City Council Agenda
City of Campbell, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California
NOTE: To protect our constituents, City officials, and City staff, the City requests all members of the public follow the guidance of the California Department of Health Servi ces', and the County of Santa Clara Health Officer Order, to help control the spread of COVID -19. Additional information regarding COVID-19 is available on the City's website at www.campbellca.gov.
This City Council Regular meeting will be conducted in person as well as telecommunication and is compliant with provisions of the Brown Act.
The City Council meeting will be live -streamed on Channel 26 or Channel 88, the City's website and on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/user/CityofCampbell for those who only wish to view the meeting.
Those members of the public wishing to provide public comment virtually are asked to register in advance at: https://www.campbellca.gov/signup. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the mee ting. Members of the public may attend the meeting in person at Campbell City Hall - Council Chambers.
Public comment will also be accepted via email at [email protected] prior to the start of the meeting. Written comments will be posted on the website and distributed to the Co uncil. If you choose to email your comments, please indicate in the subject line “FOR PUBLIC COMMENT” and indicate the item number.
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CAMPBELL CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, October 4, 2022 – 7:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chamber – 70 N. First Street
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS
ORAL REQUESTS
NOTE: This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the City Council on any matter not on the agenda. Persons wishing to address the Council are requested, but not required to complete a Speaker’s Card. Speakers are limited to two (2) minutes. The law generally prohibits the Council from discussion or taking action on such items. However, the Council may instruct staff accordingly regarding Oral Requests.
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
CONSENT CALENDAR
NOTE: All matters listed under consent calendar are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a request is made by a member of City Council, City staff, or a member of the public.
Any person wishing to speak on any item on the consent calendar should ask to have the item removed from the consent calendar prior to the time the Council votes to approve. If removed, the item will be discussed in the order in which it appears.
1. Minutes of City Council Regular Meeting of September 20, 2022 Recommended Action: Approve the regular meeting minutes of September 20, 2022.
2. Approving Bills and Claims
Recommended Action: Approve the attached lists of bills and claims in the amount of $4,876,578.52.
3. Monthly Investment Transactions Report (August 2022) Recommended Action: That the City Council review and accept the Mont hly Investment Transactions Report for August 2022.
4. Biennial Review of the City of Campbell Conflict of Interest Cod e (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the Conflict of Interest Code Appendix A and B.
5. St. Lucy Fun Fest 2022 Carnival Permit for St. Lucy Fun Fest 2022 (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a resolution approving the issuance of a Carnival Permit for the St. Lucy Parish School Fun Fes t Carnival on October 21-23, 2022, subject to the restrictions and conditions as described in the resolution and denying the request for a fee waiver.
6. Building Plan Check Services - RFQ (Resolution / Roll Call Vote) Recommended Action: That the City C ouncil adopt a Resolution authorizing the Community Deve lopment Director to issue a Request for Qualifications for Building Plan Check services; and authorize the City Manager to execute a service contract with the most responsive bidders for a period of two (2) years with options to renew another twelve (12) months.
7. Approval of Salary Adjustments for Lighting and Traffic Signal Assistant, Lighting and Traffic Signal Supervisor, Senior Services Supervisor and Salary Schedules (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a resolution updating Salary Schedules to reflect 2022 market adjustments for the classifications of Lighting and Traffic Signal Assistant, Lighting and Traffic Signal Supervisor, and Senior Services Supervisor, retroactively to be effective July 1, 2022.
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES
NOTE: Members of the public may be allotted up to two (2) minutes to comment on any public hearing item. Applicants/Appellants and their representatives may be allotted up to a total of five (5) minutes for opening statements and up to a total of three (3) minutes maximum for closing statements. Items requested/recommended for continuance are subject to Council’s consent at the meeting.
8. Resolution Approving Use of the Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) and Related Budget Adjustments Appropriating the Remaining Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) Balance Towards Police Equipment for FY 2022-23 (Resolution/Roll Call Vote) Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize use the Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) to fund a Community Service Officer and approve a budget adjustment to allocate the remaining SLESF balance towards police equipment for FY2022-23.
9. Continued Public Hearing and Introduction of Ordinance to Consider a City-Initiated Text Amendment to the Campbell Municipal Code Removing the Requirement for a Security Deposit for Parklet Permits; Adoption of a Resolution App roving an Amendment to the Semi -Permanent Parklet Program Guide to Incorporate Preferred Parklet Designs and Remove References to the Requirement for a Security Deposit; Adoption of a Resolution Approving an Amendment to the City’s Mast er Fee Schedule Reducing the Parklet Permit Application Fee from $1,500 to $500, Deferring the Effective Date of the Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee to FY 2024, Removing Security Deposits Related to Parklets in the Public Right - Of-Way and Approv ing Associated Budge t Adjustments for FY 2023; and Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract Amendment with the Parklet Design Consultant, Sidell Parkravan Architects, to Provide for the Customization of Up to 16 Parklets at a Cost Not to Exceed $3,000 Per Parklet ($48,000 Total), and Approving Associated Budget Adjustments for FY 2023. File No. PLN -2022-39. (Introduction of Ordinance/Resolutions/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council introduce an Ordi nance amending Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right -of Way) of the Campbell Municipal Code to remove the requirement for a security deposit; adopt a Resolution approving Amendments to the Semi -Permanent Parklet Program Guide to incorporate preferred parklet designs and removing references to the requirement for a security deposit; adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to the City’s Master Fee Schedule to reduce the Parklet Permit Application Fee from $1,500 to $500, deferring the effective date o f the Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee to FY 2024, removing security deposits related to parklets in the public right -of-way, and approving associated budget adjustments for FY 2023; and adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with the parklet design consultant, Sidell Parkravan Architects, to provide for the customization of up to 16 parklets at a cost not to $3,000 per parklet ($48,000 total), and approving associated budget adjustments for FY 2023.
NEW BUSINESS
10. Potential Reach Code Updates to be Considered with the Adoption of the 2022 Building Code and Authorization to Initiate a Zoning Code Text Amendment to CMC 21.18 (Parking and Loading) to Comply with Recent Amendments to State Law.
Recommended Action: That the Cit y Council take the following actions: receive the report and provide direction to staff on potential Reach Code updates to be
pursued with the adoption of the 2022 Building Code later this year; and authorize the initiation of a Zoning Code Text Amendment to amend CMC 21.28 (Parking and Loading) to comply with recent amendments to state law.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
11. Council Committee Reports
Recommended Action: That the City Council report on activities from their committee assignments.
ADJOURN
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection with the agenda packet in the lobby of City Clerk’s Office, 70 N. First Street, Campbell, CA 95008, during normal business hours. These materials will also be available on the City website at https://www.ci.campbell.ca.us/agendacenter with the agenda packet following t he last item of the agenda, subject to staff’s ability to post the documents prior to the meeting. All documents not posted prior to the meeting will be posted the next business day.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, listening assistive devices are available for all meetings held in the City Council Chambers. If you require accommodation, please contact the City Clerk’s Office, (408) 866-2117, at least one week in advance of the meeting.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
City of Campbell, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California
REGULAR MEETING OF THE CAMPBELL CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, September 20, 2022 – 7:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chamber – 70 N. First Street
This City Council meeting was duly noticed pursuant to open meeting requirements of the Ralph M. Brown Act (G.C. Section 54956).
This meeting was recorded and can be viewed in its entirety at www.cityofcampbell.com/agendacenter.
CALL TO ORDER
The City Council of the City of Campbell convened this day in the regular meeting place, the City Hall Council Chamber, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California.
ROLL CALL
Attendee Name Title Status
Paul Resnikoff Mayor Present
Anne Bybee Vice Mayor Present
Elizabeth 'Liz' Gibbons Councilmember Present
Susan M. Landry Councilmember Present
Sergio Lopez Councilmember Present
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Resnikoff led the Pledge of Allegiance.
SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS AND PROCLAMATIONS
There were no special presentations and proclamations.
COMMUNICATIONS AND PETITIONS
There were no communications and petitions.
ORAL REQUESTS
Sean Mendelson spoke on Climate Action and encouraged the Council to continue their efforts. He noted available grant funding that could be used towards a Climate Action Plan and noted Project Green Home’s tour of climate-friendly homes. 1 Packet Pg. 5
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 20, 2022 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
Minutes of September 20, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 2
COUNCIL ANNOUNCEMENTS
City Hall is open to the public for in -person services Monday through Friday, from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm. For your convenience, online services such as permits, business license applications and virtual appointments are available online. Visit the city’s website at campbellca.gov to view information for all city departments and services available.
Please join me as I discuss the city’s recent accomplishments, our resilience during and after COVID, and information on upcoming projects including Measure O. The State of the City address will be held at the Orchard City Banquet Hall on Thursday, September
22. Doors open at 5:30 pm with the event beginning promptly at 6. Please RSVP to [email protected] by Wednesday, September 21.
The City Clerk’s office is accep ting applications for the Boards and Commissions. To find out more about these positions, or to apply, please contact the City Clerk’s office at (408) 866-2117 or visit the city’s website at campbellca.gov.
The Friends of the Heritage Theatre are currently recruiting new board members and volunteers. For more information, please email [email protected].
The Campbell Heritage Theatre Fall 2022 Spring 2023 Season w ill go on sale on Thursday, Septem ber 22. For a full lineup of concerts, or to buy tickets, please visit campbellca.gov.
The 12th Annual Caregivers Count Conference. This is a free virtual conference for families and friends caring for an older adult. This year's conference is a 4 -part series virtual event. The dates are Sept. 24 and Oct. 1, from 10am -12pm. The topics include self-care, strategies for dementia caregiving, long -term care, and fall prevention/home safety. The conference is free and registration is available at www.caregiverscount.net.
Live music is coming back to t he Ainsley House this fall with a series of four fabulous concerts and talented musicia ns. Fall Garden Concerts will begin September and run through November. Tony Lindsay will perform on October 23 and Brian Ho November
13. Registration is required. Fo r addit ional info rmation, please visit campbellmuseums.com.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Resnikoff asked if anyone wished to remove an item from the Consent Calendar.
Item nine was pulled from the Consent Calendar.
The Consent Calendar was considered as follows:
1. Minutes of City Council Special Meeting of August 17, 2022 Recommended Action: Approve the special meeting minutes of August 17, 2022.
This action approves the special meeting minutes of August 17, 2022. 1 Packet Pg. 6
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 20, 2022 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
Minutes of September 20, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 3
2. Minutes of City Council Executive Session Meeting of August 31, 2022 Recommended Action: Approve the executive session meeting minutes of August 31, 2022.
This action approves the executive session meeting minutes of August 31, 2022.
3. Minutes of City Council Executive Session Meeting of September 6, 2022 Recommended Action: Approve the executive session meeting minutes of September 6, 2022.
This action approves the executive session meeting minutes of September 6, 2022.
4. Minutes of City Council Regular Meeting of September 6, 2022 Recommended Action: Approve the regular meeting minutes of September 6, 2022.
This action approved the regular meeting minutes of September 6, 2022.
5. Approving Bills and Claims
Recommended Act ion: Approve the bills and claims in the amount of $842,381.81.
This action approve s the bills and claims in the amount of $842 ,381.81 as follows: payroll checks dated August 18, 2022, in the amount of $69, 611.40; bills and claims checks dated August 19, 2022, in the amount of $58,497.31; bills and claims checks dated Au gust 22, 2022, in the amount of $289,547.11; and bills and claims checks dated August 29, 2022, in the amount of $424,725.99.
6. Water Tower Lighting Request - Teal Foundation
Recommended Action: That the City Council approve the Teal Foundation's Water Tower Themed Lighting Request ap plication and direct sta ff to l ight the City of Campbell Water Tower teal on September 24, 2022 to raise awareness of ovarian cancer.
This action appr oves the Teal Foundation's Water Tower Themed Lighting Request application and direct s staff to l ight the Ci ty of Campbell Water Tower teal on September 24, 2022 to raise awareness of ovarian cancer.
7. Amendment to the Classification and Salary Plan - Recreation Supervisor (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Actio n: That the City Council adopt a Resolution amending the Classification and Salary Plan for Recreation Supervisor.
Resolution 12889 amends the Classification and Salary Plan for Recreation Supervisor.
8. Approval of Consultant Agreement with Management P artners for Procurement Services and Dispe nsing of Bidding Requirements as 1 Packet Pg. 7
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 20, 2022 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
Minutes of September 20, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 4 Specified in Campbell Municipal Code Section 3.20.030(4) (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to e nter into a Consu ltant Agreement with Mana gement Partners for procurement process evaluation services and dispe nse wit h bidding requirements as authorized by Cam pbell Municipal Code Section 3.20.030(4) for specialized services.
Resolution 12890 authorizes the City Manager to enter into a Consu ltant Agreement with Management Partners for procurement process evaluation services and dispe nse wit h bidding requirements as authorized by Cam pbell Municipal Code Section 3.20.030(4) for specialized services.
M/S: Gibbons/Landry – That the City Council approve the Consent Calendar with the exception o f item nine. The motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gibbons
SECONDER: Landry
AYES: Resnikoff, Bybee, Gibbons, Landry, Lopez
ITEMS CONSIDERED SEPARATE FROM CONSENT
9. Temporary Authorization of Outdoor Dining on Private Property Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a resolution providing temporary authorizat ion of outdoor dining on private property as origin ally authorized under the Declaration of a local emergency resulting from community spread of COVID-19 in the City of Campbell.
Councilwoman Landry commented that when referencing parking in-lieu fees, it should be clearly defined if partial percentages are rounded up or down.
M/S: Landry/Lopez – That the City Council adopt Resolution 12891 providing temporary authorization of outdoor dining on private property as originally authorized under the Declaration of a local emergency resulting from community spread of COVID-19 in the City of Campbel l, including the desk item. The motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Landry
SECONDER: Lopez
AYES: Resnikoff, Bybee, Gibbons, Landry, Lopez
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES
10. Public Hearing an d Introduction of Ordinance to Consider a City -Initiated Text Amendment to the Campbell Municipal Code Removing the 1 Packet Pg. 8
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 20, 2022 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
Minutes of September 20, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 5 Requirement for a Security Deposit for Park let Permits; Adoption of a Resolution Approving an Amend ment to the Semi -Permanent Parklet Program Guide to Incorporate Preferred Parkle t Designs and Remove References to the Requirement for a Security Deposit; Adoption of a Resolution Approving an Amendme nt to the City’s Master Fee Schedule Reducing the Parklet Permit Application Fee from $1,500 to $ 500, Deferring the Effective Date of th e Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee to FY 2024, Removing Security Deposits Related to Parklets in the Public Ri ght- Of-Way and Approving Associated Budget Adjustments f or FY 2023; and Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract Amendment with the Parklet Design Consultant, Sidell Parkravan Architects, to Provide for the Customization of Up to 16 Parklets at a Cost Not to Exceed $3,000 Per Parklet ($48,000 Total), and Approving Associated Budget Adjustments for FY 2023 . File No. PLN -2022-39. (Introduction of Ordinance/Resolutions/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Counc il introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 11.15 (Parkle ts in the Public Right -of Way) of the Cam pbell Municipal Code to remove the requ irement for a security deposit; adopt a Resolution approving Amendments to the Semi -Permanent Parklet Program Guide to incorporate preferred parklet designs and removing refere nces to the requirement for a security de posit; adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to the City’s Master Fee Schedule to reduce the Parklet Permit Application Fee from $1,500 to $500, deferring the effective date of the Parklet Annual Compliance Veri fication Fee to FY 2024, removing securit y deposits related to parklets in the p ublic right-of-way, and approving associated budget adjustments for FY 2023; and adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with the parkle t design consultant, Sidell Parkravan Architects, to provide for the customizati on of up to 16 parklets at a cost not to $3,000 per parklet ($48,000 total), and approving associated budget adjustments for FY 2023.
This is the time and place for a public h earing to consider a City-initiated Text Amendment to the Campbell Municipal Code removing the requirement for a security deposit for Park let Permits; adoption of a Resolution approving an amendment to the Semi -Permanent Parklet Program Guide to incorporate preferred parklet designs and remove references to the requirement for a security deposit; adoption of a Resolution approving an amendment to the City’s Master Fee Schedule reducing the Parklet Permit Application Fee from $1,500 to $500, deferring the effective date of th e Parklet Annual Compli ance Verification Fee to FY 2024, removing security deposits related to parklets in the Public Right-Of-Way and approving associated Budget Adjustments for FY 2023; and adoption of a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract amendment w ith the Parklet Design Consultant, Sidell Parkravan Architects, to provide for the customization of up to 16 parklets at a cost not to exceed $3,000 per parklet ($48,000 Total), and approving associated Budget Adjustments for FY 2023.
1 Packet Pg. 9
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 20, 2022 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
Minutes of September 20, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 6 Community Development Director Eastwood intr oduced Economic Development Program Manager, Leslie Parks and the Sidell Pakravan design team consultants Rudabeh Pakravan and Vadim Mishchuk.
Economic Development Program Manager Parks presented a sta ff report dated September 20, 2022. Ms. Parks noted the parklet designs offered , estimated costs, stakeholder outreach and proposed schedule.
Council a sked questions related to parklet materials, design s, heaters, construction, estimated costs, and prevailing wage requirements.
Mayor Resnikoff opened the public hearing and asked if anyone wished to speak.
Ken Johnson, C ampbell Chamber of Commerce Executive Director, stated he has spoken to the restaurants and notified these businesses that the City Council wants to hear what their n eeds are, and the Chamber will conti nue to hel p support them.
Raja Pallela, Campbell resident, stated the parklet permit fees should be higher, and commented on insurance or liability should there be a parklet incident.
Seeing no one else wishing to speak Mayor Resnikoff closed the public hearing.
Councilmembers discussed various ways to reduce construction or material costs.
Councilmember Gibbons was not supportive of the picket fence design as it do es not prevent from rain and splashes and would prefer a more solid fence.
Councilwoman Landry did not think the 18-inch canopy structure was vi sually appealing, would like a rounded corner option and would like restaurants to have the ability to pain t their busine ss name on the o utside wall. Councilwom an Landry was not supportive of the white propane tanks and recommended the cone style heaters similar to those found at Blue Line Pizza.
Councilmembers concluded with con sensus that the y were supportive of the parklet program but needed additional inform ation on the level of commitment from business owners.
Mayor Resnikoff reopened the public hearing.
M/S: Gibbons/Landry - That the City Council continue this item to the October 4, 2022 Cit y Council meeting. The mo tion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gibbons
1 Packet Pg. 10
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 20, 2022 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
Minutes of September 20, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 7 SECONDER: Landry
AYES: Resnikoff, Bybee, Gibbons, Landry, Lopez
NEW BUSINESS
11. Approval of the Purchase of the NEOGOV Human Resources Information System (HRIS) and Payroll Platform through a Coope rative Purchasing Agreement with SHI International Corp. and the National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO), Dispensing of Bidding Requirements as Specified in Campbell Municipal Code Section 3.20.030(6), an d Associated Budget Adjustment (Resolution/Roll Call Vote) Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a resolution (1) authorizing the City Manager to execute a t hree-year agreement with SHI Internationa l Corp., using pricing and terms specified thro ugh a competitively bid award fr om the National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO), to purchase the NEOGOV Human Resources Information System (HRIS) and Payroll Platform for an amount not to ex ceed $328,567; and, to dispense with bidding requirements, as authorized in Cam pbell Municipal Code Section 3.20.030(6); and, (2) authorizing the Finance Director to implement an associated budget adjustment for implementation support services.
Information Technology Manager Lawson presented a staff r eport dated September 20, 2022. He reviewed the current s ystems and staff needs. Mr.
Lawson reviewed the vendor selection process and criteria as well as the new program functions.
Finance Director Fuentes provided clarification on the associated budg et adjustment.
Mayor Resnikoff asked i f anyone from the public wished to speak. There was no one wishing to speak.
Councilmembers stated support for the HRIS and payroll system.
After discussion, M/S: Gibbons/ Bybee – That the City Council adopt Resolution 12892 authorizing the City Manager to execute a t hree-year agreement with SHI International Corp., using pricing and t erms specified through a competitively bid award fr om the National Association of State Procurement Officials (NASPO), to purchase the NEOGOV Human Resources Information Sys tem (HRIS) and Payroll Platform for an amount not to exceed $328,567; and, to dispe nse with bidding requirements, as authorized in Cam pbell Municipal Code Section 3.20.030(6); and, (2) authorize the Finance Director to implement an associated budget adjustment for imp lementation support serv ices. The motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
1 Packet Pg. 11
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 20, 2022 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
Minutes of September 20, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 8 MOVER: Gibbons
SECONDER: Bybee
AYES: Resnikoff, Bybee, Gibbons, Landry, Lopez
The City Council took a ten-minute recess and reconvened at 10:05 p.m.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
12. Oktoberfest Fee Waiver Request (Resolution/Roll Call Vote) Recommended Action: That the City Council adopt a resolution approving a 50% reduction in fees charged to the Campbell Chamber of Commerce for the 2022 Oktoberfest.
Assistant City Manage r Gaeta presented a sta ff report dated Septembe r 20, 2022.
Mayor Resnikoff asked if anyone from the public wished to speak.
Ken Johnson, C ampbell Chamber of Commerce Executive Director, stated he met with City staff to review the Chamber’s event financial information since 2017. He requested a 50% fee waiver for Oktoberfest 2022.
After discussion, M/S: Gibbons/Lan dry – That the City Council adopt Resolution 12893 approving a 50% reduction in fees charged to the Campbell Chamber of Commerce for the 2022 Oktoberfest. The motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gibbons
SECONDER: Landry
AYES: Resnikoff, Bybee, Gibbons, Landry, Lopez
13. Receive a Progress Update on the Residential Design Standards Work Plan Effort and Preparation of an Initial Draft of the Multi -Family Residential Development and Design Standards. (File No.: PLN-2022-90) Recommended Action: That the City Council receive the report and provide feedback on the initial approach for preparing the Multi -Family Residential Development and Design Standards.
Senior Planner Rose presented a staff report dated September 20, 2022.
Opticos consultant Stefan Pelle grinni gave a presentation that discusse d their analysis approach and how they use input from the Zoning Code, General Plan Land Use maps, and Area Plans. Also discussed was th e Test Kit process a nd parking standards.
Associate Planner Tam reviewed the project schedule , next steps and a second series of community outreach.
1 Packet Pg. 12
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 20, 2022 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
Minutes of September 20, 2022 City Council Meeting Page 9
Mayor Resnikoff asked if anyone from the public wished to speak.
Raja Pallela, Campbell resident requested that elevations not be restrict ed to a particular style, wanted a diverse style w ith the option to allow for modern designs with in the framework of o bjective standards, and encouraged open terraces in mixed-use projects as this will lend to more open space.
Councilmembers noted that the current graphics, fonts, size, margin white space and color sche me made the documents di fficult to see. Council stressed th e importance of making the documents readable.
Councilmembers commented on Campbell’s diverse and eclectic style and asked staff to look at a variety of design options to keep the City unique.
Councilmember Gibbons commented on p arking standards and noted the C ity’s narrow street structure. She noted various issues w ith the Test Kit and also cautioned staff not to compare Campbell with its surrounding cities.
Councilwoman Landry noted that Modern Revival is a current architecture. She stressed the importance of clearly defining the architectural styles and suggested having models to give residents a visual graphic to help them understand.
Councilmember Lopez noted that developer stake holder meetings will be important and to have as much specificity as possible.
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS
14. Council Committee Reports
Recommended Action: That the City Council report on acti vities from their committee assignments.
Due to the lateness of the hour Council Committee Reports was not heard.
ADJOURN
Mayor Resnikoff adjourned the meeting at 11:15 p.m.
APPROVED:
ATTEST:
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
1 Packet Pg. 13
Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Sep 20, 2022 7:30 PM (CONSENT CALENDAR)
City
Council
Report
TITLE: Approving Bills and Claims
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Approve the attached lists of bills and claims in the amount of $4,876,578.52.
DISCUSSION
The bills and cla ims that have been audited and approved by staff for payments made as noted below:
Type Check Date Amount
Payroll September 1, 2022 37,114.64
Bills & Claims September 5, 2022 3,776,883.88
Bills & Claims September 12, 2022 1,062,580.00
Total $4,876,578.52
FISCAL IMPACT
Requested action does not require a budget adjustment. Adequate funding was available to cover all expenses as listed.
Prepared by:
Ana Rios, Accounting Clerk II
Reviewed by:
Norite Vong, Finance Manager
Item: 2
Category: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
2 Packet Pg. 14
Approving Bills and Claims Page 2 of 2
Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
2 Packet Pg. 15
City
Council
Report
TITLE: Monthly Investment Transactions Report (August 2022)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council review and accept the Monthly Investment Transactions Report for August 2022.
BACKGROUND
As required by California Government Code ( GC) Section 53607, staff will submit to Council Monthly Investment Transaction Reports within 45 days of the prior month end that show a listing of investments purchased, sold, called , or that have reached maturity, along with any Local Agency Investment Fund ( LAIF) transfers. This is in addition to the Quarterly Investment Report, which shows a number of other items listed under Section VII.A of the City’s Investment Policy and has be en historically prepared by staff and submitted to Council within 30 days from the end of the prior quarter.
DISCUSSION
This Monthly Investment Transaction Report covers August 2022. As shown in Attachment A , staff made five withdrawals totaling $ 8.1 million from the City’s Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) account to support weekly operating cash flow needs and purchase additional investments . The primary cash outlays this month were the 2020/2022 Measure O debt service payments totaling $3.6 million. The City also purchased an additional $2.0 million in investments at higher yields while $1.0 million matured. Consistent with the recommended FY 2022-23 Investment Strategy approved by Council on August 1 6, 202 2, staff will continue looking for longer -term investment opportunities outside of LAIF , as interest rates continue to rise, providing a higher, yet still safe return consistent with the City’s Investment Policy. With the pandemic largely being under control and the current LAIF investment rate now at 1.276% staff continues to look for attractive and appropriate longer -term investment opportunities throughout FY 2023; contingent on continued positive economic interest rate trends. Please note that all investment purchases made adhere to the City’s Investment Policy.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the review and acceptance of the Monthly Investment Transactions Report.
Item: 3
Category: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
3 Packet Pg. 16
Monthly Investment Transactions Report (August 2022) Page 2 of 2
Prepared by:
John Formale, Accountant
Reviewed by:
Will Fuentes, Finance Director
Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Attachment:
a. Monthly Investment Activity Report-8.31.22
3 Packet Pg. 17
CITY OF CAMPBELL
Monthly Investment Transactions Report
August 1 to August 31, 2022
Account Trans. Date August 2022
LAIF - ******137
Average Monthly Yield 1.276%
Beginning Balance 72,985,975$
Transactions
Withdrawal 08/03/2022 (200,000)
Withdrawal 08/04/2022 (1,600,000)
Withdrawal 08/11/2022 (1,100,000)
Withdrawal 08/17/2022 (1,000,000)
Withdrawal 08/24/2022 (4,200,000)
Monthly Total (8,100,000)
Ending Balance 64,885,975$
Account Trans. Date August 2022
Bank of New York (BNY) - ******818
Beginning Balance 22,999,860$
Transactions
Invest. Maturity - GOLDMAN SACHS (2.15% Yield; 3.00 Yrs) 08/09/2022 (250,000) Invest. Maturity - CAPITAL ONE BANK (2.15% Yield; 3.00 Yrs) 08/09/2022 (250,000) Invest. Maturity - CAPITAL ONE NAT'L ASSOC (2.15% Yield; 3.00 Yrs) 08/09/2022 (250,000) Invest. Maturity - ALLY BANK (2.15% Yield; 3.00 Yrs) 08/09/2022 (250,000) Invest. Purchase - AMEX (3.35% Yield; 2.00 Yrs) 08/10/2022 250,000 Invest. Purchase - CAPITAL ONE NA BANK (3.30 Yield; 2.00 Yrs) 08/10/2022 250,000 Invest. Purchase - CAPITAL ONE NA BANK (3.30% Yield; 2.00 Yrs) 08/10/2022 250,000 Invest. Purchase - FHLHC (Step-Up- 3.5%, 4%, 5%, 6%, 7%, 8%; 3.00 Yrs) 08/15/2022 1,000,000 Invest. Purchase - BANK OF INDIA (3.35% Yield; 2.00 Yrs) 08/22/2022 250,000 Monthly Total 1,000,000
Ending Balance 23,999,860$
3.a
Packet Pg. 18
Attachment: Monthly Investment Activity Report-8.31.22 (Monthly Investment Transactions Report (August 2022))
City
Council
Report
TITLE: Biennial Review of the City of Campbell Conflict of Interest Code (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council adopt a Resolution a pproving the Conflict of Interest Code Appendix A and B.
BACKGROUND
The Political Reform Act requires every local government agency to review its Conflict of Interest Code biennially to determine if it is accurate and up -to date or, alternatively that the code must be amended. Once the determination has been made, the City Clerk must notify the code reviewing body, the City Council . Following that review, any amendments necessary must be approved within 90 days.
Ordinance 2237 adopted October 16, 2018 a pproved amendments to Appendix A and Appendix B of the Conflict of Interest Code to be adopted by Resolution of the City Council.
In the 2020 review of the Conflict of Interest Code, Council approved removing “Friends of the Heritage Theatre” and “Oversig ht Board for the City of Campbell Successor Agency” as designated filers.
DISCUSSION
After reviewing the current code, the City Attorney and City Clerk’s office have determined that the only amendment necessary at this time is an update of Appendix A, Designated Employees. A Designated Employee is anyone within the agency whose position entails the making or participation in the making of decisions which may foreseeably have a material effect on any financial interest.
To accommodate recently added po sition within the City of Campbell, staff is recommending the following positions be added to the list of Designated Employees :
Assistant City Manager, Administrative Analyst I , Senior Project Manager and Environmental Program Specialist.
Item: 4
Category: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
4 Packet Pg. 19
Conflict of Interest - 2022 Biennial Review Page 2 of 2
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.
Prepared by:
Dusty Christopherson, City Clerk
Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Attachment:
a. RESOLUTION
b. APPENDIX A
c. APPENDIX B
4 Packet Pg. 20
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
ADOPTING THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE APPENDIX A AND B TO
REFLECT THE CITY OF CAMPBELL DESIGNATED POSITIONS AND DISCLOSURE
CATEGORIES
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Cod e 87300 the City of C ampbell is required to adopt a Conflict of Interest Code; and
WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act requires every local government agency to review its Conflict of Interest Code biennially or as deemed appropriate; and
WHEREAS, the Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted regulation 2 California Code of Regulations 1837 0 which contains the terms of a standard model conflict of interest which can be incorporated by reference and which may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission after public no tice and hearings to conform to amendments to the Political Reform Act; and
WHEREAS, a review has been conducted and a det ermination has been made that the City of Campbell ’s Conflict of Interest Code should be maintained as outlined in Appendix A (Statement of Economic Interest for Designated Employee) and B (Disclosure Categories).
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Campbell adopt the attached Appendix A (Statement of Economic Interest for Designated Employee) and Appendix B (Disclosure Categories).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___day of _____, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
__________________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
4.a
Packet Pg. 21
Attachment: RESOLUTION (Conflict of Interest - 2022 Biennial Review)
APPENDIX A
STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS FOR DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
POSITION 1 2 3 4
Administrative Services Director X X X X
Assistant City Manager X X X X
Deputy City Manager X X X X
Administrative Analyst 1 X X X X
Administrative Analyst II X X X
Recreation & Community Services Director X X X
Recreation Services Manager X X X
Building Maintenance Supervisor X X X
City Clerk X
Police Chief X X X
Police Captain X X
Police Sergeant (if they are processing permits) X
Building Official X X X
Sr. Building Inspector X X X
Building Inspector X X X
Finance Director X X X
Finance Manager X
Public Works Director X X X X
City Engineer X X X X
Public Works Superintendent X X
Associate Civil Engineer X
Senior Civil Engineer X
Assistant Engineer X
4.b
Packet Pg. 22
Attachment: APPENDIX A (Conflict of Interest - 2022 Biennial Review) Environmental Program Manager X X X
Environmental Program Specialist X X X
Public Works Inspector X X X
Park Maintenance Supervisor X
Traffic Engineer X
Lighting & Traffic Signal Supervisor X
Equipment Maintenance Supervisor X
Community Development Director X X X
Senior Planner X X X
Associate Planner X X X
Assistant Planner X X X
Economic Development Project Manager X X X
Economic Development Specialist X X X
Senior Project Manager X X X X
Project Manager X X X
Building Board of Appeals X X
Historic Preservation Board X X X
Site and Architectural Review Committee X X X
Consultants Who Participate in Making Decisions X X X X Code Enforcement Officer X X X
Civic Improvement Commission X X X
Information Technology Manager X X
Information Technology Administrator X X
Information Technology Technician X X
Rental Dispute Fact Finding Committee X X X
4.b
Packet Pg. 23
Attachment: APPENDIX A (Conflict of Interest - 2022 Biennial Review) Appendix B
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
1. Persons in this category shall disclose all interests in real property located within the City of Campbell, or within two miles of the city boundary (however, this provision shall not require anyone to list the address of their personal residence).
2. Persons in this category shall disclose all sources of income and investments in business entities located within the City of Campbell.
3. Persons in this category shall disclose all investments in business entities or income from sources in the construction or building industry doing business within the City of Campbell.
4. Persons in this category shall disclose all investments in business entities or income from sources which manufacture or sell supplies of the type utilized by the department for which the designated employee is employed.
4.c
Packet Pg. 24
Attachment: APPENDIX B (Conflict of Interest - 2022 Biennial Review)
City
Council
Report
TITLE: St. Lucy Fun Fest 2022 Carnival Permit for St. Lucy Fun Fest 2022 (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council adopt a resolution a pproving the issuance of a Carnival Permit for the St. Lucy Parish School Fun Fest Carnival on October 21 -23, 2022, subject to the restrictions and conditions as described in the resolution and denying the request for a fee waiver.
BACKGROUND
The following applicant has requested a Carnival Permit:
St. Lucy Parish School Parent Teacher Group
2350 Winchester Boulevard and 76 E. Kennedy Avenue
Campbell, CA 95008
Sue Grover, Principal
St. Lucy’s has held this event successfully for over 28 years.
DISCUSSION
The event is an annual fund -raising project to raise money for St. Lucy Parish School.
Activities include a carnival, games of skill, food, silent auction, raffle and entertainment.
The applicant is requesting to include live entertainment on Friday evening from 6:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m., Saturday from 12:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. and on Sunday from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Each band will be located on a 20’ x 20’ stage adjacent to the pavilion area. There will be background music when the bands are in tran sition. The festival committee and musicians will insure that the sound level is modulated so as not to disturb neighbors in the community. Past events have had minimal impact on normal City operations and provided a valuable source of income for the school.
The applicant has requested that the permit fee be reduced by 50%. St. Lucy Parish School has agreed to pay full costs for Police security. Since there is no fee waiver policy for Carnival Permits, staff is not recommending a fee waiver for this event.
Item: 5
Category: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
5 Packet Pg. 25
St. Lucy Fun Fest 2022 Page 2 of 2
Conditions and restrictions are the same as the previous years that reflect the addition of guidelines for identification of volunteers and Security, as well as regulations involving imbibing by volunteers. Applicant agrees to adhere to these conditions.
The event will be held from Friday, October 21st to Sunday, October 23rd, 2022, during the following hours:
Friday, October 21st, from 4:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.
Saturday, October 22nd, from 10:30 a.m. to 10:30 p.m.
Sunday, October 23rd, from 12:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
The Campbell Municipal Code requires City Council approval of a Carnival Permit and sets a fee of $ 291.00 for the first day and $106.00 for each subsequent day. The total permit fee equals $582.00.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City will collect $582.00 for permit fees, and $291.00 if a 50% fee waiver is granted.
As referenced in the attached resolution, the applicant has agreed to pay the City for uniformed Police presence at the event.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Waive 50% of the permit fee.
2. Provide other direction
Prepared by:
Ana Spear, Police Permits
Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Attachment:
a. Resolution St Lucy 2022
5 Packet Pg. 26
RESOLUTION NO. ___________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CAMPBELL AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF A CARNIVAL
PERMIT TO THE ST. LUCY PARISH SCHOOL PARENT
TEACHER GROUP FOR THE CARNIVAL COMMONLY KNOWN
AS THE ST. LUCY FUN FEST LOCATED AT 76 KENNEDY
AVENUE, OCTOBER 21ST TO OCTOBER 23RD 2022.
WHEREAS, after notification and public hearing and presentation by the Police Department, after due consideration of all the evidence presented the City Council did find as follows:
1. ATTRACTIONS
The carnival will include ten amusement rides, games concessions and a food booth which shall be under contract with Midway of Fun, of Sacramento California. Liability insurance shall be provided by the carnival operator. Tickets sold prior to the opening day of the carnival will be handled by parish/school volunteers. Once the carnival has opened at 4:30 p.m. on Friday, October 21, 2022, employees of the Midway of Fun will handle ticket sales
2. ALCOHOL SALES
Beer and wine will be sold from booths to adults showing acceptable proof of age. Any purchaser who appears to be 25 years of age or younger shall be required to furnish proper identification to prove that they are 21 years old. Sales of beer and wine only occur with the issuance of a Sales License from the California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control. Any alcoholic beverage purchased at the carnival will be consumed or disposed prior to the patron leaving the carnival.
3. FOOD AND GAME BOOTHS
Parish/School Volunteers will operate approximately 25 game booths and 12 food booths. All booths will only operate after receiving approval by Santa Clara County Central Fire District. Food booths will only operate after receiving approval by the Santa Clara County Environmental Health Department.
4. AUCTIONS
Items will be displayed for silent action bidding throughout the duration of the festival. A live auction will also be conducted on Saturday evening on the pavilion area between the school and kitchen
5.a
Packet Pg. 27
Attachment: Resolution St Lucy 2022 (St. Lucy Fun Fest 2022)
5. RAFFLE
A raffle with a grand prize of $5,000.00 will be held. One complimentary ticket will be provided to each adult making a request. Each additional ticket will sell for $1.00. The winning ticket will be drawn at 5:00 pm on Sunday, October 23, 2022.
6. LIVE ENTERTAINMENT
Each band will perform on a 20’ x 20’ stage adjacent to the pavilion area. The festival committee will be responsible for monitoring the volume of the performances to ensure that the noise does not become a nuisance to the surrounding community.
7. PROMOTIONS
a) Two banners up to 20 square feet may be placed on private property on the building face as approved by the City of Campbell Community Development Department.
b) Bulk rate mailings to residents of the City of Campbell. c) Posters will be distributed to local merchants and placed on utility poles belonging to PG&E as approved by them and the City of Campbell Community Development Department.
d) Signs posted at St. Lucy Parish School and on church property. e) Banners and posters shall be removed no later than 72 hours after the close of the event.
8. PARKING
Parking will be available behind and adjacent to St. Lucy’s Church and St. Lucy’s School. Normal paths to and from the entrances and exits will be available and festival volunteers will monitor these paths to ensure that emergency and fire vehicles will have constant access to the premises.
9. SECURITY
a) Security will be provided by the Campbell Police Department. All Campbell Police Officers working security will be in full uniform. b) All festival volunteers or workers who are assigned to various activities will wear distinctive identification, such as a T-shirt or vest, that identifies both on the front and back that these individual are festival volunteers or workers.
c) All outside agency police personnel who are working as security during the festival will be required to wear distinctive security clothing at all times while they are working, i.e., a jacket or vest that indicates “St. Lucy ‘s Fun Festival Security” on the front and back of the garment. A list of those outside agency police personnel must be provided to the office of the Chief of Police no later than two weeks prior to the first day of the festival.
5.a
Packet Pg. 28
Attachment: Resolution St Lucy 2022 (St. Lucy Fun Fest 2022) d) School parents employed as peace officers by various law enforcement agencies may stay overnight on the property on Friday night and Saturday night to provide safeguarding on the festival location and property.
Information identifying these individuals and the attire of these individual shall meet the requirements stated in section (c ) above. e) Festival organizers will furnish to the Campbell Police Department, the names and identifying information of all festival personnel who will have access to large sums of money.
f) No festival volunteer or worker will be allowed to consume alcoholic beverage during the event. They may consume alcoholic beverages once they are completed with their assignment for the day. For further clarification, no festival volunteer or worker who is working a split shift will be allowed to consume alcohol during their off period. They must be completely finished for the day before they may consume alcohol.
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested the permit fee be reduced by 50% , but there is no policy for fee waivers related to Carnival Permits.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Campbell does hereby grant a Carnival permit to St. Lucy’s Parish School Parent Teacher Group and deny the requested reduction in fees.
PASSED AND ADOPTED THE 4th day of October, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Council members:
NOES: Council members:
Absent: Council members:
APPROVED:
_________________________
Paul Resnikoff , Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
5.a
Packet Pg. 29
Attachment: Resolution St Lucy 2022 (St. Lucy Fun Fest 2022)
City
Council
Report
TITLE: Building Plan Check Services - RFQ (Resolution / Roll Call Vote)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the Community Deve lopment Director to issue a Request for Qualifications for Building Plan Check services; and authorize the City Manager to execute a service contract with the most responsive bidders for a period of two (2) years with options to renew another twelve (12) months.
BACKGROUND
The Building Division of the Community Development Department provides plan check s of building permit applications to ensure applications are compliant with health and safety regulations as outlined in California Administrative Code an d California Code of Regulations, Title 24, also referred to as the California Building Standards Code.
Periodically the City receives high profile applications for development project s in which the available Building Division staff may not possess the c ertifications necessary to perform the inspections required, or the volume and/or expedited timeline exceeds what can be provided by in -house staff. The City has traditionally utilized third party assistance in performing these services, in order to mainta in the level of service, and ensure the safety of the residents in the community. This results in time and cost savings compared to diverting Building Division staff resources to conduct plan -checks resulting in delays in other processes and impacting cust omer service to applicants and the public.
DISCUSSION
Staff requests the Council adopt a Resolution (Attachment A) to authorize the issuance of the Request for Qualifications (Attachment B) to obtain consulting services for building plan check review services
The Building Division is seeking proposals from qualified firms to provide plan check services for both residential and non -residential projects. The services required by the Building Division will include: the review of construction drawings to en sure compliance with City adopted Building codes and related Municipal Code requirements; providing expertise for addressing unique or challenging plan check or code interpretation issues such as the use of alternate methods of construction.
Item: 6
Category: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
6 Packet Pg. 30
Building Plan Check Services - RFQ Page 2 of 3
Over the past three years, the Building Division has experienced consistently high levels of building permit activity and has reviewed and permitted several major development projects .
2020 2021 2022 (YTD)
PERMITS
ISSUED
815 1648 1011
VALUATION $36,393,126 $47,952,207 $22,831,766
The current contracts the Building Division maintains with consulting firms to provide third party plan check services are expiring and the Department is now seeking authorization from the City Council to advertise an RFQ for experience d firms interested in providing plan -check services on an “as -needed” basis. The Building Division anticipates hiring more than one consulting firm to provide plan check services, as this allows the use of firms with different expertise and can provide mor e flexibility in distributing projects for building plan check review.
FISCAL IMPACT
Services under the two-year Consultant Services Agreement s will be performed under individual purchase orders based on individual project needs and will not exceed $300,000 for all vendor agreements . The FY 2023 Adopted Budget within the Building Division (Acct.# 101.554.7430) includes $130,000 for year 1 of these third party plan check services. For year 2 of these service agreements, the Community Development Department will return with a funding request of up to $170,000 as part of the FY 2024 proposed budget process. This will result in two -year agreements not to exceed $300,000 as specified in the Resolution ( Attachment A) and noted above. Year 1 of these service ag reements will be paid using funds available in the existing FY 2023 expenditure budget and no FY 2023 budget adjustment for these services is being requested at this time.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not authorize the issuance of the RFQ As an alternative, the Ci ty could add more staff resources to the Community Development Department, Building Division to provide plan check services. However, it is expected the Building Division would still require third party plan check services to provide unique technical expertise on complex building projects.
2. Modify the RFQ as presented
3. Provide other direction to staff
6 Packet Pg. 31
Building Plan Check Services - RFQ Page 3 of 3
Prepared by:
Ken Ramirez, Administrative Analyst
Reviewed by:
Rob Eastwood, Community
Development Director
Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Attachment:
a. Draft Resolution (Plan Check Services RFQ)
b. Building Plan Check Services RFQ
6 Packet Pg. 32
RESOLUTION NO. ______________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF TH E CITY OF CAMPBELL
AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ)
FOR (A) CONSULTANT SERVICES TO SUPPORT BUILDING DIVISION WITH PLAN CHECK SERVICES ; (B) ISSUANCE OF A REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR CONTRACT SERVICES TO PROVIDE
BUILDING PLAN CHECK SERVICES ; AND (C) AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH THE SELECTED SERVICE
PROVIDERS FOR A TWO YEAR TERM IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $300,000 FOR ADOPTED CONTRACTS.
WHEREAS, in order to maintain the level of service and ensure the safety of the residents in the community through the verification and assurances that applications are compliant with health and safety regulations as outlined in California Administrative Code and California Code of Regulations, Title 24 s; and
WHEREAS, the City has recognized the need for third party assistance in performing services which may require review and analysis when existing department staff due not possess the required technical certifications to conduct the review or analysis; and
WHEREAS, approximately $ 130,000 of appropriated funds r emain and the Council authorized $130,000 to be spen t through FY 2023 for contracted plan check services ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and accepted the draft RFQ and found it to include the appropriate tasks needed to assist the Community Development Department’s Building Division to provide California Building and Municipal code compliant plan check services for the safety of the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and accepted the draft RFQ and found it appropriate for the selection of a contract plan checker to support department operations for a two-year term; and
WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes a co mbined total of $300,000 for adopted contracts; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Campbell hereby authorizes distribution of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for (a) consultant services to support building division with plan check services; (b) issuance of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for contract services to provid e plan check services ; and (c) authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with the selected service providers for a two year term in an amount not to exceed a combined total of $300,000 for adopted contracts.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ____ day of October, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
6.a
Packet Pg. 33
Attachment: Draft Resolution (Plan Check Services RFQ) (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
APPROVED:
_____________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
6.a
Packet Pg. 34
Attachment: Draft Resolution (Plan Check Services RFQ) (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS
(RFQ)
[Building Plan Check Services]
RFQ Release Date
10/07/22
Proposal Submittal Deadline
Friday, October 21 , 2022
5:00 PM
City of Campbell
Attn: City Clerk’s Office
70 North First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
(408) 866-2117
6.b
Packet Pg. 35
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
City of Campbell
REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) TO PROVIDE
BUILDING PLAN CHECK SERVICES FOR THE
CITY OF CAMPBELL, CALIFORNIA
Dated: October 7, 2022
PROJECT TITLE
Consultant to perform structural life safety, accessibility, plumbing, electrical, mechanical, California Green Energy Compliance and building code review to ensure compliance with the model codes adopted in the City of Campbell’s Municipal Code
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City is seeking qualifications (RFQ) from consulting firms to enter into a Consulting Services Agreement to assist the City’s Building Division in the Community Development Department , with third party plan check services.
DIVISION/DEPARTMENT REQUESTING
Building Inspection Division, Community Development Department
RFQ ISSUED: October 7, 2022
SUBMITTAL DEADLINE: 5:00pm October 21, 2022
EMAIL SUBMITTAL TO: [email protected]
CITY CONTACTS:
Bob Lennen, Acting Building Official
City of Campbell
70 N. 1st St., Campbell, CA 95008
[email protected]
(408) 866-2133
6.b
Packet Pg. 36
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
INTRODUCTION:
The City of Campbell is requesting qualifications (RFQ) from consulting firms to provide third party plan check services for City’s Building Division . The selected firm(s) will work with the Building Official, or other designated staff to review plans and documents for code compliance.
Consultant services will support the City by performing structural life safety, accessibility, plumbing, electrical, mechanical, California Green Energy Compliance and building code review to ensure compliance with the model codes adopted in the City of Campbell’s Municipal Code.
BACKGROUND
The Building Division has utilized outside consultants on an as-needed basis to provide plan check services and handle overflow work. Given the increase in development activity in the City of Campbell and the recent entitlements of several large projects, the City is interested in selecting up to three firms to provide plan check services on an as-needed basis.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Project tasks shall include, but are not necessarily limited to, the following described below.
• Provide plan review and perform all necessary contacts with the applicant designer and conduct all necessary rechecks to achieve conformance to the applicable code and regulation. • Coordinate activities with Building Official, Building Inspector, or their designee. • Conduct necessary site analysis when required
• Prepare correction lists
• Stamp approved plans
• Maintain records of plans in process
• Provide continuity of plan check services through project completion • Ability to perform, structural, general building, Energy, CASp, and OSHPAD III type plan reviews.
• Ability to also perform special, standard, and OSHPAD III inspections • Ability to perform any engineering testing documentation • Review revisions
RFQ SCHEDULE
The following information is supplied as a guideline rather than as a set of absolute deadlines. The City reserves the right to alter the schedule as necessary:
RFQ Issued October 7, 2022
Responses Due by 5:00p.m., October 21, 2022
Evaluations of Responses October 24-28, 2022
Estimated Start Date December 2022
6.b
Packet Pg. 37
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
The City is seeking a consulting firm with a solid understanding of the California Building Codes to perform structural, life safety, accessibility, plumbing, electrical, mechanical, California Green Energy Compliance, and building code review and encoring compliance with the model codes adopted in the City of Campbell Municipal Code. The selected firm(s) must demonstrate that its team has staffing capacity and experience in providing timely, accurate and comprehensive plan checking services for construction projects.
The Consultant shall be responsible for preparing an effective, clear, and concise proposal. The City is requesting an electronic copy of the proposal in PDF format emailed to [email protected] The proposal shall be organized by clearly labeled section s. Submit an electronic signed copy of the Consultant’s formal proposal submittal including fee proposal in PDF file format with file titled as follows: RFQ Building Plan Check Services – Consultant Name.
Proposals must contain at a minimum the following information:
A. Format for Proposal: To facilitate the review of responses, all responses are required to adhere to the following requirements regarding their proposal. The City strongly encourages respondents to ensure that RFQ submissions are su ccinct and clearly organized. If the proposal is not in this format or does not include all the listed items, it may be deemed nonresponsive. For ease of handling, all responses are to be provided in a standard 8 ½” x 11” portrait layout in PDF format.
a. Title Page showing the request for proposals subject; the firm’s name; the name, address, email address and telephone number of the contact person; and the date of the proposal.
b. Table of Contents identifying the submitted materials by section and page number.
c. Detailed Proposal following the order as set forth below and clearly label each section.
B. Statement of Qualifications and Interest. Explain the background of the firm and its principals. Describe relevant public sector experience, including similar third-party plan check services for other cities. Please provide the name, title, telephone number, and email of the individual authorized to negotiate and execute the Consultant Services Agreement with the City.
C. Staffing Capacity and Project Management. Briefly describe who will be the project team leader and the individuals who will be assigned to plan heck service for individual projects assigned by the City. Describe how your firm will manage projects and ensure that plan check review are comprehensive, thorough, and will meet City deadlines.
6.b
Packet Pg. 38
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
D. Experience. Provide resumes and any relevant information (such as education, training, certification, licenses, etc.) regarding the experience and skills of the individuals on your team. (including subconsultants if applicable ) who will be working with the City under the Consultant Services Agreement
E. Fee Schedule. Provide hours fees for all personnel assigned to each project.
F. Plan Check Turnaround Times. Provide plan check turnaround times for single family dwelling, multi -family residential buildings, tenant improvements an d commercial /industrial buildings.
G. References. Provide contact information for a minimum of three public agencies that the firm has worked with on similar projects within the past three years.
H. Statement indicating that the firm has reviewed the City’s standard Consulting Services Agreement attached as Exhibit A, and is able to meet the agreement requirements, including insurance requirements.
I. Comments on or Requested Changes to Contract: The City’s standard Consultant Services Agreement is included as Attachment A to this Request for Proposals. The proposing firm shall identify any objections to and/or request changes to the standard contract language in this section.
6.b
Packet Pg. 39
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
SELECTION CRITERIA
This evaluation team, in accordance with the criteria listed below, will evaluate all proposals received as specified. The City team members, in applying the major criteria to the proposals, may consider additional criteria beyond those listed. During the evaluation period, the team may elect to interview some or all of the proposing firms. The final selection will be the firm which, in the City’s opinion, is the most responsive and responsible, meets the City’s requirements in providing this service, and is in the City's best interest. The City maintains the sole and exclusive right to evaluate the merits of the proposals received. Consultants will be objectively evaluated based on their responses to the project scope outlined in the RFQ. The written proposal should clearly demonstrate how the firm could best satisfy the City’s requirements. Proposals will be evaluated on the following criteria:
No. Written Evaluation Criteria Point Value
1 Completeness of Response Pass/Fail
2 Qualifications & Experience 30
3 Organization & Approach 20
4 Scope of Services to be Provided 20
5 References 25
6 Local Presence 5
7 Conflict of Interest Statement Pass/Fail
Subtotal: 100
Failure to comply with the requirements set forth in this RFQ may result in disqualification.
Proposals and/or modifications received after the hour and date specified above will not be accepted. Submitted proposals may be withdrawn at any time prior to the submission time specified in this RFQ, provided notification is received in writing before the submittal deadline.
No handwritten notations or corrections will be allowed. The responding Consultant is solely responsible for all costs related to the preparation of the proposal.
The City reserves the right to reject all proposals and to waive any minor informalities or irregularities contained in any proposal. Acceptance of any proposal submitted pursuant to this RFQ shall not constitute any implied intent to enter a contract.
TERM OF CONTRACT
The initial contract term shall commence upon execution of the contract by the City shall be for a twenty four (24) month period. The contract may include the option for two additional (6) six - month renewal periods in the event additional consult ing services are requested by the City, for a total potential contract term of up to three (3) years.
6.b
Packet Pg. 40
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
GENERAL CONDITIONS
The City reserves the right to modify or cancel the selection process or schedule at any time.
Additionally, the City may seek clarification or additional information from proposers. This RFQ does not commit the City of Campbell to sign an agreement or award a contract. All documents, conversations, correspondence, etc. between the City are subject to the laws and regulations that govern the City.
Attachment:
Exhibit A – Consultant Services Agreement
All responses must be received no later that the date and time noted above. Responses must be emailed to [email protected] to be considered.
Submittals received after the date and time listed above will not be evaluated or considered.
Each applicant shall bear all costs associated with their response to this RFQ. All submittals will become, and remain, the property of the City of Campbell. Submittals or additional information received by the City after the submittal deadline will not be considered in the selection process unless additional information was requested by the City. If in the City’s opinion participation with this RFQ was not adequate, additional RFQ’s may be issued.
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
The consultant will be expected to execute the City’s Consultant Services Agreement. A sample copy of the Consultant Services Agreement is attached in this RFQ. Special requirements of the agreement include insurance coverage amount and submittal of worker’s compensation and liability insurance certification.
6.b
Packet Pg. 41
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CAMPBELL
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered into at Campbell, California on the day of , 2022, by and between the CITY OF CAMPBELL (hereinafter referred to as "City") and (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant").
WHEREAS, City desires to obtain a consultant to perform structural, life safety, accessibility, plumbing, electrical, mechanical, California Green Energy Compliance and building code review to ensure compliance with the model codes adopted in the City of Campbell;
WHEREAS, Consultant will provide plan check services and inspections services on an as-needed basis;
WHEREAS, Consultant represents that it has the expertise, means, and ability to prepare and revise and make recommendations throughout the entire preparation process;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of each other's mutual promises, Consultant and City agree as follows:
1. DUTIES OF CONSULTANT
1.1 Consultant agrees to perform services as set forth in Exhibit A - Scope of Services1, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and which shall be interpreted together and in harmony with this Agreement. In the event of any conflict between Exhibit A and this Agreement, this Agreement shall govern, control, and take precedence.
1.2 Consultant’s project manager will consult with the City’s project coordinator prior to commencement of the project to establish a clear understanding of the working relationships, authorities, and management philosophy of City as it relates to this Agreement.
1.3 Consultant, working with the City, will gather available existing information concerning the project, and shall review documents as necessary for compliance with the project’s objectives.
1.4 In performance of this Agreement by Consultant, time will be of the essence.
1.5 Notwithstanding Section 1.4, Consultant shall not be responsible for delay caused by activities or factors beyond Consultant’s reasonable control, including delays or by reason of strikes, work slow-downs or stoppages, or acts of God.
1 Scope of Services, project schedule and consultant fee schedule to be included in Exhibit A following consultant selection
6.b
Packet Pg. 42
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
1.6 Consultant agrees to perform this Agreement in accordance with the highest degree of skill and expertise exercised by members of Consultant’s profession working on similar projects under similar circumstances.
1.7 Consultant shall cooperate in good faith with City in all aspects of the performance of this Agreement.
1.8 In the course of the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall act in the City’s best interest as it relates to the project.
1.9 All activities of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors and/or agents will be carried out in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations.
1.10 The designated project manager for Consultant shall be .
The Consultant’s project manager shall have all the necessary authority to direct technical and professional work within the scope of the Agreement and shall serve as the principal point of contact with the City and the City’s project coordinator. The authorized principal of Consultant executing this Agreement for the Consultant shall have authority to make decisions regarding changes in services, termination and other matters related to the performance of this agreement on behalf of Consultant.
1.11 The Consultant (and its employees, agents, representatives, and subconsultants), in the performance of this Agreement, shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers or officials or employees or agents of the City. The City shall not direct the work and means for accomplishment of the services and work to be performed hereunder. The City, however, retains the right to require that work performed by Consultant meet specific standards consistent with the requirements of this Agreement without regard to the manner and means of accomplishment thereof. Subcontractors shall assume all of the rights, obligations and liabilities, applicable to it as an independent contractor hereunder. Consultant represents and warrants that it (i) is fully experienced and properly qualified to perform the class of work and services provided for herein, (ii) has the financial capability and shall finance its own operations required for the performance of the work and services and (iii) is properly equipped and organized to perform the work and services in a competent, timely and proper manner in accordance with the requirements of this Agreement.
Consultant agrees to comply with AB5, codified at Labor Code section 2750.3, and shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, directors, agents repres entatives, volunteers, and employees against any claim or liability, including attorneys’ fees and costs, arising in any manner related to this Agreement that an employee, agent or others under Consultant’s supervision or control was misclassified.
1.12 This Agreement contains provisions that permit mutually acceptable changes in the scope, character or complexity of the work if such changes become desirable or necessary as the work progresses. Adjustments to the basis of payment and to the time for performance of the work, if any, shall be established by a written contract amendment (approved and executed by the City) to accommodate the changes in work.
2. DUTIES OF CITY
6.b
Packet Pg. 43
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
2.1 City shall furnish to Consultant all available and pertinent data and information requested by Consultant to facilitate the preparation of the documents called for in this Agreement.
Consultant shall be entitled to reasonably rely on accuracy and completeness of such information, provided that Consultant shall provide City prompt writte n notice of any known defects in such data and information.
2.2 City shall provide contract administration services. City shall notify Consultant of required administrative procedures and shall name representatives, if any, authorized to act in its behalf.
2.3 City shall review documents submitted by Consultant and shall render decisions pertaining thereto as promptly as reasonably possible.
3. COMPENSATION
3.1 For the full performance of the services described herein by Consultant, City agrees to compensate Consultant for all services and direct costs associated with the performance of the project in an amount not to exceed $200,000, as follows:
a. Once each month, Consultant shall submit for payment by City, an itemized invoice for services performed during the previous billing period. The invoice shall describe the service s rendered and the title of the item of work and shall list labor hours by personnel classification. Said invoice shall be based on all labor and direct expense charges made for work performed on the project. Labor charges shall be in accordance with the f ee schedule found in Exhibit A of this Agreement. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered and approved by the City within 30 days from the date the itemized invoice is received by the City, subject to the maximum not to exceed amount specified above and the City’s right to object.
b. Direct costs are those outside costs incurred on or directly for the project and substantiated with invoices for the charges. Direct expenses include printing, reproduction, and delivery charges.
3.2 If Consultant incurs other costs which are not specifically covered by the terms of this Agreement, but which are necessary for performance of Consultant’s duties, City may approve payment for said costs if authorized in writing by the City in advance.
3.3 City may order changes in the scope or character of services in writing, including decreasing the amount of Consultant’s services. In the event that the work is decreased, Consultant is entitled to full compensation for all services performed and expenses incurred prior to receipt of notice of change. Under no conditions shall Consultant make any changes to the work, either as additions or deductions, without the prior written order of the City. In the event, that the City determines that a change to the work or services from that specified in this Agreement is required, the contract time and/or actual costs reimbursable by the City for the project may be adjusted by contract amendment or change order to accommodate the changed work. The maximum not to exceed total amount specified in this Article 3 (Compensation) shall not be exceeded, unless authorized by written contract amendment or change order, approved and executed by the City.
Consultant shall obtain prior written approval for a revised fee schedule f rom the City before exceeding such fee schedule. Only City’s authorized representative(s) is authorized to approve
6.b
Packet Pg. 44
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
changes to this Agreement on behalf of City.
3.4 In no event, will the Consultant be reimbursed for any costs or expenses at any rates that exceed the rates for set forth in the fee schedule found in Exhibit A.
3.5 Consultant agrees that the payments to Consultant specified in this Article 3 (Compensation) will constitute full and complete compensation for all obligations assumed by Consultant under this Agreement. Where conflicts regarding compensation may occur, the provisions of this section apply.
4. SUBCONSULTANTS
4.1 Consultant may not subcontract any services required under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City.
4.2 Consultant shall be responsible to City for the performance of any and all subconsultants who perform work under this contract, and any acts of negligence or misconduct on their part. Consultant is solely responsible for all payments due to subconsultants.
4.3 Consultant shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all of the requirements stated herein, including naming the City of Campbell, its officers, officials, directors, agents’ representatives, volunteers, and employees as additional insureds. Any modification to the insurance requirements for subcontractors must be agreed to by the City in writing.
4.4 If at any time, the City determines any subcontractor is incompetent or unqualified, Consultant will be notified and will be expected to immediately cancel the subcontract.
5. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS
All original drawings, documents, data, materials, photographs, negatives and other work products prepared by the Consultant and/or its subconsultants in the performance of the services encompassed in this Agreement (whether in printed or electronic format) (“project -related documents and materials”) shall be the property of the City and may be used on this project without the consent of the Consultant or its s ubcontractors. City acknowledges that such drawings, documents, and other items are instruments of professional services intended for use only on the subject project. Consultant agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the Project- related documents and materials pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in the City and waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the City.
Any and all project-related documents and materia ls including draft documents and materials related to this Agreement shall be confidential, not to be used by the Consultant on other projects or disclosed to any third party, except by agreement in writing by the City, or except as otherwise
6.b
Packet Pg. 45
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
provided herein or applicable laws. Upon the completion or termination of this Agreement for any reason, the City shall be entitled to receive, and Consultant shall promptly provide to the City upon request, all finished and unfinished project-related documents and materials, produced or gathered by or on behalf of Consultant that are in Consultant’s possession, custody or control. Consultant may retain copies of said documents and ma terials for its files. In the event of termination, any dispute regarding compensation or damages shall not hinder, prevent, or otherwise impact the City’s right to promptly receive and use such documents and materials which are the sole and exclusive property of the City.
6. TERMINATION
6.1 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, City may terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, in its sole discretion, by giving notice in writing to Consultant not less than 14 calendar days prior to an effective termination date. In the event of such termination, Consultant shall have the right and obligation to immediately assemble the work then in progress for the purpose of completing the work and turning over all materials a nd documents to City.
6.2 In the event of such termination, Consultant shall be compensated for all work and services performed to the point of termination in accordance with the payment provisions set forth in Section 3.1, unless the termination is for cause, in which event Consultant need be compensated only to the extent required by law.
6.3 Upon notice of termination by City, the Consultant will immediately act to not incur any additional obligations, costs or expenses, except as may be reasonably necessary to terminate its activities. All finished or unfinished work or documents procured or produced under the Agreement will become property of the City upon the termination date. In the event of Consultant’s failure to perform pursuant to the Agreement, the City reserves the right to obtain services elsewhere and Consultant will be liable for the difference between the prices set forth in the terminated Agreement and the actual cost to the City. Termination of the Agreement pursuant to this paragraph shall not relieve the Consultant of any liability to City for additional costs, expenses, or damages sustained by City due to failure of the Consultant to perform pursuant to the Agreement. City may withhold any payments to Consultant for the purpos e of set off until such time as the exact amount of damages due City from Consultant is determined. After the effective date of termination, Consultant will have no further claims against the City under the Agreement.
No other compensation will be payable for anticipated profit on unperformed services.
7. AUDIT AND INSPECTION
Consultant shall permit authorized representatives of City to inspect and audit all data and records relating to its performance under this Agreement for a period of three years following acceptance of the final study.
8. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
Consultant agrees to refrain from discriminatory employment practices on the basis of race, religious creed, color, sex, national origin, handicap, sexual orientation, marital status, medical
6.b
Packet Pg. 46
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
condition, disability, ancestry, organizational affiliation, military or veteran status, or any other consideration made unlawful by local, State or Federal law, of any employee of, or applicant for employment with, such Consultant or subcontractor. City requires Consultant to comply with all applicable Federal and State and local equal employment opportunity laws and regulations.
9. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION
9.1 With respect to any professional services provided by Consultant , the Consultant agrees to indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, and employees to the fullest extent allowed by law from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, damages, liabilities and losses, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant, except for any claims, actions , causes of action, losses, damages or liabilities proximately caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City. City shall not be liable for acts of Consultant in performing services described herein. Notwithstanding anything in this paragraph to the contrary, any defense costs charged to the consultant under this paragraph shall not exceed the consultant proportionate percentage of fault, except:
a. That in the event one or more defendants is unable to pay its share of defense costs due to bankruptcy or dissolution of the business, the consultant shall meet and confer with the other parties regarding unpaid defense costs in good faith effort to agree on the allocation of those costs amongst the parties; and
b. Where a project-specific general liability policy ensures all project participants for general liability exposures on a primary basis and also covers all consultant for their legal liability arising out of their professional services on a primary basis, then there shall be no limitation on the consultant 's duty to provide a defense and cover the City's cost of defense.
With respect to all matters other than those covered by the foregoing paragraph, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend (with counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City) and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, directors, agents representatives, volunteers, and employees to the fullest extent allowed by law from and against any and all claims, actions, causes of action, losses, damages, liabilities and costs of every nature, including attorneys’ fees and costs (collectively, “Losses”) including but not limited to all claims, actions, causes of action, losses, damages, liabilities for property damage, bodily injury, or death, and all costs of defending any claim, caused by or arising out of, or alleged to have been caused by or arise out of, in whole or in part, Consultant’s performance under this Agreement, except for any claims, actions, causes of action, losses, damages, costs or liabilities proximately caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City. City shall not be liable for acts of Consultant in performing services described herein.
In no event shall this section be construed to require indemnification by the Consultant to a greater extent than permitted under the public policy of the State of California; and in the event that this contract is subject to California Civil Code section 2782(b), the foregoing indemnity provisions shall not apply to any liability for the active negligence of the City.
6.b
Packet Pg. 47
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
The defense and indemnity provisions obligations of this Agreement are undertaken in addition to and shall not in any way be limited by the insurance obligations contained in thi s Agreement. The foregoing indemnity provisions are intended to fully allocate the parties’ risk of liability to third - parties; and there shall be no rights to indemnity or contribution, in law or equity or otherwise between the parties that are not set forth in this section. Consultant waives all rights to subrogation for any matters covered by the provisions of this section. Consultant’s responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations as set forth in this section shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.
9.2 Consultant shall maintain insurance conforming to the following specifications to the fullest amount allowed by law for a minimum of three (3) years following the term ination or completion of this Agreement:
A. Types of Coverage
The policies shall afford the following types of coverage:
1. Commercial General Liability;
2. Automotive;
3. Workers’ Compensation and Employer Liability; and
4. Professional Liability and/or Errors and Omissions
B. Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. For Commercial General Liability: Insurance Services Office (ISO) CGL Form 00 01 11 85; and
2. For Automotive Liability: ISO CA 00 01 06 92 including symbol 1(any auto); and
3. For Workers’ Compensation: insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employer's Liability insurance; and
4. For Professional Liability and/or Errors and Omissions: insurance covering negligence committed by or on behalf of Consultant in rendering services to City.
C. Minimum Limits of Insurance
Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for
6.b
Packet Pg. 48
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
bodily, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers’ Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers’ Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employer's Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. The Worker’s Compensation policy must be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all work performed by the Consultant and its employees.
4. Professional Liability a nd/or Errors and Omissions: $1,000,000 per claim and $2,000,000 in the annual aggregate.
The limits of insurance required in this Agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance sha ll contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of City (as agreed to in this Agreement) before the City’s own insurance or self - insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
D. Deductible and Self-Insured Retention
Any deductibles or self -insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City and shall not reduce the limits of liability. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self -insured retention as resp ects the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses related to investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. Policies containing any self-insured retention provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that the self- insured retention may be satisfied by either the named insured or the City.
E. Other Insurance Provisions
The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverage:
a. The City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of this Agreement perfor med by or on behalf of the Consultant, products and completed operations of the Consultant, premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. It is a requirement of this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader
6.b
Packet Pg. 49
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits set forth in this Agreement shall be available to the City as an additional insured. Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be (1) the minimum coverage limits specified in this Agreement, or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured, whichever is affords greater coverage.
b. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials and volunteers.
Any insurance or self -insurance maintained by the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials and volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
c. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials, and volunteers.
d. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
2. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Coverage: The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials, and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Consultant for the City.
3. All Coverages: Any unintentional failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City; and unless otherwise approved by the City, each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by regular mail has been given to the City, or ten (10) days for cancellation for non- payment of premium.
F. Suspension or Cancellation
If any of the coverages required by this Agreement should be suspended, voided, cancelled or reduced in coverage during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall immediately notify City and replace such coverage with another policy meeting the requirements of this Agreement.
G. Subcontractors
Consultant agrees that any and all contracts with subcontractors for performance of any matter under this Agreement shall require the subcontractors to comply with the same indemnity and insurance requirements set forth in this Agreement to the extent that they apply to the scope of the subcontractors’ work. Subcontractors are to be bound to contractor and to City in the same manner
6.b
Packet Pg. 50
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
and to the same extent as the Consultant is bound to City under this Agreement. Subcontractors shall further agree to include these same provisions with any sub -subcontractor. A copy of this Agreement will be furnished to the subcontractor on request. The Consultant shall require all subcontractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in the Agreement prior to commencing any work and will provide proof of compliance to the City.
H. Acceptability of Insurers
Without limiting Consultant's indemnification provided hereunder, the policies of insurance listed in Article 9.2 of this Agreement are to be issued by an issuer with a current A.M. Best Rating of A:V and who is authorized to transact business in the State of California, unless otherwise approved by the City.
I. Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with endorsements and certificates of insurance evidencing coverage required by this clause. The certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be on forms acceptable to the City. Where required by statue, forms approved by the Insurance Commissioner are to be submitted. All certificates are to be received and approved by the City before work commences.
J. Special Risks/Circumstances
City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances and provide notice to Consultant.
10. MISCELLANEOUS
10.1 This Agreement shall be binding on the heirs, executors, assigns and successors of Consultant.
10.2 Neither party may assign this Agreement, or any portion hereof, without the prior written consent of the other.
10.3 This Agreement shall not be construed to alter, affect, or waive any lien or stop notice rights, which Consultant may have for the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement.
10.4 Neither party’s waiver of any term, condition or covenant, or breach of any term, condition or covenant shall be construed as the waiver of any other term, condition or covenant or waiver of the breach of any other term, condition or covenant.
10.5 This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between City and Consultant relating to the project and the provision of services to the project. Any prior agreements,
6.b
Packet Pg. 51
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
promises, negotiations, or representations not expressly set forth in this Agreement are of no force or effect. Subsequent modifications to this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both City and Consultant.
10.6 If any term, condition or covenant of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall be valid and binding on City and Consultant.
10.7 This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
10.8 All changes or amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and approved by all parties.
10.9 The initial contract term shall commence upon execution of the contract by the City and shall be for a two (2) month period, unless terminated sooner in accordance with the contract.
The City of Campbell at its sole discretion may elect to extend the contract up to two (2) consecutive six-month periods by providing written notice to Consultant not less than thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the original or extended term. The total length of the contract shall not exceed a period of one year. Annual contractual costs shall be equal to the August-to-August San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Consumer Price Index -All Urban (CPI-U) in an amount not to exceed five percent (5%), but not lower than three percent (3%), annually, on July 1 of each contract renewal if executed.
10.10 Consultant owes the City a duty of undivided loyalty in performing the work and services under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the obligation to refrain from having economic interests and/or participating in activities that conflict with the City’s interests in respect to the work and/or services and project. The Consultant shall list current clients who may have a financial interest in the outcome of this Agreement. The Consultant hereby certifies that it does not now have, nor shall it acquire any financial or business interest that would conflict with the performance of services under this agreement. Consultant shall not make or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant’s position to influence a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a direct or indirect financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement. Consultant will immediately advise the City if Consultant learns of a financial interest of Consultant's during the term of this Agreement.
10.11 City is a public agency subject to the disclosure re quirements of the California Public Records Act (“CPRA”). If Consultant’s proprietary information is contained in documents or information submitted to City, and Consultant claims that such information falls within one or more CPRA exemptions, Consultant must clearly mark such information “Confidential and Proprietary,” and identify the specific lines containing the information. In the event of a request for such information, City will make best efforts to provide notice to Consultant prior to s uch disclosure. If Consultant contends that any documents are exempt from the CPRA and wishes to prevent disclosure, it is required to obtain a protective order, injunctive relief or other appropriate remedy from a court of law in Santa Clara County before the City is required to respond to the
6.b
Packet Pg. 52
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
CPRA request. If Consultant fails to obtain such remedy within the time the City is required to respond to the CPRA request, City may disclose the requested information without any liability to Consultant. Consultant further agrees that it shall defend, indemnify and hold City harmless against any claim, action or litigation (including but not limited to all judgments, costs, and attorney’s fees) that may result from denial by City o f a CPRA request for information arising from any representation, or any action (or inaction), by the Consultant.
10.12 Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligation hereunder to the extent that the performance of any such obligation is prevented or delayed by an act of God, natural disaster, pandemic, acts of terrorism, war, or other peril, which is beyond the reasonable control of the affected party and without the negligence of the respective Parties. Each party hereto shall give notice promptly to the other of the nature and extent of any Force Majeure claimed to delay, hinder or prevent performance of the services under this Agreement. Each Party will, however, make all reasonable efforts to remov e or eliminate such a cause of delay or default and will, upon the cessation of the cause, diligently pursue performance of its obligations in this Agreement. In the event either party is prevented or delayed in the performance of its respective obligation by reason of such Force Majeure, there may be an equitable adjustment of the schedule and Consultant compensation based on City’s sole discretion.
10.13 Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
10.14 Consultant warrants that Consultant, its subcontractors and/or agents (if any) has/have complied with any and all federal, state, and local licensing requirements
10.15 Each party acknowledges that it has reviewed this Agreement and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Agreement.
10.16 The signatories to this Agreement warrant and represent that each is authorized to execute this Agreement and that their respective signatures serve to legally obligate their respective representatives, agents, successors and assigns to comply with the provisions of this Agreement.
10.17 This Agreement is entered into, and to be performed in Santa Clara County, California, and any action arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be maintained in a court of appropriate jurisdiction in Santa Clara County, California.
10.18 This Agreement may be executed in counterparts which shall, in the aggregate, be deemed an original but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. A scanned, electronic, facsimile or other copy of a party’s sig nature shall be accepted and valid as an original.
6.b
Packet Pg. 53
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
11. NOTICES
Notices required under this Agreement may be delivered by first class mail addressed to the appropriate party at one of the following addresses:
CITY: City of Campbell
Attention: Rob Eastwood
70 North First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
CONSULTANT: _________________________________
Attention: _________________________
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
6.b
Packet Pg. 54
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
Having read and understood the foregoing Agreement, the undersigned parties agree to be bound hereby:
CONSULTANT
By
CITY OF CAMPBELL
By
6.b
Packet Pg. 55
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ) 22 Title Title
Approved as to Form
City Attorney
6.b
Packet Pg. 56
Attachment: Building Plan Check Services RFQ (Building Plan Check Services - RFQ)
City
Council
Report
TITLE: Approval of Salary Adjustments for Lighting and Traffic Signal Assistant, Lighting and Traffic Signal Supervisor, Senior Services Supervisor and Salary Schedules (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council adopt a resolution updating Salary Schedules to reflect 2022 market adjustments for the classifications of Lighting and Traffic Signal Assistant, Lighting and Traffic Signal Super visor, and Senior Services Supervisor, retroactively to be effective July 1, 2022.
BACKGROUND
On August 16, 2022, the City Council adopted resolutions to ratify successor Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) and respective Salary Schedules, effective July 1, 2022, between the City of Campbell and the Northern California Carpenters Regional Council (CARP) via Resolution 12877 and the Campbell Municipal Employees Association (CMEA) via Resolution 12878. The adopted salary schedule did not reflect 2022 market adjustments for the benchmark classifications provided by the respective MOUs terms of the benchmark section for the classifications of Lighting and Traffic Signal Assistant, Lighting and Traffic Signal Supervisor, and Senior Services Supervisor.
DISCUSSION
During labor negotiations, a salary survey was conducted by Bryce Consulting under the direction of the City's negotiation team. The salary survey included information on comparable positions within the labor market of the benchmark cities per the t erms of the MOUs for each respective labor group. Council and City Staff have met during multiple executive sessions to discuss the compensation study results and consider salary market adjustments and the city's financial health. Council authorized those benchmarked classifications to be brought up to a competitive position within the market, as reflected in the successor MOUS for CARP and CMEA.
The recommended salary adjustments are as follows:
Classification Labor Group 2022 Market Adjustment
Lighting and Traffic
Signal Assistant
CARP 9.25%
Item: 7
Category: CONSENT CALENDAR
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
7 Packet Pg. 57
Revised Salary Schedule Page 2 of 3
Lighting and Traffic
Signal Supervisor
CARP 9.25%
Senior Services
Supervisor
CMEA 0.57%
The market adjustment would be retroactive to July 1, 2022, to bring the classifications to the labor market mean in tota l compensation as surveyed by the City in Spring 2022.
While identical market adjustments were already made for related benchmark classifications of Lighting and Traffic Signal Technician (9.25%) in CARP and Recreation Supervisor in CMEA (0.57%), upon staf f review, it was determined that they were inadvertently not made for the positions listed above. Thus, the recommended update reflects prior Council approval and intent for these benchmark classifications.
FISCAL IMPACT
The combined salary increases for the Lighting and Traffic Signal Assistant, Lighting and Traffic Signal Supervisor, and Senior Services Supervisor will result in a total annual cost of $19,000 for salary. It is expected that these costs can be absorbed within the FY 2023 Adopted Budget and do not require a budget adjustment at this time.
However, should budget adjustments be needed in FY 2023, they will be included as part of the mid-year adjustment process.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not approve the attached resolution.
2. Provide other direction to staff.
Prepared by:
Jenny Le-Christensen, HR Manager
Approved by:
7 Packet Pg. 58
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Revised Salary Schedule Page 3 of 3
Attachment:
a. Resolution Salary Plan
b. Campbell Salary Schedule 10.4.2022 Special Adjustments 7 Packet Pg. 59
RESOLUTION NO. __________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL AMENDING
THE CLASSIFICATION AND SALARY PLAN
WHEREAS, Title 2, Section 2.16.020 of the Campbell Municipal Code prov ides that the City Council may, from time to time, by r esolution, change the compensation of employees of said City, and may, by resolution, adopt salary and wage scales; and
WHEREAS, California Public Employees ’ Retirement System (CalPERS) issued Circular Letter 200 -050-16 dated Nov ember 4, 2016 as a reminde r to employers of the requirements for compensation earnable and publicly available salary schedules; and
WHEREAS, all employers must comply with the compen sation earnable and publicly available salary schedules provisions contained within California Government Code (GC) section 20636(d) and California Code of Regulations (CCR) 570.5; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary for the City Council to review and duly appro ve and adopt in accordance with requirements of applicable public meeting s laws a publicly availa ble salary schedule; and
WHEREAS, the City Coun cil previously approved salary adjustments for benchmarked classifications, and the classifications related to the be nchmarked classifications, within the labor groups shown in Table 1 to implement the terms of negotiated agreements with the respective labor groups; and
Table 1 – Previously Approved 2022 Special Adjustments by City Council
Benchmarked
Classification
Related
Classification
Labor Group 2022 Market Adjustment
Lighting &
Traffic Signal
Technician
Lighting and
Traffic Signal
Assistant
CARP 9.25%
Lighting &
Traffic Signal
Technician
Lighting and
Traffic Signal
Supervisor
CARP 9.25%
Recreation
Supervisor
Senior Services
Supervisor
CMEA 0.57%
WHEREAS, a review of the Salary Plan has been conducted; and
WHEREAS, an amendment to the Salary Plan is needed to reflect the previous approvals of the C ity Council and to fully meet the requirements of Municipal Code Section
2.12.030.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Ca mpbell does hereby approve an amendment to the Salary Plan to add salary adjustments for the
7.a
Packet Pg. 60
Attachment: Resolution Salary Plan (Revised Salary Schedule) classifications of Lighting and Traffic Signal Assistant, Lighting and Traffic Signal Supervisor, and Senior Services Supervisor as more fully described in Table 1 of this resolution.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of October 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
APPROVED:
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
7.a
Packet Pg. 61
Attachment: Resolution Salary Plan (Revised Salary Schedule) Effective: 7/11/2022
CLASS CD JOB TITLE
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
4212 LGT/TRF SIG ASSIST MIL03 CARP Hourly 41.04 43.15 45.29 47.54 49.90 Bi-Weekly 3,283.20 3,452.00 3,623.20 3,803.20 3,992.00 Monthly 7,113.60 7,479.33 7,850.27 8,240.27 8,649.33 Annual 85,363.20 89,752.00 94,203.20 98,883.20 103,792.00 4210 LGT/TRF SIG SPVSR MIL01 CARP Hourly 59.01 61.96 65.05 68.32 71.73 Bi-Weekly 4,720.80 4,956.80 5,204.00 5,465.60 5,738.40 Monthly 10,228.40 10,739.73 11,275.33 11,842.13 12,433.20 Annual 122,740.80 128,876.80 135,304.00 142,105.60 149,198.40 3250 SR SVCS SPVSR CME19 CMEA Hourly 53.44 56.12 58.93 61.91 65.00 Bi-Weekly 4,275.20 4,489.60 4,714.40 4,952.80 5,200.00 Monthly 9,262.93 9,727.47 10,214.53 10,731.07 11,266.67 Annual 111,155.20 116,729.60 122,574.40 128,772.80 135,200.00
CITY OF CAMPBELL
POSITION CLASSIFICATION - CARPENTERS
FY 22/23 - SALARY SCHEDULE
STEP RANGES
Range
7.b
Packet Pg. 62
Attachment: Campbell Salary Schedule 10.4.2022 Special Adjustments (Revised Salary Schedule)
City
Council
Report
TITLE: Resolution Approving Use of the Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) and Related Budget Adjustments
Appropriating the Remaining Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) Balance Towards Police Equipment for FY 2022-23 (Resolution/Roll Call Vote)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize use the Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) to fund a Community Service Officer and approve a budget adjustment to allocate the remaining SLESF balance towards police equipment for FY2022-23.
BACKGROUND
In July 1996, California approved AB3229 {Citizens’ Option for Public Safety (COPS)} and in July 2000, AB2885 extended this program indefinitely. This bill appropriated $100 million from the State General Fund for distribution to local law enforcement agencies for “front line municipal police services.” Each California Ci ty is guaranteed a minimum of $100,000, regardless of population. No competitive selection process is necessary to qualify for these funds, nor are matching City funds required. COPS funds must be spent on personnel, equipment, or supplies. COPS funds a re not approved for capital improvement or construction projects.
Other requirements and restrictions include:
1) COPS funds shall be used to supplement, not supplant existing funding for law enforcement services.
2) COPS funds shall be deposited into a separa te fund, not intermingled with other monies.
3) The City Council shall approve the appropriation of COPS funds pursuant to a recommendation by the Chief of Police.
4) Each county shall establish a Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Fund for deposit of State COPS funds and distribution to municipalities. 5) Each county shall establish a Supplemental Law Enforcement Oversight committee.
The Oversight Committee must approve proposed uses of COPS funds and ensure that funds are expended in compliance with State Law.
Item: 8
Category: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND
INTRODUCTION OF
ORDINANCES
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
8 Packet Pg. 63
Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) Fy2022-23 Page 2 of 3
DISCUSSION
Beginning in 2002, and in each year that followed, the City Council has approved COPS funds for the services of Police Department Community Services Officers. The Chief of Police again proposes that COPS funds be applied towards a Community Services Officer.
As of June 30, 2022, the SLESF had an ending fund balance of $273,830. As with prior fiscal years, $133,555 or 90% of a Community Services Officer is funded in the Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Fund (210); with the remaining 1 0% funded in the General Fund Police Department – Field Services Program.
The remaining $140,275 in the SLESF is proposed to be allocated by the Chief of Police to be used for equipment purchases.
When the FY 2022 -23 Adopted Budget was developed, no fund s for equipment replacement costs were appropriated in the SLESF account. Thus, a budget adjustment to the SLESF (210) is recommended.
FISCAL IMPACT
The FY 2022-23 Adopted Budget currently includes funding for the Community Services Officer for $133,555. If approved by Council, staff will appropriate the remaining SLESF fund balance ($140,275) towards police equipment replacement via the attached budget adjustment.
ALTERNATIVES
1) Direct that available COPS funds be applied towards another approved purpose.
Prepared by:
Dan Livingston, Police Captain
Reviewed by:
Gary Berg, Police Chief
8 Packet Pg. 64
Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) Fy2022-23 Page 3 of 3
Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Attachment:
a. Resolution SLESF 2022-23
b. BA-7 (FY 2023) (10-04-22)
8 Packet Pg. 65
RESOLUTION NO. ______
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
APPROVING THE USE OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL LAW ENFORCEMENT
SERVICE FUNDS (SLESF) TO PARTIALLY FUND A COMMUNITY SERVICE
OFFICER AND APPROVING A BUDGET ADJUSTMENT TO ALLOCATE THE
REMAINING SLESF BALANCE TOWARDS THE PURCHASE OF POLICE
EQUIPMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Campbell has adopted a budget for the 2022-2023 fiscal year (FY); and
WHEREAS, The adopted FY 2022 -2023 includes an appropriation of $133,555 of SLESF to partially fund a Community Service Officer; and
WHEREAS, revenue is available from the State of California SLESF balance; and
WHEREAS, the City has complied with the legal prov isions required to appropriate this revenue.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Campbell that the City approves use of $133,555 of SLESF to partially fund a Community Service Officer; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Campbell that the City approves a budget adjustment to appropriate the remaining SLESF balance ($140,275) for the purchase of police equipment.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of October 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
_______________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
8.a
Packet Pg. 66
Attachment: Resolution SLESF 2022-23 (Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) Fy2022-23) Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
8.a
Packet Pg. 67
Attachment: Resolution SLESF 2022-23 (Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) Fy2022-23) City of Campbell
Request for Budget Adjustments
Department/Program Division Date Request No.
October 4, 2022 BA-7
Budget to be Reduced
Fund/Program Account Number Description Amount
Budget to be Increased
Fund/Program Account Number Description Amount
EXPENDITURES
210.606 7427 Equipment Replacement 140,275$
REASON FOR REQUEST - BE SPECIFIC:
Police
Will Fuentes Gary Berg Brian Loventhal
To appropriate the remaining fund balance ($140,275) of the SLESF Fund towards equipment replacement. 606 - SLESF
Finance Director Police Chief City Manager
8.b
Packet Pg. 68
Attachment: BA-7 (FY 2023) (10-04-22) (Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Funds (SLESF) Fy2022-23)
City
Council
Report
TITLE: Continued Public Hearing and Introduction of Ordinance to Consider a City -Initiated Text Amendment to the Campbell Municipal Co de Removing the Requirement for a Security Deposit for Parklet Permits; Adoption of a Resolution Approving an Amendment to the Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide to Incorporate Preferred Parklet Designs and Remove References to the Requirement for a Security Deposit; Adoption of a Resolution Approving an Amendment to the City’s Master Fee Schedule Reducing the Parklet Permit Application Fee from $1,500 to $500, Deferring the Effective Date of the Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee to FY 2024, Removing Security Deposits Related to Parklets in the Public Right - Of-Way and Approving Associated Budget Adjustments for FY 2023; and Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract Amendment with the Parklet Design Consultant, Sidell Parkravan Architects, to Provide for the Customization of Up to 16 Parklets at a Cost Not to Exceed $3,000 Per Parklet ($48,000 Total), and Approving Associated Budget Adjustments for FY 2023.
File No. PLN -2022-39. (Introduction of Ordinance/Resolutio ns/Roll Call Vote)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council introduce an Ordinance amending Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right-of Way) of the Campbell Municipal Code to remove the requirement for a security deposit; adopt a Resolution approving Amendments to the Semi -Permanent Parklet Program Guide to incorporate preferred parklet designs and removing references to the requirement for a security deposit; adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to the City’s Master Fee Schedule to reduce the Par klet Permit Application Fee from $1,500 to $500, deferring the effective date of the Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee to FY 2024, removing security deposits related to parklets in the public right-of-way, and approving associated budget adjustmen ts for FY 2023; and adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with the parklet design consultant, Sidell Parkravan Architects, to provide for the customization of up to 16 parklets at a cost not to $3,000 per parklet ( $48,000 total), and approving associated budget adjustments for FY 2023.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Item: 9
Category: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND
INTRODUCTION OF
ORDINANCES
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
9 Packet Pg. 69
Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 2 of 10
This report provides a final update of the proposed Semi -Permanent Parklet Program and key policy considerations, and actions needed to begin implementation of the program. Staff conducted another online survey of stakeholder restaurants and property owners September 1 to 9 to determine interest and held a community meeting on September 12 to obtain feedback on the parklet designs, cost estimates and other components of the program, such as the use of heaters. This report also outlines a schedule of key milestones and next steps for implementation.
BACKGROUND
City Council has provided direction to create a more permanent parklet program in the downtown which would allow for a transition from the existing temporary parklets into permanent parklets incorporating a more uniform, design aesthetic and eliminating the concrete “k -rails”. Council extended the temporary parklet program until January 9, 2023, to allow time f or development and consideration of a permanent parklet program.
The Semi -Permanent Parklet Program incorporates direction provided by the City Council at the January 18, April 19, and July 5 Council meetings and presents feedback from key stakeholders, t he public, and additional information from other cities implementing similar parklet programs. At the September 20 meeting, Council requested an update be provided on business participation for the proposed program. A summary of that information in provided in Attachment F.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
Establishing permit procedures for parklets in the public right -of-way and associated actions outlined above constitute a "project" under Section 15378(a)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. However, such an action may be deemed exempt from environmental review if the City finds that: 1) the project is exempt pursuant to a categorical exemption; and 2) the application of that categorical exemption is not barred by one of the excep tions set forth in Sec. 15300.2 (Sec. 15061(b)(2)).
In review of the CEQA Guidelines, the project may be found categorically exempt under Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) given that it would result in only minor alterations of existing public or priva te facilities (e.g., alterations to streets, sidewalks, and parking facilities) and negligible expansion of existing uses (parklets expand on outdoor dining activities currently allowed in the City). The project may also be found categorically exempt under Section 15311 (Accessory Structures) given that it would only allow for the construction or placement of minor structures accessory to existing commercial facilities (parklets would only be allowed in association with a “bona fide public eating place”).
Further, as none of the exceptions set forth in Sec. 15300.2 apply (such as location of the project in a particularly sensitive environment) staff has recommended the Council find the project categorically exempt under CEQA.
9 Packet Pg. 70
Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 3 of 10
DISCUSSION
In evaluating in formation and preparing final recommendations for this report, staff relied on “Guiding Principles” learned from Los Gatos and other city parklet programs as well as feedback from stakeholders.
1. Simplify the permit process and parklet design standards used
2. Minimize the number of design professionals and contractors working on parklet program and construction
3. Attention to detail in final customization of each parklet template to each parking space
In addition to these “Guiding Principles”, staff has wor ked with the consulting design team to ensure the parklets meet the following two design objectives, based on initial Council direction:
• Create a uniform design aesthetic for the parklets that complements the Downtown
• Ensure the parklets meet safety stan dards including protection of diners from adjacent traffic
1. Parklet Design and Estimated Construction Costs
Many cities are implementing parklet program that will replace outdoor dining structures allowed because of COVID pandemic. Some cities, such a s Redwood City, Morgan Hill, and Los Gatos have retained design firms to produce design options (usually two) for restaurants to choose from that also have the choice of a roof (either canvass or metal) or not. Some cities allow restaurants to propose thei r own designs or customize the standard designs but are advised that option may lengthen the permit review/approval process.1 While the parklet design options provide standard design specifications, each parklet location may require site customization due to location features like surface slope, curb cuts, bulb outs and proximity to utilities and storm drains.
1 The City of Morgan Hill allows businesses to use their own designs. To date two applications have been received; both opt to use their own designs and not the pre-designed options.
9 Packet Pg. 71
Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 4 of 10
Figure 1 – Parklet Designs
The estimated cost of the two separate parklets designs, “Orchard” or “Water Tower”, is about the same. The constru ction cost of a parklet without a roof is estimated to cost $75,500, where parklets with a roof and additional items will run $90,000 or more (see
Figure 2 – Estimated Costs).
Figure 2: Estimated Parklet Construction Costs
9 Packet Pg. 72
Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 5 of 10
Many of the restaurant stakeholders in Downtown Campbell have identified a strong interest to allow heaters in the parklets. City policies vary regarding use of heating for parklets. Morgan Hill allows gas or electric heaters with metal roof while Redwood City does not allow any heaters if there is a roof of any kind. Both the “Water Tower” and “Orchard” Parklet designs include the option of a metal roof that is designed to allow the use of heaters underneath. Staff is obtaining final verification from the County Fire Marshall th at the parklet designs will allow both propane and electric heaters. Staff have advised the restaurant stakeholders that the use of an electric heater will likely require an increase in power capacity at the building (panel upgrade) and the creation of an overhead service line between the building and parklets.
The Campbell Chamber of Commerce has agreed to administer a list of eligible contractors who can construct parklets. As previously described to Council, staff intends to create objective criteria to “qualify” contractors to construct the parklets. Contractors must be licensed general contractors who are bonded and insured; produce a payment bond, possess a City business license, meet insurance requirements, and have experience constructing one or more parklets. In addition, general contractors must attend a Q and A session with the parklet designer and City staff. Efforts will be made to reach to qualified general contractors located in the City to see if they are interested in being on the list.
2. City Fees and Business Assistance (Parklet Grants)
In prior meetings, the City Council expressed interest in assisting restaurants with the soft and/or hard costs of developing the parklets. Several options were considered, such as reducing permit fee s and providing a grant directly to the restaurants to assist with parklet costs. The Council had previously considered a grant of approximately $3,000 per parklet.
The City Attorney has advised that a grant to businesses will require contractors to pay prevailing wage to construction workers on the project which can increase the cost by as much as 35 percent. The City must also issue 1099s to the grant recipient and if American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds are used, sub -recipient reporting and monitoring to the US Treasury is required . Under these parameters , a grant must be substantial to provide any real financial benefit to a business. Based on the estimated construction cost of the parklets, a grant would likely need to be in excess of $3 0,000 per parklet in order to provide a financial benefit.
As such, in order to implement the Council’s direction to provide financial assistance to businesses transitioning to the new parklet program, staff recommends the City focus on reducing the permitting cost of participating in the program as follows:
• Reduce the permit application fee from $1,500 to $500; • Remove the $3,000 refundable security deposit required to cover the cost of removing parklets;
9 Packet Pg. 73
Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 6 of 10
• Begin collecting the annual compliance verification fee of $6 02 starting July 1, 2024 (waiving the first year); and
• Expand the consultant contract with Sidell Pakravan to include preparation of site specific parklet design customizations for up to 16 parklets and at a cost not to exceed $3,000 per parklet (up to $48 ,000 total for all parklets applications). Any design costs that exceed the scope of services covered by the City will need to be paid by the parklet operator.
These actions will reduce potential permitting costs by between $4,000 to $7,000 per parklet and should provide a notable financial benefit to the businesses.
Alternatively, if the Council would still like to pursue direct financial grants to provide to the businesses, staff will return to Council with further options and considerations to implement this direction.
3. Business Outreach to Determine Interest in the Semi -Permanent Parklet Program
Based on the known number of restaurants that have shown interest in a semi - permanent parklet to date and the total number of parklets that will be allow ed (32 stalls), staff anticipates all applicants (businesses or property owners) will be provided the opportunity to obtain a semi -permanent parklet. An online survey of all downtown restaurants and associated property owners was conducted between Septemb er 1 and
9. Seventeen responses were received (Nine are restaurant owners; five are property owners; and two were “others”). A summary of responses is below and provided as Attachment E:
Participate in program:
• Five responses said they would participate i n the program (consistent with the number of businesses that responded the same in a prior survey); • Five businesses said probably;
• Two indicated possibly;
• Two indicated probably not; and
• Three said definitely not
Preference for roof or no roof:
• Eight respondents prefer no roof
• Seven prefer roofs
Number of parking spaces:
• Five want one space
• Seven want two spaces
Comments:
• Three would like parklets with no benches
9 Packet Pg. 74
Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 7 of 10
• Two said the parklets were two expensive
There is an option to remove benches on the longer side of the parklet (but not the ends as they provide stability). The design below shows this option.
Figure 2: Parklet Design (Open Seating)
A stakeholder outreach meeting was held on September 12. About five (5) restaurant owners attended. Staff pr esented the parklet design concepts and an estimate of costs as well as an overview of other recommendations made in this report. There was concern from one restaurant representative about the cost of the parklets and the recommendation not to provide gran ts due to the prevailing wage requirement that would ultimately increase the construction cost. Staff explained that other recommendations to reduce the permit fee, cover the basic cost of construction plans, and eliminate the deposit for removal of existi ng parklets would provide greater assistance to businesses.
One restaurant owner asked if the City would consider building the parklets and then renting the space to businesses. This option had been discussed in the early stages of program development, bu t staff had recommended against this option and Council did not provide direction to pursue it further. If Council wishes to pursue consideration of that suggestion, additional time is needed for staff to research the policy (legal and financial) implications.
Previous resolutions include extension of the temporary parklet program from October 31, 2022, to January 9, 2023. Any temporary parklet operators who do not apply for Parklet Permits by the application deadline must vacate their temporary parklets by January 9, 2023 and the city will remove the accompanying k -rails. Staff is proposing to 9 Packet Pg. 75
Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 8 of 10
open the application window in mid -October with a deadline to submit by the end of November (45 day application window). Temporary parklet operators who apply by the application deadline may continue to operate their temporary parklets until construction of their new parklets begins, anticipated to occur between January and March 2023. All remaining k-rails would be removed by March 2023.
SCHEDULE
The following table serves to outline key milestones in the parklet program leading up to a one-year check in on the program performance with the Council next year.
Task / Description Estimated Date / Time Period
2022
City Council Meeting
(Approval of Parklet Designs) September 20, 2022
Program Start Mid-October, 2022
Permit Application Period Mid-October – End of November Temporary Parklet Program Extension January 9, 2023 (proposed) 2023
Semi-Permanent Parklet Construction January to March
City Council Meeting
(One-Year Check-in) Summer
FISCAL IMPACTS
If Council approves a flat rate permit fee of $500 , this would reduce the fees by $2,032 versus full cost recovery, resulting in lost permit fees of $32,512 for 16 parklets (32 parking stalls). Addition ally, Staff has recommended expanding the scope of the consultant contract to prepare site specific design customizations (which may serve as construction drawings) for up to 16 parklets which could add up to $48,000 in additional costs depending on the nu mber of program participants ; thereby bringing the total amount of the agreement from $30,000 to $78,000.
From the temporary program’s implementation in September 2020 through October 2022, the City will have spent $77,500 on k -rail rental costs. If the temporary program is extended until January 9, 2023, additional rental costs will total $8,250. If k -rails remain in place only for temporary parklet operators after January 9 who applied for Parklet Permits, additional k -rail rental costs could range from $2,750 to $5,500 depending on when all k-rails removed relative to semi-permanent parklet construction beginning. The following table summarizes added costs discussed within this report:
9 Packet Pg. 76
Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 9 of 10
Description Estimated Cost
Parklet Design Consultant with Customizations
(up to 16 parklet plans at $3,000 each) $48,000
Revenue Loss from Flat Permit Fee (16 parklets) $32,512 K-Rail Rental through November 2022
through March 2023 $13,750
Total $94,262
Figure 3 - Program Funding Breakdown
ALTERNATIVES
There are potential alternatives to the proposed actions related to both (a) financial incentives provided to businesses and (b) parklet designs and costs.
For the Financial Incentives – as an alternative to the recommended reductions in fees identified by staff, Council may consider–
a) Direct grants to businesses, that will require further consideration of prevailing wage ramifications and the resulting net financial benefit to businesses. b) Further reduction in fees (such as reducing the application fee furt her or waiving the compliance fee)
For the Parklet Designs - stakeholder feedback has commented that the costs of the parklets are very high. If Council wishes to pursue an option that has a reduced parklet cost, the following alternatives may be considered – a) Allow the existing temporary parklets and K -rails to remain. Under this option, the City would continue to pay for the placement of the existing K -rails allowing the current temporary parklets. The City would need to consider any necessary improvements needed to meet accessibility requirements or other building requirements in the parklets and the aesthetic considerations of using K-rails. b) Direct staff to commission design of parklets using wood or other materials that can reduce cost. As described, parklet designs that use wood (such as those in Redwood City) cost less, but the City will need to consider the safety ramifications of using a wood design.
9 Packet Pg. 77
Prepared by:
Leslie Parks, Economic Program
Manager
Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 10 of 10
Attachment:
a. Draft Ordinance - Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way b. CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide c. CC Resolution - Parklet Fees and Security Deposit
d. CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment
e. Semi Permanent Parklet Survey Report (Graphic)
f. Semi-Permanent Parklet Business Survey (Owner Responses) 9 Packet Pg. 78
Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Reviewed by:
Rob Eastwood, Community Development Director
Ordinance No. _____
BE
ING AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL AMENDING CHAPTER 11.15 (PARKLETS IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY) TO THE CAMPBELL MUNICIPAL CODE (“CMC”). FILE NO. PLN-2022-39
A
fter notification and public hearing, as specified by law and after presentation by the Community Development Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed.
A
fter due consideration of all evidence presented, the City Council of the City of Campbell does hereby ordain as follows:
S
ECTION 1. The legislature of the State of California has, in Government Code Sections 65302, 65560, and 65800 conferred upon local government units authority to adopt regulations designed to promote the public health, safety and general welfare of its citizenry.
S
ECTION 2. The City Council finds and determines that nothing in this Ordinance is intended to authorize, legalize, or permit the establishment, operation, or maintenance of any business, building, or use which violates any City ordinance or any statue of the State of California.
S
ECTION 3. The City Council finds and determines that the proposed amendments to Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right -of-Way) of the Campbell Municipal Code would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City.
S
ECTION 4. The City Council finds and determines that the adoption of an Ordinance is considered a "project" under Section 15378(a)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, typically subject to environmental review. However, such an action may be exempted from environmental review if the City finds that: 1) the project is exempt pursuant to a categorical exemption; and 2) the application of that categorical exemption is not barred by one of the exceptions set forth in Sec. 15300.2 (Sec. 15061(b)(2)).
S
ECTION 5. The City Council finds and determines that in review of the CEQA statute, the project may be found categorically exempt under Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) given that it would result in only minor alterations of existing public or private facilities (e.g., alterations to streets, sidewalks, and parking facilities) and negligible expansion of existing uses (parklets expand on outdoor dining activities already allowed in the City).
The project may also be found categorically exempt under Section 15311 (Accessory Structures) given that it would only allow for the construction or placement of minor structures accessory to existing commercial facilities (parklets would only be allowed in association with a “bona fide public eating place”). Further, as none of the exceptions set forth in Sec. 15300.2 apply (i.e., not in a particularly sensitive environment, the cumulative impact of the project is not significant, there is no reasonable possibility that the project
9.a
Packet Pg. 79
Attachment: Draft Ordinance - Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City Council Ordinance No. Page 2 of 3
Amending Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way) of the Campbell Municipal Code
File No.: PLN-2022-39
will have a significant impact due to usual circumstances, impact scenic highways, the project would not impact a hazardous waste site, does not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource) the City Council finds and determines that project may be found categorically exempt under CEQA.
SECTION 6. Section 11.15.80 (Conditions of approval.) of Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right -of-Way) is hereby amended to read as follows with underlining ( i.e., underlining) indicating new text and strikeouts (i.e., strikeouts) indicating deleted text.
11.15.080 Conditions of approval.
The following conditions of approval shall apply to all Parklet Permits approved under this Chapter in addition to any additional conditions of approved imposed by the City Engineer:
(a) Fees. The applicant for a Parklet Permit shall be subject to all applicable fees and charges for the issuance and operation of a Parklet Permit, which shall be determined by resolution adopted by the city council. If no resolution has been adopted, then the applicant must submit a signed written statement that acknowledges that the applicant will be required to reimburse the city for its reasonable costs incurred in connection wit h t
he application within ten days after the city issues a written demand for reimbursement. Applicant shall also be responsible for paying all costs associated with the parklet installation and operation including, but not limited to, an annual fee collected to ensure the ongoing compliance of the Parklet with the requirements o f t
his Chapter.
(b
) Inspection and reporting. The permittee under the Parklet Permit, when directed by the city, must perform an inspection of the parklet and submit a report to the Public Works Department on the condition of the facility to include any identified concerns and corrective action taken or to be taken. The permittee shall als o
m
aintain and repair the parklet at its sole expense during its placement in the public right -of-way. The p
ermittee must correct or repair the parklet within thirty days after the city's notice for corrective action; after which the city reserves the right to take any action it deems necessary, which may include revocation o f a
ny applicable permit(s). The permittee is responsible for any costs associated with necessary actions performed by the city due to permittee's failure to comply with this section and with the Parklet Desig n R
equirements. The permittee has the burden to demonstrate compliance with this chapter. (c) Expiration. The applicable permit(s) may be rescinded if construction is not substantially commenced within one year of the Permit being granted, absent a showing of good cause. The applicant may not renew the Permit or resubmit an application to develop a parklet at the same location for six months from date of rescission.
(d) Abandonment. Abandoned parklets shall be removed by the last known owner of record of such parklet, at the sole cost of said owner and to the satisfaction of the city. For the purposes of this chapter, a parklet shall be considered abandoned when it is no longer used by the applicant to provide service for a period of one - hundred and eighty (180) days without a new Parklet Permit being submitted. It shall be the obligation of the applicant of any Parklet Permit not in active use to respond to any comments issued by the City within thirt y
(
30) c
alendar days of their transmittal by the City or the Parklet shall be considered abandoned. (e) Insurance. The applicant and operator shall obtain and maintain insurance in compliance with Chapter 11.30 (Insurance Requirements for Encroachment) of the Campbell Municipal Code. (f) Business License. The business utilizing the parklet shall be required to obtain and maintain a valid Cit y
b
usiness license at all times.
(g) No Smoking. “No Smoking" signs shall be posted on the premises in compliance with CMC 6.11.060.
9.a
Packet Pg. 80
Attachment: Draft Ordinance - Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City Council Ordinance No. Page 3 of 3
Amending Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way) of the Campbell Municipal Code
File No.: PLN-2022-39
(h) Security Deposit. A security deposit, in an amount established by the City’s schedule of fees and charges, shall be paid to the City to cover the cost of removal and/or enforcing the removal of the parklet prior to the issuance of building permits. Every three (3) years following the receipt of the initial security deposit, an additional security deposit shall be paid to account for any difference in the security deposit held by the Cit y and the security deposit required by the City’s most recently adopted schedule of fees and charges. (hi) Non-Transferable. Parklet Permits shall not be transferable and a new parklet permit shall be required whenever the applicant is no longer associated with the operation, maintenance, or removal of the Parklet or insurance policy required under subsection (e) of this Section. (ij) Operational Requirements. Parklet Permits shall be operated in accordance with all operational requirements established by any permit pertaining to the bona fide public eating establishment, including those required by other agencies (e.g., Alcohol Beverage Control). The preceding sentence notwithstanding, an exception to the maximum number or type of seats permitted by a permit issued under Title 21 of the Campbell Municipal Code shall be permitted.
SECTION 7. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following its passage and adoption and shall be published, or summary thereof, one time within fifteen (15) days upon passage and adoption in the Metro Silicon Valley , a newspaper of general circulation for the City of Campbell, County of Santa Clara.
P
ASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
APPR
OVED:
___
____________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
A
TTEST:
___
____________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
9.a
Packet Pg. 81
Attachment: Draft Ordinance - Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
RESOLUTION NO. ____
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CAMPBELL APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE A SEMI -
PERMANENT PARKLET PROGRAM GUIDE. FILE NO.: PLN-2022-
39 After notification and public hearing, as specified by law and after presentation by the Community Development Director, proponents and opponents, the hearing was closed.
The City Council finds as follows with regar d to the proposed amendments to the Semi - Permanent Parklet Program Guide (PLN-2022-39):
1. The proposed amendments to the Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide may be approved concurrently, and subject to, proposed amendments to Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way) to the Campbell Municipal Code;
2. The legislature of the State of California has, in Government Code Sections 65302, 65560, and 65800 conferred upon local government units authority to adopt regulations designed to promote the public health, safety and general welfare of its citizenry;
3. Amendments to the Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide is considered a "project" under Section 15378(a)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, typically subject to environmental review. However, such an action may be exempted from environmental review if the City finds that: 1) the project is exempt pursuant to a categorical exemption; and 2) the application of that categorical exemption is not barred by one of the exceptions set forth in Sec. 15300.2 (Sec. 15061(b)(2));
4. In review of the CEQA statute, the project may be found categorically exempt under Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) given that it would result in only minor alterations of existing public or private facilities (e.g., alterations to streets, sidewalks, and parking facilities) and negligible expansion of existing uses (parklets expand on outdoor dining activities already allowed in the City). The project may also be found categorically exempt under Section 15311 (Accessory Structures) given that it would only allow for the construction or placement of minor structures accessory to existing commercial facilities (parklets would only be allowed in association with a “bona fide public eating place”).
Further, as none of the exceptions set forth in Sec. 15300.2 apply (i.e., not in a particularly sensitive environment, the cumulative impact of the project is not significant, there is no reasonable possibility that the project will have a significant impact due to usual circumstances, impact scenic highways, the project would not impact a hazardous waste site, does not result in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historic resource) staff has recommended the decision-making body find the project categorically exempt under CEQA;
Based upon the foregoing findings of fact, the City Council further finds and concludes that:
1. The Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide, as amended, is consistent with the goals, policies, and actions of the General Plan;
2. The Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide, as amended would not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or general welfare of the City;
9.b
Packet Pg. 82
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City Council Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 PLN-2022-39 – Approving Amendments to the Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide
3. No substantial evidence has been presented from which a reasonable argument could be made that shows that the project, as presented, will have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and
4. The project is categorically exempt under CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council adopts a Resolution approving the adoption of a Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide as set forth in attached Exhibit A-1 with underlining (i.e., underlining) indicating new text and strikeouts (i.e., strikeouts ) indicating deleted text , except for Appendix A which is added new in its entirety . This Resolution shall become effective November 4, 2022, contingent on the passage and adoption of the associated Ordinance amending Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right- of-Way) to the Campbell Municipal Code.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of _____, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
_______________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
9.b
Packet Pg. 83
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi -Permanent Parklet Program Guide
Exhibit A-1 9.b
Packet Pg. 84
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
SEM I-PERMANENT PARKLET
PROGRAM GUIDE
Cover Page Image Credit: National Association of City Transportation Officials
9.b
Packet Pg. 85
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents.................................................................................................................................................... i Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 2 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 Program Goals .............................................................................................................................................. 3 Parklet Design Options ................................................................................................................................. 4 Eligibility ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 Location, Number & Size of Parklets ............................................................................................................. 6 VII. Applying for a Permit…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 8 ..…..11
I
X. Fees & Costs……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. .11 X. Parklet Construction………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ….12 XI. Insurance Requirements…..…………………..………………………………………………………………………………………………….12 XII. Operational Standards……………………….…………………………………………………………………………………………………….1 3 XIII. Transferability..………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..14 XIV. Abandonment……………..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………14 XV. Revocation &Appeals..……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 14 Appendix A Design Options (TBD following design approval)…..……………………………………………………………………….16
9.b
Packet Pg. 86
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide 2
INTRODUCTION
The City of Campbell is transitioning from temporary parklets, which were allowed to replace indoor dining space in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated health order restrictions that significantly limited indoor business operations, to semi - permanent parklets that provide a safe, accessible and aesthetically appealing outdoor dining environment.
This comprehensive program offers flexibility, as well as necessary regulations and design standards to create safe, accessible outdoor dining areas i n parklets that feature a consistent aesthetic design across parklets that reflects downtown’s street scape, built environment and pedestrian-oriented environment.
On March 17, 2020, the
City Council adopted a
resolution ratifying the
Declaration of Local
Emergency in response to
the COVID -19 pandemic
and State and County
Health Orders. The City
Council authorized the
Temporary Parklet Program on September 1, 2020 to allow businesses to conduct outdoor dining within the public right -of-way as a means to provide dining establishments a way to continue operating when indoor operations were limited due to public health orders issued to protect public health.
While originally conceived as an emergency response to the pandemic, outdoor dining proliferated, often in ways that have resulted in more active and enjoyable use of public spaces not previously experienced prior to the pandemic. In response, the City developed the Semi-Permanent Parklet program to continue providing outdoor dining space in the public right -of-way while contributing to the enjoyment of the public space and enhancing Downtown Campbell’s pedestrian-oriented environment.
9.b
Packet Pg. 87
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide 3
PURPOSE
The purpose of these Guidelines is to provide uniform and comprehensive standards and requirements for the development, siting, installation, construction, operation, maintenance, relocation, and removal of parklets in the public right-of-way.
A parklet is an outdoor dining area provided by a “bona fide public eating place” as defined by the State of California for customers furnished with tables, chairs, umbrellas, and other items necessary for consuming food and beverages served by the restaurant or café by repurposing public parking space(s) within the public right -of- way.
The public right -of-way was and is
never intended to have permanent
built structures on the road surface
so as to provide access to utilities
and infrastructure. In the event
future projects in the right -of-way
require removal of parklets, parklets
will be designed and constructed
such that they can be removed in the
future.
PROGRAM GOALS
• Transition from temporary parklets to semi-permanent parklets • Create safe, accessible, parklets with consistent and aesthetically appealing designs
• Collaborate with businesses and community partners to provide an equitable use of public right -of-way between outdoor din ing space, other businesses, event space and public parking
• Enhance Downtown’s street scape, built environment, and pedestrian- oriented environment
• Increase opportunities for businesses to expand dining operations in the public right-of-way
• Improve social connections among community members
9.b
Packet Pg. 88
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide 4
PARKLET DESIGN OPTIONS
All parklets musted be planned, designed, located and built per the Semi- Permanent Parklet Program. The following is a brief description of each design option with complete design specifications provided in Appendix A. Each parklet may require design customization to comply with design standards relative to each location.
Option 1: Open-Air Parklet
Compliant decking or slab surface and safety barriers that allows for ADA and emergency access. Use of compliant moveable umbrellas is allowed. Transparent wind barriers made of non -combustible materials attached to pre -cast concrete planters may be included. ADA -compliant tables and chairs must be clearly marked.
Option 2: Parklet with Overhead Shade Covering
Overhead shade covering with a fixed or retractable shade covering in addition to design features in Option 1.
Option 3: Parklet with Overhead Fixed Roof
Overhead fixed roof constructed of non -combustible materials in addition to design features in Option 1.
Parklets Must Comply With:
• All applicable state and federal laws including the Americans with Disabilities Act and all applicable health and safety requirements • All applicable state and local building codes, including all applicable rules, laws, included Semi-Permanent Parklet Program
9.b
Packet Pg. 89
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide 5
PARKLET ELIGIBILITY
Permitted bona fide public eating places such as restaurants, cafés or other eligible eating establishments within the Downtown area as marked by the following map are eligible to apply for a parklet. Stand-alone bars are not eligible for parklets. Eligible applicants must have:
• An active business license
• All permits in good standing (e.g., Use Permit, Live Entertainment, Outdoor Dining, etc.)
• No use permit violations
• No active code enforcement nor permit revocation action • Existing on-street parking stall(s) fronting their business location Permitted bona fide eating places that meet eligibility requirements and feature existing permitted outdoor dining areas may apply for a Parklet Permit.
Following the end of the permit applic ation period, no applications will be accepted. Eligible business may apply for a Parklet Permit during an application period.
Eligible Semi-Permanent Parklet Zone
9.b
Packet Pg. 90
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 6
LOCATION, NUMBER & SIZE OF PARKLETS
Eligible parklets are limited to two parallel on -street parking stalls or storefront width whichever is smaller to preserve parking spaces for other businesses’ customers, public parking and public events in the downtown area. To maintain equitable use of parking spaces, the total amount of parking stalls in the Program will be limited to 32 stalls. Adjustments to the amount of parking stalls allotted for parklets may be considered in the future if an equitable balance of on -street parking stalls can be mai ntained. Parking stalls in off -street parking lots are not eligible for parklets.
Parklet Size Limit: Two Stalls or Storefront Width Whichever is Less
On-street parking stall dimensions measure 20 feet by 8 feet (160 sq. ft.). A parklet’s footprint would comprise lesser surface area to allow for setbacks from adjacent parking stalls and traffic lanes to create a safety buffer between a parklet and parked cars and traffic. Setback standards are provided in the Parklet Design Options in Appendix A.
Parklets are allowed in green and non -painted on-street parking stalls. Parklets may be considered in yellow commercial loading zones if a new suitable location is identified subject to the City’s discretion. Red, blue and white parking zones are not eligible for parklets.
9.b
Packet Pg. 91
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 7
Eligible businesses located on street corners can use only one frontage.
Adjacent restaurants may combine their parklet space, but be limited to the combined frontage of their storefronts.
9.b
Packet Pg. 92
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide 8
APPLYING FOR PERMIT
Permit Required
A Parklet Permit is required to construct, install, modify, maintain, or engage in an activity relating to a parklet in, on, under, or above the public right -of-way before conducting any work related to a parklet. The Public Works Department reviews and decides Parklet Permit applications. The Community Development Department will review for building code compliance. The County Fire Department will review for fire safety and emergency access compliance.
Issuance of a Parklet Permit does not grant, imply or otherwise create ownership of the public right-of-way.
Apply for a Parklet Permit via the City of Campbell’s online permit website MyGovernmentOnline (MGO). Visit the City’s Permits Center for instructions
to create a MGO account and submit a Parklet Permit application. The property owner is the permit holder and the property owner or their designee may submit an application. The property owner is ultimately responsible for the parklet in the event the tenant vacates its tenant space or abandons the parklet. The business owner/operator cannot submit the application.
Application Process
Applicants must submit a complete and duly filed application that is received and decided by City staff. Permit applications will be evaluated for compliance with eligibility requirements, parklet design standards, and permit and code compliance. Applicants who operated temporary parklets in good standing will be considered as part of the evaluation process.
1. Submit a Completed Parklet Permit Application That Includes:
Desired parklet design option (Appendix A)
Parklet location details
Identify underground utilities and infrastructure (Underground Service Alert)
Site plan showing parklet location relative to tenant space Four Site photographs proposed location from multiple vantage points Photos of all proposed furniture
9.b
Packet Pg. 93
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 9
2. The Public Works Department will issue a conditional approval if the following criteria are satisfied:
The application is deemed complete by the City
The proposed project meets the definition for a "parklet" as defined by this Chapter
The proposed parklet complies with all applicable program requirements
The proposed parklet is in compliance with all federal and state standards and laws.
The applicant demonstrates that the proposed project will comply with all applicable health and safety regulations including the Americans with Disabilities Act
The proposed parklet will not inconvenience the public’s use of the public right-of-way
The proposed construction plan and schedule will not unduly interfere with the public's use of the public right-of-way
3. Parklet Engineering and Building Division Review
Following conditional approval by Public Works, applicant will review the design option and select the aesthetic features with parklet consultant who will tailor the parklet design to the approved location.
Building Division and Fire Department review for Building Code, ADA and emergency access compliance
4. Permit Issued to Construct Parklet
Parklet construction and installation can be scheduled with a licensed contractor(s)
Contractor must schedule inspections per the inspection scheduled specified in the Parklet Permit
Permit may be rescinded if construction does not begin within one year of the Permit being granted unless good cause is provided. The applicant may not re-new the Permit or re-submit an application for the same location for six months from date of rescission.
9.b
Packet Pg. 94
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 10
5. Final Approval
Final permit approval and certificate of occupancy issued following successful final inspection by the City.
6. Alcohol Beverage Control Licensed Premises Change
Following final permit approval, existing ABC licensees can apply to serve alcohol in approved parklets. Prepare and submit the following to ABC’s San Jose District Office:
Form ABC-244 Change in Licensee Information or Licensed Premises . Check
Box 13 e Premises Expansion when completing the form
Form ABC-255 Zoning Affidavit
Attach approved Parklet Permit and approval letter to the form
Form ABC 257 Licensed Premises Diagram (Retail)
Attach approved site plan showing parklet and tenant space locations
Submit Forms 244, 255 and 257 (Retail) when submitting application package to ABC’s San Jose District Office. The on-time Premises Expansion Fee is available on ABC’s Application Fee Schedule.
ABC License Renewal Fee Waiver
Verify eligibility for ABC license renewal fee waiver . Check eligibility within two months or less of renewal deadline.
ABC District Office
ABC District Office contact information is available here.
9.b
Packet Pg. 95
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 11
APPLICATION WAIT LIST
In the event the City receives more Parklet Permit applications than available parking stalls by the application deadline , the City will utilize a wait list by the date the City received the application based on the following criteria:
Applicant eligibility
Application completeness
Project compliance with design standards
Consideration will be given for applicants who are temporary parklet operators
Wait-listed applications will be considered as parklet space becomes available.
FEES & COSTS
Parklet Permit Application Fee
An a pplication fee is required for each new permit application. Re- submitted applications resulting from a rescinded permit are subject to the full application fee.
Annual Parklet Compliance Verification Fee
Permit holders shall pay an annual fee for the use of the public -right-of way for business purposes, annual inspection by City staff for compliance with program standards and maintenance and cleaning of streets and sidewalks. The fee will be waived for the first year of a parklet permit being issued.
Refundable Security Deposit
A security deposit shall be paid to the City to cover the cost of removal and/or enforcing the removal of the parklet prior to the issuance of the Parklet Permit.
Every three years following the receipt of the initial security deposit, an additional security deposit shall be paid to account for any difference in the security deposit held by the City and the fee established by the City for the cost of removal and/or enforcing the removal of the parklet based on inflation and other factors.
9.b
Packet Pg. 96
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 12
PARKLET CONSTRUCTION
Applicants can select from a list of construction contractors qualified to build parklets pre-approved by the City. City staff will provide contractor information to permit applicants following permit issuance. Construction cannot begin until a Parklet Permit is issued.
Utility Repair Access:
In the event, utili ties above, below , on or in the public right -of-way where a parklet exists need repairs, the permit holder shall pay for costs associated with accessing the utilities and restoring the parklet after repairs are completed .
Accessing utilities may require removal of a parklet in whole or in part to facilitate utility repairs.
INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Since parklets will be installed, constructed, maintained and operated in the public right -of-way, applicants shall provide a certificate s of insurance to the Public Works Department before permit issuance and construction per CMC Chapter 11.30 – Insurance Requirements for Encroachment . C ertificates of insurance shall name The City of Campbell, its officers, employees, and volunteers as additional insured parties.
Certificates of insurance shall indicate coverage for commercial general liability, automotive liability, workers compensation and employer’s liability as determined by the Public Works Department . Course of C onstruction may be required subject to special provisions determined by the Public Works Department.
9.b
Packet Pg. 97
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 13
OPERATIONAL STANDARDS
Operational Hours
Outdoor dining is the only activity allowed in parklets and can occur between 7:00 AM and 11:00 PM daily, unless otherwise restricted by a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). Live entertainment and amplified sound in parklets are prohibited. The parklet dining area shall always be kept clean and free of trash and debris. Decking surface shall be cleaned regul arly and maintained in good condition.
Electricity Use
Electricity used to power heating, lighting or other allowed device(s) shall be supplied by the business’ tenant space . Electricity cannot be sourced from City- owned sources including but not limited to lamp posts and outlets.
Waste Management
Garbage and debris shall not be placed in city waste cans on the sidewalk. All waste shall be disposed of in the business’ dedicated waste receptacles. If City Staff observes waste management practices are inadequate, City Staff may require additional collection days to be scheduled, larger waste receptacles be obtained, or a combination of the two.
Alcohol Service
Parklet operators must be approved to serve alcohol by Alcohol B everage Control (ABC). See Step 6 under Application Process on page 10.
Maintenance and Cleaning
The parklet dining area shall always be kept clean and free of trash and debris.
Decking surface shall be cleaned regularly and maintained in good condition.
Smoking in Parklets is Prohibited
“No Smoking" signs shall be posted within the parklet
9.b
Packet Pg. 98
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 14
TRANSFERABILITY
Parklet Permits are not transferable and a new parklet permit shall be required whenever the applicant is no longer associated with the operation, maintenance, or removal of the Parklet or insurance policy required by this program.
ABANDONMENT
Abandoned parklets shall be removed by the last known owner of record at the sole cost of the owner and to the satisfaction of the City. For the purposes of this chapter, a parklet shall be considered abandoned when it is no longer used by the applicant to provide service for a period of one -hundred and eighty (180) days without a new Parklet Permit being submitted.
REVOCATION & APPEALS
Any permit or other authorized use of the public right -of-way granted as part of this program may be r evoked or modified. Revocation proceedings may be initiated by the City Engineer who may revoke or modify the parklet permit if it makes any of the following findings:
1. The permittee obtained permit approval by means of fraud or misrepresentation of a material fact
2. The permittee substantially expanded or altered the use or structure beyond what is set forth in the Permit or substantially changed the installation's character
3. The bona fide eating place that the parklet serves has ceased to exist or has been suspended or abandoned
4. Failure to comply with any condition of a permit issued
9.b
Packet Pg. 99
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 15
5. Failure to comply program standards or the Parklets Ordinance (Chapter
11.15)
6. A parklet’s interference with a city project, which seeks to protect and promote public safety and health, and community welfare
7. A parklet’s interference with vehicular or pedestrian use of the public right-of-way
8. Failure to make a safe and timely restoration of the public right-of-way The City Engineer shall issue a written determination of revocatio n and mail the determination to the permittee within ten calendar days of such determination. A permittee whose Parklet Permit or right has been revoked may have the revocation reviewed, upon written appeal as set forth in Section 11.15.100.
Appeals
Appeals from City Engineer's Decision. The applicant or any interested person or entity may file an appeal to the Director of Public Works of any decision made by the City Engineer in compliance with this chapter. The appeal shall be filed within two days of the City Engineer's decision, with the city clerk in writing and accompanied by a filing fee in compliance with the city's schedule of fees and charges.
The Public Works Director, or Public Works Director's designee, in his or her discretion, shall determine whether to affirm, set side, or modify the City Engineer's decision appealed therefrom. Thereafter, the appellant shall be notified of the Public Works Director's decision.
Appeals from Public Works Director's Decision. The applicant or any interested person or entity may file an appeal to the City Council of any decision made by the Public Works Director in compliance with this chapter. The appeal shall be filed within ten d ays of the Public Works Director's decision, with the city clerk in writing and accompanied by a filing fee in compliance with the city's schedule of fees and charges. The city council's decision shall be final.
The decision on appeal shall be made using the same criteria as set forth in subsection (c) of Section 11.15.090 Notice of Action.
9.b
Packet Pg. 100
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
Semi-Permant Parklet Program Guide 16
APPENDIX A: PARKLET DESIGN OPTIONS
Design options to be provided following completion by
the design consultant and final approval by the City.
9.b
Packet Pg. 101
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Semi-Permanent Parklets
09.12.2022
9.b
Packet Pg. 102
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
Xref ..\00000 TB 22x34.dwg
Architects
Sidell PakravanCampbell Parklets 08.18.22 Solid Footing Plan 40'-0" OVERALL PAKRLET
8'-0"
OVERALL PAKRLET
24"
FOOTING
20'-0" OVERALL PAKRLET
24"
FOOTING
8'-0"
OVERALL PAKRLET
12" WIDE STEEL DRAINAGE GRATE
WOOD BENCH OVER
PERIMETER FOOTING, TYP
TABLE AND CHAIRS, TYP
WOOD DECKING, TYP
PLANTER, TYP
SOLID FOOTING SEATING LAYOUTS
*NOTE: SEATING COUNT VARIES WITH
CONFIGURATION OF TABLE GROUP COUNT
40' PARKLET: 16 - 22 SEATS
20' PARKLET: 8 -12 SEATS
4" STEEL ROUND POST EMBEDDED IN CONC
3 8" THICK STEEL PLATE RAILING
12" WIDE STEEL DRAINAGE GRATE
WOOD BENCH OVER
PERIMETER FOOTING, TYP
TABLE AND CHAIRS, TYP
WOOD DECKING, TYP
PLANTER, TYP
4" STEEL ROUND POST EMBEDDED IN CONC
3 8" THICK STEEL PLATE RAILING
Parklet Plan
9.b
Packet Pg. 103
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
NOTE: RENDERINGS ARE FOR VISUAL
REFERENCE ONLY. FINAL DESIGN IS BASED
ON PLAN AND SECTION DRAWINGS.
“Orchard” Parklet
9.b
Packet Pg. 104
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
NOTE: RENDERINGS ARE FOR VISUAL
REFERENCE ONLY. FINAL DESIGN IS BASED
ON PLAN AND SECTION DRAWINGS.
“Orchard” Parklet with Roof
9.b
Packet Pg. 105
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
“Water Tower” Parklet
NOTE: RENDERINGS ARE FOR VISUAL
REFERENCE ONLY. FINAL DESIGN IS BASED
ON PLAN AND SECTION DRAWINGS.
9.b
Packet Pg. 106
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
“Water Tower” Parklet with Roof
NOTE: RENDERINGS ARE FOR VISUAL
REFERENCE ONLY. FINAL DESIGN IS BASED
ON PLAN AND SECTION DRAWINGS.
9.b
Packet Pg. 107
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
“Water Tower” Parklet
NOTE: RENDERINGS ARE FOR VISUAL
REFERENCE ONLY. FINAL DESIGN IS BASED
ON PLAN AND SECTION DRAWINGS.
9.b
Packet Pg. 108
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
“Water Tower” Parklet
NOTE: RENDERINGS ARE FOR VISUAL
REFERENCE ONLY. FINAL DESIGN IS BASED
ON PLAN AND SECTION DRAWINGS.
9.b
Packet Pg. 109
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
Essential Pieces
Concrete Footing
Wood Bench Topping
Steel Railing
Planters
Removable 12” grate
2x wood decking
4” Steel Posts
Steel Frame Roofing with Non-
Combustable Infill
9.b
Packet Pg. 110
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
Footing Options
2% Max Floor Slope Sidewalk Level
Min 12” high curb
Min 4” thick curb
Solid Footing and bench
allows for a level floor on a
steep road crown
Removal of bench requires
a deep footing which cannot
accomodate a steep road crown
Sidewalk Level2% Max Floor Slope
Road crown max ~2” below sidewalk curbRoad crown max ~1” above sidewalk curb
9.b
Packet Pg. 111
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
Railing Height
42” high min per code
9.b
Packet Pg. 112
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
Heater Options
No Roof + Propane Heaters
(Requires proper propane tank storage)
With Roof + Propane Heaters
(Requires proper propane tank storage)
With Roof + Electric Heaters
(Requires ~75 amps free in electrical panel)
9.b
Packet Pg. 113
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
24" DEEP FOOTING
12" GUTTER
MIN 12" CONC. THICKNESS
96" OVERALL PARKLET
18" BENCH
42" GUARDRAIL
CONC FOUNDATION CURB
WOOD BENCH SURFACE
4" STEEL ROUND POST SET IN CONC CURB
3 8" THICK STEEL PLATE RAILING W/ 6" BASE FLANGES
ANCHORED TO CONCRETE
4" SQUARE HSS SPANNING BETWEEN POSTS ALONG
LENGTH AND WIDTH OF PARKLET
STEEL PLATE PERIMETER
PLASTIC SHEET BTWN CONC CURB AND ASPHALT
(E) ROAD SURFACE, SLOPE VARIES
STEEL DRAINAGE GRATE
PT SLEEPERS, CUT TO ROAD SLOPE
WOOD DECK, 2% SLOPE MAX
3" X 2" X 1
4" STEEL ANGLES ANCHORED
INTO CONC CURB AND WD SLEEPERS
STEEL POST EMBEDDED IN CONCRETE, SSD.
STEEL PLATE FASCIA WELDED TO POSTS
18"
FABRIC LOUVERS ON STEEL CABLE TRACKS
SPACED 12" O.C.
4" SQUARE HSS SPANNING BETWEEN POSTS
ALONG LENGTH AND WIDTH OF PARKLET
STEEL PLATE FASCIA WELDED TO POSTS
18"
12G SHEET METAL CEILING
LGS FRAMING SLOPED TO GUTTER
SHEET METAL GUTTER
CORRUGATED METAL ROOFING
Xref ..\00000 TB 22x34.dwg
Architects
Sidell PakravanCampbell Parklets 08.18.22 Section of Solid Footing ADD ALTERNATE 1A - SOLID ROOF ADD ALTERNATE 1B - FABRIC LOUVERS Parklet Section
9.b
Packet Pg. 114
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan
Architects
Campbell Parklet Design
SCALE:
TIPPING JOB# 2022.132.00
SK-1Campbell Parklet Design - Structural Detail
Campbell, CA
DATE: August 17, 2022
1" = 1'-0"
PLAN VIEW
SK-2
Edge of conc.
curb, typ.
1 4
typ. Embed plate w/ anchors
to concrete, typ.
4" steel round post, typ.
Embed HSS post into
concrete. Allow 3 in min.
clear cover.
Guardrail,
s.a.d., typ.
typ.
SCALE:
TIPPING JOB# 2022.132.00
SK-2Campbell Parklet Design - Structural Detail
Campbell, CA
DATE: August 17, 2022
1" = 1'-0"
TYP. SECTION AT CURB
Conc. Curb
#4 @ 6" o.c. ties
2'-0"
(3) #4 T&B bars w/ 90 deg.
hook each end
2'-6" max. Periodic angle with
(2) anchors to conc.
1'-0"
MIN.
3'-6" Wood bench, s.a.d.
1 4
3 8" thick steel plate
railing
4" steel round post
4" square hss beam
9.b
Packet Pg. 115
Attachment: CC Resolution - Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Guide (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) RESOLUTION NO._______
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CAMPBELL AMENDING THE CITY’S MASTER FEE
SCHEDULE TO REDUCE THE PARKLET PERMIT
APPLICATION FEE FROM $1,500 TO $500, DEFER RING
THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PARKLET ANNUAL
COMPLIANCE VERIFICATION FEE TO FY 2024, REMOVING
SECURITY DEPOSITS RELATED TO PARKLETS IN THE
PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND APPROVING ASSOCIATED
BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS FOR FY 2023 . FILE NO. PLN -
2022-39.
WHEREAS, on August 20, 2022, the City Council adopted Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way) to the Campbell Municipal Code (“CMC”) which establishes a permit process for parklets in the City of Campbell’s public right-of-way.
WHEREAS, an associated Ordinance has been introduced to amend Chapter
11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right -of-Way) to the Campbell Municipal Code (“CMC”) to remove the requirement for a security deposit for parklet permits.
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest to ensure adequate fees are charged for processing permit applications and use of public right -of-way to achieve the City’s cost recovery goals except where an overriding public benefit has been recognized.
WHEREAS, City staff estimated the full cost to process and review a Parklet Permit Application to be approximately $2,532, conduct an annual compliance verification of ongoing compliance with the requirements of Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right- of-Way) to be approximately $602, and cause the removal of parklets in the public right - of-way to be approximately $3,000.
WHEREAS, the City is considering reducing the Parklet Permit Application Fee from $1,500 to $500 , deferring the effective date of the Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee of $602 to FY2024 , and eliminating the Parklet Security Deposit of $3,000.
WHEREAS, the proposed Parklet Permit Application fee of $500 is less than the estimated cost to review parklet permit applications of $2,532.
WHEREAS, the deferring the effective date of the Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee to FY2024 will result the collection of no fees to cover the anticipated cost to facilitate the annual review of parklets in the public right -of-way and confirmation of ongoing compliance with the requirements of Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way).
WHEREAS, the elimination of the Parklet Security Deposit may result in the City bearing the full cost, or temporarily bearing the full cost, to cause the removal of parklets in the public right-of-way and/or enforce their removal.
9.c
Packet Pg. 116
Attachment: CC Resolution - Parklet Fees and Security Deposit (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City Council Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 PLN-2022-39 – Amending Fees and Deposits for Parklets in the Public Right-of-Way
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the public benefit from subsidizing the Parklet Permit Application Fee, deferring the collection of the Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee, and eliminating the security deposit fee, outweigh the subsidy provided and potential cost of enforcing their removal to the City.
WHEREAS, no impact to the existing level of service for the right-of-way will result from the proposed actions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby:
1. Amends the F ees and Deposits for Parklets in the Public Right -of-Way, included in the Schedule of Fees and Charges under the Public Works Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees within the Master Fee Schedule, as follows with underlining (i.e., underlining) indicating new text and strikeouts (i. e., strikeouts) indicating deleted text:
Parklets
a) Parklet Permit Application Fee: $1,500
b) Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee: $602 (Effective FY2024) c) Parklet Security Deposit: $3,000
; and
2. Approves the Associated Budget Adjustments as set forth in Exhibit C-1.
This Resolution shall become effective in sixty (60) days.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
APPROVED:
________________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
9.c
Packet Pg. 117
Attachment: CC Resolution - Parklet Fees and Security Deposit (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City of Campbell
Request for Budget Adjustments
Department/Program Division Date Request No.
September 20, 2022 BA-5
Budget to be Reduced
Fund/Program Account Number Description Amount
REVENUE
101.740 4722 16,000
101.740 4722 Parklet Annual Compliance Verification Fee 9,632 Budget to be Increased
Fund/Program Account Number Description Amount
REASON FOR REQUEST - BE SPECIFIC:
Finance Director Community Development Director City Manager City Manager
Will Fuentes Rob Eastwood Brian Loventhal
To modify action approved on July 5, 2022; reducing Parklet Permit Application Fee and Annual Compliance Fee Verification Revenue Estimates.
740 - Land Development
Parklet Permit Application Fee
9.c
Packet Pg. 118
Attachment: CC Resolution - Parklet Fees and Security Deposit (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) RESOLUTION NO._______
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CAMPBELL AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER
TO EXECUTE A N AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTANT
SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY’S PARKLET
DESIGN CONSULTANT, SIDELL PARKRAVAN
ARCHITECTS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE CUSTOMIZATION OF
UP TO 16 PARKLETS AT A COST NOT TO $3,000 PER
PARKLET ($48,000 TOTAL) AND APPROV ING
ASSOCIATED BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS FOR FY 2023. FILE
NO. PLN-2022-39.
WHEREAS, on August 20, 2022, the City Council adopted Chapter 11.15 (Parklets in the Public Right -of-Way) to the Campbell Municipal Code (“CMC”) which allows for parklets in the City of Campbell’s public right-of-way.
WHEREAS, on July 5, 2022, the City of Campbell entered into a Consultant Services Agreement with Sidell Pakravan Architects to pr ovide parklet design services and build options for a Semi-Permanent Parklet Program with a total contract amount not to exceed $30,000.
WHEREAS, the Scope of Services included in the Consultant Services Agreement with Sidell Pakravan Architects did not include the preparation of site specific parklet design customizations.
WHEREAS, Sidell Pakravan Architects has estimated the cost of preparing site specific parklet design customizations to run approximately $2,500 per parklet.
WHEREAS, to cover unanticipated situations, staff has recommended authorizing site specific parklet customization costs of up to $3,000 per parklet with the parklet operator being responsible for any design costs that run greater than that amount.
WHEREAS, providing site specific design customizations (which may serve as construction drawings) is in furtherance of the existing Consultant Services Agreement to provide parklet design services and build options for the City’s Semi -Permanent Parklet Program.
WHEREAS, the City anticipates the need to prepare site specific parklet design customizations for up to sixteen (16) locations would cost a total of $48,000.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the reappropriation of $48,000 of one-time construction grants from funds received in response to the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) to provide for the customization of up to 16 parklets at a cost not to exceed $3,000 per parklet ($48,000) to be an appropriate use of such funds.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Campbell hereby:
9.d
Packet Pg. 119
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City Council Resolution No. Page 2 of 2 PLN-2022-39 – Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract Amendment and Approving Associated Budget Adjustments
1. Authorizes the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with Sidell Pakravan Architects in substantially the form and content set forth in Exhibit D-1, with the inclusion of the preparation of site specific design customizations for up to sixteen (16) locations at a cost of $3,000 per parklet , and at a total cost not to exceed $48,000, from funds to be re appropriated from one-time construction grants previously encumbered from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) , as part of the scope of work; and
2. Approves the Associated Budget Adjustments as set forth in Exhibit D-2.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________, 2022 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NOES: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
APPROVED:
________________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
9.d
Packet Pg. 120
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -1-
CITY OF CAMPBELL
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Agreement is entered into at Campbell, California on the day of , 2022, by a nd between the CITY OF CAMPBELL (hereinafter referred to as "City") and (hereinafter referred to as "Consultant").
W
HEREAS, City desires to obtain a consultant to prepare parklet architectural design services for a cost not to exceed $30,000; and
W
HEREAS, Consultant represents that it has the expertise, means, and ability to prepare and revise plans consistent with the Campbell Municipal Code, California Building and Fire Codes, and federal and state accessibility (ADA) standards and parklet design standards; N
OW, THEREFORE, in consideration of each other's mutual promises, Consultant and City agree as follows:
1. DUT
IES OF CONSULTANT
1.1 Consultant agrees to perform services as set forth in Exhibit A - Scope of Services, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and which shall be interpreted together and in harmony with this Agreement. In the event of any conflict between Exhibit A and this Agreement, this Agreement shall govern, control, and take precedence.
1.2 Consultant’s project manager will meet with the City’s project coordinator prior to commencement of the project to establish a clear understanding of the working relationships, authorities, and management philosophy of City as it relates to this Agreement.
1.3 Consultant, working with the City, will gather available existing information concerning the project, and shall review documents as necessary for compliance with the project’s objectives.
1.4 In performance of this Agreement by Consultant, time will be of the essence.
1.5 Notwithstanding Section 1.4, Consultant shall not be responsible for delay caused by activities or factors beyond Consultant’s reasonable control, including delays or by reason of strikes, work slow-downs or stoppages, or acts of God.
1.6 Consultant agrees to perform this Agreement in accordance with the highest degree of skill and expertise exercised by members of Consultant’s profession working on similar projects under similar circumstances.
1.7 Consultant shall cooperate in good faith with City in all aspects of the performance of this Agreement.
5th
July
Sidell Pakravan Architects
9.d
Packet Pg. 121
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -2-
1.8 In the course of the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall act in the City’s best interest as it relates to the project.
1.9 All activities of Consultant, its employees, subcontractors and/or agents will be carried out in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations.
1.10 The designated project manager for Consultant shall be .
The Consultant’s project manager shall have all the necessary authority to direct technical and professional work within the scope of the Agreement and shall serve as the principal point of contact with the City and the City’s project coordinator. The authorized principal of Consultant executing this Agreement for the Consultant shall have authority to make decisions regarding changes in services, termination and other matters related to the performance of this agreement on behalf of Consultant.
1.11 The Consultant (and its employees, agents, representatives, and subconsultants), in the performance of this Agreement, shall act in an independent capacity and not as officers or officials or employees or agents of the City. The City shall not direct the work and means for accomplishment of the services and work to be performed hereunder. The City, however, retains the right to require that work performed by Consultant meet specific standards consistent with the requirements of this Agreement without regard to the manner and means of accomplishment thereof. Subcontractors shall assume all of the rights, obligations and liabilities, applicable to it as an independent contractor hereunder. Consultant represents and warrants that it (i) is fully experienced and properly qualified to perform the class of work and services provided for herein, (ii) has the financial capability and shall finance its own operations required for the performance of the work and services and (iii) is properly equipped and organized to perform the work and services in a competent, timely and proper manner in accordance with the requi rements of this Agreement.
Consultant agrees to comply with AB5, codified at Labor Code section 2750.3, and shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, directors, agents representatives, volunteers, and employees against any claim or liability, including attorneys’ fees and costs, arising in any manner related to this Agreement that an employee, agent or others under Consultant’s supervision or control was misclassified.
1.12 This Agreement contains provisions that permit mutually acceptable changes in the scope, character or complexity of the work if such changes become desirable or necessary as the work progresses. Adjustments to the basis of payment and to the time for performance of the work, if any, shall be established by a written contract amendment (approved and executed by the City) to accommodate the changes in work.
2. DUTIES OF CITY
2.1 City shall furnish to Consultant all available and pertinent data and information requested by Consultant to facilitate the preparation of the documents called for in this Agreement. Consultant shall be entitled to reasonably rely on accuracy and completeness of such information, provided that Consultant shall provide City prompt written notice of any known defects in such data and information.
2.2 City shall provide contract administration services. City shall notify Consultant of Vadim Mishchuck
9.d
Packet Pg. 122
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -3-
required administrative procedures and shall name representatives, if any, authorized to act in its behalf.
2.3 City shall review documents submitted by Consultant and shall render decisions pertaining thereto as promptly as reasonably possible.
3. COMPENSATION
3.1 For the full performance of the services described herein by Consultant, City agrees to compensate Consultant for all services and direct costs associated with the performance of the project in an amount not to exceed $30,000, as follows:
a. Once each month, Consultant shall submit for payment by City, an itemized invoice for services performed during the previous billing period. The invoice shall describe the services rendered and the title of the item of work, and shall list labor hours by personnel classification.
Said invoice shall be based on all labor and direct expense charges made for work performed on the project. Labor charges shall be in accordance with the fee schedule found in Exhibit A of this Agreement. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered and approved by the City within 30 days from the date the itemized invoice is received by the City, subject to the maximum not to exceed amount specified above and the City’s right to object. b. Direct costs are those outside costs incurred on or directly for the project, and substantiated with invoices for the charges. Direct expenses include printing, reproduction, and delivery charges.
3.2 If Consultant incurs other costs which are not specifically covered by the terms of this Agreement, but which are necessary for performance of Consultant’s duties, City may approve payment for said costs if authorized in writing by the City in advance.
3.3 City may order changes in the scope or character of services in writing, including decreasing the amount of Consultant’s services. In the event that the work is decreased, Consultant is entitled to full compensation for all services performed and expenses incurred prior to receipt of notice of change. Under no conditions shall Consultant make any changes to the work, either as additions or deductions, without the prior written order of the City. In the event, that the City determines that a change to the work or services from that specified in this Agreement is required, the contract time and/or actual costs reimbursable by the City for the project may be adjusted by contract amendment or change order to accommodate the changed work. The maximum not to exceed total amount specified in this Article 3 (Compensation) shall not be exceeded, unless authorized by written contract amendment or change order, approved and executed by the City. Consultant shall obtain prior written approval for a revised fee schedule from the City before exceeding such fee schedule. Only City’s authorized representative(s) is authorized to approve changes to this Agreement on behalf of City.
3.4 In no event, will the Consultant be reimbursed for any costs or expenses at any rates that exceed the rates for set forth in the fee schedule found in Exhibit A.
9.d
Packet Pg. 123
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -4-
3.5 Consultant agrees that the payments to Consultant specified in this Article 3 (Compensation) will constitute full and complete compensation for all obligations assumed by Consultant under this Agreement. Where conflicts regarding compensation may occur, the provisions of this section apply.
4. SUBCONSULTANTS
4.1 Consultant may not subcontract any services required under this Agreement without the prior written consent of the City.
4.2 Consultant shall be responsible to City for the performance of any and all subconsultants who perform work under this contract, and any acts of negligence or misconduct on their part. Consultant is solely responsible for all payments due to subconsultants.
4.3 Consultant shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all of the requirements stated herein, including naming the City of Campbell, its officers, officials, directors, agents representatives, volunteers, and employees as additional insureds. Any modification to the insurance requirements for subcontractors must be agreed to by the City in writing.
4.4 If at any time, the City determines any subcontractor is incompetent or unqualified, Consultant will be notified and will be expected to immediately cancel the subcontract.
5. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS AND MATERIALS
All original drawings, documents, papers, data, materials, photographs, negatives and other work products prepared by the Consultant and/or its subconsultants in the performance of the services encompassed in this Agreement (whether in printed or electronic format) (“project-related documents and materials”) shall be the property of the City and may be used on this project without the consent of the Consultant or its subcontractors. City acknowledges that such drawings, documents, and other items are instruments of professional services intended for use only on the subject project. Consultant agrees that all copyrights which arise from creation of the Project-related documents and materials pursuant to this Agreement shall be vested in the City and waives and relinquishes all claims to copyright or other intellectual property rights in favor of the City. Any project -related documents and materials related to this Agreement shall be confidential, not to be used by the Consultant on other projects or disclosed to any third party, except by agreement in writing by the City, or except as otherwise provided herein. Upon the completion or termination of this Agreement for any reason, the City shall be entitled to receive, and Consultant shall promptly provide to the City upon request, all finished and unfinished project-related documents and materials, produced or gathered by or on behalf of Consultant that
9.d
Packet Pg. 124
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -5-
are in Consultant’s possession, custody or control. Consultant may retain copies of said documents and materials for its files. In the event of termination, any dispute regarding compensation or damages shall not hinder, prevent, or otherwise impact the City’s right to promptly receive and use such documents and materials which are the sole and exclusive property of the City.
6. TER
MINATION
6.1 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, City may terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, in its sole discretion, by giving notice in writing to Consultant not less than 14 calendar days prior to an effective termination date. In the event of such termination, Consultant shall have the right and obligation to immediately assemble the work then in progress for the purpose of completing the work and turning over all materials and documents to City.
6.2 In the event of such termination, Consultant shall be compensated for all work and services performed to the point of termination in accordance with the payment provisions set forth in Section 3.1, unless the termination is for cause, in which event Consultant need be compensated only to the extent required by law.
6.3 Upon notice of termination by City, the Consultant will immediately act to not incur any additional obligations, costs or expenses, except as may be reasonably necessary to terminate its activities. All finished or unfinished work or documents procured or produced under the Agreement will become property of the City upon the termination date. In the event of Consultant’s failure to perform pursuant to the Agreement, the City reserves the right to obtain services elsewhere and Consultant will be liable for the difference between the prices set forth in the terminated Agreement and the actual cost to the City. Termination of the Agreement pursuant to this paragraph shall not relieve the Consultant of any liability to City for additional costs, expenses, or damages sustained by City due to failure of the Consultant to perform pursuant to the Agreement. City may withhold any payments to Consultant for the purpose of set off until such time as the exact amount of damages due City from Consultant is determined. After the effective date of termination, Consultant will have no further claims against the City under the Agreement. No other compensation will be payable for anticipated profit on unperformed services.
7. AUDIT AND INSPECTION
Consultant shall permit authorized representatives of City to inspect and audit all data and records relating to its performance under this Agreement for a period of three years following acceptance of the final study.
8. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY
Consultant agrees to refrain from discriminatory employment practices on the basis of race, religious creed, color, sex, national origin, handicap, sexual orientation, marital status, medical condition, disability, ancestry, organizational affiliation, military or veteran status, or
9.d
Packet Pg. 125
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -6-
any other consideration made unlawful by local, State or Federal law, of any employee of, or applicant for employment with, such Consultant or subcontractor. City requires Consultant to comply with all applicable Federal and State and local equal employment opportunity laws and regulations.
9. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION
9.1 With respect to any design professional services provided by Consultant, the Consultant agrees to indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, and employees to the fullest extent allowed by law from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, damages, liabilities and losses, that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Consultant, except for any claims, actions, causes of action, losses, damages or liabilities proximately caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City. City shall not be liable for acts of Consultant in performing services described herein. Notwithstanding anything in this paragraph to the contrary, any defense costs charged to the design professional under this paragraph shall not exceed the design professional’s proportionate percentage of fault, except:
a. T
hat in the event one or more defendants is unable to pay its share of defense costs due to bankruptcy or dissolution of the business, the design professional shall meet and confer with the other parties regarding unpaid defense costs in good faith effort to agree on the allocation of those costs amongst the parties; and
b. Wh
ere a project-specific general liability policy insures all project participants for general liability exposures on a primary basis and also covers all design professionals for their legal liability arising out of their professional services on a primary basis, then there shall be no limitation on the design professional's duty to provide a defense and cover the City's cost of defense.
W
ith respect to all matters other than those covered by the foregoing paragraph, Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend (with counsel reasonably satisfactory to the City) and hold harmless the City, its officers, officials, directors, agents representatives, volunteers, and employees to the fullest extent allowed by law from and against any and all claims, actions, causes of action, losses, damages, liabilities and costs of every nature, including attorneys’ fees and costs (collectively, “Losses”) including but not limited to all claims, actions, causes of action, losses, damages, liabilities for property damage, bodily injury, or death, and all costs of defending any claim, caused by or arising out of, or alleged to have been caused by or arise out of, in whole or in part, Consultant’s performance under this Agreement, except for any claims, actions, causes of action, losses, damages, costs or liabilities proximately caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City. City shall not be liable for acts of Consultant in performing services described herein.
I
n no event shall this section be construed to require indemnification by the Consultant to a greater extent than permitted under the public policy of the State of California; and in the event that this contract is s ubject to California Civil Code section 2782(b), the foregoing indemnity provisions shall not apply to any liability for the active negligence of the City.
9.d
Packet Pg. 126
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -7-
The defense and indemnity provisions obligations of this Agreement are undertaken in addition to, and shall not in any way be limited by the insurance obligations contained in this Agreement. The foregoing indemnity provisions are intended to fully allocate the parties’ risk of liability to third- parties; and there shall be n o rights to indemnity or contribution, in law or equity or otherwise between the parties that are not set forth in this section. Consultant waives all rights to subrogation for any matters covered by the provisions of this section. Consultant’s responsibility for such defense and indemnity obligations as set forth in this section shall survive the termination or completion of this Agreement for the full period of time allowed by law.
9.2 Consultant shall maintain insurance conforming to the following specifications to the fullest amount allowed by law for a minimum of three (3) years following the termination or completion of this Agreement:
A. Types of Coverage
The policies shall afford the following types of coverage:
1. Commercial General Liability;
2. Automotive;
3. Workers’ Compensation and Employer Liability; and
4. Professional Liability and/or Errors and Omissions
B. Minimum Scope of Insurance
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
1. For Commercial General Liability: Insurance Services Office (ISO) CGL Form 00 01 11 85; and
2. For Automotive Liability: ISO CA 00 01 06 92 including symbol 1(any auto); and
3. For Workers’ Compensation: insurance as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employer's Liability insurance; and
4. For Professional Liability and/or Errors and Omissions: insurance covering negligence committed by or on behalf of Consultant in rendering services to City.
C. Minimum Limits of Insurance
Consultant shall maintain limits no less than:
1. General Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence for
9.d
Packet Pg. 127
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -8-
bodily, personal injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.
2. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
3. Workers’ Compensation and Employer's Liability: Workers’ Compensation limits as required by the Labor Code of the State of California and Employer's Liability limits of $1,000,000 per accident. The Worker’s Compensation policy must be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all work performed by the Consultant and its employees.
4. Professional Liability and/or Errors and Omissions: $1,000,000 per claim and $2,000,000 in the annual aggregate.
The limits of insurance required in this Agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of City (as agreed to in this Agreement) before the City’s own insurance or self - insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.
D. Deductible and Self-Insured Retention
Any deductibles or self-insured retention must be declared to and approved by the City, and shall not reduce the limits of liability. At the option of the City, either: the insurer shall reduce or eliminate such deductibles or self -insured retention as respects the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials and volunteers; or the Consultant shall procure a bond guaranteeing payment of losses related to investigations, claim administration, and defense expenses. Policies containing any self-insured retention provision shall provide or be endorsed to provide that the self- insured retention may be satisfied by either the named insured or the City.
E. Other Insurance Provisions
The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
1. General Liability and Automobile Liability Coverage:
a. The City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials and volunteers are to be covered as additional insureds as respects: liability arising out of this Agreement performed by or on behalf of the Consultant, products and completed operations of the Consultant, premises owned, occupied or used by the Consultant, or automobiles owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Consultant. It is a requirement of this Agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader
9.d
Packet Pg. 128
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -9-
than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits set forth in this Agreement shall be available to the City as an additional insured. Furthermore, the requirements for coverage and limits shall be
(1) the minimum coverage limits specified in this Agreement, or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy or proceeds available to the named insured, whichever is affords greater coverage.
b. The Consultant's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials and volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant's insurance and shall not contribute with it.
c. Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials, and volunteers.
d. The Consultant's insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought except with respect to the limits of the insurer's liability.
2. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Coverage: The insurer shall agree to waive all rights of subrogation against the City, its agents, officers, attorneys, employees, officials, and volunteers for losses arising from work performed by the Consultant for the City.
3. All Coverages: Any unintentional failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to the City; and unless otherwise approved by the City, each insurance policy required by this clause shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be canceled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by regular mail has been given to the City, or ten (10) days for cancellation for non- payment of premium.
F. Suspension or Cancellation
If any of the coverages required by this Agreement should be suspended, voided, cancelled or reduced in coverage during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall immediately notify City and replace such coverage with another policy meeting the requirements of this Agreement.
G. Subcontractors
Consultant agrees that any and all contracts with subcontractors for performance of any matter under this Agreement shall require the subcontractors to comply with the same indemnity and insurance requirements set forth in this Agreement to the extent that they apply to the scope of the subcontractors’ work. Subcontractors are to be bound to contractor and to City in the same
9.d
Packet Pg. 129
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -10-
manner and to the same extent as the Consultant is bound to City under this Agreement.
Subcontractors shall further agree to include these same provisions with any sub-subcontractor. A copy of this Agreement will be furnished to the subcontractor on request. The Consultant shall require all subcontractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in the Agreement prior to commencing any work, and will provide proof of compliance to the City.
H. Acceptability of Insurers
Without limiting Consultant's indemnification provided hereunder, the policies of insurance listed in Article 9.2 of this Agreement are to be issued by an issuer with a current A.M. Best Rating of A:V and who is authorized to transact business in the State of California, unless otherwise approved by the City.
I. Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with endorsements and certificates of insurance evidencing coverage required by this clause. The certificates for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. The certificates are to be on forms acceptable to the City. Where required by statue, forms approved by the Insurance Commissioner are to be submitted. All certificates are to be received and approved by the City bef ore work commences.
J. Special Risks/Circumstances
City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances and provide notice to Consultant.
10. MISCELLANEOUS
10.1 This Agreement shall be binding on the heirs, executors, assigns and successors of Consultant.
10.2 Neither party may assign this Agreement, or any portion hereof, without the prior written consent of the other.
10.3 This Agreement shall not be construed to alter, affect, or waive any lien or stop notice rights, which Consultant may have for the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement.
10.4 Neither party’s waiver of any term, condition or covenant, or breach of any term, condition or covenant shall be construed as the waiver of any other term, condition or covenant or waiver of the breach of any other term, condition or covenant.
10.5 This Agreement contains the entire Agreement between City and Consultant relating to the project and the provision of services to the project. Any prior agreements,
9.d
Packet Pg. 130
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -11-
promises, negotiations, or representations not expressly set forth in this Agreement are of no force or effect. Subsequent modifications to this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both City and Consultant.
10.6 If any term, condition or covenant of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall be valid and binding on City and Consultant.
10.7 This Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
10.8 All changes or amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and approved by all parties.
10.9 The initial contract term shall commence upon execution of the contract by the City and shall be for a two (2) month period, unless terminated sooner in accordance with the contract. The City of Campbell at its sole discretion may elect to extend the contract up to two (2) consecutive six-month periods by providing written notice to Consultant not less than thirty (30) days prior to expiration of the original or extended term. The total length of the contract shall not exceed a period of one year. Annual contractual costs shall be equal to the April - to-April San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose Consumer Price Index-All Urban (CPI-U) in an amount not to exceed five percent (5%), but not lower than three percent (3%), annually, on July 1 of each contract renewal if executed.
10.10 Consultant owes the City a duty of undivided loyalty in performing the work and services under this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the obligation to refrain from having economic interests and/or participating in activities that conflict with the City’s interests in respect to the work and/or services and project. The Consultant shall list current clients who may have a financial interest in the outcome of this Agreement. The Consultant hereby certifies that it does not now have, nor shall it acquire any financial or business interest that would conflict with the performance of services under this agreement. Consultant shall not make or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant’s position to influence a governmental decision in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a direct or indirect financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement.
Consultant will immediately advise the City if Consultant learns of a financial interest of Consultant's during the term of this Agreement.
10.11 City is a public agency subject to the disclosure requirements of the California Public Records Act (“CPRA”). If Consultant’s proprietary information is contained in documents or information submitted to City, and Consultant claims that such information falls within one or more CPRA exemptions, Consultant must clearly mark such information “Confidential and Proprietary,” and identify the specific lines containing the information. In the event of a request for such information, City will make best efforts to provide notice to Consultant prior to such disclosure. If Consultant contends that any documents are exempt from the CPRA and wishes to prevent disclosure, it is required to obtain a protective order, injunctive relief or other appropriate remedy from a court of law in Santa Clara County before the City is required to respond to the
9.d
Packet Pg. 131
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -12-
CPRA request. If Consultant fails to obtain such remedy within the time the City is required to respond to the CPRA request, City may disclose the requested information without any liability to Consultant. Consultant further agrees that it shall defend, indemnify and hold City harmless against any claim, action or litigation (including but not limited to all judgments, costs, and attorney’s fees) that may result from denial by City of a CPRA request for information arising from any representation, or any action (or inaction), by the Consultant.
10.12 Neither party hereto shall be considered in default in the performance of its obligation hereunder to the extent that the performance of any such obligation is prevented or delayed by an act of God, natural disaster, pandemic, acts of terrorism, war, or other peril, which is beyond the reasonable control of the affected party and without the negligence of the respective Parties. Each party hereto shall give notice promptly to the other of the nature and extent of any Force Majeure claimed to delay, hinder or prevent performance of the services under this Agreement. Each Party will, however, make all reasonable efforts to remove or eliminate such a cause of delay or default and will, upon the cessation of the cause, diligently pursue performance of its obligations in this Agreement. In the event either party is prevented or delayed in the performance of its respective obligation by reason of such Force Majeure, there may be an equitable adjustment of the schedule and Consultant compensation based on City’s sole discretion.
10.13 Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
10.14 Consultant warrants that Consultant, its subcontractors and/or agents (if any) has/have complied with any and all federal, state, and local licensing requirements
10.15 Each party acknowledges that it has reviewed this Agreement and that the normal rule of construction to the effect that any ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in the interpretation of this Agreement.
10.16 The signatories to this Agreement warrant and represent that each is authorized to execute this Agreement and that their respective signatures serve to legally obligate their respective representatives, agents, successors and assigns to comply with the provisions of this Agreement.
10.17 This Agreement is entered into, and to be performed in Santa Clara County, California, and any action arising out of or related to this Agreement shall be maintained in a court of appropriate jurisdiction in Santa Clara County, California.
10.18 This Agreement may be executed in counterparts which shall, in the aggregate, be deemed an original but all of which, together, shall constitute one and the same instrument. A scanned, electronic, facsimile or other copy of a party’s signature shall be accepted and valid as an original.
9.d
Packet Pg. 132
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -13-
11. NOTICES
Notices required under this Agreement may be delivered by first class mail addressed to the appropriate party at one of the following addresses:
CIT Y: City of Campbell
Attention: Rob Eastwood
70 North First Street
Campbell, CA 95008
CONSULTANT: _________________________________
Attention:
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
Sidell Pakravan Architects
2445 Sixth Street
Berkeley, CA 94710
[email protected]
Rudabeh Pakravan
9.d
Packet Pg. 133
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) -14-
Having read and understood the foregoing Agreement, the undersigned parties agree to be bound hereby:
CONSULTANT
By
CITY OF CAMPBELL
By
Title Title
Approved as to Form
City Attorney
William R. Seligmann (Jul 25, 2022 09:21 PDT)
William R. Seligmann
Principal, Sidell Pakravan Architects
Brian Loventhal (Jul 25, 2022 14:43 PDT)
Brian Loventhal
City Manager
9.d
Packet Pg. 134
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City of Campbell
City-Approved Parklet Design Proposal
Sidell Pakravan
Architects
2445 Sixth Street, Berkeley, CA 94710
Contact: Rudabeh Pakravan
mobile: 323.428.4958
Exhibit A - Scope of Services & Fee Schedule
9.d
Packet Pg. 135
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan Architects
Campbell City-Approved Parklet Design Program 1
Project Schedule
Project Kickoff: June 28, 2022
Designs Finalized for Publication and Distribution: September 2, 2022 Phase 1 Due Diligence and Conceptual Design: 2 weeks Deliverables and meetings include the following:
1-2 webinars and 1-2 meetings with business owners, DCBA, and any other stakeholders (per City of Campbell direction) 2-3 Meetings as necessary with Public Works, Building Department, Planning/Zoning, and Economic Development Departments to determine short term and long term goals and expectations.
Prepare conceptual design, layout, and construction strategy. Devliverables include the following:
site plans
renderings
structural and foundation connections and diagrammatic details Phase 2 : Design Development 2 weeks
Revise design based on staff feedback. Develop design in greater detail.
Meet with staff as needed.
Devliverables include the following:
site plans
floor plans
curb/platform details
Handrail/guardrail details
Roofing/Shading details
Extra details, ie planters/benches
section
renderings
Phase 3 : Construction Documents 2 weeks
Devliverables include the following:
complete Design plans for distribution and publiction including site plans
floor plans
curb/platform details
Handrail/guardrail details
Roofing/Shading details
Extra details, ie planters/benches
section
renderings
Note: anticipated schedule may vary depending on scheduling of staff review and public presentations.
9.d
Packet Pg. 136
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Campbell Parklet Design Plans
Project Schedule & Deliverables Timeline
Sidell Pakravan Architects & City of Campbell
Ju
ly 5: Finalize scope of services, project schedule, deliverables timeline and sign agreement.
• Create “rough” template options that meet applicable codes and city design parameters
• Sidell creates customized design for each applicant
o How much site customization can Sidell provide for each parklet and what is the cost per parklet design?
o Sidell Pakravan interaction with applicant and construction contractor July 6-8: Consultant and city staff meet to determine short-term and long-term goals and expectations and discuss:
• Site assessments
• Consensus on design parameters
• Previously gathered stakeholder feedback on design features o DCBA, Chamber and Farmers’ Market
• Planning, Building, Fire, Public Works & ABC code compliance • Stakeholder involvement
• Conceptual design, layout and construction strategy
• Site customization
• Design review meeting schedule
July 11-15: Prepare conceptual design, layout and construction strategy July 18-22:
• First Presentation and Review of Design Plans
o Present conceptual design, layout and construction strategy to City staff Deliverables include the following:
Site plans
Renderings
Structural and foundation connections and diagrammatic details • P
resent design, layout and construction strategy to stakeholders (i.e., downtown restaurants, DCBA & Chamber)
• R
evise conceptual design plans based on staff and stakeholder feedback to develop designs in greater detail. Deliverables include the following:
o Site plans
Campbell City-Approved Parklet Design Program 2
9.d
Packet Pg. 137
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) o Floor plans
o Curb/platform details
o Handrail/guardrail details
o Roofing/Shading details
o Extra details, i.e., planters/benches
o Renderings
Ju
ly 25 – 29:
• Second Presentation and Review of Design Plans
• Revise conceptual design plans based on staff feedback to develop designs in greater detail
August 1:
• Third Presentation and Review of Design Plans
• Present revised design plans to City Staff for review in preparation for Council Consideration on August 16
August 16: Parklet design plans presented to City Council for consideration* *In the event design plans are not presented to the City Council on August 16, plans would be presente d S
eptember 6, 2022, and the schedule will be adjusted accordingly.
August 17-24: Design plans revised based on Council direction if applicable August 25 - 26: Final and complete design plans presented to City Staff for approval August 29 - September 2: Designs and construction documents prepared for distribution and publication
September 12: Program Launch
Campbell City-Approved Parklet Design Program 3
9.d
Packet Pg. 138
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Sidell Pakravan Architects
Campbell City-Approved Parklet Design Program 4
Scope of Services and Fee
Sidell Pakravan Architects
Principal, Rudabeh Pakravan $200 per hour
Project Manager, Vadim Mishchuck $150 per hour
Designer, Claire Jang $100 per hour
Engineer, Tipping Engineers, 18% of total fee
Landscape Architect, Groundworks Office 12% of total fee
1. Due Dilligence, Outreach, Conceptual Design
a. Site assessments to determine current parklet locations, uses, layouts, successes, and failures. b. Research into existing best practices, protocols, and information. Review of the Existing Downtown Campbell Parklet program “temporary program as well as pre-COVID parklets.
c. 1-2 webinars and 1-2 meetings with business owners, DCBA, and any other stakeholders (per City of Campbell direction) d. Meetings as necessary with Public Works, Building Department, Planning/Zoning, and Economic Development Departments to determine short term and long term goals and expectations. e. Due dilligence and research into relevant building, planning, public works, and engineering codes as well as ABC compliance. f. Initial Concept and Site Layouts for Review (see project schedule for specific deliverables) Fee for this phase: $7,000
2. Design Development
a. New and updated iterations of parklet design options based on staff comments. See project schedule for specific deliverables. b. 3 sequential design meetings with staff to review design options in July and August. In between each meeting, Sidell Pakravan architects will build upon feedback and create new iterations to present. Designs will adhere to relevant Zoning and Land Use codes, California Building and Fire Codes, federal and state ADA standards, and City of Campbell Parklet Design Parameters. Any plan check comments or staff direction will be incorporated into the final iteration. d. Committee and Council meetings that are relevant to this project are included as part of this proposal, up to 4 meetings.
Fee for this phase: $8,000
3. Construction Documents and Final Deliverables For the City Approved Parklets, Sidell Pakravan Architects proposes to create a visually appealing and clear set of design plans that include:
a. Site Plans for multiple options of parklets based on size, either one parking stall or two parking stalls. Site plans to include dimensions and relevant specifications
b. Foundation, Curbing Strategies We will design, detail, and graphically represent 1-2 clear foundation and curbing strategies including specifications and dimensions. We will work directly with the city Public Works department to determine compliance and best practices for foundation and curbing.
c. Platform/Railing/Planter/Perimeter Detailing. We will design, detail, and graphically represent 3 options for each platforms/flooring, vertical components, and roofing/overhead support options. Three overhead support options will be provided, one with no overhead structure, one with a shade structure, and one with a roof. These details will be reviewed multiple times with City representatives. The proposals will design for high quality, non-combustible materials and will provide specific specifications and dimensions. d. Design Standards
We will work with our consulting Landscape Architect, Groundworks Office, to outline and graphically represent options for site planning, lighting, furniture, signage and planting options. We will also work with our consulting engineer, Tipping Engineers, to develop the guardrail details, the roof connection detail, and any other relevant structural connections. Both consultants’ fees are included in this proposa Fee for this phase: $15,000
Total Fee: $30,000
9.d
Packet Pg. 139
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Consultant Agreement Parklet Design Services
Sidell Pakravan - Corrected Signature Order
Final Audit Report 2022-07-25
Created: 2022-07-22
By: Michael Thomas ([email protected])
Status: Signed
Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAA6bdlT1OVLtbq8QPdBU0TJzvJ9oJpyHHT "Consultant Agreement Parklet Design Services Sidell Pakravan - Corrected Signature Order" History
Document created by Michael Thomas ([email protected]) 2022-07-22 - 7:44:12 PM GMT
Document emailed to [email protected] for signature
2022-07-22 - 7:47:59 PM GMT
Email viewed by [email protected]
2022-07-25 - 4:18:45 PM GMT
Signer [email protected] entered name at signing as William R. Seligmann 2022-07-25 - 4:21:29 PM GMT
Document e-signed by William R. Seligmann ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2022-07-25 - 4:21:31 PM GMT - Time Source: server Document emailed to Sidell Pakravan Architects ([email protected]) for signature 2022-07-25 - 4:21:34 PM GMT
Email viewed by Sidell Pakravan Architects ([email protected]) 2022-07-25 - 9:36:25 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Sidell Pakravan Architects ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2022-07-25 - 9:36:46 PM GMT - Time Source: server Document emailed to Brian Loventhal ([email protected]) for signature 2022-07-25 - 9:36:48 PM GMT
Email viewed by Brian Loventhal ([email protected]) 2022-07-25 - 9:41:01 PM GMT
9.d
Packet Pg. 140
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Document e-signed by Brian Loventhal ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2022-07-25 - 9:43:58 PM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed.
2022-07-25 - 9:43:58 PM GMT
9.d
Packet Pg. 141
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City of Campbell
Request for Budget Adjustments
Department/Program Division Date Request No.
September 20, 2022 BA-6
Budget to be Reduced
Fund/Program Account Number Description Amount
EXPENDITURES
101.740 7432 One-Time Construction Grant 48,000
Budget to be Increased
Fund/Program Account Number Description Amount
EXPENDITURES
101.539 7427 Parklet Design Contract Amendment 48,000
REASON FOR REQUEST - BE SPECIFIC:
Finance Director Community Development Director City Manager City Manager
Will Fuentes Rob Eastwood Brian Loventhal
To modify action approved on July 5, 2022; shifting One-Time Construction Grant to Parklet Design Contract. 539 - COVID Response
9.d
Packet Pg. 142
Attachment: CC Resolution - Authorizing Contract Amendment (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City of Campbell
Community Development Department
City of Campbell – 70 N. First Street, Campbell, CA 95008 – Community Development – 408-866-2140 Semi-Permanent Parklet Stakeholder Survey
9.e
Packet Pg. 143
Attachment: Semi Permanent Parklet Survey Report (Graphic) (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) City of Campbell
Community Development Department
City of Campbell – 70 N. First Street, Campbell, CA 95008 – Community Development – 408-866-2140
9.e
Packet Pg. 144
Attachment: Semi Permanent Parklet Survey Report (Graphic) (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) To: Mayor Resnikoff and City Council Members
Date: October 4 2022
From: Rob Eastwood, Community Development Director
Via: Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Subject: Results of Survey of Downtown Business Participation in Semi - Permanent Parklet Program
This memorandum is intended to provide an update to the Council regarding an additional survey of Downtown businesses interest in participating in in the semi-permanent parklet program, following direction provided by Council at the September 20, 2022 meeting. This memo also re-frames the options identified by staff for the Council to consider regarding next steps in the Program.
Semi-Permanent Parklet Program
At the September 20 City Council meeting, the Council considered actions to provide authorization for the semi -permanent parklet to move forward , including removal of the requirement for a security deposit; reduc tion of the Parklet Permit Application Fee from $1,500 to $500, incorporation of the preferred parklet designs; and authorization for the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with the parklet design consultant, Sidell Parkravan Architects, to provide for the customization of the parklets.
Council expressed concerns about the estimated cost ($75,000 to $90,000) to construct the parklets and the weak response from Downtown businesses regarding a firm commitment to participate in the program. Council requested staff to conduct additional outreach to businesses and report findings in time for the October 4, Council meeting .
Subsequently, staff contacted e ach business eligible for a one or two- space parklet by phone and asked if they were a firm “yes” or “no” to participating in the program based on the estimated costs, even if there was no City funding assistance available. The results as of the finalization of this memo (September 29, 2022) are as follows:
A total of nineteen businesses (19) were contacted.
A total of fourteen responded.
Eight (8) businesses responded “yes”:
1. Distrito Federal
2. Katie Blooms
3. Sushi Confidential
4. Wild Rose
5. Trattoria 360
6. Mo’s*
Six (6) businesses responded “no”
1. Flights
2. Vesper
3. Naschmarkt
4. Tessora
5. Opa
6. Willard Hicks
MEMORANDUM City of Campbell
Community Development Department
9.f
Packet Pg. 145
Attachment: Semi-Permanent Parklet Business Survey (Owner Responses) (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Update on Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 2 of 3
7. A Bellagio
8. One Fish Raw Bar
*Owner specified only building parklet for one of the
3 restaurants owned (Mo’s, Williard Hicks, or Opa)
Businesses responding “no” were asked what the cost threshold would be to allow them to participate in the program. Responses ranged from $20 to $50k or identifying that the City or Property owner would need to pay for 50% of total costs.
Options moving Forward
To reframe the options for the Council going forward, the Council may consider the following:
A) Authorization of the Semi-Permanent Parklet program to move forward.
If the Council authorizes the program to move forward, staff recommends the Council approve the reduction in the fees associated with the program and approve the contract amendment with Sidell to support customization of the parklet designs. Staff anticipates opening the permit application process in October, with construction anticipated to occur between January and March, 2023.
B) Consideration of Potential Grants to Businesses
At the September 20
th Council meeting, there was discussion about increasing the amount of potential grants to businesses to $40,000 or more .1 As disclosed by staff, provision of a grant subjects the parklet construction to prevailing wage requirements, estimated to increase construction costs by up to 35%. Based on the parklet construction costs, a grant would need to be more than $25- 35k to result in a net financial benefit to businesses.
The semi-permanent parklet program currently allows sixteen parklets (two spaces allowed per parklet). If all sixteen parklets were granted a $40,000 grant, the cost would be $640,000. Alternatively, the Council could consider a minimum allotment of parklets and grants to businesses that initially opt into the program.
1 Currently only two cities in Santa Clara County are providing grants to assist with the parklets. Los Gatos is providing up to $40,000 or 75% of construction costs whichever is less. Morgan Hill is considering providing $5,000 per business. Los Gatos has processed about 35 parklet /grant applications; Morgan Hill has received two applications and expects a total of five or six applications.
9.f
Packet Pg. 146
Attachment: Semi-Permanent Parklet Business Survey (Owner Responses) (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program) Update on Semi-Permanent Parklet Program Page 3 of 3
In addition to the prevailing wage requirements, the City will also need to create an application process with the grants that includes the following:
• Proof of need or determination of public benefit that supersedes verification of need (tax returns, bank statements, financials).
• T he business must be in good standing: no code violations or incomplete permit s and have a current business license;
• Approval and execution of an agreement with each grant recipient; • Grants are subject to a 1099 issued by the City;
• Grants will be paid in progress payments with final payment issued when the project is completed and all receipts for costs submitted and validated; • Grant recipients will need to provide the City with detailed records of what was spent on design, construction, permits, etc., for City certification purposes. • All records and information pertaining to the grant are co nsidered public information.2
Should Council decided to offer businesses grants that in total is $100,000 or more, state law (AB 56 2) also requires the public agency providing the assistance to hold a public hearing and disclose the following:
• Name and address of all corporations or any other business entities • The timeline for the economic development subsidy.
• A description of the economic development subsidy, including the estimated total amount of the expenditure of public funds by, or of revenue lost to, the local agency because of the economic development subsidy.
• A statement of the public purposes for the economic development subsidy. • Projected tax revenue to the local agency because of the economic development subsidy. • Estimated number of jobs created by the economic development subsidy, broken down by full-time, part-time, and temporary positions.
• The net tax revenue accruing to the local agency because of the subsidy. • The information required should be available to the public and be posted on the local agency’s Internet Web site for the entire term of the economic development subsidy. • A follow-up report and public hearing is required within five years of the issuance of grants.
C) Other Options
As an alternative to authorizing the program to move forward or considering a grant program, the Council may also consider deferring initiation of the semi-permanent parklet program and instead extending the temporary parklet program further into 2023. This may allow more time to look at options that address identified concerns with the Parklet costs, although it is unknown at this time what other solutions are available. As a final alternative, the Council may consider requesting new parklet designs that are less costly.
However, as disclosed in the September 20 meeting, any s ignificant reduction in costs will likely compromise the safety elements of the parklet designs.
2 Certain information such as dentification numbers and license and account numbers can be redacted.
9.f
Packet Pg. 147
Attachment: Semi-Permanent Parklet Business Survey (Owner Responses) (Update to Semi-Permanent Parklet Program)
City
Council
Report
TITLE: Potential Reach Code Updates to be Considered with the Adoption of the 2022 Building Code and Authorization to Initiate a Zoning Code Text Amendment to CMC 21.18 (Parking and Loading) to Comply with Recent Amendments to State Law.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council take the following actions: receive the report and provide direction to staff on potential Reach Code updates to be pursued with the adoption of the 2022 Building Code later this year; and authorize the initiation of a Zoning Code Text Amendment to amend CMC 21.28 (Parking and Loading) to comply with recent amendments to state law.
PURPOSE
In compliance with State Law, the California Building Standards Code (“Building Code”) is revised and updated every three (3) years. As the 2022 Building Code will go into effect on January 1, 2023, the City needs to update the Campbell Municipal Code (“CMC”) to reference the new Building Code standards by th e end of this year. Building Division Staff, in coordination with the County Fire District, is currently preparing updates to CMC to adopt the 2022 Building Code, incorporating minor amendments to reflect local and regional conditions. In adopting the 202 2 Building Code, the City may also impose local requirements that exceed minimum building code requirements by amending the City’s adopted Reach Code 1 (i.e., requiring additional Electric Vehicle (“EV”) charging stations).
One of Council’s four main strat egic priorities identified for the City for Fiscal Year 2023 is Sustainability. In pursuing Sustainability objectives, the City may consider pursuing adoption of a Reach Code that creates higher environmental standards in building construction, by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, reliance on fossil fuels , and other related sustainability principles.
This report intends to inform the Council on options to expand the City’s adopted Reach Code so Council can provide initial direction to staff on the type o f Reach Code amendments that should be pursued. This includes consideration how Reach Code standards should apply to different types of construction (e.g., commercial, residential)
1 A “Reach Code” is a local building code that reaches beyond the state minimum requirements, typically for energy use in building design and construction.
Item: 10
Category: NEW BUSINESS
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
10 Packet Pg. 148
Reach Code Update Page 2 of 8
and thresholds for requiring compliance (e.g., new construction, during ma jor remodels of existing buildings). Further, as recent amendments to state law require the City to streamline the installation of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (e.g., AB 970, AB 1100, and AB 1236), this report serves to seek authorization to initiate a Zoning Code Text Amendment to be considered for adoption in tandem with the Building Code adoption.
BACKGROUND
On November 5, 2019, the City Council considered amendments to Title 1, 17, & 18 of the Campbell Municipal Code incorporating the 2019 Buil ding Code. In consideration of the adoption of the 2019 Building Codes, the Council also considered electrification Reach Codes proposed by Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) (reference Attachment B – November 5, 2019 – City Council Report).
After due con sideration, the Council adopted a local Reach Code 2 prohibiting all newly constructed residential living units from using natural gas or any other carbon -based gas for the purpose of water heating and warm air heating systems in the living unit but allowing for the use of natural gas for other purposes (i.e., cooking).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Reach Codes are typically considered in tandem with the three -year Building Code update cycle for efficiency of discussion and to avoid the creation of conflicting requirements (i.e., local Reach Code becoming less restrictive than the Building Code overtime). As a result, many cities are in the process of considering Reach Code updates with the three -year code cycle update to implement state law and align with local priorities.
The following discussion includes an overview of three options to expand/modify the Reach Code identified by staff that the City may consider with the adoption of the 2022 Building Code.
• Option 1: Pursue adoption of a Tier 1 Reach Code as set forth by CalGreen.
• Option 2: Pursue adoption of the Bay Area Model Reach Code requiring all electric energy usage for new construction, specifying any exemptions to building types that may be appropriate.
• Option 3: Do not change the City’s adopted Reach Cod e, retain existing requirements.
Should the Council consider updates to the Reach Code as part of this year’s code cycle, the discussion also provides options for different types of construction (e.g., commercial, residential) construction thresholds for requiring compliance (e.g., new
2 See Campbell Municipal Code (“CMC”) Section 18.18.020 – New Residential Living Units. Separately, the Council included three technical amendments to the 2019 Building Code related to concrete reinforcement and the use of drywall in shear wall construction based on the higher-than-normal risk of seismic events in the Bay Area region. 10 Packet Pg. 149
Reach Code Update Page 3 of 8
construction, during major remodels of existing buildings), as well as summary on the required process and findings to adopt the Reach Code and related Zoning Code Text Amendments.
DISCUSSION
Staff has identified three pri mary options that may be considered to expand/modify the City’s Reach Code:
Option 1: Pursue adoption of a Tier 1 Reach Code as set forth by CalGreen.
Any standards that go beyond the minimum 2022 Building Code requirements are considered ‘Reach Codes’, including topics outside the scope of the City’s adopted Reach Code (such as water efficiency and material conservation in construction).
The 2022 Building Code includes two parts which contribute to achieving California’s climate and air quality goals, including the: 1) Energy Code (which is focused on reducing energy consumption); and 2) CalGreen Code (which is focused on improving public health, reducing environmental impacts, and encouraging sustainable construction in residential and nonresidential buildings).
In addition to mandatory building standards, the CalGreen Code includes its own voluntary ‘Reach Codes’, known as Tiers, which offer model building code language for local governments to consider that wish to go beyond the minimum statewide requirements to achieve greater energy conservation, resource conservation, and/or reductions in greenhouse gas emissions which cover the following topic areas: 1) Planning & Design; 2) Energy Efficiency; 3) Water Efficiency and Conservation; 4) Material Co nservation and Resource Efficiency; and 5) Environmental Quality (reference Attachment B – Reach Code Topic Area Examples).
If the City would like to pursue a comprehensive approach in adopting building standards that achieve sustainability objectives, i t may consider the adoption of CalGreen Codes as a Reach Code. While this approach will achieve greater sustainability principles, staff believes pursuit of this option will require more research and outreach. Staff is not aware of any other local juris dictions that have comprehensively adopted the Cal Green codes as Reach Codes and has not conducted research into any challenges and issues in apply the Cal Green Codes (cost benefit analysis, available alternative products and technologies). As such, if Council would like to pursue this option, staff believes that more research and stakeholder engagement is required before a CalGreen code can be adopted. Given competing workplan priorities, this likely cannot be completed until early 2023, and thus could not be completed in time to be paired for adoption with the 2022 Building Code (which must be adopted in November to become effective by January 2023).
Option 2: Direct staff to adopt the Bay Area Model Reach Code requiring all electric energy usage for new construction, specifying any exemptions to building types that may be appropriate.
10 Packet Pg. 150
Reach Code Update Page 4 of 8
As an alternative to the adoption of CalGreen, the City may instead focus on a Reach Code pertaining to the type of energy used in buildings, focusing on decreasi ng the use of natural gas (a fossil fuel) and instead increasing electrification. The following table summarizes the key approaches under this category:
Table 1: Common Natural Gas & Electricity Restrictions in Projects
Examples of jurisdictions that fall under each category are as follows:
• Natural Gas Moratorium Ordinance (No New Gas Hookups or Piping) Alameda, Berkeley, Fairfax, Half Moon Bay, Morgan Hill, Oakland, Petaluma, San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz
• All-Electric Ordinance (No New Gas Appliances or Space/Water Heating) Alameda, Brisbane, Cupertino, Encinitas, Menlo Park, Pacifica, Richmond, Sacramento, Solana Beach, Santa Clara, Santa Rosa, Sunnyvale, Los Gatos, Mountain View
• Electric-Preferred Ordinance (Mixed -Fuel Buildi ngs Must Exceed Energy Code)
Albany, Davis, Hayward, Palo Alto, San Luis Obispo, Santa Monica
In consideration of these categories, Silicon Valley Clean Energy (in which the City of Campbell is party to a Joint Powers Agreement 3), Peninsula Clean Energy, and East Bay Community Energy are advocating adoption of a Bay Area Model Reach Code which effectively c reates an all -electric requirement for new construction and requires more expansive installation of EV charging units in multifamily and non -residential settings than Building Code requirements.
The following tables highlight the difference between the State Code, Campbell’s adopted Reach Code, and Bay Area Model Energy Reach Code:
Appliance 2022 State Code Campbell Reach Bay Area Reach
3 The City of Campbell is one of twelve jurisdictions that are included in a Joint Powers Agreement with Silicon Valley Clean Energy.
10 Packet Pg. 151
Reach Code Update Page 5 of 8
Code Code
Water Heating Gas or Electric Electric Required
(SF Res Only)
Electric Required
Space Heating Encourages
Electric
Electric Required
(SF Res Only)
Electric Required
Cooking Gas or Electric Gas or Electric Electric Required Outdoor N/A Gas or Electric Electric Required
Table 2: New Construction – Building Requirements
Building Type 2022 State Code Campbell Reach
Code
Bay Area Reach
Code
Single Family and
Multi Family with
Private Garages
1 L24 Capable N/A 1 L1 Ready, 1 L2
Ready
Multi Family with
Shared Parking
10% L2 Capable N/A 40% L2, 60%L1
Office NA N/A 20% EVSE, 30% L2
Capable
Other Non. Res. 5% L2 EVSE, 15%
L2 Capable
N/A 10% EVSE, 10% L2
Capable
Table 3: New Construction – EV Charging Requirements
(Note: See Table 1 & 2 for Definitions of Terms)
Figures 1 & 2: EV Charger Types and Charging Infrastructure
To encourage Bay Area Cities to con sider adopting the Bay Area Model Reach Code, Clean Energy Silicon Valley offers an incentive of $10,000 to each City that presents specific Reach Codes to their Council for consideration of adoption. The incentive is not conditional on adoption, but only that the Council be given the opportunity to review and adopt.
4 See Figures 1 & 2 which define L1 (Level 1), L2 (Level 2), EVSE (Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment) 10 Packet Pg. 152
Reach Code Update Page 6 of 8
If the Council elects to pursue this option, Staff recommends excluding several types of construction from the all-electric requirements. Specifically, staff recommends excluding restaurants , industrial buildings and Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s0 .
Restaurants traditionally rely upon gas for their high production cooking needs and many industrial processes may still rely upon the need for natural gas without an all - electric alternative. The requirement for “all -electric” in ADU’s may require expensive panel upgrades in single family homes and could present a barrier to ADU producing, which is a priority for providing housing and affordable housing in Campbell. For single family homes, bas ed on research and cost studies received from Silicon Valley Clean Energy, staff believes that there are feasible and cost effective electric and induction - based stoves that allow for a shift to all electric cooking.
Finally, in addition to new construc tion, staff recommends that the reach codes apply to major remodels of single family projects , to account for circumstances when a homeowner or developer is conducting a significant rebuild of an existing residence.
Currently, single-family residential projects that are classified as a “New Dwelling using portions of the original structure”, in accordance with CMC 18.32.010 , are subject to new code requirements including, but not limited to, requiring the installation of fire sprinklers and solar panels as well as frontage improvements (i.e., curb, gutter, sidewalk) and utility undergrounding where required.
Option 3: Do not change the City ’s adopted Reach Code, retain existing requirements.
As an alternative to pursuing adoption of either the Cal Green Reach Code or the Bay Area Model Reach Code, the Council may alternatively elect to retain Campbell’s Reach codes as currently adopted. As seen in Table 3 above, the 2022 Building Code will create higher standards for the installation of EV Charging systems, which are greater than Campbell’s current requirements. Under this option, Staff will return in November only with an ordinance that ad opts the 2022 Building Code, including minor amendments as proposed by the Building Division and the County Fire District. Further consideration of Reach Code updates could follow the adoption of the City’s Climate Action Plan (following adoption of the G eneral Plan and Housing Element in March 2023).
Findings and Adoption of Reach Codes : Under State law, cities are allowed to modify the Building Code to make it more restrictive5 when locally adopted.
When local adoption includes local amendments, each amendment must be justified through findings that demonstrate the proposed amendment is “reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geologic, or topographical conditions.” Amendment findings must be filed with the California Building Standards Commiss ion (CBSC). Once received by the CBSC, the findings are evaluated to ensure they are acceptable.
Amendments become effective once findings are received by the Commission. With
5 While jurisdictions may make the Building Code more restrictive, they are prohibited from making it less restrictive. 10 Packet Pg. 153
Reach Code Update Page 7 of 8
Council approval, Campbell’s amendments with associated findings will be sent to the Building Standards Commission.
Zoning Code Text Amendment : In accordance with CMC 21.60.020.B., only the Planning Commission or City Council may authorize a Zoning Code Text Amendment.
Accordingly, staff is seeking Council authorization to initialize a Zoning Code Text Amendment to Chapter 21.28 (Parking and Loading) of the Campbell Municipal Code to comply with recent changes to state law intended to streamline the review and permitting of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations. In general, these amendme nts will ensure that electric vehicle charging spaces count as at least one standard parking space and accessible charging spaces with an access aisle count as two standard parking spaces (AB 1100), that the City shall reduce the number of required parking spaces for existing uses by the amount necessary to accommodate Electric Vehicle Charging Stations (AB 970), and ensure that permits for electric vehicle charging stations are processed in a streamlined manner (AB 1236).
Staff Recommendation : In review of the options and considerations outlined in this report, staff recommends the City pursue adoption of the Bay Area Model Reach Code (see ‘Option 2’) for all new construction projects and major remodels with the following exceptions:
• Industrial buildings;
• Restaurants;
• Accessory dwelling units; and
• Pool and spas.
Staff believes this approach will increase movement of building energy usage more significantly towards electricity and reduce the City’s reliance on fossil fuels. The exceptions outlined by s taff are intended to avoid unintended consequences (i.e., prohibiting industrial processes that require gas) and topic areas (i.e., prohibiting gas in restaurants) that should involve broader community engagement and participation.
Further, the applicatio n of these standards on only new construction and major remodels will help ensure the cost of upgrading power service to the building (i.e., installing transformers, new electric switchboxes or panels) and requiring the replacement of appliances has a roug h proportionality to the scope of the project.
Under this approach, staff believes it can complete stakeholder engagement and preparation of the ordinances in time to pair adoption of the Reach Codes with the 2022 Building Code. Under this schedule, staf f anticipates returning to Council in November for the collective adoption of these ordinances.
With respect to the option of adopting the Cal Green Reach Codes, this could be considered further as a program within the broader Climate Action Plan prepar ation that is scheduled to begin in 2023.
FISCAL IMPACT
10 Packet Pg. 154
Reach Code Update Page 8 of 8
Based on the feedback provided by the City Council, staff will return with an analysis of potential impacts to construction costs. The City may incur costs if the City Council chooses to hire a co nsultant to complete a cost analysis to determine the financial impacts that will occur for residents, businesses, or property owners required to comply with the new Reach Code once adopted.
If the City adopts the Bay Area Model Reach Code, it is expecte d that construction costs will be reduced for most buildings due to the elimination of the need for gas infrastructure and the elimination of a separate heating appliance. Installing electrical charging infrastructure will add costs ranging from $1,000 to $4,000 per unit, Silicon Valley Clean Energy has a program that will provide up to $1,000 per unit for low - and very-low-income units with a charger for the 2022 Building Code cycle.
Additional costs could be incurred during the building plan check process as city specific building code regulations will require specialized review from either in -house staff or third-party consultants. Should in -house building division staff be required to facilitate additional plan check review , this could necessitate addi tional staffing resources to conduct the plan review or provide inspection services.
Prepared by:
Stephen Rose, Senior Planner
Approved by:
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Attachment:
a. Bay Area Model Reach Code
b. Reach Code Topic Area Examples
c. November 5, 2019 - City Council Report
d. November 5, 2019 - City Council Meeting Minutes Item 10 Only e. Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019
f. November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting Minutes Item 14 10 Packet Pg. 155
2022 Model All-Electric Part 11 Reach Code
Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE), Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE), and East Bay Community Energy (EBCE) provide a 2022 model of an all-electric reach code, representing recommended local building code amendments to cross-referenced portions of the 2022 Title 24 Part 11 of the California Code of Regulations, the California Green Building Standards Code (also known as CALGreen). Additions are underlined, deletions are stricken through, and comments explain the rationale.
Please visit BayAreaReachCodes.Org to review related information, including an alternative Municipal Ordinance prohibiting gas infrastructure, sample Facts and Findings, and other resources.
Source Documents Replied Upon
• 2019 CALGreen
• Final Express Terms for the 2022 CALGreen (Part 11)
Version Date Summary of Updates
March 30 1st Draft
July 8, 2022 1. Included additions in the definition of ‘newly constructed buildings.’
Part 11 – California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen)
CHAPTER 2 – DEFINITIONS
ADDITION. An extension or increase in floor area of an existing building or structure.
ALL-ELECTRIC BUILDING. A building that contains no combustion equipment or plumbing for combustion equipment serving space heating (including fireplaces), water heating (including pools and spas), cooking appliances (including barbeques), and clothes drying, within the building or building property lines, and instead uses electric heating appliances for service.
ALTERATION OR ALTER. Any construction or renovation to an existing structure other than repair for the purpose of maintenance or addition.
COMBUSTION EQUIPMENT. Any equipment or appliance used for space heating, water heating, cooking, clothes drying and/or lighting that uses fuel gas.
ELECTRIC HEATING APPLIANCE. A device that produces heat energy to create a warm environment by the application of electric power to resistance elements, refrigerant compressors, or dissimilar material junctions, as defined in the California Mechanical Code.
FUEL GAS. A gas that is natural, manufactured, liquefied petroleum, or a mixture of these.
NEWLY CONSTRUCTED (or NEW CONSTRUCTION). A newly constructed building (or new construction) does not include additions, alterations or repairs.
10.a
Packet Pg. 156
Attachment: Bay Area Model Reach Code (Reach Code Update)
10.a
Packet Pg. 157
Attachment: Bay Area Model Reach Code (Reach Code Update)
CHAPTER 4 – RESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES
Division 4.1 PLANNING AND DESIGN
SECTION 4.106
SITE DEVELOPMENT
……..
4.106.5 All-electric buildings. New construction buildings and qualifying alteration projects shall comply with Section 4.106.5.1 or 4.106.5.2 so that they do not use combustion equipment or are ready to accommodate installation of electric heating appliances.
4.106.5.1. New construction and qualifying alteration projects. All newly constructed buildings shall be all-electric buildings. Alterations that include replacement or addition of over 50 percent of the existing foundation for purposes other than a repair or reinforcement as defined in California Existing Building Code Section 202; or where over 50 percent of the existing framing above the sill plate is removed or replaced for purposes other than repair, shall be all-electric buildings. If either of these criteria are met within a three-year period, measured from the date of the most recent previously obtained permit final date, the project shall be subject to the all-electric buildings requirements.
Tenant improvements shall not be considered new construction. The final determination whether a project meets the definition of substantial reconstruction/alteration shall be made by the local enforcing agency.
10.a
Packet Pg. 158
Attachment: Bay Area Model Reach Code (Reach Code Update)
CHAPTER 5 – NONRESIDENTIAL MANDATORY MEASURES
Division 5.1 PLANNING AND DESIGN
SECTION 5.106 - SITE DEVELOPMENT
……..
5.106.13 All-electric buildings. New construction buildings and qualifying alteration projects shall comply with Section 5.106.13.1 or 5.106.13.2 so that they do not use combustion equipment or are ready to facilitate future electrification.
5.106.13.1. New construction and qualifying alteration projects. All newly constructed buildings shall be all-electric buildings. Alterations that include replacement of over 50 percent of the existing foundation for purposes other than a repair or reinforcement as defined in California Existing Building Code Section 202; or where over 50 percent of the existing framing above the sill plate is removed or replaced for purposes other than repair, shall be all-electric buildings. If either of these criteria are met within a three-year period, measured from the date of the most recent previously obtained permit final date, the project shall be subject to the all-electric buildings requirements.
Tenant improvements shall not be considered new construction. The final determination whether a project meets the definition of substantial reconstruction/alteration shall be made by the local enforcing agency.
10.a
Packet Pg. 159
Attachment: Bay Area Model Reach Code (Reach Code Update) CalGreen Reach Code Topic Areas
The following provides examples of requirements from the five topic areas included in the CalGreen Reach Code (Tier 1 & Tier 2).
1. Planning & Design
• Site Selection:
o Requiring projects to facilitate community connectivity by locating within walking distance of basic services or incorporating measures to increase access to such resources.
• Deconstruction and Reuse of Existing Materials
o Requiring existing buildings to be disassembled for reuse or recycling of building materials such as light fixtures, plumbing fixtures, doors, and appliances.
• Site Preservation:
o Assigning an individual with oversight responsibilities that has participated in education program promoting environmentally friendly design or development
• Site Development:
o Limiting the amount of cut/fill of soil in the installing access roads and driveways
o Requiring topsoil to be protected and stockpiled for reuse o Utilize at least 75% native California or dr ought tolerant plant and tree species appropriate for the climate zone region
o Require the use of permeable pavers for at least 20% of the total parking, walking, or patio areas onsite
o Require roofing materials to have a 3 -year aged solar reflectance and thermal emittance or a minimum Solar Reflectance Index (SRI) equal or greater than that otherwise required
o Require the installation of vegetated or blue roofs for a specified percentage of the roof area
2. Energy Efficiency
• Performance Approach for Newly Constructed Buildings
o Require compact hot water distribution systems
o Require energy storage systems
o Require larger than required solar photovoltaic (PV) systems
• EV Parking
o Require the installation of electrical circuits for electrical vehicle charging in residential and commercial buildings
10.b
Packet Pg. 160
Attachment: Reach Code Topic Area Examples (Reach Code Update) o Require the installation of specified EV charger types or infrastructure in residential and commercial buildings
• Battery Storage
o Require the installation of battery storage units (i.e., Tesla Powerwall) with new construction to offset the impact to the grid and reduce impacts from power outages
3. Water Efficiency and Conservation
This category of Reach Codes establishes requirements for indoor and outdoor water use, such as the following:
• Indoor Water Conservation:
o Require submeters for multi-family buildings and dwelling units o Establish a maximum flow rate for specified plumbing fixtures lower than that specified by the Building Code (i.e., 1.5 gallons per minute for kitchen faucets)
o Require installation of at least one qualified ENERGY STAR dishwasher or clothes washer
o Require the installation of a hot water recirculatory system
• Outdoor Water Conservation:
o Require all new landscaping to comply with the current California Department of Water Resources Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO)
o Require the installation of a rainwater capture, storage, and re-use system
4. Material Conservation and Resource Efficiency
Reach Codes which establish requirements for material conservation and resource efficiency include standards for foundation systems, efficiency framing techniques, material sources, enhanced durability and reduced maintenance, and water re sistance and moisture management. Examples of Reach Codes in this category include:
• Foundation Systems:
o Cement use in foundation mix design is reduced by 20%
• Efficiency Framing Techniques:
o Beams and headers are minimum size to adequately support the load o Use premanufactured building systems to eliminate solid sawn lumber whenever possible.
• Material Sources:
o Floors that do not require additional coverings are used – such as stamped concrete floor
10.b
Packet Pg. 161
Attachment: Reach Code Topic Area Examples (Reach Code Update) o Require the use of postconsumer or pre-consumer recycled content values are used on the project at a specified percentage
• Enhanced Durability and Reduced Maintenance:
o Close annual spaces around pipes, electric cables, etc. with cement mortar or concrete masonry
• Water Resistance and Moisture Management:
o Require the installation of foundation and landscape drawings o Require the installation of gutter and downspout syste ms to route water at least 5 feet away from the foundation of a building or connect to rainwater capture systems
• Construction Waste Reduction, Disposal and Recycling:
o Divert construction waste generated at the site to recycle or salvage at a specified minimum percentage subject to third party verification
5. Environmental Quality
Reach Codes which establish requirements for Environmental Quality include standards for pollutant control as follows:
• Pollutant Control:
o Require the installation of Volatile Or ganic Compound (VOC) resilient flooring systems
o Use composite wood products made with either California Air Resources Board approved no added formaldehyde (NAF) resins or ultra -low emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins
o Require the installation of thermal insulation in compliance with VOC limits
10.b
Packet Pg. 162
Attachment: Reach Code Topic Area Examples (Reach Code Update) City
Council
Report
TITLE: Introduction of Ordinance to Amend Titles: 1, 17 and 18 of the Campbell Municipal Code to Amend and Adopt the 2019 Editions o f the California Building & Fire Codes and Consider Electrification Reach Codes Proposed by Silicon Valley Clean Energy
(Ordinance/Roll Call Vote)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council introduce an ordinance amending Title 1, 17 and 18 of the Campbell Municipal Code to amend and adopt the 2019 Editions of the California Building & Fire Codes; and that the City Council consider the Electrification Reach Codes proposed by Silicon Valley Clean Energy.
DISCUSSION
Background: On July 1, 2019, the State of California Building Standards Commission published the 2019 editions of the California Building Codes Title 24 and California Fire Codes. Local and County governments are given the opportunity to review the new Codes and adopt them with local amendments. Local jurisdictions are not permitted to selectively “un -adopt” sections of the State Codes they find objectionable. The 2019 Codes become State Law, effective Statewide regardless of any jurisdiction failing to locally adopt prior to January 1, 2020.
Under State law, cities are allowed to modify the Codes thereby making them more restrictive when locally adopted. However, they are prohibited from making the Code less restrictive. When local adoption includes local amendments, each amendment must be justif ied through findings that demonstrate the proposed amendment is “reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geologic, or topographical conditions.” Amendment findings must be filed with the California Building Standards Commission.
Once received by the Commission, the findings are evaluated to insure they are acceptable. Amendments become effective once findings are received by the Commission. With Council approval, Campbell ’s amendments with associated findings will be sent to the Building Standards Commission.
With each successive Code adoption ( three Years), Codes typically become more restrictive. There are cases where individual requirements may be relaxed but overall the trend is for more restrictive Codes.
Item: 10
Category: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND
INTRODUCTION OF
ORDINANCES
Meeting Date: November 5, 2019
10 Packet Pg. 306
10.c
Packet Pg. 163
Attachment: November 5, 2019 - City Council Report (Reach Code Update) Amend and Adopt 2019 California Building & Fire Codes Page 2 of 4 Reach Codes: In addition to the ado ption of the Model Codes, the City Council is given the opportunity to consider “Reach Codes” that go beyond the Model Codes. Although not proposed in the attached draft Building Codes, a “Reach Code”, is defined as a voluntary code that “reaches” beyond the requirement of the model codes adopted by the State.
The Reach Codes presented in this report for consideration in the adoption of the Model Codes are the product of efforts by Silicon Valley Clean Energy . The Reach Codes are designed to effect significant reductions in the production of greenhouse gases and can contribute to the conservation of energy. The two Reach Codes presented are:
1. Building Appliance Electrification
2. Electrical Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
In an effort to encourage Bay Area C ities to consider adopting Reach Codes, Silicon Valley Clean Energy offers an incentive of $10,000 to each City that presents two specific Reach Codes to their Council for consideration of adoption. The incentive is not conditional on adoption, but only that the Council is given the opportunity to review and adopt.
Building Appliance Electrification : Under this proposed code offering, new buildings would be subject to electrical requirements that would require the new buildings to be “pre-wired” electrically to supply power for electric water heating, electric space heating, electric clothes drying and electric cooking. Those buildings that go beyond the pre -wire and install electric water heating, space heating, clothes drying, and electric cooking are able to obtain Energy Code benefits as well as cost of use benefits. This code offering allows for the continued use of natural gas but encourages the use of electrical power to replace gas appliances going forward.
Electrical Vehicle Charging Infrastructu re: This code would require the installation of electrical circuits for electrical vehicle charging in residential and commercial buildings.
These circuits would be “EV -Ready” or “Plug & Play” to allow for immediate use by occupants. This code offering recognizes the increasing number of electric vehicles and is an effort to encourage the infrastructure supporting electric vehicles.
Amendments: Under this adoption of the new codes, Title 18, of the Campbell Municipal Code is amended. Three technical amend ments to the codes are proposals of the Tri - Chapter Uniform Code Committee, comprised of members from the East Bay, Peninsula and Monterey Bay Chapters of the International Code Conference (ICC). By adopting these amendments, the City of Campbell will hav e requirements in common with all south bay cities. These amendments relate to concrete reinforcement and the use of drywall in shear wall construction. These amendments are based on the higher than normal risk of seismic events in the Bay Area region. 10 Packet Pg. 307
10.c
Packet Pg. 164
Attachment: November 5, 2019 - City Council Report (Reach Code Update) Amend and Adopt 2019 California Building & Fire Codes Page 3 of 4 Following each proposed amendment, you will see the rationale provided which will be given to the Building Standards Commission as findings for the amendments.
Amendment of 18.04.052 Hours of Construction has been made to clarify the definition of “Legal H oliday.” Exception (a), allowing owners to work outside of regulated hours has also been amended to limit abuses of this exception.
Title 17 contains the California Fire Code with local amendments. Ordinance amendments to Title 17 have been prepared and submitted by Santa Clara County Deputy Fire Chief, John Justice. The amendments to Title 17 are consistent with other Santa Clara County, and Bay Area fire jurisdiction requirements.
Title 17, required findings for justification can be found in attachment 3.
Adoption of this ordinance amending Chapters 1, 17 and 18 of the Campbell Municipal Code will bring the City Codes into agreement with State and regional code adoptions.
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of new code books: approximately $2,500.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not adopt proposed ordinance changes.
2. Provide direction for other local amendments to the State Building Code.
Prepared by:
Bill Bruckart, Building Official
Reviewed by:
Paul Kermoyan, Community
Development Director
Approved by:
10 Packet Pg. 308
Brian Loventhal, City Manager
10.c
Packet Pg. 165
Attachment: November 5, 2019 - City Council Report (Reach Code Update) Amend and Adopt 2019 California Building & Fire Codes Page 4 of 4 Attachment:
1. Proposed Ordinance
2. Title 1 Text
3. Title 17 Text
4. Title 18 Text
5. Reach Code Presentation
10 Packet Pg. 309
10.c
Packet Pg. 166
Attachment: November 5, 2019 - City Council Report (Reach Code Update) Minutes of November 5, 2019 City Council Meeting Page 3
10. Introduction of Ordinance to Amend Titles: 1, 17 and 18 of the Campbell Municipal Code to Amend and Adopt the 2019 Editions of the California Building & Fire Codes and Consider Electrification Reach Codes Proposed by Silicon Valley Clean Energy (Ordinance/Roll Call Vote) Recommended Action: That the City Council introduce an ordinance amending Title 1, 17 and 18 of the Campbell Municipal Code to amend and adop t the 2019 Editions of the California Building & Fire Codes; and that the City Council consider the Electrification Reach Codes proposed by Silicon Valley Clean Energy.
City Manager Loventhal recommended that this item be continued due to some text formatting issues.
Mayor Waterman stated that this item will be continued but declared the public hearing open and asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to be heard.
Councilmember Gibbons commented on this item, spoke about a simplified presentation and commen ted on the letter received from PG&E, and cost changes.
M/S: Gibbons/Landry - that the City Council continue th e public hearing for this item to the Novemb er 19, 2019, City Council meeting. The motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT: CONTINUE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gibbons
SECONDER: Landry
AYES: Waterman, Landry, Resnikoff, Bybee, Gibbons
ADJOURN
Vice Mayor Landry requested the meeting be closed in memory of Jo-Ann Fairbanks.
10.d
Packet Pg. 167
Attachment: November 5, 2019 - City Council Meeting Minutes Item 10 Only (Reach Code Update)
Residential Cooktop Performance and Energy
Comparison Study
Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
July 2019
Prepared by:
Denis Livchak
Russell Hedrick
Richard Young
Frontier Energy
Contributors:
Mark Finck
Todd Bell
Michael Karsz
Frontier Energy
Prepared for:
Cheri Davis
Residential Efficiency Program Supervisor
Advanced Energy Solutions
916-732-5919
[email protected]
SMUD
Sacramento Municipal Utility District
6201 S Street, Mail Stop B100
Sacramento, CA 95852
Frontier Energy, All rights reserved. 2019
The information generated in this report is based on data generated at the Food Service Technology Center (FSTC)
10.e
Packet Pg. 168
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 2 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Policy on the Use of Food Service Technology Center Test Results and Other Related Information Frontier Energy and the FSTC do not endorse particular products or services from any specific manufacturer or service provider. The FSTC is strongly committed to testing foodservice equipment using the best available scientific techniques and instrumentation. The FSTC is neutral as to fuel and energy source. It does not, in any way, encourage or promote the use of any fuel or energy source nor does it endorse any of the equipment tested at the FSTC.
FSTC test results are made available to the general public through technical research reports and publications and are protected under U.S. and international copyright laws.
Disclaimer
Copyright 2019 Frontier Energy. All rights reserved. Reproduction or distribution of the whole or any part of the contents of this document without written permission of Frontier Energy is prohibited. Results relate only to the item(s) tested. Neither Frontier Energy nor any of their employees, or the FSTC, make any warranty, expressed or implied, or assume any legal liability of responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any data, information, method, product or process disclosed in this document, or represents that its use will not infringe any privately-owned rights, including but not limited to, patents, trademarks, or copyrights.
Reference to specific products or manufacturers is not an endorsement of that product or manufacturer by Frontier Energy or the FSTC. In no event will Frontier Energy be liable for any special, incidental, consequential, indirect, or similar damages, including but not limited to lost profits, lost market share, lost savings, lost data, increased cost of production, or any other damages arising out of the use of the data or the interpretation of the data presented in this report.
Revision History
Revision num. Date Description Author(s)
0 July 2019 Initial Release D. Livchak, R. Hedrick
10.e
Packet Pg. 169
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 3 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Contents
Background ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Approach ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 Technology Description ................................................................................................................................ 6 Equipment Description ................................................................................................................................. 8 Results ......................................................................................................................................................... 10 Heat-Up Time .......................................................................................................................................... 10 Temperature Response ........................................................................................................................... 14 Energy Efficiency ..................................................................................................................................... 17 Simmer Test ............................................................................................................................................ 19 Standby Energy ....................................................................................................................................... 19 Energy Cost Model ...................................................................................................................................... 20 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................... 21 Appendix A: Test Method ........................................................................................................................... 23 Appendix B: Ventilation Requirements and Ambient Heat Impacts .......................................................... 25 References .................................................................................................................................................. 27
10.e
Packet Pg. 170
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 4 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Figures
Figure 1: Water Boil and Simmer Test ............................................................................................................ 6 Figure 2: Sauté Test with a Standard Food Product ........................................................................................ 6 Figure 3: Electric Resistance Ceramic Range Top .......................................................................................... 6 Figure 4: Electric Resistance Coil Range Top ................................................................................................. 6 Figure 5: Gas Open Burner Range Top ........................................................................................................... 6 Figure 6: Electric Induction Range Top........................................................................................................... 6 Figure 7: Water Heat-Up Times ..................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 8: Water Heat-Up Rate Test Results .................................................................................................. 12 Figure 9: Preheating the pan and temperature verification ........................................................................... 18 Figure 10: Frozen product placement in the pan ........................................................................................... 18 Figure 11: Product flip after 60% of elapsed time .......................................................................................... 18 Figure 12: Resistance Coil Cooktop ............................................................................................................. 19 Figure 13: Gas Cooktop ................................................................................................................................ 19 Figure 14: Induction Cooktop ....................................................................................................................... 19
Tables
Table 1: Cooktop Heat-Up Time Results ....................................................................................................... 11 Table 2: Effect of Efficiency on Energy Delivered – 12-lb Water Heat-up Test ............................................... 13 Table 3: Cooktop Temperature Response Results ........................................................................................ 15 Table 4: Energy Efficiency Results ............................................................................................................... 18 Table 5: Simmer Energy Rate Results........................................................................................................... 19 Table 6: Energy Model Assumptions ............................................................................................................ 20 Table 7: Energy Model .................................................................................................................................. 20 Table 8: Results Summary ............................................................................................................................ 22 Table 9: Ventilation Assumptions ................................................................................................................. 25 Table 10: Ventilation Cost Estimations ......................................................................................................... 26
10.e
Packet Pg. 171
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 5 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Background
The perception that gas residential cooktops are superior in performance to electric cooktops has been prevalent for decades. Gas cooktops offer users the ability to adjust the heat to the pan based on a visual reference to the height of the flame. Many home cooks prefer the immediate response of flame adjustment to the delayed response associated with electric resistance coils.
Induction technology, however, has revolutionized electric cooktop cooking by changing the way heat is transferred to cookware. Using a magnetic field, induction cooktops excite the molecules in a pot or pan, generating heat for cooking. Induction technology results in a near complete energy transfer to the cooking vessel, making induction cooktops incredibly energy efficient relative to other modes of cooking. Other benefits of induction cooktops, in comparison to gas burners and traditional resistance heating elements include increased safety and reduced energy use when not cooking. When a pot or pan is removed from the burner or element on a gas range top or resistance electric range top, the burner or element needs to be manually turned off. But, when a pot or pan is removed from an induction hob, the magnetic coil immediately stops consuming energy, providing the most effective energy control of any range top design. And, since there is no open flame or hot element on an induction range top, there is no chance of igniting any flammable object that might be on or near the range top – increasing fire safety in the kitchen.
Induction cooking technology was developed in the 1990s for the commercial market but has yet to be widely adopted in the U.S. residential market. Growing concerns over climate change and the desire to reduce the burning of fossil fuels is generating interest in induction cooking as a replacement for natural gas; however, consumers’ unfamiliarity with the technology, its higher price point, and fears regarding the special cookware that is required are barriers to developing this market. Also, there is relatively little information available to date on the benefits of induction cooking for homeowners, making it difficult to even initiate the push for market transformation. The goal of this study is to address this final barrier by assessing the cooking performance and energy consumption of induction relative to more traditional residential cooktops – gas open burners, electric resistance heat coils, and electric glass-ceramic cooktops.
Approach
Under controlled laboratory conditions, researchers performed the following tests on each cooktop type to test:
Water Heat Up – The energy and time to bring water to 200°F, which is used to both measure the production capability of the cooktop as well as the energy efficiency. In addition, the overshoot and cool-down from the water heat-up test is used to illustrate the temperature response of each cooktop.
Simmer – Once the water is boiling, the energy required to keep a pot of water at a simmer, which is used to measure energy consumption under regular cooking conditions for inclusion in an energy cost model.
Sauté – The energy and time to pan-cook a typical food product, which is used to both measure the production capability of the cooktop as well as the energy efficiency.
10.e
Packet Pg. 172
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 6 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Figure 1: Water Boil and Simmer Test
Figure 2: Sauté Test with a Standard Food Product
Each of the performance tests used a modified methodology based on the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) F1521 Standard Test Methods for Performance of Range Tops for the heat-up tests and ASTM F1275 Standard Test Method for Performance of Griddles for the sauté tests. A summary of the test methodology is provided in Appendix A. These tests were conducted for each of the residential range tops split into four categories:
Electric Resistance Ceramic Range Top
Electric Resistance Coil Range Top
Gas Open Burner Range Top
Electric Induction Range Top
Technology Description
Cooktop technology can be described in terms of respective modes of heat transfer. Identifying the distinct physics of each cooktop technology and the method in which they transfer heat to cookware is the best way to characterize the inherent benefits and drawbacks of each mode. It is industry standard to use the terms “burner” and “element” to describe the heat transfer technologies on gas and electric range tops respectively, with the term “hob” used generically to describe burners or elements on either range top type.
Figure 4: Electric Resistance
Coil Range Top
Figure 5: Gas Open Burner
Range Top
Figure 6: Electric Induction
Range Top
Figure 3: Electric Resistance
Ceramic Range Top
10.e
Packet Pg. 173
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 7 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Gas Cooktops:
Heat is transferred to the cookware by an open flame, fueled by an air-gas mixture. The flame transfers its energy by convection and radiant heat through the heated circulating air surrounding the cookware. The main objective of gas/flame cooking is to transfer the maximum amount of energy generated by the gas combustion into the cooking vessel. This is done by maximizing the space for the flame to heat up the pan while minimizing the surface area of the metal grates holding the pan. Some heat is transferred from the grates to the cookware through conduction but, this is insignificant compared to the heat transferred by the convection and radiation from the direct flame. Even though a pot or pan is directly receiving energy from the open flame, this does not mean that energy is being effectively transferred into the food product. As test results have demonstrated, most energy is diverted around the bottom of the pan and ends up as waste heat in the surrounding space.
Electric Resistance Cooktops:
Electric resistance coils became the first commercially popular electric cooktops due to their simple and reasonably inexpensive design. While the physics behind the heating element is typically the same across this cooktop technology, there are some design differences. All resistance heating elements generate their heat by running an electric current through a metal wire with high resistance and thermal conductive properties. When heated, the wire becomes red-hot and emits a great deal of thermal radiation. This material is often thin nichrome wire and therefore must be protected from repeated use and abrasion. Two protective solutions are represented by the two types of resistance electric cooktops tested:
o For electric resistance coil cooktops, a common solution consists of encasing the heating element with a metal or ceramic sleeve. All the thermal radiation generated by the heating element is transferred into the metal/ceramic sleeve. The heat is then transferred into the cookware by conduction. Most modern heating coils are designed to maximize the amount of material in contact with the cooking surface by flattening the sleeves and minimizing space between windings; however, imperfections in the coils and the bottoms of the cookware can decrease the efficiency of the conductive heat transfer.
o For electric resistance infrared cooktops, a solution for protecting the heating element is to encase it beneath a glass-ceramic top. There are performance benefits and drawbacks to utilizing glass as a heat transfer medium. Glass offers high emissivity but low conductivity. The glass-ceramic top is excellent for allowing thermal radiation to pass through due to its high emissivity. Most of the energy transferred to the cookware comes from thermal radiation emitted from the heating element located beneath the glass. Glass is not a good conductor, so less energy is transferred to the cookware through conduction. However, since the glass-ceramic surface is one continuous piece, the low thermal conductivity has the advantage of maintaining the heat within the
10.e
Packet Pg. 174
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 8 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
localized cooking surface over the heating element. This provides some degree of thermal isolation around an element - allowing a cooking zone over an element that is set on a high temperature to have minimal thermal impact on the other cooking zones of the range top.
Electric Induction Cooktops:
Induction heating is the most efficient means of transferring heat from the cooktop to the cookware. Close to 90% of the energy consumed by the induction hob is transferred into the cooking vessel. Induction heating is accomplished by allowing a high frequency alternating current to flow through a tightly wound coil of wire, generating a rapidly changing magnetic field at the surface of the cooktop. When a pot or pan containing ferrous (magnetic) material is placed on the surface of the cooktop, the magnetic field induces an “eddy current” in the material, causing heat to be generated directly in the bottom and sides of the cookware. Non-magnetic materials are not affected by the presence of the magnetic field so, nearly all the energy is transferred directly into the cookware. The surface material for an induction cooktop is typically glass-ceramic.
Equipment Description
Researchers conducted energy and performance testing on six (6) different residential cooktops (three induction, two resistance, and one gas). Below are the cooktop specifications:
Frigidaire FGIF3036TF - Electric Induction Cooktop
Number of Elements: 4
Cooktop Controls: Digital Button 1-9 (and power
boost)
Oven Type: Convection
Tested Elements*: 9.4 3.6 kW; 7.0 2.8 kW
Retail Price: $1,199
*Maximum Input Rate (kW) in power boost mode
GE Profile PHS930SL2SS - Electric Induction Cooktop
Number of Elements: 4+1 warmer
Cooktop Controls: Digital Touchpad 0-100% (5%
Increments)
Oven Type: Convection
Tested Elements*: 11.0 3.7 kW; 8.0 2.5 kW
Retail Price: $2,399
*Maximum Input Rate (kW)
10.e
Packet Pg. 175
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 9 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Samsung NE58K9560WS - Electric Induction Cooktop
Number of Elements: 4
Cooktop Controls: Digital Rotary (Analogue Look)
Oven Type: Dual-Fan Convection
Tested Elements*: 11.0 3.3 kW; 7.0 1.8 kW
Retail Price: $2,199
*Maximum Input Rate (kW) in power boost mode
Whirlpool WFE515S0ES1 - Electric Resistance Glass-
Ceramic Top
Number of Elements: 4
Cooktop Controls: Rotary Dial 1-9
Oven Type: Standard Non-Convection
Tested Elements: 9.0 2.5 kW; 6.0 1.2 kW
Retail Price: $579
Frigidaire FFEF3016USB - Electric Resistance Coil
Number of Elements: 4
Cooktop Controls: Rotary Dial 1-9
Oven Type: Standard Non-Convection
Tested Elements: 8.0 2.4 kW; 6.0 1.5 kW
Retail Price: $579
10.e
Packet Pg. 176
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 10 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Samsung NX58H5600SS – Gas Burner Range
Number of Burners: 5
Cooktop Controls: Analog rotary dials
Oven Type: Convection
Tested Burners: 3.8 17 kBtu/h; 2.9 9.5 kBtu
Retail Price: $799
Cooktops were selected based on the most popular models on the market. The largest induction elements were rated at 2.3 kW and ranged between 3.0 kW and 3.7kW when operated in the power boost mode. The largest resistance cooktop elements were 2.5 kW and the largest gas burners ranged between 15 and 17 kBtu/h. Medium burners/elements were usually ½ to ¾ the input of the largest burners/elements and the smallest burners/elements were not tested because they were designed to be used for warming, not cooking. Cooktop prices depended on the cooktop heating methods, control features (e.g., analogue dials, Wi-Fi connectivity), and oven features (e.g., convection, multiple fans).
Results
Researchers used the following performance metrics while comparing the four cooktop categories:
Heat-Up Time
Temperature Response
Energy Efficiency
Simmer Energy Consumption
Standby Energy Consumption
Heat-Up Time
Heat-up time is a function of cooktop power and efficiency – the more powerful and efficient the cooktop, the faster it will heat up a pot of water. A cooktop may have a high input-rate and low efficiency but heat up water just as fast as a low-input and high-efficiency range top. Two of the three induction cooktops include “power boost” modes, which increase the wattage to the element by up to 50% for a period of 10 minutes. The third induction cooktop operates in a default power boost mode and throttles down the wattage to the element as more elements are turned ON. All the induction cooktops were operated with their elements at the maximum or power-boost setting for the Heat-Up Time tests. Across the board, the induction cooktops (operated at the highest power setting) demonstrated faster heat-up times than both the electric resistance and gas models. Researchers conducted heat-up tests on the largest gas burner or hob/element of each cooktop using an 8-quart pot with 12-pounds of water as well as the medium burner or hob/element of each cooktop using a 3.5-qt
10.e
Packet Pg. 177
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 11 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
pot with 5-lb of water. The test consisted of heating the water from 70°F to 200°F and the results are presented in Table 1 and Figures 7 and 8. The energy to heat up the pot is also included in the efficiency calculations.
Table 1: Cooktop Heat-Up Time Results
Cooktop Induction
A
(Frigidaire)
Induction
B
(GE)
Induction
C
(Samsung)
Resistance
Ceramic
(Whirlpool)
Resistance
Coil
(Frigidaire)
Gas Burner
(Samsung)
Medium Hob
Input Rate 2.8 kW 2.5 kW 2.3 kW 1.2 kW 1.5 kW 9.5 kBtu/h Equivalent
kBtu/h 9.5 8.5 7.8 4.0 5.1 9.5
5-lb water heat
up time (min) 5.3 5.8 6.4 18.8 11.5 14.1
Efficiency 86.2% 86.8% 85.3% 70.3% 72.3% 30.6%
Large Hob Input
Rate 3.6 kW 3.7 kW 3.3 kW 2.5 kW 2.4 kW 17 kBtu/h
Equivalent
kBtu/h 12.3 12.6 11.3 8.5 8.2 17.0
12-lb water heat
up time (min) 9.8 9.3 11.6 17.8 15.5 18.6
Efficiency 85.2% 86.1% 83.0% 75.5% 79.3% 31.9%
Production*
Capacity (lb/h) 73.5 77.2 62.2 40.4 46.5 38.6
*calculated based on a single high-input element or burner heating 12 lb of water from 70 to 200F in an 8 qt pot.
10.e
Packet Pg. 178
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 12 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Figure 7: Water Heat-Up Times
*calculated based on a single high-input element or burner heating 12 lb of water from 70 to 200F in an 8 qt pot Figure 8: Water Heat-Up Rate Test Results
02468101214161820Induction A(Frigidaire)Induction B (GE) Induction C(Samsung)ResistanceCeramic(Whirlpool)Resistance Coil(Frigidaire)Gas Burner(Samsung) Heatup Time from 70°F to 200°F (min)Tested Range, 5lb and 12lb heatup tests were performed with different input burners12lb water heat up5 lb water heatup 7080901001101201301401501601701801902002100 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20Water Temperature [°F]Test Time [min]ThresholdResistance Coil (Frigidaire)Induction A (Frigidaire)Resistance Ceramic (Whirlpool)Induction B (GE)Gas Burner (Samsung)Induction C (Samsung)
10.e
Packet Pg. 179
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 13 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
With water heat-up times averaging 10 minutes for the large 12-lb pot of water and efficiencies averaging 85%, the induction cooktops displayed the best heat-up performance among all tested cooktops. The induction cooktops had the highest hob input rate (averaging 3.5 kW in power boost mode) compared to the standard resistance cooktops, which average 2.5 kW for the largest elements.
The ability of the electronically controlled induction cooktops to boost the power to individual hobs is a feature that is not available on the cooktops with traditional resistance elements, which have a fixed maximum kW based on their physical resistance. This important feature allows a user to install a cooktop with increased cooking performance on the same sized electrical service as a standard electric resistance cooktop. The induction cooktop adjusts the kW input automatically to provide maximum cooking performance without exceeding the available electric supply.
Most residential gas cooktops list a maximum input rate in the 15-17 kBtu/h range. The 17 kBtu/h burner tested was one of the higher input burners on the market, yet it had heat-up times closer to the resistance cooktops and significantly slower than the induction cooktops. This can be explained by revisiting the physics of how gas burners interact with the pot. The gas burner is delivering 17,000 Btu/h of heat energy in the zone above the burner where the pot will sit. Some of this heat will hit the bottom of the pot and be absorbed by the metal and the liquid inside the pot, but most of the heat will move up the sides of the pot and radiate out into the surrounding space. The efficiency of the gas burner for the 12 pounds of water heat-up test was just 32%, meaning that the pot and contents received only 5,440 Btu/h of heat energy out of the input rate of 17,000 Btu/h; the rest was lost to the surrounding air.
Comparatively, the largest element on the ceramic top electric range top has a rating of 2.5 kW, which is the equivalent of 8,500 Btu/h; at an efficiency of 75.5%, the burner can deliver the equivalent of 6,417 Btu/h to the pot and the liquid, thus finishing the test almost a minute faster than the gas burner. The induction hob, with an efficiency of 85%, can deliver the equivalent of over 10,000 Btu/h to the pot and the liquid, cutting the heat-up time in half. The Energy Efficiency section of this report includes a definition of energy efficiency as applied to the cooktop testing as well as a detailed explanation of the testing procedures. The effects of hob energy-efficiency on energy delivery are summarized in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Effect of Energy Efficiency on Energy Delivered – 12-lb Water Heat-up Test Cooktop Induction
A
(Frigidaire)
Induction
B
(GE)
Induction
C
(Samsung)
Resistance
Ceramic
(Whirlpool)
Resistance
Coil
(Frigidaire)
Gas Burner
(Samsung)
Large Hob Input
Rate 3.6 kW 3.7 kW 3.3 kW 2.5 kW 2.4 kW 17 kBtu/h
Equivalent kBtu/h 12.3 12.6 11.3 8.5 8.2 17.0
Efficiency 85.20% 86.10% 83.00% 75.50% 79.30% 31.90%
Effective kBtu/h 10.5 10.8 9.4 6.4 6.5 5.4
10.e
Packet Pg. 180
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 14 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Temperature Response
Temperature response is defined as the response time and sensitivity of a burner or element/hob to adjustment of the range top’s controls. This could include how fast a burner or element/hob heats from cold start, how quickly it responds to a turn-down of the temperature setting, how much it overshoots the desired temperature endpoint, and how effectively it can hold a single temperature setpoint. While the Heat-Up Test is a good measure of the effective power and efficiency of a range top for heavier production, like boiling water for pasta, the Temperature Response is a measure of how well the operator can control and fine-tune the cooking process. Temperature response is important when cooking dishes that are sensitive to temperature fluctuations. This is most apparent when preparing delicate foods like melting or tempering chocolate, making a roux, or melting butter. The goal is to heat up the food item to a desired temperature without overheating and burning the contents. Good temperature response is also important when heating up a stock or gravy to a simmer without boiling.
Electric resistance cooktops are typically poor at temperature response. There is an initial temperature lag as the resistance coil, which has a relatively high thermal mass, comes up to temperature. There is an equally delayed response when the temperature setting is reduced during cooking, as the energy stored in the fully heated resistance coil dissipates slowly, causing the electric resistance element to continue heating the food long after the element is turned down or off. For this reason, many recipes call for removing the pot or pan off the element after bringing the food to the desired temperature. This is the biggest complaint against electric resistance cooktops when compared to gas cooktops, which deliver very good temperature response including fast heat up, quick temperature adjustment and minimal temperature overshoot.
Gas burners have infinite adjustability and immediately respond to changes in the burner controls.
While the burner grates do create a thermal mass that can slow temperature response, this mass contains less thermal inertia than the electric resistance range tops, so the gas burners respond faster than resistance elements but not as fast as the induction hobs, which have even less thermal mass.
Induction cooktops offer the best temperature response of the three technologies. Induction cooktops deliver the heat directly into the cookware and do not add any additional heat to the surface of the cooktop. The lack of residual energy in the cooktop surface allows the unit to respond much more quickly to control changes while virtually eliminating temperature overshoot.
Also, because the induction controls vary the intensity of the magnetic field, similar to the way a gas range top’s controls vary the intensity of the flame, the induction cooktop provides dynamic and precise control over the heat to the cooking unit. Gas range tops provide the ability to hold a very precise temperature, but the operator must constantly monitor the flame and fine-tune the burner to maintain the setpoint. An induction range top can also hold a very precise temperature by modulating the magnetic field around a proscribed setpoint but, unlike the gas burner, the operator does not have to constantly monitor and fine-tune the controls. Once set, the power input remains the same and the temperature delivered to the pot remains constant.
To demonstrate the temperature response of the different cooktops, researchers repeated the water heat-up tests, bringing a large 8-quart pot with 12-lb of water and a medium 3.5-quart pot with 5-lb of
10.e
Packet Pg. 181
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 15 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
water to 200°F, and then turning off the element/hob or burner and leaving the pots of water in place.
Water temperature was measured for 40 minutes after turning off the HOB or burner to see how much residual heat was transferred to the water above the 200°F end of test, defined as overshoot, and how fast the water cooled down to 190°F. Satisfactory temperature response is characterized by a minimal temperature overshoot and faster cooldown time. This means that if you heat up a pot of stock to a desired temperature and turn off the element/hob or burner, the stock will not overheat above the desired temperature. Table 2 presents the temperature response results for the three different cooktop types.
Table 3: Cooktop Temperature Response Results
Cooktop Induction
A
(Frigidaire)
Induction B
(GE)
Induction
C
(Samsung)
Resistance
Ceramic
(Whirlpool)
Resistance
Coil
(Frigidaire)
Gas Burner
(Samsung)
Medium Pot 200°F
Overshoot (°F) 1.4 0.0 0.4 7.4 8.5 1.3
Large Pot 200°F
Overshoot (°F) 0.8 0.8 0.8 7.1 4.9 1.7
Medium Pot
Cooldown to
190°F (min)
12.2 12.5 9.5 26.0 22.5 16.3
Large Pot
Cooldown to
190°F (min)
18.8 20.6 18.8 38.1 26.5 23.9
Figures 9 and 10 compare the overshoot and response times of electric induction, resistance, and gas cooktops.
10.e
Packet Pg. 182
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 16 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Figure 9: Cooktop Temperature Overshoot
*calculated based on a single high-input element or burner heating 12 lb of water from 70 to 200F in an 8 qt pot Figure 10: Temperature Overshoot Results for 12-lb of Water
0123456789Induction A(Frigidaire)Induction B (GE) Induction C(Samsung)ResistanceCeramic(Whirlpool)Resistance Coil(Frigidaire)Gas Burner(Samsung) Temperature Overshoot above 200°F (°F)Tested Range, 5lb and 12lb heatup tests were performed with different input burnersLarge pot overshootMedium pot overshoot 1961982002022042062088 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40Temperature [deg F]Time [min]ThresholdResistance Coil (Frigidaire)Induction A (Frigidaire)Resistance Ceramic (Whirlpool)Induction B (GE)Gas Burner (Samsung)Induction C (Samsung) Overshoot
10.e
Packet Pg. 183
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 17 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Overshoot is defined as the highest temperature recorded above the 200°F end-of-test water temperature, after the burner or element/hob is turned off. In summary, the induction cooktops had the lowest temperature overshoot and quickest cool down times, demonstrating the superior temperature performance of induction technology. The resistance ceramic and resistance coil elements, having the most thermal mass, demonstrate the greatest temperature overshoot and slowest response times. Gas falls somewhere in the middle, with a temperature overshoot comparable to induction and cool down times longer than induction but faster than electric resistance.
Energy Efficiency
Energy efficiency is defined as the ratio of energy into the food product versus the energy into the appliance. The higher the energy efficiency, the lower the thermal losses into the kitchen environment.
Gas cooktops have the highest thermal losses because the gas flame heats up the air around the pot or pan, which in turn heats up the kitchen. Induction cooktops have the highest efficiency and the lowest thermal losses because they heat up the pot or pan directly and not the surrounding air. The heating elements in resistance electric cooktops have high thermal mass resulting in higher thermal losses into the cooktop itself, which heats the air indirectly.
Efficiency tests were conducted under two conditions: (1) a full input rate water heat-up test while heating up an 8-quart pot containing 12 pounds of water (previously described in the heat-up test section), and (2) a partial input rate test cooking a burger in a pan. These two tests are representative of how cooktops are used in a day-to-day home kitchen. The water heat-up test is used to determine the cooktop efficiency when preparing a pot of water for a stock, soup, pasta, or rice load. This test is conducted at maximum input. The burger test is representative of frying or sautéing a smaller dish. It is important to note that efficiency is maximized by increasing the amount of product to be heated; burger tests produce lower efficiency results because the 0.25-lb of beef product is a smaller thermal mass when compared to the 12-lb of water.
Researchers conducted the burger test with a frozen 80/20 burger patty cooked to 35% moisture loss, which provided a 165°F internal temperature (per ASTM F1275). Sauté cooking requires a lower input rate as to not burn the food product before the internal temperature reaches the target. Testers selected a power level to achieve a 350-400°F nominal pan temperature before placing the frozen burger in the pan. Frozen burger cook times for all cooktops ranged between 6.5 and 7.0 minutes. Pan preheat times for all cooktops ranged between 2 and 3.5 minutes depending on the power setting.
10.e
Packet Pg. 184
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 18 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Figure 9: Preheating the pan and
temperature verification
Figure 10: Frozen product placement in
the pan
Figure 11: Product flip after 60% of
elapsed time
Table 4: Energy Efficiency Results
Cooktop Induction
A
(Frigidaire)
Induction B
(GE)
Induction
C
(Samsung)
Resistance
Ceramic
(Whirlpool)
Resistance
Coil
(Frigidaire)
Gas Burner
(Samsung)
Max Burner/Hob
Input Rate 3.6 kW 3.7 kW 3.3 kW 2.5 kW 2.4 kW 17 kBtu/h Heat-Up
Efficiency 85.2% 86.1% 83.0% 75.5% 79.3% 31.9%
Sauté Power
Level Setting 6 55% 4 50% 70% 6
Sauté Time (min) 7.04 6.69 7.05 7.03 7.03 7.08
Sauté Input Rate 523 W 585 W 515 W 507 W 758 W 4.4 kBtu/h Sauté Efficiency* 52.5% 47.8% 54.0% 54.8% 38.0% 22.8%
*Sauté efficiency was calculated according to ASTM F1275 which takes in account initial and final moisture content of the burger patty, specific heat of ground beef and energy for melting phase change of the burger heated from 0 to 165F. The test was conducted in triplicate.
Two induction cooktops (A and C) showed the highest sauté efficiency, but not markedly higher than the resistance glass-ceramic cooktop. Induction Cooktop B had a comparable efficiency at a 45% power level but had slower cook times. When testers increased the power to 55%, the cook times were more comparable to the other units, but the efficiency suffered slightly due to a higher sauté input rate. The resistance coil had a high heat-up efficiency, but its sauté efficiency was significantly lower due to a high input rate required to properly sear the burger. Thermal imaging also showed uneven temperature distribution in the pan for the resistance coil cooktop compared to gas and induction cooktops, which may have contributed to low sauté efficiency.
10.e
Packet Pg. 185
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 19 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Figure 12: Resistance Coil Cooktop Figure 13: Gas Cooktop Figure 14: Induction Cooktop Simmer Test
A common cooking practice is to bring a pot to a boil then reduce to a simmer for 15 minutes or more for pasta or rice, or up to 4 hours for complex stocks or soups. Simmer energy is a measurement of energy consumption that represents a typical application of a range top burner or element/hob and is useful for building an accurate energy-cost model of a range top. Simmer temperature is defined to be between 205-210°F without vigorous bubbling due to boiling. The Simmer Test results are summarized in Table 4. The simmer energy rate is similar across all three technologies because the pot and the water are already hot and have a considerable amount of thermal mass, meaning that it takes only about a third of the total burner/element energy input-rate to keep the contents at the target temperature.
Table 5: Simmer Energy Rate Results
Cooktop Induction
A
(Frigidaire)
Induction B
(GE)
Induction C
(Samsung)
Resistance
Ceramic
(Whirlpool)
Resistance
Coil
(Frigidaire)
Gas Burner
(Samsung)
12-lb Pot Simmer
Energy Rate 952 W 910 W 1000 W 907 W 976 W 6,702 Btu/h
12-lb Pot Simmer
Water Temp (°F) 208 209 205 208 209 209
5-lb Pot Simmer
Energy Rate 557 W 745 W 518 W 546 W 594 W 3,046 Btu/h
5-lb Pot Simmer
Water Temp (°F) 210 209 209 208 209 208
Standby Energy
One question with induction cooktops is the potential standby energy or ‘phantom load’ that could occur when all the hobs are off. Researchers conducted an overnight standby test with a high-resolution electric meter on the three induction cooktops. While the Frigidaire induction cooktop recorded no noticeable energy consumption, both the Samsung and GE induction cooktops recorded comparable standby energy consumptions between 3-6 watts. 6 watts standby energy over the course of a year
10.e
Packet Pg. 186
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 20 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
amounts to 52.6 kWh, or $8.4/year at $0.16/kWh. One of the potential factors for this standby energy may be due to the additional technical features such as the LCD screen and Wi-Fi capabilities. After these tests, it cannot be accurately concluded that the higher standby energies are inherent to the induction technology itself.
Energy Cost Model
Components of the above energy tests were compiled into an energy model to estimate the amount of annual energy consumed for each type of cooktop. Below is a table of input assumptions for the energy model, which assumes a 12-lb pot of water heated for pasta per day then simmered for 15 minutes and two sauté cook loads conducted five days per week.
Table 6: Energy Model Assumptions
Days Cooking Per Week 5
Number of 12-lb pots boiled per day 1
12-lb pot simmer duration 15 minutes
Number of sauté dishes cooked per day 2
Days Cooking Per Year 260
Electric Energy Cost* $0.16 / kWh
Gas Energy Cost $1.56 / therm
*normalized average of SMUD 2019 Time-of-Use summer and winter rates, with assumption that summer cooking occurs on peak with weekly cooking during 3 weekdays and 2 weekend days.
These assumptions were applied to the six different cooktop models in the table below. To build a model that would include both the direct cost to operate the range top as well as the potential costs from the interaction with the residential heating and cooling system, the researchers estimated the heating and cooling loads that would be offset or increased by the waste heat from each range top type.
A detailed explanation of the methodology is included in Appendix B. These estimates are for informational purposes only and are meant to present a general idea of the holistic costs for each range top type.
Table 7: Energy Model
Cooktop Induction
A
(Frigidaire)
Induction
B
(GE)
Induction
C
(Samsung)
Resistance
Ceramic
(Whirlpool)
Resistance
Coil
(Frigidaire)
Gas Burner
(Samsung)
Heat-Up Energy
Per Day 563 Wh 561 Wh 581 Wh 641 Wh 606 Wh 5,148 Btu
Simmer Energy
Per Day 238 Wh 228 Wh 250 Wh 227 Wh 244 Wh 1,676 Btu
Sauté Energy
Per Day 169 Wh 207 Wh 182 Wh 182 Wh 238 Wh 1,326 Btu
10.e
Packet Pg. 187
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 21 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Cooktop Induction
A
(Frigidaire)
Induction
B
(GE)
Induction
C
(Samsung)
Resistance
Ceramic
(Whirlpool)
Resistance
Coil
(Frigidaire)
Gas Burner
(Samsung)
Total Energy
Per Day
970 Wh 996 Wh 1013 Wh 1050 Wh 1088 Wh 8,150 Btu
Total Energy
Per Year
252 kWh 259 kWh 263 kWh 273 kWh 283 kWh 21.19
therms
Energy Cost Per
Year
$40.55 $41.62 $42.35 $43.89 $45.48 $33.06
Annual Cooling
Costs*
$4.62 $4.74 $4.82 $5.00 $5.18 $9.10
Annual Heating
Savings*
$6.23 $6.39 $6.50 $6.74 $6.99 $12.27
Total Annual
Costs
$38.94 $39.97 $40.66 $42.15 $43.68 $29.89
*see Appendix B for heating and cooling calculation methodologies Conclusion
This residential range top study compared the performance of three different induction cooktops to traditional gas and electric cooktops. Induction technology offers precise control, focused heat, quick response and greater energy efficiency over the more traditional cooktop technologies. The clear advantage from induction is the level of precision and control over the amount of heat delivered to the pot or pan, which is a vast improvement over other electric cooking options.
The results mirror previous testing of commercial range tops at the Food Service Technology Center. The residential induction cooktops exhibited comparable heat-up efficiencies to commercial-grade induction cooktops, while providing comparably quick heat-up times to similarly rated commercial units. While the three induction cooktops exhibited close performance to each other, it should be noted that not all appliances are equal and a unit with lower input ratings may exhibit slower heat-up times.
The induction cooktops in these tests demonstrated superior heat-up times and temperature response when compared to both electric resistance and gas. The more direct power of the induction hobs provided significantly faster water heat-up times, nearly twice the speed of the gas and electric resistance cooktops. Temperature response was measured by looking at the overshoot and the cool- down times. Relative to the electric resistance cooktops, the induction cooktops on average exhibited an 84-89% improvement in overshoot and a 27-49% improvement in cool-down time. Relative to the gas cooktop, the induction cooktops on average exhibited a 53% improvement in overshoot and a 19% improvement in cool-down time.
The simmer and sauté tests represented other cooking operations. In these tests, all the range tops exhibited comparable performance. Simmer rates for all the electric cooktops tested were within 10% of one another. There was no noticeable trend between sauté efficiency results based on the single frozen
10.e
Packet Pg. 188
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 22 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
hamburger test used for this study. Table 7 compares the final test results from the six cooktops and includes the energy cost analysis presented earlier.
Table 8: Results Summary
Cooktop Induction A
(Frigidaire)
Induction B
(GE)
Induction C
(Samsung)
Resistance
Ceramic
(Whirlpool)
Resistance
Coil
(Frigidaire)
Gas Burner
(Samsung)
Large Hob Input
Rate 3.6 kW 3.7 kW 3.3 kW 2.5 kW 2.4 kW 17 kBtu/h
12-lb water heat
up time (min) 9.8 9.3 11.6 17.8 15.5 18.6
Heat-Up Efficiency 85.2% 86.1% 83.0% 75.5% 79.3% 31.9%
Production
Capacity (lb/h) 73.5 77.2 62.2 40.4 46.5 38.6
Large Pot 200°F
Overshoot (°F) 0.8 0.8 0.8 7.1 4.9 1.7
Large Pot
Cooldown to
190°F (min)
18.8 20.6 18.8 38.1 26.5 23.9
Sauté Input Rate 523 W 585 W 515 W 507 W 758 W 4.4 kBtu/h Sauté Efficiency 52.5% 47.8% 54.0% 54.8% 38.0% 22.8%
12-lb Pot Simmer
Energy Rate 952 W 910 W 1000 W 907 W 976 W 6,702 Btu/h
Estimated Energy
Cost Per Year $40.55 $41.62 $42.35 $43.89 $45.48 $33.06
Although the energy cost to run a gas cooktop in California is currently lower than an induction cooktop, the air conditioning cost impact of gas cooktop cooking is higher due to a higher heat load to space. This waste heat has a benefit during the cooler months and the gas cooktop offered heating savings that somewhat mitigated the increased cooling costs during the warmer months. This analysis does not, however, address comfort impacts due to the kitchen being warmer than other rooms of the house.
The appeal of residential induction cooktops lies in the superior temperature response, ease of cleaning, and increased safety associated with cooler surfaces. As customer demand for induction technology continues to rise with more information dissemination, hands-on demonstration, and commissioned test studies, production costs will decrease with increased production volume, further increasing the technology adoption rates.
10.e
Packet Pg. 189
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 23 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Appendix A: Test Method
1. Install cooktop according to manufacturer’s specifications
2. Take appliance setup pictures:
a. Whole cooktop/oven for report
b. Controls
c. Nameplate
d. Cooktop top (all burners or elements)
e. Zoomed out picture including test computer and electric meter f. Pot #1, #2, and Pan on cooktop top burners/elements
g. Top surface temperature measurement location (induction and resistance only see 5f)
3. Document cooktop burner input rates per manufacturer’s documentation for each burner
4. Use the same cookware set for all cooktops tested
a. Pot #1 – Large 10-qt pot with lid; 12-lb of water
b. Pot #2 – Medium 4-qt pot with lid; 5-lb of water
c. Pan – Medium 10” top diameter; ¼-lb, 80/20 frozen hamburger
5. Attach thermocouples to each cooking vessel:
a. Pot #1:
i. Geometric center 1” from the bottom
ii. Geometric center 1” submerged in liquid from the top lid b. Pot #2:
i. Geometric center 1” from the bottom
ii. Geometric center 1” submerged in liquid from the top lid c. Pan:
i. Welded to cooking surface, 1” from handle joint, not to interfere with hamburger cooking
ii. An additional, removable temperature probe or puck should be used in order to verify pan pre-heat temperature for center of cooking pan. d. Freezer:
i. Monitor temperature for the last hour of burger holding with a thermocouple logger and a thermocouple inside the burger box
e. Final Burger:
i. Use multi-surface probe at the end of the hamburger cooking cycle to verify final temperature is 165 ± 5°F.
6. Verify the test voltage at full burner input is within 5% of specification
7. Verify the tested input rate is within 5% of specification during water heat-up test
8. Water heat-up test is conducted with specified amount of water in section 4 for two pot sizes. a. Initial water temperature 70 ± 2°F
b. Record pot weight and material
c. Initial burner/element/hob temperature 70 ± 2°F
d. Burner input rate set to maximum at initiation of test e. Final water temperature 200°F per data acquisition system f. Conducted as a single replicate
g. Record temperature, time, energy and voltage
h. Leads to cool down test
9. Simmer test conducted with specified amount of water in section 4 for two pot sizes.
10.e
Packet Pg. 190
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 24 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
a. Achieve 212 ± 2°F
b. Set burner input level to maintain simmer
c. Record temperature, time, energy and voltage during simmer for 15 minutes d. Verify simmer conditions are steady throughout the 15-minute test e. Adjust input rate and repeat if 9d not met
10. Sauté test conducted with a pan and product specified in section 4c a. Use frozen product stabilized in a 0 ± 5°F environment for at least 12 hours, do not have product out of freezer for more than 1 minute prior to cooking b. Record pan weight and material
c. Record initial food product weight using a high-resolution scale d. Preheat pan to 375°F per temperature probe listed in 5cii e. Record temperature, time and energy to preheat pan
f. Place frozen hamburger patty in the hot pan
g. After 60% of elapsed time, flip the patty with a spatula h. Remove patty when conditions in 5e are met
i. Stop recording temperature, time and energy to cook burger j. Record final product weight using a high-resolution scale k. Verify cooked weight loss was 35±2% and 165 ± 5°F, repeat if needed l. Conduct the test 3 times
11. Surface top cool down test
a. At the end of the Pot #2 water heat-up test 8d turn off burner or heating elements at 200°F
b. Leave the pot on the element or burner and monitor time and temperature to cool down the water to 190°F.
c. Record maximum temperature (overshoot over 200°F) during cool down test.
10.e
Packet Pg. 191
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 25 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Appendix B: Ventilation Requirements and Ambient Heat Impacts The energy consumed by a residential cooktop is converted to heat to cook food. The energy is then released to the kitchen as heat through the food or as waste heat from the heat source (e.g., gas burner, electric element, or the cooktop itself). Most residential ventilation hoods recirculate the cooking effluent and heat generated by cooking on a cooktop. Where commercial kitchens hoods are required to vent to the outside, very few residential installations vent to the outside.
The higher the cooktop cooking energy efficiency, the less energy is required to cook the food, therefore generating less wasted heat to the space. The less heat wasted into the space, the less air conditioning energy required to cool the space down to maintain the thermostat setpoint. The energy consumed by the cooktop can be directly related to the amount of cooling required to offset the heat generated by the cooktop.
It is estimated that air conditioning is required in Sacramento from May 17th through September 18th. All cooktop cooking during this period is performed when the air conditioning is on. If cooktop cooking is conducted 5 out of 7 days per week, there are 89 days when cooktop cooking is done with the AC on. If the residential AC system Coefficient of Performance (COP) is 3.0 and 80% of all the gas burner energy is turned into heat, the heat generated by the gas cooktop has twice the impact on the air conditioning load than the induction or resistance cooktops.
Ventilation cost assumptions are shown in Table 8 and the results summary is shown in Table 9.
Table 9: Ventilation Assumptions
AC months per year* May 17th - Sept 18th
AC months per year 5
AC days per year 125
Cooking days per week 5 / 7
AC cooking days per year 89
AC system coefficient of performance (COP) 3.0
Hours cooking per day 1
Gas Combustion Efficiency 80%
Electricity Cost $ / kWh 0.16
*estimated on 2020 weather forecast provided by SMUD
10.e
Packet Pg. 192
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 26 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
Table 10: Ventilation Cost Estimations
Cooktop Induction
A
(Frigidaire)
Induction
B
(GE)
Induction
C
(Samsung)
Resistance
Ceramic
(Whirlpool)
Resistance
Coil
(Frigidaire)
Gas Burner
(Samsung)
Total Energy
Per Day*
970 Wh 996 Wh 1013 Wh 1050 Wh 1088 Wh 8,150 Btu
Heat Generated
Per Day (Btu)
3,310 3,397 3,456 3,583 3,712 6,520
Annual Cooling
Load (Btu)
295,504 303,302 308,603 319,875 331,451 582,143 Cooling Load
input (Btu)
98,501 101,101 102,868 106,625 110,484 194,048 Cooling Load
input (kWh)
28.87 29.63 30.15 31.25 32.38 56.87
Annual Cooling
Costs
$4.62 $4.74 $4.82 $5.00 $5.18 $9.10
*Details shown in Table 8
Just as the cooktops contribute to air conditioning costs in the summer, the heat given off by cooktops during the winter saves on heating costs. Weather forecast data provided by SMUD for 2020 showed an estimated 152 of heating days from November 1st through March 31st which would include 109 heated cooking days. Assuming gas heating combustion efficiencies of 80%, the gas heating savings generated by the range tops would exceed the annual cooling penalties, the combined heating and cooling results are shown in table 9.
The ventilation and filtration of the cooking byproducts in residential hoods is inefficient and may lead to poor indoor air quality. The byproducts of cooking can be very small respirable particles along with grease, vapor, and other gasses. Flue products from gas burners introduce additional gasses. Direct venting the hood to the outside can mitigate most of the air quality problems.
10.e
Packet Pg. 193
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update) 27 Frontier Energy Report # 501318071-R0
References
1. American Society for Testing and Materials, 2018. Standard Test Method for Performance of Range Tops. ASTM Designation F1521-12. In Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.
2. American Society for Testing and Materials, 2014. Standard Test Method for Performance of Griddles. ASTM Designation F1275-14. In Annual Book of ASTM Standards, West Conshohocken, PA.
3. Sorensen, G., Zabrowski, D., 2008. Diva, Model 10-CT Induction Cooktop Performance Test. Food Service Technology Center (FSTC) Report #5011.08.02. Accessed January 2019:
https://fishnick.com/publications/appliancereports/rangetops/Diva_10_CT_Cooktop.pdf
4. Fisher, D., et al., 2002. Commercial Cooking Appliance Technology Assessment. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.02.26.
5. Young, R., 1995. Development and Validation of a Uniform Testing Procedure for Range Tops.
Food Service Technology Center Report 1022.95.20, October.
6. Cesio, C. and Young, R., 1996. Garland 2.5 kW Induction Range Top: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1521-94. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.95.30, February.
7. Cesio, C. and Young, R., 1996. Vulcan-Hart Induction Range Top: Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1521-94. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.95.29, March.
8. Bohlig, C., 1999. Induction Cooktop Performance: How Pan Size Impact Energy Input. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.99.68, March.
9. Bohlig, C., 1999. Sunpentown, Model SR-1262F Induction Cooktop Performance Test:
Application of ASTM Standard Test Method F1521-96. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.99.77, November.
10. Wong, F., 2002. Comparison of Commercial Range Top Performance Test Methods. Food Service Technology Center Report 5011.02.16, October.
10.e
Packet Pg. 194
Attachment: Induction-Range-Final-Report-July-2019 (Reach Code Update)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
City of Campbell, 70 N. First St., Campbell, California
PUBLIC HEARINGS AND INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES
14. Continued Public Hearing to Consider an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 1.01 & Title 18 and Repeal and Replace Chapter 17.04 of the Cam pbell Municipal Code to Impleme nt the 2019 Editions of the California Building & Fire Codes and Consider Pr oposed Electrification Reach Codes by Silicon Valley Clean Energy (Ordinance/Roll Call Vote)
Recommended Action: That the City Council take first reading and introduce an ordinance amending Chapter 1.01 & Title 18 and repealing and replacing Chapter 17.04 of the Campbell Municipal Code to implement the 2019 Editions of the California Building & Fire Codes ; and consider the proposed Electrification Reach Codes by Silicon Valley Clean Energy.
This is the time and place for a public hearing to consider an ordinance to amend Chapter 1.01 & Title 18 and r epeal and r eplace Chapter 17.04 of the Campbell Municipal Code to i mplement the 2019 Editions of the Ca lifornia Building & Fire Codes and consider proposed Electrification Reach Codes by Silicon Valley Clean Energy.
Building Official Bruckart presented the staff report dated November 19, 2019.
Community Development Director Kermoyan referenced the desk it em with the reach codes.
Council d iscussed se parating the discussion on the 2019 Editions of the California Building & Fire Codes and the proposed Electrification Reach Codes by Silicon Valley Clean Energy.
Mayor Waterman declared the public hearing to consider an ordinance to amend Chapter 1.01 & Title 18 and r epeal and r eplace Chapter 17.04 of the Campbell Municipal Code to i mplement the 2019 Editions of the California Building & Fire Codes open and asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to be heard.
There being no one wishing to speak, Mayor Waterman closed the public hearing.
M/S: Gibbons/Landr y – that the City Council take first reading and introduce Ordinance 2255 amending Chapter 1.01 & Title 18 and repealing and replacing Chapter 17.04 of the Campbell Municipal Code to implement the 2019 Editions of the California Building & Fire Codes.
10.f
Packet Pg. 195
Attachment: November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting Minutes Item 14 (Reach Code Update)
Minutes of November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting Page 2 Councilmember Bybee asked to clarif y if the motion included the desk item with the revised ordinance, that did not include the reach codes.
Councilmember Gibbons confirmed that it included the referenced desk item.
The motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gibbons
SECONDER: Landry
AYES: Waterman, Landry, Resnikoff, Bybee, Gibbons
City Clerk Wood read the title of Ordinance 2255.
M/S: Gibbons/Bybee - that the City Council waive further reading of Ordinance 2255. The motion was adopted unanimously.
RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Gibbons
SECONDER: Bybee
AYES: Waterman, Landry, Resnikoff, Bybee, Gibbons
John Sup p, Representative from Silicon Valley Clean Energy , gave a presentation on the proposed Electrification Reach Codes.
Mayor Waterman declared the public hearing opened to consider the proposed Electrification Reach Codes by Silicon Valley Clean En ergy open and asked if there was anyone in the audience wishing to be heard.
Carol Cross spoke about climate change , commented on the need to eliminat e fossil fuel, and supports all-electric buildings.
James Tuleya, Sunnyvale resident and chair person of Carbon Free Silicon Valley, requested that an ordinance for all-electric reach codes be brought to council for approval as soon as pos sible, and commented on the impact s with implementing the codes.
Hoai-An Trung, Climate Activist and member of M others Out Front Mobilizing for a Livable Climate and Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action, spoke about reducing methane gases, requested that Council vote for an all -electric code, and commented on the benefits of implementing the codes.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Water man closed t he public hearing.
Council discussed the options regarding banning natural gas, limiting the natural gas usage in selected applications, and encouraging electric use by investing in
10.f
Packet Pg. 196
Attachment: November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting Minutes Item 14 (Reach Code Update)
Minutes of November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting Page 3 other benefits and cost-effective technologies or incentives.
After further discussion, M/S: Gibbons/Landry – that the City Council instruct staff to make all new residential construction all-electric, and not have any requirement for commercial or renovation projects.
Community Development Director Kermoyan s uggested clarifying the language to state non-residential instead of commercial.
Councilmember Gibbons stated that she would accept that clarification.
After further discussion, the motion failed by the following roll call vote:
RESULT: FAILED [3 TO 2]
MOVER: Gibbons
SECONDER: Landry
AYES: Landry, Gibbons
NAYS: Waterman, Resnikoff, Bybee
M/S: Gibbons/Landry – that the City Council direct staff to bring back a Reach Code which allows limited use of fo ssil fuels into new residential construction requiring electrical space heating and electric water heating.
After discussion, the motion was adopted by the following roll call vote:
RESULT: ADOPTED [3 TO 2]
MOVER: Gibbons
SECONDER: Landry
AYES: Waterman, Landry, Gibbons
NAYS: Resnikoff, Bybee
10.f
Packet Pg. 197
Attachment: November 19, 2019 City Council Meeting Minutes Item 14 (Reach Code Update)
City
Council
Report
TITLE: Council Committee Reports
RECOMMENDED ACTION
That the City Council report on activities from their committee assignments.
DISCUSSION
This is the section of the City Council Agenda that allows the City Councilmembers to report on items of interest and the work of City Council Subcommittees.
MAYOR RESNIKOFF:
City Attorney Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
City Clerk Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
City Manager Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority Board (SVACA)
West Valley Clean Water JPA
West Valley Mayors and Managers
West Valley Sanitation District
West Valley Solid Waste Authority JPA
VICE MAYOR BYBEE
Advisory Commissioner Appointment Interview Subcommittee City Attorney Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
City Clerk Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
City Manager Performance/Compensation Subcommittee
Cities Association of SCC Representative
Downtown Subcommittee
Finance Subcommittee
Friends of the Heritage Theater Liaison
Association of Bay Area Governments (Alt.)
Cities Association Selection Committee & Legislative Action Committee (Alt.) Silicon Valley Animal Control Authority Board (SVACA) (Alt.) Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee (Alt.) West Valley Mayors and Managers (Alt.)
COUNCILMEMBER GIBBONS:
Association of Bay Area Governments Executive Committee** Item: 11
Category: COUNCIL COMMITTEE
REPORTS
Meeting Date: October 4, 2022
11 Packet Pg. 198
Council Committee Reports Page 2 of 3
Campbell Historical Museum & Ainsley House Foundation Liaison Cities Association of SCC Selection Committee & Legislative Action Committee Education Subcommittee
Legislative Subcommittee
Silicon Valley Clean Energy JPA Board of Directors & Executive Committee (SVCE)
County Library District JPA Board of Directors (Alt.)
SCC Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee (Alt.)
COUNCILWOMAN LANDRY
Advisory Commissioner Appointment Interview Subcommittee County Library District JPA Board of Directors
Downtown Subcommittee
Education Subcommittee
Economic Development Subcommittee
Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission of SCC**
Santa Clara Valley Water District: County Water Commission
Cities Association of Santa Clara County Representative (Alt.) State Route (SR) 85 Corridor Policy Advisory Board (Alt.) West Valley Solid Waste Authority JPA (Alt.)
West Valley Clean Water JPA (Alt.)
COUNCILMEMBER LOPEZ:
Association of Bay Area Governments
Economic Development Subcommittee
Finance Subcommittee
Legislative Subcommittee
SCC Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee State Route (SR) 85 Corridor Policy Advisory Board
Valley Transportation Authority Policy Advisory Committee
Campbell Historical Museum & Ainsley House Foundation Liaison (Alt.) Friends of the Heritage Theater Liaison (Alt.)
Santa Clara Valley Water District: County Water Commission (Alt.) Silicon Valley Clean Energy JPA Board of Directors Executive Committee (Alt.) West Valley Sanitation District (Alt.)
**appointed by other agencies
Prepared by:
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
11 Packet Pg. 199
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Date: October 3, 2022.
From: Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
Via: Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Subject: Desk Item 4 – Revised Resolution
T
he Conflict of Interest Resolution has been revised to add an additional Whereas noting the newly added Designated Employee positions to Appendix A as follows:
W
HEREAS, to accommodate newly added City positions, Appendix A (Statement of Economic Interest for Designated Employee) has been amended to add Assistant City Manager, Administrative Analyst I, Senior Project Manager and Environmental Program Specialist.
T
he added positions are also reflected by an asterisk on Appendix A.
T
he position of Administrative Analyst II has been revised to reflect reporting requirements for all four categories as previously adopted in the Conflict of Interest Code.
C
ity of Campbell M
EMORANDUM
City Clerk’s Office
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
ADOPTING THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE APPENDIX A AND B TO
REFLECT THE CITY OF CAMPBELL DESIGNATED POSITIONS AND DISCLOSURE
CATEGORIES
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code 87300 the City of C ampbell is required to adopt a Conflict of Interest Code; and
WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act requires every local government agency to review its Conflict of Interest Code biennially or as deemed appropriate; and
WHEREAS, the Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted regulation 2 California Code of Regulations 18370 which contains the terms of a standard model conflict of interest which can be incorporated by reference and which may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission after public no tice and hearings to conform to amendments to the Political Reform Act; and
WHEREAS, a review has been conducted and a det ermination has been made that the City of Campbell’s Conflict of Interest Code should be maintained as outlined in Appendix A (Statement of Economic Interest for Designated Employee) and B (Disclosure Categories); and
WHEREAS, to accommodate newly added C ity positions, Appendix A (Statement of Economic Interest for Designated Employee) has been amended to add Assistant City Manager, Administrative Analyst I, Senior Project Manager and Environmental Program Specialist.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED , by the City Council of the City of Campbell adopt the attached Appendix A (Statement of Economic Interest for Designated Employee) and Appendix B (Disclosure Categories).
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ___day of _____, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
__________________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
APPENDIX A
STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS FOR DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
POSITION 1 2 3 4
Administrative Services Director X X X X
*Assistant City Manager X X X X
Deputy City Manager X X X X
*Administrative Analyst I X X X X
Administrative Analyst II X X X X
Recreation & Community Services Director X X X
Recreation Services Manager X X X
Building Maintenance Supervisor X X X
City Clerk X
Police Chief X X X
Police Captain X X
Police Sergeant (if they are processing permits) X
Building Official X X X
Sr. Building Inspector X X X
Building Inspector X X X
Finance Director X X X
Finance Manager X
Public Works Director X X X X
City Engineer X X X X
Public Works Superintendent X X
Associate Civil Engineer X
Senior Civil Engineer X
APPENDIX A
STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS FOR DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
POSITION 1 2 3 4
Assistant Engineer X
Environmental Program Manager X X X
*Environmental Program Specialist X X X
Public Works Inspector X X X
Park Maintenance Supervisor X
Traffic Engineer X
Lighting & Traffic Signal Supervisor X
Equipment Maintenance Supervisor X
Community Development Director X X X
Senior Planner X X X
Associate Planner X X X
Assistant Planner X X X
*Economic Development Project Manager X X X
Economic Development Specialist X X X
Project Manager X X X
*Senior Project Manager X X X X
Building Board of Appeals X X
Historic Preservation Board X X X
Site and Architectural Review Committee X X X
Consultants Who Participate in Making Decisions X X X X Code Enforcement Officer X X X
Civic Improvement Commission X X X
APPENDIX A
STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS FOR DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
POSITION 1 2 3 4
Information Technology Manager X X
Information Technology Administrator X X
Information Technology Technician X X
Rental Dispute Fact Finding Committee X X X
*Denotes added Designated Employee positions
10/4/22
Appendix B
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
1. Persons in this category shall disclose all interests in real property located within the City of Campbell, or within two miles of the city boundary (however, this provision shall not require anyone to list the address of their personal residence).
2. Persons in this category shall disclose all sources of income and investments in business entities located within the City of Campbell.
3. Persons in this category shall disclose all investments in business entities or income from sources in the construction or building industry doing business within the City of Campbell.
4. Persons in this category shall disclose all investments in business entities or income from sources which manufacture or sell supplies of the type utilized by the department for which the designated employee is employed.
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: October 4, 2022.
From: Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
Via: Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Subject: Desk Item 6 – Revised Resolution
The Resolution authorizing a RFQ for Plan C heck Services has been revised to incl ude the following information:
WHEREAS, the purchasing procedures outlined in the City’s Municipal Code (CMC) Section 3.20.030(4) state that bidding requirements may be dispensed with when “the City seeks the special services, consultation or advice in financial, economic, accounting, engineering, legal, administrative or other matters from persons specially trained, experienced and competent to perform the special services required;” and
The CMC reference to dispense with the bidding procedures has also been added to the title and Now Therefore section of the resolution.
The revised resolution has been attached for your consideration.
City of Campbell
MEMORANDUM
City Clerk’s Office
RESOLUTION NO. ______________
BEING A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CAMPBELL
AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR (A) CONSULTANT SERVICES TO SUPPORT BUILDING DIVISION WITH PLAN CHECK SERVICES ; (B) ISSUANCE OF A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ) FOR CONTRACT SERVICES TO PROVIDE BUILDING PLAN CHECK SERVICES; (C) DISPENSE WITH THE BIDDING REQUIREMENT PER (CMC) SECTION 3.20.030(4) AND (D) AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A CONTRACT WITH THE SELECTED SERVICE PROVIDERS FOR A TWO YEAR TERM IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $ 300,000 FOR ADOPTED CONTRACTS.
WHEREAS, in order to maintain the level of service and ensure the safety of the residents in the community through the verification and assurances that applications are compliant with health and safety regulations as outlined in California Administrative Code and California Code of Regulations, Title 24 s; and
WHEREAS, the City seeks the special services, consultation or advice in building code plan check matters from persons specially trained, experienced and competent to perform the special services required; and
WHEREAS, the City has recognized the need for third party assistance in performing services which may require review and analysis when existing department staff due not possess the required technical certifications to conduct the review or analysis; and
WHEREAS, the purchasing procedures outlined in the City’s Municipal Code (CMC) Section 3.20.030(4) state that bidding requirements may be dispensed with when “the City seeks the special services, consultation or advice in financial, economic, accounting, engineering, legal, administrative or other matters from persons specially trained, experienced and competent to perform the special services required;” and
WHEREAS, approximately $130 ,000 of appropriated funds r emain and the Council authorized $130,000 to be spent through FY 2023 for contracted plan check services; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and accept ed the draft RFQ and found it to include the appropriate tasks needed to assist the Community Development Department’s Building Division to provide California Building and Municipal code compliant plan check services for the safety of the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and accepted the draft RFQ and found it appropriate for the selection of a contract planner to support department operations for a two-year term; and
WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes a combined total of $ 300,000 for adopted contracts; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Campbell hereby authorizes distribution of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for (a) consultant services to support building division with plan check services ; (b) issuance of a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for contract services to provide plan check services ; and (c)
dispense with the bidding requirements per (CMC) Section 3.20.030(4); and (d) authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract with the selected service providers for a two year term in an amount not to exceed a combined total of $ 300,000 for adopted contracts.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this ____ day of October, 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
_____________________
Paul Resnikoff, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Date: October 4, 2022.
From: Andrea Sanders, City Clerk
Via: Brian Loventhal, City Manager
Subject: Desk Item 10 – Correspondence
The Clerk ’s Office received the attached public comment email relating to item 10 Potential Reach Code Updates from the Santa Clara County Association of Realtors.
City of Campbell
MEMORANDUM
City Clerk’s Office
From: Enrique Navarro-Donnellan
To: Clerks Office; Paul Resnikoff; Anne Bybee; Sergio Lopez; Susan M. Landry; Liz Gibbons Subject: SCCAOR Commentary on Agenda Item 10 - Potential Reach Code Updates Date: Tuesday, October 4, 2022 1:52:05 PM
Attachments: SCC Home Electrification Potential Costs.pdf WARNING: This email originated from an external sender! Please do not open attachments or click on links unless you are certain it is legitimate.
Good Afternoon Campbell Mayor & City Council,
The Santa Clara County Association of REALTORS® encourages you to reject any additional regulations or requirements beyond state mandates (ie: "reach codes") pertaining to existing homes.
For your reference, I have attached a study we conducted detailing the costs affiliated with reconfiguring a home to accommodate all-electric appliances - costs and necessary home adjustments well beyond solely swapping out appliances. Even in the case where only future development is considered for reach codes, several of these costs will be factored into the cost of said new housing. Our cost ranges were developed with responses from seven licensed electrician contractors in Santa Clara County.
As advocates for more, and affordably-priced housing, we advocate that home and property owners should be driving their own energy consumption decisions and have the option to live with energy systems that meet their needs and budget. In an area already among the most expensive markets in the nation, facing cost-of-living inflation across all consumer goods and services, particularly with electric utility rates higher than that paid elsewhere in the state or nation, we find it helpful to allow residents flexibility with the energy they use.
We ask that you oppose any additional reach codes on existing homes.
Additionally, should it
be considered, please oppose any mandates to require all-electric home conversion until public financing options are available to cover the costs of gas appliance replacement and the related structural work needed to accomodate all-electric appliances.
Kind Regards,
Enrique Navarro-Donnellan
Government Affairs Associate
Direct: 408.445.5063
Email: [email protected]
Santa Clara County Association of REALTORS®
1651 North First Street, San Jose, CA. 95112
Main 408.445.8500
STRUCTURAL COSTS Low End* High End*
APPLIANCES
Air/Heating System $4,500 $40,000
Range Cooktop $800 $6,500
Water Heater $1,000 $7,500
Clothes Dryer $1,000 $3,000
SERVICES
Rewiring & New 220 Amp Outlets $3,650 $22,000
Construction Access to Electrical $2,000 $9,000
Abatement of Asbestos & Lead $4,000 $36,000
Replacement Housing During Asbestos Removal & Construction Upgrades $5,000 $10,000 Electric Panel Upgrade from 50/100 to 200 amp $3,000 $15,000 Undergrounding of Lines $3,500 $15,000
Replacment of 2 inch pipe with 3 inch pipe to accommodate 200 amp service $5,000 $30,000 PG&E Capping-Off Gas Lines $9,500 $25,000
Permitting $1,000 $5,000
SUBTOTAL APPLIANCES & SERVICES $43,950 $224,000
ADDITIONAL FACTORS
Solar Panels + Structural Upgrades $25,000 $50,000
New Roof $20,000 $75,000
Backup Battery $7,500 $30,000
Swimming Pool/Spa Conversion** $10,000 $35,000
Trigger for Fire Sprinklers $10,000 $35,000
Trigger for Sewer Lateral $9,000 $30,000
*Cost of Labor is the Most Significant Unknown Factor
** Conversion to Electric is Discouraged by Pool Companies due to Inefficiency TOTAL STRUCTURAL COST $125,450 $479,000
Potential Cost Range of All-Electric Conversion
Building Electrification Cost Study Published: June 27, 2022 Sources: Based upon a study conducted by the Santa Clara County Association of REALTORS® (SCCAOR) with estimates from 7 Electrical Contractors in Santa Clara County.
The appliances, services, and additional factors are a "menu" of options and range of costs. Some newer homes will require fewer of the options and older homes will require most of the listed services and additional factors. 1651 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95112 • (408) 445-8500 • sccaor.com