptance by CITY shall operate as a waiver on the part of CITY of any of its rights under this Agreement. M. INSURANCE. CONTRACTOR, at its sole cost, shall purchase and maintain in full force during the term of this Agreement, the insurance coverage described at Exhibit D. Insurance must be provided by companies with a Best’s Key Rating of A-:VII or higher and which are otherwise acceptable to CITY’s Risk Manager. The Risk Manager must approve deductibles and self-insured retentions. In addition, all policies, endorsements, certificates and/or binders are subject to approval by the Risk Manager as to form and content. CONTRACTOR shall obtain a policy endorsement naming the City of Palo Alto as DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 5 Rev. April 20, 2015 General Services Agreement an additional insured under any general liability or automobile policy. CONTRACTOR shall obtain an endorsement stating that the insurance is primary coverage and will not be canceled or materially reduced in coverage or limits until after providing 30 days prior written notice of the cancellation or modification to the Risk Manager. CONTRACTOR shall provide certificates of such policies or other evidence of coverage satisfactory to the Risk Manager, together with the required endorsements and evidence of payment of premiums, to CITY concurrently with the execution of this Agreement and shall throughout the term of this Agreement provide current certificates evidencing the required insurance coverages and endorsements to the Risk Manager. CONTRACTOR shall include all subcontractors as insured under its policies or shall obtain and provide to CITY separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor that meet all the requirements of this section. The procuring of such required policies of insurance shall not operate to limit CONTRACTOR’s liability or obligation to indemnify CITY under this Agreement. N. HOLD HARMLESS. To the fullest extent permitted by law and without limitation by the provisions of section M relating to insurance, CONTRACTOR shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, its Council members, officers, employees and agents from and against any and all demands, claims, injuries, losses, or liabilities of any nature, including death or injury to any person, property damage or any other loss and including without limitation all damages, penalties, fines and judgments, associated investigation and administrative expenses and defense costs, including, but not limited to reasonable attorney’s fees, courts costs and costs of alternative dispute resolution), arising out of, or resulting in any way from or in connection with the performance of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR’s obligations under this Section apply regardless of whether or not a liability is caused or contributed to by any negligent (passive or active) act or omission of CITY, except that CONTRACTOR shall not be obligated to indemnify for liability arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of CITY. The acceptance of the Services by CITY shall not operate as a waiver of the right of indemnification. The provisions of this Section survive the completion of the Services or termination of this Agreement. O. NON-DISCRIMINATION. 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 agrees to meet all requirements of Section 2.30.510 pertaining to nondiscrimination in employment. P. WORKERS' COMPENSATION. CONTRACTOR, by executing this Agreement, certifies that it is aware of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California 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 certifies DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 6 Rev. April 20, 2015 General Services Agreement that it will comply with such provisions, as applicable, before commencing and during the performance of the Services. Q. TERMINATION. The City Manager may terminate this Agreement without cause by giving ten (10) days’ prior written notice thereof to CONTRACTOR. If CONTRACTOR fails to perform any of its material obligations under this Agreement, in addition to all other remedies provided by law, the City Manager may terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice of termination. Upon receipt of such notice of termination, CONTRACTOR shall immediately discontinue performance. CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR for services satisfactorily performed up to the effective date of termination. If the termination if for cause, CITY may deduct from such payment the amount of actual damage, if any, sustained by CITY due to CONTRACTOR’s failure to perform its material obligations under this Agreement. Upon termination, CONTRACTOR shall immediately deliver to the City Manager any and all copies of studies, sketches, drawings, computations, and other material or products, whether or not completed, prepared by CONTRACTOR or given to CONTRACTOR, in connection with this Agreement. Such materials shall become the property of CITY. R. ASSIGNMENTS/CHANGES. This Agreement binds the parties and their successors and assigns to all covenants of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be assigned or transferred without the prior written consent of CITY. No amendments, changes or variations of any kind are authorized without the written consent of CITY. S. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. In accepting this Agreement, CONTRACTOR 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 this Contract. CONTRACTOR further covenants that, in the performance of this Contract, it will not employ any person having such an interest. CONTRACTOR certifies that no CITY Officer, employee, or authorized representative has any financial interest in the business of CONTRACTOR and that no person associated with CONTRACTOR has any interest, direct or indirect, which could conflict with the faithful performance of this Contract. CONTRACTOR agrees to advise CITY if any conflict arises. T. GOVERNING LAW. This contract shall be governed and interpreted by the laws of the State of California. U. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Agreement, including all exhibits, represents the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the services that may be the subject of this Agreement. Any variance in the exhibits does not affect the validity of the Agreement and the Agreement itself controls over any conflicting provisions in the exhibits. This Agreement supersedes all prior agreements, representations, statements, negotiations and undertakings whether oral or written. V. NON-APPROPRIATION. This Agreement is subject to the fiscal provisions of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. This Agreement will terminate without any penalty (a) at the end of any fiscal year in the event that funds are not DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 7 Rev. April 20, 2015 General Services Agreement 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 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 Contract. W. ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERRED PURCHASING AND ZERO WASTE REQUIREMENTS. CONTRACTOR shall comply with CITY’s Environmentally Preferred Purchasing policies which are available at CITY’s Purchasing Division, which are incorporated by reference and may be amended from time to time. CONTRACTOR 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, CONTRACTOR shall comply with the following zero waste requirements: • All printed materials provided by CONTRACTOR 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 Contractor 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 CONTRCATOR, at no additional cost to CITY, for reuse or recycling. CONTRACTOR shall provide documentation from the facility accepting the pallets to verify that pallets are not being disposed. X. AUTHORITY. The individual(s) executing this Agreement on behalf of the parties represent and warrant that they have the legal capacity and authority to do so on behalf of their respective legal entities. Y. CONTRACT TERMS: All unchecked boxes do not apply to this Agreement. Z. DIR REGISTRATION. In regard to any public work construction, alteration, demolition, repair or maintenance work, CITY will not accept a bid proposal from or enter into this Agreement 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. City requires CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of SB 854. CITY provides notice to CONTRACTOR of the requirements of California Labor Code section 1771.1(a), which reads: DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 8 Rev. April 20, 2015 General Services Agreement “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 contractor is registered to perform public work pursuant to Section 1725.5 at the time the contract is awarded.” CITY gives notice to CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors that CONTRCATOR 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. CITY requires CONTRACTOR and its listed subcontractors to comply with the requirements of Labor Code section 1776, including: 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 9 Rev. April 20, 2015 General Services Agreement 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 CYPRESS SECURITY, LLC. __________________________________ By________________________________________ City Manager or Designee Name _____________________________________ Title_______________________________________ Approved as to form: ____________________________________ DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 Kes Narbutas CEO 8 Rev. April 20, 2015 EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES The vendor shall provide access control and enforce access control procedures to the site by monitoring pedestrian traffic through designated railroad crossings. Specifically: • Meadow Drive Caltrain Crossing • Charleston Road Caltrain Crossing • Churchill Avenue Caltrain Crossing • California Avenue Caltrain Platform The vendor shall provide standing officers to secure a section of railroad against trespassing to prevent endangerment of all parties involved. The vendor shall provide security guards with uniforms (standardized polo type shirts and pants are acceptable) that identify the company and are to be unarmed. The guard shall be alert and standing outside of a vehicle observing the northbound and southbound railroad tracks at designated locations. A marked vehicle at each location would be preferable but not mandatory. The guard is allowed two 15-minute breaks and a half-hour lunch for each eight-hour shift. SPECIFIC SERVICES/REQUIREMENTS: The vendor shall provide personnel who conduct themselves in a professional manner at all times while maintaining the highest levels of empathy and service. Personnel are expected to demonstrate the following abilities and characteristics: • Minimum of average intelligence • Good physical condition including sight and hearing • Mental alertness • Neat appearance • Good character • Dependability • Sense of responsibility for the safety of children and others • Good verbal communications skills • Familiarity with traffic rules and regulations The City will evaluate both independently and collectively with the vendor, whether assigned personnel are meeting the above standards. The City may mandate changes in personnel if it deems that these standards are not being met. Personnel will be expected to perform the following duties, practices, and procedures: 1. CROSSING ASSISTANCE DUTIES AND STANDARDS OF CONDUCT: The vendor shall ensure that all Caltrain General Orders and site specific protocols are followed at all times. The vendor hereby agrees that security personnel will also perform track (not street) crossing assistance functions during working hours. Such functions will include helping pedestrians and cyclists who need assistance to "cross-over" the tracks. The goal of the additional duties is to increase safety at the crossings while at the same time fostering positive interactions between the guards and members of our community. DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 9 Rev. April 20, 2015 Security personnel are to perform these services in a manner which is helpful, positive, and designed to foster a feeling of goodwill. Security functions shall take priority over the crossing assistance functions at all times. Security personnel shall use their discretion, expertise, and judgment in deciding whether or not to perform crossing assistance functions at any given time. However, security personnel shall make a reasonable effort to try to provide some crossing assistance at "busy" pedestrian times (especially to those in need). Security personnel should be alert to and approach (if safe to do so) individuals who may be or appear to be in distress, lingering near rail crossings, engaging in any behavior contrary to personal safety, or engaging in any illegal activity and immediately report these incidents to Caltrain dispatch and Palo Alto Police Dispatch. In addition, security personnel are expected to identify potential safety, health, environmental, and/or fire hazards and immediately report these occurrences to appropriate parties. In addition, the vendor shall ensure security personnel remain attentive and vigilant throughout the work shift including but not limited to, refraining from cell phone usage unless reporting an emergency or discussing an urgent issue with his or her supervisor. In addition, security personnel shall not provide interviews or statements to the media related to any aspect of the security operations without prior written consent from the City. The City does not require a supervisor or lead officer at each location. However, in the event of an incident, the City would require a supervisor to evaluate the performance of the personnel and report on the findings (see below). A dedicated Account Manager to work with City Staff on operational issues, concerns and billing is highly preferable. 2. CROSSING GUARD EQUIPMENT TO BE PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR: The vendor shall provide a whistle to be used by personnel to be used to alert pedestrians to safety concerns. In addition, the vendor shall provide a safety/traffic vest to be worn by security personnel at all times while on duty. 3. USE OF BINOCULARS TO SCAN TRACKS: The vendor will provide security personnel with binoculars with a magnification of approximately 7X50. Security personnel will use binoculars to assist them in scanning the crossing area as well as up and down the tracks. Security personnel will use their discretion in determining when to use binoculars. Night vision capabilities are highly preferable. 4. NAME TAGS: Name tags (or stitched fabric) are to be worn outside the clothing of security personnel. The name tags shall state the name of the security guard on duty and identify vendor as the provider of the track watch service. The tag will be made of laminated or comparable material such that it will be suitable for wearing it in the rain. 5. OUTDOOR WEAR: Security personnel shall come equipped with clothing and footwear suited to the outdoor conditions in which they work. The vendor shall make a good faith effort to make sure that all security personnel have appropriate outdoor wear for all seasons including: jackets designed to be worn in cold weather and rain; gloves; head wear (caps, hats); appropriate footwear; and sunscreen. All personnel equipment is considered a vendor cost and should be included in the appropriate billing rates. DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 10 Rev. April 20, 2015 6. LOG OF SECURITY PERSONNEL ON DUTY AND DAILY ACTIVITY REPORTS: At regular intervals to be agreed upon, the vendor will send the City of Palo Alto a proposed schedule of the guards on duty. This log will include the name of security personnel, the hours which they will be working and an emergency cell phone contact number for each guard. This schedule will be emailed to the City’s Contract Administrator. The City of Palo Alto understands that the staffing schedule submitted may be subject to change. The vendor will make a good faith effort to update the log to reflect such changes. In addition, the vendor shall ensure that personnel prepare daily activity reports that document all activity and provide these to the City at regular intervals to be agreed upon. 7. INCIDENT REPORTING: The vendor will ensure that a report is generated for any contact at a designated location where activity that is suspicious in nature occurs. When there is an incident involving attempted suicide, injury, or death, the vendor supervisor will attach a cover memorandum acknowledging the report and evaluating/critiquing the actions/observations/behavior of the guard. These reports should be summarized and reviewed by a supervisor and forwarded to the City as soon as possible after an incident. 8. SECURITY PERSONNEL TRAINING: The vendor agrees that it will schedule training sessions for personnel working this detail. Training will be held at mutually agreed upon times. The City anticipates a 4-6 hour training session prior to assignment. Additional training standards by the vendor are highly preferable and should be discussed in the proposal. The City may request additional training for personnel as the contract progresses. 9. FLEXIBILITY OF SCHEDULING: The vendor agrees, given reasonable notice, to make a good faith effort to make adjustments to the shift schedules of security personnel shifts and/or the locations where services are to be provided if requested to do so by the City. The purpose of this provision is to allow the City to make scheduling and/or location adjustments to meet the needs of the community without requiring the City of Palo Alto to contract for additional hours of service. DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 11 Rev. April 20, 2015 EXHIBIT B SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE CONTRACTOR shall perform the Services according to the following schedule: Service will be required at four (4) locations: • Meadow Drive Caltrain Crossing • Charleston Road Caltrain Crossing • Churchill Avenue Caltrain Crossing • California Avenue Caltrain Platform DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 12 Rev. April 20, 2015 EXHIBIT C SCHEDULE OF FEES Compensation based upon fee schedule CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR according to the following rate schedule. The maximum amount of compensation to be paid to CONTRACTOR, including both payment for services and reimbursable expenses, shall not exceed Four Hundred Twenty-nine Thousand Four Hundred Forty One Dollars and eighty four cents ($429,441.84). Any services provided or hours worked for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum amount of compensation set forth herein shall be at no cost to CITY. Month Coverage Cost December 2015 30 Regular Days 1 Holiday 24 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $67,806.72 January 2016 29 Regular Days 2 Holidays 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $62,850.48 February 2016 27 Regular Days 1 Holiday 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $56,208.24 March 2016 31 Regular Days 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $61,461.84 April 2016 30 Regular Days 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $59,479.20 May 2016 30 Regular Days 1 Holiday 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $62,156.16 June 2016 30 Regular Days 22 Hour per Day Coverage 4 Locations $59,479.20 Total Cost $429,441.84 DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 13 Rev. April 20, 2015 EXHIBIT C RATE SCHEDULE ITEM UNIT DESCRIPTION (BIDDING PURPOSES ONLY- AVERAGE WORK WEEK) PRICE PER HOUR 01 hr Standard Hourly Rate - Monday - Friday $22.53 02 hr Hourly Rate – Saturday $22.53 03 hr Hourly Rate – Sunday $22.53 04 hr Holiday Hourly Rate $30.42 DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 12 Rev. April 20, 2015 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: REQUIRED 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 NO PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY, INCLUDING, ERRORS AND OMISSIONS, MALPRACTICE (WHEN APPLICABLE), AND NEGLIGENT PERFORMANCE ALL DAMAGES $1,000,000 YES THE CITY OF PALO ALTO IS TO BE NAMED AS AN ADDITIONAL INSURED: CONTRACTOR, AT ITS SOLE COST AND EXPENSE, SHALL OBTAIN AND MAINTAIN, IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE TERM OF ANY RESULTANT AGREEMENT, THE INSURANCE COVERAGE HEREIN DESCRIBED, INSURING NOT ONLY CONTRACTOR AND ITS SUBCONSULTANTS, IF ANY, BUT ALSO, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION, EMPLOYER’S LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE, NAMING AS ADDITIONAL INSUREDS CITY, ITS COUNCIL MEMBERS, OFFICERS, AGENTS, AND EMPLOYEES. I. INSURANCE COVERAGE MUST INCLUDE: A. A PROVISION FOR A WRITTEN THIRTY DAY ADVANCE NOTICE TO CITY OF CHANGE IN COVERAGE OR OF COVERAGE CANCELLATION; AND B. A CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY ENDORSEMENT PROVIDING INSURANCE COVERAGE FOR CONTRACTOR’S AGREEMENT TO INDEMNIFY CITY. C. DEDUCTIBLE AMOUNTS IN EXCESS OF $5,000 REQUIRE CITY’S PRIOR APPROVAL. II. CONTACTOR MUST SUBMIT CERTIFICATES(S) OF INSURANCE EVIDENCING REQUIRED COVERAGE. III. ENDORSEMENT PROVISIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE INSURANCE AFFORDED TO “ADDITIONAL INSUREDS” DocuSign Envelope ID: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 13 Rev. April 20, 2015 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 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: C542E6C3-75DA-4A31-9F36-093BDCAE0794 1 6313/sg Revised November 9, 2015 Ordinance No. XXXX ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016 TO PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION OF $328,715 FROM THE STANFORD MEDICAL CENTER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FUND TO THE COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT PROJECT SAFETY NET PROGRAM TO PROVIDE FOR TRACK WATCH CONTRACT SECURITY SERVICES ALONG THE CALTRAIN CORRIDOR IN PALO ALTO 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. Since 2009, the City of Palo Alto has used the services of contract security guards in response to teen deaths that have occurred along the Caltrain corridor in Palo Alto; and C. In October 2014, the City expanded its security services from two stations to Churchill crossing and in November 2014 expanded to include California Avenue, for a total of four stations; and D. In July 2015, the City issued a Request for Proposals for Security Services for various CalTrain stations; and E. Cypress Security, Inc. provides a high quality of service, including program management, data collection, and digital record keeping that will help evaluate the effectiveness of the Track Watch program; and F. Staff recommends approval of a seven month contract with Cypress Security, Inc. in the amount of $429,441 beginning December 1, 2015 to continue Track Watch services through June 30, 2016; and F. A contingency is established in the amount of $10,000 in the event that additional service is needed; and G. Savings are available from previously approved expenditures including temporary fencing, the existing contract, and Project Safety Net contingency to offset the contract amount with Cypress Security Inc. SECTION 2. Therefore, the sum of Three Hundred Twenty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifteen Dollars ($328,715) is hereby appropriated to the Community Services Department Project Safety Net Program and the ending fund balance in the Stanford Medical 2 6313/sg Revised November 9, 2015 Center Development Agreement Fund is decreased by Three Hundred Twenty Eight Thousand Seven Hundred and Fifteen Dollars ($328,715) with no fund balance remaining. 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 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 Community Services CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK November 16, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 18.79 of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Regarding Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures (FIRST READING: October 26, 2015 PASSED: 9-0) This Ordinance was first heard on October 26, 2015 and was approved by the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment: Attachment A: 0131482 ORD Amending 18.79 re Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures October 29 (PDF) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 NOT YET APPROVED 150825 jb 0131482 1 Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter 18.79 of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Regarding Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Chapter 18.79 (Development Project Preliminary Review Procedures) of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: Chapter 18.79 DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PRELIMINARY REVIEW PROCEDURES Sections: 18.79.010 Purposes. 18.79.020 Supplemental procedures. 18.79.030 Applicability and initiation. 18.79.040 ReservedPreliminary review. 18.79.050 Preliminary review public study session procedure. 18.79.060 Voluntary compliance. 18.79.010 Purposes. This chapter establishes procedures for preliminary screening of development projects ("prescreening"). This chapter is intended to achieve, and shall be implemented to accomplish, the following purposes: (a) To maximize opportunities for meaningful public discussion of development projects, at the earliest feasible time, for the guidance of the public, project proponents and city decision makers. Prescreening is intended to focus on purpose, scope, conceptual design and other similar matters and is not intended to involve review of complete drawings and documentation. (b) To focus public and environmental review of development projects on the issues of greatest significance to the community, including, but not limited to, planning concerns, neighborhood compatibility, Comprehensive Plan consistency, economics, social costs and benefits, fiscal costs and benefits, technological factors, and legal issues. These procedures are not intended to permit or foreclose debate on the merits of approval or disapproval of any given development project. (c) To provide members of the public with the opportunity to obtain early information about development projects in which they may have an interest. NOT YET APPROVED 150825 jb 0131482 2 (d) To provide project proponents with the opportunity to obtain early, non-binding preliminary comments on development projects to encourage sound and efficient private decisions about how to proceed. (e) To encourage early communication between elected and appointed public officials and staff with respect to the implementation of city policies, standards, and regulations on particular development projects. (f) To facilitate orderly and consistent implementation of the city's City's Comprehensive Plan and development regulations. 18.79.020 Supplemental procedures. These procedures are supplemental to any other authority under state or local law which permits preliminary screening of development projects, including, but not limited to, the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq., and the State Planning and Zoning Law, Government Code Section 65000, et seq. 18.79.030 Applicability and initiation. (a) These procedures may be applied to the following types of development projects: Preliminary screening is required for development projects that include any of the following applications: (1) Planned Community (PC); (2) Development Agreement (3) ComprehensiveGeneral Plan Amendment and Specific Plans, including Specific Plan Amendments (4) District Map Amendment (5) Zoning Text Amendment, except as provided for in section (c) below. (1) Substantial zoning regulation or district map change proposals; (2) Comprehensive plan amendments, including specific plans; (3) Any other development project, or permit or entitlement application, including a major alteration or expansion of existing use, which implicates major land use or other policy or planning concerns. (b) Development project preliminary review may be initiated by motion of the city council, with the concurrence of the project proponent, or upon request of the city manager and project proponent with the concurrence of the city council, at any time after the city has received a development project application and before the development project is noticed for public hearing on the merits of the application, if any is required. Preliminary screening is initiated by filing an application and payment of applicable fees. Preliminary screening applications shall be scheduled for a study session before the City Council. Notice of the study NOT YET APPROVED 150825 jb 0131482 3 session and the opportunity for public participation shall be provided in the same manner as may be required by law for action on the underlying development project application. The City Council shall conduct the study session. (c) Development project preliminary review may also be initiated prior to the filing of an application, upon the request of the project proponent with the concurrence of the city council. The project proponent shall pay a preliminary review fee as set forth in the municipal fee schedule. If the project proponent wishes to proceed with the project after preliminary review, he or she must then file an application and pay a regular application fee. Preliminary screening is not required for zoning text amendments under the following circumstances: (1) The project does not include a request for an application in section (a) (1) through (a)(4 ) above, and (2) The Director of Planning and Community Environment determines the requested amendment would not have significant policy implications. Such zoning amendments include, but are not limited to, projects requiring a hotel or automobile combining district. (d) Preliminary screening may be initiated for any application not included in section (a) (1) through (a)(4 ) above that results in The city may from time to time establish application forms, submittal requirements, fees, and such other requirements, guidelines and informal regulations as will aid in the efficient implementation of these procedures. Any other development project, or permit or entitlement application, including a major alteration or expansion of an existing use, which implicates major land use or other policy or planning concerns, subject to the following requirements: (1) Development project preliminary review may be initiated by motion of the City Council, with the concurrence of the project proponent, or upon request of the city manager and project proponent with the concurrence of the City Council, at any time after the City has received a development project application and before the development project is noticed for public hearing on the merits of the application, if any is required. (2) Development project preliminary review may also be initiated prior to the filing of an application, upon the request of the project proponent with the concurrence of the City Council. The project proponent shall pay a preliminary review fee as set forth in the municipal fee schedule. If the project proponent wishes to proceed with the project after preliminary review, he or she must then file an application and pay a regular application fee. (3) The City Council will conduct the pre-screening as a noticed public study session. . NOT YET APPROVED 150825 jb 0131482 4 (4) Notice of the study session and the opportunity for public participation shall be provided in the same manner as may be required by law for action on the underlying development project application. (d) (e) The City may from time to time establish application forms, submittal requirements, fees, and such other requirements, guidelines and informal regulations as will aid in the efficient implementation of this section these procedures. (f) No formal action may be taken during preliminary review. (g) Development project preliminary review under this Chapter 18.79 shall not preclude a project proponent from applying for preliminary review before the Architectural Review Board as provided in section 18.76.020(c). Project proponents shall pay the applicable fee for each type of review sought. 18.79.040 ReservedPreliminary review. Upon initiation as provided in Section 18.79.030, one or more noticed public study sessions will be held to solicit comments which will aid in accomplishing the purposes of these procedures. The noticed public study session will be conducted solely by the planning commission; or by the planning commission initially and then by the city council; or solely by the city council; or as a joint meeting of the city council and planning commission, or as a joint meeting of the city council and any other city boards, commissions or committees whose participation is deemed desirable by the city council. Unless directed otherwise by the city council, the planning commission shall conduct a study session on all preliminary review matters and forward its comments to the city council. Minutes of planning commission study sessions conducted pursuant to this section shall be produced in the same manner as minutes of regular meetings. Notice of the study session and the opportunity for public participation shall be provided in the same manner as may be required by law for action on the underlying development project application. No formal action may be taken during preliminary review. 18.79.050 Preliminary review public study session procedure. (a) Preliminary review study sessions may be conducted in any manner deemed appropriate by the Ccity Ccouncil. (b) City staff will prepare a summary outline of the proposed project which highlights any information relevant to the purposes identified in Section 18.79.010, including but not limited to any initial study prepared for the project. In addition, the project proponent or any interested person may provide oral or written comments consistent with the purposes of these procedures during a preliminary review study session. Subsequent city staff reports on development projects which have been subject to preliminary review should summarize NOT YET APPROVED 150825 jb 0131482 5 any comments made during the process. (c) Preliminary review study sessions shall not be for the purpose of taking evidence with respect to a development project. Neither the city City councilCouncil, nor any Ccity board, commission, committee, or staff person may rely upon information obtained or comments made during the preliminary review process for any final decision, unless such information or comments are reintroduced during a subsequent noticed public hearing on the merits of the development project. 18.79.060 Voluntary compliance. (a) Compliance with any development project revisions, alterations, or conditions suggested during the preliminary review process shall be voluntary. Failure to comply with any such revisions, alterations, or conditions shall not affect consideration of the project by the cityCity. (b) Nothing in these procedures is intended, nor shall any provision be construed, to constitute, permit or result in any binding determination of the rights, interests, or entitlements of the cityCity, project proponent, or any interested person with respect to a development project upon which preliminary review is conducted. (c) Development project preliminary review shall be without prejudice to the ability of the cityCity, project proponent, or any interested person to proceed with a development project in any manner, notwithstanding any suggested revisions, alterations, or conditions. (d) When preliminary review has been initiated, a project proponent shall have the right to withdraw a development project application at any time before commencement of a public hearing on the first discretionary permit, license, or entitlement for the project. Such withdrawal shall be without prejudice to the project proponents ability to reapply for the same or a substantially similar development project at a future date, subject to the regulations, standards, and policies in effect upon reapplication. Upon such withdrawal, the city City shall refund any application processing deposits to the project proponent which have not yet been expended. SECTION 2. Any provision of the Palo Alto Municipal Code inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, is hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to effect the provisions of this chapter. SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this chapter 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 chapter. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this chapter and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the chapter would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. NOT YET APPROVED 150825 jb 0131482 6 SECTION 4. The Council finds that the adoption of this chapter is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guideline section 15061 because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the project will have a significant effect on the environment in that the proposals make procedural modifications to an already existing zoning district. SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED: PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ Senior Assistant City Attorney City Manager CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK November 16, 2015 The Honorable City Council Palo Alto, California SECOND READING: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 2.28.080 (Amendments after Adoption) of Chapter 2.28 (Fiscal Procedures) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (FIRST READING: November 2, 2015 PASSED: 9-0) This is the second reading of this Ordinance which was first heard on November 2, 2015 and approved by the City Council. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment: Attachment A: Ordinance from report 6181 (PDF) Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk Page 2 NOT YET APPROVED 150325 jb 0131328 1 Ordinance No. _____ Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 2.28.080 (Amendments after Adoption) of Chapter 2.28 (Fiscal Procedures) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to __________________ The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. Section 2.28.080 Amendments after Adoption of Chapter 2.28 (Fiscal Procedures) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 2.28.080 Amendments after adoption. During the fiscal year, the city manager shall amend the budgetary accounts of the city to reflect the following: (a) Additional Appropriations. By a two‐thirds vote, the council may make additional appropriations of receipts that are in excess of the total estimated receipts and appropriations contained in the adopted budget. (b) Additional Positions. By a majority vote, the council may add positions to the table of organization. (c) Transfer of Appropriations. (1) By a majority vote, the council may transfer part or all of the unencumbered balance of any appropriation from one fund, department, office, or capital project to another; (2) By written authorization, the city manager may direct the redistribution, within any department or office, of the unencumbered balance of appropriations within the departments or offices, provided that he or she shall not make transfers from the classification of utilities purchased for resale to any other object or make transfers between funds or transfers between departments without the affirmative vote of a majority of the council; (3) By written authorization, the city manager may authorize a transfer of appropriation from the unallocated balance of the contingent account to any department, office or capital project. Funds shall not be transferred between the general fund and the enterprise funds, nor between operating and capital funds. (d) Transfer of Positions. By written authorization, the city manager may transfer positions or assign personnel from any department or office under the control of the city manager to another in accordance with Article IV, Section 6(n) of the Charter. (e) Inter‐fund Transactions. In the event that appropriations and equivalent offsetting credits for allocated inter‐fund services or transfers are affected by amendments to appropriations for Deleted: by ordinance Deleted: by ordinance Deleted: by ordinance Attachment A NOT YET APPROVED 150325 jb 0131328 2 direct expenditures or estimated revenue, the city manager may make corresponding adjustments to the inter‐fund accounts so affected. (f) Salaries and Benefits. Amendments to the Employee Classification and Compensation Plan adopted by the council pursuant to Article III, Sections 12, 18 and 21 of the Charter. (g) Prior year Encumbrances. Appropriations that were encumbered by properly executed, but uncompleted, purchase orders or contracts at the close of the previous fiscal year may be carried forward and incorporated with appropriations of the current year. (h) Municipal Fee Schedule. By a majority vote, the council may, by ordinance, add or change fees in the municipal fee schedule. SECTION 2. The City Council finds that this ordinance is exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility of significant environmental effects occurring as a result of the adoption of this ordinance. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective upon the commencement of the thirty‐first day after the date of its adoption. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ___________________________ _____________________________ Senior Asst. City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Administrative Services Attachment A City of Palo Alto (ID # 6343) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/16/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriation Requests to be Carried Forward into Fiscal Year 2016 Title: Finance Committee Recommends Adoption of a Budget Amendment Ordinance Authorizing the Reappropriation of Fiscal Year 2015 Funds to Fiscal Year 2016 From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services Recommendation The Finance Committee and staff recommend that the City Council approve the Fiscal Year 2015 reappropriations to be carried forward into Fiscal Year 2016 and adopt the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment A). The Finance Committee further recommended that the reappropriation request for the establishment of a Planning & Community Environment Contingent Account be approved as a Transportation Contingency Account whereby each request for funding from this Contingent Account be approved by the City Council. Executive Summary On November 2nd, the City Council approved the actions contained in this report. However, inadvertently, staff did not include the approval of the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment A) in the title of the City Manager Report. Therefore, based on advice from the City Attorney’s Office, this report is resubmitted to the City Council for approval with the appropriate title. On September 22, 2015, the Finance Committee reviewed and recommended for approval to the City Council Fiscal Year 2015 capital and operating budget reappropriations to be carried forward into Fiscal Year 2016, with an amendment that the request for the establishment of a $500,000 Planning & Community Environment Contingent Account be approved as a Transportation Contingent Account whereby each request for funding from this Contingent Account be approved by the City Council. Background As a part of the fiscal year-end process, staff reviews the City’s unencumbered and unspent appropriations of the fiscal year just ended, along with the City’s spending plans. Encumbered City of Palo Alto Page 2 amounts are those subject to the legal claims of other parties due to contractual obligations (for example, commitments made through purchase orders), which are carried forward from one fiscal year to the next. However, each year there are a small number of important projects which staff was not able to complete or encumber funds for. The reappropriation process allows staff to bring forward funding recommendations to the Finance Committee and City Council to continue these projects. On September 22, 2014, the City Council approved a recommendation to amend Chapter 2.28, Section 2.28.090 of the Municipal Code, reducing the previous two-step reappropriations process (preliminary and final reappropriation authorization) to one step as long as the Administrative Services Director certifies that sufficient unencumbered and unexpended funds are available in the current Fiscal Year to be carried forward to the subsequent Fiscal Year. Additionally, the City Council amended the Municipal Code to eliminate the provision allowing for the automatic reappropriation of capital project funds. Previously, the Municipal Code stated that appropriations of capital project funds should continue until the project was completed or no funds had been expended for two years. Effective Fiscal Year 2016, the Finance Committee reviewed and the Council approved a capital budget which includes all active projects. Since capital projects may be delayed for various reasons, unexpended funds are carried forward in two ways from the outgoing to the new fiscal year. As part of the approval of the Fiscal Year 2016 budget, based on estimates, the majority of unexpended and unencumbered funds were carried forward from Fiscal Year 2015 to Fiscal Year 2016. Now that the Fiscal Year 2015 has closed and staff has processed necessary accounting transactions any unexpended and unencumbered funds for each capital project are reviewed one more time. Based on that review, staff recommends that for some projects in various funds remaining Fiscal Year 2015 capital dollars are reappropriated to Fiscal Year 2016. Also, as part of this review, staff realized that for some projects too much funding was recommended for reappropriation as expenditures occurred in Fiscal Year 2015. Therefore, this staff report also recommends reversing a portion of previously authorized reappropriations. Discussion On November 2nd, the City Council approved the actions contained in this report. However, inadvertently, staff did not include the approval of the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment A) in the title of the City Manager Report. Therefore, based on advice from the City Attorney’s Office, this report is resubmitted to the City Council for approval with the appropriate title. As noted above, the changes to the Municipal Code from last year allow for the reappropriation of unencumbered and unexpended funds in advance of the normal year-end closing ordinance as long as the Administrative Services Director certifies that sufficient unencumbered and unexpended funds are available in Fiscal Year 2015 to be carried forward to Fiscal Year 2016. With the submission of the staff report for consideration at the September 22nd Finance City of Palo Alto Page 3 Committee meeting as approved unanimously by the Finance Committee, the Administrative Services Director has certified that sufficient unencumbered and unexpended funds are available in Fiscal Year 2015 to be carried forward to Fiscal Year 2016. For the attached Budget Amendment Ordinance (Attachment A), Exhibit 1 identifies those operating budget reappropriation requests that staff recommends for approval while Exhibit 2 lists recommended capital project reappropriations. At the September 22nd Finance Committee meeting, the Finance Committee recommended that the City Council approve the Fiscal Year 2015 reappropriations as identified in the Finance Committee staff report (see Attachment B for the staff report and Attachment C for the meeting minutes) with an amendment that the requested reappropriation for a Planning & Community Environment Contingent Account be specified as a contingent account limited for Transportation project funding and any use of the funds requiring City Council approval. The projects for which operating budget reappropriations are recommended can generally be grouped into the following categories: Timing and Workload Delays: Certain projects were delayed due to competing workload demands, appropriation of funds late in the fiscal year, or other unanticipated delays. Examples of projects in this category include Document Scanning and Management Services ($66,000), Temporary Staffing for the Purchasing division ($51,000), Business Registry Program ($99,050), Police Utilization Study ($70,000), Airport On-Call Consultant ($40,987), Storm Water Rebates ($55,710) and Santa Clara Valley Water District MOU ($400,000). Technology Services: Funding was approved in Fiscal Year 2015 for a number of technology system evaluation and upgrade projects but contracts were not awarded by the end of the fiscal year. Projects in this category include Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Evaluation of the City’s GIS solutions ($82,500), Palo Alto 3-1-1 implementation ($40,000), Mobile Device Management Solution ($75,000), and Police Interview Recording System ($40,000). Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund: Due to the timing of Council’s action approving loans and staffing constraints, transactions with Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) were not completed in Fiscal Year 2015 for some projects. Continuation of the housing transactions will require reappropriation of Residential Housing In-Lieu Funds for the following properties: loan for PAHC purchase of 2811-2825 Alma Street ($600,000), loan for PAHC renovation of Stevenson House at 435 E. Charleston Road ($1,000,000), and loan for PAHC rehabilitation and deed restriction of Pine Street property at 110-130 El Dorado ($375,000). Staff expects to be able to execute and conclude the agreements with PAHC for these projects in Fiscal Year 2016. Library Donation and Grant: This action reappropriates $339,845 in revenue and offsetting expenses as a result of donations and grants received by the Library. In early City of Palo Alto Page 4 Fiscal Year 2015 the Library was awarded two grants from the Pacific Library Partnership (PLP): one in the amount of $4,485 to offset delivery costs for LINK+, an interlibrary loan program for participating organizations; and a $15,000 grant for the Maker+: A Summer Maker Program to support STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art & Math) learning and to foster interdisciplinary exploration among sciences, art, and social sciences. In addition, in June 2015, the City received a $320,000 donation from the Palo Alto Library Foundation. The Library intends to use $100,000 for the purchase of additional technology, such as tablets, e-readers, and other devices for staff development and customer instruction; $112,100 for databases and digital services, such as Learning Express, Mango Languages, and online video, magazines, and music; and $107,900 on contractual services to improve workflow efficiency, provide staff training, and customer service improvements for the new facilities and new products. Teen Services Programs: At the June 2, 2014 City Council meeting, the City Council approved a recommendation from the Policy and Services Committee to use a portion of the net revenue collected from 455 Bryant Street in Fiscal Years 2009 through 2013 to fund Teen Programs for Fiscal Year 2015 (CMR #4776). Staff was to return to the City Council with another plan six months after the opening of the Mitchell Park Community Center where the Teen Center is located to discuss the best use of the facility and programming for Teen Services at the Teen Center and elsewhere throughout the City utilizing the Bryant Street funds. Staff is expecting to return to the City Council in the fall of 2015 with a funding plan for Fiscal Year 2016 and beyond. Teen Services programming includes but is not limited to: makeX, Project Enybody, Click PA, Ghost Bike, and Ceramics class drop-ins. As a result, this action will reappropriate $331,046 to continue supporting these programs as well as a sustainable, long-term approach for Teen Services utilizing Bryant Street funds. Management and Professional Development funds: A number of City employees, as part of their compensation plan, are eligible for certain self-improvement activities. These funds are available to certain employees for civic and professional association memberships, conference participation and travel, educational programs, certain tuition costs, and professional and trade journal subscriptions. Unspent funds are recommended to be carried over to Fiscal Year 2016 to improve and supplement the job and professional skills of employees ($145,000). Establish Contingency Account – Planning, Community & Environment Department: To establish a contingency account for the Planning and Community Environment Department to set aside funds related to planning, parking, and transportation related funding needs ($500,000). In accordance with the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the use of contingency funding requires the approval of the City Manager. At the September 22 Finance Committee meeting, the committee recommended that the contingency account be limited to Transportation project purposes. City of Palo Alto Page 5 Capital Reappropriations: As discussed in the Background section of this report, starting with the Fiscal Year 2016 capital budget, all capital project reappropriations require City Council approval. The Adopted Budget included approximately $51.1 million in reappropriated funds, across all City funds based on estimates of anticipated spending in Fiscal Year 2015. Since the adoption of the capital budget, some adjustments and refinements to project reappropriations are required since Fiscal Year 2015 year end actuals and projects costs have been updated. For some projects, additional reappropriations are recommended, as project expenditures originally anticipated to occur before the end of Fiscal Year 2015 will now likely occur in Fiscal Year 2016. Additionally, some expenditures not anticipated to occur until Fiscal Year 2016 and therefore reappropriated in the budget document to Fiscal Year 2016 have been realized in Fiscal Year 2015, requiring downward adjustments for Fiscal Year 2016. The table on the following page summarizes the recommended net reappropriation adjustments as detailed in Exhibit 2 of Attachment A. These Fiscal Year 2016 adjustments represent the final step in the City Council approved change to the reappropriation process. There are sufficient expenditure savings in Fiscal Year 2015 to support all recommended reappropriation adjustments. It should be noted that as a result of this revised process and active review of all project reappropriations, a reduced level of carryforward from one year to the next is recommended than by automatically carrying forward all unspent capital funding. As part of the detailed review of capital projects which started with the development of the Fiscal Year 2016 Capital Budget and is concluding with the recommendations contained in this CMR, a total of $10.8 million is being returned to reserves across several funds that otherwise would have been reappropriated under the prior model, including $4.7 million in the Capital Improvement Fund. Fund Number of Projects Recommended Reappropriation Adjustment Capital Improvement Fund* 61 $5,099,421 Airport Fund 1 $34,359 Electric Fund 26 $703,741 Fiber Optics Fund 2 $35,319 Gas Fund 5 ($245,727) Storm Drainage Fund 4 ($40,606) Wastewater Collection Fund 6 $370,570 Wastewater Treatment Fund 3 ($2,387,156) Water Fund 13 $5,995,001 Technology Fund 11 $641,422 Vehicle Replacement and Maintenance Fund 4 $1,074,511 Total All Funds 136 $11,280,855 *Includes an increase of $32,692 for the Monroe Park Improvements project (PG-11002) due to higher than anticipated costs, as outlined in CMR 6025, approved by the City Council on City of Palo Alto Page 6 9/21/2015. Finance Committee Review and Recommendation At the September 22, 2015 Finance Committee meeting, the Finance Committee unanimously approved (4-0) staff’s recommendation (see Attachment C for the Minutes) to carry forward staff’s reappropriation requests with an amendment that the request for the establishment of a $500,000 Planning & Community Environment Contingent Account be approved as a Transportation Contingent Account whereby each request for funding from this Contingent Account be approved by the City Council. Resource Impact The majority of requested items have been previously reviewed and approved by City Council as part of annual budget processes. The Director of Administrative Services has certified that sufficient funds exist for the recommended Fiscal Year 2015 Operating Budget reappropriations (Attachment A, Exhibit 1) and Capital Budget reappropriations (Attachment A, Exhibit 2). For Fiscal Year 2016, staff recommends $1.7 million in carryover funds in the General Fund, $0.5 million in Enterprise Funds, $0.2 in Internal Service Funds and $2.0 million in Special Revenue Funds. For capital projects staff recommends $5.1 million to be reappropriated in the Capital Improvement Fund, net $4.5 million in the various Enterprise Funds, and $1.7 million in the Internal Service Funds. Policy Implications This recommendation is consistent with adopted Council policy. Environmental Review (If Applicable) The action recommended is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. Attachments: Attachment: Attachment A - BAO XXXX - FY15 to FY16 Reappropriation (PDF) Attachment: Attachment B - Reappropriations to FY 2015 Report, Finance Committee Report, Sept. 22, 2015 (PDF) Attachment: Attachment C - 22-Sept-2015 Finance Committee Mtg Minutes Item 1 (PDF) Ordinance No. XXXX ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING THE REAPPROPRIATION OF FISCAL YEAR 2015 FUNDS TO FISCAL YEAR 2016 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 and as set forth in Section 2.28.070 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the Council on June 16, 2014 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2015; and B. Fiscal Year 2015 has ended and the financial results, although subject to audit adjustment, are now available. C. The Administrative Services Director certifies that sufficient funds are available in Fiscal Year 2015 in applicable funds to be reappropriated to Fiscal Year 2016. SECTION 2. The Council hereby re-appropriates Fiscal Year 2015 appropriations in certain departments and categories, as shown in Exhibit 1 for the operating budget and Exhibit 2 for the capital budget, which were not encumbered by purchase order or contract, into the Fiscal Year 2016 budget. SECTION 3. The Fiscal Year 2016 General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of One Million Seven Hundred Thousand Eighty One Dollars ($1,700,081) as described in Exhibit 1. SECTION 4. The Fiscal Year 2016 Airport Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Forty Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Seven Dollars ($40,987) as described in Attachment A and decreased by the sum of Thirty Four Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Nine ($34,359) as described in Exhibit 2. SECTION 5. The Fiscal Year 2016 Electric Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Seven Hundred Three Thousand Seven Hundred Forty One Dollars ($703,741) as described in Exhibit 2. SECTION 6. The Fiscal Year 2016 Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund is hereby decreased by the sum of One Million Nine Hundred Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($1,975,000) as described in Exhibit 1. 1 SECTION 7. The Fiscal Year 2016 Fiber Optics Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Thirty Five Thousand Three Hundred Nineteen Dollars ($35,319) as described in Exhibit 2. SECTION 8. The Fiscal Year 2016 Gas Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby increased by the sum of Two Hundred Forty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Seven Dollars ($245,727) as described in Exhibit 2. SECTION 9. The Fiscal Year 2016 Storm Drainage Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Fifty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Ten Dollars ($55,710) as described in Exhibit 1 and increased by the sum of Forty Thousand Six Hundred Six Dollars ($40,606) as described in Exhibit 2 for a net decrease to the reserve of Fifteen Thousand One Hundred Four Dollars ($15,104). SECTION 10. The Fiscal Year 2016 Technology Fund is hereby decreased by the sum of One Hundred Ninety-seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($197,500) as described in Exhibit 1 and decreased by the sum of Six Hundred Forty One Thousand Four Hundred Twenty Two Dollars ($641,422) as describe by Exhibit 2. SECTION 11. The Fiscal Year 2016 Wastewater Collection Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Three Hundred Seventy Thousand Five Hundred Seventy Dollars ($370,570) as described in Exhibit 2. SECTION 12. The Fiscal Year 2016 Wastewater Treatment Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby increased by the sum of Two Million Three Hundred Eighty Seven Thousand One Hundred Fifty Six Dollars ($2,387,156) as described in Exhibit 2. SECTION 13. The Fiscal Year 2016 Water Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000) as described in Attachment A and decreased by the sum of Five Million Nine Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand and One Dollars ($5,995,001) as described by Exhibit 2. SECTION 14. The Fiscal Year 2016 Vehicle Replacement and Maintenance Fund Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of One Million Seventy Four Thousand Five Hundred Eleven Dollars ($1,074,511) as described in Exhibit 2. SECTION 15. The Capital Projects Fund Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Five Million, Ninety Nine Thousand Four Hundred Twenty One Dollars ($5,099,421) as described in Exhibit 2. SECTION 16. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. SECTION 17. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby finds that this is not a 2 project under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: ________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Administrative Service 3 Exhibit 1 Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriations 1 City Council November 16, 2015 General Fund Department Fund Amount Recommended Reappropriation Justification Administrative Services Department General Fund $66,000 Document Scanning and Retrieval Services: In 2014, the Administrative Services Department (ASD) started on a pilot to scan existing documents and store them electronically. The pilot was successfully completed with the Purchasing and Accounts Payable sections. Based on the experience from the pilot, the City issued a citywide Request for Proposal for scanning paper documents and storing them electronically ASD, Planning and Community Environment, Utilities, and Public Works-Engineering. With reappropriating $66,000 ASD will be able to continue its efforts to easily retrieve scanned documents, especially for Information requests, free up limited office space, and have an organized cloud retrieval structure. ASD’s scanning for FY 2015 and FY 2016 is scheduled to be completed in FY 2016 with 253,000 total number of scanned images with an average cost per scan of $0.26. Administrative Services Department General Fund $51,000 Temporary Staffing: The Purchasing Division of the Administrative Services Department (ASD) is undergoing rapid change due to the eProcurement initiative. With this initiative, there is a parallel, heavy workload for the Division’s contract administrators. Temporarily adding a Management Specialist hourly position will help to balance the demands of the eProcurement process implementation and the workload of regular staff. Community Services Department General Fund $331,046 Teen Programs / Bryant Street Garage Rent Revenue: At the June 2, 2014 City Council meeting, the City Council approved a recommendation from the Policy and Services Committee to use a portion of the net revenue collected from 455 Bryant Street in Fiscal Years 2009 through 2013 to fund Teen Programs for Fiscal Year 2015 (CMR #4776). Staff was to return to the City Council with another plan six months after the opening of the Mitchell Park Community Center where the Teen Center is located to discuss the best use of the facility and programming for Teen Services at the Teen Center and elsewhere throughout the City utilizing the Bryant Street funds. Staff is expecting to return to the City Council in the fall of 2015 with a funding plan for Fiscal Year 2016 and beyond. Teen Services programming includes but is not limited to: makeX, Project Enybody, Click PA, Ghost Bike, and Ceramics class drop-ins. As a result, this action will reappropriate $331,046 to continue supporting these programs as well as a sustainable, long-term approach for Teen Services utilizing Bryant Street funds. Community Services Department General Fund $50,000 Human Services Resource Allocation Program (HSRAP) Reserve: At the June 9, 2014 City Council meeting, the Council established a $50,000 reserve for the Human Services Resource Allocation Process as part of the Budget Adoption for Fiscal Year 2015. Since the reserve was funded as a one-time appropriation and remains unspent, this action will reappropriate the reserve balance of $50,000 into Fiscal Year 2016. Development Services Department General Fund $99,050 Business Registry: As part of Council directive, the Development Service Department in coordination with the City Manager’s Officer began working on a two phase project to implement an online Business Registry Certificate program. To implement the program, the City Council authorized initial funding of $250,000 (CMR #5146) and a Fiscal Year 2015 reappropriation request of $35,000 (CMR #5647) for phase I of the Business Registry Program which included initial start- up costs for Accela integration, staffing, and outreach. Because the work on phase I is continuing, this action will reappropriate $99,050 for staffing and continued community outreach efforts. Exhibit 1 Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriations 2 City Council November 16, 2015 Human Resources Department General Fund $145,000 Management Development and Training: Funding will be used to continue the citywide management training program that began in Fiscal Year 2015. Training programs will focus on the following areas: Ethics, Civics and Citizen Engagement, Leadership and Management, Budget, Finance, Procurement, Interpersonal Communication, Presentation Skills, Business Writing, Time Management, Project Management, Change Management, SkillSoft (online based education), and Safety & Security. Approval of this action also requires approval of the Fiscal Year 2015 Year-End Budget Amendment Ordinance (scheduled for a November Finance Committee meeting), which recommends consolidating General Fund savings for training across various departments into the Human Resources (HR) Department in Fiscal Year 2015 in order to reappropriate the full amount into HR in Fiscal Year 2016. Library Department General Fund $339,985 Library Foundation Donation & Pacific Library Partnership Grant: This action reappropriates $339,845 in revenue and $339,845 in expenses as a result of donations and grants received by the Library. In early Fiscal Year 2015 the Library was awarded two grants from the Pacific Library Partnership (PLP): one to be used for a summer 2015 program with expenses incurred in Fiscal Year 2016, and one in the amount of $4,485 to offset delivery costs for LINK+, an interlibrary loan program for participating organizations. LINK+ is a union catalog of contributed holdings from participating libraries in California and Nevada. Patrons from member libraries electronically request an item not available in their own library and the item is delivered to the requested library for check‐out. A $15,000 grant was received from PLP for the Maker+: A Summer Maker Program to support STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art & Math) learning and to foster interdisciplinary exploration among sciences, art, and social sciences. By participating in the program, students will discover solutions for today's social issues through technology. The program includes opportunities for people of all ages to participate in a week long structured programming at the Rinconada and Mitchell Park libraries. In addition, in June 2015, the City received a $320,000 donation from the Palo Alto Library Foundation. The Library intends to use $100,000 for the purchase of additional technology, such as tablets, e-readers, and other devices for staff development and customer instruction; $112,100 for databases and digital services, such as Learning Express, Mango Languages, and online video, magazines, and music; and $107,900 on contractual services to improve workflow efficiency, provide staff training, and customer service improvements for the new facilities and new products. Planning and Community Environment Department General Fund $500,000 Establish Transportation Contingent Account: This action reappropriates $500,000 of the $1,000,000 million shuttle reserve from the Fiscal Year 2015 Non-Departmental budget to be used as a contingency account for unanticipated expenses as a result additional City Council direction related to transportation issues. Each request for funding from this Contingent Account must be approved by the City Council Police Department General Fund $78,000 Police Utilization Study: In Fiscal Year 2013, funding was allocated for the Police Department to hire a consultant to conduct a utilization study of overall police operations; however, the study was not completed due to competing workload demands. The funds were reappropriated to Fiscal Year 2014 and Fiscal Year 2015; however, the Department was unable to conduct the utilization study due to other projects that took precedence (Tri-City Computer Aided Dispatch, Records Management System, Patrol Vehicle Mobile Audio Video, etc.). Reappropriation of these funds will allow Police Department staff to determine the scope of the study, integrate it into their workload, and hire a consultant to conduct the study. Police Department General Fund $40,000 Police Interview Recording System: The Interview Recording System that provides cameras, audio equipment and storage for interviewing suspects, witness and victims unexpectedly failed in Fiscal Year 2015 and needs to be replaced. The existing system has failed repeatedly and the Department attempted to replace it as quickly as possible in May and June 2015. The Department completed a Request for Proposal and no responses were received. Therefore, with thsi funding, the Department will issue a new RFP and increase its vendor outreach efforts with the hope of receiving viable proposals for the replacement of the system. $1,700,081 Total General Fund Reappropriations Exhibit 1 Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriations 3 City Council November 16, 2015 Enterprise Funds Department Fund Amount Recommended Reappropriation Justification Public Works Department Airport Fund 530 $40,987 Airport On-Call Planning & Environmental Consultants: In October 2014 Council approved two on-call consultant contracts for airport related work: one for design and construction administration services and one for planning and environmental services. At the end of June three purchase requests submitted for the airports on-call planning and environmental consultant were inadvertently cancelled. Therefore, staff requests to reappropriate the funds so that the following projects can continue: 1. Development of an Extraordinary Circumstance Information Submittal (CATEX) for review by the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) San Francisco Airport District Office (SF-ADO). The CATEX is being prepared for approval under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) relative to a potential future apron rehabilitation project at Palo Alto Airport with possible future reimbursement under the FAA grant. 2. Development of DBE goals for the airport as required by the FAA for inclusion in grant application submittals. 3. Planning, implementing and facilitation of a charrette with key community stakeholders to discuss a vision and goals for the Airport; share potential strategies to integrate sustainability into the Airport’s management, planning, operation, maintenance, and development; and generate/prioritize potential sustainability initiative ideas to be considered by the City. Public Works Department Storm Drainage Fund 528 $55,710 Storm Water Rebates: In April 2005, the majority of Palo Alto property owners voted to increase the Storm Drainage Fee (CMR 244:05). In addition to the seven proposed CIP projects to be completed by 2017, the fee increase provided an annual innovative projects budget. These funds have been utilized since Fall 2008 to fund a Stormwater Rebate Program that offers financial incentives to residents and businesses for the installation of measures that reduce stormwater runoff, including rain barrels, cisterns, permeable pavement, and green roofs. Staff proposes that these funds be reappropriated because they have been specifically earmarked for funding of innovative storm drain projects per the terms of the 2005 Storm Drainage Fee ballot measure approved by Palo Alto property owners. As the rebate program has not generated sufficient demand to spend the budgeted funds, we are researching alternatives that may garner the desired environmental result. Utilities Water Fund 522 $400,000 Santa Clara Valley Water District MOU: On February 10, 2015, Council approved a Budget Amendment Ordinance to appropriate $400,000 from the Water Fund Reserve to increase the 2014-2016 Memorandum of Understanding with the Santa Clara Valley Water District for the Administration and Funding of Water Conservation Programs (the “2014-2016 MOU”) to increase the City of Palo Alto’s (City) three-year $735,915 total cost obligation by $500,000 to $1,235,915. Inadvertently, the approved funds were not encumbered before the end of the year. Therefore, it is recommended to carry forward the funding to fiscal year 2016 in order to fund the contract. $496,697 Total Enterprise Funds Reappropriations Exhibit 1 Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriations 4 City Council November 16, 2015 Internal Services Funds Department Fund Amount Recommended Reappropriation Justification Information Technology Department Technology Fund 682 $82,500 Geographic Information System Evaluation: The Geographic Information System (GIS) Evaluation Project was approved as part of the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget to contract with a consultant to perform an analysis of the City's current GIS environment and determine how updated GIS solutions align with the City's needs and goals. The City's current GIS solution has been in place for over 20 years and needs to be evaluated and updated to reduce IT application and infrastructure support costs, improve flexibility and offer GIS mobile services for field and remote staff. The IT Department planned to award the assessment to a vendor prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2015; however, a vendor was not selected before the June 30 deadline. Information Technology Department Technology Fund 682 $40,000 Palo Alto 3-1-1: The Palo Alto 3-1-1 Project was approved as part of the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget to route all 3-1-1 calls to the City's telephone system. The 3-1-1 service will allow the City to be more responsive to the needs of the residents, business owners, and visitors, and these groups will only need to know two numbers to access all City of Palo Alto services: 9-1-1 for emergencies and 3-1-1 for all non-emergency and other City services. The IT Department planned to award the project prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2015; however, a vendor was not selected before the June 30 deadline. Information Technology Department Technology Fund 682 $75,000 Mobile Device Management Security Solution: The Mobile Device Management (MDM) Security Solution Project was approved as part of the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget to secure, monitor, manage, and support mobile devices used by City staff. MDM software protects these devices from cyber security threats and allows designated staff to remotely erase data from a mobile device in the event it is lost or stolen. The Department planned to select a solution prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2015; however, a solution is still being evaluated and the deadline was not met. $154,000 was originally appropriated for this project in Fiscal Year 2015, however, after further evaluation by the IT Department, only $75,000 will be needed to award the project, and the remaining funding will be returned to the Technology Surcharge Reserve for future technology enhancement projects. $197,500 Total Internal Service Funds Reappropriations Exhibit 1 Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriations 5 City Council November 16, 2015 Special Revenue Funds Department Fund Amount Recommended Reappropriation Justification Planning and Community Environment Department Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund 233 $600,000 Palo Alto Housing Corporation Loan for 2811 Alma: This action reappropriates $600,000 in the Residential Housing In- Lieu Fund for use by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) for a loan and promissory note for property located at 2811- 2825 Alma Street (CMR #5197). In 2011, the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) entered into negotiations with the owners of 2811-2825 Alma Street and submitted a $1.89 million offer for the purchase of these two parcels. The offer was accepted and escrow closed in December 2011. At that time, however, the City did not have sufficient fund balances in its housing funds to provide the $1.89 million loan, and was only able to provide $1.29 million. To make up the difference, the Opportunity Fund of Santa Clara County provided a two year, $600,000 short term loan for the project acquisition with the understanding that the City would repay the short term loan, which was set to expire in December 2014. With Council’s approval of this action, the City new $600,000 loan defeased the Opportunity Fund loan and the City is the sole lender on the project. However, due to staffing constraints, this transaction has not yet been executed. With this recommended action, staff expects to execute and conclude the agreement with PAHC in the fall of Fiscal Year 2016. Planning and Community Environment Department Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund 233 $1,000,000 Stevenson House Rehab Loan: Stevenson House, located at 435 E. Charleston Road, has been serving extremely low, very low, and low income Palo Alto seniors for 47 years. Built in 1968, Stevenson House consists of 120 studio and one bedroom units. In addition to providing affordable housing, it offers services, meals and social programs for its residents. This action reappropriates $1,000,000 in the Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund to effectuate the $1,000,000 City loan for the renovation of Stevenson House (CMR# 5526) and the consolidation of outstanding Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) loans consistent with the funding commitment previously approved by the City Council on November 5, 2012 (CMR #3176). However, due to staffing constraints, this transaction has not yet been executed. With this recommended action, staff expects to execute and conclude the agreement with PAHC in the fall of Fiscal Year 2016. Planning and Community Environment Department Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund 233 $375,000 Loan Associated with Pine Street Sale: This action reappropriates $375,000 in the Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund for use by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) to rehabilitate and deed restrict three units located at 110 - 130 El Dorado (CMR #5712). Due to the timing of Council’s action approving this activity and staffing constraints, this transaction has not yet been executed. With this recommended action, staff expects to execute and conclude the agreement with PAHC in the fall of Fiscal Year 2016. $1,975,000 Total Special Revenue Funds Reappropriations $4,369,278 Total - All Reappropriations Exhibit 2 Capital Reappropriations 1 City Council November 16, 2015 Project ID Project Title Fund Reappropriation Adjustment AP-15003 Apron and Taxi Lane Repair Airport 34,359 PF-93009 Americans with Disabilities Capital Improvement Fund 200,853 AC-14000 Art Center Auditorium Audio, Visual, and Furnishings Capital Improvement Fund 19,802 AC-86017 Art in Public Places Capital Improvement Fund (55,550) OS-09002 Baylands Emergency A Capital Improvement Fund 602 PE-15029 Baylands Interpretive Center Improvements Capital Improvement Fund (26,859) PE-14018 Baylands Interpretive Center Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 2,205 PL-04010 Project Capital Improvement Fund (21,886) PE-13008 Bowden Park Capital Improvement Fund 1,053 PF-01003 Building Systems Improvements Capital Improvement Fund (129,236) PE-13020 Byxbee Park Trails Capital Improvement Fund 268,652 PL-11002 California Avenue Streetscape Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 183,613 PE-13011 Charleston Arastrade Capital Improvement Fund (33,391) PE-09003 City Facility Parking Capital Improvement Fund 286,310 PE-12017 City Hall 1st Floor Capital Improvement Fund 253,086 PE-13005 City Hall/King Plaza Capital Improvement Fund 7,020 PF-01002 Civic Center Infrastructure Capital Improvement Fund (434) PE-15020 Civic Center Waterproofing Study and Repairs Capital Improvement Fund (78,492) PF-14000 Cubberley Roof Replacements Capital Improvement Fund 1,442 PO-12001 Curb & Gutter Repair Capital Improvement Fund 186 PE-13017 EC Median Landscape Capital Improvement Fund (17,573) PE-13016 El Camino Park Expand Capital Improvement Fund 10,123 PL-14000 Design Capital Improvement Fund 8,652 PL-15001 Embarcadero Corridor Capital Improvement Fund 200,710 PF-15005 Emergency Facility Improvements Capital Improvement Fund (13,532) PF-02022 Facility Interior Finishes Replacement Capital Improvement Fund (27,828) PF-14002 Fire Station 1 Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 863 LB-11000 Furniture and Technology for Library Projects Capital Improvement Fund (5,711) PG-13003 Golf Reconfig & Bayland Athletics Center Capital Improvement Fund 34,954 PE-13010 Greer Park Renovatio Capital Improvement Fund 33,075 PE-11011 Highway 101 Pedestrian Capital Improvement Fund 943,638 PE-09010 Library & Community Center Capital Improvement Fund 2,277 PE-14015 Lucie Stern Building Capital Improvement Fund 7,130 PE-12013 Magical Bridge Playg Capital Improvement Fund 100,888 PE-11000 Main Library New Construction Capital Improvement Fund (14,079) PL-14001 Matadero Creek Trail Capital Improvement Fund 14,204 PE-09006 Mitchell Park Library Capital Improvement Fund 2,483,343 PG-11002 Monroe Park Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 270,996 OS-09001 Off-Road Pathway Resurfacing and Repair Capital Improvement Fund 1,033 OS-00001 Open Space Trails & Amenities Capital Improvement Fund (14,991) PE-15022 Palo Alto Community Gardens Irrigation System Capital Improvement Fund (47,296) PG-09003 Park Maintenance Sho Capital Improvement Fund 84,419 PE-13003 Parks Master Plan Capital Improvement Fund 6,725 PE-08001 Rinconada Park Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 1,271 PE-12003 Rinconada Park Master Capital Improvement Fund 4,833 PF-15000 Rinconada Pool Locker Capital Improvement Fund (23,068) PF-00006 Roofing Replacement Capital Improvement Fund (198,002) PF-07011 Roth Building Maintenance Capital Improvement Fund 3,201 PL-00026 Safe Routes to School Capital Improvement Fund (49,092) PG-12004 Sarah Wallis Park Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 65,000 PO-89003 Sidewalk Repairs Capital Improvement Fund (132,345) PO-11000 Sign Reflectivity Upgrade Capital Improvement Fund (40,542) PG-13001 Stanford / PA Soccer Turf Replacement Capital Improvement Fund 722,740 PG-12001 Stanford/Palo Alto P Capital Improvement Fund 47,198 Exhibit 2 Capital Reappropriations 2 City Council November 16, 2015 PO-05054 Street Lights Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 21,841 PE-86070 Street Maintenance Capital Improvement Fund (471,182) PE-13014 Streetlights Conditi Capital Improvement Fund 78 PE-13012 Structural Assessment Capital Improvement Fund 1,143 PE-11012 Temporary Main Library Capital Improvement Fund 83,438 PO-11001 Thermoplastic Lane Marking and Striping Capital Improvement Fund (12,000) PL-05030 Traffic Signal and ITS Upgrades Capital Improvement Fund (30,043) PL-12000 Transportation and Parking Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 163,956 EL-02010 SCADA System Upgrades Electric (17,015) EL-02011 Electric Utility GIS Electric 75,000 EL-04012 Utility Site Securit Electric 33,719 EL-05000 El Camino Undergroun Electric (200,000) EL-06001 230 kV Electric Inte Electric (3,441) EL-06002 UG District 45 Electric 59,271 EL-09000 Middlefield Undergro Electric (282,906) EL-10006 Rebuild UG Dist 24 Electric 53,968 EL-10009 Street Light System Electric (23,259) EL-11003 Rebuild UG Dist 15 Electric (1,133) EL-11006 Rebuild UG Dist 18 Electric 164,587 EL-11008 Rebuild UG Dist 19 Electric 3,926 EL-11010 UG District 47 - Mid Electric (601,553) EL-11014 Smart Grid Technolog Electric 1,395 EL-12000 Rebuild UG Dist 12 Electric 9,028 EL-12001 UG District 46 - Cha Electric (976) EL-13006 Sand Hill / Quarry 1 Electric (25,028) EL-13008 Upgrade Estimating S Electric (20,000) EL-14004 Maybell 1&2 4/12kV C Electric (121,029) EL-14005 Reconfigure Quarry F Electric (61,119) EL-15001 Substation Battery R Electric 69,251 EL-89028 Electric Customer Co Electric 402,508 EL-89031 Communications Syste Electric (60,307) EL-89038 Substation Protectio Electric 18,713 EL-89044 Substation Facility Electric (55,640) EL-98003 Electric System Imp Electric 1,285,781 FO-10000 Fiber Optic Customer Fiber Optic (48,703) FO-10001 Fiber Optic Network Fiber Optic 84,022 GS-03009 Sys Extensions Operations - Unreimbursed Gas 726 GS-11002 Gas System Improvement Gas (67,511) GS-12001 Gas Main Replacement - Project 22 Gas (199,920) GS-13002 Gas Equipment and Tools Gas 17,869 GS-80019 Gas Meters and Regulators Gas 3,109 SD-06102 San Francisquito Creek Storm Water Pump Station Storm (631) SD-06101 Storm Drain System Replacement and Rehabilitation Storm 58,190 SD-13003 Improvements Storm (110,762) SD-11101 Channing/Lincoln Storm Drain Improvements Storm 12,597 TE-00010 Telephone System Repair Technology (38) TE-01012 IT Disaster Recovery Technology 43,479 TE-05000 Radio Infrastructure Technology 1,000,000 TE-06001 Library RFID Implementation Technology 4,369 TE-09000 Public Safety Computer-Aided Dispatch Replacement Technology (292,044) TE-10001 Utilities Customer Bill System Improvements Technology 502 TE-11001 Library Computer System Software Technology (64,019) TE-12001 Development Center Blueprint Technology Enhancement Technology (117,312) TE-13004 Infrastructure Management Syste Technology 80,431 TE-14002 Library Virtual Branch Technology (20,000) TE-95016 Permit Information Tracking System Technology 6,054 VR-14000 Schedule Vehicle and Equipment Replacement - Fiscal Year 2014 Vehicle (30,395) VR-13000 2013 Vehicle 22,770 Exhibit 2 Capital Reappropriations 3 City Council November 16, 2015 VR-15001 Emergency Repair and Replacement Vehicle 47,347 VR-15000 2015 Vehicle 1,034,789 WC-10002 Project 23 Wastewater Collection 758,010 WC-11000 Project 24 Wastewater Collection (90,474) WC-12001 Project 25 Wastewater Collection (80,641) WC-13001 Project 26 Wastewater Collection (66,657) WC-14001 Project 27 Wastewater Collection (51,716) WC-80020 Sewer System, Customer Connections Wastewater Collection (97,952) WQ-10001 Plant Master Plan Wastewater Treatment (66,000) WQ-14001 Dewatering and Loadout Facility Wastewater Treatment (2,301,219) WQ-04011 Facility Condition Assessment Wastewater Treatment (19,937) WS-02014 Water, Gas, Wastewater Utility GIS Data Water (9,500) WS-07000 Water Regulation System Improvements Water 785,585 WS-08001 Water Reservior Coating Improvements Water 2,160,306 WS-08002 Emergency Water Supply Project Water (6,919) WS-09000 Seismic Water System Upgrades Water 3,501,875 WS-11000 Water Main Replacement - Project 25 Water (282,944) WS-11003 Water Distribution System Improvements Water (49,710) WS-11004 Water System Supply Improvements Water (110,352) WS-12001 Water Main Replacement - Project 26 Water 27,995 WS-13004 Asset Management Mobile Deployment Water (1,652) WS-15004 Water System Master Plan Water (1,001) WS-80014 Water Service Hydrant Replacement Water 1,789 WS-80015 Water Meters Water (20,471) Total- All Funds 11,280,855 City of Palo Alto (ID # 5940) Finance Committee Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 9/22/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Approval of Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriation Requests to be Carried Forward into Fiscal Year 2016 Title: Approval of Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriation Requests to be Carried Forward Into Fiscal Year 2016 From: City Manager Lead Department: Administrative Services Recommendation Staff recommends that the Finance Committee approve the Fiscal Year 2015 reappropriations to be carried forward into Fiscal Year 2016 and direct staff to forward the Finance Committee’s recommendation to the City Council. Background As a part of the fiscal year-end process, staff reviews the City’s unencumbered and unspent appropriations of the fiscal year just ended, along with the City’s spending plans. Encumbered amounts are those subject to the legal claims of other parties due to contractual obligations (for example, commitments made through purchase orders), which are carried forward from one fiscal year to the next. However, each year there are a small number of important projects which staff was not able to complete or encumber funds for. The reappropriation process allows staff to bring forward funding recommendations to the Finance Committee and City Council to continue these projects. On September 22, 2014, the City Council approved a recommendation to amend Chapter 2.28, Section 2.28.090 of the Municipal Code, reducing the previous two-step reappropriations process (preliminary and final reappropriation authorization) to one step as long as the Administrative Services Director certifies that sufficient unencumbered and unexpended funds are available in the current Fiscal Year to be carried forward to the subsequent Fiscal Year. Additionally, the City Council amended the Municipal Code to eliminate the provision allowing for the automatic reappropriation of capital project funds. Previously, the Municipal Code stated that appropriations of capital project funds should continue until the project was completed or no funds had been expended for two years. Effective Fiscal Year 2016, the Attachment B City of Palo Alto Page 2 Finance Committee reviewed and the Council approved a capital budget which includes all active projects. Since capital projects may be delayed for various reasons, unexpended funds are carried forward in two ways from the outgoing to the new fiscal year. As part of the approval of the Fiscal Year 2016 budget, based on estimates, the majority of unexpended and unencumbered funds were carried forward from Fiscal Year 2015 to Fiscal Year 2016. Now that the Fiscal Year 2015 has closed and staff has processed necessary accounting transactions any unexpended and unencumbered funds for each capital project are reviewed one more time. Based on that review, staff recommends that for some projects in various funds remaining Fiscal Year 2015 capital dollars are reappropriated to Fiscal Year 2016. Also, as part of this review, staff realized that for some projects too much funding was recommended for reappropriation as expenditures occurred in Fiscal Year 2015. Therefore, this staff report also recommends reversing a portion of previously authorized reappropriations. Discussion As noted above, the changes to the Municipal Code from last year allow for the reappropriation of unencumbered and unexpended funds in advance of the normal year-end closing ordinance as long as the Administrative Services Director certifies that sufficient unencumbered and unexpended funds are available in Fiscal Year 2015 to be carried forward to Fiscal Year 2016. Attachment A identifies those operating budget reappropriation requests that staff recommends for approval, while Attachment B lists recommended capital project reappropriations. With the submission of this report for Finance Committee consideration, the Administrative Services Director certifies sufficient unencumbered and unexpended funds are available in Fiscal Year 2015 to be carried forward to Fiscal Year 2016. The projects for which operating budget reappropriations are recommended can generally be grouped into the following categories: Timing and Workload Delays: Certain projects were delayed due to competing workload demands, appropriation of funds late in the fiscal year, or other unanticipated delays. Examples of projects in this category include Document Scanning and Management Services ($66,000), Temporary Staffing for the Purchasing division ($51,000), Business Registry Program ($99,050), Police Utilization Study ($70,000), Airport On-Call Consultant ($40,987), Storm Water Rebates ($55,710) and Santa Clara Valley Water District MOU ($400,000). Technology Services: Funding was approved in Fiscal Year 2015 for a number of technology system evaluation and upgrade projects but contracts were not awarded by the end of the fiscal year. Projects in this category include Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Evaluation of the City’s GIS solutions ($82,500), Palo Alto 3-1-1 implementation ($40,000), Mobile Device Management Solution ($75,000), and Police Interview Recording System ($40,000). Attachment B City of Palo Alto Page 3 Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund: Due to the timing of Council’s action approving loans and staffing constraints, transactions with Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) were not completed in Fiscal Year 2015 for some projects. Continuation of the housing transactions will require reappropriation of Residential Housing In-Lieu Funds for the following properties: loan for PAHC purchase of 2811-2825 Alma Street ($600,000), loan for PAHC renovation of Stevenson House at 435 E. Charleston Road ($1,000,000), and loan for PAHC rehabilitation and deed restriction of Pine Street property at 110-130 El Dorado ($375,000). Staff expects to be able to execute and conclude the agreements with PAHC for these projects in Fiscal Year 2016. Library Donation and Grant: This action reappropriates $339,845 in revenue and offsetting expenses as a result of donations and grants received by the Library. In early Fiscal Year 2015 the Library was awarded two grants from the Pacific Library Partnership (PLP): one in the amount of $4,485 to offset delivery costs for LINK+, an interlibrary loan program for participating organizations; and a $15,000 grant for the Maker+: A Summer Maker Program to support STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art & Math) learning and to foster interdisciplinary exploration among sciences, art, and social sciences. In addition, in June 2015, the City received a $320,000 donation from the Palo Alto Library Foundation. The Library intends to use $100,000 for the purchase of additional technology, such as tablets, e-readers, and other devices for staff development and customer instruction; $112,100 for databases and digital services, such as Learning Express, Mango Languages, and online video, magazines, and music; and $107,900 on contractual services to improve workflow efficiency, provide staff training, and customer service improvements for the new facilities and new products. Teen Services Programs: At the June 2, 2014 City Council meeting, the City Council approved a recommendation from the Policy and Services Committee to use a portion of the net revenue collected from 455 Bryant Street in Fiscal Years 2009 through 2013 to fund Teen Programs for Fiscal Year 2015 (CMR #4776). Staff was to return to the City Council with another plan six months after the opening of the Mitchell Park Community Center where the Teen Center is located to discuss the best use of the facility and programming for Teen Services at the Teen Center and elsewhere throughout the City utilizing the Bryant Street funds. Staff is expecting to return to the City Council in the fall of 2015 with a funding plan for Fiscal Year 2016 and beyond. Teen Services programming includes but is not limited to: makeX, Project Enybody, Click PA, Ghost Bike, and Ceramics class drop-ins. As a result, this action will reappropriate $331,046 to continue supporting these programs as well as a sustainable, long-term approach for Teen Services utilizing Bryant Street funds. Management and Professional Development funds: A number of City employees, as part of their compensation plan, are eligible for certain self-improvement activities. These funds are available to certain employees for civic and professional association memberships, conference participation and travel, educational programs, certain tuition Attachment B City of Palo Alto Page 4 costs, and professional and trade journal subscriptions. Unspent funds are recommended to be carried over to Fiscal Year 2016 to improve and supplement the job and professional skills of employees ($145,000). Establish Contingency Account – Planning, Community & Environment Department: To establish a contingency account for the Planning and Community Environment Department to set aside funds related to planning, parking, and transportation related funding needs ($500,000). In accordance with the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the use of contingency funding requires the approval of the City Manager. Capital Reappropriations: As discussed in the Background section of this report, starting with the Fiscal Year 2016 capital budget, all capital project reappropriations require City Council approval. The Adopted Budget included approximately $51.1 million in reappropriated funds, across all City funds based on estimates of anticipated spending in Fiscal Year 2015. Since the adoption of the capital budget, some adjustments and refinements to project reappropriations are required since Fiscal Year 2015 year end actuals and projects costs have been updated. For some projects, additional reappropriations are recommended, as project expenditures originally anticipated to occur before the end of Fiscal Year 2015 will now likely occur in Fiscal Year 2016. Additionally, some expenditures not anticipated to occur until Fiscal Year 2016 and therefore reappropriated in the budget document to Fiscal Year 2016 have been realized in Fiscal Year 2015, requiring downward adjustments for Fiscal Year 2016. The table on the following page summarizes the recommended net reappropriation adjustments as detailed in Attachment B. These Fiscal Year 2016 adjustments represent the final step in the City Council approved change to the reappropriation process. There are sufficient expenditure savings in Fiscal Year 2015 to support all recommended reappropriation adjustments. It should be noted that as a result of this revised process and active review of all project reappropriations, a reduced level of carryforward from one year to the next is recommended than by automatically carrying forward all unspent capital funding. As part of the detailed review of capital projects which started with the development of the Fiscal Year 2016 Capital Budget and is concluding with the recommendations contained in this CMR, a total of $10.8 million is being returned to reserves across several funds that otherwise would have been reappropriated under the prior model, including $4.7 million in the Capital Improvement Fund. Attachment B City of Palo Alto Page 5 Fund Number of Projects Recommended Reappropriation Adjustment Capital Improvement Fund* 61 $5,099,421 Airport Fund 1 $34,359 Electric Fund 26 $703,741 Fiber Optics Fund 2 $35,319 Gas Fund 5 ($245,727) Storm Drainage Fund 4 ($40,606) Wastewater Collection Fund 6 $370,570 Wastewater Treatment Fund 3 ($2,387,156) Water Fund 13 $5,995,001 Technology Fund 11 $641,422 Vehicle Replacement and Maintenance Fund 4 $1,074,511 Total All Funds 136 $11,280,855 *Includes an increase of $32,692 for the Monroe Park Improvements project (PG-11002) due to higher than anticipated costs, as outlined in CMR 6025, to be considered by the City Council on 9/21/2015. Resource Impact The majority of requested items have been previously reviewed and approved by City Council as part of annual budget processes. The Director of Administrative Services has certified that sufficient funds exist for the recommended Fiscal Year 2015 Operating Budget reappropriations (Attachment A) and Capital Budget reappropriations (Attachment B). For Fiscal Year 2016, staff recommends $1.7 million in carryover funds in the General Fund, $0.5 million in Enterprise Funds, $0.2 in Internal Service Funds and $2.0 million in Special Revenue Funds. For capital projects staff recommends $5.1 million to be reappropriated in the Capital Improvement Fund, net $4.5 million in the various Enterprise Funds, and $1.7 million in the Internal Service Funds. Policy Implications This recommendation is consistent with adopted Council policy. Environmental Review (If Applicable) The action recommended is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act. Attachments: Attachment A - Operating Reapprop FY15 to FY16 (PDF) Attachment B- Capital Reappropriations (XLSX) Attachment C - BAO XXXX - FY15 to FY16 Reappropriation (PDF) Attachment B Attachment A Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriations 1 Finance Committee September 22, 2016 General Fund Department Fund Amount Recommended Reappropriation Justification Administrative Services Department General Fund $66,000 Document Scanning and Retrieval Services: In 2014, the Administrative Services Department (ASD) started on a pilot to scan existing documents and store them electronically. The pilot was successfully completed with the Purchasing and Accounts Payable sections. Based on the experience from the pilot, the City issued a citywide Request for Proposal for scanning paper documents and storing them electronically ASD, Planning and Community Environment, Utilities, and Public Works-Engineering. With reappropriating $66,000 ASD will be able to continue its efforts to easily retrieve scanned documents, especially for Information requests, free up limited office space, and have an organized cloud retrieval structure. ASD’s scanning for FY 2015 and FY 2016 is scheduled to be completed in FY 2016 with 253,000 total number of scanned images with an average cost per scan of $0.26. Administrative Services Department General Fund $51,000 Temporary Staffing: The Purchasing Division of the Administrative Services Department (ASD) is undergoing rapid change due to the eProcurement initiative. With this initiative, there is a parallel, heavy workload for the Division’s contract administrators. Temporarily adding a Management Specialist hourly position will help to balance the demands of the eProcurement process implementation and the workload of regular staff. Community Services Department General Fund $331,046 Teen Programs / Bryant Street Garage Rent Revenue: At the June 2, 2014 City Council meeting, the City Council approved a recommendation from the Policy and Services Committee to use a portion of the net revenue collected from 455 Bryant Street in Fiscal Years 2009 through 2013 to fund Teen Programs for Fiscal Year 2015 (CMR #4776). Staff was to return to the City Council with another plan six months after the opening of the Mitchell Park Community Center where the Teen Center is located to discuss the best use of the facility and programming for Teen Services at the Teen Center and elsewhere throughout the City utilizing the Bryant Street funds. Staff is expecting to return to the City Council in the fall of 2015 with a funding plan for Fiscal Year 2016 and beyond. Teen Services programming includes but is not limited to: makeX, Project Enybody, Click PA, Ghost Bike, and Ceramics class drop-ins. As a result, this action will reappropriate $331,046 to continue supporting these programs as well as a sustainable, long-term approach for Teen Services utilizing Bryant Street funds. Community Services Department General Fund $50,000 Human Services Resource Allocation Program (HSRAP) Reserve: At the June 9, 2014 City Council meeting, the Council established a $50,000 reserve for the Human Services Resource Allocation Process as part of the Budget Adoption for Fiscal Year 2015. Since the reserve was funded as a one-time appropriation and remains unspent, this action will reappropriate the reserve balance of $50,000 into Fiscal Year 2016. Development Services Department General Fund $99,050 Business Registry: As part of Council directive, the Development Service Department in coordination with the City Manager’s Officer began working on a two phase project to implement an online Business Registry Certificate program. To implement the program, the City Council authorized initial funding of $250,000 (CMR #5146) and a Fiscal Year 2015 reappropriation request of $35,000 (CMR #5647) for phase I of the Business Registry Program which included initial start- up costs for Accela integration, staffing, and outreach. Because the work on phase I is continuing, this action will reappropriate $99,050 for staffing and continued community outreach efforts. Human Resources Department General Fund $145,000 Management Development and Training: Funding will be used to continue the citywide management training program that began in Fiscal Year 2015. Training programs will focus on the following areas: Ethics, Civics and Citizen Engagement, Leadership and Management, Budget, Finance, Procurement, Interpersonal Communication, Presentation Skills, Business Writing, Time Management, Project Management, Change Management, SkillSoft (online based education), and Safety & Security. Approval of this action also requires approval of the Fiscal Year 2015 Year-End Budget Amendment Ordinance (scheduled for a November Finance Committee meeting), which recommends consolidating General Fund savings for training across various departments into the Human Resources (HR) Department in Fiscal Year 2015 in order to reappropriate the full amount into HR in Fiscal Year 2016. Library Department General Fund $339,985 Library Foundation Donation & Pacific Library Partnership Grant: This action reappropriates $339,845 in revenue and $339,845 in expenses as a result of donations and grants received by the Library. In early Fiscal Year 2015 the Library was awarded two grants from the Pacific Library Partnership (PLP): one to be used for a summer 2015 program with expenses incurred in Fiscal Year 2016, and one in the amount of $4,485 to offset delivery costs for LINK+, an interlibrary loan program for participating organizations. LINK+ is a union catalog of contributed holdings from participating libraries in California and Nevada. Patrons from member libraries electronically request an item not available in their own library and the item is delivered to the requested library for check‐out. A $15,000 grant was received from PLP for the Maker+: A Summer Maker Program to support STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art & Math) learning and to foster interdisciplinary exploration among sciences, art, and social sciences. By participating in the program, students will discover solutions for today's social issues through technology. The program includes opportunities for people of all ages to participate in a week long structured programming at the Rinconada and Mitchell Park libraries. In addition, in June 2015, the City received a $320,000 donation from the Palo Alto Library Foundation. The Library intends to use $100,000 for the purchase of additional technology, such as tablets, e-readers, and other devices for staff development and customer instruction; $112,100 for databases and digital services, such as Learning Express, Mango Languages, and online video, magazines, and music; and $107,900 on contractual services to improve workflow efficiency, provide staff training, and customer service improvements for the new facilities and new products. Planning and Community Environment Department General Fund $500,000 Establish Planning & Community Environment Contingent Account: This action reappropriates $500,000 of the $1,000,000 million shuttle reserve from the Fiscal Year 2015 Non-Departmental budget to be used as a contingency account for unanticipated expenses as a result additional City Council direction related to planning, parking, or transportation. Police Department General Fund $78,000 Police Utilization Study: In Fiscal Year 2013, funding was allocated for the Police Department to hire a consultant to conduct a utilization study of overall police operations; however, the study was not completed due to competing workload demands. The funds were reappropriated to Fiscal Year 2014 and Fiscal Year 2015; however, the Department was unable to conduct the utilization study due to other projects that took precedence (Tri-City Computer Aided Dispatch, Records Management System, Patrol Vehicle Mobile Audio Video, etc.). Reappropriation of these funds will allow Police Department staff to determine the scope of the study, integrate it into their workload, and hire a consultant to conduct the study. Police Department General Fund $40,000 Police Interview Recording System: The Interview Recording System that provides cameras, audio equipment and storage for interviewing suspects, witness and victims unexpectedly failed in Fiscal Year 2015 and needs to be replaced. The existing system has failed repeatedly and the Department attempted to replace it as quickly as possible in May and June 2015. The Department completed a Request for Proposal and no responses were received. Therefore, with thsi funding, the Department will issue a new RFP and increase its vendor outreach efforts with the hope of receiving viable proposals for the replacement of the system. $1,700,081 Total General Fund Reappropriations Attachment A Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriations 2 Finance Committee September 22, 2016 Enterprise Funds Department Fund Amount Recommended Reappropriation Justification Public Works Department Airport Fund 530 $40,987 Airport On-Call Planning & Environmental Consultants: In October 2014 Council approved two on-call consultant contracts for airport related work: one for design and construction administration services and one for planning and environmental services. At the end of June three purchase requests submitted for the airports on-call planning and environmental consultant were inadvertently cancelled. Therefore, staff requests to reappropriate the funds so that the following projects can continue: 1. Development of an Extraordinary Circumstance Information Submittal (CATEX) for review by the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) San Francisco Airport District Office (SF-ADO). The CATEX is being prepared for approval under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) relative to a potential future apron rehabilitation project at Palo Alto Airport with possible future reimbursement under the FAA grant. 2. Development of DBE goals for the airport as required by the FAA for inclusion in grant application submittals. 3. Planning, implementing and facilitation of a charrette with key community stakeholders to discuss a vision and goals for the Airport; share potential strategies to integrate sustainability into the Airport’s management, planning, operation, maintenance, and development; and generate/prioritize potential sustainability initiative ideas to be considered by the City. Public Works Department Storm Drainage Fund 528 $55,710 Storm Water Rebates: In April 2005, the majority of Palo Alto property owners voted to increase the Storm Drainage Fee (CMR 244:05). In addition to the seven proposed CIP projects to be completed by 2017, the fee increase provided an annual innovative projects budget. These funds have been utilized since Fall 2008 to fund a Stormwater Rebate Program that offers financial incentives to residents and businesses for the installation of measures that reduce stormwater runoff, including rain barrels, cisterns, permeable pavement, and green roofs. Staff proposes that these funds be reappropriated because they have been specifically earmarked for funding of innovative storm drain projects per the terms of the 2005 Storm Drainage Fee ballot measure approved by Palo Alto property owners. As the rebate program has not generated sufficient demand to spend the budgeted funds, we are researching alternatives that may garner the desired environmental result. Utilities Water Fund 522 $400,000 Santa Clara Valley Water District MOU: On February 10, 2015, Council approved a Budget Amendment Ordinance to appropriate $400,000 from the Water Fund Reserve to increase the 2014-2016 Memorandum of Understanding with the Santa Clara Valley Water District for the Administration and Funding of Water Conservation Programs (the “2014-2016 MOU”) to increase the City of Palo Alto’s (City) three-year $735,915 total cost obligation by $500,000 to $1,235,915. Inadvertently, the approved funds were not encumbered before the end of the year. Therefore, it is recommended to carry forward the funding to fiscal year 2016 in order to fund the contract. $496,697 Total Enterprise Funds Reappropriations Attachment A Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriations 3 Finance Committee September 22, 2016 Internal Services Funds Department Fund Amount Recommended Reappropriation Justification Information Technology Department Technology Fund 682 $82,500 Geographic Information System Evaluation: The Geographic Information System (GIS) Evaluation Project was approved as part of the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget to contract with a consultant to perform an analysis of the City's current GIS environment and determine how updated GIS solutions align with the City's needs and goals. The City's current GIS solution has been in place for over 20 years and needs to be evaluated and updated to reduce IT application and infrastructure support costs, improve flexibility and offer GIS mobile services for field and remote staff. The IT Department planned to award the assessment to a vendor prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2015; however, a vendor was not selected before the June 30 deadline. Information Technology Department Technology Fund 682 $40,000 Palo Alto 3-1-1: The Palo Alto 3-1-1 Project was approved as part of the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget to route all 3-1-1 calls to the City's telephone system. The 3-1-1 service will allow the City to be more responsive to the needs of the residents, business owners, and visitors, and these groups will only need to know two numbers to access all City of Palo Alto services: 9-1-1 for emergencies and 3-1-1 for all non-emergency and other City services. The IT Department planned to award the project prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2015; however, a vendor was not selected before the June 30 deadline. Information Technology Department Technology Fund 682 $75,000 Mobile Device Management Security Solution: The Mobile Device Management (MDM) Security Solution Project was approved as part of the Fiscal Year 2015 Budget to secure, monitor, manage, and support mobile devices used by City staff. MDM software protects these devices from cyber security threats and allows designated staff to remotely erase data from a mobile device in the event it is lost or stolen. The Department planned to select a solution prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2015; however, a solution is still being evaluated and the deadline was not met. $154,000 was originally appropriated for this project in Fiscal Year 2015, however, after further evaluation by the IT Department, only $75,000 will be needed to award the project, and the remaining funding will be returned to the Technology Surcharge Reserve for future technology enhancement projects. $197,500 Total Internal Service Funds Reappropriations Attachment A Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriations 4 Finance Committee September 22, 2016 Special Revenue Funds Department Fund Amount Recommended Reappropriation Justification Planning and Community Environment Department Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund 233 $600,000 Palo Alto Housing Corporation Loan for 2811 Alma: This action reappropriates $600,000 in the Residential Housing In- Lieu Fund for use by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) for a loan and promissory note for property located at 2811-2825 Alma Street (CMR #5197). In 2011, the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) entered into negotiations with the owners of 2811-2825 Alma Street and submitted a $1.89 million offer for the purchase of these two parcels. The offer was accepted and escrow closed in December 2011. At that time, however, the City did not have sufficient fund balances in its housing funds to provide the $1.89 million loan, and was only able to provide $1.29 million. To make up the difference, the Opportunity Fund of Santa Clara County provided a two year, $600,000 short term loan for the project acquisition with the understanding that the City would repay the short term loan, which was set to expire in December 2014. With Council’s approval of this action, the City new $600,000 loan defeased the Opportunity Fund loan and the City is the sole lender on the project. However, due to staffing constraints, this transaction has not yet been executed. With this recommended action, staff expects to execute and conclude the agreement with PAHC in the fall of Fiscal Year 2016. Planning and Community Environment Department Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund 233 $1,000,000 Stevenson House Rehab Loan: Stevenson House, located at 435 E. Charleston Road, has been serving extremely low, very low, and low income Palo Alto seniors for 47 years. Built in 1968, Stevenson House consists of 120 studio and one bedroom units. In addition to providing affordable housing, it offers services, meals and social programs for its residents. This action reappropriates $1,000,000 in the Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund to effectuate the $1,000,000 City loan for the renovation of Stevenson House (CMR# 5526) and the consolidation of outstanding Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) loans consistent with the funding commitment previously approved by the City Council on November 5, 2012 (CMR #3176). However, due to staffing constraints, this transaction has not yet been executed. With this recommended action, staff expects to execute and conclude the agreement with PAHC in the fall of Fiscal Year 2016. Planning and Community Environment Department Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund 233 $375,000 Loan Associated with Pine Street Sale: This action reappropriates $375,000 in the Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund for use by the Palo Alto Housing Corporation (PAHC) to rehabilitate and deed restrict three units located at 110 - 130 El Dorado (CMR #5712). Due to the timing of Council’s action approving this activity and staffing constraints, this transaction has not yet been executed. With this recommended action, staff expects to execute and conclude the agreement with PAHC in the fall of Fiscal Year 2016. $1,975,000 Total Special Revenue Funds Reappropriations $4,369,278 Total - All Reappropriations Attachment B Capital Reappropriations Project ID Project Title Fund Reappropriation Adjustment AP-15003 Apron and Taxi Lane Repair Airport 34,359 PF-93009 Americans with Disabilities Capital Improvement Fund 200,853 AC-14000 Art Center Auditorium Audio, Visual, and Furnishings Capital Improvement Fund 19,802 AC-86017 Art in Public Places Capital Improvement Fund (55,550) OS-09002 Baylands Emergency A Capital Improvement Fund 602 PE-15029 Baylands Interpretive Center Improvements Capital Improvement Fund (26,859) PE-14018 Baylands Interpretive Center Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 2,205 PL-04010 Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan - Implementation Project Capital Improvement Fund (21,886) PE-13008 Bowden Park Capital Improvement Fund 1,053 PF-01003 Building Systems Improvements Capital Improvement Fund (129,236) PE-13020 Byxbee Park Trails Capital Improvement Fund 268,652 PL-11002 California Avenue Streetscape Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 183,613 PE-13011 Charleston Arastrade Capital Improvement Fund (33,391) PE-09003 City Facility Parking Capital Improvement Fund 286,310 PE-12017 City Hall 1st Floor Capital Improvement Fund 253,086 PE-13005 City Hall/King Plaza Capital Improvement Fund 7,020 PF-01002 Civic Center Infrastructure Capital Improvement Fund (434) PE-15020 Civic Center Waterproofing Study and Repairs Capital Improvement Fund (78,492) PF-14000 Cubberley Roof Replacements Capital Improvement Fund 1,442 PO-12001 Curb & Gutter Repair Capital Improvement Fund 186 PE-13017 EC Median Landscape Capital Improvement Fund (17,573) PE-13016 El Camino Park Expand Capital Improvement Fund 10,123 PL-14000 El Camino Real & Churchill Avenue Intersection Improvements - Design Capital Improvement Fund 8,652 PL-15001 Embarcadero Corridor Capital Improvement Fund 200,710 PF-15005 Emergency Facility Improvements Capital Improvement Fund (13,532) PF-02022 Facility Interior Finishes Replacement Capital Improvement Fund (27,828) PF-14002 Fire Station 1 Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 863 LB-11000 Furniture and Technology for Library Projects Capital Improvement Fund (5,711) PG-13003 Golf Reconfig & Bayland Athletics Center Capital Improvement Fund 34,954 PE-13010 Greer Park Renovatio Capital Improvement Fund 33,075 PE-11011 Highway 101 Pedestrian Capital Improvement Fund 943,638 PE-09010 Library & Community Center Capital Improvement Fund 2,277 PE-14015 Lucie Stern Building Capital Improvement Fund 7,130 PE-12013 Magical Bridge Playg Capital Improvement Fund 100,888 PE-11000 Main Library New Construction Capital Improvement Fund (14,079) PL-14001 Matadero Creek Trail Capital Improvement Fund 14,204 PE-09006 Mitchell Park Library Capital Improvement Fund 2,483,343 PG-11002 Monroe Park Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 270,996 OS-09001 Off-Road Pathway Resurfacing and Repair Capital Improvement Fund 1,033 OS-00001 Open Space Trails & Amenities Capital Improvement Fund (14,991) PE-15022 Palo Alto Community Gardens Irrigation System Capital Improvement Fund (47,296) PG-09003 Park Maintenance Sho Capital Improvement Fund 84,419 PE-13003 Parks Master Plan Capital Improvement Fund 6,725 PE-08001 Rinconada Park Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 1,271 PE-12003 Rinconada Park Master Capital Improvement Fund 4,833 PF-15000 Rinconada Pool Locker Capital Improvement Fund (23,068) PF-00006 Roofing Replacement Capital Improvement Fund (198,002) PF-07011 Roth Building Maintenance Capital Improvement Fund 3,201 PL-00026 Safe Routes to School Capital Improvement Fund (49,092) PG-12004 Sarah Wallis Park Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 65,000 PO-89003 Sidewalk Repairs Capital Improvement Fund (132,345) PO-11000 Sign Reflectivity Upgrade Capital Improvement Fund (40,542) PG-13001 Stanford / PA Soccer Turf Replacement Capital Improvement Fund 722,740 PG-12001 Stanford/Palo Alto P Capital Improvement Fund 47,198 PO-05054 Street Lights Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 21,841 PE-86070 Street Maintenance Capital Improvement Fund (471,182) PE-13014 Streetlights Conditi Capital Improvement Fund 78 PE-13012 Structural Assessment Capital Improvement Fund 1,143 PE-11012 Temporary Main Library Capital Improvement Fund 83,438 PO-11001 Thermoplastic Lane Marking and Striping Capital Improvement Fund (12,000) PL-05030 Traffic Signal and ITS Upgrades Capital Improvement Fund (30,043) PL-12000 Transportation and Parking Improvements Capital Improvement Fund 163,956 EL-02010 SCADA System Upgrades Electric (17,015) EL-02011 Electric Utility GIS Electric 75,000 EL-04012 Utility Site Securit Electric 33,719 EL-05000 El Camino Undergroun Electric (200,000) EL-06001 230 kV Electric Inte Electric (3,441) EL-06002 UG District 45 Electric 59,271 Attachment B Capital Reappropriations EL-09000 Middlefield Undergro Electric (282,906) EL-10006 Rebuild UG Dist 24 Electric 53,968 EL-10009 Street Light System Electric (23,259) EL-11003 Rebuild UG Dist 15 Electric (1,133) EL-11006 Rebuild UG Dist 18 Electric 164,587 EL-11008 Rebuild UG Dist 19 Electric 3,926 EL-11010 UG District 47 - Mid Electric (601,553) EL-11014 Smart Grid Technolog Electric 1,395 EL-12000 Rebuild UG Dist 12 Electric 9,028 EL-12001 UG District 46 - Cha Electric (976) EL-13006 Sand Hill / Quarry 1 Electric (25,028) EL-13008 Upgrade Estimating S Electric (20,000) EL-14004 Maybell 1&2 4/12kV C Electric (121,029) EL-14005 Reconfigure Quarry F Electric (61,119) EL-15001 Substation Battery R Electric 69,251 EL-89028 Electric Customer Co Electric 402,508 EL-89031 Communications Syste Electric (60,307) EL-89038 Substation Protectio Electric 18,713 EL-89044 Substation Facility Electric (55,640) EL-98003 Electric System Imp Electric 1,285,781 FO-10000 Fiber Optic Customer Fiber Optic (48,703) FO-10001 Fiber Optic Network Fiber Optic 84,022 GS-03009 Sys Extensions Operations - Unreimbursed Gas 726 GS-11002 Gas System Improvement Gas (67,511) GS-12001 Gas Main Replacement - Project 22 Gas (199,920) GS-13002 Gas Equipment and Tools Gas 17,869 GS-80019 Gas Meters and Regulators Gas 3,109 SD-06102 San Francisquito Creek Storm Water Pump Station Storm (631) SD-06101 Storm Drain System Replacement and Rehabilitation Storm 58,190 SD-13003 Matadero Creek Storm Water Pump Station and Trunk Lines Improvements Storm (110,762) SD-11101 Channing/Lincoln Storm Drain Improvements Storm 12,597 TE-00010 Telephone System Repair Technology (38) TE-01012 IT Disaster Recovery Technology 43,479 TE-05000 Radio Infrastructure Technology 1,000,000 TE-06001 Library RFID Implementation Technology 4,369 TE-09000 Public Safety Computer-Aided Dispatch Replacement Technology (292,044) TE-10001 Utilities Customer Bill System Improvements Technology 502 TE-11001 Library Computer System Software Technology (64,019) TE-12001 Development Center Blueprint Technology Enhancement Technology (117,312) TE-13004 Infrastructure Management Syste Technology 80,431 TE-14002 Library Virtual Branch Technology (20,000) TE-95016 Permit Information Tracking System Technology 6,054 VR-14000 Schedule Vehicle and Equipment Replacement - Fiscal Year 2014 Vehicle (30,395) VR-13000 Scheduled Vehicle and Equipment Replacement - Fiscal Year 2013 Vehicle 22,770 VR-15001 Emergency Repair and Replacement Vehicle 47,347 VR-15000 Scheduled Vehicle and Equipment Replacement - Fiscal Year 2015 Vehicle 1,034,789 WC-10002 Wastewater Collection System Rehabilitation/Augmentation Project 23 Wastewater Collection 758,010 WC-11000 Wastewater Collection System Rehabilitation/Augmentation Project 24 Wastewater Collection (90,474) WC-12001 Wastewater Collection System Rehabilitation/Augmentation Project 25 Wastewater Collection (80,641) WC-13001 Wastewater Collection System Rehabilitation/Augmentation Project 26 Wastewater Collection (66,657) WC-14001 Wastewater Collection System Rehabilitation/Augmentation Project 27 Wastewater Collection (51,716) WC-80020 Sewer System, Customer Connections Wastewater Collection (97,952) WQ-10001 Plant Master Plan Wastewater Treatment (66,000) WQ-14001 Dewatering and Loadout Facility Wastewater Treatment (2,301,219) WQ-04011 Facility Condition Assessment Wastewater Treatment (19,937) WS-02014 Water, Gas, Wastewater Utility GIS Data Water (9,500) WS-07000 Water Regulation System Improvements Water 785,585 WS-08001 Water Reservior Coating Improvements Water 2,160,306 WS-08002 Emergency Water Supply Project Water (6,919) WS-09000 Seismic Water System Upgrades Water 3,501,875 WS-11000 Water Main Replacement - Project 25 Water (282,944) WS-11003 Water Distribution System Improvements Water (49,710) WS-11004 Water System Supply Improvements Water (110,352) WS-12001 Water Main Replacement - Project 26 Water 27,995 WS-13004 Asset Management Mobile Deployment Water (1,652) WS-15004 Water System Master Plan Water (1,001) WS-80014 Water Service Hydrant Replacement Water 1,789 WS-80015 Water Meters Water (20,471) Total- All Funds 11,280,855 1 Ordinance No. XXXX ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AUTHORIZING THE REAPPROPRIATION OF FISCAL YEAR 2015 FUNDS TO FISCAL YEAR 2016 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 and as set forth in Section 2.28.070 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the Council on June 16, 2014 did adopt a budget for Fiscal Year 2015; and B. Fiscal Year 2015 has ended and the financial results, although subject to audit adjustment, are now available. C. The Administrative Services Director certifies that sufficient funds are available in Fiscal Year 2015 in applicable funds to be reappropriated to Fiscal Year 2016. SECTION 2. The Council hereby re-appropriates Fiscal Year 2015 appropriations in certain departments and categories, as shown in Attachment A for the operating budget and Attachment B for the capital budget, which were not encumbered by purchase order or contract, into the Fiscal Year 2016 budget. SECTION 3. The Fiscal Year 2016 General Fund Budget Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of One Million Seven Hundred Thousand Eighty One Dollars ($1,700,081) as described in Attachment A. SECTION 4. The Fiscal Year 2016 Airport Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Forty Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty Seven Dollars ($40,987) as described in Attachment A and decreased by the sum of Thirty Four Thousand Three Hundred Fifty Nine ($34,359) as described in Attachment B. SECTION 5. The Fiscal Year 2016 Electric Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Seven Hundred Three Thousand Seven Hundred Forty One Dollars ($703,741) as described in Attachment B. SECTION 6. The Fiscal Year 2016 Residential Housing In-Lieu Fund is hereby decreased by the sum of One Million Nine Hundred Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($1,975,000) as described in Attachment A. Attachment C 2 SECTION 7. The Fiscal Year 2016 Fiber Optics Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Thirty Five Thousand Three Hundred Nineteen Dollars ($35,319) as described in Attachment B. SECTION 8. The Fiscal Year 2016 Gas Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby increased by the sum of Two Hundred Forty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Twenty Seven Dollars ($245,727) as described in Attachment B. SECTION 9. The Fiscal Year 2016 Storm Drainage Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Fifty Five Thousand Seven Hundred Ten Dollars ($55,710) as described in Attachment A and increased by the sum of Forty Thousand Six Hundred Six Dollars ($40,606) as described in Attachment B for a net decrease to the reserve of Fifteen Thousand One Hundred Four Dollars ($15,104). SECTION 10. The Fiscal Year 2016 Technology Fund is hereby decreased by the sum of One Hundred Ninety-seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($197,500) as described in Attachment A and decreased by the sum of Six Hundred Forty One Thousand Four Hundred Twenty Two Dollars ($641,422) as describe by Attachment B. SECTION 11. The Fiscal Year 2016 Wastewater Collection Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Three Hundred Seventy Thousand Five Hundred Seventy Dollars ($370,570) as described in Attachment B. SECTION 12. The Fiscal Year 2016 Wastewater Treatment Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby increased by the sum of Two Million Three Hundred Eighty Seven Thousand One Hundred Fifty Six Dollars ($2,387,156) as described in Attachment B. SECTION 13. The Fiscal Year 2016 Water Rate Stabilization Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Four Hundred Thousand Dollars ($400,000) as described in Attachment A and decreased by the sum of Five Million Nine Hundred Ninety Nine Thousand and One Dollars ($5,995,001) as described by Attachment B. SECTION 14. The Fiscal Year 2016 Vehicle Replacement and Maintenance Fund Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of One Million Seventy Four Thousand Five Hundred Eleven Dollars ($1,074,511) as described in Attachment B. SECTION 15. The Capital Projects Fund Reserve is hereby decreased by the sum of Five Million, Ninety Nine Thousand Four Hundred Twenty One Dollars ($5,099,421) as described in Attachment B. SECTION 16. As provided in Section 2.04.330 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, this ordinance shall become effective upon adoption. SECTION 17. The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby finds that this is not a Attachment C 3 project under the California Environmental Quality Act and, therefore, no environmental impact assessment is necessary. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: ATTEST: ________________________ ____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: ________________________ ____________________________ City Attorney City Manager ____________________________ Director of Administrative Service Attachment C Special Meeting Tuesday, September 22, 2015 Chairperson Schmid called the meeting to order at 6:07 P.M. in the Council Chambers, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, California. Present: Filseth, Kniss (arrived at 6:09 P.M.), Scharff, Schmid (Chair) Absent: Oral Communications Chair Schmid: I do not have any cards for public comment. Agenda Items 1. Approval of Fiscal Year 2015 Reappropriation Requests to be Carried Forward Into Fiscal Year 2016. Chair Schmid: I do note there has been a change in the title of Item Number 1. Let us turn to Item Number 1. Lalo, if you want to kick it off. Walter Rossmann, Office of Management and Budget Director: Good evening, Chair Schmid, Vice Mayor Schmid and Council Members. Walter Rossmann, Budget Director. The first item for tonight is the Fiscal Year 2015 reappropriation request. [audio break] Monroe Park improvements. For this project, Council approved the contract last night pending approval to reappropriate unspent funds and move those funds for Fiscal Year 2015 to 2016 plus additional funding of about $33,000. I have here in the audience department representatives here as well to speak to specific items which you may have questions on. Otherwise, this concludes my presentation. Chair Schmid: Good. I guess the goal of the Finance Committee is to look over the reappropriations and to recommend them to the Council. Mr. Rossmann: That is correct, Vice Mayor. Chair Schmid: Good. Are there colleagues who'd like to raise a question? Council Member Scharff. Attachment C Council Member Scharff: My first question relates to—where was it? First of all, the print is so small on this. If I'm slow, it's because I can barely see it. It's the Planning and Community Environmental Department. It's the establish the $500,000 of the $1 million shuttle research reserve from Fiscal Year 2015 non-departmental budget to be used as a contingency account. I guess I have a real hard time with this one. I just want to make sure I have it in my mind correctly. If I recall, we voted $1 million for a shuttle from Embarcadero, right, from the Baylands to come up. Staff decided that after we had the vote on that and approved it, which was fairly controversial, that we should cancel it and not do it. Now, you want to take the $1 million and create a $0.5 million discretionary fund without Council approval to be able to use for whatever you want. That's the way I read it. Is that right? Is that wrong? Mr. Rossmann: As you know, the contingency reserves, how they work is that the City Manager is the only approval authority for moving funds. Council Member Scharff: Yeah, but this wasn't a contingency reserve that we created. You're creating a $0.5 million contingency reserve. Mr. Rossmann: That is correct. The reason was more reaction to last year. Last year we had to bring forth, which we can do this year as well, several Budget Amendment Ordinances for parking, transportation, etc., related items. We felt to expedite the process for responding to Council requests, instead of doing a budget action coming back to you, we could establish the contingency reserve. Council Member Scharff: It would clearly expedite the process if we didn't have a Council; the City Manager just always made the decisions. Why would we do that? Mr. Rossmann: That is truly up to the discretion of the Council to establish the contingency reserve or not. Council Member Scharff: I mean it's not like Council even took this $1 million—it's not like you're doing it over for another shuttle program. You're basically taking $1 million, taking half of it and creating a new fund and doing it through this process. It seems inappropriate. Chair Schmid: Could I ask Director of Planning to make a comment. Hillary Gitelman, Planning and Community Environment Director: Thank you, Council Members. Just quickly on the comments about the shuttle program, I just want to clarify. Last year we did budget for Embarcadero shuttle route, which we pay a portion of that. The rest is paid by JPB. We Attachment C did budget for the cross-town shuttle. We budgeted for the East Palo Alto shuttle; although, we're reimbursed the cost of that. We started thinking about the west shuttle route and budgeted some funds for that. We also budgeted some funds for additional planning work associated with the shuttle, marketing, outreach and other things. The west route didn't come to fruition, but the Embarcadero route, the cross-town route, the East Palo Alto route are all operating. What we didn't do is fund this dramatic expansion of the program. We increased frequency on the cross-town route, but we didn't add a route. That's why we didn't spend a lot of the money that was in that fund. We do have significant transportation needs as a community though, and we are currently undertaking a review of the shuttle program and really coming up what we think is going to be a five-year look ahead on how the program should be modified. Looking at increased frequencies again, looking at the routes, looking at potential on-demand services or door-to-door services. Obviously, we'll be coming back to Council for any policy decisions having to do with this, but we thought in light of our experiences last year on all of the parking and transportation programs, where we had to come multiple times for BAOs and adjustments, that this was an approach that would be beneficial to keep moving on these priorities of the Council. Council Member Scharff: Fair enough, but it takes—policy decisions cost money is what you're saying, but Council should be aware and so should the public that when we make a policy decision it costs money. It shouldn't be buried in a discretionary fund of which the public and Council basically have no idea when they give a policy direction if they're spending money. Every time we give a policy direction, it should come forward with a BAO so everyone says, "Yeah, we spent that money. We're agreeing to do it. We understand the policy costs money." Ed Shikada, Assistant City Manager: Could I add perhaps a request for Director Gitelman? Could you describe the timeframe in which the results of the shuttle study that you just described would be coming back for Council discussion? Ms. Gitelman: I don't have a specific timeline, but the study is currently underway. I think it's going to be fairly short order. I also wanted to just make sure everyone's aware that if we procure services or we make expenditures that require contracts, agreements with other agencies and the like, all of those things come to Council. We would never be doing anything other than executing the Council's policy direction consistent with the rules around procurement for services and contracts. The only thing here is the budgetary allocation that happened when those agreements came forward. We wouldn't have to go through that BAO every time this happened. This is Attachment C our effort to more efficiently respond to what the Council has articulated in terms of priorities around parking and transportation issues. Council Member Scharff: I also had a question, not quite the same thing. I also had a question about the police utilization study. Here my concern was that—I have to read it—is that this was allocated in 2013. It's not a lot of money. It's really phrased in a way that just sort of made me focus on it, which says reapportion of these funds will allow Police Department Staff to determine the scope of the study integrated into the workload and hire a consultant to conduct the study. It seemed a little bit the way it was phrased that back in 2013, there was a plan and we allocated money to do it. Everyone's been too busy to do it, and now we're going to decide what needs to be done and what doesn't need to be done. It sort of struck me that since the money had been allocated, we might as well find a way to spend it. I could be convinced otherwise. It's just three years later, and it seems like we're starting from scratch about how we should do this. Is it really necessary to spend this money or is it just that the money's in the department budget, so now let's find a way to spend it? Which is the way it struck me. Lalo Perez, Chief Financial Officer and Director of Administrative Services: Lao Perez, Chief Financial Officer. The way it came about was you may recall about that timeframe there was a study for Fire Services. There were questions from the Council, the Finance Committee, why don't we do the same for the police. You tasked the City Manager to think about that and see if that was necessary. At that point, he made a request to conduct that study. As you mentioned—I think PD is here behind me, they can explain their staffing situation where it didn't allow them to complete the project. The hope would be for us to be able to review the demand of the services that we need, the resources, are we right-sized, are we not, are we utilizing the resources in an appropriate way, are there any changes that could be made, that you may want to consider as a Council as a result of the study that is conducted. At a big level, that was the background on that. Council Member Scharff: Is there—I mean is there anyone from the Police Department? I mean I don't mind if just someone said should we still do this. Explain to me why they think it's a good idea. I mean I'm not against it necessarily. I just don't want us to spend money because it's in the budget. Ian Hagerman, Senior Management Analyst: Good evening, Council Member Scharff. Ian Hagerman, Senior Management Analyst with the Police Department. I think the PD is—we're interested in doing the study. I think that we're looking for opportunities to be as efficient as possible and do our Attachment C work in the best way we can. Really the delay, as Lalo and others have mentioned, was really a resourcing issue. The folks that are going to be responsible for a lot of the heavy lifting on this study are the same folks that are responsible for replacing our Cad and RMS system, doing kind of all the technology projects in the department. It's really just been kind of a resourcing issue. We actually have a meeting October 1, I think, with kind of the command staff of the PD to kind of talk about scoping this out and possible vendors. We kind of committed to ASD during this last budget process that we'd kind of kick this off in the first half of the next calendar year, so early 2016. I think to tie it all together, we think it's a good idea. We think that it'll help us make sure that we're running things appropriately, and we're definitely going to get it done. Council Member Scharff: Okay, thanks. Mr. Shikada: Along those lines, I have to admit I'm not up to speed on the prior direction and where this is currently standing. Subject to the Committee's decision and where this goes, presuming it's still on the table, I'd like to perhaps have our office be a part of that discussion and do an information report to the Committee on the outcome and particular priority areas we'd be looking at. Council Member Scharff: That'd be great. Then finally the last question I really had was on the storm water rebates. I struggled with this one a little bit. This is the way I read it which could be incorrect. It's not like the Staff Report gives a lot of information on these particular items. The way I read it was that when we did the ballot measure back in 2005, we had a—I was going to say—what is it? Part of the measure was to do innovative—what was it? I want to get it right. Yeah, an annual innovative projects budget. As part of that, so what Staff took that to mean was that we should have rebates for homeowners who did good things with the storm water stuff, and that there was no uptake on that. Therefore, we didn't spend the money, and now we have to come up with another innovative plan. We have to figure out some way to spend the money. I guess the question is—since our next item is using—has this gone to the storm drain committee and have they decided? Because there is an oversight committee, right, on the storm drain. Are they [audio break] with this, do they think we should spend this money? That kind, because I'd much rather they make the recommendation on this. Joe Teresi, Senior Engineer: Good evening. I'm Joe Teresi from the Public Works Department. You are correct that back in 2005 there was a certain amount of money earmarked for efforts to try to reduce storm water runoff and pollutants. At the time of the ballot measure, we had a blue ribbon Attachment C committee who said, "Why are we always trying to attack it from the end up, trying to make bigger pipes and bigger pumps. Why don't we try to reduce the storm water itself and attack it from that angle?" We came up with the rebate program, and it's been moderately successful, but we haven't spent the amount of money earmarked. If you recall a couple of years ago, we took a lot of that money that had built up over the years that hadn't been applied to rebates and used it to implement the Southgate neighborhood storm water improvements which were in that innovative vein. We've been talking about this with the oversight committee, and they are concerned that it's not being spent, but they also are clear that they don't want it to be spent for something else. It's going to be our challenge to find perhaps another thing like Southgate or try to motivate more interest in the rebate program. I think it's important to us and to the committee that it be spent for that particular purpose. Council Member Scharff: Because that's what we told the voters we'd do? Right, I agree. All you're asking us to do—and that was one of my questions—is we reauthorize this and then it's going to go to the committee and the committee will talk about how to spend it? Okay. All right. Those were my questions. Chair Schmid: Good. Council Members, any other questions? Council Member Kniss: I have a little, tiny one. If you go to the print that's even harder to read ... Council Member Scharff: That's the part that's really hard to read, right? Council Member Kniss: This is the part that's really hard to read. Council Member Scharff: Yeah, that's even worse. Council Member Kniss: If I'm looking at all this—who am I looking at? Lalo, who should I be ... Mr. Perez: (inaudible) Council Member Kniss: If I look at that, at the project title, the fund, the reappropriated adjustment, and so forth, these are all relatively small amounts. Are these amounts that we take out, put back in? Mr. Rossmann: Sure ... Council Member Kniss: Where does this—if I come way down, I look at Roth Building maintenance. Just that happened to be one of the ones that I looked at. Now, I presume—I don't know whether that is—it says capital Attachment C improvement fund, but I presume that's one of the ones we decided as a City that we needed to shore up. This didn't have anything to do with their fundraising efforts. Am I correct? Mr. Rossmann: That is correct. What you see here, Council Member, is basically putting the dollars which are unspent which in two fiscal years, which is in either Fiscal Year '15 or '16. If it's a negative amount, we're actually putting it back into '15. If it’s a positive amount, we move money from '15 into '16 fiscal year for the projects which were approved by the Council as part of the budget process. Council Member Kniss: We had money left over? Mr. Rossmann: That's correct. What we do in the budget process is we think we will spend a certain amount of money in Fiscal Year '15, and we carry the rest forward. However, we don't know until we close the books exactly how those dollars land. Here we're truing that up. Council Member Kniss: Mm-hmm. Okay. Mr. Rossmann: There are no new projects which are asked to be authorized here. Council Member Kniss: Okay. This is really just a bookkeeping kind of exercise to be honest, right? Mr. Rossmann: That is correct. Council Member Kniss: Not looking as we have been at the reappropriations. Quite different. This is bookkeeping. Mr. Rossmann: That's correct. For capital ... Council Member Kniss: This is reappropriations. Mr. Rossmann: That's correct. For capital, it's pure bookkeeping except for the Monroe Park. I mentioned in the presentation about $33,000 we're asking for extra funds to align the contract you approved last night. For the operating, it's really moving money for specific projects from Fiscal Year '15 into '16. Council Member Kniss: Okay, thank you. Mr. Rossmann: Thank you, Lalo. He made a good point here. In the previous years, this just happened with the capital process. This actually creates visibility to the Council. As we change the reappropriation process, Attachment C we're showing you the entire capital budget for the entire year in one document. This is now a visible way you see how the money flows. Before it would just be a line item in the capital. Council Member Kniss: Okay. It is different than it has been, right? Mr. Rossmann: That's correct. Council Member Kniss: Okay, good. This is the phone book version, right? Mr. Rossmann: That's correct. Council Member Kniss: Okay. Thanks, Greg. Chair Schmid: I just wanted to note that I also had circled the $500,000 for the Planning Department. I appreciate the back and forth that we've had on that. Let me ask of the Library issue is also a substantial amount. It's a library donation fund. It's spread around technology, training. Is there anything in there that is included in our 2016 budget or are these all additions to what we voted on in our 2016 budget? This is the $339,000 donation money. Monique LeConge-Ziesenhenne, Library Director: I think these are all—oh, sorry. Hi. I'm Monique LeConge-Ziesenhenne, the Library Director. These categories are nothing new, and these are all things, I believe, that were included as part of that budget. This is just the bookkeeping to keep us balanced. No? These are new? Mr. Rossmann: What we did—if I may step in quickly, Monique. Ms. LeConge-Ziesenhenne: Yeah. Mr. Rossmann: What we did here is at the time of the budget development, we didn't know that we will receive those grants. If you had known in April, let's say, or in March these grants will come in, we would have included them in the budget. In this case, it's additional dollars for the Library Department for grants received late in the fiscal year. Ms. LeConge-Ziesenhenne: Right. We, the Library, had planned on them as part of our planning for the budget for the coming year. Internally we knew. Chair Schmid: I guess my question gets down to are we saving money then from the budget that we voted for 2016 and are there extra resources for the Library or for other departments from our budget? Attachment C Mr. Rossmann: The way the Council approved the Library Department Budget was without those grants; however, the Library Department was counting on getting these funds in order to provide the level of service to the public. Ms. LeConge-Ziesenhenne: Yes. Mr. Rossmann: There's no savings per se. It is ... Chair Schmid: We did vote a balanced Library budget ... Mr. Rossmann: That's correct. Chair Schmid: ... and now we have extra funds moving in. Doesn't that free up some of those ... Mr. Rossmann: No, it does not, unless we reduce the service level at the libraries. If it were to do that, then there would be—assume these grants— from Monique's perspective, they were assumed. As she presented you performance measures about the Library, etc., she assumed those dollars. Ms. LeConge-Ziesenhenne: Right. Mr. Rossmann: They just weren't yet in the book. Ms. LeConge-Ziesenhenne: Right, yeah. Chair Schmid: Okay, thank you. I guess I have a more general question of I went to look for reappropriations in our budget documents. When we vote the budget, we see the 2015 Adopted Budget and the 2016 Proposed Budget. Where's the millions of dollars of reappropriations from last year? Mr. Rossmann: In last year's process, the reappropriation process did not amend the budget. It just kept it the same, so you don't see it in FY 2015 Adopted. However, with the change the Council made and with the budget (inaudible) attached to here, we actually will see the change now in the '16 Adjusted Budget, a modified budget. When we come back to you in part of the quarterly reports, what (inaudible) report, you will see those dollars in those departments. Chair Schmid: Next month or so, we're going to get the outside audited look at the budget. Will the reappropriations appear there? Mr. Rossmann: They will not in the Fiscal Year '15 budget. (inaudible) moving from an accounting process to a budget process which makes them Attachment C more visible. Last year in the CAFRA, you may have learned the line called reappropriations ... Chair Schmid: Shouldn't there be savings in the 2015 budget if we did not spend the money in that year and we're pushing it to the next year? Shouldn't there be less spending in the 2015 budget? Council Member Kniss: it's like a slush fund. Mr. Rossmann: In the 2015 budget, these dollars we are moving forward to '16, they are available because we either didn't spend them or we saved them. We're just taking the money forward from one fiscal year to the next, if I answer your question correctly, unless ... You will have every year, there will be—even in the past, we had the reappropriations coming to the Council, to the Committee first, because there's always some unspent funds which we would like to carry forward for projects we would like to execute. Chair Schmid: Yeah. I guess my base question is there somewhere in the budget I can see that number. Mr. Perez: We give it ... Chair Schmid: Will our audited budget say, "Here's the amount that has been transferred"? Mr. Perez: Yeah. It's a complex area, so let me see if we can try to simplify our response and not be so technical. You will not see it in the Adopted Budget. You will see it in our first adjustment of our midyear report under the adjusted column. That's what Walter was referring to. What we could do is we show you the base budget in that midyear, and we show you a line item with the reappropriation. That should match whatever you approve tonight. That's how you track it. You don't track it from the base budget, the Adopted Budget of the June meeting, but you see it going forward. Chair Schmid: Then when you go and introduce the new budget in March/April, that carried forward amount will be in the ... Mr. Rossmann: I understand now. No, it will not, because these are all one- time dollars, which I assume to be spent. As we close out the fiscal year, that's Fiscal Year '16, and indeed we come to the same situation of some funds to be carried forward, this will always happen after you adopt the '17 budget. You'll always be trailing, because we don't know whether we can get the work done or not, are we able to award a contract or not. In sum, thus we're trying to push very hard to get this done and sometimes it doesn't work out. Attachment C Mr. Perez: Its' very rare that we have something. I think the only thing that comes to mind—I'm not picking on Planning—is the Comprehensive Plan. For a couple of years, you probably remember seeing the reappropriation, but that's usually one off. Usually it's like Walter stated. Something else is the reappropriation. Chair Schmid: Okay. I guess that makes that 500,000 contingency item an important ... Mr. Rossmann: If I may, if Council Member Scharff, if the Committee would like to entertain, the other thing we could do, what Lalo was suggesting, we could make the contingency pending Council approval. We can treat it like the City Council contingency. If we were to use the funds, we'll have to come back to you. If that makes the Committee more comfortable. Council Member Scharff: No. Why should I just not approve it? Why shouldn't we do it the way we've always done it? Mr. Perez: Let me try that, because it's a good question. One of the things that we do is we have a 18 1/2 percent target for our Budget Stabilization Reserve. If you don't, then what will happen is then you're going to be forced to take that money from next year's Budget Stabilization Reserve. You're going to drop it below 18 1/2, because you don't have this $0.5 million in there. What we're trying to do is give you a vehicle so you don't go below the 18 1/2 by having this $0.5 million that you know you want to spend, we just don't know how or how much. You have it in there. If you don't use it, let's say you use 100,000, then you have 400,000 more in the Budget Stabilization Reserve that you can then later move to infrastructure. It's really giving you the cushion so we can stay within our target of 18 1/2. That's really what it's doing from a budgetary standpoint. It's not trying to force you to make a call, because you have to give the authority ... Council Member Scharff: You lost me. I don't know—did the rest of you follow that? (inaudible) Where is the 500,000 now? Mr. Perez: Right now it's in the Fiscal Year '15 Budget Stabilization Reserve. Let me back up. You're right, I probably assumed some things here. The reserve policy says that at the end of the fiscal year anything above the 18 1/2 percent of reserve, the City Manager has the discretion to send it forward to the Infrastructure Reserve, leaving you back at 18 1/2 if there's any excess. Council Member Scharff: Right. Attachment C Mr. Perez: We're going to probably do that or give you some direction or recommendation. Let's say that we do that to '16 and we go to 18 1/2. Now you have these transportation needs; you didn't move the 500,000. You're going to dip from that reserve, and you're going to go below the 18 1/2 because ... Council Member Scharff: We're only going to go below because the City Manager has moved the money above 18 1/2 percent, over it, to the infrastructure funding. That's the only reason we're going below, is that correct? Mr. Perez: Yes. Council Member Scharff: (inaudible) discretionary on the City Manager. Couldn't the City Manager say to himself, "I'm leaving the extra few hundred thousand"? We don't have a requirement that if we go above 18 1/2, you move it. It's discretionary with the City Manager. Mr. Perez: Right. I mean at the end of the day, you make the final call; you're the Council. If you wanted ... Council Member Scharff: We don't make the call. I thought the City Manager ... Mr. Perez: I'm sorry? Council Member Scharff: I thought the City Manager—I thought if this money goes into—I understood it this way. If I'm understanding it wrong, tell me. I understand if we don't approve this, this money goes into the Budget Stabilization Reserve ... Mr. Perez: If you ... Council Member Scharff: ... where it just sits. The City Manager has the discretion but not the obligation to move all of the money above 18 1/2 to the infrastructure fund. He can leave, because he has discretion, some of that money in the Budget Stabilization Reserve. Am I incorrect? Mr. Perez: That's correct. At the end of the day, you could change this ... Council Member Scharff: He could look at this and say, "We're likely to spend 300,000 of this, so I am leaving 300,000." He could say, "I'm leaving 400,000." He could say, "I'm leaving all 500,000 there." Attachment C Mr. Perez: It does exactly the same thing as moving the 500 by your scenario. There's no difference. The difference is that we have to write a BAO. That's the only difference. Council Member Scharff: Right, that's the difference, you have to write a BAO. Mr. Perez: What we are saying to you ... Council Member Scharff: Which is what I think you should do. That's the point; you have to write a BAO. Why should this be any different? Why have a BAO process? Why not say for everything in the City then, the City Manager can decide not to do a BAO? Mr. Perez: Actually that's the item for later tonight, Number 3. Council Member Scharff: Okay. That's really the point. Mr. Perez: The (crosstalk). Council Member Scharff: If you're going to fix that structurally throughout the City in Item Number 3, why should I agree to it to be different? Why should we single this out and do a one-off on this?? How is that good budgeting, to do a one-off? Mr. Perez: It doesn't change the budget. It’s a process issue. That's really what it is. Council Member Scharff: Why should you do a one-off on process? I mean, this is what our auditor comes back and gives you a hard time about, Lalo. That's really what that's about. It's like there are procedures and stuff and then the auditor comes in and says that the budget did a one-off over here, and that we shouldn't have done. Or utilities did a one-off. That's really what they're talking about, at least the way I understand it. Mr. Perez: Technically there's nothing wrong with that. There's no findings. We've done it for years before this Council. You call them different contingencies. I've seen cities that have 20 contingencies. There's nothing wrong with it. Its' a matter of preference and style. If you don't like it, it's okay. Council Member Scharff: Okay. Council Member Kniss: Could I just comment to that? Chair Schmid: Yeah. Attachment C Council Member Kniss: I understand where you're going, Greg, but that is one of those choices. It's a process thing, and I don't know if I'd call that a one-off. I think I would—characterize it as you will, but I don't think that's an unusual process. Council Member Scharff: It's clearly a one-off. We don't typically have a habit of creating large contingency funds to get around the fact that the City—what's the City Manager's authority? Mr. Perez: 85,000. Council Member Scharff: To get around the City Manager's $85,000 authority. We don't have 20 different funds in which the City Manager can then go do that. It just—I don't see any reason why we should do it differently. Chair Schmid: Comment from the Planning Director. Ms. Gitelman: Yeah. Thank you, Council Members. Obviously this is your decision to make. I just wanted to articulate really the motivation behind this was a recognition that we are spending—we, the Planning and Transportation Department, spend a lot of our evenings here with the Council working on multiple initiatives. Many times we come to the Council, like we did last night, to get some decision from the Council. Invariably that decision leads to additional requests for study or for information. We were attempting to recognize that. The amount that we have going through our department right now in a process that would enable us to be more nimble, to be responsive to the Council's priorities and to just make the system work a little better. If it makes you uncomfortable, then obviously that's your prerogative. It was really in recognition for the amount of work that's being handled in the office, and the priority with which we know the Council holds some of these efforts. Chair Schmid: Thank you. Council Member Scharff: Could I just respond to that for just a second? In a nice way. Look, I didn't mean to cast that you were trying to get away with anything or that it was inappropriate in a sort of a way that—I understand that you had good intentions behind it. I understand that you're overworked and that you really just want to be efficient. But financial structural procedures that are put in place for a reason and it's always more efficient to ignore them. It always is. It's always easier. That's really what the auditor comes in and says when there are these issues that come up. The auditor wants to put in some new process and procedure, and Lalo comes to Finance and says, "If you do this," and he wrings his hands. I Attachment C mean not inappropriately. I mean there's a tension there. I understand that, but I don't think that you can suddenly create large amounts of cash, and I consider 500,000 to be a large amount of cash. I mean, if you think the City Manager should be able to approve more than $85,000, we could have a system-wide discussion of that. I just think large amounts of cash that don't come to Council, that the City Manager gets to just approve, I think it's just the wrong way to go. Council Member Kniss: Could I respond to that or are you going to? Chair Schmid: I think we ought to move to a motion, a concrete motion of how to approach this and deal with it. Any suggestions? Council Member Kniss: Just another comment. In any governing body I've served on, this is always the discussion. The question is should the person have authority who has the authority to use that money or should they have to come to the governing body and ask them to use that money. That's really what your question is. Council Member Scharff: It's not actually. Council Member Kniss: Then I must not be hearing it correctly. Council Member Scharff: We do; we had that discussion. The City Manager has $85,000. We made those decisions. What they're asking for is an exception to that. I think that you should only have exceptions to these things when you have a really good reason. The fact that it's more efficient and easier to do it is not a good reason, unless there's some crisis, unless there's some ... Council Member Kniss: I think we're saying the same thing. I really do. I think it's a matter—I mean you're uncomfortable with the expediency. Council Member Scharff: Correct. I'm uncomfortable changing the procedures for expediency. Council Member Kniss: I understand totally. As Lalo just said, it's our call. Council Member Scharff: Yeah, absolutely. Council Member Kniss: We want to see every appropriation that comes through. Sometimes governing bodies lose faith in their administration, and they want to see absolutely everything. I think at some point you say, "Is this good or is this bad?" End of discussion for me. You want a motion? Chair Schmid: Yes. If we could get it ... Attachment C Council Member Scharff: I'll make a motion. Council Member Kniss: I'll second it. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to recommend the City Council approve these reappropriations with the exception of the Planning Department for the $500,000. Council Member Scharff: Okay, great. I'll move that we approve these reappropriations with the exception of the Planning Department one for $500,000. Council Member Kniss: With what exception? Council Member Scharff: The Planning Department one for $500,000. Council Member Kniss: No. No, I'm not going to, no. You're going to have to get somebody else to do (crosstalk). Chair Schmid: You seconded it too early. Council Member Kniss: Because I didn't hear what you said. Get closer to the mike. No, I'm not going to penalize the Planning Department for 500,000. MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND Chair Schmid: Is there a second? Council Member Filseth: I'll second it. MOTION: Council Member Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to recommend the City Council approve these reappropriations with the exception of the Planning Department for the $500,000. Chair Schmid: Do you want to speak to your motion? Council Member Scharff: I think we've talked about it quite a bit. I think, Council Member Kniss, that the difference is it's not a matter of trust. It's not a matter of—it's a matter that we have certain procedures in place. You'd have to make a good argument. Otherwise, you could say, "Why not any time"—why have 85,000? Why not just let the City Manager sign whatever he wants? We trust him. I mean, why have an 85,000 rule? If you're not going to follow those kind of procedures, you're going to get yourself in trouble. If you're always looking at expediency as opposed to we Attachment C have these procedures—if the procedures are too limiting, we should change the procedures. That's the difference. Council Member Kniss: I don't agree with that because I don't think— Chair Schmid: I'm sorry, Council Member ... Council Member Kniss: Sorry, the second gets to talk. Excuse me. Chair Schmid: ... Filseth. Yes. Council Member Filseth: It just seems to me that setting up a $0.5 million discretionary budget without sort of a huge amount of restriction on what it's going to get used for with some money coming from someplace else that it was originally for but didn't get spent, it seems to me that setting that during the reappropriations process seems like kind of an odd way to do it. I'll second the motion. Chair Schmid: Council Member Kniss, did you ... Council Member Kniss: Because I see this so differently—basically you have a CEO of your company and the CEO of your company has a certain limit. At the County, the limit was 95,000. The difference that it makes is there should be some ability of your CEO or whomever it is, your manager, to make some of those discretionary calls. I think, yes, 500,000 may sound like a lot, but I'm not sure you're going to get a whole lot for 500,000, given what we've been spending on transportation and attempting to get our house in order in many of the areas that Hillary has been dealing with. I am not saying this as a far out kind of issue. I can hear your concern about the auditor. I can only say it is not an unusual process, nor is it an unusual practice. We're simply saying we don't like having it like that. Council Member Scharff: With the exception, I've been on Finance Committee every year for the last whatever number of years I've been on Council. I have never seen us do this. I mean, I don't recall ever you setting up a $0.5 million fund out of something that was completely different. Reappropriations, every time I've looked at them in the past has always been we're taking the money that was appropriated for something and reappropriating it for the same thing. I've never seen it used in this way. Chair Schmid: Let's see. I am sympathetic to the motion, that this is $500,000 that was voted for the Council for very particular thing that did not happen. It becomes discretionary. I think the point has been made that the Planning Department especially in its transportation work is under severe Attachment C pressure. The Council, every time it deals with the issue, asks for further work to be done on deadlines to move ahead. Let me suggest a friendly addition to the motion, that the first part of the motion is that the—is what, Greg? Council Member Scharff: That we approve the appropriations. Chair Schmid: Other and not this, but that this money is moved into a special Council contingency fund which will be set aside for transportation issues over the course of the year. When the Council asks for something, the Planning Director can come and say or the Finance Director can come and say, "We would like to use X amount of dollars for this specific purpose." Mr. Perez: Yes. You can add it to your current contingency or make it a special transportation contingency. I just have to make one clarification, Council Member Scharff. We were not asking for a waiver of the 85,000 with this process. Just to be clear. We would still come to you with anything over 85, just so we were on the record on that. We don't want to leave you with the wrong impression. That's not what we were asking for. Anything you give us, we have to come to you with anything above 85, no matter what contingency it comes from. Chair Schmid: Okay. Council Member Scharff: If we take Council Member Schmid's approach, then the money would go into a separate transportation fund. Mr. Perez: Within the General Fund. Council Member Scharff: Within the General Fund. Mr. Perez: What we would have to do is come back and write a report. Typically when you put it in a contingency, technically you do not need a Budget Amendment Ordinance, because it's already appropriated for that purpose. Council Member Scharff: I'm fine with Council Schmid's approach then. I don't see any difference from it being there or being in the Budget Stabilization Reserve frankly, except for it actually is ... Chair Schmid: Yeah, I guess ... Council Member Scharff: .... it's more focused on transportation now as opposed to you can't use it for anything else actually in the meantime. Attachment C Chair Schmid: Yeah, I guess I'm concerned a little bit with the Budget Stabilization Fund, because there's what has become an automatic movement to the infrastructure. Council Member Scharff: Right. I'm good with your amendment. Chair Schmid: Okay. Any further comment? Council Member Filseth: I'll accept it. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to recommend the Council direct Staff to move the Planning Department request of $500,000 to a special Council Contingency Fund to be set aside for transportation issues brought forward over the upcoming year. Council Member Kniss: I'm going to clarify it once more. It will go into a special fund. I don't care whether it's called ABC or DEF. It's a special fund that is—it is meant for transportation needs, correct? Mr. Perez: Correct. Council Member Kniss: It doesn't change the 85,000 ceiling, correct? Mr. Perez: Correct. That accomplishes what we're asking you to do. Council Member Kniss: Then I'm okay with that. Let me just say a little further. If there is anything that I have spent more time and energy on in email and phone calls than those issues that have dealt with transportation this year, I don't know what it is. Between parking down in Eric Filseth's area—hello, down there. Whether it's parking in North Palo Alto or now it's moved across the street or whatever it may be, this is one of those areas where I keep hearing from citizens, "You guys have to move on this. You've got to move it up. You've got to move it over." We have a real demand in this community for things that deal with transportation. I am far more sympathetic with this than I would be if you tell me you need to re-roof the Roth Building or something like that and stick that in a contingency. I think this is a real, live issue in our community. I want our transportation division and Hillary to be nimble with this. I think this is the easiest way to be nimble. Chair Schmid: Yeah, and that's the goal of it. Planning Director. Ms. Gitelman: Thank you. I appreciate where this is trending. I just wanted to clarify. We had suggested this contingency planning and transportation item and the thought that there might be a larger Attachment C transportation—I'm sorry, planning issue in addition to transportation issues. I don't know whether you want to make it specific to transportation and parking or leave open the potential that this could be used, for example, if we wanted to proceed with the next phase of the Downtown CAP study or another big initiative like that that's not currently budgeted elsewhere. Entirely up to you. Mr. Perez: To remind you, the way you have set the motion, you give the direction, not the City Manager. Chair Schmid: Do you want to widen it? Council Member Scharff: I'm just laughing because it gets wider and wider as you go through this process. Chair Schmid: Yeah. I said transportation because the original Council vote was for a shuttle program which was transportation-oriented. That, of course, does not mean that as funding needs arise, as we go through the Comp Plan Update, we won't respond to whatever the Council is asking for. Council Member Scharff: By putting it in this fund though, any time you want to use it, you'd need to do a BAO that would say where it's coming from. Mr. Perez: We cannot touch it ourselves, correct. Council Member Scharff: You'd say where it's coming from, right? Mr. Perez: We don't have to do a BAO technically, but we have to come to you to pull from there. Council Member Scharff: You have to come to us and pull it from there? Mr. Perez: Yes, we can't do it ourselves. Mr. Rossmann: You'll approve it (crosstalk)—I'm sorry. You will approve it by motion. Council Member Kniss: That's fine. Mr. Rossmann: It will be part of the recommendation language. It would say allocate $50,000 from the planning/transportation/parking contingency account towards that purpose. That's the type of motion you would see. Chair Schmid: Transportation contingency because that ... Attachment C Mr. Rossmann: Whatever the Council decides to call it. Chair Schmid: ... that's wider. Okay, if there are no further comments ... Council Member Scharff: Hillary, now I'm concerned actually. No, I mean, the issue is this. The issue is that you said transportation and you may need to use it for something else. I'm not saying it would be inappropriate to use it for something else, but if we leave it at transportation and you need to do a big planning initiative, then we have money sitting there and you have to find the money somewhere else. Right? As long as we are making the decision at Council, I'm fine with broadening it. My goal here is not to hamstring—make it even more difficult. I think if we just have a transportation contingency, what we're doing is making it more difficult for you to do your job, not less. If I'm wrong and you're fine with it just being transportation, say so and I'll shut up. Ms. Gitelman: I'm fine with that. Council Member Scharff: Just being transportation, you're fine with that? Okay. I'm fine. Transportation it is. Chair Schmid: Okay. Any further comments? Council Member Kniss: It's almost midnight. I'm ready to vote. Chair Schmid: All in favor of the motion. I guess we need to say all in favor. Council Member Scharff: Oh, we all push the button. Is that what we do? Chair Schmid: Yeah. That passes unanimously. Thank you very much. MOTION PASSED: 4-0 ADJOURNMENT: Meeting adjourned at 7:50 P.M. Attachment C City of Palo Alto (ID # 6338) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 11/16/2015 Summary Title: 1050 Page Mill Road Title: PUBLIC HEARING - Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) and Approval of the Record of Land Use Action to Allow Demolition of Four Existing Structures Totaling 265,895 sf and Construction of Four Two-Story Office Buildings Totaling 265,895 Square Feet of Floor Area with Below and At-Grade Parking and Other Site Improvements Located at 1050 Page Mill Road. Zoning District: Research Park (RP). Environmental Assessment: An Environmental Impact Report has Been Prepared (Staff Requests This Item be Continued to December 7, 2015) From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation 16thThis item will not be heard on November and is instead being recommended for continuance to December 7, 2015 to allow adequate time for staff to obtain a recommendation from the Planning and Transportation Commission regarding certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The Commission is scheduled to make their recommendation at a special meeting on November 18, 2015. City of Palo Alto Page 1 City of Palo Alto (ID # 6120) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 11/16/2015 Summary Title: Ordinance Regulating Hazardous Material Users (CPI) Title: Review and Direction Regarding a Draft Ordinance Regulating Hazardous Materials Users and Sensitive Receptors such as Residences, Schools, Day Care Centers, Convalescent Homes and Similar Uses in Office, Research and Manufacturing Districts and Making Related Changes to Municipal Code Provisions Related to Non-Conforming Uses, as well as a Draft Ordinance Regarding Amortization of Uses at Communications & Power Industries, LLC (CPI), 607-811 Hansen Way From: City Manager Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment Recommendation Direct staff to prepare two ordinances substantially in the form of the draft ordinances attached regulating hazardous materials users and establishing a schedule for amortizing a non- conforming use, for review by the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) and consideration by the City Council at a noticed public hearing before the end of February 2016. Executive Summary The proposed draft hazardous materials ordinance at Attachment A would amend provisions in the Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) related to industrial zoning districts in four principal ways: It would define three categories or “tiers” of hazardous materials uses, including two that are already addressed in the code, and one that is not; It would define “sensitive receptors” that could potentially be affected if there is an accidental release of hazardous materials from hazardous materials uses and the hazardous materials travel off site; It would establish a minimum distance between Hazardous Materials Tier 2 and Hazardous Materials Tier 3 uses and sensitive receptors; and It would make adjustments to provisions governing non-conforming uses. The hazardous materials ordinance was drafted in response to City Council direction after several Council discussions regarding hazardous materials uses at Communication & Power City of Palo Alto Page 1 Limited Manufacturing Subdistrict - Embarcadero (ROLM(E)) ROLM to apply to smaller sites in areas with limited access or with environmental sensitivity because of their proximity to the Palo Alto Baylands in the Embarcadero Road area. (29 parcels) 67 acres Research Park (RP) Provides for research and manufacturing uses that may have unusual requirements for space, light, and air and desire sites in a research park environment. Premium research and development facilities should be encouraged in the RP. Support office uses should be limited, existing primarily to serve primary research and manufacturing uses. (82 parcels) 437 acres Research Park Subdistrict 5 (RP(5)) A subdistrict that modifies the site development regulation of the RP to regulate large sites in hilly areas. (19 parcels) 230 acres General Manufacturing (GM) Provides for light manufacturing, research and commercial service uses. Office uses are very limited to maintain the district as a desirable location for manufacturing uses. (145 parcels) 97 acres Source: Palo Alto Department of Planning & Community Environment and Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.20, October 2015. Communication & Power Industries, LLC (CPI) CPI is located at 607-811 Hansen Way in the Stanford Research Park and manufactures microwave and radio frequency products for defense, communications, and medical scientific and other applications. Once a part of Varian, but now independent, CPI has been at this location since the 1950’s. The ity believes that PI’s lease with Stanford University extends to the year 2051. In 2005 CPI was the only plating shop in Palo Alto using and storing hazardous materials at or above the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP) threshold levels (defined as “Hazardous Materials Tier 3” in the draft hazardous materials ordinance. In 2005-2006, CPI consolidated its San Carlos operations into Palo Alto, expanding and upgrading the plating facility and related storage areas. CPI continued to use and store hazardous materials in amounts over the CalARP thresholds. (As explained further below, CPI reduced their use and storage of hazardous materials below the CalARP thresholds in 2012.) Between 2006 and 2008 there were three hazardous materials releases from the CPI site. In February 2005 residents on Chimalus Drive reported a noxious odor, which turned out to be caused by a nitric acid gas release from CPI. In March 2008, about 20 gallons of 31% hydrochloirc acid was released in the rear driveway and about 60 gallons of less than 31% mixture of hydrochloric acid and water were released inside the basement of Building 2 during a chemical delivery because of an improper overfill and disconnect procedure by the delivery driver. In May 2008, approximately 50 gallons of dilute wastewater contining copper and nickel was released to Matadero Creek as the result of improper weekend shutdown of process equipment and improper opening of a containment valve that discharges to the creek. In 2007 the City Council enacted zoning code amendments to address hazardous materials. Section 18.23.100 (Hazardous Materials) of the Municipal Code was intended to prevent new hazardous materials uses or intensification of uses above the CalARP thresholds, and to provide more notification for residents throughout the city when adjacent facilities increased or City of Palo Alto Page 3 modified hazardous materal use and storage. Specifically, the City Council added provisions to the Zoning Ordinance to require uses such as CPI to comply with the California Accidential Release Prevention Program (CalARP) regulations and provide regularly prepared Risk Management Plans (RMP) for local review. In addition, the zoning required a conditional use permit for any new facility and for conversion or reconstruction of any existing facilities subject to CalARP regulations. New and reconstructed CalARP facilities with RMPs (now proposed to be defined as “Hazardous Materials Tier 3” uses) were prohibited within 300 feet of a residential zone or existing residential uses. These zoning changes made CPI a noncomforming use until March 2012 when CPI reduced the amount of Potasssium Cyanide and Nitric Acid on site below the CalARP threshold quantities and was no longer required to comply with the CalARP regulations. Since 2012, CPI has been in conformance with the requirements of the Zoning Code. Under the proposed ordinance, CPI would qualify as a Hazardous Materials Tier 2 use. The City hired AECOM to conduct a Risk Assessment of PI’s operations. !EOM reviewed documents, conducted a site visit to the plating shop and cryogenic liquid storage area, and reviewed PI’s hemical Management Program, which is required by both the U.S. EPA (for compliance with the Clean Air Act) and Cal-OSHA (administering California requirements that employers implement an Injury and Illness Prevention Program). AECOM also undertook validation of prior CPI air dispersion modeling (from the 2008 RMP), identified five potential ‘extreme events,’ and performed air dispersion modeling to estimate potential off-site health effects from the two extreme events determined to be ‘most likely’ to occur. (See CMR#4622 from October 6, 2014 for more details, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/44095) AECOM issued its report in January 2014. !EOM’s air dispersion modeling demonstrated that a hypothetical nitric acid release event could result in health effects up to 92 feet from the assumed release, or to the first row of residences in the Barron Park neighborhood, south from Building 2. Air dispersion modeling of the cryogenic hydrogen release event showed that the toxic end point would terminate within PI’s property boundaries and would not reach the adjacent residences. On February 20, 2014, the City held a community meeting where neighbors expressed the concern that the ‘extreme events’ modelled in the Risk !ssessment did not address a major earthquake, which might affect the wider community and cause a delay in public safety response. To address the neighbors’ concern, AECOM developed another air dispersion model to examine the impact if a major earthquake compromised the containment of chemicals in the plating shop and the building housing it. The supplemental evaluation examined a hypothetical scenario based on assumptions about the nature of the earthquake damage to the building and the resulting mixing of chemicals that !EOM described as “highly unrealistic.” Based on these assumptions, AECOM concluded that the hypothetical scenario could result in a release with City of Palo Alto Page 4 the potential to affect residential uses up to a distance of 616 feet from the plating shop. (Again, see CMR #4622, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/44095). Representatives of CPI commented that this scenario, which assumes substantial building damage from a major earthquake, should be evaluated in the context of the building’s seismic strengthening and the likelihood of an earthquake occurring that would cause damage sufficient to result in the mixing of chemicals in the plating shop. CPI retained a consultant (Albus-Keefe & Associates) (AKA) to conduct a probabilistic assessment of the likelihood of ground shaking sufficient to cause structural failure of the second floor. AKA concluded that the probability of this level of ground shaking would be 0.75% over 50 years, or less than the current Building Code requirements. The ity’s consultants at AECOM subsequently reviewed this report and concluded that !K!’s results were reasonable, with several limitations. !EOM also noted several additional items that would be helpful to understand in order to evaluate the probability of ground motion seriously affecting Building 2 and observed that the AKA review did not constitute a comprehensive seismic risk evaluation. At the Council meeting of October 6, 2014, PI’s consultant ENVIRON submitted a declaration further commenting on the supplemental evaluation of an earthquake scenario. !EOM’s response to this declaration is included as Attachment C. The ity ouncil’s direction to staff at the October 6, 2014 meeting is included as !ttachment D and indicated that staff was to develop a zoning ordinance to regulate plating shops and similar uses with similar hazards, identify incompatible adjacent uses, identify appropriate volumes of hazardous materials for regulation, possibly establishing tiers in the ordinance for facilities covered, and incorporate an amortization schedule for non-conforming uses. Discussion Regulatory changes in the attached draft hazardous materials ordinances (Attachment A and Attachment B) can be grouped into three categories: definitions, minimum distances, and amortization. The recommendations and alternatives related to each of these are discussed below. Definitions The proposed ordinance would define three “tiers” of hazardous materials users where there are currently two, and would define as “sensitive receptors” those uses that may include individuals who are more susceptible than others to adverse effects from exposure to toxic chemicals and other pollutants. Section 18.23.100(B)(i) through (iv) of the ity’s Municipal ode currently regulates uses of hazardous materials in excess of the “CUPA” thresholds (quantities) defined by the State Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95. These uses would now be defined as “Hazardous Materials Tier 1” uses. The CUPA program requires facilities which store, use or handle more than 55 gallons, 500 pounds, or 200 cubic feet of regulated material to submit a Hazardous City of Palo Alto Page 5 Materials Business Plan (HMBP) that reports the on site chemical inventory.1 According to the Palo Alto Fire Department, there are 419 facilities with hazardous materials in Palo Alto, and 268 of them require HMPs. These “Hazardous Materials Tier 1” uses are dispersed throughout Palo Alto, and include a wide variety of land uses such as gas stations, manufacturing businesses, retailers who sell paint, solvents and pesticides, and nail salons. Section 18.23.100(B) (v) of the ity’s Municipal ode currently regulates uses of hazardous materials in excess of the CalARP or Title 19 thresholds defined by the California Code of Regulations. These uses would now be defined at “Hazardous Materials Tier 3” uses.2 There are currently no Hazardous Materials Tier 3 facilities in Palo Alto. The ordinance would establish a middle tier (“Hazardous Materials Tier 2”) defined as users of hazardous materials exceeding the CUPA quantities where those materials are classified as Toxic or Highly Toxic by Chapter 2 of the State Fire Code or as Extremely Hazardous Substances by federal regulations (40 CFR Part 355). There are currently 14 Hazardous Materials Tier 2 facilities in Palo Alto, as shown in Table 2 below.3 Two hospital facilities and the ity’s regional wastewater treatment plant are excluded from this definition and fall outside the zoning districts that would be affected by the proposed hazardous materials ordinance in Attachment A. Because hospitals provide services to ill, youth and elderly (all of whom are considered sensitive receptors), they are required to implement safeguards to avoid accidental exposure. Hospitals must adhere to specialized building safety regulations, receive oversight by the California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, and comply with the Alfred E. Alquist Hospital Seismic Safety Act. The regional wastewater treatment plant is an essential public facility. The plant has been upgraded regularly, most recently in 2010, with the addition of ultraviolet light disinfection which eliminated the use of chlorine at the plant. The plant implements a management system that integrates elements of al/OSH!’s process Safety Management standard, EP!’s Risk 1 Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health's Hazardous Materials Compliance Division is the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) and administers the Hazardous Waste Generator Program and Tiered Permitting (California Health and Safety Code Chapter 6.5), Underground Storage Tank Program (California Health and Safety Code Chapter 6.7) and the Risk Management Program (California Health and Safety Code Chapter 6.95). As a Participating Agency, the Palo Alto Fire Department administers the Hazardous Materials Business Plans requirement (California Health and Safety Code Chapter 6.95) and Aboveground Storage Tank (California Health and Safety Code Chapter 6.67). 2 alifornia !ccidential Release Prevention Program (also referred to as “Title 19”), contains State regulations that require Risk Management Plans (RMPs) to be prepared for local review when the use of hazardous materials exceeds certain thresholds. The City added requirements to its Municipal Code regarding uses that exceed the CalARP thresholds in 2007. 3 This list is compiled from forms submitted to the Palo !lto Fire Department using the State’s electronic reporting system and reviewed by the ity’s consultant, !EOM. Hazardous Materials Tier 2 facilities are subject to change as hazardous materials uses and quantities shift over time. City of Palo Alto Page 6 facilities in Palo Alto).4 ased on staff’s analysis, these proposed regulations would make three existing Tier 2 facilities “legal and non-conforming,” meaning that the uses were legally permitted when they were instituted, but would no longer conform with the ity’s zoning. The affected facilities are all on the CPI site (Buildings 1A, 1B and 2).5 Amortization As first discussed in April 2012, amortization is one means by which a city can terminate a nonconforming use. Amortization can phase-out a use that is either incompatible with adjacent uses or where a change in use is desired as part of an orderly transition to other uses, for example, the conversion of an area from light industrial uses to residential. In the past, the City of Palo Alto has provided amortization periods from five years to 30 years and has terminated uses including a nonprofit molecular research activity, a dance studio, art studio, gero- psychaitric skilled nursing facility, and tire sales and installation. Generally, when zoning regulations change in a manner incompatible with a current use that was lawfully established, the non-conforming use may remain but cannot expand or intensify. The California Supreme Court has held, however, that “zoning legislation may validly provide for the eventual termination of nonconforming uses without compensation if [the legislation] provides a reasonable amortization period commensurate with the investment involved.” Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San Diego (1980) 435 Cal3d 848. Thus, to determine an amortization schedule, the City must look at the value of the investments involved, and the Court has indicated that “the reasonableness of the amortization period depends on the interplay of many factors, including the depreciated value of the structures to be removed, their remaining useful life, and the hardship to the public if they are left standing.” City of Salinas v. Ryan Outdoor Advertising, Inc. (1987) 189 CalApp3d 416. In 2011, following three accidental hazardous materials releases at CPI, the City commissioned an amortization study to determine a reasonable amortization period for CPI to come into 4 Under the terms of the proposed ordinance, existing sensitive receptors within 300 feet of existing Hazardous Materials Tier 2 uses would only be considered legal and non-conforming (and therefore constrained from expanding) if they are located within an industrial zoning district. 5 The staff recommendation to use 300 feet as the minimum separation for hazardous materials uses (Hazardous Materials Tiers 2 and 3) is based on the ouncil’s prior determination in 2007 to use 300 feet for Tier 3 uses. It is also three times the distance of off-site impacts identified in the 2014 dispersion modelling completed by the ity’s consultant AECOM. The later, supplemental earthquake scenario indicated that a physical separation of around 300 feet may not be sufficient to completely avoid health risks in a hypothetical scenario in which there is substantial damage to Building 2 (which houses the plating shop), rupture and failure of the containment barriers occurs, and hazardous materials mix to create hydrogen cyanide, assumptions that AECOM characterized as “highly unrealistic.” Under this scenario, a physical separation of about 616 feet would be needed to assure no off site impacts under the assumptions in the model. If the Council were to consider a minimum separation that is greater than 300 feet, more Hazardous Materials Tier 2 facilities would become legal and non-conforming, and could be subject to amortization. City of Palo Alto Page 8 compliance with the Zoning Ordinance adopted in 2007. (This was before CPI reduced its use of hazardous materials below the CalARP thresholds that the ordinance proposes to define as “Hazardous Materials Tier 3.”) The study prepared by CB Richard Ellis, economic real estate consultants, concluded that a reasonable termination date for PI’s plating shop would be 20 years from the date that the most significant improvements occurred on the CPI site, which was in 2006. Thus the CB Richard Ellis study would support an ordinance eliminating the nonconforming use in 2026. CPI subsequently submitted its own amortization study which concluded that the plating shop could not be separated from the rest of the facility, and that a reasonable amortization period for the entire facility would be about 40 years - or in 2052. Both amortization studies can be reviewed at http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/pln/new projects/cpi.asp. The proposed draft amortization ordinance (Attachment B) accepts the conclusions of both studies regarding CPI, which were peer reviewed by AECOM, and would require that the plating shop be moved more than 300 feet away from sensitive receptors by the end of 2026, and that the other Hazardous Materials Tier 2 uses be moved more than 300 feet away from sensitive receptors by 2052. The plating shop could be moved 300 feet away from sensitive receptors without being separated from the rest of the facility because the CPI site is large enough to accommodate a new plating shop on the north side of the site, away from Barron Park. If the Council were to select a minimum distance that would preclude relocation of the plating shop on PI’s site, !EOM’s peer review suggests that the termination date would need to be extended so that either technological advances are developed sufficient to allow the plating shop to be separated from the rest of the facility, or sufficient time is provided for CPI to recoup its investment in the entire facility. See Attachment G for !EOM’s peer review of the 2011/2012 amortization studies. Public Outreach City staff has made an effort to ensure that those who may be interested in the attached ordinance are aware of the ity’s interest in regulating hazardous materials uses. Staff and consultants from AECOM conducted a community meeting on October 22, 2015 and a written summary of questions and answers from that meeting is provided as Attachment I. Staff also provided notice to potentially affected Hazardous Materials Tier 2 uses, and reached out to those that would become legal and non-conforming under the terms of the hazardous materials ordinance in Attachment A. In the course of this outreach, one of the potential Hazardous Materials Tier 2 uses that was on the list shown at the October 22nd meeting has been determined to qualify as a Hazardous Materials Tier 1 use (reducing the number of facilities on the list from 15 to the 14 listed in Table 2 above). If the City Council directs staff to proceed with preparation of the proposed ordinance for consideration in early 2016, staff will continue efforts to verify the facilities on the list. Timeline City of Palo Alto Page 9 Upon receipt of the ouncil’s direction, staff can revise the draft ordinances as needed and schedule them for review by the Planning & Transportation Commission and consideration by the City Council at a public hearing in early 2016. Resource Impact The proposed draft ordinances would modify zoning regulations in the City and provide a termination date for three legal and non-conforming uses that would be created under the new zoning. No additional City resources would be required to draft or implement the ordinaces. If additional facilities become subject to regulation or if substantial disputes arise from adoption of the ordinances, additional resources may be required. Policy Implications The ity’s omprehensive Plan contains goals and policies that are protective of neighborhood quality of life and the health of the community. The Plan also contains goals and policies that support Palo !lto’s image as a business-friendly community (Policy B-10). On balance, the proposed ordinance is consistent with the Plan’s vision of a healthy community which is supportive of businesses to the extent that they are compatible with Palo !lto’s residential character and natural environment (see Policy L-4, Goal B-1). Environmental Review Staff is seeking City Council direction, which is not a “project” requiring review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However the ordinances that may be prepared based on ouncil’s direction would be subject to EQ! review prior to adoption. As a regulatory action that would modify the list of permitted uses in industrial zones to protect the health and life safety of Palo Alto residents, it is expected that the ordinances would be categorically exempt from review under Section 15308 (Class 8, Actions for Protection of the Environment). Attachments: Attachment A: Ordinance Amending Zoning Regulations Related to Hazardous Materials Use, Storage and Handling (PDF) Attachment B: Amortization Ordinance (PDF) Attachment C: AECOM Response to Declaration of Douglas Dougherty (DOCX) Attachment D: City Council Excerpt Minutes of October 6, 2014 (PDF) Attachment E: AECOM Memo dated October 2, 2015 (PDF) Attachment F: Map of Tier 2 Facilities within 300 Ft of Sensitive Receptors (PDF) Attachment G: AECOM Memo - Peer Review of CBRE 2011 Amortization Study and CPI 2012 Response (PDF) Attachment H: Map of Industrial Zoning Districts (PDF) Attachment I: October 22nd Community Meeting Q&A (DOCX) City of Palo Alto Page 10 Attachment C AECOM [Phone] 916-414-5800 2020 L Street, Suite 400 [Fax] 916-414-5850 Sacramento, California 95811 October 28, 2014 Ms. Hillary Gitelman Planning Director City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 Email: Hillary.Gitelman@CityofPaloAlto.org Subject: Response to Declaration of Douglas Dougherty, PhD, PE, CIH (October 1, 2014) Dear Ms. Gitelman, AECOM has prepared this letter to respond to the Declaration of Douglas Dougherty, PhD, PE, CIH, in Regards to Process Safety at Communications & Power Industries, LLC, dated October 1, 2014. The responses are not intended to address each point contained in the declaration; rather, they focus on select items in Section II, Overall Conclusions, that misstate AECOM information or conclusions contained in AECOM’s report “Risk Assessment for Storing and Handling Hazardous Materials at Communications and Power Industries” January 2014 or associated supplement documents. This letter follows a comment and response format. 1.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Item 8a. The AECOM Report states that not listing oxygen as a Special Management Chemical as part of the CMP was an omission as it is regulated under the Federal Risk Management Program. Oxygen, however, is not regulated under this program and does not fall under the CMP’s definition of a Special Management Chemical. Nonetheless, ENVIRON performed an offsite consequence analysis for an oxygen worst-case release scenario and the offsite consequence analysis concluded that impacts from an oxygen worst-case scenario release would not extend offsite. Since oxygen is not regulated under either the federal or state risk management programs and any impacts from a worst-case oxygen release would remain onsite, CPI does not see the basis to add oxygen to its CMP as requested by the City’s consultant, AECOM. Response – Section 4.1 of the Risk Assessment for Storing and Handling Hazardous Materials report prepared by AECOM in January 2014 states that oxygen is maintained in large quantities at the facility and can be considered an extremely hazardous substance per the Clean Air Act, Section 112 (r). This section of the risk assessment report did not state that oxygen is regulated under the Federal Risk Management Program. AECOM recommends that oxygen be listed as an extremely hazardous substance (EHS) within the CMP since it is considered hazardous under the Hazardous Communication Standard administered and enforced by Occupational Safety and Health Administration (29 CFR 1910.1200). This classification as an EHS is supported by the General Duty Clause of the Clean Air Act, Section 112(r)(1), which does not limit an EHS to the list of regulated substances under Section 112(r) nor the extremely hazardous substances under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. Response to Declaration of Douglas Dougherty Page 2 Item 8bi. Two comments on a lack of a training matrix and potential training gaps of plate shop employees. CPI does have a training matrix and tracks and records training completion by employees. Response – Section 4.3.4 of the AECOM risk assessment report states that Based on discussions with department supervisors, implementation of this training program is limited. Employees working in the plating shop and facilities department are trained in many subject areas annually but a training matrix has not been developed for each employee. This information was obtained from department supervisors during the site survey. An element of an effective safety program is training. Developing a training matrix for each employee confirms adequate training is being provided to limit employee injury within the workplace. Appropriate training records should be maintained to support the safety program and confirm compliance. If the training matrix has been developed since AECOM’s site visit and there is evidence that employees have been trained, AECOM would appreciate an opportunity to review this documentation. Item 8biii. A comment that CPI should keep copies of its daily inspections at the cryogenic liquid storage area and plating shop, which CPI does. Response – Section 4.3.2 of the risk assessment report states Additionally, CPI states that visual inspections are completed daily within the cryogenic liquid storage area and plating shop, and records are maintained of these inspections. However, copies of these records were not provided for review during the site survey. An effective safety program involves completion of mechanical integrity inspections and recording the outcome of these inspections. These inspections support a preventative maintenance program and indicate whether equipment needs to be repaired or replaced. Records of these inspections should be maintained on file. If the records of inspection are available, AECOM would appreciate an opportunity to review this documentation. Item 9. Both the AECOM Report and ENVIRON independently confirmed that the conclusion of no offsite impacts from previously prepared and submitted CPI studies required for federal and state risk management programs were correct. The previous studies found that CPI’s operations do not pose a hazard to the public based on the results of regulatory defined “worst case scenarios”. Response – Section 2.3.4 of the risk assessment report summarizes the air dispersion modeling and outcome of the risk management plans previously prepared for the CPI facility. AECOM did not confirm that no offsite impacts were found from the air dispersion modeling completed for these prior scenarios. In fact, the air dispersion modeling completed for the 2004 Risk Management Plan indicates that the worst-case scenario involving the release of nitric acid would result in the airborne plume traveling 1,056 feet from the facility to reach the toxic endpoint. Similarly, a worst-case scenario involving a spill of potassium cyanide coming into contact with acids would generate hydrogen cyanide gas and this gas would travel 1,056 feet from the facility and offsite to reach its toxic endpoint. Therefore, we find the statement in the declaration misleading. Response to Declaration of Douglas Dougherty Page 3 2.0 CONCLUSION In conclusion, AECOM presents a letter of responses to select items in the declaration. We focused on items that required a clarification and provided responses with an accurate description of the information. . AECOM appreciates this opportunity to provide consulting services to the City of Palo Alto. If you have any questions regarding this letter, do not hesitate to contact Roman Worobel, Certified Industrial Hygienist or Rodney Jeung, Principal. Sincerely, AECOM Environment Roman Worobel, CIH Rodney Jeung SH&E Services Manager Principal Environment Environment roman.worobel@aecom.com rod.jeung@aecom.com MINUTES Public Hearing closed at 9:37 P.M. MOTION: Council Member Price moved, seconded by Council Member Burt to adopt the Ordinance to create Underground Utility District No. 46 and thereby amending section 12.16.02 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Klein absent 17. Council Review and Direction to Staff Regarding the Risk Assessment for Storing and Handling Hazardous Materials at 607-811 Hansen Way (CPI) and Possible Zoning Ordinance Amendments. Mayor Shepherd advised that CPI manufactured microwave and radio frequency products for defense, communication, and medical scientific applications. In 2005, CPI was the sole plating shop in Palo Alto using and storing hazardous materials at or above the California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP) threshold levels. In 2006, CPI upgraded facilities, storage, processing, and safety equipment, but continued to store hazardous materials above the correct levels. Between 2005 and 2008, three hazardous material releases occurred. In response, the City enacted a Zoning Code amendment related to hazardous materials in 2007. CPI was a nonconforming use until March 2012, when CPI reduced the levels of hazardous materials below threshold levels. Hillary Gitelman, Planning and Community Environment Director, reported in April 2012 the Council requested Staff retain a consultant to evaluate potential offsite hazards related to CPI and compare current zoning to best zoning practices. The Council also requested Staff prepare definitions and thresholds of hazardous material facilities for possible restrictions related to the distance between uses similar to CPI and residential uses. The Council also requested recommendations on potential amortization options and a review of those in the context of the consultant's report. Rodney Jeung, AECOM, explained three concepts which contributed to the concept of risk and the understanding of possible public health implications from an accidental release. First, the type and amount of hazardous materials at a facility or source was simply a characterization of quantity, type, and potential health impacts from an accidental release. The second concept was a pathway or mechanism by which hazardous materials might be transported from the source to the surrounding receptor population. The third concept referred to engineering and administrative controls in place at the site to reduce the accidental release. Not considering all three components could lead to inaccurate conclusions or statements that might be taken out of context. He was primarily concerned with Building 2, the cryogenic liquid storage area and the plating shop. The assessment focused Page 19 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES on those facilities because of the use of acutely hazardous materials and their proximity to the Barron Park neighborhood. CalARP was the primary mechanism for evaluating risks at businesses that used, processed, or disposed of acutely hazardous materials that exceeded an amount specified by the State. Businesses that exceeded such amounts were required to prepare a Risk Management Plan, which considered the offsite consequences of an accidental release. Prior to March 2012, CPI exceeded threshold amounts and was required to prepare Risk Management Plans. The Plans were required to identify worst case scenarios or accidental releases and then to predict the toxic endpoint of the scenario whether onsite or offsite. The toxic endpoint was defined as the concentration of airborne hazardous materials beyond which a short-term exposure would not be expected to result in an acute adverse health effect. In other words, exposure within the endpoint would result in adverse health effects. Council Member Holman requested a definition of an acute health effect. Mr. Jeung explained it was exposure of a short-term nature, from a half hour to an hour, that could result in a health effect that would be disturbing, adverse, and require attention. Council Member Holman requested a definition of sensitive receptors. Mr. Jeung defined sensitive receptors in an environmental context as a residential area, a childcare facility, a school, a park, etc. In the instant case, a sensitive receptor was any member of the population. Council Member Holman believed examples would be an individual with asthma or an elderly person with a compromised immune system. She inquired whether the analysis accounted for that. Mr. Jeung responded no. CPI prepared three Risk Managements Plans, in 2004, 2007 and 2008. Nitric acid and potassium cyanide were the hazardous materials of concern in each of the Risk Management Plans. Under the column titled release, all of the scenarios/accidents involved spills or ruptures of tanks storing these chemicals. The 2004 results showed that the distance to the toxic endpoint extended offsite into the surrounding neighborhood. In the more recent two results, adverse health effects occurred on the CPI property but did not extend into the neighborhood. Comparing the three Risk Management Plans (RMP) was difficult, because the amounts and toxicities of materials evaluated in each scenario varied. Assumptions of how the accidental release occurred varied among RMPs. Changes in onsite operations altered the release scenarios and the accidental releases. The methodology for determining the toxic endpoint used an air dispersion model. Each RMP utilized a different model. Staff asked AECOM Page 20 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES to review the most recent RMP and utilize the most current guidance from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to decide which air dispersion model was most appropriate based on which chemicals AECOM anticipated being released. Results essentially confirmed information contained within the 2008 Risk Management Plan, that the offsite consequences would not extend beyond CPI property. He found the toxic endpoint distance to be less than the distance reported in the 2008 RMP. Staff assigned a second primary task to consider other extreme events, other plausible release scenarios and take into account amounts located on the site, possible impact to offsite uses, the likelihood an extreme release would occur, and preventative and safety measures and equipment that could reduce the likelihood of a release. Based on these factors, he developed three scenarios, two of which were reported in January 2014 and the third one in September 2014. The first scenario reviewed a release of 45 gallons of nitric acid that occurred due to a possible equipment malfunction or human error. Under these conservative assumptions, the toxic endpoint extended 92 feet from the loading area to the first row of houses in Barron Park. The second scenario reviewed the cryogenic/liquid hydrogen storage area. In this case, an accidental release could result from mechanical failure, a traffic accident, or a seismic event. Trailers carried the liquid hydrogen, and the scenario expected a failure associated with one of those trailers. The liquid hydrogen would mix with the oxygen in the air, resulting in a very intense flame. In this case, the toxic endpoint was equivalent to the distance within which someone would be exposed to a first degree burn. That distance was 111 feet, within the CPI property. The third scenario arose after a meeting with the Barron Park neighbors. Neighbors expressed concern about a substantial earthquake causing storage tanks to rupture and the chemicals to mix. Therefore, the third scenario considered the nitric acid and the potassium cyanide storage tanks rupturing and containment berms being breached. The two chemicals would mix and result in an airborne release of highly toxic hydrogen cyanide. Using meteorological assumptions and air dispersion modeling, the toxic endpoint was 616 feet from the source, which would extend into the Barron Park neighborhood. The affected area would probably include 60 homes to the south/southeast of CPI. His recommendations included correcting deficiencies reported by the Fire Department. The Fire Department required a Hazardous Materials Business Plan, but there was not an annual update and no oversight to receive that report from CPI. A Chemical Management Plan was important. On its own, CPI prepared a draft Chemical Management Plan in 2013; although, it contained some limitations. He would feel more comfortable with CPI's engineering and administrative controls if improvements to the Chemical Management Program were conducted under Fire Department oversight. Page 21 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES Ms. Gitelman noted Attachment I provided a status of the Health Risk Assessment recommendations that fell within the City's purview. The risk assessment laid groundwork for further consideration of zoning revisions and amortization. At Council direction, Staff surveyed other jurisdictions but did not find an Ordinance comparable to these circumstances. However, Staff learned definitions of uses and methods to establish buffer zones between uses and residential areas. Staff reviewed the City's current zoning regulations and summarized different aspects of zoning regulations. The Code specified the uses generally permitted in Office, Research and Manufacturing Districts. Conditional Use requirements for hazardous materials uses above Title 19 thresholds and the 300-foot buffer instituted for any new use above those thresholds was summarized in the Staff Report. Staff reviewed the mapped landscape buffer included on the Zoning Maps as a means to deal with the question of a buffer. The Staff Report also included information about rules governing legal and nonconforming uses and Building and Fire Code provisions. Staff identified three possible approaches to zoning. The three approaches assumed the City would adopt a Zoning Ordinance consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and expand the landscape buffer adjacent to the site. Using Fire or Building Code definitions would not be a practical strategy. The concept of defining plating shops as a permitted use within Manufacturing Zones except within a specified buffer distance of residential districts received the most attention. The Council would need to determine the appropriate buffer distance. A buffer distance of 100 feet would be appropriate in the first scenario. Other jurisdictions used a 500-foot buffer. The City's Ordinance contained a buffer distance of 300+ feet. In the third scenario, 616 feet would be an appropriate buffer distance. The common concept was to create a regime in which the current use would be legal and nonconforming. That raised the question of amortization. The law allowed nonconforming uses to be phased out over time provided there was a reasonable amortization period commensurate with the investment. The amortization period was calculated based on the value of the investment, not on the date of adoption of the Ordinance. In 2011 the City had a consultant study the value of the investment assuming that a portion of CPI's facility would become nonconforming and have to be relocated. The study assumed the plating shop and the storage area would have to be relocated. The following year, CPI conducted a study of amortizing the entire facility, which indicated it would not be practical or feasible to relocate a portion of the facility. Staff wished to retain a consultant to review both studies and to determine if additional plating shops would be affected by the distance selected in the proposed Zoning Ordinance. Supplemental materials provided to the Council included AECOM's review of a seismic memorandum prepared by CPI's consultant, the PowerPoint presentation, and questions raised at a neighborhood meeting Page 22 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES held the prior week. Staff had not completed preparing written responses to questions answered orally at the meeting. Bob Fickett, CPI President, recalled depictions of CPI as a fly-by-night organization that did not care about public health and safety. Those depictions were not true. CPI had been located at the current site for more than 60 years. The plating shop had been located on the site for more than 50 years. In those 60 years, there had been no harm to any community member. Despite the move of San Carlos operations into the Palo Alto facilities in 2006, CPI currently had the lowest quantity of Title 19 chemicals ever. CPI made numerous improvements over the past several years. Since 2006, CPI added perimeter sensors and alarm systems, backup safety systems, and backup to backup systems at the request of the community. CPI viewed strengthening safety culture as its responsibility and worked to ensure safety protocols remained state of the art. After the accidental release in 2006, CPI hired a company to conduct a complete review of facilities and processes. The consultant found CPI operations to be safe and compliant overall and made some recommendations for additional improvements. CPI implemented those recommendations immediately. At a 2012 Council meeting, a public speaker questioned the approach of the consultant's risk analysis. CPI hired ENVIRON, the same consultant the public speaker mentioned, to perform a second risk analysis. ENVIRON found that CPI's Palo Alto operation was safe and compliant. CPI implemented ENVIRON's recommendations for additional enhancements. The City's consultant, AECOM, also found CPI's operation to be safe and compliant and made some recommendations. After reviewing those recommendations with ENVIRON, CPI addressed recommendations that were appropriate. CPI unequivocally possessed the trainings, operating procedures, and records that AECOM indicated were still needed. He admitted three incidents occurred between 2006 and 2008 when San Carlos operations transitioned to Palo Alto. While none of the incidents harmed employees or community members, CPI implemented measures to ensure similar incidents did not happen again. CPI's employees were proud of their work to save civilian and military lives. Therefore, it was increasingly difficult to tolerate the community's treatment of CPI. CPI had a proven track record of operating a safe, legal, and compliant facility in Palo Alto since 1953. CPI was willing to continue working with the City toward an acceptable solution; however, CPI had limits. It would continue to participate in rational, responsible discussions concerning the safety of CPI operations and the community. CPI would not sit idly by while its reputation was attacked, lies were voiced about its record, employees' characters were impugned, and the vitality of operations was threatened. CPI expected the Council to consider the matters based upon facts and to fairly, appropriately, and legally represent all interests affected by decisions. Page 23 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES Mark Steres, CPI Attorney, had requested another date for discussion of the item, because Doug Daugherty, the lead consultant with ENVIRON, would be out of the country. He would provide ENVIRON's findings in place of Dr. Daugherty. ENVIRON's services included reviewing AECOM's report and supplemental report, and replicating and validating the air dispersion modeling results for the worst case scenarios presented in the 2008 report. ENVIRON thoroughly reviewed and advised CPI regarding its Chemical Management Program. Upon completion of his analysis, Dr. Daughtery concluded "[g]iven the independent safeguards CPI has in place and the unlikely occurrence of extreme events as modeled by AECOM in their two reports, the risk of offsite consequences from an accidental release is very low and it is very unlikely that an incident will occur at CPI that will result in adverse effects to the health or safety of the neighbors." He requested Dr. Daugherty prepare a comprehensive declaration to be submitted to the City and Council. He would provide the declaration to the City Clerk for inclusion in the record. The declaration contained critical information for the City's deliberations. The information directly related to any action that might ultimately be considered by the City as it moved forward. The declaration responded to all comments made by AECOM regarding possible omissions or gaps in CPI's Chemical Management Program. The declaration set forth in detail three conclusions about the AECOM report. First, some of AECOM's comments were based on incorrect interpretation of the regulations. Second, some of AECOM's comments were based on an incomplete review of CPI's records and documents. Third, any remaining AECOM comments had been addressed by CPI. Like AECOM, ENVIRON modeled offsite consequence analysis for nitric acid and potassium cyanide and confirmed no offsite impacts. Based on a comment in the AECOM report, ENVIRON also modeled a liquid oxygen scenario and determined there would be no offsite consequences from it. ENVIRON also assisted in validating a Process Hazard Assessment for the plate shop and for the delivery, storage and waste services that supported the plate shop and for hydrogen storage and distribution. ENVIRON assisted CPI in gathering all existing facility safety programs and organizing them into the Chemical Management Program. Due to earlier work, ENVIRON could review the report and findings prepared by AECOM. All AECOM's comments regarding employee training, equipment maintenance, operating procedures, and inspection records were based on AECOM's incomplete assessment of CPI's records as those matters were addressed by CPI's operations prior to AECOM's review. CPI requested AECOM return to CPI to confirm this and to correct its report. Even with those recommendations, AECOM concluded that equipment was properly maintained and that the EPA's defined worst case scenarios were not expected to travel offsite. At the request of the City, AECOM went beyond the worst case scenarios and evaluated even more remote scenarios. Then, the neighbors requested AECOM model an event Page 24 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES that was so remote that AECOM originally rejected it as too remote to occur. The scenario was an earthquake that collapsed the plate shop building. The scenario was highly unrealistic. AECOM did not include a couple of items in modeling that had a significant difference in its results. The nitric acid release occurred at an outside temperature greater than 90 degrees; however, CPI prohibited delivery on those days. Other controls were not taken into account. The EPA strongly urged communities not to base decisions on worst case modeling. The admonishment applied even more so to extreme events. All experts concluded that CPI's business operations were safe and had a very low risk of harm to the neighboring community. He cautioned the City Council not to make zoning decisions based on highly unrealistic, extreme event modeling such as the 616 feet stated in AECOM's earthquake scenario. The City had not made decisions for other land uses in this manner and should not single out CPI and treat its existing business differently. No daily nuisance conditions were coming from CPI. The neighborhood's concerns were based strictly on fear, not facts or likelihoods. Fear was an insufficient basis to adopt Zoning Regulations that negatively impacted CPI. The Staff Report was correct in that the current meeting was not the time to make a determination or provide direction on an appropriate amortization period for CPI. That determination could be made only after a Zoning Regulation was established and adopted by the City. CPI had a large and long-term investment in the property. Several experts concluded that risk of harm to the community from continued operations at CPI was extremely low. He requested time to respond to public testimony. Romola Georgia stated problems with the CPI facility were ongoing. Noise from delivery trucks was a nuisance. Neither neighbors nor the City were notified of the toxic release. In the case of chemicals mixing as a result of an earthquake, experts estimated she would have less than a minute to evacuate her home. The independent consultant reported neighbors were at risk in case of an industrial accident. Robert Moss felt something was wrong at CPI for spills to occur in the last 8- 10 years. AECOM did not thoroughly investigate the site. CPI was wrong in stating worst case scenarios should not be considered in evaluations. Without that analysis, people would die. The only proper approach was for the City to put CPI on notice that it would have to vacate the premises. Samir Tuma advised that the issue was not as complicated as the amount of information indicated. Fundamentally, a risk to human life was located in proximity to residents. Unlikely events did occur. The primary role of government was to protect the health and safety of residents. All of CPI's safety measures could not ensure people would not die. Page 25 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES Stephanie Munoz believed the Council could obtain correct information and commit to act appropriately. The City's use of amortization was inconsistent. Lydia Kou questioned the ability of CPI to obtain a building permit when it stored hazardous materials onsite. Residents learned about the storage of hazardous materials in 2006 when the first spill occurred. The Risk Assessment Report did not guarantee residents' safety in the case of an earthquake or catastrophic event. She urged the Council to amortize now and for the shortest time period allowed. Arthur Liberman stated Staff assumed CPI was safe because of Fire Department inspections. Seismic analysis could not be trusted. Removing hazardous chemicals would make residents' lives more healthful. He urged the Council to ban hazardous materials from Research Park. Reine Flexer discovered her home on Matadero would be impacted by a spill at CPI. Mr. Steres advised that Barron Park and CPI had been located in the same place since the 1950s and not one person had been harmed. The Loma Prieta earthquake did not cause any problems at CPI even though seismic upgrades were not in place at that time. Council Member Burt noted the Staff Report mentioned regulations that would cover other facilities containing similar materials and volumes. However, the Motion did not address that. He did not wish to create an Ordinance in reaction to one specific circumstance. The Ordinance should identify facilities that posed risks that the Council felt an obligation to mitigate. Zoning referenced distance to residents. Zoning should also consider schools and any other incompatible uses. There was not a distinction with respect to volumes of hazardous materials. The risk was very similar whether volumes were 10 gallons over or under the threshold. There was no attempt to distinguish between a facility with 20 gallons of hazardous materials and a facility with the volumes CPI used and stored. The Ordinance should set boundaries that reflected risk. Mr. Jeung reported a 33-foot distance to the toxic endpoint in one scenario while the distance was 92 feet in the second scenario. He requested an explanation of those two scenarios. Mr. Jeung asked if Council Member Burt was referring to the scenario he created as one of the extreme events with a 92-foot toxic endpoint. Council Member earthquake. Burt inquired whether that scenario involved the Page 26 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES Mr. Jeung answered no. Council Member Burt asked if the 92 feet began at the CPI site or the edge of either the plating facility or the cryogenic storage. Mr. Jeung advised that the 92 feet was measured from the location of the accident. In the referenced scenario, the accident occurred outside Building 2 where loading occurred. Council Member Burt inquired about the distance from the occurrence site to the nearest back fence of a residence. Mr. Jeung clarified that loading occurred in the alleyway. Council Member Burt inquired about the conditions for the 33-foot toxic endpoint. Mr. Jeung reported two scenarios were considered previously in the Risk Management Plans of 2007 and 2008. Both cases assumed the storage tanks ruptured. County Member Burt recalled that the most extreme scenario of an earthquake did not model an existing level of seismic protection. He asked why did it not include that. Mr. Jeung indicated Staff's first direction was to analyze a seismic event sufficient to cause mixing of the chemicals from the two storage tanks. The basic assumption was that two storage tanks would fail and the containment barriers around each tank would fail. Otherwise, chemicals would not mix in a fashion that allowed the release scenario to be evaluated. Council Member Burt suggested AECOM analyzed a seismic event that was not of a specific earthquake scale and not against a specific building. Instead, AECOM analyzed some seismic event that would cause the catastrophic failure; however, AECOM did not define the scale of the event needed to collapse the building or where the seismic event might be centered. Mr. Jeung concurred. The starting point was a seismic event that resulted in failure of the tanks and their containment barriers. There was no attempt to identify the magnitude of that earthquake. Council Member Burt inquired whether a different expert would be needed to appraise the building and determine the level of an event necessary to cause the building to collapse. Page 27 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES Mr. Jeung indicated Council Member Burt was leading him into the seismic evaluation prepared by CPI. In response to the scenario, CPI attempted to evaluate the seismic load required to cause the building's collapse. The study evaluated the probability of such an earthquake occurring. Council Member Burt assumed the evaluation included the scale of an earthquake at some distance from the facility. He asked if AECOM reviewed the study and could provide comments on it. Mr. Jeung did review the document. The basic conclusion was that the approach was logical. The methodology used in the CPI report made sense. The conclusions were rational. However, there were no drawings, calculations, or information that would allow him to verify the calculations. He identified some areas where additional information and context would be beneficial. Council Member Price recalled Ms. Gitelman's comment that an expert would be needed for peer review of the two amortization analyses. Ms. Gitelman advised the City hired an expert to prepare an amortization study. Subsequently, CPI hired an expert to prepare an amortization study and it reached a different conclusion. An expert would be needed to reconcile the conclusions of those studies. The expert could also review any other facilities that could be affected by zoning changes. Council Member Price expressed concern about deficiencies identified in the many studies and reports. MOTION: Council Member Price moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Kniss to direct Staff to prepare a draft Ordinance for review by the Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC) and consideration by the City Council in early 2015. The Ordinance should amend the list of uses in the Zoning Code to explicitly identify plating shops, prohibit plating shop uses within a specific distance of residential uses and residential zoning districts, and incorporate an amortization schedule based on updated information on the value of affected investments. Council Member Price believed people would continue to disagree regarding the findings, outcomes, and implications of the reports. The most reasonable and compassionate approach was to follow Staff's recommendation. The Ordinance should protect the community and neighbors. The Council needed a thorough analysis to provide an appropriate amortization period. This type of use immediately adjacent to community members was unsafe. Palo Alto was at risk for an earthquake. Page 28 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES Vice Mayor Kniss asked if Staff would comment on the value of affected investments if the Motion passed. Ms. Gitelman indicated past studies commented on the value of investments. She did not expect that part of the prior analysis would change, unless there had been changes to the facilities. Vice Mayor Kniss appreciated Council Member Burt's scientific analysis. Council Member Price effectively summarized effects on the neighborhood. While she was sympathetic to CPI, the neighborhood needed protection that the Council could provide. Council Member Schmid noted the extreme scenario of seismic activity did not state clearly the activity. Intensive seismic activity would likely result in gas lines exploding as well. He questioned whether exploding gas lines would compare to an accidental release. The Motion called for a response to plating plants explicitly and for an amortization over a reasonable period of time. CPI's consolidation of facilities into Palo Alto adjacent to a neighborhood should be considered as well. Mayor Shepherd believed the deciding factor was the location of hazardous materials close to a neighborhood. It was important to shift the facility to another neighborhood. Council Member Berman inquired about operational changes made prior and subsequent to consolidating the San Carlos facility. Mr. Fickett reported the size of the plate shop did not change. Some of the tanks and piping were seismically upgraded and the size increased. The amount of chemicals increased when the two plants were first consolidated in 2004. In 2008, the amount of chemicals decreased to current levels. Council Member Berman asked if the location of operations changed. Mr. Fickett replied no. CPI added quite a few structural berms to ensure chemicals did not mix. Council Member Berman recalled Mr. Fickett's comment that the three incidences occurred because of the consolidation of operations. Mr. Fickett advised that the nitric acid odor incident resulted from the transition. Because of construction work, the back doors were open. That was not a normal operating condition. Council Member Berman inquired whether the Fire Department was familiar with the incident of a plume of smoke over CPI. Page 29 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES Eric Nickel, Fire Chief, answered yes. In January or February 2014, a hydrogen transfer resulted in a water vapor. Neighbors called 911. The dispatch center contacted CPI to confirm the incident but did not dispatch a unit. That was not an appropriate response and actions had been taken to correct it. The Fire Department responded to the area the previous Friday evening to check on reports of smoke. The Fire Department had responded immediately to other reports of odors from the neighborhood. Council Member Berman believed it was important for the public to understand the entire situation. While CPI had made changes to improve its safety procedures, the community had changed as well. That type of facility would no longer be allowed adjacent to a neighborhood. He expressed concerns about the comprehensiveness of the Motion. Council Member Holman recognized that CPI had been located in Research Park for a long time; however, circumstances had changed. One of the Council's responsibilities was public safety. Neighbors had rational fears. She would support the Motion. Council Member Scharff would not want to live in fear of smelling unusual odors or of having only minutes to evacuate. He supported the Motion. INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to: 1) identify uses from similar operations with similar hazards; 2) identify additional incompatible adjacent uses (schools, retail, restaurant); 3) identify appropriate volume of hazardous materials thresholds and possibly establishing tiers in the Ordinance for facilities covered; and 4) have AECOM review the ENVIRON analysis of the most extreme risk scenario. Ms. Gitelman reported Staff spent a considerable amount of time reviewing regulatory standards for hazardous materials. CalARP standards no longer applied to CPI. Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) standards were too low. Staff could not identify thresholds that logically separated acceptable risks from unacceptable risks. Staff could not identify quantities or thresholds that made sense in a zoning context; therefore, Staff returned to regulating by use. Council Member Burt noted the Staff Report did not identify CUPA thresholds. Use was not an adequately meaningful description. When Staff returned, the Ordinance would be considered based on those issues. Ms. Gitelman clarified that the Staff Report discussed CUPA thresholds. Staff identified 419 facilities with hazardous materials in Palo Alto, 268 of which required Hazardous Materials Business Plans consistent with CUPA Page 30 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 MINUTES standards. Staff quantified the number of acutely hazardous and hazardous materials facilities regulated under the Fire Code. Staff investigated other standards and the number and types of facilities that complied with standards. Staff did not find it a useful course of investigation to set zoning. Perhaps Council Member Burt could suggest additional approaches for Staff to investigate. Council Member Burt advised that the lack of an easily available standard did not make the proposal a good one. The Council wanted Ordinances to be legally sound which would require some level of technical basis. By simply stating plating facilities, the same risk could occur in a different type of facility. The Ordinance should include other types of facilities. The use of cryogenics had virtually no association with plating, but could be found in many other facilities. James Keene, City Manager, understood Council Member Burt's intent to include many facilities. The conversation could need to be iterative concerning thresholds and tiers and could involve consultant assistance. Council Member Burt suggested Staff consult with CUPA experts at the County of Santa Clara or utilize AECOM. Ms. Gitelman reported the current Ordinance contained two tiers; CUPA and CalARP thresholds. CUPA thresholds required notification after a building permit was issued for facilities that met the CUPA standard. CalARP thresholds required a 300-foot buffer for any new facility and any existing facility that expanded or improve its facilities. Staff attempted to identify additional tiers that might be appropriate. After months of discussions and consultations with experts, Staff concluded the issue was land use compatibility, whether one land use was compatible next to another. Land use had inherent risks associated with hazardous materials. Staff could attempt to identify a threshold between CUPA and CalARP thresholds if the Council wished. Council Member Burt wanted Staff to make another attempt. Council Member Scharff asked if additional analysis would delay providing relief for the neighborhood. He was concerned that Staff would not return for another two years. Ms. Gitelman indicated Staff would perform some additional analysis prior to crafting an Ordinance with or without the Amendment. Until she could speak with experts and debrief from the meeting, she could not provide a timeline for Staff to return. Page 31 of 35 City Council Meeting Minutes: 10/06/14 Hazardous Materials Inventories and Reporting Businesses are required to submit information on a Hazardous Materials Registration Form, whenever they seek a Use and Occupancy permit from the Palo Alto Fire Department if they exceedthe quantities identified in Table 1 or when conditions change onsite (pursuant to Title 17 of the Municipal Code). These forms are part of a statewide system (California Environmental ReportingSystem [CERS]) and provide a consistent way of reporting hazardous materials across businesses and jurisdictions. Businesses are required to certify the accuracy of their inventory statements on an annual basis. Hazardous materials inspectors from the Palo Alto Fire Department verify the accuracy of the inventories during hazardous material inspections. The Palo Alto Fire Departmentis required by State law to inspect the buildings and/or facilities that exceed the CUPA thresholds at least once every three years. The City of Palo Alto currently requires reporting and permits from businesses at hazardousmaterials quantities similar to those identified in the State Health and Safety Code and CertifiedUnified Program Agency (CUPA) regulations, with one exception as indicated in Table 1. Those hazardous materials classified as toxic or highly toxic must be reported to the Palo Alto FireDepartment when their quantities are less than the State threshold quantities (referred hereafter asthe “CUPA thresholds”). Table 1 Hazardous Materials Threshold Quantities Requiring Permits Type of Hazardous Material City of Palo Alto State (Health and Safety Code) Liquids (gallons) Solids (pounds) Compressed Gases (cubic feet) Liquids (gallons) Solids (pounds) Compressed Gases (cubic feet) Hazardous Materials other than those enumerated below 55 500 200 55 500 200 Toxic 10 100 Any amount Highly Toxic Any amount Any amount Any amount Acutely Hazardous Materials Threshold Planning Quantities Threshold Planning Quantities Italicized text indicates Palo Alto reporting and permitting requirements that are more stringent than those in the State Health and Safety Code that are used by most jurisdictions in the state. The State Health and Safety Code refers to Extremely Hazardous Substances; the City’s Municipal Code in Title 17 uses the term “Acutely Hazardous Materials.” Sources: City of Palo Alto, Municipal Code, Title 17 (Hazardous Materials Storage), Chapter 17.20 (Hazardous Materials Inventory); State Health and Safety Code, Division 20, Chapter 6.95, Section 25507(a)(1) 2 More specifically, the City, in its reporting requirements, distinguishes between facilities that have certain types of chemicals (i.e., toxic and highly toxic materials); whereas, the State in its thresholdquantities does not make this distinction. Facilities in the City using any amount of “highly toxic” hazardous materials are required to file hazardous materials inventory forms and obtain a permit. For materials that are considered “toxic,” the City requires the inventory forms and a permit fortoxic liquids greater than 10 gallons, for toxic solids greater than 100 pounds, and for any amountof toxic gases. Acutely hazardous materials and extremely hazardous substances are defined underfederal laws, and businesses with these chemicals require permits when they exceed “ThresholdPlanning Quantities,” as defined in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR 40 Part 355, Appendices Aand B). Hazardous Materials Business Plans / Hazardous Materials Management Plans Businesses that exceed the CUPA thresholds defined by the State Health and Safety Code (see Table 1) are required to prepare Hazardous Materials Business Plans (HMBPs). The State code establishes minimum statewide standards for the content of the HMBPs and allows local jurisdictions the discretion to adopt more stringent standards. In Palo Alto, HMBP requirements areaddressed in Title 17 (Hazardous Materials Storage) of the Municipal Code (see Chapter 17.16Hazardous Materials Management Plan). The City requirements in Title 17 identify two reporting threshold quantities. At quantities that businesses are required to submit a hazardous materials inventory form, businesses are alsorequired to prepare a Hazardous Materials Management Plan (HMMP) as defined by the State Fire Code. If the quantities are at or above the CUPA thresholds, businesses must provide supplementary materials that make the HMMP the equivalent of the state HMBP. In general, HMBPs/HMMPs contain the following information: • a site plan identifying, among other things, the locations of hazardous material handling andstorage areas, evacuation staging areas, and emergency response equipment; • an inventory of the amount and types of chemicals onsite; • a description of methods to separate and protect stored hazardous materials from factors that may cause a fire or explosion, or the production of a flammable, toxic, or poisonous gas, or the deterioration of the primary or secondary containment; • a monitoring program and recordkeeping forms; and • employee training in safety procedures in the event of a release or threatened release of a hazardous material. The supplementary materials required in Palo Alto for businesses if at or above the CUPAthresholds, in order to make the HMMP the equivalent of an HMBP, include: • emergency response plans and procedures in the event of a release or threatened release of a hazardous material; • procedures for mitigating a release of threatened release; • evacuation plans and procedures for the business site; • procedures to prevent an accidental spill or leak of hazardous materials from reaching the sewer or storm drainage systems; and 3 • alarm notifications within the facility and to neighboring facilities that may be affected byan off-site release. These plans are available for public inspection, except for those portions of the plans that specifythe precise location where hazardous materials are stored and handled on site. The Palo Alto Municipal Code, similar to the State Code, has a list of materials that are excludedfrom a hazardous material classification and, therefore, exempt from necessitating a HMMP. These materials include: • retail products, defined as hazardous materials contained solely in consumer products packaged for distribution by retail businesses for the general public, • commercial products used at the facility solely for janitorial or minor maintenance purposes, • hazardous materials contained in a substance intended for use as animal food, • hazardous materials located at a work station in a quantity reasonably required for use asdetermined by the fire chief under the circumstances, • hazardous materials exempted by the fire chief when it has been demonstrated to thesatisfaction of the city that the material in the quantity and/or solution stored does notpresent a significant actual or potential hazard to the public health, safety, or welfare. Chemicals of Interest There are many types of hazardous materials and regulations governing their use and disposal. The City’s regulations in Title 18 (Zoning) do not distinguish among these different types of hazardous materials, with one exception. Section 18.23.100 specifically identifies hazardous materials that require preparation of a Risk Management Prevention Plan pursuant to Title 19 (California Accidental Release Program) of the California Code of Regulations. Title 19 “regulated substances”include toxic and flammable substances subject to Section 112(r) of the federal Clean Air Act andExtremely Hazardous Substances. Title 19 covers hazardous materials that result in human healthhazards and physical hazards. Health hazards are those that affect carcinogenicity or sensitization;physical hazards are those that involve fires, explosions, or reactive hazards. As noted above, the City’s existing zoning regulations in Section 18.23.100 address substances regulated by the state and federal governments above Title 19 thresholds. The City Council expressed concern in October 2014 that hazardous materials at quantities less than Title 19 levelscould adversely affect nearby land uses and an approach should be developed to address this potential effect. The question is, which chemicals should be considered for defining a new tier of hazardous materials use for the City’s zoning regulations? The City’s hazardous materials requirements for permits help address this question in that theyalready require hazardous materials inventory forms from businesses with toxic and highly toxic materials at amounts less than the CUPA thresholds. In addition, Title 17 of the City’s Municipal Code specifically mentions acutely hazardous materials. These classifications of hazardous materials are considered to potentially pose adverse effect to nearby populations in the event of anaccidental release. Considering these types of hazardous materials for the new zoning regulationswould also respond to suggestions from the community to consider “Extremely Hazardous 4 Substances.”1 Chemicals included within these three types of hazardous materials are considered topose health hazards when nearby populations are exposed. While these particular chemicals do notaddress all potential hazards, such as physical hazards, they do encompass those that may be accidentally released, become airborne, and transported toward nearby land uses. The definitions of toxic or highly toxic substances are found in the California Fire Code (see Chapter60 of the 2013 edition). Toxic or highly toxic chemicals are also explicitly identified in the City’spermit system (Use and Occupancy permit from the Fire Department) and building code (“High- hazard Group H-4” that use, handle, or store hazardous materials that are considered health hazards). These chemicals produce a lethal dose or lethal concentration in laboratory animals.2 ExtremelyHazardous Substances are those chemicals listed in 40 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Part 355, Appendices A and B. Their inherent toxicity is most likely to cause severe toxic effects in humans who are exposed to them due to an accidental release, and are specifically targeted as requiringEmergency Response Plans pursuant to the federal Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (42 U.S.C. 11002). 1 In general, many of the chemicals that are defined as Extremely Hazardous Substances are also classified toxic or highly toxic. Nevertheless, there are some toxic and highly toxic chemicals that are not identified as ExtremelyHazardous Substances, and vice versa. Including both types of hazardous materials is somewhat redundant, but ismore inclusive than either list alone. Extremely Hazardous Substances are referred to as “acutely hazardous materials” in the City’s regulations in Title 17 of the Municipal Code. 2 Highly Toxic. A material which produces a lethal dose or lethal concentration which falls within any of the following categories: 1. A chemical that has a median lethal dose (LD50) of 50 milligrams or less per kilogram of body weight whenadministered orally to albino rats weighing between 200 and 300 grams each. 2. A chemical that has a median lethal dose (LD50) of 200 milligrams or less per kilogram of body weight whenadministered by continuous contact for 24 hours (or less if death occurs within 24 hours) with the bare skin ofalbino rabbits weighing between 2 and 3 kilograms each. 3. A chemical that has a median lethal concentration (LC50) in air of 200 parts per million by volume or less of gasor vapor, or 2 milligrams per liter or less of mist, fume or dust, when administered by continuous inhalation for one hour (or less if death occurs within 1 hour) to albino rats weighing between 200 and 300 grams each. Mixtures of these materials with ordinary materials, such as water, might not warrant classification as highly toxic. While this system is basically simple in application, any hazard evaluation that is required for the precisecategorization of this type of material shall be performed by experienced, technically competent persons. Toxic. A chemical falling within any of the following categories: 1. A chemical that has a median lethal dose (LD50) of more than 50 milligrams per kilogram, but not more than500 milligrams per kilogram of body weight when administered orally to albino rats weighing between 200 and300 grams each. 2. A chemical that has a median lethal dose (LD50) of more than 200 milligrams per kilogram but not more than1,000 milligrams per kilogram of body weight when administered by continuous contact for 24 hours (or less ifdeath occurs within 24 hours) with the bare skin of albino rabbits weighing between 2 and 3 kilograms each. 3. A chemical that has a median lethal concentration (LC50) in air of more than 200 parts per million but not morethan 2,000 parts per million by volume of gas or vapor, or more than 2 milligrams per liter but not more than 20milligrams per liter of mist, fume or dust, when administered by continuous inhalation for 1 hour (or less ifdeath occurs within 1 hour) to albino rats weighing between 200 and 300 grams each. 5 Businesses with Chemicals of Interest Based on the types of chemicals of interest identified above, the hazardous materials informationforms on file with the Palo Alto Fire Department were reviewed to identify those buildings withthese chemicals in quantities that exceed the CUPA thresholds. Of the approximately 420 buildingsthat have forms on file in 2014, 14 facilities in industrial/manufacturing zones have toxic/highlytoxic chemicals above the CUPA thresholds or Extremely Hazardous Substances above the Threshold Planning Quantities (see Table 2). Four of the listed buildings have toxic/highly toxic materials and Extremely Hazardous Substances above state thresholds. Table 2 Buildings with Hazardous Materials in Excess of State Thresholds (i.e., CUPA thresholds and Threshold Planning Quantities) Toxic and # of # of Building Highly Toxic Chemicals EHS Chemicals 1 CPI 1A X 1 2 CPI 1B X 14 3 CPI 2/2A X 18 X 1 4 CPI 4 X 2 5 Genecor International X 5 6 Hammon Plating -855 Commercial X 2 7 Hewlett Packard B-1 X 1 8 Hewlett Packard B-2 X 1 X 1 9 ONED Materials X 2 X 2 10 Palo Alto Research Center (Hillview) X 3 X 8 11 Palo Alto Research Center (Coyote Hill) X 2 X 2 12 Space Systems Loral B3 X 1 13 Space Systems Loral B4 X 1 14 Target Discovery X 1 15 Stanford Central Core Building X 1 16 Stanford Phase 1 Diagnostic and Treatment X 1 17 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant X 1 Source: City of Palo Alto Fire Department, 2014. Notes: Toxic Materials = Class 31 chemicals in the City’s fire code hazard classification system Highly Toxic Materials = Class 13 chemicals in the City’s fire code hazard classification system EHS = Extremely Hazardous Substance = acutely hazardous materials in the City’s regulations See tables in attachments for the specific chemicals by building that exceed the CUPA thresholds/Threshold Planning Quantities. Boldface buildings have both toxic/highly toxic substances and Extremely Hazardous Substances above the thresholds. Italicized buildings are not within industrial / manufacturing zoning districts and are subject to additional state and federal regulations to reduce hazardous materials accidental releases. These facilities are all in the Public Facility zone and provide essential /critical services locally and regionally. Their function is different than those that are in industrial zones. 6 Buildings 15, 16, and 17 in Table 2 are the only buildings in the City with hazardous materials inexcess of the state thresholds that are not in an industrial/manufacturing zone. Two are Stanfordmedical facilities and the third is the Regional Water Quality Control Plant. All three are in the City’s Public Facility zone and provide essential services to the City and the surrounding region. Because hospitals and other medical facilities provide services to the ill, youth, and elderly, all of whom are considered sensitive receptors, they are required to implement safeguards to avoidaccidental exposure. It is essential to public health to maintain the operational capabilities of healthcare facilities during and after emergency events. As a result, health care facilities must adhere toadditional building safety regulations and receive oversight provided by the California Office ofStatewide Health Planning and Development. These additional regulations, imposed under theAlfred E. Alquist Hospital Seismic Safety Act, are intended to enable hospitals to remain standingand functional during and after an earthquake for the safety of patients and staff and to providemedical assistance to earthquake victims. As a result, these facilities are not anticipated to pose the same public health effects that industrial buildings might, and are not recommended to be includedas buildings of interest for the proposed zoning regulations. The City’s Regional Water Quality Control Plant also has quantities of toxic/highly toxic hazardousmaterials in excess of CUPA thresholds. At the far east end of the City (more than half a mile fromthe nearest residential area), the plant has been operational since 1934 and has undergone ongoingupgrades, including most recently in 2010 with the addition of ultraviolet light disinfection whicheliminated the use of chlorine at the plant. To prevent accidental releases of hazardous materials, the plant implements a management system that integrates elements of Cal/OSHA’s Process Safety Management standard, EPA’s Risk Management Program rule, and the CalARP program. The plantalso maintains an emergency response plan. As an essential regional facility, the plant is notrecommended to be included as a building/facility of interest for the proposed zoning regulations. Receptors of Interest The City’s existing hazardous materials regulations (Section 18.23.100 of the Municipal Code)require noticing and specify use restrictions for businesses with hazardous materials in quantitiesabove CUPA thresholds. The noticing and use restrictions are directed toward informing andprotecting residential properties (i.e., residentially zoned properties or a property with existingresidential uses in a nonresidential zone). The City Council during its discussion in October 2014expressed concern that other uses, besides residential uses, may also be particularly susceptible tohazardous materials exposure. The US Environmental Protection Agency, local/regional air qualitymanagement districts, and public health agencies all recognize that certain populations are moresusceptible to hazardous materials exposure. In light of the City Council’s direction, the “receptors” that are targeted to be informed and protected by the new zoning revisions is proposed to beexpanded to include “sensitive receptors” – residential areas, medical facilities, schools (typically,elementary and middle schools), and daycare, elderly, or convalescent facilities. Proximity to Sensitive Receptors As mentioned in the “Introduction,” a key factor in determining the potential for off-site adverse health consequences from an accidental release is the distance between a building with toxic or 7 highly toxic hazardous materials and Extremely Hazardous Substances and the sensitive receptors.The January 2014 risk assessment by AECOM showed that there are multiple factors, including the amount of chemicals, the type of chemicals, the meteorological conditions, and the engineering andadministrative controls employed at a business, that affect the distance to the “toxic endpoint”3 and whether acute health risks may affect off-site neighboring land uses. The proximity of sensitivereceptors to buildings/facilities with toxic or highly toxic hazardous materials and ExtremelyHazardous Substances is useful information in establishing the potential for land useincompatibilities and changes to the City’s zoning regulations. The definition of “proximity” can reasonably be based on the City’s zoning and hazardous materialsregulations (Section 18.23.100): • 150 feet – Residential properties receive written notice from the City when there would bea change in the types or quantities of hazardous materials under conditions specified in theregulations and an application for a building permit to enable such change is approved. • 300 feet – Businesses with hazardous materials above Title 19 thresholds are not permittedwithin this distance of a residential property. Beyond 300 feet, such businesses require a Conditional Use Permit. • 600 feet – Noticing distance for businesses applying for a Conditional Use Permit in the City. Under current City regulations, for any business proposing to change the type and quantities of hazardous materials stored, used, or handled when the conditions in Section 18.23.100(B)(iii) are met (i.e., there is a change in the amount of hazardous materials that results in exceeding the CUPAthresholds or a doubling of the amount onsite, or the business has a release or threatened release incident), residential property owners within 150 feet must be notified within 10 days after the issuance of the building permit to enable such changes at the site (see Section 18.23.100(B)(iv)). Nobuilding proposing to store, use, or handle hazardous materials that meet or exceed the thresholdquantities established by Title 19 of the California Code of Regulations (the California Accidental Release Program) would be permitted within 300 feet of a residentially zoned property or aresidential use. None of the buildings in the City currently has hazardous materials in amounts thattrigger the Title 19 requirements. However, if a business were to exceed the Title 19 thresholds,Section 18.23.100(B)(vi) would require City Council approval of a Conditional Use Permit.Conditional Use Permits require that addresses within 600 feet of the subject property be notified. In light of the current regulations, the proposed zoning regulations should result in a notification,setback, and/or some restriction in uses with chemicals of interest at some distance greater than150 feet (the notification requirement for businesses meeting the CUPA thresholds) and up to 300feet (the setback requirement for businesses meeting the Title 19 thresholds). Because existing buildings, as well as future buildings, could use amounts of hazardous materials, up to the Title 19thresholds, it is logical that the distance for possibly prohibiting buildings with toxic or highly toxic hazardous materials and Extremely Hazardous Substances in amounts less than Title 19 should be no more than 300 feet from a sensitive receptor. At a distance of 300 feet, three of the buildings identified in Table 2 would become legal nonforminguses, if buildings with toxic/highly toxic chemicals or Extremely Hazardous Substances above thestate thresholds were not permitted. The buildings are CPI Buildings 1A, 1B, and 2. This 3 The toxic endpoint is the concentration of an acutely hazardous substance above which there may be a serious acutehealth effect following a single short-term exposure. 8 determination is based on the hazardous materials inventory forms filed by these businesses in 2014.4 Conclusion Based on the review of the hazardous materials inventory forms provided to the Palo Alto Fire Department; the City Council’s direction to identify businesses with chemicals below the Title 19(CalARP thresholds) with operations and potential hazards that could affect nearby land uses; and the existing notification and reporting requirements and distances in Section 18.23.100, newsubcategories of the industrial/manufacturing land use can be defined to reflect the type andquantity of hazardous materials used onsite. Table 3 identifies the framework for these subcategories, or “tiers.” Table 3 Industrial/Manufacturing Tiers based on Hazardous Materials Type and Quantities Tier Type of Hazardous Materials Regulated Quantities (X=maximum amount at one time at site) New Restrictions on Use 1 All hazardous materials, unless they meet Tier 2 or Tier 3 definitions X < Title 19 (CalARP) None, except noticing would apply to sensitive receptors (instead of residential properties only) 2 Toxic/Highly Toxic or Extremely Hazardous Substances CUPA < X < Title 19 (CalARP) Prohibited within 300 feet of sensitive receptor; CUP beyond 300 feet 3 Extremely Hazardous Substances X > Title 19 (CalARP) None, except noticing would apply to sensitive receptors (instead of residential properties only) 4 The hazardous materials inventory form for Lockheed Building 202 in 2014 identified quantities of toxic/highly toxicmaterials in excess of CUPA thresholds. Recent updates in 2015 to the form reveal that the amount of toxic/highlytoxic materials is now below the CUPA thresholds, so that this building is not included in Table 2 and would be regarded as a Tier 1 use. 9 Attachment Chemicals of Interest above Thresholds, by Building Table A-1 Buildings with EHS Amounts in excess of Threshold Planning Quantities (TPQ), by Individual EHS Building/Substance Quantity (lbs) TPQ (lbs) CPI 2 811 Hansen Way Sulfuric acid 4,361.10 1000 Hewlett Packard B-1 1501 Page Mill Road Hydrogen fluoride 124.00 100 Hewlett Packard B-2 1501 Page Mill Road Hydrogen fluoride 186.46 100 ONED Material 2625 Hanover Street Hydrogen fluoride 502.64 100 Sulfuric acid 2,733.60 1000 Palo Alto Research Center, 3333 Coyote Hill Road Hydrogen fluoride 4,165.00 100 Sulfuric acid 1,666.00 1000 Palo Alto Research Center, 3406 Hillview Avenue Ammonia 8,181.76 500 Arsine 7,990.80 100 Boron trichloride 3,246.24 500 Chlorine 18,315.02 100 Diborane 6,092.96 100 Hydrogen fluoride 319.44 100 Phosphine 18,478.80 500 Silane 30,901.50 1000 Stanford Central Core Bldg 300 Pasteur Drive Formaldehyde 997.00 500 Stanford Phase 1 D & T, 300 Pasteur Drive Formaldehyde 1,131.40 500 Source: City of Palo Alto Fire Department, 2014. Italicized buildings are on non-industrial zoned lands. 10 11 Table A-2 Buildings with Toxic and Highly Toxic Hazardous Materials in Amounts Greater Than CUPA Thresholds (Max Daily Amounts), by Individual Chemical Applicable CUPA Threshold Amount (Cu. Ft.=200, Gallons=55, Pounds=500) Cubic Feet Gallons Pounds Building/Substance CPI 1A 607 Hansen Way Bead Blasting Waste 0 0 670 500 CPI 1B 607 Hansen Way Barium Contaminated Waste 0 0 500 500 Bead Blasting Waste 0 0 2,680 500 Beryllium Oxide Containing Waste 0 0 4,000 500 Electroless Nickel Waste 0 165 0 55 Ethylene Glycol Liquid Waste 0 440 0 55 Kanthal/Copper Waste 0 0 750 500 Misc. Labpack Waste 0 0 1,200 500 Nickel Chloride Solution 0 55 0 55 Nickel Stripping Waste 0 110 0 55 Nickel Sulfamate Solution 0 55 0 55 Scrubber Cleaning Waste 0 330 0 55 Toxic Liquid Plating Chemicals 0 200 0 55 Waste Cyanide Containing Liquid 0 110 0 55 Wastewater Sludge 0 0 4,900 500 CPI 2 811 Hansen Way Bead Blasting Waste 0 0 670 500 CM-07 - Wood's Strike 0 101 0 55 CM-09 - Nickel Chloride Plate 0 327 0 55 Crohone Blasting Waste 0 0 750 500 12 Building/Substance Cubic Feet Gallons Pounds Applicable CUPA Threshold Amount (Cu. Ft.=200, Gallons=55, Pounds=500) Cyanide Wastewater 0 3,245 0 55 NA-01 - Wood's Strike 0 75 0 55 NA-03 - Watts Nickel 0 218 0 55 NB-01 - Wood's Strike 0 75 0 55 NB-03 - Nickel Sulfamate 0 218 0 55 PM-02 - Rinse Static 0 83 83 55 PM-04 - Rinse - Recycle (Local) 0 83 83 55 PM-09 - Rinse - Static 0 58 58 55 PM-11 - Rinse - Static 0 58 58 55 PM-24 - Cyanide Strip 0 58 58 55 PM-25 - Rinse - Slow Flow 0 58 58 55 PT-04 - Platinum 0 75 0 55 Sulfuric Acid 0 0 1,690 500 Sulfuric Acid 93% 0 0 2,610 500 CPI 4 3120 Hansen Way Bead Blasting Waste 0 0 670 500 FC-77 0 70 0 55 Genecor 925 Page Mill Road Ammonium Hydroxide 0 63.88 0 55 Sodium Hydroxide 0 61.26 26.4 55 Sodium Hydroxide Solution 0 57.52 0 55 Sulfuric Acid 0 104.55 0 55 Sulfuric Acid/Water Solution 0 1,512 0 55 Hammon Plating, 855 Commercial Nickel Sulfate 0 660 0 55 Sodium Nitrate 0 0 2,000 500 Hewlett Packard B-2 1501 Page Mill Rd. Vinyl Bromide 900 0 0 200 13 Source: City of Palo Alto Fire Department, 2014. Italicized buildings are on non-industrial zoned lands. Building/Substance Cubic Feet Gallons Pounds Applicable CUPA Threshold Amount (Cu. Ft.=200, Gallons=55, Pounds=500) ONED Material, 2625 Hanover Street Sulfuric Acid 0 0 2,700 500 Waste Sodium Hydroxide Solution 0 55 0 55 Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant, 2501 Embarcadero Way Ammonium Hydroxide 0 2,400 0 55 Palo Alto Research Center, 3333 Coyote Hill Road Hydrofluoric Acid 0 0 4,165 500 Sulfuric Acid 0 0 1,666 500 Palo Alto Research Center, 3406 Hillview Ave Carbon Tetrachloride 300 0 0 200 Chlorine 200 0 0 200 Phosphine 400 0 0 200 Space Systems Loral Bldg 3, 3825 Fabian Way Hydrochloric Acid 0 200 0 55 Space Systems Loral Bldg 4, 3825 Fabian Way Specially Denatured Alcohol (SDA) 40-B, 200 Proof 0 69 0 55 Target Discovery, 4030 Fabian Way Waste Flammable Liquid Nos 0 110 0 55 2 AECOM 300 California, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA 94101 www.aecom.com 415 796 8100 tel 415 796 8200 fax industrial facilities. He has experience managing, directing, and administering a scientific work force conducting a broad spectrum program of highly sophisticated basic and applied research. Mr. Couture has specific expertise in electroplating. metal finishing, and electronic components manufacturing and has served as senior technical advisor to non-governmental environmental organizations and U.S. government agencies on international environmental regulatory compliance consulting and program development. Amortization Period AECOM reviewed the 2011 CBRE Amortization Study as well as the 2012 CPI response to the analysis. In general, the evaluation approach deployed by CBRE is standard and reflects common practice for considering the depreciated value of facilities, especially where reported depreciation value numbers to the IRS are not available. It is clear that CBRE also did not have complete access to all data and therefore did not know specifically the reported depreciated value of the plating facility. Rather, CBRE used Marshall Evaluation Service life estimates to straight-line depreciate the plating facility based on Marshall asset categories, a reasonable practice in the absence of better information. If AECOM had access to the actual reported depreciation of CPI’s facilities, we would be able to provide a more accurate estimate of when the plating facility and other buildings would be fully depreciated. It is noted that the CBRE study was completed in 2011. If CPI has made capital improvements to Building 2, the amortization period of 15 years to 2026 could be extended further into the future. Fundamental to CBRE’s evaluation was the assumption that the plating facility could be placed off site without a meaningful loss to CPI’s overall operation. In other words, the relocation or outsourcing of the facility would not result in substantial disruption to CPI’s overall business operations. This assumption may have resulted from CBRE’s scope of work, which may have requested a narrow line of investigation; i.e., what would be a reasonable amortization period for the plating shop only? We find that CPI’s response to the CBRE Amortization Study is more a business and legal argument than an economic one. There is no supporting economic or financial information in the CPI response that would suggest that the useful economic life of Building 2 should be different than identified by CBRE. In fact, the 40-year-threshold minimum, argued for in CPI’s response, would imply that CPI is amortizing its facilities in Palo Alto at the slower depreciation rate. While AECOM does not have access to CPI’s full detail tax receipts, we would be surprised if CPI were not depreciating its assets as guided by the IRS. Commercial buildings are depreciated at 39 years – but can depreciate more rapidly under certain circumstances – and capital equipment is depreciated more rapidly still at the point of construction/installation. Unless a building was constructed within the last five years, one would expect a much faster depreciation value. However, since the plating shop appears to be critical to the ongoing operations of the overall facility, as discussed below, then an amortization analysis would need to be widened to account for the entire facility, including recently rehabilitated buildings and any new fixed equipment installed on the site. As such, the CBRE study is reasonable for its intended purpose – to examine Building 2 independently – but limited in that it does not account for all of CPI’s facilities. 3 AECOM 300 California, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA 94101 www.aecom.com 415 796 8100 tel 415 796 8200 fax CPI’s Plating Shop Interconnectivity with Other Onsite Facility Operations CPI asserted in its 2012 response to the CBRE study that the plating facility is integral to the rest of their business on Hansen Way and cannot be outsourced or relocated. Dr. Bhagat and Mr. Couture, AECOM’s industrial engineers familiar with the manufacture of electronic devices in CPI’s lines of businesses (as well as similar types of precision electronic devices), do not disagree with the CPI argument concerning the interrelationship between the plating operations and other onsite activities. Although CPI’s response to the CBRE Amortization Study were not supported by details or specifics, and did not necessarily justify a minimum 40-year amortization period, the comments about the nature and process of product manufacturing were not invalid. Based on our review of the information provided by CPI regarding their product manufacturing and quality control/testing operations and our experience working with clients involved in manufacturing electronic components and devices (and employing the same chemical cleaning, etching, and plating processes employed at CPI’s Palo Alto facility), we understand CPI’s reasoning that their plating and non-plating operations have a critical interconnectivity and that these operations must be performed within contiguous process areas. The devices manufactured by CPI, including the individual components and sub-assemblies that ultimately make up these devices, commonly move between mechanical (i.e., non-chemical), wet chemical process operations (e.g., cleaning, etching, plating), and quality control/testing operations, sometimes making multiple passes back and forth among these operations. Due to the precision nature of the devices manufactured by CPI, controlling and mitigating environmental contamination of these devices are critical to their function and reliability for CPI’s customers. The additional handling of components, sub-assemblies, and devices that would be involved in conducting some of the manufacturing operations processes in an offsite/non-contiguous facility could introduce additional opportunities for exposing the components/devices to environmental contamination. If the chemical cleaning, finishing, and/or plating operations associated with the manufacture of these devices were required to be relocated to an offsite facility, the additional logistics, handling, and transport that would be involved in moving the components, sub-assemblies, and devices between the current CPI facility and offsite facility(ies) would add labor, other costs, and time to the manufacturing process. The longer manufacturing time and additional costs that would be incurred could make CPI’s product less competitive among other industry providers of these products. Although we have not spoken to any CPI representatives or visited the facilities, it is our conclusion, for the sake of ensuring product reliability and cost competitiveness of CPI’s devices, that all of the manufacturing operations involved (including assembly and testing operations) should be co-located, whether that be at CPI’s Palo Alto facility or an offsite location. Therefore, any amortization evaluation/valuation should include all interconnected manufacturing operations/facilities and not be limited to the wet chemical operations of concern. Notwithstanding the above conclusion, the option of relocating the plating functions elsewhere onsite at a greater distance from sensitive receptor land uses should not be dismissed. Substantial capital expenditures would be incurred by CPI to relocate plating operations elsewhere onsite, but this option would mitigate several of the arguments in CPI’s response to the CBRE study. 4 AECOM 300 California, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA 94101 www.aecom.com 415 796 8100 tel 415 796 8200 fax Notably, AECOM’s opinion that the facilities be co-located onsite or offsite is based on current technologies and understanding of the processes that occur at CPI. In contrast to the chemical metal finishing/plating operations currently conducted by CPI at their Palo Alto facility, there are existing commercially available process technologies and process/manufacturing technologies in development/early stage commercialization that could potentially replace the wet chemical manufacturing operations that are conducted in CPI Building 2. These alternative manufacturing process technologies may include, but are not necessarily limited to: x Plasma etching x Chemical Vapor Deposition x Supercritical C02 cleaning/degreasing x 3-D printing Given the future availability of these alternative technologies for activities similar to those performed at the CPI’s plating shop, it is not inconceivable that CPI might take advantage of them and reduce the toxic/highly hazardous materials and Extremely Hazardous Substances use, handling, and storage at Building 2 or perform some of the Building 2 activities non-contiguous from other onsite operations. Ram Bhagat, PhD, PMP, FASM Chief Scientist and Senior Engineering Manager Areas of Expertise Summary Dr. Bhagat is a subject matter expert (SME) in materials, metallurgy, manufacturing, defense electronics, and mechanics. He has over 20 years of experience in managing, directing, and administering a scientific work force conducting a broad spectrum program of highly sophisticated basic and applied research, and exploratory and advanced development of new or improved materials used in Naval/Air force/Army weapon platforms and systems. Dr. Bhagat is also a recognized systems engineering leader of national/international prominence. He planned and executed difficult programs of national significance demonstrating outstanding attainment in the multifunctional materials, sensors, computational materials science and fracture mechanics. Delivered results to sponsors and stakeholders for over 75 programs/projects on time and within budget. Skilled in effective communication at multiple levels of the organization, delegating tasks, mentoring and motivating. Responsive, results-oriented and agile. Experience United States Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), Infrastructure Consulting Services – Energy, AECOM [Germantown, MD], Chief Scientist and Senior Engineering Manager, 2015. Dr. Bhagat was one of the principal authors of the proposal leading to a BPA win for AECOM in July 2015; $50M (proposed, no BPA level ceiling) for 5 years. United States Department of Defense, DSTAT/IAC, URS Corporation [Germantown, MD], Chief Scientist and Senior Engineering Manager, 2013. Dr. Bhagat was the principal author and program lead for Advanced Materials for the DSTAT IDIQ proposal. URS was awarded DSTAT IDIQ in June 2014 with a ceiling of $3B for 5 years. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) [Arlington, VA], Assessment, and Analysis of a MACS MSC Truck Based Mobile Sensor Platform, URS Corporation [Germantown, MD], Chief Scientist and Senior Engineering Manager, 2014. Dr. Bhagat submitted a comprehensive report for the performance of vibration and shock monitoring, assessment, and analysis of a MACS MSC truck based mobile sensor platform to Systems Engineering Directorate, Office of Technology Innovation and Acquisition (OTIA). United States Navy, Advanced Steam Turbine Magnetic Bearing Engineering Model (AST MBEM), Dresser-Rand Corporation Defense Systems Engineering Metals Plating and Surface Engineering High Temperature Multifunctional Materials Design and Analysis Coatings and Thermal Protection Systems Metallurgy and Composites Aerospace Products Manufacturing Processes and Standards Sensors and Nanotechnology Computational Materials Science Structures Engineering and Mechanics Defense Special Projects Education PhD, Metallurgical/Materials Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai India, 1982 MSME, Mechanical Engineering, West Virginia University, 1981 BS, Metallurgical/Materials Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, India, 1975 Licenses/Registrations None Years of Experience With AECOM <1 With Other Firms 38 With URS >2 Professional Associations Fellow, ASM International NRC Fellow, NASA Glenn Research Center Member, Project Management AECOM Ram Bhagat, PhD, PMP, FASM Page 2 of 3 International (PMI) Member, MRS, SAMPE, TMS Member, AAAS, ACerS, ASM International, IEEE Member, NACE International [Wellsville, NY], Chief Scientist, 2011-2012. Dr. Bhagat managed, directed, and administered a recognized scientific work force at Dresser- Rand Govt. Business Unit – Navy/Nuclear in demonstrating a new technology – advanced steam turbine magnetic bearing engineering model (AST MBEM) for Ohio Class submarines. A very challenging, program of national significance for tomorrow’s Navy. [Budget: $9.3M] United States Department of Defense, Multiple Projects (see below), Northrop Grumman Corporation [Linthicum, MD], Advisory Engineer – Materials and Mechanics SME, 2002-2010, Cost > $100 M, Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems. Performance on large defense programs is presented below: Large Defense Programs IFTS, IFMU, F-16 ABR, F22, AWACS, Wedgetail, Blue Yonder, SSMIS, BAT, Longbow, AURA, STS SBIRS, V9, V10, B-1, JSTARS, Blue Storm, SPQ9B, Expo, JSF, Cobra Judy, VADER, Phoenix, G/ATOR (Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar), ManTech Programs, and High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWV). Significant Results and Achievements Provided DOD with significant operational benefits through critical root-cause analysis after a catastrophic fatigue failure of a JSTAR in operation. Determined that a rotating part made of steel was given a wrong heat treatment by a vendor; the hardness was too high. Defined a new design and rework of a critical component whose earlier failure led to scrubbing a satellite launch. My root-cause analysis showed that a solder cracked due to a lack of strain relief for the transistor leads. Authored a new document for the rework. Established the root cause of fracture (of HTCC ceramic substrate) in conjunction with environment-assisted slow crack growth for products already built. Led a risk analysis for the products’ acceptance. The customer accepted my specific recommendations. Led a thorough metallurgical evaluation combined with finite element analysis and concluded that the risk of device failure in the field as a result of a missed processing step was minimal. The customer accepted my recommendations and authorized shipment. Determined that a plated magnetic ceramic suffered a thermal shock as a result of rapid cooling during the solder reflow cycle, and cracked. Suggested changes to the reflow cycle. This solved the problem. Determined the root cause of device (silicon carbide transistor) failure during thermal fatigue testing. Saved the program from potential cancellation, thereby saving NGES millions of dollars. Patents and Invention Disclosures ExoFlash Consolidation Technology for Fabricating Fully Dense Nanostructured Materials (Patent, US 6,402,802 B1, awarded in 2002, principal inventor) A Materials Solution to Nozzle-Clogging Issue in Thermal Spray (invention disclosure, principal inventor) Training and Certifications 2011, Project Management Professional (PMP) [Credentialed 2011-2020] 2004, Leadership Program at Northrop Grumman Corporation 2003, Art of Negotiation 2002, Proposal Manager's Course (CLC-02) at Northrop Grumman Corp. 1988, Executive Management Program at Penn State University AECOM Ram Bhagat, PhD, PMP, FASM Page 3 of 3 Publications (Total count > 300) Bhagat, R. B. Casting Fiber Reinforced Metal Matrix Composites. In: Treatise on Materials Science and Technology Volume 32: Metal Matrix Composites: Processing and Interfaces. R. Arsenault and R. Everett (eds), Academic Press, Orlando, FL, pp. 43 82 [1991]. Rajesh, G., A. Sinharoy, and R.B. Bhagat, A Fracture Mechanics Based Numerical Analysis for Predicting Optimum Interface Properties in a Metal Matrix Composite, Composites Engg, Vol. 5, No. 6, pp. 583-596 [1995]. Woytera, S.A., R.B. Bhagat, and M.F. Amateau, Development of Niobium Aluminide Based Composites with Improved Toughness using Treated Reinforcements, Acta Metallurgica et Materialia, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp. 963- 976 [March 1996]. Bhagat, R.B., J.C. Conway, Jr., M.F. Amateau and R.A. Brezler III, Mechanical properties, wear resistance and a fracture mechanics based wear model for tungsten carbide-based cermets, Wear, Vol. 201, No. 1-2, pp. 233-243 [1996]. Bhagat, R.B., Advanced Aluminum Powder Metallurgy Alloys and Composites, Invited contributor to ASM Handbook Volume 7 Powder Metal Technologies and Applications, ASM International, Materials Park, OH, [1998]. Raut, J., K.A. Fichthorn, and R.B. Bhagat, Sintering Mechanisms of Aluminum Nanocrystals – A Molecular Dynamics Study, Nanostructured Materials, Vol. 10, N0. 5, pp. 837-851 [1998]. Bhagat, R.B., Specification for Electroless Palladium Plating for Printed Circuit Boards [PDS30058], Northrop Grumman Corporation - ES [2005]. Bhagat, R.B., S. Gurkovich, and C. Van Sickle, Intermetallics in Solder Joints, Proceedings of the Northrop Grumman Fifth Annual Materials Science Forum, 20-21 June 2006, El Segundo, CA. [Presenter: Bhagat] Bhagat, R.B., Gold Embrittlement Mitigation to Improve Solder Joint Reliability in ES Products, Proceedings of the 3rd ES Symposium, 7&8 November 2007, Baltimore, MD. Chronology 2011-2013: Dresser-Rand/Oxford Global Resources, Beverly, MA 2002-2010: Northrup Grumman Corporation, Baltimore, MD 1984-2001: Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA 1982-1984: NASA Lewis Research Center, Cleveland, OH Contact Information Company: AECOM Technical Services Address: 12420 Milestone Center Drive, Suite 150 Germantown, MD 20876 Direct: 443-737-1297 Mobile: 814-876-3333 ram.bhagat@aecom.com Stephen Couture, P.E., DEE, BCEE Principal Water/Wastewater Engineer Overview Mr. Couture has experience in industrial wastewater treatment, including system design engineering, water use optimization and wastewater minimization, pollution prevention, water/wastewater utility energy conservation, and environmental regulatory compliance. Additional experience includes training for water/wastewater treatment operators and development of industrial pretreatment and permitting programs for municipal wastewater utilities. He has also provided environmental regulatory and technical consultation to clients and legal counsel in negotiating administrative, civil, and criminal enforcement settlements. Additionally, Mr. Couture has served as senior technical advisor to non-governmental environmental organizations and U.S. government agencies on international environmental regulatory compliance consulting and program development. Project Specific Experience Electroplating. Metal Finishing, and Electronic Components Manufacturing MAHLE Engine Components USA (Atlantic, IA) Served as Project Technical Director and senior technical consultant on an industrial wastewater discharge compliance project to identify toxic constituents in the wastewater treatment facility’s effluent and evaluate modifications to meet WET testing requirements. Technology evaluations included chelate breaking chemistry evaluations, Advanced Oxidation Processes, diffusion dialysis, and evaporation. In parallel with evaluating upgrades to the industrial wastewater treatment system for surface water discharge compliance, the project included evaluating the option of discharging pretreated industrial wastewater to the local municipal sewerage system. The sewer discharge option evaluation included assessing the impact to the POTW through respirometry and ultraviolet transmittance testing and the impact to the POTW receiving water through an anti-degradation assessment. Pratt & Whitney (Columbus, GA) Served as senior technical consultant for the conceptual design of upgrades to the wastewater pretreatment facility for a jet engine maintenance and overhaul facility. In addition to engine maintenance and overhaul operations, the facility includes chemical metal finishing operations to produce turbine engine components used in the maintenance and overhaul of jet engines. Areas of Expertise Industrial Wastewater Treatment Municipal Wastewater Treatment Environmental Regulations Industrial Water Treatment Pretreatment and Permitting Water/Wastewater Systems Water and Energy Conservation Years of Experience With AECOM: 11 With Other Firms: 26 Years Education MS/Environmental Engineering/ University of Maine/1978 BS/Civil/Environmental Engineering/University of Maine/1976 Registration/Certification Diplomate Environmental Engineer (DEE) Board Certification in Water and Wastewater Engineering (American Academy of Environmental Engineers) Board Certified Environmental Engineer (BCEE) in Environmental Sustainability (American Academy of Environmental Engineers) Professional Engineer, Maine and Massachusetts Project Apollo -Confidential Client (China) Senior technical consultant for process water reduction program development and industrial wastewater treatment systems’ compliance/performance at multiple printed circuit board manufacturing facilities. The project is part of the client’s assessment of their suppliers’ environmental compliance status and vulnerabilities and compliance with their benchmark for water footprint reduction. Provided guidance and technical consultation to in country audit team regarding: • printed circuit board manufacturing process and associated wastewater treatment systems’ auditing. • development of wastewater sampling plan. • evaluation of in-process modifications for process water use minimization. • independent technical review of project findings, recommendations, and deliverables. Raytheon Company • Cooling Water Treatment System – DOD Radar Station (Kwajalein Atoll, Marshall Islands), Supervising engineer on preliminary and final design of high-purity recirculating cooling water treatment system for phased array radar electronics for DOD Strategic Defense Initiative tracking system. • Missile Systems Division – Printed Circuit Board Metal finishing Facility (Andover, MA), project manager on design, installation, and commissioning of industrial wastewater treatment system clarifier. • Microwave and Power Tube Division (Waltham, MA), design engineer and project manager on industrial wastewater treatment recycle system for metal plating facility. Project included metal recovery and rinsewater recycle using ion exchange. Wastewater treatment included metal precipitation and microfiltration. Project responsibilities included construction management, system commissioning, and operator training. • Equipment Division (Waltham, MA), design engineer and project manager on industrial wastewater treatment system for printed circuit board facility electroplating and metal plating processes Tyco • Fire and Building Products Division (Lubbock, TX), member of design and commissioning team for the industrial wastewater pretreatment systems (chelated metal precipitation/filtration, wastewater recycle ultrafiltration). 3 Responsibilities included technical lead on wastewater treatability studies and inprocess wastewater minimization source reduction modifications. • Printed Circuit Group (Manchester, CT and Stafford, CT), prepared industrial wastewater treatment systems’ evaluations (three facilities) to assist company with meeting negotiated settlement requirements for Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection enforcement action. Tasks included preparing wastewater pretreatment discharge permit applications and development and implementation of wastewater treatment upgrade and metal discharge reduction program. IBM Project engineer on industrial wastewater treatment system upgrade design (Essex Junction, VT and Manassas, VA), for semiconductor fabrication facilities. Texas Instruments, Inc. (Attleboro, MA), project engineer for industrial wastewater treatment system pilot testing, design, and commissioning for multi-faceted electroplating, metal finishing, and electronic components manufacturing facility. TRW Carr Division (Cambridge, MA), prepared final design of facility’s industrial wastewater segregation collection system. Also conducted troubleshooting evaluation of facility’s industrial wastewater treatment system and developed electroplating metal finishing process operations’ source reduction waste minimization modifications. M/A-COM Advanced Semiconductor Division (Lowell, MA), designed high purity process water treatment system (RO, ion exchange, UV disinfection) for the facility’s GaAs gate array semiconductor fabrication operations. Pollution Prevention/Waste Minimization Consulting and Design Lockheed Martin - Avionics Systems Integration Division (Owego, NY) Provided technical consultation in identifying and evaluating wastewater reduction/reuse and water use reduction optimization opportunities at Lockheed Martin’s avionics electronics manufacturing and integration facility. Prepared final project report presenting the evaluation of opportunities and recommendations for implementing wastewater reduction/reuse and water use reduction, optimization to achieve company’s project goal of 25% reduction of wastewater discharged and water usage. 4 United Technologies Hamilton Standard Division (Windsor Locks, CT), project engineer for development electroplating/metal finishing operations; inprocess source reduction waste minimization modifications and preliminary design of electroplating metal finishing operations. US Agency for International Development, World Environment Center (Latvia and Estonia), senior technical consultant for pollution prevention waste minimization program development, implementation, and training for the metal finishing electroplating industry. Texas Instruments Inc., (Attleboro, MA), conducted a facility wide source reduction waste minimization study at the company’s electronic components and electroplating-metal finishing facility, resulting in a 45% reduction in the facility’s process water consumption and wastewater discharge volume. MITRE (Bedford, MA), project engineer for final design of in- process source reduction modifications for facility’s printed circuit board manufacturing, metal finishing, and satellite photography developing operations. Vishay-Sprague (Concord, NH), evaluated facility’s industrial wastewater reduction and treatment recycle options for operations related to the manufacture (conventional metal finishing electroplating) of tantalum capacitors. EG&G Electro-optics (Salem, MA), prepared facility’s industrial wastewater discharge permit and treatment system design plans submittal for regulatory approval. Varian Vacuum Products (Lexington, MA), managed contract operation of the site’s groundwater remediation system. Conference and Workshop Presentations A Combined Source Reduction/Process Modification and Pretreatment/Recycle Waste Management Strategy at a Metals Product Machining and Finishing Facility, Water Environment Federation, Industrial Water Quality Conference, Providence, Rhode Island, 2007. Tools for Reducing [Industrial Pollutant Loadings, Maine Wastewater Control Association Spring Conference, Ogunquit, Maine, 2005. Technologies for Compliance, Metal Products and Machining Point Source Category Effluent Guideline Rule Seminar, sponsored by the Maine Metal Products Association - Environmentally Conscious Manufacturing Project, Portland, Maine, 1995. 5 Pollution Prevention Technology Transfer Electroplating Industry Waste Minimization in the Republic of Latvia, presented at the 6th Annual New England Environmental Expo, Boston, Massachusetts, April 1994. Meeting Water Quality Based Discharge Limits with Advanced Treatment Technology, presented at the Ninth Conference on Pollution Control for the Metal Finishing Industry, Orlando, Florida. Sponsored by the American Electroplaters and Surface Finishers Society and the United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1988. Source Reduction of Hazardous Waste in the Printed Circuit Industry, presented at the Second Annual Hazardous Materials Management Conference, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Sponsored by Pollution Engineering Magazine, June 1984. Publications "World Environment Center's Waste Minimization Demonstration Projects for the Electroplating Metal Finishing Industry in Latvia", Plating and Surface Finishing, November 1993 (co-author). "Electronics: Wastewater Treatment Systems at Texas Instruments Among the Most Advanced in Industry," United Today, Spring 1988 issue. "Environmental Update for Printed Circuit Manufacturers," Printed Circuit Fabrication, May 1985 (contributing author). "Chapter 16 - Wastewater Treatment," Institute for Interconnecting and Packaging Electronic Circuits Guidelines for Chemical Handling Safety in Printed Circuit Manufacture, IPC-CS-70, 1984 (contributing author). "High Purity Process Water Treatment for a Microelectronics Device Fabrication Facility" Microcontamination, April/May 1984 (co-author). Alexander Quinn, Director of Sustainable Economics Résumé appropriate development fee program and public benefits package for Berkeley’s Downtown Area Plan. The intent of the analysis was to maximize public benefit (e.g. affordable housing, streetscape improvements, parking management, transportation demand management, etc.) without saddling projects where no developments would be initiated in Downtown. AECOM deployed its multidisciplinary team of economists, architects, costing engineers, and planners to provide the most realistic depiction of development on opportunity sits in Downtown. Ultimately, the analysis arrived at a recommended fee level for downtown and an estimate of how much the fee program would provide over the 20-year Downtown Area Plan planning period. Fruitvale Business Improvement District Economic Strategy, Oakland, CA Market repositioning strategy for the Unity Council's Fruitvale Business Improvement District. The strategy included a real estate and retail repositioning analysis, as well as an evaluation of best management practices of business improvement districts. AECOM performed a local shopper intercept survey, retail leakage analysis - accounting for the informal economy - and a opportunity site analysis to inform the direction of the business district. Coliseum City, New NFL Stadium and Ancillary Real Estate Development, Oakland, CA AECOM performed a comprehensive study for a new football- only stadium with the Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum Authority. The analysis also considered supporting commercial/ entertainment development. The study includes analysis of local market conditions, analysis of the operations of other NFL stadiums, demand for the Raiders, coordination with ongoing masterplanning efforts, development recommendations, forecasts of future stadium and other development operations, and analysis of the viability of public and private funding based on estimated construction costs and operating needs. Mr. Quinn served as the market lead for the potential ancilary development. Balboa Reservoir Development Evaluation, San Francisco CA Evaluation of the land value and optimum development program for the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission's ancillary property near the Balboa BART Station. AECOM evaluated the potential opportunity for mixed income housing that maximized affordable housing and community open space, while still generating sufficient returns for the property owner (SFPUC). AECOM performed a full market and cash flow analysis to inform the land value potential and the affordable housing generation from the development. This included considering 4 percent low income housing tax credits and an infrastructure financing district. The analysis informs a request for qualification process for developers who will bid for the property. Cleantech Corridor Feasibility Analysis and Clustering Strategy, Los Angeles, CA Evaluation and identification of Cleantech industry opportunities for an aging manufacturing node south of Downtown Los Angeles. The analysis evaluates market opportunities presented in the corridor, location factors that drive Cleantech site selection, evaluation of the corridor’s competitive position, and a development strategy to facilitate a Cleantech industry cluster within the study area. The analysis also reviews existing Cleantech clusters across the world that have parallels to Los Angeles. Mr. Quinn served as Project Manager on this project for the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency. Las Begonias Master Plan Market Analysis and Cash Flow Model, Lima, Perú Market and feasibility evaluation for the redevelopment of Lima's growing downtown and burgeoning Class A office market in San Isidro. For Urbanova, AECOM evaluated the future Class A office, lifestyle retail, and hotel demand for Lima's downtown area, providing the client with a detailed absorption schedule by parcel. In addition, AECOM developed a full cash flow model with estimates on returns on investments, projected equity required, and premiums realized by building a new park in the downtown. In total, AECOM developed a long-term schedule and cash flow model for over 500,000 square meters of new mixed-use development that would be built over the next thirty years. In addition to the demand projections and cash flow analysis, AECOM also delivered both models to allow Urbanova to adjust their projections as new data becomes available. Central Market Economic Strategy, San Francisco, CA Mr. Quinn served as the Principal-In-Charge for the Mayor’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development. AECOM led a study that was the culmination of more than ten months of community outreach, technical research, and collaboration of a diverse group of stakeholders, focused on creating a clear and unified plan for improving the Central Market district, a vital part of San Francisco’s urban core. The area had struggled with high vacancy rates, lack of private investment, physical blight, and other social challenges. The Economic Strategy sought to build on existing community assets and harness the energy brought about by the recent presence of the creative technology industry as well as the growth of cultural and performing arts organizations, facilities, and institutions. Since the strategy, the study area has experienced a remarkable rise in economic activity with over Alexander Quinn, Director of Sustainable Economics Résumé two million square feet of office absorption over a two year period and over 1,000 housing multifamily housing units under construction. Technology companies Dolby, Twitter, and Square have all located in the area. The project won a number of awards, including the San Francisco Chamber Economic Development Award and the National American Planning Association Award in Economic Development. Port of Port Townsend Eco-Industrial Park Feasibility Study, Port Townsend, WA Having acquired 24 acres adjacent to its airport, the Port of Port Townsend requested assistance from AECOM to determine the feasibility of developing an eco-industrial park on the site. The primary purposes of the study was to 1) assess the demand for use of a light industrial facility at this site, 2) develop profiles of likely facility users and 3) formulate a conceptual design of future site development. The AECOM team prepared a market study of the potential for an eco- industrial park, identified existing conditions on the site and prepared initial conceptual plans for review by the Port Commissioner. The report included recommendations for LID and sustainable design guidelines for buildings. Japan Center Revitalization Plan, San Francisco, CA Development of an urban design concept for 3-D Investments to help create a world-class retail experience in the neighborhood, while remaining true to the community's cultural roots. A range of urban design schemes and concepts address both commercial and residential land uses, and improve the streetscape, pedestrian experience, and transit access. A market and development feasibility analysis was performed prior to the community participation process, thereby confining the community discussion to economically viable development alternatives. Chinatown Economic and Tourism Development Action Plan, San Francisco, CA Economic Action Strategy to improve community economic vitality for one of the City’s historic and cultural gems. San Francisco’s Chinatown still acts as a gateway for Chinese immigrants. Chinatown also is historic landmark as one of the first Chinese communities in America initiated during the California Gold Rush of 1849. While the neighborhood is a historic and cultural gem, Chinatown struggles economically as a predominantly low-income and poorly educated population. In conjunction with local community organizations, the Economic Action Plan assessed prevailing socio- economic conditions, real estate markets, visitation, and development opportunities in Chinatown. The action plan included a visitor intercept survey to identify potential physical and business improvements that would increase tourism activity in Chinatown while maintaining its unique cultural heritage. AECOM facilitated a community economic forum to determine economic development priorities, community champions, and city and local organizations to carry out community priorities. The action plan will be used both as a local economic strategy and as a mechanism to obtain addition community development funds for the physical and social improvement of Chinatown. Northeast Fairfield Station Market Strategy and Industry Cluster Analysis, CA AECOM developed a market and industrial tenanting strategy for the City of Fairfield for a large scale master-planned community directly adjacent to a new Amtrak Station that is part of the Capitol Corridor line in Northern California. The market study evaluates viable rail logistics uses and cleantech industries that could be located in the planned research and development park, which could be located near a major transit hub in Fairfield. The analysis includes detailed housing absorption projections over the life cycle of the project development, as well as optimized development mix recommendations. In addition, the industrial tenanting strategy evaluated cleantech industry site location attributes to determine the ideal industrial area plan to meet this growing real estate market in California. Finally, the market analysis performed a comparable case study analysis of projects throughout the Western United States to determine absorption and land value premiums associated with proximity to the planned regional rail station and incorporate green infrastructure and building systems into the master planned community. Bayshore Boulevard Economic Action Plan, San Francisco, CA The development of an economic action plan and retail corridor strategy for the City of San Francisco’s Bayshore Boulevard area. The final plan includes retail corridor case studies, real estate market analyses, employment analyses, existing business mix and opportunity site identification, stakeholder interviews and surveys, and community outreach. The goal of the plan is to determine the desired business mix, land use plan, and economic development strategies that would best work towards the revitalization and redevelopment of the Bayshore corridor. The plan focuses on actionable near-term strategies that will generate immediate impacts on the business environment along Bayshore Boulevard. Alexander Quinn served as the project manager for AECOM for the City of San Francisco’s Redevelopment Agency. AECOM [Phone] 916-414-5800 2020 L Street, Suite 400 Sacramento, California 95811 [Fax] 916-414-5850 October 28, 2014 Ms. Hillary Gitelman Planning Director City of Palo Alto Planning and Community Environment 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 Email: Hillary.Gitelman@CityofPaloAlto.org Subject: Response to Declaration of Douglas Dougherty, PhD, PE, CIH (October 1, 2014) Dear Ms. Gitelman, AECOM has prepared this letter to respond to the Declaration of Douglas Dougherty, PhD, PE, CIH, in Regards to Process Safety at Communications & Power Industries, LLC, dated October 1, 2014. The responses are not intended to address each point contained in the declaration; rather, they focus on select items in Section II, Overall Conclusions, that misstate AECOM information or conclusions contained in AECOM’s report “Risk Assessment for Storing and Handling Hazardous Materials at Communications and Power Industries” January 2014 or associated supplement documents. This letter follows a comment and response format. 1.0 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Item 8a. The AECOM Report states that not listing oxygen as a Special Management Chemical as part of the CMP was an omission as it is regulated under the Federal Risk Management Program. Oxygen, however, is not regulated under this program and does not fall under the CMP’s definition of a Special Management Chemical. Nonetheless, ENVIRON performed an offsite consequence analysis for an oxygen worst-case release scenario and the offsite consequence analysis concluded that impacts from an oxygen worst-case scenario release would not extend offsite. Since oxygen is not regulated under either the federal or state risk management programs and any impacts from a worst-case oxygen release would remain onsite, CPI does not see the basis to add oxygen to its CMP as requested by the City’s consultant, AECOM. Response – Section 4.1 of the Risk Assessment for Storing and Handling Hazardous Materials report prepared by AECOM in January 2014 states that oxygen is maintained in large quantities at the facility and can be considered an extremely hazardous substance per the Clean Air Act, Section 112 (r). This section of the risk assessment report did not state that oxygen is regulated under the Federal Risk Management Program. AECOM recommends that oxygen be listed as an extremely hazardous substance (EHS) within the CMP since it is considered hazardous under the Hazardous Communication Standard administered and enforced by Occupational Safety and Health Administration (29 CFR 1910.1200). This classification as an EHS is supported by the General Duty Clause of the Clean Air Act, Section 112(r)(1), which does not limit an EHS to the list of regulated substances under Section 112(r) nor the extremely hazardous substances under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. Response to Declaration of Douglas Dougherty Page 2 Item 8bi. Two comments on a lack of a training matrix and potential training gaps of plate shop employees. CPI does have a training matrix and tracks and records training completion by employees. Response – Section 4.3.4 of the AECOM risk assessment report states that Based on discussions with department supervisors, implementation of this training program is limited. Employees working in the plating shop and facilities department are trained in many subject areas annually but a training matrix has not been developed for each employee. This information was obtained from department supervisors during the site survey. An element of an effective safety program is training. Developing a training matrix for each employee confirms adequate training is being provided to limit employee injury within the workplace. Appropriate training records should be maintained to support the safety program and confirm compliance. If the training matrix has been developed since AECOM’s site visit and there is evidence that employees have been trained, AECOM would appreciate an opportunity to review this documentation. Item 8biii. A comment that CPI should keep copies of its daily inspections at the cryogenic liquid storage area and plating shop, which CPI does. Response – Section 4.3.2 of the risk assessment report states Additionally, CPI states that visual inspections are completed daily within the cryogenic liquid storage area and plating shop, and records are maintained of these inspections. However, copies of these records were not provided for review during the site survey. An effective safety program involves completion of mechanical integrity inspections and recording the outcome of these inspections. These inspections support a preventative maintenance program and indicate whether equipment needs to be repaired or replaced. Records of these inspections should be maintained on file. If the records of inspection are available, AECOM would appreciate an opportunity to review this documentation. Item 9. Both the AECOM Report and ENVIRON independently confirmed that the conclusion of no offsite impacts from previously prepared and submitted CPI studies required for federal and state risk management programs were correct. The previous studies found that CPI’s operations do not pose a hazard to the public based on the results of regulatory defined “worst case scenarios”. Response – Section 2.3.4 of the risk assessment report summarizes the air dispersion modeling and outcome of the risk management plans previously prepared for the CPI facility. AECOM did not confirm that no offsite impacts were found from the air dispersion modeling completed for these prior scenarios. In fact, the air dispersion modeling completed for the 2004 Risk Management Plan indicates that the worst-case scenario involving the release of nitric acid would result in the airborne plume traveling 1,056 feet from the facility to reach the toxic endpoint. Similarly, a worst-case scenario involving a spill of potassium cyanide coming into contact with acids would generate hydrogen cyanide gas and this gas would travel 1,056 feet from the facility and offsite to reach its toxic endpoint. Therefore, we find the statement in the declaration misleading. Response to Declaration of Douglas Dougherty Page 3 2.0 CONCLUSION In conclusion, AECOM presents a letter of responses to select items in the declaration. We focused on items that required a clarification and provided responses with an accurate description of the information. . AECOM appreciates this opportunity to provide consulting services to the City of Palo Alto. If you have any questions regarding this letter, do not hesitate to contact Roman Worobel, Certified Industrial Hygienist or Rodney Jeung, Principal. Sincerely, AECOM Environment Roman Worobel, CIH Rodney Jeung SH&E Services Manager Principal Environment Environment roman.worobel@aecom.com rod.jeung@aecom.com ATTACHMENT I This item is currently not available but will be distributed in the November 12th Council packet City of Palo Alto (ID # 6278) City Council Staff Report Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 11/16/2015 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Council Priority: Land Use and Transportation Planning Summary Title: PAO Airport Fees and Minimum Standards Title: Adopt a Resolution Establishing Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies for the Palo Alto Airport and Adopt a Resolution Revising the Airport Schedule of Fees and Charges From: City Manager Lead Department: Public Works Recommendation Staff recommends that Council adopt: 1. A resolution approving and adopting the Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies for the Palo Alto Airport (Attachment B); and 2. A resolution amending the Airport fee schedule (Attachment C) to update the fees to reflect the transfer of Palo Alto Airport operations to the City of Palo Alto. Background On August 11, 2014, the City Council approved the transfer of the Palo Alto Airport (PAO) from the County of Santa Clara (County) to the City of Palo Alto (City). Two matters could not be resolved by the transfer date and were therefore deferred, (1) the adoption of airport minimum standards and (2) the revision of the fee schedule to reflect the transfer of operations. Kaplan Kirsch & Rockwell, the City’s special counsel on airport matters, has prepared a memorandum explaining the function of minimum standards and procedures regarding their development. (Attachment A) As explained in the Kaplan memorandum, airport owners and operators commonly impose City of Palo Alto Page 2 requirements that must be met by businesses that perform commercial aeronautical services at the airport. These services and activities include aircraft fueling, aircraft line services, aircraft maintenance and repair, aircraft storage, aircraft rental and flight training/instruction, aircraft sales, and aircraft charter and management. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommends the development of minimum standards “to promote safety in all airport activities, protect airport users from unlicensed and unauthorized products and services, maintain and enhance the availability of adequate services for all airport users, promote the orderly development of airport land, and ensure efficiency of operations.” FAA Advisory Circular 150/5190-7, Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities (2006) at 1.2(a). Santa Clara County did not adopt minimum standards for the Palo Alto Airport. Kaplan recommends that the City adopt an interim set of regulations establishing key provisions now, subject to development of a comprehensive set of standards through a community-involved process that will begin in 2016. Kaplan also recommends updating the Airport fee schedule to reflect the airport transfer to City control. Discussion Staff recommends adoption of interim Minimum Standards to establish a set of initial requirements that airport service providers must meet, consistent with best practices as set forth by FAA Advisory Circular1 and Transportation Research Board2. The attached Interim Minimum Standards, based on those of similar size general aviation airports and current best practices, will provide a stop gap until long- term minimum standards can be adopted. Staff recommends that Council adopt the Interim Minimum Standards to address the types of activities in which existing or potential users of PAO may wish to engage in the time it takes staff to prepare and Council to adopt long-term Standards. 1 FAA Advisory Circular 150/5190-7, Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities (2006). 2 Transportation Research Board, Survey of Minimum Standards: Commercial Aeronautical Activities at Airports (ACRP Legal Research Digest #11) (2011). City of Palo Alto Page 3 Staff also recommends that the Council adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment B) updating airport fees and charges to reflect transfer of Airport administration to the City. The changes remove fees that were related to Countywide functions and are no longer applicable at PAO. A redline showing the changes is attached as Attachment D. Resource Impact Adoption of interim Minimum Standards and updates to Airport fees and charges do not require additional resources. Staff anticipates returning to Council in early 2016 for approval of a contract to support staff efforts to develop an airport business plan, update key leases and develop long-term comprehensive minimum standards. Consistent with the practice of the County, which previously managed the Airport, the fees identified in Attachment 3 were increased by the Consumer Price Index on July 1, 2015. These increases are assumed in the Fiscal Year 2016 Adopted Budget for the Airport Enterprise Fund as approved by the City Council. Therefore, there is no increase in the fees at this time. For future fiscal years, the fees are increased by Consumer Price Index (CPI) annually effective July 1st. Policy Implications These recommendations are consistent with current City policies. Environmental Review Approval of minimum standards is not a project subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The adoption of revised rates and charges is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act; under California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3, Section 15273(a), because CEQA does not apply to the modification, restructuring or approval of rates and charges for the purpose of meeting operating expenses and obtaining funds for capital projects necessary to maintain service. Attachments: Attachment A: Kaplan Memo Re Minimum Standards (PDF) Attachment B: Resolution Adopting Interim Minimum Standards and Leading Policies for the Palo Alto Airport (PDF) Attachment C: Resolution Amending the Airport Fee Schedule (PDF) City of Palo Alto Page 4 Attachment D: Redline PAO Schedule of Fees and Charges (PDF) M E M O R A N D U M TO: Molly Stump, Esq., CITY ATTORNEY COPY: Mike Sartor, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR Andrew Swanson, AIRPORT DIRECTOR FROM: KAPLAN KIRSCH & ROCKWELL DATE: October 18, 2015 SUBJECT: Adoption of Airport Minimum Standards and Airport Fee Schedule Last year, when control of the Palo Alto Airport was transferred from Santa Clara County to the City, there was some unfinished business that the City determined could not be completed in time for the transfer deadline. The two most important issues that were deferred at that time were the adoption of airport minimum standards and the revision of the fee schedule previously in use when the Airport was operated by the County. Minimum Standards Under Federal law, the owner or operator of any airport that has been developed or improved with Federal grant assistance is required to operate the airport for the use and benefit of the public and to make the airport available for all types, kinds, and classes of aeronautical activity, on reasonable conditions and without any unjust discrimination. FAA strongly recommends that airport sponsors establish minimum standards: “The FAA objective in recommending the development of minimum standards serves to promote safety in all airport activities, protect airport users from unlicensed and unauthorized products and services, maintain and enhance the availability of adequate services for all airport users, promote the orderly development of airport land, and ensure efficiency of operations. Therefore, airport sponsors should strive to develop minimum standards that are fair and reasonable to all on-airport aeronautical service providers and relevant to the aeronautical activity to which it is applied. Any use of minimum standards to protect the interests of an exclusive business operation may be interpreted as the grant of an exclusive right and a potential violation of the airport sponsor’s grant assurances and the FAA’s policy on exclusive rights.”1 1 FAA Advisory Circular 150/5190-7, Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities (2006) at 1.2(a). October 14, 2015 Page 2 As a result, airport owners and operators commonly impose requirements that must be met by businesses that perform commercial aeronautical services at the airport. These services and activities include aircraft fueling, aircraft line services, aircraft maintenance and repair, aircraft storage, aircraft rental and flight training/instruction, aircraft sales, and aircraft charter and management. Airport minimum standards vary considerably from airport to airport, depending on the specific circumstances of each facility. In fact, the Federal Aviation Administration recommends against using a template or “fill-in-the-blank” forms for Airport Minimum Standards.2 There are, however, several publications which set forth best practices for the drafting and tailoring of minimum standards.3 Since the transfer of the Airport, the City has received several inquiries about new or expanded aeronautical activities at the Airport and the absence of Minimum Standards places the City in the legally awkward position of not being able to answer inquiries about the City’s requirements with definitive information. It is critically important that the City be able to provide not only authoritative answers to such inquiries but also that its responses be consistent, so that the City meets its federal obligation to operate the Airport in a fair and reasonable manner, not unjustly discriminate among providers of aeronautical services and not improperly prohibit access to the Airport for such activities.4 The existence of Minimum Standards will alleviate this problem. Best practice in the industry is that an airport proprietor engage users and potential users in the preparation of Minimum Standards and draft such requirements in an open and transparent manner. We have found that this process, even for small airports like Palo Alto Airport, can take many months. We therefore recommend that the City develop long-term standards in a deliberate manner. In the meantime, however, the City is placed at a legal and practical disadvantage by not having any Minimum Standards to use for responding to immediate inquiries from potential service providers. We recommend, therefore, that the City adopt interim or temporary Minimum Standards, just as it did when it adopted Santa Clara County’s Rules and Regulations in 2014 (City Council Resolution 9457, Sept. 8, 2014). Santa Clara County does not have Minimum Standards for its other airports that would be appropriate for the City to adopt on an interim basis for the Palo Alto Airport. Therefore, we looked to other airports, including those where we have assisted in drafting or revising Minimum 2 See FAA Order 5190.6B, Airport Compliance Manual § 10.5(a) (2009) (“The FAA will not endorse “fill-in-the-blank” minimum standards because of the high probability that many airport sponsors would adopt the document without modifying it to the needs of their particular airports. This could result in the imposition of irrelevant and unreasonable standards.”). 3 FAA Advisory Circular 150/5190-7, Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities (2006); Transportation Research Board, Survey of Minimum Standards: Commercial Aeronautical Activities at Airports (ACRP Legal Research Digest #11) (2011). 4 See FAA Order 5190.6B §§ 10.2 – 10.4. October 14, 2015 Page 3 Standards in recent years to accord with current best practices. We recommend that the City Council adopt the attached Interim Minimum Standards to be effective until such time as the City and the Airport staff can conduct the process necessary and appropriate for enactment of permanent Minimum Standards. The attached Interim Minimum Standards are not intended to be comprehensive but instead to address the types of activities in which existing or potential users of the Palo Alto Airport are most likely to want to engage in the next several months or year while tailored Minimum Standards are prepared and adopted. Fee Schedule At the time of the transfer of the Airport, the City adopted the County’s fee schedule for users of the Airport. Like the Interim Minimum Standards we propose above, this document was approved for expediency and staff recognized that it would be prudent to revise the schedule soon after the transfer. We are attaching a proposed revised fee schedule for Airport users. This document is prepared in redline so you can see clearly what changes are being proposed. NOT YET APPROVED 1 151104 sh 0140149 Resolution No. ________ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving and Adopting the Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies for the Palo Alto Airport The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. The Council hereby approves and adopts the Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies for the Palo Alto Airport as recommended by Staff and outside counsel for the City of Palo Alto. A copy of the revised Minimum Standards, marked Attachment "A" is attached hereto, and made a part hereof. SECTION 2. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not meet the definition of a project under Public Resources Code Section 21065, thus, no environmental assessment under the California Environmental Quality Act is required. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: __________________________ _____________________________ City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Director of Public Works _____________________________ Director of Administrative Services Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 1 PALO ALTO AIRPORT MINIMUM STANDARDS AND LEASING POLICIES ATTACHMENT "A" Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section A. – INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 3 I. Authority .................................................................................................................................................. 3 II.Purposes ................................................................................................................................................... 3 III.Applicability .............................................................................................................................................. 4 IV.Prohibited Activities ................................................................................................................................. 5 V. Waivers and Variances ............................................................................................................................. 5 VI.Additive Standards and Conflicts .............................................................................................................. 6 VII.Administration .......................................................................................................................................... 7 VIII.Reservation of Rights ............................................................................................................................... 7 Section B. – APPLICATION ........................................................................................................................ 7 I. Application ............................................................................................................................................... 8 II.Action on Written Application .................................................................................................................. 9 Section C. – GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL FBOs and SASOs ............................................... 11 I. Collateral Requirement .......................................................................................................................... 11 II.Capability / Experience ........................................................................................................................... 11 III.Compliance ............................................................................................................................................. 11 IV.Equipment and Vehicles ......................................................................................................................... 12 V. Facilities, Maintenance, and Construction ............................................................................................. 12 VI.Insurance ................................................................................................................................................ 14 VII.Lease or License Requirement ................................................................................................................ 15 VIII.Notice and Reporting of Initiation or Termination of Services ............................................................... 16 IX.Personnel ................................................................................................................................................ 16 X. Subcontracting, Subleasing, and Assignment ........................................................................................ 17 Section D. – FIXED BASE OPERATORS (FBOS).................................................................................... 18 I. Land and Facility Requirements ............................................................................................................. 18 II.FBO Staffing and Personnel .................................................................................................................... 18 III.Required FBO Services ............................................................................................................................ 19 IV.Commercial Self-Service Fueling. ............................................................................................................ 20 V. Insurance. ............................................................................................................................................... 20 Section E. – SPECIALIZED AERONAUTICAL SERVICE OPERATORS (SASOS) ................................ 20 I. General Facility Requirements for SASOs ............................................................................................... 20 II.Air Taxi/Charter Service Operators......................................................................................................... 21 III.Aircraft Rental Operators ....................................................................................................................... 23 IV.Aviation Repair Service Operators .......................................................................................................... 24 V. Flight Training Operators ....................................................................................................................... 25 VI.Hangar Keepers ...................................................................................................................................... 26 VII.Specialized Commercial Flying Services .................................................................................................. 27 VIII.Other ...................................................................................................................................................... 28 Section F. – DEFINITIONS ........................................................................................................................ 29 Attachment 1. – Reserved [Required Lease Clauses] ........................................................................... 32 Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 3 SECTION A. – INTRODUCTION I. Authority a. These Palo Alto Airport Minimum Standards (“the Minimum Standards”) are promulgated under the authority of Section 2.08.190 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, which grants the City of Palo Alto, California (“City”), through the Department of Public Works, the power to regulate the use of the Palo Alto Airport (“Airport”). The Minimum Standards also are adopted pursuant to the City’s authority as the owner, operator, and proprietor of the Airport. All leases, licenses, permits and other Agreements authorizing the use of Airport property and facilities shall require compliance with the Minimum Standards. b. In addition to the Minimum Standards, all persons on the Airport are subject to all applicable provisions of federal law, laws of the State of California, the Airport Rules and Regulations, and the City of Palo Alto Municipal Code. c. The privilege of using the Airport and any and all of its facilities shall be conditioned on the assumption of full responsibility and risk by the user thereof. The City reserves the right to claim immunity from liability in connection with its operation of the Airport and to assert any other defense available, including without limitation immunity or defenses pursuant to the California Government Claims Act, CAL. GOV’T CODE § 815 et seq, as the same may be amended from time to time. d. References and citations in the Minimum Standards to ordinances, laws, regulations, policies, standards and guidelines promulgated by the City, the State of California, the United States, and public and private bodies include any amendments as may be adopted after the City’s adoption of the Minimum Standards. e. The Minimum Standards cancel and supersede all previous minimum standards governing use of the Airport. f. The invalidation of any specific minimum standards shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the Minimum Standards. g. Except as prescribed herein or pursuant to an Agreement, the standards and requirements of the Minimum Standards are minimums and may be exceeded. II. Purposes a. In establishing the Minimum Standards, the City’s goals are: 1. To preserve the Airport as a community facility that serves the City and neighboring communities by accommodating small general aviation aircraft while also minimizing impacts on the surrounding residents. 2. To ensure a minimum level of aeronautical services and facilities for Airport users. 3. To promote safety in all Airport activities. 4. To maintain a higher quality of service for Airport users. 5. To protect Airport users from unlicensed and unauthorized products and services. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 4 6. To provide a clear and objective distinction between service providers that will provide a satisfactory level of service and those that will not. b. The City recognizes the jurisdiction of the federal government, delegated to the Federal Aviation Administration, concerning the licensing and regulation of pilots and aircraft; and concerning the navigable airspace. Nothing herein is intended to assert jurisdiction by the City over matters under the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government, and the provisions hereof shall be interpreted consistent with this purpose. III. Applicability a. General. 1. All Commercial Aeronautical Activities conducted on the Airport must be authorized in a Lease or other written Agreement approved by the City, as appropriate, and shall be performed in accordance with the Minimum Standards and the Airport Rules and Regulations. b. Covered Entities and Activities. The Minimum Standards shall apply to the following: 1. Any Entity proposing to conduct a Commercial Aeronautical Activity at the Airport, including Fixed Base Operators (FBOs) and Specialized Aviation Service Operators (SASOs). 2. The City, in any instance in which the City is conducting a Commercial Aeronautical Activity at the Airport. c. Non-Covered Entities and Activities. 1. The Minimum Standards shall not apply to the following Entities: i. A flight instructor accessing the Airport for the limited purpose of picking up or dropping off a student pilot or conducting flight training in an aircraft that is not based at the Airport. ii. An aircraft manufacturer providing parts and services at the specific request of an aircraft owner or operator pursuant to a “rapid response” or similar program. iii. A mechanic providing services to aircraft storage space licensees at the licensee’s assigned storage space. iv. The Civil Air Patrol California Wing currently located on the Airport. v. Flying Clubs, to the extent that they are exempt from the Minimum Standards as outlined in the Airport Rules and Regulations. vi. Any nonprofit or charitable Entity accessing the Airport for the purpose of providing medical air transport. 2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent that any Entity otherwise exempted from the Minimum Standards provides ground handling services, the General Standards outlined at Section C of these Minimum Standards shall apply to those services. 3. The Minimum Standards shall not apply to the following activities: Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 5 i. Itinerant commercial aircraft operations shall not be subject to these Minimum Standards. However, passengers of any commercial aircraft operation by a Part 135 operator without a Lease or License to conduct a Commercial Aeronautical Activity at the Airport shall be considered “visitors” under the Airport Rules and Regulations. ii. Non-commercial Aeronautical Activities, including, without limitation, private hangar storage and co-ops shall not be subject to these Minimum Standards. iii. Self-servicing and Self-fueling by a Tenant to the extent permitted by the Airport Rules and Regulations, shall not be subject to these Minimum Standards; however, per Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) policy, co-ops shall not have the right to self-fuel. d. Grandfathered Leases and Licenses. 1. The provisions of these Minimum Standards shall only apply to any new Lease, License, or Agreement executed after the adoption of these Minimum Standards and to any material amendment to an Agreement authorizing a Commercial Aeronautical Activity at the Airport executed after the adoption of these Minimum Standards. 2. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the provisions of these Minimum Standards shall apply to any new sublease, sublicense or assignment executed after the adoption of these Minimum Standards, even where the underlying Lease or License may be grandfathered. IV. Prohibited Activities a. Through-the-Fence Operations. These Minimum Standards expressly forbid all Through-the- Fence (“TTF”) operations. The City's obligation to make the Airport available for the use and benefit of the public does not extend to providing access from adjacent property. Such TTF operations can adversely affect the ability of the Airport to sustain itself financially, result in unfair competitive situations, and contribute to loss of control with respect to Airport access. b. Cross-Ownership. Consistent with the City’s obligation to avoid granting exclusive rights, no person or entity may hold or control, directly or indirectly, any ownership, voting, management or debt interests (actual or contingent) in more than one on-Airport commercial service provider, absent written authorization by the City. V. Waivers and Variances a. Waivers. 1. The City may approve a permanent Waiver for all or any portion of the Minimum Standards for the benefit of any government or government agency providing public or emergency services, including, for example, and without limitation: law enforcement, disaster relief, search and rescue, fire prevention and firefighting. 2. The City may approve a temporary Waiver of the Minimum Standards upon finding that each of the following conditions is satisfied: i. The Commercial Aeronautical Operator seeking the Waiver will be the only operator on the Airport to provide a specific product, service, or facility as of the effective date of the Lease or License. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 6 ii. The Commercial Aeronautical Operator has agreed to come into full compliance with the Minimum Standards within a prescribed schedule. iii. The schedule is enforceable by the City. iv. The temporary Waiver is needed to alleviate the financial burden of initiating a new Commercial Aeronautical Activity at the Airport. v. The City finds that the temporary Waiver will not materially interfere with the Commercial Aeronautical Operator's ability to provide high quality products, services and facilities to Airport users. 3. In extraordinary circumstances, in order to further the Purposes outlined in Section A.II, the City may also grant a permanent Waiver for any portion of the Minimum Standards. b. Variances. The City may approve a temporary Variance of the Minimum Standards upon finding that each of the following conditions is satisfied: 1. A special condition or unique circumstance exists that makes the application of the Minimum Standards unduly burdensome. 2. The temporary Variance is narrowly tailored to address the special condition or unique circumstance. 3. The Commercial Aeronautical Operator has agreed to come into full compliance with the Minimum Standards within a prescribed schedule. 4. The schedule is enforceable by the City. 5. The temporary Variance will not create an unfair competitive relationship among commercial aeronautical operators at the Airport. 6. The City finds that the temporary Variance will not materially interfere with the Commercial Aeronautical Operator's ability to provide high quality products, services and facilities to Airport users. c. Any temporary Waiver or temporary Variance approved by the City hereunder shall apply only to the specific Commercial Aeronautical Operator and the specific circumstance and shall not serve to amend, modify, or alter the Minimum Standards. VI. Additive Standards and Conflicts a. Unless authorized in writing by the City or otherwise provided herein, Commercial Aeronautical Operators must meet every minimum standard for every authorized Commercial Aeronautical Activity. b. In the event of conflicting Minimum Standards, the Commercial Aeronautical Operator will be required to satisfy the higher or more demanding standard. In the event of a conflict between the Lease, License or Agreement and the Minimum Standards, the terms of the Lease, License or Agreement shall apply. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 7 c. The City may permit a SASO conducting multiple Commercial Aeronautical Activities to satisfy a Minimum Standard that is less than the sum of the standards for each Commercial Aeronautical Activity, if the City finds that each of the following conditions is satisfied: 1. The off-set will not affect the Commercial Aeronautical Operator's ability to provide high quality products, services and facilities to Airport users in keeping with the policies hereof. 2. The off-set will not create an unfair competitive relationship among Commercial Aeronautical Operators at the Airport. An off-set granted pursuant to this provision shall not constitute a temporary Waiver or temporary Variance as provided in Section A (IV). VII. Administration a. The City has primary responsibility for the interpretation and application of the Minimum Standards and is authorized to issue citations, directives, adequacy determinations, and interpretive guidance in conformity with the Minimum Standards. b. An Entity may request an advisory opinion from the City as to the application of these Minimum Standards to such Entity. Any person may seek reconsideration of the City’s advisory opinion through the procedures outlined in Section 1.04.071 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. c. The Minimum Standards shall be made available upon request in electronic or hard copy format. d. The City is authorized to assist in the application and implementation of the Minimum Standards, principally through communications with Commercial Aeronautical Operators on the content and proper interpretation of the Minimum Standards. VIII. Reservation of Rights a. The grant of permission by the City to conduct Commercial Aeronautical Activities at the Airport shall not be construed as granting any exclusive right of use of the premises and facilities at the Airport, other than those premises which may be leased exclusively to a Commercial Aeronautical Operator, and then only to the extent provided in the relevant Lease or License. b. The City reserves and retains the right to conduct Commercial Aeronautical Activities at the Airport either in competition with other Entities or by exercising a proprietary exclusive right as authorized by FAA in the FAA Airport Compliance Manual (FAA Order 5190.6B, as amended if amended). c. The City reserves and retains the right for use of the Airport by others who may desire to use the same, pursuant to applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, codes, minimum standards and other regulatory measures pertaining to such use. d. The City further reserves the right to designate the specific Airport areas in which specific Aeronautical Activities may be conducted. Such designation shall give consideration to the nature and extent of the operation and the land and improvements available for such purpose, consistent with the orderly and safe operation of the Airport. SECTION B. – APPLICATION This section shall not apply to the City. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 8 I. Application a. Statement of Interest. An Entity seeking to conduct a Commercial Aeronautical Activity at the Airport must first submit a Statement of Interest to the City. There is no required form for a Statement of Interest. However, the Statement should address the following: 1. General overview and scope of the proposed Commercial Aeronautical Activity(ies), including the general area in which the proposed Activity(ies) shall occur. 2. Contact information, including the name, mailing address, email address and telephone number of the applicant. b. Procurement. Upon receipt of a Statement of Interest the City shall issue a request for qualifications or proposals or otherwise select a Commercial Aeronautical Operator through a competitive solicitation. The City may also issue a request for qualifications or proposals on its own initiative. In either event: 1. The City shall issue a Request for Qualifications or a Request for Proposals in a manner consistent with then-applicable City and Federal procurement requirements to determine whether any other entity is interested and qualified to perform the same or similar Commercial Aeronautical Service. 2. The City shall accept responses for a reasonable time period so as not to unreasonably delay consideration of the first application. c. Written Application. If the City elects to conduct a procurement process, it will request a written application from interested parties. If the City does not conduct a procurement process, it will request a written application from the Entity that filed the Statement of Interest. The written application shall be in the form prescribed by the City, or, in the absence of a form, shall include the following information and any such additional information as may be requested by the City. 1. Scope of Services. i. The name, mailing address, email address and telephone number of the applicant. If the applicant is a corporation, provide the name, address, and telephone number of the corporation’s officers and directors and of owners of any corporate stock with the number of total shares and the number of shares owned. If the applicant is a partnership, provide the name, address, and telephone number of the partners. ii. lf any person or entity holding or controlling, directly or indirectly, any ownership, voting, management or debt interests (actual or contingent) (“cross-ownership”) in any on-Airport commercial service provider (aeronautical or non-aeronautical) is involved in the ownership or management of the potential operator, provide complete information about the extent and nature of such cross-ownership. iii. The requested or proposed date for commencement of the service and the term of conducting the same and the proposed structure and amounts of rent and/or revenue to the City. iv. A comprehensive listing of all services proposed to be offered on or from the Airport and the proposed schedule of fees and charges therefor. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 9 v. A map, to scale, of the amount, configuration, and location of the land requested or desired to be constructed or leased. vi. The size and position of the building(s) to be constructed or leased and the proposed design and terms for the construction of any additional space and the ownership, leasing or sub-leasing thereof. An identification of any necessary or desirable capital improvements to be constructed in conjunction with the operation and applicant’s proposal for financing the same. vii. The number, type(s) and basing of aircraft to be provided/maintained (as applicable) and/or a detailed description of all equipment and facilities. viii. The number of persons to be employed (including the qualifications and certifications of each person); whether employees will be Airport-based (full-time, part-time and seasonal) or transient; and the certifications required, if any, for each Person to provide a proposed Commercial Aeronautical Activity. ix. The hours of the proposed operation. x. The types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained. xi. Identification of any and all bankruptcies relating to the applicant and the applicant’s principles. xii. Disclosure of any and all documented violations by the applicant and/or the applicant’s principals of FAA regulations. xiii. A preliminary safety and emergency response plan for the proposed Commercial Aeronautical Activities. 2. Financial and Managerial Responsibility and Capability. i. Prior Performance. Relevant information regarding the applicant’s past experience and its key employees in providing the proposed aviation services, together with a statement that the applicant or its principals have the financial and managerial ability to perform the selected services. Where relevant, applicants shall provide audited financial statements for the past three (3) years. If unaudited, the statements must be signed by a corporate officer attesting to the financial statements’ accuracy. The most recent unaudited quarterly statement must also be included. ii. Projected Performance. The applicant must demonstrate financial capability to initiate operations, to construct proposed improvements, and to provide working capital to carry on the contemplated operations. The demonstration of financial and managerial capability shall include a cash flow and a profit and loss projection for the first five years of the proposed operation. (In order to avoid the potential anti-competitive effects of financial control of potential competitors, prospective operators shall also disclose their sources and terms of financing.) II. Action on Written Application a. Grounds for Denial. In its sole discretion, the City reserves the right to deny an application upon finding any of the following: Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 10 1. The Commercial Aeronautical Activity proposed by the applicant would not meet the Minimum Standards prescribed herein. 2. The City has determined, upon examination of the applicant’s business plan, financial plan, and credit report that the applicant is unlikely to be able to continue to meet the Minimum Standards prescribed herein throughout the term of a Lease or License, including the payment of rates and charges. 3. The Entity applying or interested in the business cannot provide a performance bond or applicable insurance in the amounts and types required by the Airport for that Commercial Aeronautical Activity; or 4. The applicant has, either intentionally or unintentionally, supplied the City, or any other Person, with false or misleading information or has failed to make full disclosure in their application or supporting documents. 5. There is no suitable space on the Airport to accommodate the proposed Commercial Aeronautical Activity without requiring the reduction in space leased to another Commercial Aeronautical Operator; or the development or use of the area requested by the applicant will result in a congestion of aircraft or buildings or will result in unduly interfering with the operations of any present Commercial Aeronautical Operator on the Airport. 6. The proposed Commercial Aeronautical Activity is inconsistent with the current FAA- approved Airport Layout Plan or the current City-approved Master Plan. 7. The FAA has determined that any proposed development would constitute an obstruction or hazard to air navigation. 8. The proposed Commercial Aeronautical Activity would require the City to spend funds or to supply resources and such funds are not available or budgeted, or the operation will result in a financial loss to the Airport; 9. The applicant, an immediate family member of the applicant, a principal of the applicant, or an entity of which a principal of the applicant was a principal, meets one or more of the following descriptions: i. Was party to a Lease or License with the City that was terminated for cause. ii. Has been party to vexatious or frivolous litigation, including, without limitation, any administrative litigation, against the City. iii. Has been debarred or evicted from the Airport or any other another public-use airport at which the applicant conducted a Commercial Aeronautical Activity; provided, however, that the City nevertheless may approve the application upon examination of the facts and circumstances surrounding the debarment or eviction. 10. Denial of the application is otherwise in the best interest of the City. b. Appeals Process. The denial of an application hereunder may be appealed through the procedures outlined in Section 1.04.071 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 11 c. Notification of Changes. Applicants must provide the Airport with any information reflecting a material change in the information submitted in an application. This information includes, for example, and without limitation: (i) a change in ownership of the Entity, (ii) the filing of a petition in bankruptcy, (iii) addition or subtraction of principals, (iv) any felony or misdemeanor convictions that would result in loss of airport identification media, and (v) any federal fines imposed on the Commercial Aeronautical Operator. SECTION C. – GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL FBOS AND SASOS The following performance standards apply to all Commercial Aeronautical Operators and Commercial Aeronautical Activities. Additional standards specific to FBOs and SASOs can be found in Sections D (FBOs) and E (SASOs) of these Minimum Standards. I. Collateral Requirement a. Commercial Aeronautical Operators shall post any required collateral in a form and amount acceptable to the City Attorney. II. Capability / Experience a. All Entities providing Commercial Aeronautical Services at the Airport shall demonstrate the financial and technical capability to the satisfaction of the City. b. All Commercial Aeronautical Operators shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City, before and throughout the term of the relevant Lease, License or Agreement with the City, the capability of consistently providing the required products, services and facilities and engaging in the required Commercial Aeronautical Activities in a safe, secure manner in service to and to the benefit of the general public. III. Compliance a. Federal, state and local requirements. Commercial Aeronautical Operators must comply with all federal, state and local requirements applicable to their operations, including, but not limited to, the Airport Rules and Regulations and grant assurances applicable to the Airport. Without limiting the foregoing, Commercial Aeronautical Operators must comply with the following specific requirements: 1. Airport Access and Security. Commercial Aeronautical Operators are to comply with the Airport Security Plan; laws, regulations, orders and directives of Transportation Security Administration (“TSA”), as each may be amended; instructions of law enforcement personnel; and the policies, orders and directives of the City in furtherance of the Airport Security Program. Commercial Aeronautical Operators are responsible for their employees’, vendors’, and agents’ compliance with the Airport Security Plan. 2. Safety. Commercial Aeronautical Operators are to comply with federal, state and local law applicable to workplace and aviation safety; and the orders and directives of the City in furtherance of any Safety Management System or similar or related program at the Airport designed and intended to enhance safety. 3. Environmental. Commercial Aeronautical Operators are to comply with all applicable federal, state and local environmental laws; orders and directives of a federal or state agency with requisite jurisdiction over environmental conditions at the Airport; the Airport environmental Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 12 policies and procedures, including, for example, and without limitation, SPCC Plan, SWMP and spill response plan; and generally accepted industry environmental policies and standards. b. Licenses, Permits, Certifications and Regulations. Commercial Aeronautical Operators shall, at their own cost, obtain, maintain, and comply with all necessary licenses, permits, certifications, or ratings required for the conduct of their activities at the Airport. Upon request, entity shall provide copies of such licenses, permits, certifications, or ratings to the City. IV. Equipment and Vehicles a. Commercial Aeronautical Operators must own, lease, or otherwise have access to the equipment to provide the applicable aeronautical services promptly on demand without causing any flight delays or other operational impacts on aircraft at the Airport. b. Commercial Aeronautical Operators shall make all reasonable efforts to keep equipment operable, maintained in a safe operating condition, and capable of providing all required products and services at the hours and in a manner consistent with their intended use. c. All vehicles operating at the Airport shall comply with recurrent federal training requirements, applicable FAA and TSA transportation requirements, and applicable Airport Rules and Regulations governing vehicles and traffic. d. Each building, vehicle, and piece of mobile or vehicular equipment used on the Airport in conjunction with the Commercial Aeronautical Activity, shall bear the Commercial Aeronautical Operator’s identification in the form of a company logo, sign, emblem, or other means to designate to whom the building, vehicle, or equipment belongs or is assigned. V. Facilities, Maintenance, and Construction a. Leased Premises 1. Commercial Aeronautical Operators shall lease an area of adequate and appropriate size, shape, and location to provide for its activities/services and operations. 2. The leased premises shall be sufficient to accommodate the following minimum set-backs around each structure or facility: i. A minimum of 20 feet on the entrance (front) side of the structure and 10 feet on all three other sides. ii. A minimum of 15 feet from any adjacent structure. iii. T-hangars and patio shelters are exempted from the provisions of this section except that they shall have minimum 25 foot front setbacks. b. Parking i. Commercial Aeronautical Operators shall provide sufficient dedicated parking for employees and anticipated clients within their leased premises. ii. At a minimum, this includes all of the following: Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 13 (a) One spot for each employee. (b) An additional five (5) spots for any Commercial Aeronautical Operator that provides aircraft repair services. (c) Additional parking sufficient to accommodate the maximum reasonably expected number of clients to be on airport at any given time. c. Maintenance 1. All Commercial Aeronautical Operators shall comply with the Architectural Control Provisions for Fixed-Base Operator Lease Plots at Palo Alto Airport (1968) as amended if amended. 2. All building maintenance on non-City-owned facilities shall be the Commercial Aeronautical Operator's responsibility. 3. For City-owned facilities, structural and external repairs (except for windows and hangar doors) shall be the City's responsibility; all other maintenance, including repair of windows and hangar doors, shall be the Commercial Aeronautical Operator's responsibility. 4. Commercial Aeronautical Operators shall be responsible for trash removal, sewage, grass mowing, landscape maintenance (including weed removal), utility line maintenance, and pavement maintenance within its Leased Premises, including the set-back areas around structures. 5. Commercial Aeronautical Operators shall maintain all premises in a clean, sanitary condition and at the expiration of the lease term shall return said premises to the City in this condition, reasonable wear and tear excepted. 6. Landscaping of facilities shall comport with the Architectural Control Provisions for Fixed- Base Operator Lease Plots at Palo Alto Airport (1968) as amended if amended. Each FBO or SASO will be required to provide a plan for landscaping its area to be approved by the City and maintained by the FBO or SASO in a neat, clean and aesthetically pleasing manner. 7. Each FBO and SASO shall provide for sanitary handling and disposal, away from the Airport, of all trash, waste and other materials, including but not limited to used oil, solvents, lavatory cart contents and other waste. 8. The piling and storage of crates, boxes, barrels, containers, refuse, and surplus property shall not be permitted. 9. If painting operations are contemplated, the FBO or SASO shall provide a separate paint shop that meets all applicable safety requirements. d. Construction 1. All paving and building shall comply with any Airport Development and Construction Standards, as may be adopted and amended from time to time. 2. All construction shall comply with all applicable building codes. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 14 VI. Insurance a. General Requirements 1. All Entities conducting Aeronautical Activities at the Airport pursuant to a Lease, License or Agreement must maintain insurance policies and coverage limits that are relevant and appropriate to the activities conducted at the Airport. Entities required to maintain insurance include, without limitation, Commercial Aeronautical Operators, including FBOs and SASOs; Flying Clubs; and Entities conducting Self-Fueling in accordance with a Lease, License or Agreement. i. Each Entity shall maintain the required insurance throughout the term of a Lease, License or other Agreement. ii. The applicable insurance coverage shall be in force during the period of any construction of the Commercial Aeronautical Operator's facilities and/or prior to its entry upon the Airport for the conduct of its business. iii. Lapses in insurance coverage may result in denial of access to the Airport. iv. Any Commercial Aeronautical Operator, who by nature of its size, has become self- insured, shall furnish evidence of such self-insurance and shall hold the City and all its personnel, and the officers and agents and assigns harmless in the event of any claims or litigation arising out of its operation on the Airport. v. The City must be named as an additional insured. 2. Minimum insurance types and coverage limits for Entities conducting Commercial Aeronautical Activities at the Airport are addressed in Section D for FBOs and Section E for SASOs. The precise insurance types and limits required by the City will be prescribed in a Lease, License or other Agreement and may differ from or exceed the requirements of the minimum insurance requirements identified below based upon the circumstances and the risks presented by the proposed Commercial Aeronautical Activity. 3. In prescribing insurance coverage types and limits, the City is not representing or guaranteeing that the types and limits are adequate to protect the Entity’s interests and liabilities. It is understood that the specified amounts of insurance stated herein or in a Lease, License or other Agreement shall in no way limit the liability of an Entity. 4. The City reserves the right to review insurance requirements during the term of a Lease, License or other Agreement and to make reasonable adjustments to required types of insurance coverage, limits and exclusions when deemed necessary and prudent by the City based upon changes in statutory law, court decisions, the claims history of the industry or financial considerations of the insurance company and/or the Entity. 5. Each Entity required to maintain insurance by operation of these Minimum Standards or any Agreement will provide a Certificate of Insurance listing the City as an additional insured. This obligation shall not apply to any workers’ compensation policy. 6. Each insurance policy, except workers’ compensation, shall cover both bodily injury and property damage. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 15 7. Each policy shall be primary and non-contributory. 8. Each policy, except a workers’ compensation policy, shall insure the defense and indemnity obligations assumed by the Entity under a Lease, License or other Agreement. 9. It shall be the Entity’s responsibility to pay any retention or deductible for the coverages required herein and in a Lease, License or other Agreement. 10. Insurance shall be secured by a company authorized to conduct business in the State of California. 11. Insurance policies must include a requirement that a 30-day notice of cancellation, material change or non-renewal will be sent to the City. 12. In requiring Entities to maintain insurance hereunder, the City in no way assumes liability for injury and damage occurring on or in connection with the Airport, and the City reserves the right to claim any defense or immunity available under law. 13. The precise coverage types and limits shall be prescribed in a Lease, License or other Agreement. In the event of a conflict between the Lease, License or Agreement and the Minimum Standards, the terms of the Lease, License or Agreement shall apply. i. Where more than one aeronautical service is proposed, the minimum limits will vary (depending upon the nature of individual services in such combination) but will not necessarily be cumulative in all instances. ii. Coverage may be provided through primary or excess policies. VII. Lease or License Requirement a. A Lease or License is a prerequisite to providing any Commercial Aeronautical Activity on the Airport. b. The failure to remain current in the payment of any and all rents, fees, charges, and other sums due and owing to the City shall be grounds for revocation of an Entity’s Lease, License or Agreement with the City for Commercial Aeronautical Activities at the Airport. c. General Lease or License Terms. 1. The Lease or License with the City must recite the terms and conditions under which the Commercial Aeronautical Operator will do business on the Airport, including but not limited to, the term of Agreement, the rentals, fees, and charges, the rights, privileges and obligations of the respective parties, and other relevant covenants. 2. Clauses that shall be included in all Leases and Licenses and in any contracts between the Commercial Aeronautical Operator and any subtenants or subcontractors providing Aeronautical Activities on the Airport are set forth in Attachment 1. The provisions contained in Attachment 1 can be amended from time to time by the City without amending these Minimum Standards. 3. Leases and Licenses shall contain all provisions required by the FAA as a condition of any Federal Grant to the City for the Airport. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 16 d. Term lengths will be determined by the City depending upon such factors as the degree of investment made by the prospective tenant and the remaining value of such improvements at the end of the proposed lease term. e. Limited Exception Available for Non-Tenant Operators. 1. The City intends for all Commercial Aeronautical Operators to lease space at the Airport in the minimum area prescribed by the Minimum Standards. The purpose of this policy is to ensure that Commercial Aeronautical Operators do not attempt to gain an unfair competitive advantage by operating without the same level of financial investment in the Airport and in their business operation as their competitors. 2. Nevertheless, the City recognizes that there may be limited instances in which a one-time only Commercial Aeronautical Activity may be performed by an Entity that does not lease space at the Airport. Specifically, an Entity may be permitted to provide products and services at the Airport upon demonstrating, to the satisfaction of the City, that no Commercial Aeronautical Operator leasing space at the Airport has the requisite certificate, certified personnel, or access to equipment and parts to provide the product or perform the service. The City may approve a request from an Entity meeting these conditions provided that: i. The Entity enters into an Agreement with the City identifying the Commercial Aeronautical Activity that may be performed and the rates and charges assessed for the privilege of conducting the Commercial Aeronautical Activity; ii. The Agreement specifies that the authorization is for limited duration; and iii. The Entity reasonably satisfies applicable Minimum Standards prescribed herein for the Commercial Aeronautical Activity. VIII. Notice and Reporting of Initiation or Termination of Services a. A Commercial Aeronautical Operator shall provide the City with 30 days advance notice of its intention to start up or discontinue a Commercial Aeronautical Activity authorized under its Lease, License or Agreement. b. If said start-up or discontinuation is not permitted or authorized under the Lease, License or Agreement, or if said Commercial Aeronautical Activity shall be conducted by a third party through a sublease or assignment, an amendment to the Lease, License or Agreement may be required prior to the initiation or discontinuance of said use. IX. Personnel a. Commercial Aeronautical Operators must provide high quality customer service by meeting or exceeding Airport customer needs through consistent, responsive, and professional service. b. A list of contacts shall be supplied to the City including after-hours phone numbers. This list shall be updated when any change occurs. c. Commercial Aeronautical Operators must control the conduct and demeanor of their personnel, agents, subcontractors, and subtenants, as well as conduct their business operations in a safe, orderly, efficient, and proper manner so as not to unreasonably disturb or endanger any Airport customers, Tenants or other operators. Commercial Aeronautical Operators are also responsible Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 17 for the compliance of their personnel, agents, subcontractors and subtenants with the Airport Security Plan. d. All personnel employed by a Commercial Aeronautical Operator to perform duties on the Airport have a City-issued airport identification badge and must have any additional identification as may be required by regulation or directive of TSA. X. Subcontracting, Subleasing, and Assignment a. The City must provide written approval for any sublease, assignment or subcontracting for the provisions of commercial services, products and services at the Airport. b. Subcontracting. 1. Consistent with the terms of the controlling Lease or Agreement and with the requirement for City approval outlined in subparagraph (X)(a) above, FBOs may subcontract to another Entity to conduct a Commercial Aeronautical Activity. In such event, the subcontractor shall be responsible for complying with all applicable Minimum Standards; provided, however, that the FBO shall remain liable to the City for compliance with the Minimum Standards and the terms of an Agreement. 2. SASOs are prohibited from subcontracting absent extraordinary circumstances and written approval from the City. However, this prohibition does not apply with respect to a SASO’s contractual relationship with individual independent contractors or temporary employees. c. Subleasing. 1. FBOs and SASOs are permitted to sublease space to another Entity to perform one or more Commercial Aeronautical Activities, provided that the following conditions are met: i. The subleasing party must obtain a License to operate at the Airport. For purposes of this requirement, the City’s written approval of a sublease, per section X.a above, shall constitute the necessary License. ii. The FBO or SASO must pay the City fees applicable to the class of services provided by the sublessee at the levels set forth in the Airport Rules and Regulations or applicable Lease. iii. The FBO or SASO must carry public liability insurance for its sublessee or provide a certificate of insurance which shows the lessee and the City as additional insured, in amounts commensurate with the services provided by the sublessee. 2. No Entity shall conduct a Commercial Aeronautical Activity as a lessee or sublessee of Airport property that is leased or designated for a non-commercial use, including, for example, and without limitation, a hangar leased for private, non-commercial use. 3. FBOs must provide at least two of the required FBO services identified in Section D.III and may not sublease all of their operations. d. Assignment. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 18 1. Prior to granting consent for any assignment, the City may require the prospective assignee to complete an application or submit the information prescribed in Section B.I (Application) hereof. The City may reject the request to assign the Agreement based on the factors enumerated in Section B.1 hereof. SECTION D. – FIXED BASE OPERATORS (FBOS) I. Land and Facility Requirements a. Land Requirements. [Reserved] b. Facility Requirements. FBOs shall provide: 1. Adequate facilities for its operations including, but not limited to, crew and passenger lounge facilities, and hangar space. 2. Adequate equipment, including ropes, chains and other types of restraining devices, and wheel chocks for the typical number and type of aircraft simultaneously using the FBO facilities during a peak period. c. Parking and Access. 1. FBOs shall provide asphalt or concrete paved surfaced, on-site automobile parking space in compliance with parking standards and requirements of the City and the Architectural Control Provisions for Fixed Base Operator Lease Plots at Palo Alto Airport (1968) as amended if amended. 2. No parking shall be permitted in any setback area. 3. FBOs shall provide and maintain a paved walkway within the leased area to facilitate pedestrian access to the Commercial Aeronautical Operator's office II. FBO Staffing and Personnel a. FBO Manager. There shall be a full-time, on-site general manager. The individual managing the operations of an FBO shall have at least five (5) years’ experience in the business in the period of eight (8) years immediately preceding such application, having been engaged in the business of an FBO on an airport of comparable size, facilities and activity as the Airport. b. Staffing. In addition to the on-site general manager, there shall be a minimum of two individuals staffing the FBO during hours of operation. Additional requirements for staffing shall be dictated in the Lease c. All aircraft fuel handing personnel shall be fully trained in the safe and proper handling, dispensing, and storage of aircraft fuel. Acceptable training shall be NATA Safety 1st Professional Line Service Training or an equivalent training program. The City shall enforce spill training in accordance with the applicable SPCC Plan. Records identifying completed training programs shall be kept on file and submitted to the City upon demand. d. [Reserved] Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 19 III. Required FBO Services a. Fueling and Lubricating. This includes Jet Fuel, AVGAS, aircraft propellants and aircraft lubricants. 1. Hours of Operation. [Reserved] 2. Facilities, Equipment and Services. [Reserved] 3. Contracts for delivery of fuel. [Reserved] 4. Calculation of fuel flowage. [Reserved] 5. Safety of fueling operations. [Reserved] b. Line Services 1. Hours of Operation. [Reserved] 2. Facilities, Equipment and Services: The following facilities, services and equipment are required. i. Ramp Parking, Tie-Down, Aircraft Storage and FBO Ramp Assistance within the FBO's Leased Premises [Reserved] ii. Aircraft Servicing, Maintenance and Repair (a) Servicing of aircraft shall include generally expected services, such as cleaning of the interior and exterior of aircraft and catering. (b) FBOs shall provide proper equipment for repairing and inflating aircraft tires, servicing struts, changing engine oil, servicing oxygen systems, washing aircraft and aircraft windows, and recharging or energizing discharged aircraft batteries and starter. (c) FBOs must provide work space for any aircraft upon which airframe or engine repairs are being performed. (d) FBOs must provide storage space for aircraft before and after repair and maintenance have been accomplished. (e) FBOs must provide shop space to house the equipment and adequate equipment and machine tools, jacks, lifts and testing equipment as required for its operation. iii. Aircraft storage [Reserved] iv. Other required services and equipment [Reserved] 3. Customer service i. FBOs shall provide pilot and passenger lounge facilities. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 20 ii. FBOs shall provide adequate public restroom facilities that comply with Americans With Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines and Chapter 16.10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. iii. FBOs shall provide telephone or wifi services. IV. Commercial Self-Service Fueling. a. Commercial Self-Service Fueling is an optional service for FBOs, and is not mandatory. However, if an FBO decides to provide this facility and service, the FBO must comply with the following. 1. Hours of Operation. [Reserved] 2. Facilities, Equipment and Services. i. All Commercial Self-Service Fueling must comply with the Airport Rules and Regulations. ii. The FBO shall provide at least one above-ground, double-walled fuel tank. iii. The FBO must post signage communicating the location and procedures for the emergency shut-off valve and any emergency service contact phone numbers. IV. The FBO shall pay the City a fuel flowage fee for each gallon of fuel stored in the self- fueling tank(s). V. Insurance. a. Insurance minimums for FBOs. 1. Commercial general liability - no less than $$1,000,000 per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate. 2. Automobile - no less than $500,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate (shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non-owned vehicles). 3. Compliance with relevant California law with respect to Workmen's Compensation and Unemployment Insurance (where applicable). b. FBOs conducting fueling or deicing operations at the Airport shall maintain pollution liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the level of environmental risk presented by the operation and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. c. FBOs providing commercial aircraft storage shall maintain hangar-keeper’s liability coverage of no less than $500,000 per aircraft and $1,000,000 per occurrence unless otherwise agreed to by the City to reflect the value of the aircraft. SECTION E. – SPECIALIZED AERONAUTICAL SERVICE OPERATORS (SASOS) I. General Facility Requirements for SASOs a. Land and Facility Requirements. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 21 1. Unless otherwise indicated in this Section E, SASOs shall construct, lease, or sublease an area that is adequate to erect a building providing a minimum of 1,000 square feet of floor space to accommodate its operations. This floor space shall be used to house all equipment and provide for aircraft storage, offices, restrooms, customer lounges, telephone facilities, or other uses necessary to the SASO’s operations. 2. SASOs shall construct, lease, or sublease sufficient: (1) paved onsite automobile parking space with suitable accommodations for automobiles; and, where appropriate, (2) ramp space to accommodate the SASO’s services and operations. b. Hours of Operation. Each SASO shall have its premises open and services available on an as needed basis sufficient to meet the needs of its users. Unless otherwise specified herein, specific terms shall be identified in each Lease Agreement. c. Personnel. 1. Each SASO shall have employ and have on duty sufficient staff to meet the Minimum Standards for each Commercial Aeronautical Activity provided. A staffing plan shall be submitted to the City for reference. Unless otherwise specified herein, specific terms shall be identified in each Lease Agreement. 2. Each SASO shall provide the City with a point-of-contact, including telephone numbers, for personnel empowered to make decisions in emergency situations. d. SASOs shall hold all licenses and certifications required to perform each Commercial Aeronautical Activity provided. e. The SASO shall provide, by means of an office or a telephone, a point of contact for the public desiring to utilize the SASO’s services. f. Prohibited Activities. 1. The sale of fuel by SASOs is prohibited. II. Air Taxi/Charter Service Operators a. Statement of Concept. An Air Taxi/Charter operator is a type of SASO Entity that is engaged in the business of providing air transportation (persons or property) to the public for hire, either on a charter basis or as an air taxi Operator, as defined in the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, or as said Act may be amended from time to time. b. Personnel. 1. The Air Taxi/Charter shall have available qualified operating crews and personnel for checking in and ticketing passengers, handling of luggage, and for furnishing or arranging for suitable ground transportation. 2. The Air Taxi/Charter shall provide reasonable assurance of continued availability of qualified operating crews and approved aircraft within a reasonable or maximum notice period. c. Facilities, Equipment, and Services. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 22 1. The Air Taxi/Charter shall have available for hire, either owned or under written lease to the Air Taxi/Charter, at least one (1) four-place aircraft equipped for and capable of use in instrument conditions, or a sufficient number of aircraft properly certificated to handle the proposed scope of its operation. 2. All loading and loading of passengers shall be conducted within the leasehold or within public space immediately adjacent to the leasehold. 3. If employees or passengers must transit through the Airport Operations Area, the Air Taxi/Charter shall erect ropes or a reasonable equivalent to ensure safety and to avoid interference with any other Airport tenants or users. 4. Where appropriate, the Air Taxi/Charter shall provide aircraft-to-lounge ground transportation for passengers and pilots and shall have passenger transportation (e.g., golf carts, vans, etc.) in adequate numbers to provide service to their customers. All equipment shall be maintained and operated in accordance with OSHA and local and state industrial codes. 5. The Air Taxi/Charter shall secure sufficient aircraft storage spaces (i.e., hangars, shelters or tie-downs) at Airport to accommodate its anticipated operations and shall provide appropriate documentation to the Airport Manager. 6. The Air Taxi/Charter shall provide the following customer service facilities i. Pilot and passenger lounge facilities ii. Sanitary and free public restrooms that comply with Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines and Chapter 16.10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. iii. Telephone or wifi services. d. Insurance Minimums 1. Commercial general liability - no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate. 2. Automobile - no less than $1,500,000 per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate (shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non-owned vehicles). 3. Compliance with the California Statutes with respect to Workmen's Compensation and Unemployment Insurance (where applicable). 4. Entities conducting self-fueling or deicing operations at the Airport shall maintain pollution liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the level of environmental risk presented by the operation and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. 5. Entities providing commercial aircraft storage shall maintain hangar-keeper’s liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the value of aircraft to be stored and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. 6. Aircraft passenger liability insurance of no less than $10,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 for each passenger seat. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 23 III. Aircraft Rental Operators a. Statement of Concept. An aircraft rental operator is a person or persons, firm or corporation engaged in the rental of aircraft to the public. b. Personnel. The SASO shall employ and have on-duty or on-call and available to provide service at the Airport within one hour of being called, a properly FAA-certified pilot capable of performing any rental check rides that may be necessary for all aircraft available for rental. c. Facilities, Equipment, and Services. 1. The SASO shall have available for rental, either owned or under written lease to Operator, a sufficient number of aircraft properly certificated to handle the proposed scope of its operation. 2. Aircraft shall be available for rental under commercially reasonable terms and conditions and at commercially reasonable rates and charges. 3. All loading and loading of passengers shall be conducted within the leasehold or within public space immediately adjacent to the leasehold. 4. If employees or passengers must transit through the Airport Operations Area, the SASO shall erect ropes or a reasonable equivalent to ensure safety and to avoid interference with any other Airport tenants or users. 5. Where appropriate, the SASO shall provide aircraft-to-lounge ground transportation for passengers and pilots and shall have passenger transportation (e.g., golf carts, vans, etc.) in adequate numbers to provide service to their customers. All equipment shall be maintained and operated in accordance with OSHA and local and state industrial codes. 6. The SASO shall secure sufficient aircraft storage spaces (i.e., hangars, shelters or tie-downs) at Airport to accommodate its anticipated operations and shall provide appropriate documentation to the Airport Manager. 7. The SASO shall provide the following customer service facilities i. Pilot and passenger lounge facilities ii. Sanitary and free public restrooms that comply with Americans With Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines and Chapter 16.10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. d. Insurance Minimums 1. Commercial general liability - no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate. 2. Automobile - no less than $500,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate (shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non-owned vehicles). 3. Compliance with the California Statutes with respect to Workmen's Compensation and Unemployment Insurance (where applicable). Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 24 4. Entities conducting self-fueling or deicing operations at the Airport shall maintain pollution liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the level of environmental risk presented by the operation and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. 5. Entities providing commercial aircraft storage shall maintain hangar-keeper’s liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the value of aircraft to be stored and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. 6. Aircraft passenger liability insurance of no less than $10,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 for each passenger seat. IV. Aviation Repair Service Operators a. Statement of Concept. A specialized aviation repair services operator is a person engaged in a business capable of providing an FAA certified shop, or a combination of shops for the repair and installation of power plant, airframe, propellers, instruments, and accessories for general aviation aircraft. The operator may furnish one, or if desired, any combination of these services. This category includes sale of new and/or used parts for associated repairs. b. Personnel. The SASO shall have in its employ, and on duty during the required operating hours, trained personnel currently certified as FAA radio, instrument or propeller repairmen in such numbers as are required to provide services in an efficient manner. c. Facilities and Equipment. 1. The SASO shall have work space for any aircraft upon which airframe or engine repairs are being performed. 2. The SASO shall have storage space for aircraft before and after repair and maintenance have been accomplished. 3. The SASO shall have shop space to house the equipment and adequate equipment and machine tools, jacks, lifts and testing equipment as required for maintenance to be performed on general aircraft. d. Nothing herein is intended to preclude the owner of any aircraft or his or her employees from maintaining or repairing such aircraft or subject an owner performing maintenance or repairs to comply with this section. e. Insurance Minimums 1. Commercial general liability - no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate. 2. Automobile - no less than $500,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate (shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non-owned vehicles). 3. Compliance with the California Statutes with respect to Workmen's Compensation and Unemployment Insurance (where applicable). Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 25 4. Entities providing commercial aircraft storage shall maintain hangar-keeper’s liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the value of aircraft to be stored and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. 5. Aircraft passenger liability insurance of no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. V. Flight Training Operators a. Statement of Concept. A flight training operator is a person or persons, firm or corporation engaged in instructing pilots in dual and solo flight operations, in fixed and/or rotary wing aircraft, and in providing such related ground school instruction as is necessary to prepare persons for taking a written examination and flight check for the category or categories of pilots' licenses and rating involved. b. Personnel. 1. The SASO shall have available, on a full-time basis, at least one (1) flight instructor who has been currently certificated by the FAA to provide the type of flight training offered. 2. The SASO shall have on call on a part-time basis, at least one (1) ground instructor who has been currently certificated by the FAA to provide the type of ground training offered. This person may be the same person as the flight instructor specified above. c. Facilities, Equipment, and Services. 1. If the SASO prefers to hangar its aircraft in leased space, the SASO may provide ground school and briefing/ debriefing of students off-Airport. Ground school and briefing/debriefing may not be provided in public areas of the Airport, but may be provided in leased/owned hangars. 2. If the SASO prefers to build a hangar for aircraft storage, the SASO shall provide a minimum of 1,600 square feet of interior floor area in hangar space. 3. SASO shall have available for use in flight training, either owned or under written lease to the Operator, a sufficient number of aircraft properly certificated to handle the proposed scope of its student operation, but not less than one (1) properly certificated aircraft. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a SASO from providing flight instruction in an aircraft owned by a third- party. 4. All loading and loading of aircraft shall be conducted within the leasehold or within public space immediately adjacent to the leasehold. 5. If employees, students or passengers must transit through the Airport Operations Area, the SASO shall erect ropes or a reasonable equivalent to ensure safety and to avoid interference with any other Airport tenants or users. 6. Where appropriate, the SASO shall provide aircraft-to-lounge ground transportation for passengers and pilots and shall have passenger transportation (e.g., golf carts, vans, etc.) in adequate numbers to provide service to their customers. All equipment shall be maintained and operated in accordance with OSHA and local and state industrial codes. 7. The SASO shall provide the following customer service facilities Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 26 i. Pilot and passenger lounge facilities ii. Sanitary and free public restrooms that comply with Americans With Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines and Chapter 16.10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code. d. Insurance Minimums 1. Commercial general liability - no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate. 2. Automobile - no less than $500,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate (shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non-owned vehicles). 3. Compliance with the California Statutes with respect to Workmen's Compensation and Unemployment Insurance (where applicable). 4. Entities providing commercial aircraft storage shall maintain hangar-keeper’s liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the value of aircraft to be stored and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. 5. Aircraft passenger liability insurance of no less than $10,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 for each passenger seat. VI. Hangar Keepers a. Statement of Concept. A hangar keeper is a person or persons, firm or corporation engaged in the lease and/or management of hangar space on the Airport for the storage of aircraft. b. Facilities, Equipment and Services. 1. The SASO shall provide a minimum of 1,600 square feet of interior floor area in hangar space. The SASO shall also have floor space to accommodate administrative and storage space. 2. SASOs engaging in the business of renting and leasing hangar storage space to aircraft owners or operators solely for aircraft storage purposes shall: i. Require all tenants who sublease space to have an executed Agreement with the SASO prior to occupancy, the form of which provides adequate indemnification protection for the City. A copy of the standard sublease form must be approved by the City in writing prior to commencement of leasing activities. The SASO must provide a listing and copies of all executed leases or subleases of all aircraft stored within the SASO or sub lessee's hangar facilities to the City semi-annually. ii. Ensure that hangar tenants perform no maintenance within the hangar other than: (a) Hangar tenants performing preventive maintenance on their own aircraft, utilizing their own employees, to the extent permitted in 14 C.F.R. § 43.7 (federal regulations regarding the specific persons authorized to approve aircraft or component parts for return to service after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration); or Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 27 (b) Maintenance performed by non-tenants as permitted by Section C (VII)(e)(2) of these Minimum Standards. iii. Ensure that hangar cooperatives shall not provide fuel services to the members of the cooperative or to the public. iv. Ensure that hangar space is used for aeronautical purposes and that, to the extent that non-aeronautical items are stored in a hangar, those items are either incidental to aeronautical use consistent with then-current FAA policy, or the non-aeronautical use has been approved by FAA. c. Insurance 1. As indicated in Section C of these Minimum Standards, the precise insurance coverage types and limits shall be prescribed in a Lease, License or other Agreement. In the event of a conflict between the Lease, License or Agreement and the Minimum Standards, the terms of the Lease, License or Agreement shall apply. 2. In the absence of specific insurance standards in the Lease, License or Agreement, the provisions in this subsection apply. i. Commercial general liability - no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate. ii. Automobile - no less than $500,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate (shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non-owned vehicles). iii. Compliance with the California Statutes with respect to Workmen's Compensation and Unemployment Insurance (where applicable). iv. Hangar-keeper’s liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the value of aircraft to be stored and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. VII. Specialized Commercial Flying Services a. Statement of Concept. A specialized commercial flying services operator is an Entity engaged in air transportation for hire for the purpose of providing any of the services listed below: 1. Nonstop sightseeing flights that begin and end at the Airport; 2. Banner towing and aerial advertising; 3. Aerial photography or survey; 4. Power line, underground cable or pipeline patrol; 5. Parachute or sky-diving operations; 6. Any other operations specifically excluded from Part 135 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. b. Facilities, Equipment and Services. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 28 1. In case of any operation involving the aerial application of chemicals, SASO shall provide a centrally drained, paved area adequate for all aircraft loading, unloading, washing and servicing. Material Safety Data Sheets are required to be onsite and three copies shall be provided to the City. This area must be built and operated in full compliance with all applicable federal, state and local laws and regulations. SASO shall also provide for the safe storage and containment of all chemical material. Such facilities will be in a location designated by the City on the Airport, which will provide the greatest safeguard to the public. 2. The SASO shall provide and have based on its leasehold, either owned or under written lease to the Operator, not less than one (1) airworthy aircraft, suitably equipped for, and meeting all the requirements of the FAA with respect to the type of operation to be performed. c. Insurance Minimums 1. Commercial general liability - no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $5,000,000 aggregate. 2. Automobile - no less than $500,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 aggregate (shall include coverage for all owned, hired and non-owned vehicles). 3. Compliance with the California Statutes with respect to Workmen's Compensation and Unemployment Insurance (where applicable). 4. Entities conducting self-fueling or deicing operations at the Airport shall maintain pollution liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the level of environmental risk presented by the operation and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. 5. Entities providing commercial aircraft storage shall maintain hangar-keeper’s liability coverage in an amount commensurate with the value of aircraft to be stored and specified in a Lease, License or Agreement. 6. Aircraft passenger liability insurance of no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and $1,000,000 per individual. VIII. Other a. If a specific commercial service is not contemplated or covered herein, a Person desiring to provide such commercial service should approach the City to negotiate the terms of airport access. b. In reviewing any proposal, the City will consider the nature of the Commercial Aeronautical Activity, the proposed business terms, and the compatibility of the Commercial Aeronautical Activity with then-existing Airport operations and activities. The Airport further may request review by the Federal Aviation Administration to consider, for example, and without limitation, whether the aeronautical activity may be conducted safely at the Airport. The Airport may decide, in its sole discretion, to amend the Minimum Standards prior to executing any Agreement authorizing the commercial aeronautical activity to, for example and without limitation, create a new category of FBO or SASO with attendant requirements and standards. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 29 SECTION F. – DEFINITIONS 1. Aeronautical Activity – Any activity that involves, makes possible, or is required for the operation of aircraft, or that contributes to or is required for the safety of such operations (e.g., air taxi and charter operations; scheduled or nonscheduled air carrier operations; pilot training; aircraft rental; sightseeing; aerial photography; aerial advertising and surveying; aircraft sales and service; aircraft storage; sale of aviation petroleum products; repair and maintenance of aircraft; sale of aircraft parts; and activities involving parachute operations, ultralight operations, glider operations, motorless aircraft operations, helicopter operations, kites, balloons, unmanned aerial systems, or any lighter- than-air aircraft operations). 2. Agreement – A written, legally enforceable contract between the Airport and any party concerning access to and use of the Airport. 3. Air Taxi/Charter – An operator licensed by the FAA to provide air transportation of persons or property for hire on a charter basis or as an air taxi operator on a scheduled, nonscheduled, or on- demand basis as defined and regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration. 4. Airport – The Airport and all of the area, buildings, facilities and improvements within the interior boundaries of such Airport as it now exists or as it may be hereafter or extended or enlarged and as depicted on a current Airport Layout Plan approved by the Federal Aviation Administration. 5. Airport Layout Plan or ALP – The current, FAA-approved drawing depicting the physical layout of the Airport and identifying the location and configuration of current and proposed runways, taxiways, buildings, roadways, utilities, navigational aids, etc. 6. Airport Operations Area or AOA – The area of the Airport identified in the Appendix I of the Rules and Regulations that includes the aircraft movement areas, aircraft parking areas, loading ramps, safety areas, and any adjacent areas that are not separated by adequate security systems, measures or procedures. 7. Airport Security Plan or ASP – The written plan concerning security at the Airport, containing the elements required by 49 C.F.R. Part 1542 and approved by the Transportation Security Administration. If no ASP exists, any written and approved City plan for security at the Airport shall substitute for the ASP for purposes of these Minimum Standards. 8. AVGAS – Aviation gasoline, 100LL or equivalent, intended for use in a piston aircraft. 9. City – The City of Palo Alto, California. 10. C.F.R. – The Code of Federal Regulations. 11. Commercial Aeronautical Activity – Any commercial business operation that is related to the operation of Aircraft at the Airport as prescribed in these Minimum Standards for Commercial Aeronautical Activities. This does not include any commercial operation not directly related to the operation of Aircraft, e.g. restaurant, rental car, or other concessions. Commercial Aeronautical Activity does not include itinerant operations by a business enterprise that is neither based nor regularly operates out of the Airport. A business enterprise will be deemed to not operate regularly at the Airport if it has no personnel (employees or contractors) whose place of employment is within the City or within a five mile radius of the Airport. 12. Commercial Aeronautical Operator – An Entity or Person conducting a Commercial Aeronautical Activity at the Airport pursuant to a Lease or other Agreement. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 30 13. Commercial Self-Service Fueling – Fueling of an aircraft by the pilot using commercial aircraft fuel pumps installed for that purpose. 14. Co-op – A mechanism for shared ownership of hangars and similar facilities. 15. Entity – Each natural person, partnership, organization or business that has a legal and separately identifiable existence. 16. FAA – The Federal Aviation Administration. 17. Fixed Base Operator or FBO – An Entity that maintains and operates facilities at the Airport for the purpose of providing commercial aeronautical services including but not limited to the retail sale of aviation fuels, aircraft line services, and aircraft airframe and engine repair and maintenance at the Airport. 18. Flying Club – A nonprofit or not-for-profit entity organized for the express purpose of providing its members with the noncommercial use of aircraft for their personal use and enjoyment. 19. Lease – A contractual agreement between the City and another Entity that establishes a tenancy on the Airport. A Lease is written and enforceable by law. 20. Leased Premises – Those premises, including, as appropriate, any area leased, subleased or otherwise controlled by an FBO or SASO on the Airport. 21. License – A contractual agreement between the City and another Entity that grants or otherwise authorizes the use of land or building space to conduct specified activities. A License is written and enforceable by law. 22. Maintenance – Aircraft inspection, overhaul, repair, preservation and replacement of parts, including preventative maintenance, as described in Part 43 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. 23. Minimum Standards – The qualifications set forth herein, which set forth the minimum requirements to be met as a condition for the right to conduct or provide a Commercial Aeronautical Activity or Service on the Airport. 24. NATA – National Air Transportation Association 25. Operator – An Entity that has entered into a Lease, License or Agreement with the City to occupy, use and/or develop land and/or improvements in order to engage in Commercial Aeronautical Activities at the Airport. 26. OSHA – The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, as amended. 27. Part 77 – The federal regulations governing the safe, efficient use, and preservation of the navigable airspace, which are codified at Title 14, Part 77 of the Code of Federal Regulations. 28. Rules and Regulations – The most recent, approved version of the Airport Rules and Regulations. 29. SOP – Standard Operating Procedure. 30. SPCC Plan – Spill Prevention Countermeasures and Control Plan, prepared to comply with the federal regulations at 40 C.F.R. Part 112. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 31 31. Specialized Aeronautical Service Operator or SASO – An Entity that is authorized to provide one or a combination of Commercial Aeronautical Activities that does not include Commercial Fueling, as described more fully in Section E. 32. Tenant – Any Entity that has an Agreement with the City for occupying space at the Airport. 33. Terminal – The terminal located at the Airport. 34. Through the Fence or TTF Operations – The movement of aircraft between the Airport Operations Area at the Airport and land adjacent to, but not part of, the Airport property. This includes access from residential properties. 35. TSA – The Transportation Security Administration. 36. Variance – The grant of a modification to the Minimum Standard requirements, often for only a temporary period to address unique facts or hardships. 37. Waiver – The grant of an exemption from a requirement of the Minimum Standards. 38. World Aeronautical Charts or WACs – Aeronautical charts that cover land areas at a standard size and scale (1:1,000,000) for navigation by moderate speed aircraft and aircraft operating at high altitudes. Palo Alto Airport Interim Minimum Standards and Leasing Policies November 2015 Page 32 ATTACHMENT 1. – Reserved [Required Lease Clauses] NOT YET APPROVED 1 151104 sh 0140148 Resolution No. ________ Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Revising the Palo Alto Airport Fees and Charges Applicable to Tenants, Licensees, Permit Holders and Other Users of the Palo Alto Airport and its Facilities During FY 2016 The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows: SECTION 1. Pursuant to Section 12.20.010 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code, the attached schedule of Airport Fees and Charges is adopted (Attachment “A”). The Airport Fees and Charges shall become effective November 17, 2015. SECTION 2. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution, revising the fees and charges to be paid by the tenants, licensees, permit holders and users located at and doing business at the Palo Alto Airport, is not subject to California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(8) and Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations Sec. 15273(a)(1) and (3), because the fees and charges adopted by this resolution are necessary to recover the Palo Alto Airport’s operating expenses. The Council finds that the Airport Division has presented sufficient evidence and other information with specificity to support the basis of the claim of exemption. INTRODUCED AND PASSED: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: ATTEST: __________________________ _____________________________ City Clerk Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED: _________________________ _____________________________ City Attorney City Manager _____________________________ Director of Public Works _____________________________ Director of Administrative Services City of Palo Alto Rates FY 2016 FEE Tail-in Open Tie-Down, improved pavement 0 to 3,500 pounds 149.00 3,501 to 5,200 pounds 173.50 5,201 to 10,200 pounds 195.00 10,201 to 17,000 pounds 218.00 Tail-in Open Tie-Down, unimproved pavement 0 to 3,500 pounds 112.00 3,501 to 5,200 pounds 127.00 5,201 to 10,200 pounds 143.00 10,201 to 17,000 pounds 160.00 Taxi-in Open Tie-Down, improved pavement 0 to 3,500 pounds 186.00 3,501 to 5,200 pounds 232.00 5,201 to 10,200 pounds 322.00 10,201 to 17,000 pounds 341.00 Large aircraft only designated tie-downs 341.00 Helicopter tie-downs 341.00 Taxi-in Open Tie-Down, unimproved pavement 0 to 3,500 pounds 149.00 3,501 to 5,200 pounds 188.00 5,201 to 10,200 pounds 271.00 10,201 to 17,000 pounds 324.50 Schedule of Fees and Charges for Palo Alto Airport AIRCRAFT: All aircraft weights referenced in this document are defined by the aircraft manufacture and/or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as the certified maximum gross take-off weight. Fees SECTION A. City-Based Aircraft On each July first of every year, all rates in Section A. “Based Aircraft”, Section B. “Non-Based Aircraft” and Section C. “Other Charges” for the ensuing twelve (12) months shall be adjusted upward in the same percentage proportion that the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose area of the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, increases over the CPI. In the case of a CPI decrease the rates will remain the same. All fees are rounded to the nearest fifty cents ($.50). ATTACHMENT "A" City of Palo Alto Rates Transient Aircraft, open tie-downs 0 to 3,500 pounds no charge 0 - 4 hours $4.00 4 - 8 hours $10.00 8 - 24 hours $10.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafter 3,501 to 5,200 pounds no charge 0 - 4 hours $5.00 4 - 8 hours $12.00 8 - 24 hours $12.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafter 10,201 to 17,000 pounds $10.00 0 - 4 hours $10.00 4 - 8 hours $21.00 8 - 24 hours $21.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafterTaxi-through parking $10.00 0 - 4 hours $10.00 4 - 8 hours $21.00 8 - 24 hours $21.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafter Helicopter parking $10.00 0 - 4 hours $10.00 4 - 8 hours $21.00 8 - 24 hours $21.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafter Transient Gliders will be billed for the number of tie-downs they occupy. Transient billing convenience fee This fee will be added to each monthly billing when a parking invoice is not paid prior to vehicle departure. $12.00 per monthly billing SECTION B. City Non-Based Aircraft City of Palo Alto Rates Charter & Air Taxi Flight Operations (charges are per aircraft) 0 to 3,500 pounds $17.50 per landing 3,501 to 5,200 pounds $28.00 per landing 5,201 to 10,200 pounds $35.00 per landing 10,201 to 17,000 pounds $69.00 per landing Glider & Aircraft Trailer Parking $139.00 per month Automobile Parking Permit Daily Parking Permit $7.00 Monthly Parking Permit - Automobiles only $66.00 Overnight guest permits will be issued free of charge to current tenants when applicable. Mobile Catering Truck Operations Permit $21.00 per day $205.00 per month Fire Extinguisher Replacement $157.00 per fire extinguisher Commercial Operators/FBO Waste Oil Fee $1.00 per quart Late Payments and Penalties Returned Check Fee Aircraft Storage Late Fee Fixed Base Operator Late Fee $25.00 per check $40.00 per month 10% of amount due per month Fuel Flowage Fee for Palo Alto Airport $0.20 per gallon Self-Fueling Permit Flowage Fee Individual aircraft owner/operator Aircraft owned or operated by a Flying Club $75.00 annual fee per aircraft $650.00 annual fee per aircraft Commercial Operations Fee $120.00 per year Commercial Agreement Transmittal Fee $1,000 per agreement Rental Car Operations 10% gross car rental receipts Fixed base operators or others who may sublease to, or offer as a part of their services, car rental services, shall pay a monthly fee based on the gross receipts which are received from car rentals. SECTION C. Other Charges (not subject to annual CPI adjustment) SECTION C. Other Charges City of Palo Alto Rates FY 2016 FEE AIRCRAFT: All aircraft weights referenced in this document are defined by the aircraft manufacture and/or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) as the certified maximum gross take-off weight. [All fees are rounded to the nearest fifty cents ($.50). Tail-in Open Tie-Down, improved pavement 0 to 3,500 pounds 149.00 3,501 to 5,200 pounds 173.50 5,201 to 10,200 pounds 195.00 10,201 to 17,000 pounds 218.00 Tail-in Open Tie-Down, unimproved pavement 0 to 3,500 pounds 112.00 3,501 to 5,200 pounds 127.00 5,201 to 10,200 pounds 143.00 10,201 to 17,000 pounds 160.00 Taxi-in Open Tie-Down, improved pavement 0 to 3,500 pounds 186.00 3,501 to 5,200 pounds 232.00 5,201 to 10,200 pounds 322.00 10,201 to 17,000 pounds 341.00 Large aircraft only designated tie-downs 341.00 Helicopter tie-downs 341.00 Taxi-in Open Tie-Down, unimproved pavement 0 to 3,500 pounds 149.00 3,501 to 5,200 pounds 188.00 5,201 to 10,200 pounds 271.00 10,201 to 17,000 pounds 324.50 Schedule of Fees and Charges for Santa Clara County Airports Palo Alto Airport Fees SECTION A. City-Based Aircraft On each July first of every year, all rates in Section A. “County Based Aircraft”, Section B. “Non-Based Aircraft” and Section C. “Other Charges” for the ensuing twelve (12) months shall be adjusted upward in the same percentage proportion that the Consumer Price Index (CPI) of the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose area of the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, increases over the CPI of December 2007. In the case of a CPI decrease the rates will remain the same. All fees are rounded to the nearest fifty cents ($.50). City of Palo Alto Rates Transient Aircraft, open tie-downs 0 to 3,500 pounds no charge 0 - 4 hours $4.00 4 - 8 hours $10.00 8 - 24 hours $10.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafter 3,501 to 5,200 pounds no charge 0 - 4 hours $5.00 4 - 8 hours $12.00 8 - 24 hours $12.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafter 10,201 to 17,000 pounds $10.00 0 - 4 hours $10.00 4 - 8 hours $21.00 8 - 24 hours $21.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafter Taxi-through parking $10.00 0 - 4 hours $10.00 4 - 8 hours $21.00 8 - 24 hours $21.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafter Helicopter parking $10.00 0 - 4 hours $10.00 4 - 8 hours $21.00 8 - 24 hours $21.00 any portion of each succeeding 24 hr period thereafter Transient Gliders will be billed for the number of tie-downs they occupy. Transient billing convenience fee This fee will be added to each monthly billing when a parking invoice is not paid prior to vehicle departure. $12.00 per monthly billing SECTION B. City Non-Based Aircraft City of Palo Alto Rates Banner Towing & Skywriting Operators & Aerial Applicators0 to 3,500 pounds $86.00 daily use fee3,501 to 5,200 pounds $117.00 daily use fee 5,201 to 10,200 pounds $147.00 daily use fee 10,201 to 17,000 pounds $176.00 daily use fee Charter & Air Taxi Flight Operations (charges are per aircraft) 0 to 3,500 pounds $17.50 Per Landing $43.00 Daily $112.50 Monthly 3,501 to 5,200 pounds $28.00 Per Landing $70.00 Daily $183.00 Monthly 5,201 to 10,200 pounds $35.00 Per Landing $88.00 Daily $229.50 Monthly 10,201 to 17,000 pounds $69.00 Per Landing $175.00 Daily $454.00 MonthlyAnnual fee for aircraft charter companies based at a County airport. Purchase of an annual permit will cover landing fees for the registered aircraft at all County-operated airports.Single aircraft $1,155.00Multiple aircraft $2,311.00 Glider & Aircraft Trailer Parking $139.00 per month Automobile Parking Permit Daily Parking Permit $7.00 Monthly Parking Permit - Automobiles only $66.00 Monthly Parking Permit - RV, Trailers and other oversized vehicles $208.00 Overnight guest permits will be issued free of charge to current tenants when applicable. Mobile Catering Truck Operations Permit $21.00 per day $205.00 per month Fire Extinguisher Replacement $157.00 per fire extinguisher Commercial Operators/FBO Waste Oil Fee $1.00 per quart SECTION C. Other Charges City of Palo Alto Rates Late Payments and Penalties Returned Check Fee Aircraft Storage Late Fee Fixed Base Operator Late Fee $25.00 per check $40.00 per month 10% of amount due per month Fuel Flowage Fee for Palo Alto Airport $0.20 per gallon Self-Fueling Permit Flowage Fee Individual aircraft owner/operator Aircraft owned or operated by a Flying Club $75.00 annual fee per aircraft $650.00 annual fee per aircraft Commercial Operations Fee $120.00 per year Commercial Agreement Transmittal Fee $1,000 per agreement Rental Car Operations 10% gross car rental receipts Fixed base operators or others who may sublease to, or offer as a part of their services, car rental services, shall pay a monthly fee based on the gross receipts which are received from car rentals. Other Charges (not subject to annual CPI adjustment)