Cupertino City Council
May 3, 2022

CITY OF CUPERTINO
CI

TY COUNCIL
AGENDA
10350 Torre Avenue, Council Chamber and via Teleconference Tuesday, May 3, 2022
5:30 PM
Televised Special Meeting Study Session (5:30) and Regular City Council Meeting (6:45)

IN-PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION Mem
bers of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following ways:
1) Attend in person at Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue. 2) Tune to Comcast Channel 26 and AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 on your TV. 3) The meeting will also be streamed live on and online at www.Cupertino.org/youtube and www.Cupertino.org/webcast
Members of the public wishing to comment on an item on the agenda may do so in the following ways:
1) Appear in person at Cupertino Community Hall. Members of the audience who address the City Council must come to the lectern/microphone, and are requested to complete a Speaker Card and identify themselves. Completion of Speaker Cards and identifying yourself is voluntary and not required to attend the meeting or provide comments. 2) E-mail comments by 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, May 3 to the Council at [email protected]. These e-mail comments will also be forwarded to Councilmembers by the City Clerk’s office before the meeting and posted to the City’s website after the meeting.
3) E-mail comments during the times for public comment during the meeting to the City Clerk at [email protected]. The City Clerk will read the emails into the record, and display any attachments on the screen, for up to three minutes (subject to the Mayor’s discretion to shorten time for public comments). Members of the public that wish to share a document must email [email protected] prior to speaking.

Members of the public may provide oral public comments during the meeting as follows:

1 CC 05-03-2022
1 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022
Oral public comments will be accepted during the meeting. Comments may be made d
uring “oral communications” for matters not on the agenda, and during the public comment period for each agenda item.

Teleconferencing Instructions
To address the City Council, click on the link below to register in advance and access the meeting:

Online
Register in advance for this webinar:
https://cityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_ldooSUCAR62q3ETwyUsiwA Phone
Dial: 669-900-6833 and enter Webinar ID: 977 3078 6143 (Type *9 to raise hand to speak, *6 to unmute yourself). Unregistered participants will be called on by the last four digits of their phone number.

Or an H.323/SIP room system:

H.323:
162.255.37.11 (US West)
162.255.36.11 (US East)
Meeting ID: 977 3078 6143
SIP: [email protected]
After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

Please read the following instructions carefully:

1. You can directly download the teleconference software or connect to the meeting in your internet browser. If you are using your browser, make sure you are using a current and up-to-date browser: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+. Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers, including Internet Explorer.

2. You will be asked to enter an email address and a name, followed by an email with instructions on how to connect to the meeting. Your email address will not be disclosed to the public. If you wish to make an oral public comment but do not wish to provide your name, you may enter “Cupertino Resident” or similar designation.

3. When the Mayor calls for the item on which you wish to speak, click on “raise hand,” or,

2 CC 05-03-2022
2 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022
if you are calling in, press *9. Speakers will be notified shortly before they are called to speak.

4. When called, please limit your remarks to the time allotted and the specific agenda topic.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this teleconference City Council meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the Council meeting to arrange for assistance.

In addition, upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, City Council meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format.

NOTICE AND CALL FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL N
OTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special meeting of the Cupertino City Council is hereby called for Tuesday, May 03, 2022, commencing at 5:30 p.m. in Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 and via teleconference. Said special meeting shall be for the purpose of conducting business on the subject matters listed below under the heading, “Special Meeting."

SPECIAL MEETING
ROLL CALL - 5:30 PM
S

TUDY SESSION

1. Subject: Consider a Study Session on the Capital Improvements Program (CIP,) including review of the five-year CIP (Fiscal Year (FY) 22-27) and new proposed projects for FY 22-23
Recommended Action: Receive report on the five-year CIP (FY 22-27,) including new proposed projects for FY 22-23, requesting comments and direction Presenter: Susan Michael, Capital Improvements Program Manager

3 CC 05-03-2022
3 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022
Staff Report
A - Proposed FY22-23 CIP Projects List
B - Proposed FY22-23 CIP Project Narratives
C – FY22-23 CIP Projects Table
D – Status Report, Current CIP Projects
E - Planning Commission Resolution 6950
F - Memo Civic Center Projects Update
G - Memo on City Hall Seismic Analysis
G1 - 2021 City Hall Tier 1 Seismic Eval
G2 - 2014 Seismic Study Tipping Mar
G3 - 2012 Essential Serv Fac Analysis AKH
G4 - 2006 Seismic Report AKH
G5 - 2011 Structural Analysis AKH

ADJOURNMENT
R

EGULAR MEETING
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - 6:45 PM
R

OLL CALL

CEREMONIAL MATTERS AND PRESENTATIONS

1. Subject: Proclamations honoring musicians from two Cupertino High Schools (Homestead-Cupertino Symphony Orchestra and Homestead Symphonic Wind Ensemble) for their performances at the Washington D.C. International Music Festival on April 16 and 17, 2022
Recommended Action: Present proclamations honoring musicians from two Cupertino High Schools (Homestead-Cupertino Symphony Orchestra and Homestead Symphonic Wind Ensemble) for their performances at the Washington D.C. International Music Festival on April 16 and 17, 2022
A - Proclamation Homestead-Cupertino Symphony Orchestra B - Proclamation Homestead Symphonic Wind Ensemble

2. Subject: Proclamation commemorating the Eid al-Fitr holiday, honoring the end of Ramadan for members of the Islamic faith and celebrating religious freedoms for every member of the Cupertino community
Recommended Action: Present Proclamation commemorating the Eid al-Fitr holiday, honoring the end of Ramadan for members of the Islamic faith and celebrating religious freedoms for every member of the Cupertino community
A - Proclamation

POSTPONEMENTS AND ORDERS OF THE DAY
O

RAL COMMUNICATIONS

4 CC 05-03-2022
4 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Council on any matter within t
he jurisdiction of the Council and not on the agenda. The total time for Oral Communications will ordinarily be limited to one hour. Individual speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. As necessary, the Chair may further limit the time allowed to individual speakers, or reschedule remaining comments to the end of the meeting on a first come first heard basis, with priority given to students. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Council from discussing or making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda. A councilmember may, however, briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by speakers. A councilmember may also ask a question for clarification, provide a reference for factual information, request staff to report back concerning a matter, or request that an item be added to a future City Council agenda in response to public comment.

REPORTS BY COUNCIL AND STAFF (10 minutes)

3. S
ubject: Brief reports on councilmember activities and brief announcements Recommended Action: Receive brief reports on councilmember activities and brief announcements

4. S ubject: Report on Committee assignments
Recommended Action: R eport on Committee assignments

5. S ubject: City Manager update
Recommended Action: R eceive City Manager update on City business CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 6-22)
Unless there are separate discussions and/or actions requested by council, staff or a member of the pu
blic, it is requested that items under the Consent Calendar be acted on simultaneously.

6. S ubject: Approve the April 19 City Council minutes Recommended Action: App rove the April 19 City Council minutes A - Draft Minutes

7. S ubject: Approve the April 21 City Council minutes Recommended Action: App rove the April 21 City Council minutes A - Draft Minutes

8. Subject: Consider adopting a resolution authorizing continued remote teleconference meetings of the legislative bodies of the City of Cupertino for the period May 3, 2022 through June 2, 2022 pursuant to the Brown Act, as amended by AB 361 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-050 authorizing continued remote teleconference meetings of the legislative bodies of the City of Cupertino for the period May 3, 2022 through June 2, 2022 pursuant to the Brown Act, as amended by AB 361

5 CC 05-03-2022
5 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022
Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution
B – Adopted Resolution No. 22-035
C – Health Officer Recommendation Regarding Public Governmental Meetings

9. Subject: Consider a donation from Marilyn Francesco for a memorial plaque to be placed on a bench in Memorial Park, in memory of Robin Andy.

Recommended Action: Authorize the following regarding a plaque in memory of Robin Andy.
1) Acceptance of the plaque donation
2) Wording of the plaque
3) Installation on a designated bench at Memorial Park Staff Report
A - Resolution 17-102 and Attached Donation Policy
B - Completed Standard Donation Form

10. Subject: Consider the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program and Below Market Rate (BMR) Affordable Housing Fund (AHF) funding allocations.

Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to execute FY 2022-23 CDBG and BMR AHF funding agreements
Staff Report
A - Housing Commission Resolution No 22-01 (FY 22-23 Funding Allocations) B - FY 22-23 NOFA RFP
C - FY 2022-23 CDBG and BMR AHF Funding Application Descriptions D - Sample CDBG Capital Housing Contract

11. Subject: Consideration of Amended and Restated Agreement with the County of Santa Clara for Weed Abatement Services
Recommended Action: Authorize the City Manager to execute an Amended and Restated Agreement with the County of Santa Clara to continue the Weed Abatement Program in Cupertino
Staff Report
A - Draft Agreement
B – Seventh Amendment to Agreement for the Abatement of Weeds

12. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 7, 2022 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-036 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 7, 2022
A - Draft Resolution
B - AP Report

13. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 14, 2022

6 CC 05-03-2022
6 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-037 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 14, 2022
A - Draft Resolution
B - AP Report

14. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 21, 2022 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-038 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 21, 2022
A - Draft Resolution
B - AP Report

15. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 22, 2022 MISC
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-039 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 22, 2022 MISC
A - Draft Resolution MISC
B - AP Report MISC

16. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 28, 2022 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-040 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending February 28, 2022
A - Draft Resolution
B - AP Report

17. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 7, 2022 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-041 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 7, 2022
A - Draft Resolution
B - AP Report

18. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 14, 2022 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-042 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 14, 2022
A - Draft Resolution
B - AP Report

19. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 21, 2022 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-043 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 21, 2022
A - Draft Resolution
B - AP Report

20. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 28, 2022

7 CC 05-03-2022
7 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-044 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 28, 2022
A - Draft Resolution
B - AP Report

21. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 28, 2022 MISC
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-045 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending March 28, 2022 MISC
A - Draft Resolution MISC
B - AP Report MISC

22. Subject: Consider proposed resolutions for submission to the United States Conference of Mayors Annual Meeting held from June 3-6, 2022
Recommended Action: Approve proposed resolutions for submission to the United States Conference of Mayors Annual Meeting held from June 3-6, 2022 Staff Report
A – Proposed Resolution 1: Accurate Public Information in a Digital Age B – Proposed Resolution 2: Financial Disclosure of Special-Interest Lobbying C – Proposed Resolution 3: Democratic Principles for Open and Effective Public Discourse SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES - None
P

UBLIC HEARINGS

23. Subject: Consider the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Fee Schedule Update (Continued from April 19, 2022)
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-049 approving FY 2022-23 Fee Schedule A, B, C, D and E effective July 1, 2022
Presenter: Thomas Leung, Senior Management Analyst
Staff Report
A - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule A - General Fees (redline)
B - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule B - Engineering Fees (redline) C - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule C - Planning Fees (redline)
D - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule D - Building Fees (redline)
E - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule E - Recreation (redline)
F - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule A - General Fees (clean)
G - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule B - Engineering Fees (clean) H - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule C - Planning Fees (clean)
I - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule D - Building Fees (clean)
J - FY2022-23 Fee Schedule E - Recreation (clean)
K - User Fee Study 2016
L - Draft Resolution

ORDINANCES AND ACTION ITEMS
P
age 8
8 CC 05-03-2022
8 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022

24. Subject: Consider conducting the first reading of an Ordinance related to regulation of single-use plastic foodware and single-use carryout bags (continued from April 19, 2022)
Recommended Action: Conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 22-2239: “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino amending City Code to change the name of section 9.15, adopt new sections 9.15.090 and 9.15.125, and amend sections

9.15.100, 9.15.110, 9.15.120, 9.15.130, 9.17.130, and 9.17.140 to regulate the use of single-use food service ware by food providers, regulate sale of single-use food service ware and expanded polystyrene foam coolers, and regulate single-use carryout bags” (Attachment A), which includes a finding that adoption of the Ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA.)
Presenter: Ursula Syrova, Environmental Programs Manager Staff Report
A - Single-Use Plastics and Bags Draft Ordinance - Blackline Version B - Single-Use Plastics and Bags Draft Ordinance - Clean Version C- Single-Use Plastics Ordinance Elements and Phasing Summary D - Single-Use Foodware Cost Comparisons

25. Subject: Consideration of Municipal Code amendments to the Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 2 to add Chapter 2.96 and codify the Economic Development Committee (continued from April 19, 2022)
Recommended Action: 1. Conduct the first reading of Ordinance No. 22-2240; “An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Adding Chapter 2.96 of Title 2 (Administration and Personnel) to Codify the Economic Development Committee"

2. Find that the proposed actions are exempt from CEQA
Presenter: Tina Kapoor, Economic Development Manager
Staff Report
A - Draft Ordinance

26. S ubject: Consider accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending December 20, 2021 Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 22-015 accepting Accounts Payable for the period ending December 20, 2021
Presenter: Katy Nomura, Deputy City Manager
Staff Report
A - Payments to Chamber Jan 2015 - Mar 2022
B - Festivals - City Fees Waived & City Expenses
C - Reservations for Meeting Space at City Facilities
D - Draft Resolution
E - AP Report (Including Chamber Contract Payment)

27. S ubject: Consideration of a City Council summer recess and cancellation of meeting(s)

9 CC 05-03-2022
9 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022
Recommended Action: Consider a City Council summer recess and cancel any meetings
Presenter: Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk
Staff Report
A – Council Upcoming Draft Agenda Items
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - CONTINUED (As necessary)
C

OUNCIL AND STAFF COMMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

ADJOURNMENT
The City of Cupertino has adopted the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6; litigation challenging a final decision of the City Council must be brought within 90 days after a decision is announced unless a shorter time is required by State or Federal law.

Prior to seeking judicial review of any adjudicatory (quasi-judicial) decision, interested persons must file a petition for reconsideration within ten calendar days of the date the City Clerk mails notice of the City’s decision. Reconsideration petitions must comply with the requirements of Cupertino Municipal Code §2.08.096. Contact the City Clerk’s office for more information or go to http://www.cupertino.org/cityclerk for a reconsideration petition form.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format.

Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Cupertino City Council after publication of the packet will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours; and in Council packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page on the Cupertino web site.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section

2.08.100 written communications sent to the Cupertino City Council, Commissioners or City staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written communications are accessible to the public through the City’s website and kept in packet archives. Do not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will be made publicly available on the City website.

10 CC 05-03-2022
10 of 1033
City Council A genda May 3, 2022

11 CC 05-03-2022
11 of 1033

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Agenda Item
22-10583 Agenda Date: 5/3/2022
Agenda #: 1.

Subject: Consider a Study Session on the Capital Improvements Program (CIP,) including review of the five-year CIP (Fiscal Year (FY) 22-27) and new proposed projects for FY 22-23 Receive report on the five-year CIP (FY 22-27,) including new proposed projects for FY 22-23, requesting comments and direction
Presenter: Susan Michael, Capital Improvements Program Manager CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 4/28/2022Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
12 CC 05-03-2022
12 of 1033

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: May 3, 2022

Subject
Consider a Study Session on the Capital Improvements Program (CIP,) including review of the five-year CIP (Fiscal Year (FY) 22-27) and new proposed projects for FY 22-23.

Recommended Action
Receive report on the five-year CIP (FY 22 -27,) including new proposed projects for FY 22-23, requesting comments and direction.

Discussion

Developing the CIP
Development of the annual CIP is a multi -step process. Staff gathers input on potential projects and these projects are evaluated based on the following criteria:

1. Council-identified priorities

2. Health and safety improvements

3. High priorities established through completed master plans or condition assessments

4. Projects in response to community input and ongoing usage; projects previously on hold that need to be re-activated

5. Availability of external funding such as grants or projects that remain eligible for external funding

6. Fiscally and programmatically conservative projects that are within the means of staff to deliver

A preliminary list of potential projects is reviewed publicly, with specific outreach to commissions to receive feedback. Subsequently the developing CIP list is presented to the City Council at a study session (current phase). This allows the City Council to provide early input into priorities for the CIP with advance knowledge from the outreach conducted on the program. On May 17, staff will bring the Proposed CIP, incorporating input from the study session to the City Council for further review, modification, and approval. The process will be completed with a second reading in June.

13 CC 05-03-2022
13 of 1033

The FY 22-27 CIP projects are grouped into the following six categories as displayed in Attachment C:
1) New projects for consideration
2) Existing projects with multi-year funding
3) Existing fully funded projects
4) Existing projects with grants/external funds
5) Completed projects
6) Deferred Projects (on hold)

The development of the CIP this year provides a five -year look ahead, with a focus on advancing and completing outstanding projects , while introducing additional work where staffing capacity allows.

FY 22-23 Project Proposals
There are seven new projects for discussion for FY 22-23 (Attachment A). Three of the seven proposals have been explicitly mentioned as Council priorities. Six of the proposed projects are drawn from a Master Plan or the General Plan. Four projects are maintenance or health and safety driven. Five projects have wide community support, either directly or by association with previous versions of similar projects.

FY22-23 NEW PROJECTS

Council
Priority
Health
Safety
Master
Plans
Public
Input
External
Funding

1. Blackberry Farms Pools
Splash Pad x x

2. City Hall Renovation/
Replacement and Library
Parking Garage: Design and
Construction x x x

3. City Lighting LED
improvements x x

4. De Anza Blvd Buffered Bike
Lanes x x

5. Jollyman All-Inclusive Play
Area: Adult-Assistive Bathroom
Facility x x x

6. Major Recreation Facilities:

Use and Market Analysis x x x

7. Stocklmeir, Bryne and
Blesch: Inspection Reports and
Analysis x x x

14 CC 05-03-2022
14 of 1033

A description and justification of each project is included in Attachment B. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects are often programmed and delivered in phases to allow for complex projects to be evaluated and scoped in detail, accounting for community and organizational needs as well as budget. In the list above, projects two, five, six, and seven are phases of larger efforts. In the list above, projects two, five, six, and seven are phases of larger efforts, either existing or proposed. Within a five-year CIP, staff attempts to identify funding expenditures for the appropriate phase and year, when sufficient information is available to do so. When the CIP is later brought forward for consideration of Council approval, the approval will a pply only to the upcoming FY 22 - 23 budget.

Background
Of particular note within the proposed projects, a third -party structural engineer has recently evaluated City Hall and identified specific and significant structural issues that impact the building’s anticipated performance in a seismic event. The report is included here as Attachment G1 along with prior Seismic Evaluations of City Hall (Attachments G2 – G5). Attachment G is a memo summarizing the importance of the City Hall Replacement/Renovation and Library Parking Garage project in light of the seismic evaluations. This project is proposed in phases to address Civic Center parking needs first, with a comple ted evaluation and decision on options for City Hall Renovation/ Replacement to be prepared for discussion in early 2023 in advance of the next CIP budget cycle.

City Council is asked to provide comments on the newly proposed projects for FY 22 -23 prior t o the FY 22-23 Proposed Budget . Additionally, staff invites comments on CIP projects suggested for fiscal years 2023 to 2027. While those projects are not included in the current Proposed Budget or CIP program review and approval, City Council’s input will help with advance workload planning . Attachment C lists the projects with their respective budgets.

Commission Input
The Planning Commission, Parks and Recreation Commission, and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission reviewed the proposed projects within their purview and provided input at their April meetings. The Parks and Recreation Commission voted unanimously to support the new CIP projects proposed. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65401 and Chapter 2.32.070(C) of the Cupertino Municipal Code, at the April 12 Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission adopted a Resolution (Attachment E), finding that the proposed FY 22-23 CIP projects conform with the General Plan. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission restated their interest in projects as follows, while acknowledging the need to prioritize based on staff resources:

1. Bollinger Road Improvements (from completed FY 20-21 Study)

2. Carmen Road Bridge (plans, specifications, and estimates)

3. Stevens Creek Boulevard Phase 3
15 CC 05-03-2022
15 of 1033

4. De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lane

5. Touchless Pedestrian Push Buttons

Sustainability Impact
Sustainability impacts vary by project, and some of these projects have not yet been reviewed for their environmental impact. In general, many CIP projects are designed to improve sustainability . Any potential impact from projects will be identified and addressed during the design phase of each project.

Fiscal Impact
The annual CIP assumes a base funding a mount of $2.5 million annually, with that amount varying based on available year end fund balances.

Over the last seven years, the General Fund transferred a total of $60,791,725 to the Capital Reserve as follows:

 FY 21-22: $10,000,000
 FY 20-21: $5,000,000
 FY 19-20: $10,000,000
 FY 18-19: $8,000,000
 FY 17-18: $10,000,000
 FY 16-17: $15,000,000
 FY 15-16: $2,791,725

Although transfers from the General Fund to the Capital Reserve are yet to be determined for future years, past experience provides a target for future project programming . Staff continues to recommend that the Capital Reserve account maintain a minimum unprogrammed fund balance of $2 million to allow for funding needs during the course of the fiscal year.

The budget for active CIP projects totals $53.1 million for 40 projects at various levels of completion, including $8.2 million of external funding . Nine projects have been completed, totaling $5.7 million in the current fiscal year . Six projects are presently on hold (deferred) due to external funding delays and project phasing.

The Capital Reserve fund balance is currently estimated to end the year at $ 13,579,991.

New projects proposed will reduce this amount by $$7,575,000. The current Fiscal Year Proposed Budget recommends transferring $2,500,000 annually to the Capital Reserve , resulting in an estimated ending fund balance of $8,504,991 for FY 22-23, should all recommended Capital Projects be approved.

_____________________________________

Prepared by: Susan Michael, Capital Improvements Program Manager Reviewed by: Matt Morley, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Dianne Thompson, Assistant City Manager
16 CC 05-03-2022
16 of 1033

Approved for Submission by: Jim Throop, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Proposed FY22-23 CIP Project List
B – Proposed FY22-23 CIP Project Narratives
C – FY22-23 CIP Projects Table
D – Status Report, Current CIP Projects
E – Planning Commission Resolution 6950
F – Memo Civic Center Projects Update
G – Memo on City Hall Seismic Analysis
G1 - 2021 City Hall Tier 1 Seismic Eval
G2 - 2014 Seismic Study Tipping Mar
G3 - 2012 Essential Serv Fac Analysis AKH
G4 - 2006 Seismic Report AKH
G5 - 2011 Structural Analysis AKH

17 CC 05-03-2022
17 of 1033

ATTACHMENT A
List of Proposed FY22-23 CIP Projects

PROJECT TITLE PROJECT TYPE/

COMMISSION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION FY22-23
budget
FY24-27 (w/o
escalation)
CATEGORY 1 - NEW PROJECTS - FISCAL YEAR 2022 -2023
Blackberry Farms Pools Splash Pad Parks &
Recreation
Design and construct a splash pad to replace the slide
feature at the Blackberry Farm Pools.
500,000$
City Hall Renovation/ Replacement
and Library Parking Garage: Design
and Construction
Facilities
The full project includes Construction of both buildings, but the proposal for this fiscal year includes only the design and consulting services for the Library Parking
Garage, and Conceptual Design services for the City
Hall project. Phasing the work will address Civic Center parking needs first, with a completed evaluation and
decision on options for City Hall Renovation/
Replacement to be prepared for discussion in early
2023 in advance of the next CIP budget cycle.

The City Hall scope which includes structural upgrades, renovation of mechanical/ electrical and life-safety
infrastructure, improvements to workplace and
accessibility, and purposeful construction of the
emergency operations center (EOC). The Library
Parking garage will be a 3-story above-ground structure in the SE corner of the existing parking lot.
4,000,000$ $75.6M
City Lighting - LED Lighting Streets &
Grounds
Implement the transition of City's streetlight
infrastructure from induction and other fixtures to LED fixtures to meet the "Dark Sky" Ordinance
requirements and reduce light pollution and energy
cost.
1,300,000$
De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike
Lanes
Transportation/
Bike & Ped
Restripe De Anza Blvd to include a painted buffered
zone between the existing bike lane and the vehicle
lanes.
525,000$
Jollyman All Inclusive Play Area:

Adult-Assistive Bathroom Facilities
Parks &
Recreation
Design and construct a new adult-assistive bathroom
facility adjacent to the All-Inclusive Play Area.
850,000$
Major Recreation Facilities: Use and
Market Analysis
Parks &
Recreation
Commission a report to study the possible locations for new major recreation facilities: Aquatic, Fine Arts/
Performance and/or Recreation Facilities. Existing
recreational and arts facilities, both public and private, will be reviewed and a recommendation based on
need, available locations, and financial investments
required. The Market Analysis and Business Plan will be the first phase in the potential development of
additional recreation facilities in the City.
350,000$
Stocklmeir, Bryne and Blesch:

Inspection Reports and Analysis
Facilities Instigate property inspection reports and work with outside consultants to develop initial use and business strategies appropriate for the three residential
properties owned by the City.
50,000$

CC 05-03-2022
18 of 1033

ATTACHMENT A
List of Proposed FY22-23 CIP Projects

PROJECT TITLE PROJECT TYPE/

COMMISSION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION FY22-23
budget
FY24-27 (w/o
escalation)
CATEGORY 1 - NEW PROJECTS FOR CONSIDERATION - FISCAL YEARS 2023 - 2027 ADA 2015 report
Update/Dashboard
Facilities Update the findings of the 2015 ADA self evaluation report.
200,000$
Blackberry Farms Golf Course
Improvements
Parks &
Recreation
BBF Golf Course Use feasibility Study is currently
underway. This project proposes to secure funding for
the outcome of that Study, to continue the work as
directed by City Council and the Community.
2,500,000$
Stevens Creek Blvd Separated
Bikeway, Phase 3 - Design
Transportation/
Bike & Ped
Construct a separated Class IV bike lane along Stevens
Creek Blvd, between Highway 85 and Foothill Blvd. The
scope is for design funding only.
225,000$
Regnart Road Improvements: Ph. 3 -
6 Streets &
Grounds
This project continues the stabilization efforts along
Regnart Road and compliments the 2017 Outfall Repair
and Slope Stabilization project and the Retaining wall
project. The 2017 Regnart Road Slope Stability Study
identified several areas along Regnart Road that exhibit poor drainage characteristics, slope stability concerns that require partial road reconstruction in order to
avoid costly road or slope failures and lengthy road
closures. Proposed improvements include additional
drainage structures, regrading/repaving the road to
drain towards the creek, slope stabilization and erosion control measures and retaining walls.
2,200,000$
Bollinger Road Bike Improvements Transportation/
Bike & Ped
Implement improvements as proposed in the 2021
Bollinger Road Corridor Safety Study.
1,500,000$
Carmen Road Bridge - Design Transportation/
Bike & Ped
Design a bicycle/pedestrian bridge across Stevens
Creek Blvd at Carmen Road.
750,000$
Carmen Road Bridge - Construction Transportation/
Bike & Ped
Construct a bicycle pedestrian bridge across Stevens
Creek Blvd at Carmen Road.
4,500,000$
Don Burnett Bridge LED Lighting
Upgrade
Streets &
Grounds
Upgrade the existing 16 architectural light fixtures to LED.
150,000$
Memorial Park Softball Field LED
Lighting Upgrade
Streets &
Grounds
Upgrade the existing 38 light fixtures to LED. Existing light fixtures are 4K 1000W Metal Halide bulbs.
150,000$
Blackberry Farm Bocce Ball Shade
Structure
Parks &
Recreation
Design and construct a new shade structure over the
player areas at the Blackberry Farm Bocce Ball Courts.
125,000$
Linda Vista Park Picnic Area Shade
Structure
Parks &
Recreation
Design and construct a shade structure over the
barbecue in the picnic area at Linda Vista Park.
125,000$
Portal Park Picnic Area Shade
Structure
Parks &
Recreation
Design and construct a shade structure over the
barbecue in the picnic area at Portal Park.
125,000$

CC 05-03-2022
19 of 1033

ATTACHMENT A
List of Proposed FY22-23 CIP Projects

PROJECT TITLE PROJECT TYPE/

COMMISSION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION FY22-23
budget
FY24-27 (w/o
escalation)
CATEGORY 1 - NEW PROJECTS FOR CONSIDERATION - FISCAL YEARS 2023 - 2027 Jollyman Park Dog Off-Leash Area
(DOLA) Pathway
Parks &
Recreation
Design and construct a paved pathway to provide
access to the DOLA at Jollyman Park along the south
side of the park.
111,000$
QCC skylight renovation Facilities Replace the aging skylight with like panels and frame. 350,000$ Memorial Park - Design &
Construction
Parks &
Recreation
Design and Construction project[s] resulting from FY22- 23 Specific Design project
TBD
Lawrence Mitty Park - Design &
Construction
Parks &
Recreation
Design and Construction project[s] resulting from FY22- 23 Master Plan project
TBD
Community Hall Improvements Facilities
Design and Construction project[s] resulting from IT/AV operational upgrades required
TBD
Major Facilities [Results] -
Programming and Design
Parks &
Recreation
Major project result from the Fy22-23 study TBD
CATEGORY 2 - EXISTING PROJECTS - MULTI-YEAR FUNDING
ADA Improvements Facilities This is an ongoing program funded annually to improve accessibility at all public facilities throughout the City. 95,000$ 100,000 $
Annual Playground Replacement
(FY22-23: Creekside Tot Lot)
Parks &
Recreation
Replacement of older playground equipment that is
dated and worn, starting with Creekside (1998) and
Varian (2002) (Year 3 of 5)
300,000$ 300,000 $
Park Amenity Improvements Parks &
Recreation
Funding for various park amenities such as benches,
hydration stations, outdoor table tennis, cornhole,
shade (structures and/or trees), dog-off-leash,
pickleball striping, etc. (Year 3 of 5)
200,000$ 200,000 $
Street Light Installation - Annual
Infill
Streets &
Grounds
This is an ongoing program funded annually to Sesign
and install street lights on an as-needed basis.
75,000$ 75,000 $

CC 05-03-2022
20 of 1033

1. New Projects
FY 2022-23 CIP Budget 1. New Projects 2
NOTES:

Cost estimates are generally "Rough Order of Magnitude" (ROM).

LEGEND
Health and Safety improvements
$
$
$
Council Priority
Projects in response to Community input and ongoing usage; projects on hold that need to be re-activated; or ongoing phases High priorities established through completed Master Plans or Condition Assessment Reports
Projects that have secured external funding

1. Blackberry Farms Pools Splash Pad

2. City Hall Renovation/Replacement and Library Parking Garage:

Design and Construction

3. City Lighting LED improvements

4. De Anza Blvd Buffered Bike Lanes

5. Jollyman All-Inclusive Play Area: Adult-Assistive Bathroom Facility

6. Major Recreation Facilities: Use and Market Analysis

7. Stocklmeir, Bryne and Blesch: Inspection Reports and Analysis Proposed
FY2022 - 2023 Capital Improvement Programs

NEW PROJECTS

ATTACHMENT B
21 CC 05-03-2022
21 of 1033
Blackberry Farms Pools Splash Pad
Total Budget $ 500,000
None
City Funding
External Funding
Origin of Request Parks and Recreation
Project Type Facilities
Location Blackberry Farm
Project Description
Design and construct a splash pad to replace the slide feature at the Blackberry Farm Pools.

Project Justification
A splash pad at the Blackberry Farm Pools will allow for replacement of the aging slide. Implementing a new feature also supports fulfilling the Outdoor Recreation Diversity and Aquatics Facility categories of opportunity outlined in the Parks and Recreation System Master Plan.

Status and/or Projected Schedule
The project can be implemented within this fiscal year.

Operating Budget Impacts
Unlike the Slide, a Splash pad will not require CalOSHA inspection, and will require less staff monitoring for user safety. Other maintenance requirements are expected to be comparable to the slide.

Budget Notes
None
Budget Unit 420-99-073
Project Number TBD
CIP Identifier TBD
FY 2022-23 CIP Budget Blackberry Farms Pools Splash Pad 4 $ 500,000

Cost Estimate up to Project Completion:

Work completed to date:

Environmental Review required:

Key Stakeholders:
as noted above
N.A.

Categorically Exempt
BBF community, Parks and Recreation Commission
22 CC 05-03-2022
22 of 1033
City Hall Improvements: Design Build implementation
Total Budget $ 38,000,000
None
City Funding
External Funding
Origin of Request Public Works - CIP
Project Type Facilities
Location City Hall
Project Description
Design and Construction of the City Hall project, which includes structural upgrades, renovation of mechanical/electrical and lifesafety infrastructure, improvements to workplace and accessibility, and purposeful construction of the emergency operations center (EOC).

Project Justification
The 1965 building has not been sufficiently reinforced to withstand a major seismic event. Retrofit of the structural system, along with upgrades to supporting MEP/life-safety infrastructure systems, are essential to extending the useful life of the facility. In addition, the existing interior layout does not meet current or projected needs for workplace and community meeting needs. Renovations to Community Hall include improvements to the pantry space to provide better support for large gatherings in the Hall.

Status and/or Projected Schedule
Bridging Architect RFQ and design will be issued in July. DBE RFQ can be issued 6 months later. Overall it is projected that Design and Construction will last two years.

Operating Budget Impacts
A renovated City Hall building will require less day to day staff time than current investment, but the staffing is not projected to be substantially altered.

Budget Notes
None
Budget Unit 420-99-250
Project Number ST 056
CIP Identifier 2022-09
FY 2022-23 CIP Budget City Hall Improvements: Design Build implementation 5 City Hall and Library Parking Garage: Design and Construction Design and Construction

City Hall Renovation/Replacement and Library Parking
Garage: Design and Construction
$ 4,000,000
$ 4,000,000
Design and Construction of the City Hall and Library Parking Garage project. The City Hall scope includes structural upgrades, renovation of mechanical/electrical and life-safety infrastructure, improvements to workplace and accessibility, and purposeful construction of the emergency operations center (EOC). The Library Parking garage will be a 3-story above-ground structure in the SE corner of the existing parking lot.

Status and/or Projected Schedule
The 1965 City Hall building has not been sufficiently reinforced to withstand a major seismic event. Retrofit of the structural system, along with upgrades to supporting MEP/life-safety infrastructure systems, are essential to extending the useful life of the facility. In addition, the existing interior layout does not meet current or projected needs for workplace and community meeting needs. Cost estimates show that a new building is more cost effective than renovations, so the proposal is to replace City Hall with a new 3-story 36,000 SF facility. Any substantial renovations to the building trigger building/planning code requirements to provide additional parking. This project addresses the requirement by the addition of approximately 200 parking spaces in a new structure in the SE corner of the civic center parking area.

Project Justification
The funding requested for FY22-23 will be allocated to design, engineering and consultant contracts to initiate the design, environmental analysis and public outreach. FY23-24 will allocate funds for the construction of the parking garage. FY24-25 will require the funding for the design-build of City Hall.

Operating Budget Impacts
A renovated City Hall building will require less day to day staff time than current investment, but the staffing is not projected to be substantially altered. A new parking structure will require additional maintenance staffing.

Budget Notes
Total Design and Construction budget: $79,600,000
Cost Estimate up to Project Completion:

Work completed to date:

Environmental Review required:

Key Stakeholders:
$79,600,000
Structural & Cost analyses
Amendment to 2020 IS/MND required
Community, City Hall visitors and staff
23 CC 05-03-2022
23 of 1033
City Lighting LED Transition Assessment
Total Budget $ 50,000
City Funding $ 50,000
External Funding
Origin of Request Public Works
Project Type Transportation
Location Various
Project Description
Assess the costs, benefits and opportunities and develop a strategy to transition the City's streetlight infrastructure, and other City operated lights, from incandescent to LED fixtures to meet the “Dark Sky” requirements and reduce light pollution.

Project Justification
In March 2021 the City ratified the "Dark Sky" night lighting footcandle limitations. This requires that we lower the FC/lighting output on our streetlights. Our system has over 2500 streetlights that will require modification.

Status and/or Projected Schedule
TBD
Operating Budget Impacts
No impacts to the Operating Budget are currently projected.

Budget Notes
$50,000 to prepare the report. If the report is accepted and a project is implemented to transition the streetlights, a CIP project would need to be initiated for FY22-23, and approximate costs would be $1,500,000.

The report should discuss any ongoing costs or savings to the Operating Budget.

Budget Unit None
Project Number None
CIP Identifier None
FY 2021-22 CIP Budget 1. New Projects 10

© google
Develop a strategy to transition the City's streetlight infrastructure, and other City operated lights, from incandescent to LED fixtures to meet the “Dark Sky” requirements and reduce light pollution. Assess the costs, benefits and opportunities of the proposed improvements. $2,000,000.

In March 2021 the City ratified the "Dark Sky" night lighting requirements for private development. As City street lighting and other facility lighting may create unintended light pollution, and in some cases is nearing the end of its useful life, this study will evaluate lighting needs and compliance with dark sky requirements for the City's over 2500 street lights, various path lighting and exterior facility lighting.

Retain "Dark Sky" knowledgeable lighting consultant and complete report in this fiscal year. Implement recommendations in the following year.

Develop a strategy to transition the City's streetlight infrastructure, and other City operated lights, from induction to LED fixtures to meet the “Dark Sky” requirements and reduce light pollution. Assess the costs, benefits and opportunities of the proposed improvements.

Status and/or Projected Schedule
TBD
Operating Budget Impacts
No impacts to the Operating Budget are currently projected.

Budget Notes
$50,000 to prepare the report. If the report is accepted and a project is implemented to transition the streetlights, a CIP project would need to be initiated for FY22-23, and approximate costs would be $1,500,000.

The report should discuss any ongoing costs or savings to the Operating Budget. $2,000,000.

Retain "Dark Sky" knowledgeable lighting consultant and complete report in this fiscal year. Implement recommendations in the following year.

Cost Estimate up to Project Completion:

Work completed to date:

Environmental Review required:

Key Stakeholders:
$2,000,000
N.A.

Exempt from CEQA - 15282 & 15306
PW

8 Improvements
$1,300,000
$1,300,000
Streets and Grounds
Implement the results of the FY21-22 "City Lighting LED Transition Assessment." Transition the City's streetlight infrastructure and other City operated lights, from induction to LED fixtures to meet the "Dark Sky" Ordinance requirements and reduce light pollution.

In March 2021 the City ratified the "Dark Sky" night lighting requirements for private development. As City street lighting and other facility lighting may create unintended light pollution, and in some cases is nearing the end of its useful life, this project will bring the City's over 2500 street lights, various path lighting and exterior facility lighting fixtures into compliance with "dark sky" requirements.

City Lighting - LED Improvements
FY 2022-23 CIP Budget

Cost Estimate up to Project Completion:

Work completed to date:

Environmental Review required:

Key Stakeholders:
as noted above
Survey of existing assets completed 2022
Categorically Exempt
Community and CMO, Sustainability division and Public Works, Streets division 24 CC 05-03-2022
24 of 1033
DeAnza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes
Total Budget $ 525,000
None
City Funding
External Funding
Origin of Request Public Works: Traffic
Project Type Transportation: Bikeways
Location De Anza Blvd, entire segment within
City limits (Bollinger Road to
Homestead Road).

Project Description
Restripe De Anza Blvd to include a painted buffered zone between the existing bike lane and the vehicle lanes.

Project Justification
Project is identified as the highest of the Tier 2 priority projects in the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan. Project will install a painted buffer area between the existing bike lane and the adjacent vehicle lane. This will require restriping De Anza Blvd to narrow the vehicle lanes to provide room for the painted buffer. Design will be done in-house, funding is for construction only.

Status and/or Projected Schedule
Project can begin once funding is secured and design is complete, earliest Fall 2022. Project can be completed in FY22-23; however, it may be useful to include with annual pavement project which would mean completion Fall 2023.

Operating Budget Impacts
No operational budget impact.

Budget Notes
None
Budget Unit TBD
Project Number TBD
CIP Identifier TBD
FY 2022-23 CIP Budget DeAnza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes 6 None
$ 525,000

Cost Estimate up to Project Completion:

Work completed to date:

Environmental Review required:

Key Stakeholders:
as noted above
N.A.

Categorically Exempt
Community, Bike and Pedestrian Commission
25 CC 05-03-2022
25 of 1033
Jollyman All Inclusive play area: Adult-Assisted
bathroom facility
Total Budget $ 500,000
None
City Funding
External Funding
Origin of Request Public Works - CIP
Project Type Facilities
Location Jollyman Park
Project Description
Design and construct a new adult-assistive bathroom facility adjacent to the all inclusive play area.

Project Justification
The new "All Inclusive Play Area" project is intended to serve the broad needs of the [inclusive] community, but the nearest toilet facility is across the park. Providing a large bathroom facility that can serve the needs of the disabled and their attendants, will vastly improve the usability of the new play area.

Status and/or Projected Schedule
The project will be implemented concurrent to the existing All Inclusive Play Area project.

Operating Budget Impacts
Adding one bathroom facility at the Park will have a slight impact on the Operating budget and staff time.

Budget Notes
None
Budget Unit 420-99-051
Project Number PVAR 007
CIP Identifier 2019-15
FY 2022-23 CIP Budget Jollyman All Inclusive play area: Adult-Assisted bathroom facility 7 $ 850,000
$ 850,000
Jollyman All-Inclusive Play Area: Adult-Assistive
Bathroom Facilities
-
-
-
Jollyman All-Inclusive Play Area: Adult-Assistive Bathroom Facilities

Cost Estimate up to Project Completion:

Work completed to date:

Environmental Review required:

Key Stakeholders:
as noted above
All-Inclusive Play Area project underway
Categorically Exempt
Jollyman park community, Parks and Recreation Commission 26 CC 05-03-2022
26 of 1033
Aquatic/Recreation/ Performing Arts Facilities Market
Analysis
Total Budget $ 350,000
None
City Funding
External Funding
Origin of Request CIP
Project Type Parks -Feasibility
Location TBD
Project Description
Commission a report to study the possible locations for new major facilities: Aquatic, Fine Arts/ Performance and/or Recreation Facilities. Existing recreational and arts facilities, both public and private, will be reviewed and a recommendation based on need, available locations, and financial investments required. The Market Analysis and Business Plan will be the first phase in the potential development of additional recreation facilities in the City.

Project Justification
Cupertino’s Park and Recreation System Masterplan has identified the potential need for an Aquatics, Fine Arts/ Performance Arts and Recreation facilities. The land-use comprehensive plan (Policy RPC-2.5.2 Recreation Facilities) has also identified a strategy to “explore the possibility of providing additional access to existing facilities such as gymnasiums, swimming pools and tennis courts.” Status and/or Projected Schedule
The report can be implemented within this fiscal year.

Operating Budget Impacts
This analysis has no operational budget impact.

Budget Notes
None
Budget Unit TBD
Project Number TBD
CIP Identifier TBD
FY 2022-23 CIP Budget Aquatic/Recreation/ Performing Arts Facilities Market Analysis 2 Major Recreation Facilities: Use and Market Analysis
Major Recreation Facilities: Use and Market Analysis
$ 350,000

Cost Estimate up to Project Completion:

Work completed to date:

Environmental Review required:

Key Stakeholders:
unknown
N.A.

Statutorily Exempt
Community, Parks and Recreation Commission
27 CC 05-03-2022
27 of 1033
Residential Properties: Inspection Reports and Analysis Total Budget $ 75,000
None
City Funding
External Funding
Origin of Request Public Works - CIP
Project Type Facilities
Location Blesch, Stocklmeir and Bryne
residences
Project Description
Instigate property inspection reports and work with outside consultants to develop initial use and business strategies appropriate for the three residential properties owned by the City.

Project Justification
Blesch, Stocklmeir and Bryne residences are presently unused and in some cases, dilapidated. Commissioning updated analysis reports of the properties in addition to initial economic forecasting related to some uses, would be beneficial to the City.

Status and/or Projected Schedule
The report can be implemented within this fiscal year.

Operating Budget Impacts
No operational budget impact.

Budget Notes
None
Budget Unit TBD
Project Number TBD
CIP Identifier TBD
FY 2022-23 CIP Budget Residential Properties: Inspection Reports and Analysis 8 $ 50,000
$ 50,000
Stocklmeir, Bryne and Blesch: Inspection Reports & Analysis Stocklmeir, Bryne and Blesch: Inspection Reports and Analysis

Cost Estimate up to Project Completion:

Work completed to date:

Environmental Review required:

Key Stakeholders:
unknown
N.A.

Community, Public Works, Facilities Division
Statutorily Exempt
28 CC 05-03-2022
28 of 1033

ATTACHMENT C
RUC = Restricted Use Category PD - Park Dedication Fund (280) (RUC) ADA - ADA Transition Plan MPP - McClellan Ranch Preserve Master Plan AP - Apple Funded Donation RP - Recreation Program Enterprise Fund (580) (RUC) BCSS - Bollinger Road Corridor Safety Study PMP - Pedestrian Master Plan BBF - Blackberry Farm Enterprise Fund (560)(RUC) SC - Sports Center Enterprise Fund (570) (RUC) BCA - Building Condition Assessment P&R - Parks & Recreation System Master Plan DIL - Developer in Lieu Fund (RUC) SCCP - Stevens Creek Corridor Park Capital Projects Fund (427) (RUC) CAP - Climate Action Plan PTP - Pedestrian Transportation Plan DON - Donation SD - Storm Drain Improvement Fund (210) (RUC) CCMP - Civic Center Master Plan RRGE - Regnart Road Geotechnical Evaluation GF - General Fund (420/429) (unrestricted) TF - Transportation Fund (270) (RUC) BTP - Bicycle Transportation Plan SCC - Stevens Creek Corridor Park Master Plan & Restoration (2006) EP - Santa Clara County Expressway Plan SDMP - Storm Drain Master Plan GP - General Plan
CATEGORY 1 - NEW PROJECTS
Funding
Type
Approved
Plan Budget Unit Project No. Revenue
Funding Sources
Total Project
Budget
Remaining
Balance 3/21/22
FY 2023
Proposed
Funding
FY 2024
Projected
(5% escalation)
FY 2025
Projected (10%
escalation)
FY 2026
Projected (15%
escalation)
FY 2027
Projected (20%
escalation)
GF P&R 420-99-073 - 500,000 500,000 GF CCMP 420-99-250 ST 056 - 79,600,000 4,000,000 21,600,000 54,000,000 GF GP 420-99-258 ST 052 - 1,300,000 1,300,000 GF BTP - 525,000 525,000
GF P&R 420-99-051 PVAR 007 - 850,000 850,000 GF P&R - 350,000 350,000
GF - 50,000 50,000
GF ADA 200,000 210,000
GF BBF 2,500,000 2,625,000
GF BTP 281,250 295,313
GF RRGE 420-99-068 ST 033 - 2,200,000 210,000 1,100,000 1,500,000 GF BCSS 1,500,000 1,575,000
GF BTP/PMP 937,500 984,375
GF BTP/PMP 4,500,000 4,950,000
GF CAP 150,000 165,000
GF BCA 150,000 150,000
GF P&R 156,250 164,063
GF P&R 156,250 164,063
GF P&R 156,250 164,063
GF P&R 138,750 145,688
GF BCA 437,500 459,375

GF P&R TBD TBD

GF P&R TBD TBD

GF BCA TBD TBD

GF P&R TBD TBD
-$ 96,638,750$ -$ 7,575,000$ 28,596,938$ 60,365,000$ 1,500,000$ -$ CATEGORY 2 - EXISTING PROJECTS - MULTI-YEAR FUNDING
Funding
Type
Approved
Plan Budget Unit Project No. Revenue
Funding Sources
Total Project
Budget
Remaining
Balance 3/21/22
FY 2023
Proposed
Funding
FY 2024
Projected
FY 2025
Projected
FY 2026
Projected
FY 2027
Projected
GF GP/ADA 420-99-007 PVAR 002 - 90,000 119,503 95,000 100,000 105,000 110,000 125,000 GF P&R 420-99-085 PVAR 010 - 300,000 360,315 300,000 300,000 500,000 500,000 750,000 GF P&R 420-99-086 PVAR 011 - 200,000 390,803 200,000 200,000 200,000 - - GF GP 420-99-056 ST 024 - 75,000 168,666 75,000 75,000 75,000.00 75,000 75,000 -$ 665,000$ 1,039,287$ 670,000$ 675,000$ 880,000$ 685,000$ 950,000$ CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ▪ FISCAL YEAR 2022 - 2023 Funding Types Approved Plan(s)
Description
Blackberry Farms Pools Splash Pad
City Hall Renovation/Replacement and Library Parking Garage: Design and Construction Blackberry Farms Golf Course Improvements
Stevens Creek Blvd Separated Bikeway, Phase 3 - Design
Regnart Road Improvements: Ph. 3 -6
Bollinger Road Bike Improvements
Carmen Road Bridge - Design
Carmen Road Bridge - Construction
City Lighting - LED Lighting
De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes
Jollyman All Inclusive Play Area: Adult-Assistive Bathroom Facilities Major Recreation Facilities: Use and Market Analysis
Stocklmeir, Bryne and Blesch: Inspection Reports and Analysis ADA 2015 report Update/Dashboard
QCC skylight renovation
Memorial Park - Design & Construction
Lawrence Mitty Park - Design & Construction
Community Hall Improvements
Major Facilities [Results] - Programming and Design
Totals Category 1
Don Burnett Bridge LED Lighting Upgrade
Memorial Park Softball Field LED Lighting Upgrade
Blackberry Farm Bocce Ball Shade Structure
Linda Vista Park Picnic Area Shade Structure
Portal Park Picnic Area Shade Structure
Jollyman Park Dog Off-Leash Area (DOLA) Pathway
Description
ADA Improvements (Annually funded)
Annual Playground Replacement (FY22-23: Creekside Tot Lot) (Year 3 of 5) Park Amenity Improvements (Year 3 of 5)
Street Light Installation - Annual Infill (Annually funded) Totals Category 2

29 CC 05-03-2022
29 of 1033

ATTACHMENT C
CATEGORY 3 - EXISTING PROJECTS - FUNDED
Funding
Type
Approved
Plan Budget Unit Project No. Revenue
Funding Sources
Total Project
Budget
Remaining
Balance 3/21/22
FY 2023
Proposed
Funding
FY 2024
Projected
FY 2025
Projected
FY 2026
Projected
FY 2027
Projected
GF BTP 420-99-036 ST 030 - 220,000 - GF BTP 420-99-036 ST 030 - 1,197,000 - - - - - - BBF P&R, SCC 560-99-088 BGC 002 - 76,400 29,050 - - - - - GF P&R 420-99-073 TBD - 750,000 691,060 - - - - GF CCMP 420-99-250 TBD - 500,000 451,960 - - - - - GF CCMP 420-99-248 TBD - 3,000,000 2,922,440 - - - GF P&R 420-99-083 PVAR 009 - 300,000 222,384 200,000 - - - - GF BCA 420-99-063 BAI 001 - 1,006,470 651,570 - 1,000,000 - 1,000,000 - GF CCMP 420-99-078 CIV 009 - 1,000,000 848,351 - - - - - GF/Grant BTP 270-99-856 ST 052 - 215,000 292,866 - - - - - DIL GP, P&R 280-99-009 P LM 001 - 5,444,085 5,429,958 - - - - - GF CCMP 420-99-077 CIV 007 - 8,705,438 137,730 - - - - - GF P&R 280-99-253 TBD - 1,150,000 1,150,000 - - - - - GF/PD P&R 280-99-254 TBD - 3,000,000 2,869,600 - - - - GF P&R 280-99-255 MP 001 - 500,000 500,000 - - - - - SD SDMP 210-99-256 TBD - 2,000,000 1,883,248 - - - - - GF BTP 420-99-036 ST 054 - 1,954,883 - - - - - - GF RRGE 420-99-068 ST 033 - 1,303,646 706,596 600,000 - GF GP 420-99-040 ST 020 - 25,000 25,000 - - - - GF PTP 420-99-257 TBD - 80,000 57,411 - - - - - GF BTP 420-99-036 ST 053 - 350,000 350,000 GF BTP 420-99-036 ST 053 - 1,000,000 1,000,000 - TF PTP 270-99-087 ST 049 - 200,000 197,991 - - - - - GF SCC, P&R 420-99-259 ST 058 - 65,000 65,000 - - - - - - -$ 34,042,922$ 20,482,215$ 800,000$ 1,000,000$ -$ 1,000,000$ -$ CATEGORY 4 - EXISTING PROJECTS WITH EXTERNAL FUNDING
Funding
Type
Approved
Plan Budget Unit Project No. Revenue
Funding Sources
Total Project
Budget
Remaining
Balance 3/21/22
FY 2023
Proposed
Funding
FY 2024
Projected
FY 2025
Projected
FY 2026
Projected
FY 2027
Projected
GF P&R 420-99-051 PVAR 007 2,448,000 3,678,000 3,188,651 - - - GF/Grant CAP 420-99-251 TBD 208,000 408,000 408,000 - - - - - GF/Grant P&R 420-99-252 TBD 177,952 350,000 271,457 200,000 - - - - Grant BTP 270-99-856 ST 052 213,300 213,300 292,866 - - - - - AP/Grant BTP, PTP 420-99-036 ST 050 1,060,000 1,060,000 - - - - AP/Grant BTP, PTP 420-99-036 ST 046 600,000 2,536,000 - - - - AP/GF/
Grant BTP 420-99-036 ST 047 1,160,000 1,324,410 - - - - - - GF/RP CAP 580-99-090 QCC 006 217,551 502,000 320,670 - - - - - AP/GF GP, PTP 420-99-069 ST 034 1,221,863 1,245,852 1,083,951 - - - - - TF/DIL GP, PTP 270-90-958 ST 013 34,495 5,158,188 2,126,639 250,000 - - - DIL/GF BTP 420-99-070 ST 044 25,658 150,090 142,208 GF BTP 420-99-036 ST 053 807,000 1,807,000 1,807,000 - - - - - - - - 8,173,819$ 18,432,840$ 9,641,442$ 450,000$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 8,173,819$ 53,140,762$ 31,162,944$ 1,920,000$ 1,675,000$ 880,000$ 1,685,000$ 950,000$ 8,173,819$ 149,779,512$ 31,162,944$ 9,495,000$ 30,271,938$ 61,245,000$ 3,185,000$ 950,000$ Description
Bicycle Boulevard Interim Improvements, Phase 2
Bicycle Boulevard Interim Improvements, Phase 3
Blackberry Farm Golf Renovation / Alternative Use Study Blackberry Farm Pool Improvements
City Hall and Community Hall Improvements (Programming and Feasibility) Library Expansion Project
Memorial Park - Amphitheater Improvements
Memorial Park - Pond Repurposing
Memorial Park - Specific Plan Design
Pumpkin and Fiesta Storm Drain Project, Phase 1 & 2
Regnart Creek Trail Fencing
City Hall Annex (10455 Torre Avenue Improvements)
*Citywide [Satellite] Community Garden (FY22-23: Wilson Park) Citywide Building Condition Assessment Implementation
Civic Center Parking Analysis
Homestead/De Anza - Construction
Lawrence-Mitty Master Plan
Tree Inventory - Stevens Creek Corridor
Totals Category 3
Description
All Inclusive Play Area (Jollyman Park)
Electric Vehicle Parking Expansion
*Regnart Road Improvements
Retaining Wall Repair - Cordova Road
Stelling and Alves Crosswalk Installation
Stevens Creek Boulevard CL IV Bikeway - Phase 2 - Design Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway Phase 2A - Construction Traffic Calming
School Walk Audit Implementation
*Sidewalk Improvements - Orange & Byrne
Stevens Creek Boulevard and Bandley Dr. Signal Upgrades Stevens Creek Boulevard Class IV Bikeway Phase 2B - Construction Totals Category 4
*Full-sized Outdoor Basketball Court (Wilson Park)
Homestead/De Anza - Design
I-280 Trail - Central Segment
I-280 Trail - East Segment
McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor, Phase 3
QCC Multi-Site Sustainable Infrastructure Upgrade
Totals Categories 2, 3, and 4 (Ongoing/Active Projects) Totals Categories 1, 2, 3, and 4 (Proposed + Ongoing/Active Projects)

30 CC 05-03-2022
30 of 1033

ATTACHMENT C
CATEGORY 5 - COMPLETED PROJECTS
Funding
Type
Approved
Plan Budget Unit Project No. Revenue
Funding Sources
Total Project
Budget
Remaining
Balance 3/21/22
GF BTP 420-99-036 ST 017 - 60,000 - AP BTP 420-99-080 ST 041 1,980,555 1,980,555 1,062,038 GF BTP,PTP 420-99-249 TBD - 75,000 72,700 - - - - - GF GP 420-99-258 ST 052 - 50,000 42,500 AP BTP 420-99-079 ST 042 165,000 165,000 153,319 GF BTP 580-99-082 QCC 005 - 125,000 34,446 GF/Grant BTP 420-99-036 ST 039 1,885,000 2,898,000 -
GF P&R, SCC 420-99-014 SCCP 004 - 100,000 30,216 GF GP 420-99-072 ST 037 - 200,090 99,330 AP/DIL GP, P&R 280-99-009 P LM 001 2,826,909 2,826,909 - 6,857,464$ 8,480,554$ 1,494,549$
Total All Categories 15,031,283$ 158,260,066$ 32,657,493$ CATEGORY 6 - DEFERRED PROJECTS (ON HOLD)
Funding
Type
Approved
Plan Budget Unit Project No. Revenue
Funding Sources
Total Project
Budget
Remaining
Balance 3/21/22
FY 2023
Proposed
Funding
FY 2024
Projected
FY 2025
Projected
FY 2026
Projected
FY 2027
Projected
TF GP 270-90-960 ST 002 628,623 710,068 - - - 710,068 - - AP/Grant BTP, PTP 420-99-036 ST 051 600,000 600,000 - - - - 600,000 - GF CCMP 420-99-074 CIV 006 - 501,162 - - - - - - AP/GF/
Grant/DIL BTP 420-99-036 ST 048 1,000,000 1,000,000 - - - - - - GF GP, SCC 420-90-898 - 406,470 203,322 - - - - - SC P&R 570-99-089 SPCT 007 - 25,000 - 2,228,623$ 3,242,700$ 203,322$ -$ -$ 710,068$ 600,000$ -$ City Lighting LED Transition Assessment
Lawrence-Mitty Annexation (*Acquisition reported complete in FY21-22) Mary Avenue Protected Bikeway
Quinlan Preschool Shade Structure
Regnart Creek Trail
Stevens Creek Bank Repair Concept
Description
Bicycle Wayfinding
Bubb Road Separated Bikeway - McClellan Rd to Stevens Creek Blvd Carmen Road Bridge Right-of-Way
Totals Category 6
Interim City Hall
McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor - Byrne Ave to Imperial Ave, Phase 4 Stevens Creek Corridor Park Chain Master Plan
Sports Center Community Needs Analysis
Street Light Replacement - Citywide (Labor Only)Totals Category 5 Description
City Bridge Maintenance Repairs
I-280 Trail - West Segment

31 CC 05-03-2022
31 of 1033

CIP PROJECT UPDATE
Program Overview, Accomplishments & Status

T
he Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Administration Division provides design and construction administration for all capital improvement projects including streets, sidewalks, storm drainage, buildings, parks, bicycle and pedestrian improvements and other public facilities.

The Division ensures that all public improvements are designed and constructed in accordance with community expectations and City standards. The Division places safety of the public, City employees, and workers as the highest priority in the delivery of capital projects.

May 2022; Q4 FY2021 - 2022

FY 21-22 CIP Accomplishments To Date
The following projects are Complete:
1 . Bicycle Wayfinding Signage

2. Bubb Road Separated Bikeway

3. Carmen Road Bridge Right-of-Way

4. City Lighting LED Transition Assessment

5. Mary Avenue Protected Bikeway

6. Quinlan Center Preschool Shade Structure

7. Regnart Creek Trail

8. Stevens Creek Bank Repair Concept

9. Street Light Replacement - Citywide

10. Lawrence-Mitty Park – Annexation (*Acquisition reported completed in FY21-22)

Projects under Construction, or soon to begin construction:

1. Annual Playground Replacement, Creekside Tot Lot

2. Bicycle Boulevard Interim Improvements – Phase 2

3. Civic Center Parking Improvements: Torre Avenue Book Drop

4. Library Expansion project

5. Homestead/DeAnza traffic signal modifications

6. Park Amenity Improvements

7. Regnart Creek Trail Fencing

8. School Walk Audit Implementation

9. Stelling and Alves Crosswalk Installation

ATTACHMENT D
32 CC 05-03-2022
32 of 1033

Projects in Design/Permitting:

1. ADA Improvements at Wilson Park

2. All-Inclusive Play Area at Jollyman Park

3. Bicycle Boulevard Interim Improvements – Phase 3

4. Blackberry Farm Pool Improvements

5. Citywide Building Condition Assessment Implementation: Sports Center Fire Control Panel replacement

6. Citywide [Satellite] Community Garden (Wilson Park)

7. Full-sized Outdoor Basketball Court at Wilson Park

8. Homestead/DeAnza traffic signal modifications: Design

9. I-280 Trail: Central trail segment

10. I-280 Trail: East trail segment

11. Lawrence-Mitty Park, Master Plan

12. McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor, Phase 3

13. Pumpkin and Fiesta Storm Drain project, Phase 1 and 2

14. Regnart Road Improvements, Phase 1

15. Retaining Wall Repair - Cordova Road

16. Stevens Creek Blvd, Class IV Bikeway, Phase 2 Design

17. Stevens Creek Blvd, Class IV Bikeway, Phase 2A Construction

18. Stevens Creek Blvd, Class IV Bikeway, Phase 2B Construction

19. Stevens Creek Blvd, Class IV Bikeway, Bandley Dr. Signal Upgrades

Projects in the RFQ/RFP/Bid phase:

1. City Hall Annex (10455 Torre)

2. Electric Vehicle Parking Expansion

3. Homestead/DeAnza traffic signal modifications: Construction

4. Memorial Park – Amphitheater Improvements

5. Memorial Park – Pond Repurposing

6. Memorial Park – Specific Plan Design

7. QCC Multi-Site Sustainable Infrastructure Upgrade

8. Sidewalk Improvements - Orange and Byrne Avenues

Studies/Feasibility Underway:

1. Blackberry Farm Golf Renovation / Alternative Use Study

2. City Hall and Community Hall Improvements (Programming and Feasibility)

3. Traffic Calming

4. Tree Inventory – Stevens Creek Corridor

Projects on Hold/Deferred:

1. City Bridge Maintenance Repairs

2. I-280 Trail - West Segment

3. Interim City Hall

4. McClellan Road Separated Bike Corridor, Phase 4

5. Stevens Creek Corridor Park Chain Master Plan - McClellan Rd to Stevens Creek Blvd.

6. Sports Center Community Needs Analysis

ATTACHMENT D
33 CC 05-03-2022
33 of 1033

Status of Current CIP Projects
The categories below directly correlate to the categ ories in the FY22-27 CIP Schedule (Attachment C). Furthermore, the projects are color-coded to illustrate the type of project. These ‘types’ are somewhat intuitively, rather than effectively ascribed to the projects, as many projects would fall into multiple categories. • Facilities-related CIP Projects (orange) – 7 active projects, 1 completed, 1 deferred • S treets and Grounds-related CIP Projects (red) – 5 active projects, 3 completed, 1 deferred • T raffic, Bike and Pedestrian-related CIP Projects (blue) – 16 active projects, 5 completed, 2 deferred • P arks and Recreation System-related CIP Projects (green) - 12 active projects, 1 completed, 2 deferred

Total: 40 active projects, 10 completed, 6 deferred (on hold).

CATEGORY 2 - EXISTING PROJECTS - MULTI-YEAR FUNDING
Project Title Description Phase Status
ADA Improvements This is an ongoing program
funded annually to improve
accessibility at all public
facilities throughout the City.

Design Undertaking improvements at
Wilson Park, Wintergreen Dr.
entrance. Update to 2015 report
proposed for FY23-24.

Annual Playground
Replacement
Replacement of older
playground equipment that is
dated and worn.

Construction Creekside Tot Lot Design
complete; installation of
equipment delayed due to supply
chain issues. Scheduled for May
2022.

Park Amenity
Improvements
Funding for various park
amenities such as benches,
hydration stations, outdoor
table tennis, cornhole, shade
structures, pickleball striping,
etc.

Construction Hydration stations will be first
amenity to be installed in the
parks. PW is also sourcing
outdoor table tennis, and new
trash receptacles. Awaiting quote
for pickleball striping.

Street Light
Installation - Annual
Infill
Design and install streetlights
on an as needed basis.

Complete Installations for this fiscal year
are complete. Year 3 of 5.

CATEGORY 3 - EXISTING PROJECTS – FUNDED
Project Title Description Phase Status
Bicycle Boulevard
Interim
Improvements, Ph. 2
Improvements from 2016
Bicycle Transportation Plan.

Construction Phase 2 design complete and
construction underway.

ATTACHMENT D
34 CC 05-03-2022
34 of 1033

CATEGORY 3 - EXISTING PROJECTS – FUNDED (continued)
Project Title Description Phase Status
Bicycle Boulevard
Interim
Improvements, Ph. 3
Improvements from 2016
Bicycle Transportation Plan.

Design Phase 3 outreach and design in
progress.

Blackberry Farm Golf
Renovation /
Alternative Use
Study
Study to determine options for
the BBF Golf Course: minor
repairs or alternative use
(‘natural habitat’).

Feasibility/
Report
Staff is reviewing Consultants’
reports and engaging Public
Involvement Consultant. Public
comment and input will be
gathered, reports to Commissions
and City Council this quarter.

Blackberry Farm Pool
Improvements
Make improvements to the
pools and facility related to
safety, accessibility, and
maintenance.

Design Design and Construction
documentation is underway.

Construction will begin in
September 2022.

City Hall and
Community Hall
Improvements
(Programming and
Feasibility)
Programming, Feasibility and
Community Outreach to form
the basis of a renovation
strategy for the buildings.

Feasibility/
Report
Initial structural and costs
analyses completed. Requesting
funding for Design and
Construction in FY22-23.

City Hall Annex
(10455 Torre Avenue
Improvements)
Program, plan and build facility
improvements required for
interim facility to accommodate
staff while City Hall is
remodeled, as well as the long-
term use of this facility.

RFQ Design services RFQ in process:
interviews in mid-April. Contract
negotiations underway.

Citywide [Satellite]
Community Garden
(Wilson Park)
Develop a program to establish
community gardens
throughout the City.

Design Design and Construction
documentation is underway.
100% Design completion by end
of May.

Citywide Building
Condition
Assessment
Implementation
Implement recommendations
identified as a priority in the
Comprehensive Facility
Condition and Use Assessment.

Design Sports Center Fire Panel
Replacement: Design services
underway. 2018 Report
Update/Dashboard creation:

Consultant contract in process.

Civic Center Parking
Analysis
Analyze the parking
requirement for the Civic
Center. Implement mitigation
measures identified in 2018
report.

Feasibility/
Report and
Construction
Implementation of many measures
dependent upon schedule of
employees returning to City Hall.

Torre Avenue Book Drop will be
under construction
Spring/Summer 2022.

Homestead/De Anza
- Construction
Modify traffic signal to relocate
median-mounted mast arm
poles to the corners.

Bid Poles ordered; storage
coordinated. Award of GC
contract will come to Council in
May 2022.

ATTACHMENT D
35 CC 05-03-2022
35 of 1033

CATEGORY 3 - EXISTING PROJECTS – FUNDED (continued)
Project Title Description Phase Status
Lawrence-Mitty
Master Plan
Develop a Master Plan for a
proposed neighborhood park
located on several acres of land
adjacent to Saratoga Creek,
near the intersection of
Lawrence Expressway and
Mitty Way.

Design Site Analysis and Public
Outreach is underway. Public
Survey posted; community
meetings scheduled for the last
half of April. Memo issued to
CMO/Council on 4/01/22.

Library Expansion
Project
Develop a design and construct
a 5600 SF addition to the
existing Library building.

Construction Construction will be complete in
April 2022.

Memorial Park -
Amphitheater
Improvements
Design and construct Memorial
Park improvements, specifically
addressing the needs of the
Amphitheater.

RFQ Design consultant team RFQ is
under development. Memo issued
to CMO/Council in February 2022.

Memorial Park -
Pond Repurposing
Design and construct Memorial
Park improvements, specifically
addressing the immediate state
of the drained ponds.

Bid Construction bid process
initiated in April. Memo issued to
CMO/Council in February 2022.

Memorial Park -
Specific Plan Design
Following the findings of the
Master Plan process, develop a
conceptual design for Phase
One features and amenities.

RFQ Design Services RFQ process is
underway. Interviews will occur
in 2
nd week of April. Memo issued
to CMO/Council in February 2022.

Pumpkin and Fiesta
Storm Drain Project,
Phase 1 & 2
Design storm drainage
improvements at Pumpkin
Drive, Fiesta Lane, as identified
in the Storm Drain Master Plan.

Design Topographic survey and design
phase are underway.

Regnart Creek Trail
Fencing
Construction of privacy fencing
along properties abutting
Regnart Creek trail.

Construction Construction began in March
2022. August/September 2022
completion anticipated.

Regnart Road
Improvements
Phase 1 will construct a
retaining wall to stabilize the
road slope to the creek from Sta
28+40 to 29+80 (approx. 140 LF).

Design Phase 1 design in progress. Bid
process anticipated for Summer
2022.

Retaining Wall
Repair - Cordova
Road
Replace failing retaining wall
lagging with City forces.

Design Start of design/ construction
delayed due to increased (6X)
cost of lumber. Construction
anticipated to begin Summer
2022.

Stelling and Alves
Crosswalk
Installation
Install a crosswalk and
pedestrian-actuated RRFB
across Stelling at the north leg
of the intersection with Alves
Drive.

Construction Ramps’ rework is underway.

Striping and flashing light
installation scheduled for late
Spring/early Summer 2022.

ATTACHMENT D
36 CC 05-03-2022
36 of 1033

CATEGORY 3 - EXISTING PROJECTS – FUNDED (continued)
Project Title Description Phase Status
Stevens Creek
Boulevard CL IV
Bikeway - Phase 2 -
Design
Design and Construction of the
separated bikeway along
Stevens Creek Blvd from Wolfe
Road to US-85.

Design 95% design complete,
Construction for Phase 2A will
begin Summer/Fall 2022
Stevens Creek
Boulevard Class IV
Bikeway Phase 2A -
Construction
Construction of the separated
bikeway along Stevens Creek
Blvd from Wolfe Road to De
Anza Blvd.

Design 95% design complete,
Construction for Phase 2A will
begin Summer/Fall 2022
Traffic Calming Funding to respond to citizen
requests for traffic calming to
reduce vehicle speeds, improve
pedestrian and bike safety.

Ongoing Ongoing; responding to resident
concerns when they occur.

Tree Inventory -
Stevens Creek
Corridor
Inventory and map City-owned
trees that are within the Stevens
Creek Corridor, including the
BBF golf course.

Feasibility/
Report
Completion of the project is
anticipated to be in Summer
2022.

CATEGORY 4 - EXISTING PROJECTS WITH EXTERNAL FUNDING
Project Title Description Phase Status
All Inclusive Play
Area (Jollyman Park)
Design and construct an all-
inclusive playground at
Jollyman Park
Design Design/Community Outreach
underway. Fund-raising task
force initiated.

Electric Vehicle
Parking Expansion
Expansion of the existing level
2 charging ports at municipal
properties from twelve (12)
ports to thirty-two (32) ports. In
addition, install five (5) level 3
(DC Fast Charging) ports.

RFQ Previously identified grant
fundings are unavailable. Scope
revision is necessary and
underway.

Full-sized Outdoor
Basketball Court
(Wilson Park)
Install a full-size basketball
court at a park, following the
Parks and Recreation System
Master Plan.

Design Design and Construction
documentation is underway.

Homestead/De Anza
- Design
Modify traffic signal to relocate
median-mounted mast arm
poles to the corners.

Bid 95% Design set submitted for bid
process.

I-280 Trail - Central
Segment
Design and construct an off-
street bicycle and pedestrian
facility parallel to the I-280
HWY, from De Anza Blvd.

Wolfe Road.

Design Design Phase underway. Draft
Environmental review report
received and in review. (Design
will pause now that IS/MND is
underway; East segment will
continue.)

ATTACHMENT D
37 CC 05-03-2022
37 of 1033

CATEGORY 4 - EXISTING PROJECTS WITH EXTERNAL FUNDING (continued) Project Title Description Phase Status
I-280 Trail - East
Segment
Design and construct an off-
street bicycle and pedestrian
facility parallel to the I-280
HWY, from Wolfe Rd. to Vallco
Parkway.

Design Design Phase underway. Draft
Environmental review report
(IS/MND) received and in
review.

McClellan Road
Separated Bike
Corridor, Phase 3
Improve pedestrian and bicycle
safety by reconfiguring the
intersection and vehicle
movements.

Design 95% design complete. Staff
presented at bicycle pedestrian
commission for final comments;
Caltrans review for advertise
approval Spring 2022;
Construction will begin
Fall/Winter 2022.

QCC Multi-Site
Sustainable
Infrastructure
Upgrade
Develop recommendation for
Council on a complete facility
upgrade for heating and
cooling system, emergency
power system, and renewable
energy.

RFQ Portable generator at Quinlan
ordered, awaiting delivery and
installation. Sports Center fire
panel replacement design is
underway. The RFQ process for
energy service companies
(ESCOs) to perform audit and
initiate improvements is
completed. Award of Contract
will come to City Council in
Summer 2022.

School Walk Audit
Implementation
Construct infrastructure related
improvements around schools
that were identified as part of
the comprehensive School Walk
Audit study.

Ongoing/
Construction
In progress. Warrant studies for
stop signs and crossing guards
scheduled Spring 2022.

Sidewalk
Improvements -
Orange & Byrne
Acquire right-of-way as
needed, initiate design and
construction of sidewalks
where there are gaps, as well as
curb, gutter, and drainage
improvements.

Bid Byrne is complete; Orange
Avenue Design completed. CM
contracted. Bid process
underway.

Stevens Creek
Boulevard and
Bandley Dr. Signal
Upgrades
Design and construct upgrades
to the traffic signal at Bandley
Dr. and Stevens Creek Blvd.

Design This project is being integrated
with Stevens Creek Blvd Ph 2B
project.

Stevens Creek
Boulevard Class IV
Bikeway Phase 2B -
Construction
Construction of the separated
bikeway along Stevens Creek
Blvd from De Anza Blvd to US-

85. Design 95% design complete,
Construction for Phase 2B will
begin 2023.

ATTACHMENT D
38 CC 05-03-2022
38 of 1033

CATEGORY 5 - COMPLETED PROJECTS
Project Title Description Phase Status
Bicycle Wayfinding Implement to Bicycle
Wayfinding Plan that
recommends the location and
messaging for the bicycle
wayfinding signage.

Complete Final items to be installed in
April/May 2022.

Bubb Road Separated
Bikeway - McClellan
Rd to Stevens Creek
Blvd
Installation of protected bike
lanes, sidewalks, a new
crosswalk with a pedestrian
refuge median island and
pedestrian activated flashing
beacons and revised lane
striping.

Complete Completed in October 2021.

Carmen Road Bridge
Right-of-Way
Initiate a process for acquiring
property to facilitate a future
year project to design and
construct a Bicycle/Pedestrian
Bridge over Stevens Creek
Boulevard, reconnecting
Carmen Road.

Complete New Title reports showed that the
APN map was incorrect: the City
has the ROW for the property
required for the bridge “landing”.

City Lighting LED
Transition
Assessment
Develop a strategy to transition
the City's streetlight
infrastructure, and other City
operated lights, from induction
to LED fixtures to meet the
“Dark Sky” requirements and
reduce light pollution.

Complete Survey is complete.

Implementation/ replacement
project is included in the new
FY22-23 CIP project “City
Lighting - LED improvements”.

Mary Avenue
Protected Bikeway
Design and construct a
protected bikeway from Stevens
Creek Blvd. to the Don Burnett
Bicycle- Pedestrian Bridge.

Complete Construction complete. Public
Outreach on bike lane/parking use
implemented in February 2022.

Quinlan Preschool
Shade Structure
Design and construct a new
shade structure over the existing
play area and sand box at the
preschool.

Complete The shade was installed in Q4 of
FY20-21.

Regnart Creek Trail Construction of a multi-use trail
along Regnart Creek
Complete Construction is complete, some
punch list items remain to be
addressed. Opening of the trail
will occur after the fences along
the trail are constructed.

ATTACHMENT D
39 CC 05-03-2022
39 of 1033

CATEGORY 5 - COMPLETED PROJECTS (continued)
Project Title Description Phase Status
Stevens Creek Bank
Repair Concept
Prepare a conceptual design for
repairs to creek banks that will
protect property from further
erosion and stabilize the bank
and is compatible with existing
goals and requirements for the
creek corridor.

Complete Final report was completed and
submitted. Concept is complete,
April 2021
Street Light
Replacement -
Citywide (Labor
Only)
Design and install streetlights on
an as needed basis.

Complete Installations for this fiscal year are
complete. Year 3 of 5.

Lawrence-Mitty Park
– Annexation
Acquire the land required to
develop a neighborhood park on
several acres of land adjacent to
Saratoga Creek, near the
intersection of Lawrence
Expressway and Mitty, which is
currently owned by the County
and within the City of San Jose.

Complete Property Annexation complete,
following LAFCO approval in
April.

CATEGORY 6 - DEFERRED PROJECTS (ON HOLD)
Project Title Description Phase Status
City Bridge
Maintenance Repairs
Design and construct 5 bridges'
repairs as recommended in the
Caltrans Bridge Report along
with additional improvements
to prolong the useful life of the
bridges.

Deferred Federal Funding on hold until
2024.

I-280 Trail - West
Segment
Design and construct an off-
street bicycle and pedestrian
facility parallel to the I-280
HWY, from the Don Burnett
Bicycle – Pedestrian Bridge to
De Anza Blvd.

Deferred This segment will be on hold until
the other segments are designed.

Interim City Hall Establish an interim facility to
accommodate City Staff if
existing City Hall were to be
replaced or significantly
remodeled.

Deferred This funding may be required to
provide City Hall services while
the building is under construction.

ATTACHMENT D
40 CC 05-03-2022
40 of 1033

CATEGORY 6 - DEFERRED PROJECTS (ON HOLD) (continued)
Project Title Description Phase Status
McClellan Road
Separated Bike
Corridor - Byrne Ave
to Imperial Ave,
Phase 4
Design and construct separated
bike lanes on McClellan Rd.
from Imperial Ave to Byrne
Ave.

Deferred Ph. 4 on hold until ROW’s are
acquired.

Stevens Creek
Corridor Park Chain
Master Plan
Study the various uses of public
lands along Stevens Creek for
optimal public use and
operation and develop a master
plan.

Deferred On hold, pending completion of
Blackberry Farm Golf Renovation/
Alternative Use Study
Sports Center
Community Needs
Analysis
Evaluate the potential long-term
needs of the facility, the cost of
renovations and repairs and the
cost effectiveness of those
improvements.

Deferred P&R performed some analysis and
determined short-term
improvements/repairs. A more in-
depth analysis will be included in
the new FY22-23 CIP project
“Major Recreation Facilities: Use
and Market Analysis”

ATTACHMENT D
41 CC 05-03-2022
41 of 1033
ATTACHMENT E 42
CC 05-03-2022
42 of 1033
43 CC 05-03-2022
43 of 1033
Attachment F

April 27, 2022

MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor Paul and City Council
RE: Civic Center Project Updates
_

The purpose of this memorandum is to provide the City Council with an update on Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and Work Program projects related to the Civic Center. These projects include:

1. 2021 – 2022 CIP: 10455 Torre Avenue Improvements

2. 2021- 2022 CIP: City Hall and Community Hall Improvements – Programming and Feasibility

3. 2021 – 2022 Work Plan: Seismic Retrofits and Upgrades to Existing City Hall

Current Projects for 2021 - 2022

1. 2021 – 2022 CIP: 10455 Torre Avenue Improvements - $3,000,000

10455 Torre Avenue is a 5,730 square foot building purchased by the City in 2020. The CIP project includes programming, planning and building improvements to facilitate use of the facility. The proposed use is to house a portion of community -serving staff functions both during and after anticipated construction work at City Hall. Programming and initial planning have been completed, with final design and construction are anticipated to take place in 2022 – 2023. The intent of design is to create flexible workspace with conference rooms.

2. 2021- 2022 CIP: City Hall and Community Hall Improvements – Programming and Feasibility - $500,000
44 CC 05-03-2022
44 of 1033

- 2 -

and

3. 2021 – 2022 Work Plan: Seismic Retrofits and Upgrades to Existing City Hall

In the current fiscal year, the goal for Project #2 is to complete programming, feasibility and cost studies, and conceptual design. Project #3 is a subset of Project #2 focused on seismic work at City Hall. To date, updated analysis of City Hall structural, mechanical, electrical and other systems has been completed along with cost studies.

Proposed Project for 2022 - 2023

Because seismic work at City Hall trigger s a requirement to address long -standing parking issues at the Civic Center, a new CIP project entitled “City Hall Renovation/ Replacement and Library Parking Garage” has been proposed for 2022 –2023. $4 million in funding is being requested in next year’s CIP to cover both initial planning and design for City Hall Renovation/ Replacement and full planning and design for the Library Parking Structure. If approved, the Library Parking Structure construction is estimated to take place in 2023 with City Hall construction following in 2024 – 2025.

It is recommended that $4 million in funds for Planning and Design services be provided from the General fund in the FY22-23 CIP program so that planning and design can continue. It is anticipated that staff would come to Council in early 2023 with a request to decide on 1) City Hall Renovation or Replacement based on conceptual plans and updated cost studies; and 2) proposed project funding scenarios.

Prepared by:

Susan Michael, Capital Improvement Programs Manager
Matt Morley, Public Works Director

Reviewed by:

Dianne Thompson, Assistant City Manager

45 CC 05-03-2022
45 of 1033
Attachment G

April 27, 2022

MEMORANDUM

TO: Mayor Paul and City Council
RE: City Hall Seismic Assessment and Proposed Project
_

Background
City Hall was built in 1965 in accordance with the 1964 Uniform Building Code (UBC).

It was remodeled in 1986, but the project did not modify the structural system to meet the 1985 UBC. Various Structural Analysis Reports performed in 2011, 2012, 2014 and 2021 documented that the building does not meet current building standards, including seismic safety standards (see Attachments A - E). In addition, City Hall is designated as the City’s Emergency Operations Center, and there are concerns that the City’s response to a seismic event would be significantly hindered due to the structure being unusable in the aftermath.

The 2012 Civic Center Master Plan Structural Analysis Report also identified that much of the mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) equipment is beyond its useful life.

Other aged systems include communications, data/IT, accessibility, sprinkler, and smoke/fire alarm. Findings from the 2012 Structural Analysis report are consistent with the current state of the building.

As of January 2022, approximately 130 Staff are stationed in the building. Staff expansion since 1965 has created a need to renovate the interior for increased efficiency, including improved public counter access, and sufficient, flexible spaces for work and conference rooms. Renovation of the interior with sufficient, flexible workspaces as well as more efficient public-facing Staff/Community meeting spaces and public counters, are needed. Parking capacity also continues to be an ongoing concern.

46 CC 05-03-2022
46 of 1033

- 2 -

The current “City Hall and Community Hall Improvements - Programming and Feasibility” project was initiated in FY 2021-2022 with $500,000 approved to form the basis of a renovation strategy for the buildings. A new CIP project entitled “City Hall Renovation/ Replacement and Library Parking Garage” is proposed for the 2022–2023 CIP Program. Staff is requesting $4 million in funds for this project in the 2022-2023 CIP so that planning and design can continue.

Civic Center Parking
Because seismic work at City Hall triggers a requirement to address long-standing parking issues at the Civic Center, a parking structure is included in the new project.

The Civic Center Parking Analysis published in 2020 by Kimley Horn describes the deficiency of parking at the Civic Center in detail. This report is based on observations of traffic patterns and use and concluded that Civic Center parking is deficient by 185 parking spaces. Similarly, Building and Planning Code requirements, determined by building area and occupancy types, indicates that the Civic Center is currently deficient by approximately 200 parking spaces.

Seismic Concerns
The importance of a full seismic retrofit of the City Hall building has been stated in past studies and reports to City Council. Most recently, the 2021 Structural Analysis was prepared by MM & E Engineers. See Attachment A.

In the words of the MM & E Engineers who conducted this recent analysis:
“The structural deficiencies noted in this report indicate that the building is likely to sustain major damage and not be functionally operable if a significant seismic event were to occur. If damaged, timely delivery of services to the community that are provided using this building would be impacted. Additionally, occupants of the building (public and staff) are at a higher risk of injury compared against a similar occupancy in a building that did not have these deficiencies.

Based on a review of the existing design and subsequent evaluation reports, the current building is very vulnerable to seismic damage. The original design from 1965 was before vast improvements in the science of earthquake engineering was incorporated into the building codes. The extensive remodel in 1986 failed to bring the building into conformance with the improved seismic codes at that time. The building relies on concrete shear walls for lateral load resistance and a combination of concrete walls and isolated concrete columns to support the gravity loads. These elements do not have sufficient ductility to resist seismic lateral displacements without sustaining 47 CC 05-03-2022
47 of 1033

- 3 -

significant damage. Damage to these critical structural gravity load-resisting elements could result in collapse of the roof structure. The life safety and economic risk could be substantial.”

Specific findings from the Structural Analysis include:
 Upper-level concrete shear walls overstressed up to 150%  Anchor bolt connections overstressed up to 26%
 Roof diaphragm overstressed up to 176%
 Roof connections overstressed up to 35%
 Concrete column ties inadequate in size and number
 Equipment anchorage capacities unknown

Options
The City considered both renovation of the existing 24,000 SF City Hall and replacement of City Hall with a new 36,000 SF building. Preliminary programming indicates that 36,000 SF is optimal for current and projected needs, in addition to space that will be provided at 10455 Torre Avenue. Both options include a new three-story above ground parking garage adjacent to the Library which would include approximately 200 parking stalls. Estimated costs for the two options are outlined below.

OPTION A City Hall Renovation (24,000 SF) + Library Parking Garage $ 4,000,000 FY22-23
Planning and Design
$ 21,600,000 FY23-24
Parking Garage
Construction
$ 34,300,000 FY24-25
City Hall Design/Build
City Hall Renovation will address seismic, infrastructure, and ADA upgrades. Exterior work would include roofing replacement; column demolition/ replacement; window replacement; shear walls stiffened. Interior work would include demolition and replacement of interior walls to accommodate new layout; replacement of elevator, mechanical, and electrical systems; and bathroom remodeling to increase required fixture counts and update plumbing. This option does not increase the square footage of City Hall, therefore additional office space would need to be identified and acquired to accommodate current and future staffing needs.

OPTION B City Hall Replacement (36,000 SF) + Library Parking Garage $ 4,000,000 FY22-23
Planning and Design
$ 21,600,000 FY23-24 $ 54,000,000 FY24-25
City Hall Design/Build
48 CC 05-03-2022
48 of 1033

- 4 -

Parking Garage
Construction

The proposed replacement of City Hall would provide an additional 12,000 SF of space to accommodate current and future staffing needs along with conference rooms that could be used by the community. The building would be fully code-compliant building and would further the City’s sustainability goals by replacing one of our most energy- intensive facilities.

Funding Request
As stated above, staff is requesting $4 million in the 2022-2023 CIP program so that planning and design can continue. It is anticipated that staff would come to Council in early 2023 with a request to decide on: 1) City Hall Renovation or Replacement based on conceptual plans and updated cost studies; and 2) Approval to move forward with the Library Parking Garage; and 3) Proposed project funding scenarios. _____________________________________

Prepared by:

Susan Michael, Capital Improvement Programs Manager
Matt Morley, Public Works Director

Reviewed by:

Dianne Thompson, Assistant City Manager

Attachments:

A - 2021 City Hall Tier 1 Seismic Eval
B - 2014 Seismic Study Tipping Mar
C - 2012 Essential Serv Fac Analysis AKH
D - 2011 Structural Analysis AKH
E - 2006 Seismic Report AKH

49 CC 05-03-2022
49 of 1033

- 5 -

50 CC 05-03-2022
50 of 1033
MME
Seismic Evaluation - Tier I
Cupertino City Hall
10300 Torre Aye
Cupertino, California
4&, Jw i i*{
Prepared For:

City of Cupertino
Prepared By:

MME Civil + Structural Engineering
MME Job No. 21143.P5
April 19, 2021
22'4 W'atnut Avenue, Sui.te B Sarita Cruz, CA - 83L426.3.186 a www.m-rne.corn ATTACHMENT G1
51 CC 05-03-2022
51 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluatian - Tier t
MME Project No: 21 t43.P5
j%xN 19, 20!2
Susan Michael AIA, Leed AP
Capital Improvement Programs Manager
Public Works
10300 Torre Ave.

Cupertino, California 95014
Re: Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation Tier I MME Project No: 21143.P5
Dear Ms. Michael,
As requested, we have prepared the Following building Tier I Seismic Evaluation report of the existing Cupertino City Hall located at 10300 Torre Ave., Cupertino, California. Our work includes a seismic evaluation of the existing building based on visual observations of the existing construction and provided documentation. We performed the seismic evaluation under the provisions of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 41-17 Standard. We also performed a visual observation of the general condition of the exposed primaiy structural systems. We have relied solely on existing as-built drawings, technical specifications, and reports provided along with our visual observations of the existing building as the single source of detailed information about the structural components of the building. No removal of finishes or other data collection, such as non-destructive or destructive testing, was provided at this time.

Our assessment intends to identify the seismic code conformance of the existing building.

Thank you for the opportunity to assist you with your project. Should you have any questions or comments or require further assistance, please call.

Respectfulfy yours,
Robert Riley, BE
Senior S(ructurar EngFneer
No. 53549
Dale Hendsbee, S.E.

Principal
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.eorn 52 CC 05-03-2022
52 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April "I 9, 2022

Table of Contents
Executive Summary 4
Structural - Scenario 1 Risk Category IV - Immediate Occupancy Structural - Scenario 2 Risk Category II - Collapse Prevention Nonstructural
Geotechnical
Introduction
Evaluation Overview
5 5
6 6
7 7
Structure Overview
General Site Description
Structural Performance Objective
Site Seismicity
General
Walls
Seismic Force-Resisting System
Foundations
Field Verification and Condition Assessment
Material Properties
Building Type
Historical Performance
Findings and Recommendations
Structural
Non-Structural
Reliability or Seismic Evaluations
APPENDIX A - Photographs
APPENDIX B - Maps
APPENDIX C - Materials
APPENDIX D - AKH Details
APPENDIX E - Tipping Mar Details
APPENDIX F - Tier I Checklists
APPENDIX G - Cupertino City Hall Essential Facility Analysis 2012 Section 3.O Structural Analysis (by AKH)
Appendix A-1 I Structural Evaluation (Tipping Mar) 48 52
107
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA a 831.426.3186 a www.rn-me.eom 53 CC 05-03-2022
53 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

Executive Summary
The structural deficiencies noted in this report indicate that the building is likely to sustain major damage and not be functionally operable if a significant seismic event were to occur. If damaged, timely delivery of services to the community that are provided using this building would be impacted. Additionally, occupants of the building (public and staff) are at a higher risk of injury compared against a similar occupancy in a building that did not have these deficiencies.

Based on a review of the existing design and subsequent evaluation reports, the current building is very vulnerable to seismic damage. The original design from 1965 was before vast improvements in the science of earthquake engineering was incorporated into the building codes. The extensive remodel in 1986 failed to bring the building into conformance with the improved seismic codes at that time. The building relies on concrete shear walls for lateral load resistance and a combination of concrete walls and isolated concrete columns to support the gravity loads. These elements do not have sufficient ductility to resist seismic lateral displacements without sustaining significant damage. Damage to these critical structural gravity load-resisting elen-ients could result in collapse of the roof structure. The life safety and economic risk could be substantial.

Two scenarios of seismic strengthening have been discussed for the Cupertino City Hall, located at 10300 Torre Ave, Cupertino, CA. The two scenarios correspond to the building's possible risk category classification according to the California Building Code (CBC) table 1604.5. Scenario one is based on its current occupancy as the Emergency Operation Center (EOC) and is designated an essential facility and therefore classified as risk category IV. Scenario two is a reduced risk category of the building where the EOC would be removed and relocated to a different location. This risk category II is similar to the category that is typically used for offices.

We used the ASCE 41-17 Standard for Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings, Tier I Evaluation in conjunction with the review of previous reports, original 1965 plans, and retrofit 1986 plans to develop the following structural findings and recommendations for improvement.

For our Tier 1 Evaluation, we have included the heavy clay tile roofing in our calculations for the weight of the building. One area that would help reduce seismic loads and therefore strengthening would be to remove and replace the clay tile with a lighter roofing type.

We found that the building does not comply with either the risk category IV or II evaluation criteria unless a seismic strengthening is undertaken. Our findings are similar to the findings in the previous reports. Based on these findings, we recommend that a Tier 2 Deficiency Based Evaluation be performed to investigate a 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 54 CC 05-03-2022
54 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

number of these deficiencies to see if any can be waived and to provide a basis for the detailed design of the remediation work. After completion of the Tier 2 evaluation, any remaining deficiencies identified should be retrofitted. We have separated the structural deficiencies into two groups. Group One are items that in our opinion would not benefit from a Tier 2 evaluation. Group Two are items that may benefit from Tier 2 evaluation.

Structural - Scenario 1 Risk Category IV - Immediate Occupancy This list is a combination of both our Tier 1 Evaluation and the deficiencies that other reports have identified. The structural deficiencies that have been identified are:

Group One - Unlikely that a Tier 2 evaluation would remove the need to upgrade Roof Diaphragm Shear Capacity
Roof Diaphragm Collector Splice Capacity
Anchor Bolt Connections at top of Shear Walls
Out of Plane Connection of Veranda Beam
Upper Floor Concrete Shear Wall Shear Capacity
Upper Floor Concrete Shear Wall Flexural Capacity Concrete Shear Wall Boundary Members
Group Two - A Tier 2 evaluation may remove the need to upgrade Continuous Cross Ties at Upper Floor Shear Wall
Upper Floor Concrete Shear Wall Adjacent to Diaphragm Openings Concrete Ground Floor Wall Reinforcing at Openings
Concrete Column Reinforcement for Confinement
Concrete Column Splices and Girder Stirrups
Wall Foundation Dowels Capacity
Structural - Scenario 2 Risk Category II - Collapse Prevention This list is only the items that we identified in our Tier '1 Evaluation. It does not include items from previous reports. The reduced amount of deficiencies listed below for risk category II are primarily a reflection of the lower safety standards associated with risk category II and therefore fewer items are required to be checked in the Tier 1 Evaluation. Many of the Scenario 1 items would still be deficient in Scenario 2 if they were required to be checked. The structural deficiencies that have been identified are:

Upper Floor Concrete Shear Wall Shear Capacity
Out of Plane Connection of Veranda Beam
Concrete Column Splices and Girder Stirrups
Upper Floor Concrete Shear Wall Adjacent to Diaphragm Openings Concrete Column Reinforcement for Confinement
Continuous Cross Ties at Upper Floor Shear Wall
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 55 CC 05-03-2022
55 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier I
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

Nonstructural
Nonstructural elements were not included in the scope of our Tier 1 analysis.

However, several nonstructural items were noted in the previous reports and are summarized in this report for your consideration (See Appendix G).

A. Equipment anchorage capacities are unknown and would require verification and or installation of anchorage and bracing. Equipment that should be considered includes the following:
o Emergency Generator, including isolators
o Emergency Generator flexible connections for conduit, fuel, and coolant piping
o Rooftop HVAC Equipment
o Elevator Equipment
o Electrical Transformers, Panels, Switchgear, Cabinets, etc. o Suspended Light Fixtures
o Ductwork and Piping Supports and Bracing
o Eiectricai Conduits, Trapezes, Banks, and Trays
o Fire Sprinkler Piping
o Accessibility
B. Anchorage and bracing for the existing suspended ceilings and interior partitions
C. Exterior cladding and glazing system
D. Deteriorated veranda fascia on the south elevation Seismic strengthening noted in our report is not typically required by the CBC unless certain changes are proposed for the building. These changes include occupancy changes, renovations, additions, and loading changes. Our understanding is that none of these changes is being considered at this time. Barring a City of Cupertino requirement that is more rigorous than the CBC, the proposed strengthening that has been recommended is considered voluntary. Scenario 2 could be a change in occupancy and may trigger these nonstructural improvements.

Geotechnical
No geotechnical report has been provided for our review. Foundation improvements may be required and if this is the case, we recommend obtaining a report by a licensed geotechnical engineer.

For our Tier 1 evaluation, we used the City of Cupertino GIS Property Information web- based application to identify Geologic Hazards. For the City Hall location, there are no mapped Liquefaction, Fault Rupture, or Slope Instability ISSUES at this site (Appendix B).
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 56 CC 05-03-2022
56 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier I
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

Introduction
The purpose of this evaluation is to review and evaluate the structural systems of the subject building using criteria provided by ASCE 41-17. Because this building has been structurally evaluated several times in the last 10 years, we were able to use the ASCE 41 evaluation to corroborate previous findings. In areas where the previous evaluations were more in-depth than our evaluation, we have reviewed their findings and included them as part oT the recommendations. The ASCE 41 evaluation criteria have been tailored for specific building types and desired levels of building performance. This standard provides a means to identify general deficiencies based on the anticipated behavior of specific building types.

The evaluation begins with a Screening Phase (Tier 1)to assess primary components and connections in the seismic force-resisting system using standard checklists and simplified structural calculations. If the element is compliant, it is anticipated to perform adequately under seismic loading without additional review or strengthening.

Items indicated as non-compliant in a Tier I checklist are considered potential CJeficiencies [ha requ!re further analysis.

A limited, deficiency-based Evaluation Phase (Tier 2) can then be used to review in more detail the items determined to be potential deficiencies by Tier 1 checklists and simplified calculations. Non-compliant items are evaluated for calculated linear seismic demand as determined by ASCE 41-17. If the elements are compliant per Tier 2 analysis, the Tier 1 deficiency is waived. However, if the element remains non- compliant after the more detailed Tier 2 analysis, repair or remediation of the deficiency is recommended.

Evaluation Overview
This seismic evaluation report for the existing building located at 10300 Torre Ave, Cupertino, CA, is based on the following:
* The American Society of Civil Engineers/ Structural Engineering Institute (ASCE/SEI 41-17) Standard for Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings - Tier 1, Immediate Occupancy and Collapse Prevention level structural evaluation criteria, including:
o Checklists
o Analysis
* One site visit for a general review of the structure was performed on August 08, 2021. No destructive testing or removal of finishes was performed or included in the scope.
* Review of the following original drawings dated October 01, 1965 o Architectural plans (Partial) prepared by Wilfred E. Blessing F.A.I.A & Associates
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 57 CC 05-03-2022
57 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April I 9, 2022

o Structural plans and calculations prepared by Kirk C. McFarland Structural Engineer
* Review of the Civic Center Improvement plans dated December 18, 1986 o Architectural plans prepared by Holland, East & Duvivier o Structural plans prepared by CYGNA Consulting Engineers * Existing material properties as indicated on sheet S10 of the 1965 structural plans. Properties are included in Appendix C.
* Review of the following reports and evaluations:
o City Hall Seismic Report" by AKH Structural Engineers, 2006 o "Report of Results From Structural Analysis and Evaluation of Existing Cupertino City Hall" by AKH Structural Engineers, 2011 o "Final Cupertino ESF Analysis Rev 1", Multiple Project Participants, 2012 o "Cupertino City Hall Alternates Study Structural Evaluation" by Tipping Mar, 2014
* No Geotechnical Report was available at the time this report was written. Sheet S10 of the original construction documents indicates that soil design information used in the design is from a soils report.
* Seismic review of non-structural elements is not included as part of our Tier 1 evaluation.

Structure Overview
General Site Description
The building is located on a relatively flat lot on the NW corner of Torre Avenue and Rodrigues Avenue in the City of Cupertino.

Structural Performance Obiective
Per ASCE 41-17, a structural performance objective consists or a target performance level for structural elements in combination with a specific seismic hazard level. For the seismic assessment of the subject building, two Basic Performance Objective for Existing Buildings (BPOE) were selected.

Scenario 1 :

The City Hall building is currently considered an "Essential Facility" by the City of Cupertino based on upgrades in 1986. This is a Risk Category IV as defined by ASCE 7:

ESSENTIAL FACILITIES: Buildings and other structures that are intended to remain operational in the event of extreme environmental loading from flood, wind, snow, or earthquakes.
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426,3186 www.m-me.com 58 CC 05-03-2022
58 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 4
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

For the Tier 1 review to the BPOE, the specified level of performance is Immediate Occupancy (1 -B) at the BSE-1 E seismic hazard level and Life Safety (3-D) at the BSE-2E seismic hazard level.

The Immediate Occupancy Performance Level as described by ASCE/SEI 41-17 is made up of two parts: the structural performance level and non-structural performance level. The number "1 " designates the structural performance level defined as:

Structural Performance Level S-I, Immediate Occupancy, is defined as the post-earthquake damage state in which a structure remains safe to occupy and essentially retains its pre-earthquake strength and stiffness.

The letter designation "B" in the BPOE indicates the nonstructural performance level and is defined as:

Position Retention Nonstructural Performance Level (N-B). Nonstructural Performance Level N-B, Position Retention, is the post-earthquake damage state in which nonstructural components might be damaged to the extent that they cannot immediately function but are secured in place so that damage caused by falling, toppling, or breaking of utility connections is avoided.

Building access and Life Safety Systems, including doors, stairways, elevators, emergency lighting, fire alarms, and fire suppression systems, generally remain available and operable, provided that power and utility services are avaiiable.

The Life Safety Performance Level as described by ASCE/SEI 41-17 is defined as:

Structural Performance Level S-3, Life Sarety, is defined as the post- earthquake damage state in which a structure has damaged components but retains a margin of safety against the onset of partial or total collapse.

The letter designation "D" in the BPOE is defined as:

Hazards Reduced Nonstructural Performance Level (N-D). Nonstructural Performance Level N-D, Hazards Reduced, shall be defined as the post- earthquake damage state in which nonstructural components are damaged and could potentially create falling hazards, but high hazard nonstructural components identified in Chapter 13, Table 134, are secured to prevent falling into areas of public assembly or those falling hazards from those components could pose a risk to life safety for many people. Preservation of egress, protection of fire suppression systems, and similar fire-safety issues are not addressed in this Nonstructural Performance Level.

Scenario 2:

To reduce the amount of strengthening required the City Hall building could be converted back to an occupancy that is typical for an office building. The primary function that would have to be removed is the EOC. The building could be considered a Risk Category If as defined by ASCE 7:
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426,3186 www.m-me.com 59 CC 05-03-2022
59 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 4 9, 2022

ALL buildings and other structures except those listed in Risk Categories /, ///, and IV.

For the Tier I review to the BPOE, the specified level of performance is Collapse Prevention (5-D) at the BSE-2E seismic hazard level. ASCE/SEI 41-17 defines Collapse Prevention as:

Structural Performance Level S-5, Collapse Prevention, is defined as the post- earthquake damage state in which a structure has damaged components and continues to support gravity loads but retains no margin against collapse.

The letter designation "D" in the BPOE is defined above in Scenario 1 A Tier 1 evaluation of nonstructural elements was not included within the scope of this reVleW.

Site Seismicity
Per ASCE 41-17, 'seismicity', or the potential For ground motion, is classified into regions defined as Low, Moderate, or High. These regions are based upon mapped site accelerations Ss and S1 which are then modified by site coefficients Fa and Fv to produce the Design Spectral Accelerations, SDS (short period), and SD1 (l-second period).

At the time of this report, no geotechnical investigation or report has been provided for the subject site. The soil profile of this building is therefore assumed the default and classified as Site Class D per ASCE 41-17 for use in the determination of site coefficients Fa and Fv.

Per the site values indicated by USGS data and evaluated using seismic acceleration equations and tables of ASCE 41-17, the site is located in a region of High Seismicity with a design short-period spectral response acceleration parameter (SDS) of 1.589g and a design spectral response acceleration parameter at a one-second period (SD1 ) of 0.623g. See Summary Data Sheet in Appendix D.

The spectral response parameters SS and SI were obtained for the BSE-I E seismic hazard level for existing structures (BPOE). The acceleration values were adjusted for the maximum direction and site class perASCE 41-17 Section 2.4.1, and compared to BSE-1 N (used by current building code for design of new buildings) to determine the design values for the Tier I analysis, since values obtained for the BSE-1 E hazard level need not exceed the hazard levels for new construction The successful performance of buildings in areas of high seismicity depends on a combination of strength, ductility of structural components, and the presence of a fully interconnected, balanced, and complete seismic force-resisting system. 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 60 CC 05-03-2022
60 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier I
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022
Page at 1 of 4 71
General
Original 1965 Construction: The original building was a one-story structure above grade with a basement below grade. A 1985 remodel opened one side of the basement, introduced openings in the north basement wall, and created an elevated veranda slab on the north side of the building (Photo 1 ). These changes created a 2 story building. The building is generally rectangular in plan, with the long side oriented in the east-west direction. The building footprint including the roofed veranda is approximatelyl36feetbyl12feet. Theinteriorspaceis120feetby96feetandthe two floors have a combined area of approximately 23,040 square feet.

The Ist floor is a reinforced elevated concrete slab, supported by concrete joists, beams, and columns. The structural floor from the I 965 drawings is shown in Figure

1. A Structural floor-framing plan of the 1st floor remodel from the 1986 plans is shown in Figure 2.

Figaire I fst Fkx>r Framing /'/m, 1965 Stmchxml Dmw%s 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.rn-me.com 61 CC 05-03-2022
61 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022
Page "12 of 171
.Q:.J;
€ -=- ?S,
J.,
Figure 2 jsf F(oor Framing P/an, !(;)86 Structura/ Drawings The roof is a mansard type with the lower hip portion having two slopes and the center portion being essentially flat. The hipped lower portion is framed with wood girders at 6' on center, T&G decking overlaid with !/!" plyvvood. The upper flat portion has rafters at 16" on center typical and sheathed with '/!" plywood. Rafters and girders are supported by bearing walls, steel beams, or concrete beams. (Figure 3). The sloping roof and mansard are clay tile.
i! ""l'
224 Walnut Avenue, 8uife B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.rn-se.eom 62 CC 05-03-2022
62 of 1033
A full building section from the 1965 drawings is shown in Figure 4. il 4fu a llll:,:'
Figure 4 - Full Building Longitudinal Section from 1965 Structural Drawings Walls
Ground floor/basement walls are reinforced concrete. Walls above the Is' floor elevated slab consist of reiativefy short shear concrete waiis with wood-framed infili 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B a Santa Cruz, CA a 831.426.:ffll6 a www.rn-me.eoa'n 63 CC 05-03-2022
63 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April I 9, 2022

walls between the shear walls. Columns supporting beams are typically 12" square reinforced concrete
Seismic Force-Resisting System
The lateral system of the building is reinforced concrete shear walls. The below-grade perimeter walls in the original plans were 12" thick with a single layer of vertical #6s at 12" and horizontal #5s at 10". The 1986 remodel opened up the northern perimeter basement wall and added reinforcing and 6" to the thickness of the walls (Figure 5). .i 2 ! . , I / 1 ,
O' -o'O'
/
Figure 5 North Wall Elevation 1986 Stmcturai Dmwings The first-floor shear walls are 6" thick reinforced concrete walls and are shown in red in Figure 6 from the 1965 IS' Floor Framing Plan. The walls reinforcing and the top of wall anchor bolts are specified in the table shown in Figure 7. 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426,3j86 www.rn-rne.eom 64 CC 05-03-2022
64 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 'l 9, 2022
N
Figure 6 Shear vvaffs from 1965 Structural Plans
CZ'Pkt kC A "-aas' k:'3k !m !- .5%x-t'j'M':" 'a'L."ay Zi't" "L !'a 4 "' y'kAiA'is'-rfal' """aa-W--Al; 'L" -'
i!arc-'iiqs
A'6:' L-j6",fi" QO NAt=.!i "6W' ,,,;'a""', T,1%:'p;4?_ Ef___W___S4,_- t"ThklA!!!a6 . '. : 4itaca", "e! Zt? as-<tb'ct.ii-"' ";!:t 'a-.'
A
=A
i.aJ
14 (:,>'J
d
(o'
(,l(
,;,n
7 (J
it>
)
(o
J!:"%'
'70E'leaarl4!
"!!";a?!48
Qkue:i a F:i"
":'>'hs'l"
4 !
1 1'
L
*b
69 ")= 1@
4! Q,
j!z-,
T}fl Jil,t, 5:RF::,.
; *4@ j4h fl>* 'AM
i :
rXs,
C,O,
F4gum 7Sh € ?WWd SChMuk,h)m 1965 SkudljfalPlmS
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-rne.eorn 65 CC 05-03-2022
65 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

Foundations
Foundations are generally shallow spread reinforced concrete interior columns and continuous concrete footings at the perimeter. A slab on grade is present over the entire footprint of the building.

Field Verification and Condition Assessment
A visual assessment was performed on August 08, 2021, by MME. The exterior and interior of the structure were observed; the interior review included a walkthrough of the ground and 1 s' floor.

The structure appeared to be in generally good structural condition with minimal structural damage or deterioration apparent (except as noted below) and appears to be constructed in general accordance with the provided structural drawings.

The veranda fascia on the south elevation has significant wood deterioration, Photo 4.

The extent of the deterioration and if it affects the structural members should be investigated during the Tier 2 evaluation.

The veranda slab at the southwest corner has a significant crack and spalling adjacent to the building corner column, Photo 5. The most likely reason is the differential settlement between the building and the slab on grade.

Material Properties
Basic properties for existing structural materials were found on the existing building documentation or per ASCE 41 code prescribed minimum structural values utilized in the analysis calculations can be found in Appendix C.

Buildinq Type
Per ASCE/SEI 41-17, this building can be classified as Building Type C2: Concrete Shear Walls with Stiff Diaphragms and C2a: Concrete Shear Walls with Flexible Diaphragms. There are no interior structural walls, but there are interior concrete columns on a grid pattern supporting the I S' floor and roof. The floor is a concrete slab supported on concrete joists and is classified as a stiff diaphragm. The roof framing consists of plywood sheathing over wood joists, girders, steel beams, and concrete columns. The plywood-sheathed diaphragm is classified as flexible. The foundation system consists of continuous perimeter footings and isolated interior footings.

Seismic forces are resisted by concrete and wood diaphragms, and exterior concrete walls.

Historical Performance
In addition to classifying buildings by type of construction, ASCE 41 identifies 'Benchmark Buildings' for each building type. The detailing of seismic force-resisting systems in Benchmark Buildings is generally considered to meet the performance requirements of ASCE 41. A building can be determined to be compliant with the 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 66 CC 05-03-2022
66 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

Benchmark Building requirements after a thorough review of the existing building plans, field verification of construction, and a condition assessment. The evaluation of non-structural elements is still required.

For building types C2 and C2a evaluated to the Immediate Occupancy Structural and Life Safety Performance, the benchmark building code year is 2000 and 1994 respectively. Since the subject building was constructed in 1965 and remodeled in 1986, it does not meet the criteria of a Benchmark Building, and a Tier 1 analysis is required.

Findings and Recommendations
Structural
We performed the ASCE 41-17 Tier 1 Building Type Specific Checklists (Appendix D) based on two scenarios Tor the two different occupancies: scenario 1- occupancy category IV and scenario 2 - occupancy category II. We found thirteen (13) and five (5) non-compliant items respectively. We have also included several non-structural non-compfiant items either that were noted in previous reports or that we identified during our site visit. See Appendix D and E for retrofit details.

We have separated the structural deficiencies into two groups. The first group are items that in our opinion a Tier 2 evaluation would not alleviate the need for the seismic upgrade. The second group may benefit from additional analysis included in a Tier 2 evaluation.

Group One - Unlikely that a Tier 2 evaluation would remove the need to upgrade

1. Roof Diaphragm Shear Capacity: The AKH evaluation determined that the shear capacity of the roof diaphragm was over-stressed. They determined that even if the clay tile roof was removed and replaced with a lighter roofing system, the plywood nailing would need to be upgraded.

Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV
Recommendation: The plywood nailing should be upgraded.

2. Roof Diaphragm Collector Splice Capacity: The AKH evaluation determined that the collector splices are over-stressed.

Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV
Recommendation: The splice connections should be upgraded.

3. Anchor Bolt Connections at top of Shear Walls: The AKH evaluation and our Tier 1 quick checks determined that the anchor bolts are overstressed Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV
Recommendation: The anchor bolt connections should be upgraded. 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 67 CC 05-03-2022
67 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

4. Out of Plane Connection of Veranda Beam: The Tier I evaluation determined that the connection from the veranda beam to the roof framing is inadequate for out-of-plane loads.

Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV and Scenario 2 occupancy category II
Recommendation: The out of plane connection at the veranda should be upgraded.

5. Upper Floor Concrete Shear Wall Shear Capacity: The Tier 1 evaluation determined that the existing shear walls are over-stressed. In addition, the AKH calculations, as well as the Tipping Mar calculations have shown that the shear walls will require additional capacity.

Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV and Scenario 2 - occupancy category II
Recommendation: The shear walls should be upgraded. Upgrades to repair Items 6 through 10 in regards to shear wall retrofits can all be achieved at the same time.

6. Upper Floor Concrete Shear Wall Flexural Capacity: See #6 above Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV

7. Concrete Shear Wall Boundary Members: See #6 above Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV
Group Two - A Tier 2 evaluation may remove the need to upgrade

8. Continuous Cross Ties at Upper Floor Shear Wall: Continuous cross ties do not exist at locations of the upper floor shear walls.

Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV and Scenario 2 occupancy category II
Recommendation: A Tier 2 evaluation may determine that continuous cross ties for the full length of the building are not required.

9. Upper Floor Concrete Shear Wall adjacent to diaphragm openings: Several of the shear walls on the East and West elevations are adjacent to openings in the concrete floor diaphragm.

Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV and Scenario 2 occupancy category If
Recommendation: A Tier 2 evaluation may show that the current geometry is adequate and this does not need to be repaired.

10. Ground floorWall Reinforcing at Openings: The 1986 remodel that created the openings in the lower level north wall placed additional vertical reinforcement at the openings but did not include horizontal reinforcement.

Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV
Recommendation: A Tier 2 evaluation may provide relief from this requirement. 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 68 CC 05-03-2022
68 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

11. Concrete Column Reinforcement for Confinement: The Tier 1 evaluation and previous studies determined that there are not adequate columri confinement ties around the longitudinal vertical bars.

Required for Scenario I - occupancy category IV
Recommendation: A Tier 2 evaluation may reduce some of the need for additional confinement. It is anticipated that some of the columns will still require modification to meet code requirements.

12. Concrete Column Splices and Girder Stirrups: The Tier I evaluation determined that the existing longitudinal bar splice lengths and the spacing of stirrups in the concrete beams at the floor level are inadequate.

Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV and Scenario 2 - occupancy category II
Recommendation: A Tier 2 evaluation may reduce some of the need for these repairs

13. Wall Foundation Dowels: The Tier 1 evaluation identified that there are dowels into the foundation at the concrete walls. However, the capacity of the dowels needs to be verified.

Required for Scenario 1- occupancy category IV
Recommendation: A Tier 2 evaluation may show that the dowels are adequate.

Non-Structural
We did not complete a Tier I evaluation of non-structural elements such as mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) anchorage and bracing. The previous reports have evaluated these items and have made recommendations for the seismic upgrade.

A. Equipment anchorage capacities are unknown and would require verification and or installation of anchorage and bracing. Equipment that should be considered includes the following:
o Emergency Generator, including isolators
o Emergency Generator flexible connections for conduit, fuel, and coolant piping
o Rooftop HVAC Equipment
o Elevator Equipment
o Electrical Transformers, Panels, Switchgear, Cabinets, etc. o Suspended Light Fixtures
o Ductwork and Piping Supports and Bracing
o Electrical Conduits, Trapezes, Banks, and Trays o Fire Sprinkler Piping
B. Anchorage and bracing for the existing suspended ceilings and interior partitions
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 69 CC 05-03-2022
69 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 2al 143.P5
April 19, 2022

C. Exterior cladding and glazing system
D. Deteriorated veranda fascia on the south elevation E. Accessibility
For our Tier 1 Evaluation, we have included the heavy clay tile roofing in our calculations for the weight of the building. One area that would help reduce seismic loads and therefore strengthening would be to remove and replace the clay tile with a lighter roofing type.

Reliability of Seismic Evaluations
In general, structural engineers cannot predict the exact damage to a building as a result of an earthquake. There will be a wide variation of damage from building to building due to the variations in ground motion and varying types and quality of construction. In addition, engineers cannot predict the exact ground motions of the earthquake that may strike a given building. Design and evaluation of buildings are performed using general guidelines and information from past earthquakes. Engineers and the codes used for design and evaluation have been conservative when attempting to ensure that building design meets minimum standards of Immediate Occupancy. This effort is based on science and technology as well as on observations made from actual seismic events. Building design and codes are constantly evolving to better meet performance targets. Continued research will improve predictive methods and facilitate performance-based engineering. It has been estimated that, given design ground motions, a small percent of new buildings and a slightly greater percent of retrofit buildings may fail to meet their expected performance.

This report is general and does not imply that the recommendations listed above are the only structural requirements that must be made to the existing structure to meet current code criteria.

We understand you may have questions regarding this evaluation and are available for comment and explanations. Please call with any questions you may have. Thank you for choosing MME Structural Engineers to assist you with this building seismic review. 224 Walnut Avenue, Sujte B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3I86 www.m-rne.com 70 CC 05-03-2022
70 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier I
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

APPENDIX A - Photographs
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA - 831.426.3f86 - www.m-rne.com 71 CC 05-03-2022
71 of 1033
April 19, 2022

Photo I North Elevation with Elevated Veranda Stab PfeEastEJe
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.428.3$86 www.ram-me.eom 72 CC 05-03-2022
72 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Eva)uation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

Photo 2 Veranda Concrete Beam
Ptdo 3 Darmged Vemnda Fasc%
224 Waariut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3j86 www.rrx-rne.eom 73 CC 05-03-2022
73 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April I 9, 2022

Photo 4 Veranda
Photo 5 Veranda
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Sarxta Cruz, CA 83!,426.3188 www.m-me.eom 74 CC 05-03-2022
74 of 1033

Photo 6 Veranda Damaged Slab on Grade
224 Walnuf Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3$86 www.m-me.com 75 CC 05-03-2022
75 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 4 9, 2022

APPENDIX B - Maps
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.m-me.com 76 CC 05-03-2022
76 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 2al 143.P5
April 19, 2022

Location Map
" a9,-
eK W "a"
i1:i9'J'
Thcj%, 9'
Map 1 Loea*on Map
224 Waanut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 83j.426.3j86 www.rn-rne.eom 77 CC 05-03-2022
77 of 1033
Cupertino City Hail Seismic Evaluation - Tier I
MME Project No: 2"l 143.P5
April 19, 2022

Geoiogic Hazard Map
Per the Cupertino GIS Property Information Map, shown below, the subject site is not in a Fault Rupture or Liquefaction-Inundation Zone.

JO'+O
Map 2 Cupertino GIS Map W/ Geologic Hazards
>[] amnwas
g J Tieas.
v ',i !eitage '-ram
&LJ AWLaamma
*[] R$mkqam*
>g
>[al Rsad&nm
Fatirt Raptuz
3a 'r =lside
-[ i
Jl Ur!ianW';d:am
'a
*[] Wmw!%nmaryam'aa
.IJ;
>[] !waSd
Since no geotechnicaf report is available, the default c(ass D soil type has been assumed for this investigation
224 Waaraut Averaue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 83j.426.3t86 www.rra-me.com 78 CC 05-03-2022
78 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier I
MME Project No: 21143.P5
April 19, 2022

APPENDIX C Materials
224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3186 www.rn-rne.com 79 CC 05-03-2022
79 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
Photo 7 Material Properties for 1965 Structural Plans 224 Watryut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 83j.426.3$86 www.rn-me.com 80 CC 05-03-2022
80 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
October 2'l, 2021
Page :31 of 121
APPENDIX D - AKH Details
Retrofit Details From "Cupertino City Hall Essential Services Facility Analysis Appendix" by AKH
224 Wagnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3f86 www.rn-me.com 81 CC 05-03-2022
81 of 1033
JUI

EXISTING

RET AINING WALL

EXISTING SLAB

ON GRADE
, ADDED SHEAR EXISTING SHEAR WALL
WALL
Figure 3.D: NEW SHEAR WALL AT EXIST. WALL
A
<7@

ADDED SHEAR WALL , EXISTING ,
' i COLUMN "
Figure 3.E: NEW SHEAR WALL AT EXIST. COL.

Figure 3.C: SECTION AT NEW SHEAR WALL
Appendix Pa<:)e2l5
82 CC 05-03-2022
82 of 1033

EXISTING
ANCHOR
BOLTS
NEW

ANCHORS

AS NEEDED
!l rl.i

EXIST'G

SHEAR WALL
WHERE
OCCURS

EXIST'G
ROOF BEAM 3/16 [> /S BALELAMSIDWEESB TO
t PLATE (EACH SIDE)
"-EXIST'G STEEL

COLLECTOR BEAM

EXIST'G COLUMN
Figure 3.F: ELEVATION: EXISTING STEEL BEAM

AT COLUMN AND SHEAR WALL

ROOF DECKING
BELO

PLYWQOD
PANELI EDGE i ElXlSTINGiEDGE i
f\lAILING (i6"o.c.) i

I NEW EDGE NAILIIG
E)ETWEElSp EXISTlpG
Figure 3.G: PLAN OF PLYWOOD PANEL EDGE NAILING
Aooendix Page 216
83 CC 05-03-2022
83 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier I
MME Project No: 21143.P5
October 21, 2021

APPENDIX E - Tipping Mar Details
Retrofit Details From 4'Cupertino City Hall Essential Services Facility Analysis Appendix 11 " by Tipping Mar
224 Walriut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831.426.3j86 www.rn-me.eom 84 CC 05-03-2022
84 of 1033

EXIST(NO W(X)D

RCIOF EIEAM

LAPPING
DOWELS
EX[ST.INO ELEVATED
FLOOR SLA!3, CONCRETE
,ICI!STS AND BEAfMS

EXISTING
RETAlf41NG WALl
EXtSTING SL.AB

B ORADE

EXISTING ROOF
[)IAPHRAGM
EXISTMa STEa

ROOF BEAM
EXIST1=4G CONCRETE
COljtJMN BEYOND
NEW 12" CONCRETE SHEAR WALL
OR
-NEW 6' CONCFlEtaa 8HEAR WALL
YI[ (E) 8" CON(',RETE SHEAR WALL
PEFI PtAN
(N) L6x8x3j8" EACH
SIDE W/ 2 8/4" DIA.

THRU BOLTS
tAa+R"
A ;, &l0a=,
(N) 3/4" EPOXY
(3RgUTED THFiEADED

ROD EACH SIDE OF

WD GIRDER
(N) 2x OR 3x BLKG
% W/ SIMPSON SDS SCREWS
TOP AND 435 CLIPS @ BTM
.1 4.s f!Xa
: ) 'lfi iJ:

DETAIL 3 - SECTION AT NEW CONCRETE SHEAR WAIL DET AIL 2 - STEEL TO STEEL COLLECTOR SPLICE rippiaa$tag
S'RuCTU)IM ffAtalNE[R1
t9e)6!ha!lt'*A't& !mrk*l#V.
sloM'M!lOti siossiyiz%x
Oupertino City Hall I Optiori B
C;upfflrUrio, CA
TM PrOj@at; 9014,094 Seam: Am NOted
DET AIL 1- STEEI TO WOOD COLLECTOR CONN.

Ftetrofit Details
8eptbmber29 2014
$3
Appendix Page 27385
CC 05-03-2022
85 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier I
MME Project No: 21143.P5
October 21, 2021

APPENDIX F - Tier I Checklists
224 Waanut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA a 831.426.3'a86 a www.m-rne.com 86 CC 05-03-2022
86 of 1033
MME
CML+STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
Appendix C: Summary Data Sheet
PrOjeCT Name Cupertino City Hall
Project Number 21143,P5
a;magi?Jaav Cupertino City Hall
\b'gA6mss: 10300 Torre Ave, Cupertino, CA 95014
Yee'dbuk= I gB5
area(N<d>l: 23,040
Nc. d Starm; 2
Yea#sp Resrrrdderd: j9
SbryH;4't 12'/17.'l'
m IQ/Ig/2021
COaTF!UCTION DATA
ataraytsassruerumysyaern: Roof-WoodFramed&Floor-ConcreteSlabandjoists Concrete Shearwalls Not in shearwalls
Concrete Shearwalls €)y? Not in Shearwalls
Clay tile and built up - Wood framinq
smvmaaate pmhvrar=,: Concrete Slab and joists
Gxotind Fkor. Slob on Grade
Foa.rdabr:. Concrete Perimet
GvterdChrxXbrio € Stmduva; Good
Le-velsBekmGrade? Groundfloorispartiallybelowgrade
SpaoaJ rea'hxgsarw5 f2orms:

LATERAL-FORCE-FIESiS'TING SYS?EM
rmMm Concrete Perimeter
Systaew:

Dmptw'agm:

Concrete shearwall
Concrete Columns
Roof - Plywood and Floor - Concrete
Anchor Bolts
Tamamam
Concrete Shearwalls
Concrete Columns
Roof - Plywood and Floor - Concr4!J
Anchor Bolts
EVALUATtON DATA
gSE-4N Spe6al %spatse
AcceJeratirm:

Sa! Factors:
&a-j,589
assay D-Default
&,, 1.048
High
.238
y= 3158.2
&a. .803
5,1.2 y... 1.7
JRn- '23
%bmmm Immediate Occupancy
addm VW- 301 4=7
BUILDING CLASSiFlCATION: C2 Concrete Shear Walls (with Stiff Diahp) C2a (with Flexible Diaph) FlEOUiREDTlEFf -l CHECK[18TS Ygs No
EI €
FURTHER EVALUATION FIEQUIREMENT: %iqi)g,[2eficien,cy Based Evaluatior;- Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown (c 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers 2 ASCE 41-1 7 Checklists 87 CC 05-03-2022
87 of 1033
ax+ ENGIMEEffiG
?7J.2aO Basic Configuration Checklist
PrOjeCt Name Cupertino City Hall
ProjeciNu"')er 21143.P5Basic
Table 17-3. Immediate Basic Configuration Checklist Status
Very Low Seismicity
Building System-General

C NC N/A U
[X € € €
c NC N/A u
€ € [X €
c NC N/A u
€ € [X €
Evaluation Statement
Tier 2
Reference
LOAD PATH: The structure 5.4.1.1
contains a complete, well-defined
load path, including structural
elements and connections, that
serves to transfer the inertial forces
associated with the mass of all
elements of the building to the
foundation.

ADJACENTBUILDINGS:Theclear 5.4.1.2
distance between the building
being evaluated and any adjacent
building is greater than O.5% of
the height of the shorter building
in low seismicity,1.O% in moderate
seismicity, and 3.0% in high
seismicity.

MEZZANINES:Interiormezzanine 5.4.1.3
levels are braced independently
from the main structure or are
anchored to the seismic-force-
resisting elements of the main
structure.

BuildingSystem-Building Configuration
C NC N/A U WEAK STORY: The sum of the shear 5.4.2.1 [, € € € strengthsoftheseismic-force-
resisting system in any Story in
each direction is not less than 80%
of the strength in the adjacent
story above.

C NC N/A U SOFTSTORY:Thestiffnessofthe 5.4.2.2
[, € € € seismic-force-resisting system in
any story is not less than 70% of
the seismic-force-resisting system
stiffness in an adjacent story above
or less than 80% of the average
seismic-force-resisting system
stiffness of the three stories above.

C NC N/A U VERTICALIRREGULARITIES:Ail 5.4.2.3
(. @ @ @ vertical elements in the seismic-
force-resisting system are
continuous to the foundation.

Commentary
Reference Comments
A.2.1.1 Load path exists, bu some are
deficient in strength. 10 checklist
A.2.1 .2
A.2.1.3
A.2.2.2
A.2.2.3
A.2.2.4
Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown @ 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers 2 ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 83j.426.3t86 www.m-me.eorra 88 CC 05-03-2022
88 of 1033
Cffi%flL+
PrOjeCi Name Cupertino City Hall
PrOjeCi Number 21143.P5 Basic
c NC N/A U GEOMETRY:Therearenochanges 5.4.2.4
in the net horizontal dimension of
A.2.2.5
[X € € €

C NC N/A U
[X € € €
c NC N/A u
[X € € €
the seismic-force-resisting system
of more than 30% in a story
relative to adjacent stories,
excluding one-story penthouses
and mezzanines.

MASS: There is no change in
effective mass of more than 50%
from one story to the next. Light
roofs, penthouses, and
mezzanines need not be
considered.

TORSION: The estimated distance
between the story center of mass
and the story center of rigidity is
less than 20% of the building
width in either plan dimension.

5.4.2.5 5.4.2.6
A.2.2.6
A.2.2.7
A.6.1.1 Reference: Cupertino GIS map
https://gis.cupertino.org/propertyi
nfo/
Tier 2 Commentary
Status EvaluationStatement Reference Reference Comments Low Seismicity (Complete the Following Items in Addition to the Items for Very Low Seismicity) GeologicSite Hazards
C NC N/A U LIQUEFACTION: Liquefaction- 5.4.3.1
[, € € € susceptible, saturated, loose
granular soils that could
jeopardize the building's seismic
performance do not exist in the
foundation soils at depths within
50 ft (15.2 m) under the building.

C NC N/A U SLOPE FAILURE: The building site 5.4.3.1 [, € € € islocatedawayfrompotential
earthquake-induced slope failures
or rockfalls so that it is unaffected
Reference: Cupertino GIS map
https://gis.cupertino.org/propertyi
nfo/
A.6.1.2
by such failures or is capable of
accommodating any predicted
movements without failure.
c NC N/A u
[X € € €
SURFACE FAULT RUPTURE: Surface 5.4.3.1
fault rupture and surface
displacement at the building site
are not anticipated.

A.6.1.3 Reference: Cupertino GIS map
https://gis.cupertino.org/propertyi
nfo/
Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown @ 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers 3 ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B a Santa Cvuz, CA * 83f.426.3t86 a www.m-me-corn 89 CC 05-03-2022
89 of 1033
CNVfflL+STRtKmJRAL
PrOjeCf Name Cupertino City Hall
PrOjeCt Num5er 21143.P5 Basic
Status Evaluation Statement
Tier 2
Reference
Commentary
Reference Comments
Moderate and High Seismicity (Complete the Following Items in Addition to the Items for Low Seismicity) Foundation Configuration
C NC N/A U OVERTURNING:Theratioofthe 5.4.3.3
(, @ @ @ least horizontal dimension of theseismic-force-resisting system at the foundation level to the
building height (base/height) is
greater than O.6Sa.

C NC N/A U TIESBETWEENFOUNDATION 5.4.3.4
z @ (, z ELEMENTS: The foundation has tiesadequate to resist seismic forces where footings, piles, and piers are
not restrained by beams, slabs, or
soils classified as Site Class A, B,
or C.

A.6.2.1
A.6.2.2
Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown (c 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers 4 ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 83t.426.3186 www.m-me-eom 90 CC 05-03-2022
90 of 1033
CML+WRAL EWNEERM;
PrOjeCt Name Cupertino City Hall Eval
ProjectNumber 21143.P5 10
?7JJOStructural Checklistfor Building Types C2: Concrete ShearWalls with Stiff Diaphragms and C2a: Concrete ShearWallswith Flexible Diaphragms Table 17-25. Immediate Occupancy Structural Checklist for Building Types C2 and C2a Tier 2 Commentary
Status EvaluattonStatement Reference Reference Comments Very Low Seismicity
Seismic-Force-Resisting System
C NC N/A U COMPLETE FRAMES: Steel or concrete 5.5.2.5.1 € € [, € frames classified as secondary
components form a complete vertical-
load-carrying system.

C NC N/A U REDUNDANCY:Thenumberoflinesof 5.5.1.1
[, € € € shear walls in each principal direction is greater than or equal to 2.

C NC N/A U SHEARSTRESSCHECK:Theshear 5.5.3.1.1
@ [, @ @ stressintheconcreteshearwalls,calculated using the Quick Check procedure of Section 4.4.3.3, is less
than the greater of 100 lb/in.2 (0.69
MPa) or 2J7:.

C NC N/A U REINFORCING STEEL: The ratio of 5.5.3.1.3 [, € € € reinforcing steel area to gross
concrete area is not less than O.0012
in the vertical direction and O.0020 in
the horizontal direction. The spacing
of reinforcing steel is equal to or less
than 18in. (457 mm).

Connections
C NC N/A 5.7.1.1U WALL ANCHORAGE AT FLEXIBLE
DIAPHRAGMS: Exterior concrete or€ € € [X

C NC N/A U
€ € € [X
masonry walls that are dependent on
flexible diaphragms for lateral support
are anchored for out-of-plane forces
at each diaphragm level with steel
anchors, reinforcing dowels, or straps
that are developed into the
diaphragm. Connections have
strength to resist the connection force
calculated in the Quick Check
procedure of Section 4.4.3.7.

TRANSFER TO SHEAR WALLS: 5.7.2
Diaphragms are connected for
transfer of loads to the shear walls,
and the connections are able to
develop the lesser ofthe shear
strength ofthe walls or diaphragms.

A.3.1.6.1
A.3.2.1.1
A.3.2.2.1
A.3.2.2.2
A.5.1.1
A.5.2.1
The shear walls supporting the roof
are significantly overstressed
Some portions of connection and
ability transfer loads will require
additional investigation in Tier 2.

Wall anchorage at veranda is
undersized and requires repair
Diaphragms are connected to the
shear-walls.

Some portions of connection and
ability transfer loads will require
additional investigation in Tier 2.

Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown (c 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B a Santa Cvuz, CA * 83?.426.3186 a www.m-me-eom 91 CC 05-03-2022
91 of 1033
MME
ProJeC' Name Cupertino City Hall Eval
Project Number 211 43,P5 10

C NC N/A U
€ € € [X
Foundation System

C NC N/A U
€ € [X €
FOUNDATION DOWELS: Wall
reinforcement is doweled into the
foundation, and the dowels are able
to develop the lesser ofthe strength
of the walls or the uplift capacity of
the foundation.

5.7.3.4 DEEP FOUNDATIONS: Piles and piers
are capable of transferring the lateral
forces between the structure and the
soil.

C NC N/A U SLOPING S!TES: The difference in
€ € [, € foundation embedment depth from
one side of the building to another
does not exceed one story.

A.5.3.5 Walls are doweled into the
foundations.

Additional capacity checks required
in Tier 2
A.6.2.3
A.6.2.4
Tier 2 Commentary
Status EvaluationStatement Reference Reference Comments Low, Moderate, and High Seismicity (Complete the Following Items in Addition to the Items for Very Low Seismicity) Seismic-Force-Resisting System
C NC N/A U DEFLECTIONCOMPATIBILIIY: Column bar splices are less than 50db.

Girders do not have continuous
stirrups
A.3.1.6.25.5.2.5.2
€ [X € €
Secondary components have the
shear capacity to develop the flexural
strength of the components and are
compliant with the following items in
Table17-23: COLUMN-BAR SPLICES,

BEAM-BAR SPLICES, COLUMN-TIE
SPACING, STIRRUP SPACING, and
STIRRUP ANDTIE HOOKS.

5.5.2.5.3 5.5.3.2.1
C NC N/A U FLAT SLABS: Flat slabs or plates not
€ € [, € part of seismic-force-resisting system
have continuous bottom steel
through the column joints.

C NC N/A U COUPLINGBEAMS:Theendsofboth
€ € [, [1] walls to which the coupling beam is attached are supported at each end to
resist vertical loads caused by
overturning. Coupling beams have the
capacity in shear to develop the uplift
capacity of the adjacent wall.

C NC N/A U OVERTURNING:Allshearwallshave 5.5.3.1.4
[, € € € aspect ratios less than 4-to-1. Wall
piers need not be considered.

A.3.1.6.3
A.3.2.2.3
A.3.2.2.4
Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown @ 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers 3 ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B aa Santa Cvuz, CA a 83$.426.3186 aa www.rn-me.eorn 92 CC 05-03-2022
92 of 1033
MME
CML+

C NC N/A U
€ [X € €

C NC N/A U
€ [X € €
CONFINEMENT REINFORCING: For
shear walls with aspect ratios greater
than 2-to-1, the boundary elements
are confined with spirals or ties with
spacing less than 8db.

WALL REINFORCING AT OPENINGS:

There is added trim reinforcement
around all wall openings with a
dimension greater than three times
the thickness of the wall.

5.5.3.2.2 5.5.3.1 .5
C NC N/A U WALLTHICKNESS:Thicknessesof 5.5.3.1.2
[, € € € bearingwallsarenotlessthanl/25
the unsupported height or length,
whichever is shorter, nor less than 4in.
(101 mm).

Diaphragms (StifforFlexible)
C NC N/A U DIAPHRAGMCONTINUITY:The 5.6.1.1
[, € € € diaphragmsarenotcomposedof
split-level floors and do not have
expansion joints.

C NC N/A U OPENINGSATSHEARWALLS: 5.6.1.3
€ [, € € Diaphragm openings immediately
adjacent to the shear walls are less
than 1 5% of the wall length.

C NC N/A U PLAN IRREGULARITIES: There is tensile 5.6.1.4 € € [, € capacity to develop the strength of
the diaphragm at reentrant corners or
other locations of plan irregularities.

C NC N/A U DIAPHRAGMREINFORCEMENTAT 5.6.1.5
€ € [, [j OPENINGS: There is reinforcing
around all diaphragm openings larger
than 50% of the building width in
either major plan dimension.

Flexible Diaphragms
C NC N/A U CROSSTIES:Therearecontinuous 5.6.1.2
€ [, € € cross ties between diaphragm chords.

C NC N/A U STRAIGHTSHEATHING:Allstraight- 5.6.2
€ € [, € sheathed diaphragms have aspect
ratios less than 1-to-1 in the direction
being considered.

C NC N/A U SPANS: All wood diaphragms with 5.6.2
[, € € € spans greater than 12 ft (3.6 m) consist of wood structural paneis or diagonal
sheathing.

Project Name
Project Number
Cupertino City Hall Eval
211 43.P5 10
A.3.2.2.5 Spacing of ties is less than specified.

A.3.2.2.6 No Top reinforcement above
openings at ground level walls on
north side
A.3.2.2.7
A.4.1.1
A.4.1 .4 In two locations adjacent to stairway
openings the concrete shear walls
have an opening for the full length of
the wall
A.4.1.7
A.4.1.8
A.4.1.2 Continuous cross ties between
chords are not present or detailed
A.4.2.1
A.4.2.2
Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknowri (c 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers 4 ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Waanut Avenue, Sukte B a Santa Cruz, CA aa 831-426.3j86 a www.gn-rrae.eorra 93 CC 05-03-2022
93 of 1033
MME
CML+

C NC N/A U DIAGONALLYSHEATHED AND
UNBLOCKED DIAPHRAGMS: All[X € € €

5.6.2 C NC N/A U
€ € [X €

C NC N/A U
[X € € €
diagonally sheathed or unblocked
wood structural panel diaphragms
have horizontal spans less than 30 ft
(9.2 m) and aspect ratios less than or
equal to 3-to-1.

NONCONCRETE FILLED DIAPHRAGMS: 5.6.3
Untopped metal deck diaphragms or
metal deck diaphragms with fill other
than concrete consist of horizontal
spans of less than 40 ft (1 2.2 m) and
have aspect ratios less than 4-to-1.

OTHER DIAPHRAGMS: Diaphragms do 5.6.5
not consist of a system other than
wood, metal deck, concrete, or
horizontal bracing.

Connections
C NC N/A U UPLIFT AT PILE CAPS: Pile caps have 5.7.3.5 € € [, € top reinforcement, and piles are
anchored to the pile caps; the pile cap
reinforcement and pile anchorage are
able to develop the tensile capacity of
the piles.

PrQ'ec' Name Ci ipertinn City Hall Fval
Project Number 211 43.p5 1@
A.4.2.3
A.4.3.1
A.4.7.l
A.5.3.8
Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown @ 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers 5 ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Waffln:ut Avenue, Sule B a Santa Cruz, CA o 831-426.3j86 a www.m-me.eom 94 CC 05-03-2022
94 of 1033
MME
CML+
PrOjeCt Name Cupertino City Hall
ProjectNumber 21143,P5CP

17.'a2CPStructural Checklistfor Building Types C2: Concrete ShearWallswith Stiff Diaphragms and C2a: Concrete ShearWallswith Flexible Diaphragms Table 17-24. Collapse Prevention Structural Checklistfor Building Types C2 and C2a Tier 2 Commentary
Reference Reference CommentsEvaluation StatementStatus

5.5.2.5.1 Low and Moderate Seismicity
Seismic-Force-Resisting System
C NC N/A U COMPLETE FRAMES: Steel or concrete
€ € [, € frames classified as secondary
components form a complete vertical-
load-carrying system.

C NC N/A U REDUNDANCY: The number of lines of
[, € € € shearwalls in each principal direction is greater than or equal to 2.

C NC N/A U SHEARSTRESSCHECK:Theshearstressin 5.5.3.1.1 the concrete shear walls, calculated using
the Quick Check procedure of Section

4.4.3.3, is less than the greater oflOO
lb/in.2 (0.69 MPa) or 2r'.

C NC N/A U REINFORCING STEEL: The ratio of 5.5.3.1.3 reinforcing steel area to gross concrete
area is not less than O.0012 in the vertical
direction and O.0020 in the horizontal
direction.
€ [X € €
[X € € €

5.5.1.1 Connections
C NC N/A U WALLANCHORAGEATFLEXIBLE 5.7.1.1
@ [, @ @ DIAPHRAGMS:Exteriorconcreteormasonry walls that are dependent on flexible diaphragms for lateral support are
anchored for out-of-plane forces at each
diaphragm level with steel anchors,
reinforcing dowels, or straps that are
developed into the diaphragm.

Connections have strength to resist the
connection force calculated in the Quick
Check procedure of Section 4.4.3.7.

C NC N/A U TRANSFERTOSHEARWALLS:Diaphragms 5.7.2
(, @ @ @ areconnectedfortransferofseismicforces to the shear walls.

C NCa N/A U FOUNDATIONDOWELS:Wall 5.7.3.4
[, @ @ @ reinforcement is doweled into thefoundation with vertical bars equa) in size and spacing to the vertical wall
reinforcing directly above the foundation.

A.3.1.6.1
A.3.2.1 .1
A.3.2.2.1 The shear walls supporting
the roof are significantly
overstressed
A.3.2.2.2
A.5.1.1 Some portions of connection
and ability transfer loads will
require additional
investigation in Tier 2.

Wall anchorage at veranda is
undersized and requires
repair
A.5.2.1
A.5.3.5
Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown @ 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers 2 ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B a Santa Cruz. CA a 83j-426.3?86 - www.m-me-eom 95 CC 05-03-2022
95 of 1033
CML+
PrOjeCf Name Cupertino City Hall
Project Number 21l43.p5 (p
Status EvaluationStatement
Tier 2 Commentary
Reference Reference Comments
A.3.1.6.2
A.3.1.6.3
A.3.2.2.3
Tier 2 analysis is required
High Seismicity (Complete the Following Items in Addition to the Items for Low and Moderate Seismicity) Seismic-Force-Resisting System
C NC N/A U DEFLECTION COMPATIBILITY: Secondary 5.5.2.5.2 € € € [, componentshavetheshearcapacityto
develop the flexural strength of the
components.

C NC N/A U FLAT SLABS: Flat slabs or plates not part 5.5.2.5.3 € € [, € oftheseismic-force-resistingsystemhave
continuous bottom steel through the
column joints.

C NC N/A U COUPLINGBEAMS:Theendsofbothwalls 5.5.3.2.1 € € [, € to which the coupling beam is attached are supported at each end to resist
vertical loads caused by overturning.

Diaphragms (StifforFlexible)
C NC N/A U DIAPHRAGM CONTINUITY: The
[, € € € diaphragmsarenotcomposedofsplit-
level floors and do not have expansion
joints.

C NC N/A U OPENINGSATSHEARWALLS:Diaphragm 5.6.1.3 A.4.l.4 € [, € € openings immediately adjacent to the
shearwalls are less than 25% of the wall
length.

Flexible Diaphragms
C NC N/A U CROSS TIES: There are continuous cross 5.6.1.2 A.4.1.2 € [, € € ties between diaphragm chords.

C NC N/A
Continuous cross ties
between chords are not
present or detailed
In two locations adjacent to
stairway openings the
concrete shear walls have an
opening for the full length of
A.4.2.1U STRAIGHTSHEATHING:Allstraight- 5.6.2
€ € [, € sheathed diaphragms have aspect ratios less than 2-to-1 in the direction being
considered.

5.6.1.1 A.4.1.1

C NC N/A U
[X € € €

C NC N/A U
€ € [X €

C NC N/A U
€ € [X €
SPANS: All wood diaphragms with spans 5.6.2
greater than 24 ft (7.3 m) consist of wood
structural panels or diagonal sheathing.

DIAGONALLY SHEATHED AND 5.6.2
UNBLOCKED DIAPHRAGMS: All diagonally
sheathed or unblocked wood structural
panel diaphragms have horizontal spans
less than 40 ft (1 2.2 m) and aspect ratios
less than or equal to 4-to-1.

OTHER DIAPHRAGMS: Diaphragms do not 5.6.5
consist of a system other than wood,
metal deck, concrete, or horizontal
bracing.

A.4.2.2
A.4.2.3
A.4.7.'l
Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown (c 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers 3 ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Walnut Avenue,. Suite B - Santa Cruz, CA a 831.426.3'a84a * www'.m-me,eom 96 CC 05-03-2022
96 of 1033
MME
CML4-STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING
Connections
C NC N/A U UPLIFTATPILECAPS:Pilecapshavetop 5.7.3.5
€ € [, € reinforcement, and piles are anchored to the pile caps.

PrOjeCi Name Cupertino City Hall
Project Number 21143,p5 CP
A.5.3.8
Legend: C = Compliant, NC = Noncompliant, N/A = Not Applicable, U = Unknown @ 2021 American Society of Civil Engineers ASCE 41-17 Checklists 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 83f.426.3f86 wwtv.m-me-corn 97 CC 05-03-2022
97 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Evaluation - Tier 1
MME Project No: 21143.P5
October 21, 2021

APPENDIX G - Cupertino City Hall Essential Facility Analysis 2012 224 Walnut Avenue, Suite B Santa Cruz, CA 831-426.3f86 www.rn-tne.com 98 CC 05-03-2022
98 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall
Essential Services Facility Analysis
Fina Report, Rev sion I
March 27 2012
Aooendix Paoe 204
99 CC 05-03-2022
99 of 1033
Table of Contents

1.O Project Participants

2.OExecutive Summary

3.OStructural Analysis

3.1. Scope

3.2. Applicable Codes

3.3, Deficiencies Identified

3.4. General Recommendations

3.5. Specific Recommendations

3.6. Recommendations
Figure 3A
Figure 3B
Figure 3C-G
Key Structural Building Plan
Key Roof Plan
Connections Details

4.OArchitectural Analysis

4.1. Scope

4.2, Applicable Codes

4.3. Fire and Life Safety Key Issues

4.4. Other Issues

4.5. Recommendations
Exhibit 4A:

Exhibit 4B:

Exhibit 4C:

Exhibit 4D:

Code Analysis Work Sheet
Accessibility for Existing Building
Occupancy Load and Exit Diagram First Floor
Occupancy Load and Exit Diagram Basement Floor

5.OMechanical, Electrical, Plumbing, Fire Protection Analysis

5.1. Scope

5.2. Applicable Codes and Standards

5.3. Mechanical
5,4. Plumbing

5.5. Fire Protection

5.6. Electrical
Appendix:

Kick-off Meeting Minutes (2/14/2012)
Clarification of Alternatives (2/21/2012 E-mail message) Appendix Page 205
100
CC 05-03-2022
100 of 1033

1.O Project Participants
Ciient:

City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino CA 95014
Carmen Lynaugh
Terry Greene
Larry Squarcia
Albert Salvador
Arnold Hom
Timm Borden
Chris Orr
Rick Kitson
Architect:

Public Works Project Manager
Acting City Architect
Senior Building Inspector
Building Official
Plan Check Engineer
Director of Public Works
Facilities Supervisor
Public and Environmental Affairs Director
Perkins + Will
185 Berry Street, Suite 5100
San Francisco, CA 94107
Phone: 415.856.3000
Karen Alschuler
Susan Seastone
Haji Ishikawa
Project Principal
Project Manager
Project Architect
Structural Engineer:

AKH Structural Engineers Inc.
1505 Meridian Avenue, Suite B
San Jose, CA 95125
Phone: 408.978.1970
Tim Hyde President
Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing, Fire Protection Engineers:

PAE Consulting Engineers, Inc.
425 California st., Ste. 1200
San Francisco, CA 94104
Phone: 415.544.7500
Mike Lucas
Marco Alves
Hooshang Pakzadan
Project Principal
Mechanical Project Engineer
Electrical Project Engineer
Apoendix Page 206
101
CC 05-03-2022
101 of 1033

2.0 Executive Summary
This scope of this project is an analysis of the Cupertino City Hall building and its compliance with current codes related to Essential Services Facility requirements. The objective of this study is to identify both deficiencies and potential improvements to the building necessary to achieve essential facility status by current codes.

Four alternative approaches were identified by the City of Cupertino representatives and the design team for the renovation of the existing City Hall facility. These approaches, described below, differ in their scope and anticipated construction cost. More detail for each item can be found in the body of the report,
Alt #1 No Upgrade: This alternate proposes no modifications to the existing City Hall building and a relocation of the existing Emergency Operations Center (EOC) to another facility.

Alt #2 Minimum Seismic Upgrade: This alternate proposes modifications to the building structure only to bring the facility to a code compliant Essential Services Facility status.

No proposed plan changes are proposed in this alternate in order to maintain the ability to "grandfather in" the existing EOC in its current configuration. Only structural items triggered by I-factor improvements and maintenance are intended to be modified.

Accessibility upgrade improvements may be triggered in this alternate.

Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: This alternate proposes that all Alternate #2 items as well as additional plan modifications to address life safety code updates be implemented.

Accessibility upgrade improvements would be triggered in this alternate.

Alt #4 Replacement - This alternate proposes a new City Hall building that aligns with ideas being proposed in the Civic Center Master Plan Study currently in process by Perkins + Will. This new facility would meet all current codes, incorporate sustainable features, and include Essential Services Facility requirements while at the same time address the specific needs and desires of the building occupants.

Following the completion of this report, the City of Cupertino and the design team will meet with a cost estimator designated by the city to identify order of magnitude costs for each alternative. After this process has been completed and an alternative is selected, the city may authorize the design team to proceed with the design and documentation of the selected alternative.

Aopendix Page 207
102
CC 05-03-2022
102 of 1033

3.0 Structural Analysis (by AKH)

3.1 Scope
The scope of this section includes recommendations for mitigating structural deficiencies discovered in our assessment report dated November 11, 2011. The report has indicated that the heavy roof tile is a major factor in the deficiencies of the structure. The following recommendations are based on the assumption that the heavy tile roofing will be replaced by a lighter roofing material, and possibly with solar panels over some of the soped roof areas.

3.2 Applicable Codes
The structure was recently assessed using seismic forces required in the 2985 Uniforrri 3uildirig Code (UBC), as this was the Code to wtaiich ttte I986 atterati-ons were dac.ign-=d.

3.3 Dcficicncics [dcntifit:tf
Roof Diaphragm Shear Capacity
Roof Diaphragm Collector Sptice Capacity
Anchor Bolt Connections at top of Shear Walls
Upper Concrete Shear Wall Flexural Capacity
Upper Concrete Shear Wall Boundary Members
Upper Concrete Shear Wall Second Layer of Reinforcing Concrete Column Reinforcement for Confinement
Equipment Anchorage Capacities Unknown

3.4 General Recommendations
This structure consists of concrete shear walls with heavy clay roof tiles on the sloped roof areas and heavy gravel ballast in the central area bounded by the upper mansard/screen wall. The roof tifes represent a significam portion of the buildirig's mass at the upper levei. The design seismic forces on a structure are based directly on a fraction or percentage of the total mass (weight) of the building. Thus, the roof tiles represent a significant amount of the seismic forces that the s iateral force- must resist.

This wou:ld atso allow for the opportunity
to instatl ptiotovottaic (PV) solar panefs on the roof surface. As the weight of typical PV panets is small relative to the weight of the existing clay roof tiles, future improvements coufd incfude th.e addition of these PV panefs while still reducing the building's mass and resulting seismic design Forces.

Also, the upper story of this structure relies on two relatively narrow concrete shear walls on each of the four sides of the building. These shear walls comprise the building's entire lateral force resistance at the upper level, as the structure does not have any interior walls or structural frames that resist lateral forces. While the shear walls occur on each of the building's four sides, the walls are relatively narrow compared to their height, resulting in high in-plane shear stresses when resisting the seismic design forces, as well as relatively high tension and compression forces at the ends of the walls. Finally, the use of only two primary force-resisting elements on each side of the structure provides Appendix Page 208
103
CC 05-03-2022
103 of 1033
only minimal redundancy. Overall, the smaller number and tength of walls resuft irr a structural configuration that has historically performed less ttran optimafly in resisting '.a4:era',, seismic forces in moderate and majcr earthquakes. Therefore -yr=ecom en t a the included key p(an of
khe building iniicates wh:ere concrete wals cadi be added to the buildi-ng, utitizing portions of existing soiid exterior wall. These proposed locations would affect tbe building's current aesthetics arid function to on(y a limited degree, if at alf. See Fig. 3.A. i [ !U i s;, eaf-\ga s 3iap _,_ .one--.cT u [mr' [ :rticj ffi,.

In general, if the clay roof tiles are replaced
PV panels), the building's seismic mass
magnitude of most oT the structure's noted
more readily addressed.

3.5 Specific Recommendations
with lighter roofing materials (even including
would be reduced substantially, and the
deficiencies are reduced to levels that are
In addition to the general recommendations above, following are our specific recommendations for each of the deficiencies noted in the Section 3.3 above:

3.5.1 Roof Diaphragm Shear Capacity
The existing roof diaphragm is comprised of plywood sheathing with specific nailing along its panel edges to common framing members. Its shear capacity is affected by the type and thickness of plywood used, and the size and spacing of nailing used, The existing roof diaphragm shear capacity is exceeded even i'f the existing rooT tile were to be removed and repfaced with a lighter roofing material. The roof diaphragm forces would be reduced significantly with the repfa.cement of the heavy clay roof tites, although the calcuiated diaph.ragm shears would stitl exceed the diaphragm near the builc'ing's perime-ter,. which is where the diaphragm ph(@g.m-c4 ,e stretAOt@en;e=d "q
;5d : >.n: :' y":;',a, ::::..,."=:.:: 7ffl___;:;,:i o:..:' ,:';,l":g

3.5.2 See Figures 3.B and 3.G.

Rmf Diaptiragm CoHedor Splm Capacity
The existing roof diaphragm collectors consist of steel roof beams around the perimeter of the structure, and are aligned parallel to and above the upper-level concrete shear walls. These elements collect the seismic forces within the roof diaphragm and deliver the forces to the shear walls.

Where splices occur in the lines of steel beams at approximately ten (10) locations, the connectors are curreritly not adequate to transfer the I!'efiiency

3.5.3 Andmr Bdt Connectk at top d Shear Walls
Aooendix Paqe 209
104
CC 05-03-2022
104 of 1033
The collector beams mentioned in the previous section are connected to the top of the concrete shear walls with anchor bolts embedded in the walls a.nd. extending through the. steel beam Tlan.ge, Th.is is the me.ans through which the seismic forces are transferved from the roof to ttte sttear walls. The current anchor bolts are insufficient to transfer ttqe prescribed forces to the shear waits, even with add.ed shear walls.

See Fig,. 3.F,

3.5.4 Staear Wall In-Plane flaagal Capacay
[n-plane fiexure results from the shear walls bending when resisting seismic loads at their tops, tending to rotate and bend the waft over, a tension and ' at wall ends,
resisted by the existing wails
flexural forces. The added
sufficient reinforcing to resist
as the forces
would be reduced, as well as the induced
shear walls would be designed to have
bending in the plane of the wall.

3.5.5 Concrete Shear Wall Boundary Members
Boundary members are required where the in-plane flexural forces generate high compressive forces at the wall ends. These compressive forces, when at a certain level, must be resisted by stronger column-type elements, containing internal confinement of the vertical wall reinforcing near the wall ends. The existing walls would require added boundary confinement to resist current Code-level forces. With the removal of the heavy roof tite and gravel, and depending on the lengths and tocatians of added shear walls as noted above, the compress.ive flexurat forces woud be reduced to a ievel where o.nty the current Code's prescriptive requirements would be appiicabte. This could be accomplished in orte of [irst4 a 'ah4i Iengtha-of>-r'ffif4re-edi qal e'4'd , dlm"% re exitting, wh!ith wsu4dlmotthphig$rt*coipresmve $r,-ces- I Way frqm the,existin@-4!ars, aqd weuN!Jiceutaaaiaa@ew laws and snfinemenq -O'c@ipa!segl,," waihe*clou:%e(tareeql'aerre":"t"l%it S'eisCvovv'di'de:f tthheaiq*lerihdiait :@aou'ljo' bb:' m!PltiCs cqmt=amni € ng th$ req4a.ireta eeaf4Eing r4in@=4eetuqC_:

3.5.6 Concrete Shear Wali Second Layer of Reinforcing When calculated in-plane shear stresses within shear walls exceed a certain threshold, those walls must have two layers of internal reinforcing.

The shear walls currently have one layer of reinforcing, comprised of vertical and horizontal rebar. With the removal of the heavy roof tile and addition of new perimeter shear walls as noted above, the shear stresses Appendix Page210
105
CC 05-03-2022
105 of 1033
within the walls will likely be reduced to levels such that the second layer is not required.

3.5.7 Concrete Column Reinforcement for Confinement
The existing concrete columns throughout the structure, at both levels, contain longitudinal reinforcement running vertically and transverse, confining tie reinforcement around the longitudinal bars. The ties are of a specific size and occur at a specific spacing. In extreme cases, such as in moderate and major earthquakes, the lateral drift of the structure, combined with the axial forces from the supported structure, can induce extremely high compressive forces in the longitudinal (vertical) column bars. If not confined adequately by ties of sufficient size, at spacing that is close enough, the vertical bars can buckle outward, causing damage to the column, loss of support and possible collapse. Regardless of the calculated forces in the existing columns, the existing column ties do not conform to the current Building Code's prescriptive requirements for minimum confinement. Thus, supplemental confinement needs to be added for conformance to the current Code. This added confinement may be required onfy near the ends of some columns, or for the fuli height of the columns, depending on the calcutated colurrin loads. Q e'w,rso:apedcO'w",it@hemdee:i@i"ed:e!qAuy'e't*'of': fimbep anal'ceadri[Ie$COe' :i4-u@ of aar=t=eq;4,gr iaye.f!%is rffialve% iii%[a_n'3qq..u3d.l..@:y4 5q@;t lie spat@si,y!qerA The a4imns oecq.j
As indicated in these descriptions, and in general, the noted deficiencies can be addressed and resolved only with a sufficient reduction of the buitding's mass through the removal or the heavy ctay tile roofing, and with the addition of some lengths of new upper-level concrete shear walls. The recommended alteratiorys combine to reduce the seismic forces acting on the structure, increase the strength and capacities of the load- resisting elements, including the shear walls and collector members. The following key building plan indicates the recommended locations for the proposed added shear walls, which would likely affect the building's aesthetics and functionality to only a minimal degree.

3.5.8 Equipment Anchorage Capacities Unknown
The capacity of the anchorage of the equipment throughout the building is unknown and warrants a survey or existing on-site conditions, as well as any drawings available that address the methods of anchorage and lateral bracing. The current Building Code excludes some equipment below certain weight limits from requiring anchorage, if the Component Importance Factor (lp) for determining the anchorage design forces is no higher than 1.0. However, since the entire subject structure is considered an Essential Facility, housing the EOC, the Importance Factor for the overall building's seismic design, as well as the seismic Com nent Importance factor, Ip, is 1.50.

Appendix Page 211
106
CC 05-03-2022
106 of 1033
:7-4-iTJ3p,ant e4tixp4'ent a@hopge :it gover@d,b,,y the 6ode, -E-!1'l4 -lapglal b@ *ns,ide@j, it' paraWcJar, qnqlu$ the-fqullowing.= * Emergency Generator, mctuding isotators
* Emergency Generator flexible connections for conduit, fuel and cootant piping
* Rooftop HVAC Equipment
* Elevator Equipment
* Electrical Transformers, Panels, Switchgear, Cabinets, etc. * Suspended Light Fixtures
* Ductwork and Piping Supports and Bracing
* Electrical Conduits, Trapezes, Banks and Trays
* Fire Sprinkler Piping
Atypendix Paqe 212
107
CC 05-03-2022
107 of 1033
0 9 0
IS 1, 19'-9" J,, 7 -1, 19'-9" I ,/
I ,_X
f
"t,
ffil
I
[
[
',,
[
'}
r % i i i i,,,, , 7$ %
/
]
i" 'l - -- I I lh/ '
i, EX1ST1NG17-0 s i
i SHEARwALL i i i
t i i i i I
!i I I I
I
I i
l
"NEW OR ADDED

SHEAR WALL
l SHOWN
I HATCHED, TYP.
i___
I I
t [=
I I
II
I I
tl
I
I
l
] [
r
I
]
[
I
I
I
]
u LJ I
3 , 31I
I I I Ij l
l _______ I I I S'
J
1,
-l-t-
C%J
(-;
%
] L 19'-8:" - U " " L--1-9-':3" '\ '-i," XX
EXISTING 9'-6"

SHEAR WALL
EXISTING 8'-4"

SHEAR WALL
EXISTING 7'-0"

SHEAR WALL
Figure 3.4: KEY STRUCTURAL BUILDING PLAN
(MAIN FLOOR WALLS SHOWN DASHED)
"EXISTING

ROOF LINE
0 - EXISTING 7'-
SHEAR WALL!
0 0
0 EXISTING 13'-0

SHEAR WALL
0 0
\- EXISTING 7'-0'

SHEAR WALL
Appendix Paqe213
108
CC 05-03-2022
108 of 1033
9 9 9
i"l<, - -_. - J. 7 7-J-...--------!1-._iz.____w-......7 1 I
I
i
j
J /By
'//i ./ ///,
L!
I
i
Th
@
, '- ROOF AREA
REQUIRING 4"

NAIL SPACING
/
a:
l'
j
C'
'%'
?/,/
I
I I

AREA OF

FLAT ROOF
I I
?,
AREA
QUIRING 2"
SP
S_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _tI<// I I ///>= J
I
1,
0 I
0 %i
0 I
0 '%
%,
S/*/
%
I
a I
I ,/", 24'-0" gl,_o)l
"'f 'f f' ----------- - -
/
l/ " ' S
Figure 3.B: KEY ROOF PLAN
(MAIN FLOOR WALLS SHOWN DASHED)
9 0 9
0 0
0 0
0 Apoendix Page 214
109
CC 05-03-2022
109 of 1033

EXISTING

RET AINING WALL

EXISTING SLAB

ON GRADE
t ADDED SHEAR
WALL

EXISTING SHEAR WALL
Figure 3.D: NEW SHEAR WALL AT EXIST. WALL
as

ADDED SHEAR WALL , EXISTING ,
z COLUMN z
Figure 3.E: NEW SHEAR WALL AT EXIST. COL.

Figure 3.C: SECTION AT NEW SHEAR WALL
Appendix Paqe2l5
110
CC 05-03-2022
110 of 1033

EXISTING
ANCHOR
BOLTS
NEW

ANCHORS

AS NEEDED
ai r'>

EXIST'G
SHEAR WALL 7
WHERE
OCCURS

EXIST'G
i'i r".i 's
II
II
II

EXIST'G SPLICE

PLATE (EACH SIDE)
W/ (6) %"s M.B.
"EXIST'G STEEL

COLLECTOR BEAM

EXIST'G COLUMN
Figure 3.F: ELEVATION: EXISTING STEEL BEAM

AT COLUMN AND SHEAR WALL
ROOF'DECKIN(! '
PLYWqOD
PANELI EDGE i qXISTINGiEDGE i
M, X. %lAILl.NG (il6."0..C.) i.

I I NEW EDGE NAILIIG
E1ETWEE1'4 EXlSTlpG
Figure 3.G: PLAN OF PLYWOOD PANEL EDGE NAILING
Aooendix Paqe216
111
CC 05-03-2022
111 of 1033

4.O Architectural Analysis

4.! Scope
The existing Cupertino City Hall building is a two-story structure containing city administrative and building department services as well as the City of Cupertino's Emergency Operations Center (EOC.) The original building was built completed in 1965 and later renovated in 1986.

This study is based on record documents listed below and received electronically from the city as well as a facility site walk on Feb 14, 2012. * 1965 Drawings for Original Construction
* 1986 Drawings for Renovation (except single line Electrical plans) * Current Exiting Diagram included the latest floor layout modifications The architectural analysis primarily focuses on fire and life safety issues and includes a detailed code compliancy review of the existing City Hall building as an Essential Service Facility. The recommendations follow the analysis and include four alternatives outlined by city representatives and the design team.

The current code, the 2010 California Building Code (CBC), and the 1985 Uniform Building Code used for the renovation exhibit significant differences in all chapters. The first step of this analysis was to review the existing building against the 2010 CBC.

Exhibit 4A provides the analysis in detail, Exhibits 4C and 4D show occupancy load calculations, exit occupancy calculations, and required rated wall locations.

The required scope of accessibility modifications for the existing building is also summarized to define the extent of potential renovation work. Exhibit 4B lists scope requirements from the 2010 CBC Chapter 11 B.

4.2 Applicable Codes
The 2010 CBC was used to review code compliancy. The 2010 California Green Building Code (Cal Green) was not used for the analysis of the existing building. Currently, the City of Cupertino does not enforce the Cal Green for the remodel of existing buildings, The requirements of 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design is applicable for local government facilities and was also used to review for compliancy.

4.3 Key Fire and Life Safety Issues
The key issues below are extracted from Exhibit 4A - Code Analysis Worksheet. * Occupancy Classification
The existing Council Room is approximately 1,300 sf (over 10% of the total floor area of the first floor) with an Occupancy Load of 86. The room cannot be considered an incidenta! accessory occupancy because it is too large. It needs to be considered an A3 0ccupancy, a separate occupancy from rest of the building, which is a B Occupancy.

Apoendix Page 217
112
CC 05-03-2022
112 of 1033
Type of Construction
The type of construction is Type VB with an automatic sprinkler system throughout.

Fire Resistive Separations
Interior Walls:

A 1-hour Fire Barrier separation is required between A and B occupancies, The existing wall is shown as a 1-hour partition in the 1986 drawings. The wall construction above the ceiling needs to be further investigated. The doors in the 1-hour Fire Barrier need to have a 45-minute fire resistance rating. The existing two doors are labeled with 20-minute ratings. The label of the third door was covered by finish material and not legible. It will need to be replaced if it cannot be confirmed as compliant. See section

4.5.1 of the 2010 CBC.

Although the 1-hour separation requirement of an incidental use area is exempted because the existing building is equipped with a sprinkler system, the Mechanical Room and Storage Rooms (over 100 sf) require smoke partitions. The 1986 drawings indicate the existing Mechanical Room is enclosed by a 1-hour partition. See section 4.5.2 or the 2010 CBC.

Elevator Shaft Enclosure:

The existing elevator shaft may be deficient. The drawing A2.1 (1986 Renovation) indicates "Carry shaft wal to underside of lobby ceiling". Fire Barriers need to extend to the underside of the roof sheathing per 707.5 or enclosed at the top with the same fire resistance rating per 708.12. See section 4.5.3 of the 2010 CBC.

Exit Stair Enclosure:

The exit stair enclosure wall needs to be a 1-hour Fire Barrier with a 1-hour rated opening. The existing door on the first floor is labeled as 60-minute. The rating of the door on the basement was not legible and will need to be replaced if it cannot be confirmed as complaint. See section 4.5.4 of the 2010CBC.

Corridors
The building's corridors are not required to be separated by fire or smoke partitions because the existing building is A and B Occupancies and equipped with a sprinkler system. The existing corridors open to the public area are rated per the 1986 drawings. The existing openings between the west corridor and the office area are allowed per the current code.

Apoendix Paoe 218
113
CC 05-03-2022
113 of 1033
Interior Finishes
Wall and Ceiling:

Corridors serving the egress of the EOC, West Corridor, Lobby, and South Corridor require Class B finishes on the walls and ceiling.

The existing finish materials need to be further examined to confirm that they meet the ASTM E-84 Class B frame spread rating and the ASTM C 635 or C636 for suspended acoustical ceiling.

See section 4.5.6 of the 2010 CBC.

Floor:

A Class I or II interior floor finish is required in all exit routes. The existing finishes need to be further reviewed and repiaced if they cannot be confirmed as compliant. See section 4.5.6 of the 2010 CBC.

Means of Egress
Occupant Load:

The Occupant Load of the existing building is calculated based upon the area under consideration divided by an occupant load factor per section 1004.1.1 of the 2010 CBC. See Exhibit 4A.

Egress Width:

All existing doors and corridors currently provide more than the required egress width. Exiting occupancies at the exit discharge are:

Basement Terrace
Main entrance
South Corridor Door
North Door
98 57 (113 / 2 exits)
35 29
Accessible Means of Egress:

Accessible means of egress are not required in alterations to existing buildings per section 1007.1 Exception 1 of the 2010 CBC.

Panic Hardware:

Mechanical Room and Transformer Room doors need panic hardware or Tire exit hardware per section 1008.1.10 of the 2010 CBC. The existing doors do not have the required hardware.

Vertical Exit Enclosures-Lobby Open Stairs to Basement:

The analysis of the exiting occupancy revealed that the basement floor egress is not code compliant without using the open stairs as means of egress. The 2010 CBC allows for vertical openings in a stairway only if it is not part of means of egress per 708.2 Exceptions; therefore, in order to meet the requirements of the code the stair will require the installation of draft curtains and closely spaced sprinklers. These upgrades based on the interpretation above are believed to be more economical than Aooendix Paoe219
114
CC 05-03-2022
114 of 1033
converting the open stairway to an enclosed exit stair. See section

3.5.7 of the 2010 CBC.

Roof Assembly and Rooftop Structure
A roof assembly is required to meet Class A fire test exposure in accordance with the city ordinances. The existing roof equipment shows an incomplete attachment mechanism to the roof deck. See section 3.5.8 of the 2010 CBC.

4.4 Other IssueS

4.4.1 Accessibility
The extent oT the specific accessibility upgrades will require further study as well as design solutions after a solution is selected, Exhibit 4B describes accessibility requirements for existing buildings.

The 2010 CBC requires that accessibility upgrades apply only to the area of specific alteration. The 2010 ADA Standards (Chapter 2, 202) state "each altered element or space shall comply with the applicable requirements".

The 2010 CBC also outlines construction cost thresholds for specific levels or accessibility upgrades. For a project where the construction cost does not exceed $50,000, it requires accessibility compliance only in the area of the actual work and not in supporting areas. For a project where the construction cost does not exceed $128,410.86, it allows accessibility compliance to be limited to 20% of the cost of the project. Priority must be given to the accessible elements in the following order.
* sanitary facilities
* drinking fountains
* signs
* public telephone
* additional accessible elements such as parking, storage, and alarms For a project where the construction cost exceeds $128,410.86, the facility must be made fully accessible.

4.4.2 0SHA
Access to all areas For building maintenance will need to meet Cal-OSHA standards. The metal ladder to the roof requires a safety upgrade.

4.4.3 Sustainability
A comprehensive sustainable strategy and specific sustainable solutions are not identified in this report; however, as the project moves to the next phase we would recommend incorporating a sustainable approach into the solution selected.

4.4.4 Architectural & Planning
Several architectural and planning iSsues were identified by the building representatives and design team during the Feb 14, 2012 site walk. These items Aooendix Paoe 220
115
CC 05-03-2022
115 of 1033
were captured in the Meeting Minutes, item 2012-02-14.07, and should be addressed if Alternate #3 or Alternate#4 is selected for implementation.

4.5 Recommendations
Four alternative approaches were identified by the City OF Cupertino representatives and the design team for the renovation of the existing City Hall facility. These approaches, described below, differ in their scope and anticipated construction cost.

Alt #1 No Upgrade: This alternate proposes no modifications to the existing City Hall building and a relocation of the existing EOC to another facility.

Alt #2 Minimum Seismic Upgrade: This alternate proposes modifications to the building structure only to bring the facility to a code compliant Essential Service Facility status. No proposed plan changes are proposed in this alternate in order to maintain the ability to "grandfather in" the existing EOC in its current comiguration. Only structural items triggered by I-factor improvements and maintenance are intended to be modified. Accessibility upgrade improvements may be triggered in this alternate. The modifications include:
* Replacement of roof tile - as maintenance
* Possible adjustment or roof projile and equipment screen * Connection of collector beam and concrete shear wall * Additional concrete wall to the main level, if required. (The modification should not affect floor plan and egress)
* Ducts and equipment seismic support
* Accessibility upgrade for 20% of construction cost if required Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: This alternate proposes that all Alternate #2 items as well as additional plan modifications to address life safety code updates be implemented. Accessibility upgrade improvements would be triggered in this alternate. The modifications include:
* All Alt #2 items
* Fire and Lire Safety upgrade to meet 2010 CBC
* MEP upgrades to meet operation requirements as Essential Services Facilities including replacement of HVAC equipment/control, water heater/plumbing pipe, adjustments of sprinkler system, and upgrade of the electrical system after testing and verifications.
* Minimum energy efficiency to meet performance of the existing building * Accessibility upgrade
Alt #4 Replacement - This alternate proposes a new City Hall building that aligns with ideas being proposed in the Civic Center Master Plan Study currently in process with Perkins + Will. This new facility would meet all current codes, incorporate sustainable features, and include Essential Service Facility requirements while at the same time address the specific needs and desires of the building occupants.

Appendix Page 221
116
CC 05-03-2022
116 of 1033
These recommendations are based on the findings from the available drawings and observations of the accessible areas during the site walk. As highlighted above, some areas of the existing building have unknown conditions and will require further investigation after an alternate is selected:
* penetrations thru partitions
* above-ceiling conditions
* actual construction of the interior partitions
* storage rooms created during the recent renovation around the EOC * renovated areas in locations where the record drawings were not available Specific recommendations for the correction of items identified in the code analysis are outlined below. If Alternative #3 or Alternative #4 described above is chosen, all architectural code deficiencies must be integrated into the solution.

4.5.1 1-hour Fire Barrier at Council Room
The existing doors to the Council room need to be replaced with at least 45- minute fire resistance rated doors. The partition may need to be repaired or re- built to meet 1-hour Fire Barrier requirements. The existing rated partition enclosing Council room should be further field investigated.

4.5.2 Smoke Partitions to Mechanical Room and Storage Room The existing doors to the Mechanical Room and Transformer Room need to be replaced with panic hardware. The existing wall and doors enclosing the Mechanical Room need to be rebuilt or repaired to meet smoke partition requirements.

Mechanical Room work space clearances and clear path of travel require further investigation near the 1600 Amp electrical panel. The room requires either 2 exits with panic hardware or 1 exit door with panic hardware and a clear unobstructed path from panel to exit door, or a single exit door with panic hardware and double the required working space around the panel.

Storage Rooms (areas exceeding 100sf) need to be enclosed by smoke partitions.

The Storage Rooms north of Council Room that were recent additions/modifications exceed 100sf. These walls and doors need to be rebuilt or repaired to meet smoke partition requirements.

4.5.3 Elevator Shaft Enclosure
The construction of the existing elevator shaft enclosure needs further field investigation to verify if it meets the 1-hour Fire Barrier requirements. The shaft enclosure may either need to extend to the roof sheathing or be enclosed at the top of the shaft with 1-hour fire resistance rated assembly.

4.5.4 60-Minute Door to the Exit Stair at Basement The exit access door to the existing exit stair should be confirmed as a 60 minute door or replaced with a 60 minute door. The construction of the existing exit stair shaft enclosure needs further field investigation to verify if it meets the 1 hour Fire Barrier requirements.

Aooendix Paoe 222
117
CC 05-03-2022
117 of 1033

4.5.5 Interior Finishes
The finishes of West Corridor, Lobby, and South Corridor need further field investigation to confirm if they meet the current code classifications. The finishes may need to be replaced to meet the requirements.

4.5.6 Lobby Open Stairs to Basement
The existing open stairs from Lobby to the basement should be designated as non- exit stairs. In addition, the draft curtains and closely-spaced sprinklers per NFPA 13 need to be installed. The exit sign should be rearranged accordingly.

4.5.7 Roof Assembly and Rooftop Equipment
The attachment of the roof equipment to the roof deck must be secured following the I Factor requirements for the Essential Services Facilities. RerooTing assembly is required to meet Class C roofing.

4.5.8 Replacement of Roof Tile (This item is for Alt #2) As described in the Structural Section 3.4 General Recommendations, the heavy tile roofing should be replaced with a lighter material such as standing seam metal roofing system. A system can be selected to match the appearance of the adjoining buildings in the Civic Center. As the project proceeds an option to integrate photovoltaic panels or Fim at the roof should be investigated.

Appendix Paoe 223
118
CC 05-03-2022
118 of 1033
Exhibit 4A - Code Analysis Worksheet
This exhibit is prepared to review the code compliancy of the existing City Hall under 2010 California Building Code.

Subject , CBC
Reference
Notes

1. Building Description
* 1 above grade story with 1 below grade basement Table 503 See 7 OK

2. Building Height
* Height to highest occupancy Story: 1.8 ft above finish grade (224.9 FG, 226.7 FF) * Height to top of roof: 20'-11 %" @ top of beam, 26' @ top of parapet Table 503 See 7 OK

3. Building Separations
* East: 174 ft
* West: 60+ ft (60 ft to PRW)
* North: 60+ft (60fttoPRW)
* South: 103 ft (to 1964 PL)
All exceeds 30' in Table 602 fire Separation distance Table 602 OK

4. Occupancy
Buildinz Area Occupancy
First Floor B (Except Concil room: A3, 1,300sf)
Basement B
I
Note: EOC Room (former Council Room) will be separated Occupancy from the rest of the building because the area sqft of 1,300sf exceeds 10% of the building area of the floor (508.2.1). The occupant load of the EOC Room is 1,300/15 = 86.

The two occupancies need to be separated by lhr fire barrier (Table 508.4) 508.4

5. Approximate Building Area
Level 1: 11,520 sf
Basement: 11,520 sf
Total: 23,040 sf

6. Type of construction
Type V-B (fully sprinklered)

7. Allowable Area and Height - Type V-B (fully-sprinklered) B occupancy A-3 0ccupancy
Allowable / Built Allowable / Built
Table 503
Story (above grade) 2 / 1 1 / 1
Height 40ft / 26 ft 40ft / 26 ft
Floor Area / Story 18,000sf / 11,520sf 12,000sf / 1,300sf Per 508.4.2
11520/18000 + 1300/12000 = 0.748 < 1.00 508.4.2 OK

8. Fire Resistive Requirements - Type V (fully-sprinklered) Aooendix Page 224
119
CC 05-03-2022
119 of 1033
Subject CBC
Reference
Notes
* Structural Frame: O hrs
* Bearing Walls
o Exterior: O hrs
o Interior: O hrs
@ Non-bearing Walls
o Exterior: O hrs
o Interior: O hrs
* Floors: O hrs 3" concrete floor
* Roof: O hrs 6x6 beam, 2x6 T&G Deck, 5/16" Plywood Table 601 &
602
603.1 &
717.5 OK

9. Fire Resistive Separations
* 1-hr Fire Barrier separations between B and Al occupancy 508.4 * Incidental Use Areas
o Mech / Boiler Room (031 & 032) -
o Storage over 100 sf (036, 038, New storage north of Council ) I-hr separation or provide automatic fire extinguishing system - OK w/ Fully sprinklered bldg
Smoke Partition (711; Full ht solid walls w/self-closing solid drs) is still required
508.2
508.2.5.2
OK

10. Exterior Walls
* Opening Allowed in exterior walls
* Max area of exterior wall openings allowed: No Limit Fire Separation distance is > 30'
Table 705.8
OK
* Parapets: not required - exterior wall is not required to be rated 705.11 OK

11. Interior Walls
* Fire Barriers - separating B & A3 occupancy around fmr. Council Room 707 o Extend from the top of the floor O ceiling assembly below to the underside of the floor or roof sheathing.
o Openings are limited to 25 % of length of wall
o Openings are not limited to 156sf if fully-sprinklered o Opening protection
Wall Type Opening Rating
707.5
707.6
707.6 exc 1 dr & glazing
need
upgrade to
1-hr shaft / exit enclosures 1 hour
I-hr fire barrier 45 min. Table 715
45 min
assembly
* Shaft Enclosures - exit stairs, elevator hoist way 708 o Enclosures to have fire barrier with I-hr fire resistance rating o Openings limits are not applicable for for exit enclosures o Opening protection - see above
708.4
707.6
Visually
inaccessibl
e, Need
further
investigatio
n of shaft
termination
above
ceiling
* Corridors - Not req'd to be separated by fire or smoke partitions in A and B occupancy if fully sprinklered.

Table
1018.1 OK
* Enclosed Elevator Lobby
Appendix Page 225
120
CC 05-03-2022
120 of 1033
Subject CBC
Reference
Notes
o not required not mre than 3 stories in Group B 708.14.1 OK o not required for A where the buikJing is fuiiy-sprinkiered 708.14.1 Ex 4 OK

12. Penetrations
* Thru penetration fire stop systems protecting wall penetrations shall have an F rating equal to the rated wall
713,3.1.2 Visually
inaccessibl
e, Need
further
investigatio
n
* Thru penetration fire stop systems protecting rated horizontai assemblies shall have an F and a T rating of 1 hour or equal to the rated assembly 712.4.1.1.2 Visually
inaccessibl
e, Need
further
investigatio
n

13. Interior Finish 803.1
* Wall and ceiling finishes per ASTM E-84, Class A, B & C / NFPA 286 * Flame spread Req
AreaServed F3
Exit Enclosures B
Corridors Serving A Occupancy B
Other rooms & corridors C
Table 803.9
* Suspended acoustical ceilings per ASTM C 635 or C636 808.1.1.1 ? * ClasslorClassllinteriorfloorfinishreq'dinallexitroute 804.4.1 ?

14. Automatic Sprinkler system - per MEP analysis 903.2.1.3 OK 15 Means of Egress
* Occupant load
Is established in Figure 1 based upon the area under consideration divided by an occupant load factor
Table
1004.1.1
OK
* Egress width 1004
o Considered for floors individually 1004.4 OK
o Stairways - factor.3 in
o Otheregresscomponent-factor.2in
1005.1
OK
* Lighting 1006.2 Noted in
Elect
Section
o 1 fc -at walking surfaces f exit access, exits, and exit discharge o 10 fc - at walking surface of stairs during use o Emergency power 90min min 1006.4
* Accessible means of egress 1007.1
o Accessible means of egress are not required in alterations to existing buildings
1007.1 Ex I
OK
* Doors
o Shall have a clear width of at least 32 in and no door leaf shall be greater than 48 in - all egress doors exceed required width 1008.1.1
OK
o With limitations, egress doors may include: 1008.1.4 OK Aooendix Paoe 226
121
CC 05-03-2022
121 of 1033
Subject CBC
Reference a
Notes
a Revolving doors
a Power-operatea doors
a Access-controlled doors
o Panic hardware is required on exit doors from
a A occupancies
a Elect rooms rated over 1200 A - check with Electrical. 1008.1.10 OK
* Stairways
o Min width is 44 in unless serving fewer than 50 people, except accessible egress stairs
o Handrails may extend 4 %" from stair wall into req'd clear width 1003.3.3
1012.7
OK
o At accessible egress stairs, the stairs are req'd to have a min clear width between handrails of 48 in min width is 44 in unless serving fewer than 50 people, except accessible egress stairs

7.2.12.2.3 n/a per
1007.1 Ex.

OK
o Min headroom clearance is 80 in 1009.2 OK
o Riser height
a Min 4in, Max 7in
1009.3
OK
o Ramps (for exiting)
o Max slope-1:12
o Max cross slope-1:48
o Max vert rise - 30 in
o Rampswithrisegreaterthan6inshallhavehandrailsonbothsides 1010.3
1010.4
1010.8
n/a
OK
* Handrails and guards
o Shall be provided on both sides of stairs and ramps with risers grater than 6 in
1009.10 Need
further
review
o Intermediate handrails to be provided so that all parts of egress capacity on stairs and ramps area within 30 in of a handrail 1012.8
o Guards required on elevated surfaces with an adjacent droop more than 30 in
1013.1
o Guards to be 42 in high min 1013.2
o Not allow a 4 in diameter sphere to pass 1013.3 * Exit Signs
o Not required in rooms or areas requiring only one exit 1011.1 OK o Required at exit and exit access doors and other areas so that no place in a corridor is more than 100 ft from an exit sign 1011.1
OK
o Exit sign may be either internally or externally illuminated 1011.2 OK o Illumination required to be on emergency power with 90 min duration 1011.5 OK * Exit Access
o Egress shall not pass through adjoining rooms except where such rooms are accessory to the area served, are not high-hazard, and provide a discernible path to an exit
1014.2
OK
o When two or more exits are required, they shall be separated by one third the diagonal dimension of the space
a fmr Council - 2 exits provided
a Mech room - 2 exits provided
1015.1
1015.1
1015.3 OK
* Travel Distance
o Max allowable travel distance from any location to an exit 43: 250 ft (w/ fully-sprinklered) Table OK
Appendix Paoe 227
122
CC 05-03-2022
122 of 1033
Subject CBC
Reference
Notes
B: 300 ft (w/ fully-sprink!ered) 1016.1
* C-ommon path of trave distance
o The max allowable common path of travel distance from any location to a point where occupants have a choice between two separate exit paths is limited to 100 feet for Group B and S
1014.3
OK
* Corridors in sprinkler protected B or S may be non-rated Table 1018.1 OK
o Corridor width to be OL x O.2 but not less than 44" o 36" with a required occupant capacity of less than 50 1005,
1018.2
1018.2 Ex OK
o Dead ends may not exceed 50 feet in B
* Min number of exits
o OL 1-500 - 2 exits required 1021 OK
* Vertical Exit Enclosures
o Required rating - 1-hr
o A max of 50% of exit capacity is permitted to egress through areas in the level of discharge w/ three conditions check (1.2 floor rating of 3" conc) o Stairs to the building permit counter should not be used for egress, to be "communicating Stair"
1022.1
1027.1 Ex
Adjust exit
sign
accordingly
* Exterior Exit Stairs and Ramps
o Exterior exit stairways can be used in a means of egress o Must be open at one side
o Not required to have separation per exceptions
1026.2
1026.3
1026.6 Ex.

OK
OK
OK
* Exit Discharge
o A max of 50% of exit capacity is permitted to egress through areas in the level of discharge w/ three conditions check
1027.1 Ex
OK
16 Roof Assembly and Rooftop Structures
* Roofing Classifications - Class A is required per City of Cupertino Ordinances Table 1505.1
Classificatio
n of (E)
roof
assembly is
unknown.
* Existing roof replacement - more than 50% of the total roof area is replaced within any one-year period, the entire roof covering of every new structure, and any roof covering applied in the alteration, repair, or replacement of the roof of every existing structure shall be a fire-retardant roof covering that is at least Class c
1505.1.3 To be Class
A per City
of
Cupertino
Ordinances
Aooendix Page 228
123
CC 05-03-2022
123 of 1033
Exhibit 4B - Accessibility for Existing Buildings
This Exhibit is prepared to summarize the required accessibility upgrade for the existing buildings per 2010 CBC.

Subject CBC
Reference
N6tes

1. Accessibility for Existing Buildings 1134B
* Provisions apply to renovation, structural repair, alteration and addition to existing buildings
* No decreased accessibility of existing buildings * Requirements shall apply only to the area of specific alteration structural repair of addition
o Primary entrance to the building
o Primary path of travel to the specific area of alteration, structural repair or addition
o Followings that serves the area of alteration, structural repair or addition a Sanitary facilities
a Drinking fountains
ffl Signs
a Public telephone
1134B.1
1134B,2
Exceptions #1
* Total construction cost does not exceed S128,410.86 (Jan 2010) * Unreasonable hardship is where exceeds 20% of the cost of the project without these features (disproportionate cost)
* Access shall be provided to the extent that it can be within 20% of the cost of project
* Priority is to these elements that will provide the greatest access following order o An accessible entrance
o An accessible route to the altered area
o At least one accessible restroom for each sex
o Accessible telephones
o Accessible drinking fountains
o When possible, additional accessible elements; parking storage and alarms
* 3 years duration of accumulated cost when there are many small work * Alterations after Jan 1992 shall be considered in determining if the cost of providing a accessible path of total is disproportionate Exceptions #2
* n/a - Re: privately funded project
Exceptions #3
* Accessibility improvement work itself is limited to the actual work of the project Exceptions #4
* Work limited to
o HVAC
o Re-roofing
o Electrical (not included switches and receptacles) o Cosmetic work
1134.2.1 Ex.
* Alternative uni-sex per floor will be permitted if technically infeasible 1134B.2.2 Aooendix Page 229
124
CC 05-03-2022
124 of 1033
N
Ca)
0 ,. '-;
I
!N&&W&M
o
125
CC 05-03-2022
125 of 1033

5.O Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing, Fire Protection Analysis

5.1 Scope
The main goal of this report is to evaluate the MEP equipment and infrastructure serving the Cupertino City Hall and the EOC. The evaluation of the existing MEP systems is being performed according to the following overall facility improvement alternatives:
* Alt #1 No Upgrade - Relocation of EOC
* Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade - Duct, pipe, and equipment seismic support (per I factor change)
* Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade - Alt #2 items, Fire & Life Safety upgrade to meet 2010 CBC, MEP upgrade to meet operation requirements as Essential Services Facilities, Energy efficiency to meet performance of the existing building * Alt #4 Replacement - New Building

5.2 Applicable Codes and Standards
Codes:

State of California Code of Regulations (CCR).
2010 California Building Code.
2010 California Electrical Code.
2010 California Mechanical Code.
2010 California Plumbing Code.
2010 California Fire Code.
2010 California Energy Code, Title 24 - 2008
2010 California Green Code, CALGreen
City of Cuppertino Municipal Code
Standards:

ASHRAE Standard 62.1-2010 - Ventilation
ASHRAE Standard 55-2010 - Thermal Comfort
ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010: Energy Standard for Buildings except Low-Rise Residential Buildings
AMCA - Air Movement and Control Association International, Inc.

ANSI - American National Standards Institute.

Apoendix Page 231
126
CC 05-03-2022
126 of 1033
ARI - Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute.

SMACNA - Fire and Smoke Damper instaiiation Guide.

SMACNA - Guidelines for Seismic Restraints of Mechanical Systems.

SMACNA - Standards for Duct Construction.

NEMA - National Electrical Manufacturer's Association.

NEMA - National Electrical Manufacturers Association.

NECA - National Electrical Contractors Association.

IEEE - Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers.

UL - Underwriters Laboratories.

NFPA - National Fire Protection Association.

NFPA 90A - Air Conditioning and Ventilating Systems.

NFPA 101 - Life Safety Code.

NFPA 13 - Standard for the Installation of Sprinkler Systems.

5.3 Mechanical HVAC Systems

5.3.1 Heating and Cooling Systems
The HVAC system for the Cupertino City Hall consists of a water-cooled chiller plant (70 Ton) with the cooling tower located on the roof and the chiller located on the lower level. A gas fired non-condensing boiler generates heating hot water.

The boiler is from the 1965 original building construction and is well past its life time. Both of these systems provide chilled and heating hot water to the Air Handling Units (AHU's) located at the lower level that heat and cool the building through a VAV reheat design. All equipment was installed in -1986 and is now 26 years old and at the end of its useful life. While the equipment appears to be well maintained, and the AHU's have been retroTitted with VFD's, the building operates inefficiently at a rate of $3.63/SF-Year and 106 kBTU/SF-Year (based on 2009 utility bills). A modern, energy efficient office building operates at $1.50/SF-Year and 50 kBTU/SF-Year.

The Cupertino City Hall has a small server room that is cooled by split system AC units, with air-cooled condensers located on the roof. The AC units for the server room appear to have been installed more recently that the rest of the HVAC equipment.

Aooendix Paoe 232
127
CC 05-03-2022
127 of 1033
Figure 5A (Closed-Circuit 70 Ton Cooling Tower)
Figure 5B (Water-cooled 70 Ton Chiller)
In the lower level mechanical room, maintenance clearances and an exit pathway may not exist throughout the space. In addition, the combination of chiller, gas boiler, electrical gear, and generator equipment do not meet today's code Appendix Page 233
128
CC 05-03-2022
128 of 1033
requirement to have separate rooms {or each of these pieces of equipment. The room is also not equipped with a refrigerant detection and exhaust systems currently required for chiller rooms, and the combustion air ducts in the boiler room need to be routed to an outdoor location.

Figure 5C (Gas Fired Boiler)
Figure 5D (Server room AC unit (1 of 2))
Aooendix Page 234
129
CC 05-03-2022
129 of 1033
Recommendations
Alt #1 No Upgrade; Nc work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: Upgrade all duct, pipe, and equipment anchorage and seismic attachments to building structure. Replace duct and pipe connections with flexible joints where required.

Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: Replace existing HVAC equipment with smaller, more efficient, better comfort equipment design.

Alt #4 Replacement: New HVAC systems for new building.

5.3.2 Ventilation
The existing AHU's air intake is located in an airwell that does not provide good air quality air for building occupants. The amount of fresh air brought into the building is not enough by today's standards and codes, and should be increased and improved,
Recommendations
Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: No work.

Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: Obtain fresh air from a different location (i,e, roof louvers) and increase amount of fresh air.

Alt #4 Replacement: New HVAC systems for new building.

5.3.3 Controls
The existing control system is and outdated pneumatic system that does not allow for remote monitoring or the implementation of common energy efficiency strategies in modern buildings. In addition the pneumatic controls system requires more maintenance to upkeep the compressor, air filter, and other mechanical systems required to run the system.

Recommendations
Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: No work.

Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: Replace existing system with modern DDC controls system,
Alt #4 Replacement: New HVAC systems for new building.

Apoendix Page 235
130
CC 05-03-2022
130 of 1033

5.4 Plumbing Systems

5.4.1 Plumbing Fixtures
The existing plumbing fixtures are functioning and meet current code.

Recommendations
Aft #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: No work.

Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: No work.

Alt #4 Replacement: New plumbing systems and fixtures for new building.

5.4.2 Domestic Water System
The domestic water piping appears to be copper. An AO Smith boiler gas fires water heater provide domestic hot water to all building plumbing fixtures. The water heater appears to have been instal!ed with the last 5 years.

Recommendations
Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: Upgrade all plumbing pipe and equipment anctiorage and seismic attachments to building structure.

Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: Replace existing plumbing pipe (cold and hot water).

Replace existing water heater with a high efficiency heat pump water heater.

Alt #4 Replacement: New plumbing systems and fixtures for new building.

5.5 Fire Protection Systems

5.5.1 Fire Sprinkler system
The bulling is fully sprinklered and testing station appears to be in proper operating condition given the test log dates.

Recommendations
Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: Upgrade all fire protection pipe and equipment anchorage and seismic attachments to building structure.

Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: Replace existing pipe and sprinkler heads inside building to match renovation intent.

Alt #4 Replacement: New fire protection system for new building.

Apoendix Paae 236
131
CC 05-03-2022
131 of 1033

5.6 ELECTRICAL

5.6.1 Electrical Systems Summary
This report is an evaluation of the Cupertino Essential Services building electrical systems, located at Rodrigues and Torre Avenue, in Cupertino, California. The data used to develop this report was collected during one site visit conducted on February 15, 2012, as well as interviews of the staff working at the building.

During the field visit, we observed the site conditions and systems exposed to visual observation. No testing or destructive investigation was performed.

Additional information about the building's power distribution system was gathered by reviewing the building plan sets made available in PDF format. The walk through was intended to evaluate the effectiveness of the existing Electrical systems.

This report provides an overview of existing conditions of the electrical system, identification of potential weaknesses in the systems and suggested improvements to the systems.

All major electrical equipment appear to be original and in working condition. The main distribution equipment is nearly 47 years old and has past its expected useful life. The generator is nearly 34 years old and has passed its useful life.

The existing light fixtures are in serviceable condition. As a possible energy saving project, the building management may want to consider replacing the existing lights with more energy efficient T5, T8, LED, and compact fluorescent fixtures. Another energy saving technique would be to upgrade the lighting control system and incorporate occupancy sensors and/or daylight sensors in addition to using time clock controls.

The main service to the City Hall space is a rated at 1000A at 208V, 3-phase system and provides power for a load density of approximately 12.5 W (or 15.5 VA, using O.8 power factor) per square foot for the entire building, which is adequate for the current loads.

5.6.2 Assessment of Existing Conditions
Normal Power
Utility Transformer
The building is fed from a utility transformer (PG&E) located outside the building.

Aooendix Paoe 237
132
CC 05-03-2022
132 of 1033
Figure IE (PG&E Transformer)
The secondary power from the transformer to the main switchboard is provided via (4) sets of 4" underground conduits.

The main switchboard is rated 1600A, 208/120V, 3-phase, 4-wire and is located inside the main electrical room.

General Condition
The transformer belongs to PG&E and was recently upgraded. It appears to be in good working condition.

Code Issues
No code issues.

Recommendation:

Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: Confirm with PG&E if the new transformer meets current Seismic code
Alt #3 Upgrade: No work. Transformer was recently upgraded.

Alt #4 Replacement: Transformer was recently upgraded.

Main Switchboard
The Main Switchboard is rated at 2000A, 120/208V, 3 phase, 4 wire with a 1600A main breaker manufactured by Industrial Electric Manufacturing, Inc. The main switchboard is feeding a distribution panel via a 1,000Amp breaker. This switchboard serves the City Hall.

Aopendix Page 238
133
CC 05-03-2022
133 of 1033
The table below summarizes the load on each panel.

Table 5.1 (Panel Load)
Name Size Load Serving
MSB 2000A Section Library,
Future Public Safety Building,
ATS for Generator
Pane! DP 1000A Section PANEL F,

PANEL C,

PANEL A,

PANEL E,

PANEL B,

PANEL D,

PANEL G (MCC)

CHILLER,
Future E.O.C. Panel
G (MCC) 600A Pump 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
Cooking Tower Fan
A/C Fan Basement
A/C Fan Ist Floor
A/C Fan IS' Floor
Remote Radiator
Fuel Pump
Aooendix Page 239
134
CC 05-03-2022
134 of 1033
Figure 5F (Main Switchboard)
General Condition
The main switchboard appears to be of the original construction and in working condition, although past its useful life. In general, the switchboard is adequately sized to support the existing loads.

Code Issues
Maintenance clearances and exit pathway are required to be investigated around the 1600 Amp electrical panel. Electrical panel is over 1200 Amps, thus requiring either (A) 2 exits with panic hardware, or (B) 1 exit door with panic hardware but a clear and unobstructed path from Panel to exit door, or (C) a single exit door with panic hardware but double the required working space around the Panel.

Recommendation
Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: Provide adequate support suitable for the seismic and earthquake condition.

Alt #3 Upgrade: The existing main distribution switchboard shall have regular preventative maintenance procedure per NETA (National Electrical Testing Association) standards.

Megger test existing feeders.

Aooendix Paoe 240
Test overcurrent protective devices in the switchboard for proper operation. 135
CC 05-03-2022
135 of 1033
Aft #4 Replacement: In order to ensure reliable power distribution to the building and reduce service needs in the future, we recommend the main switchboard be replaced with a new model.

5.6.3 Emergency Power
The emergency power system consists of a generator rated at 125KW, 208/120V and is located inside the main electrical room. The fuel tank, with 1000 ga!Ion capacity, is located outside the room. In the event of a power outage, the generator provides power to the panel DP via a 400A automatic transTer switch (ATS) located in the main electrical room. The generator also provides power to the Chiller but the pump must be 41ump" to move chilled water. The generator does not serve the existing elevator. or the chiller, as confirmed by discussions with facility personnel.

Figure 5G (Indoor Generator)
General Condition
The generator was installed in 1978, making it nearly 34 years old, which has exceeded its useTul lire. It appears to be operational, as comirmed by facility personnel.

Code Issues
No code issues
Recommendation
Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: Provide adequate support suitable for the seismic and earthquake condition.

Appendix Page 241
136
CC 05-03-2022
136 of 1033
Alt #3 Upgrade: The generator should at the minimum be tested per manufacturer's recommendation to confirm its operation, and the batteries tested to confirm capacity and condition as well.

Alt #4 Replacement: The existing generator is currently loaded to its full capacity.

In order to increase reliability and provide assurance of operation in the future, it is recommended that the generator be replaced with a new unit. We also recommend upsizing the generator to 175kW or above and its associated automatic transfer switch to 500A or above to provide capacity to serve additional loads such as the elevator and any future loads.

5.6.4 Grounding System
The service ground was not readily visible at the Main Switchboard. Feeder and branch circuit ground conductor sizes were not verified. Bonding to the building mechanical systems was not confirmed.

General Condition
No hazard has been identified with the current grounding system.

Recommendations
Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: No work
Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: The grounding electrode resistance should be verified and supplemented as needed with additional ground rods. The mechanical and plumbing system bonding should be verified.

Alt #4 Replacement: Provide new grounding system to meet current code.

5.6.5 Lighting
Interior Lighting
The existing lighting system consists mostly of recessed and pendant mounted fluorescent linear T8 32/26 watts source fixtures, with additional recessed incandescent downlight fixtures.

Illumination levels were observed to be uniform and adequate in all common area corridors, offices, work areas, and equipment rooms. Emergency exit signs are provided throughout the building according to Code. Emergency and egress lighting is provided by selected normal fixtures fed by emergency circuits from the generator.Exit lights are LED with battery back-up. Bug-eye type supplemental emergency fixtures was provided in the boiler room.

General Condition
Light fixtures appear to date back to the original construction and are in fair condition, with no operational issues.

Code Issues
Appendix Page 242
137
CC 05-03-2022
137 of 1033
Perform functional testing of all existing emergency lighting and measure light levels for code compliance.
instali ad6itionai emergency iighting as necessary after the functionai testing of the existing installation to provide current code required minimum egress illumination.

Recommendations
Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: Provide adequate support suitable for the seismic and earthquake condition.

Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: If improvements to the lighting system are to occur, the existing outmoded T12 source fixtures should be replaced with new higher efficiency T8, T5 or LED source fixtures to reduce energy usage. Newer fixtures will also provide better light distribution and higher uniformity to increase occupant comfort. Any existing incandescent source fixtures should be replaced with higher efficiency compact fluorescent source fixtures.

Alt #4 Replacement: Similar to Alternative 3

5.6.6 Lighting Controls
The existing general lighting is controlled by loca! switches located within the corridors and at the each room. Lighting in the Kitchen, bathrooms, stairwell and conference room "A" is controlled by motion sensors. Relay control panels provide time schedule control for corridors and general areas, and dimming equipment provides dimming functionality to meeting rooms.

Recommendation
Alt #1 No Upgrade: No work.

Alt #2 Min Seismic Upgrade: Provide adequate support suitable for the seismic and earthquake condition.

Alt #3 Moderate Upgrade: Ceiling mounted occupancy sensors can be added to individual rooms to automatically switch on one-half or all of the fixtures when occupancy is detected and switch off all fixtures when no one is present, to take advantage of irregular occupancy intervals. A time delay of 30 minutes or less can be used to minimize nuisance switching.

To meet current code, reduce energy use, and increase the effectiveness and flexibility of the lighting installation, it is recommended that automatic and multilevel lighting controls be installed in every space.

Alt #4 Replacement: As the perimeter office areas receive good access to daylight, ceiling mounted photosensors may used to provide automated dimming of the perimeter fixtures according to the amount of daylight available, further reducing the lighting load. The existing fluorescent source fixtures within the Appendix Paoe 243
138
CC 05-03-2022
138 of 1033
perimeter daylight area will need to be provided with dimming ballasts in order to integrate with the photosensor input.

In addition, both occupancy sensing and daylight harvesting through photosensors can be employed together. This will keep lights off when the space is unoccupied and also dim the light output when sufficient daylight is available in order to maximize the energy saving potential.

Aooendix Paoe 244
139
CC 05-03-2022
139 of 1033
This page intentionally left blank.

Aooendix Paoe 245
140
CC 05-03-2022
140 of 1033
This page intentionally leff blank.

Aooendix Page 246
141
CC 05-03-2022
141 of 1033
APPENDIX A 10
Cupertino City Hall: MEP Systems Alternatives Study (PAE, act 2, 2014)
Aooendix Page 247
142
CC 05-03-2022
142 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall:

MEP Systems
Alternatives Study
October 7, 2014
a ' :aa" " i" ' " - ': -':':L: ,..a" - .""-a ':a a" if + '+ :':'- ' :-aa PAE
paq a'i5i:'i-.rs.car
Rxllxnd I$ii t-;r;:':<::i:i I 5.s;mle
Appendix Page 248
143
CC 05-03-2022
143 of 1033
This page intentionally left blank.

Aooendix Paoe 249
144
CC 05-03-2022
144 of 1033
October 7, 2024

1.O Project Description. I

2.0 0PTION A - UPGRADE CITY HALL WITH LIFE SAFETY I

2.1 Electrical 1

2.2 Mechanical 1

2.3 Plumbing 2

2.4 Fire Protection. .2

2.5 Indirect Costs. .2

3.0 0PTION B - UPGRADE CITY HALL WITH LIFE SAFETY + EOC 2

3.1 Electrical. 2

3.2 Mechanical. .2

3.3 Plumbing 3

3.4 Fire Protection

3.5 Indirect Costs .3

3.6 Floodplain Considerations.. .3

4.0 0PTION C - GUT AND REMODEL CITY HALL 3
4,1 Electrical. 3

4.2 Mechanical

4.3 Plumbing 4

4.4 Fire Protection. 4

4.5 Indirect Costs 4

4.6 Floodplain Considerations.. .5

5.0 0PTION D - NEW CITY HALL BUILDING + BASEMENT PARKING 5 5,1 Electrical. 5

5.2 Mechanical 5

5.3 Plumbing 5

5.4 Fire Protection 6

5.5 Indirect Costs. .6

5.6 Floodplain Considerations. 6

6.0 0PTION E - NEW CITY HALL BUILDING + BASEMENT PARKING + COUNCIL CHAMBERS .....................6

6.1 Electrical. 6

6.2 Mechanical .6

6.3 Plumbing 6

6.4 Fire Protection 6

6.5 Indirect Costs. 6

6.6 Floodplain Considerations.. 6

7.p ENERGY BENCHMARKING 6
x+-:cs-gy.oo Cupertino City Half Study
Appendix Page 250
145
CC 05-03-2022
145 of 1033
C"JO6er 7, 20!4
jed Dffiary
Owner
Architect
Mechanical
& Electrical
Engineer
t<-isga.oo
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
408-777 -3200
Project Architect
2 Bryant Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, CA 94105
415-856-3000
Karen Alschuler
Principal-in-Charge
[email protected]
Geeti Silwal, LEED AP BD+C
Associate Principal, Senior Project Manager
[email protected]
PAE Consulting Engineers, Inc.
425 California Street, Suite 1200
San Francisco, CA 94104
415-544-7500
Mike Lucas, PE, LEED AP
Principal-in-Charge
[email protected]
Marco Alves, PE, LEED AP
Project Manager
[email protected]
Harj Sidhu, PE, LEED AP
Electrical
[email protected]
Stuart Gregson, PE, LEED AP
Mechanical
[email protected]
CUpertino City Hal.l St :i
Appendix Page 251
146
CC 05-03-2022
146 of 1033
O':A:(Xier 7, 2044

1.O Project Description
This report is a follow up to the 'lCupertino City Hall Essential Services Facility Analysis" report produced on 3/27/2012 by Perkins + Will, AKH Structural Engineers, and PAE. Refer to the 2012 report for details information on existing systems, At this time the design team is considering 5 options for the city hall building:

1. Option A - Upgrade city hall with life safety

2. Option B - Upgrade city hall with life safety + EOC

3. Option C - Gut and remodel city hall

4. Option D - New city hall building with basement parking

5. Option E - New city hall building with basement parking + council chambers The following sections outline the Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing implications of each of the above options. TBD Consultants has been engaged to provide cost estimates of each of these options.

2.0 0PTION A - UPGRADE CITY HALL WITH LIFE SAFETY

2.1 Electrical
Existing Electrical equipment including Main Switchboard, panelboards, etc. are all well past their useful life. Replace all Electrical distribution equipment.

Existing wiring to be removed and new wiring to be pulled through new conduit.

Upgrade Fire Alarm to meet the latest Life Safety requirements.

Provide new lighting fixtures to meet the latest T24 requirements. Emergency power for egress fixtures, via local battery packs.

2.2 Mechanical
Demo existing 70-ton, 1986 vintage water cooled chiller in lower level mechanical rOOm.

Demo existing 70-ton, closed circuit, 1986 vintage rooftop cooling tower.

Demo 1965 vintage gas fired non-condensing boiler in lower level mechanical room.

Demo lower level 1986 vintage VAV+ reheat air handling unit.

Add new 70 ton air-cooled chiller at roof/attic level.

Add (2) 400,000 Btu (input capacity) condensing boilers at basement level.

Add new pipe and pumps for chilled and hot water systems.

Add (2) new AHUs to basement level (15,000 cfm each). t<-tsga.oe
Cupertirio City Half Study I
Appendix Page 252
147
CC 05-03-2022
147 of 1033
'<'JrTa (gf;8'; 7 2gN4
Clean and reuse existing ductwork as much as possible.

Increase ventilation rate to today's standards, re-route ventilation air intake.

Demolish existing pneumatic VAV boxes.

Provide new VAV boxes with direct digital controls.

Provide new BMS with DDC controls for all equipment and terminal units with front end for basic control and monitoring functions.

2.3 Plumbing
Miscellaneous upgrades for ADA compliance per September 2014 ADA report, including repositioning toilet heights and correcting lavatory/drinking fountain access.

2.4 Fire Protection
Modify sprinklers for code updates.

2.5 Indirect Costs
Cost of building/locating the EOC elsewhere on campus. Council Chambers remains at the Community Hall. The operations of the facility is not included in the costing.

3.0 0PTION B - UPGRADE CITY HALL WITH LIFE SAFETY + EOC

3.1 Electrical
Existing Electrical equipment including Main Switchboard, panelboards, transformers etc. are all well past their useful life. Replace all Electrical distribution equipment.

Existing wiring to be removed and new wiring to be pulled through new conduit.

Existing Generator is well past it's useful life. Replace with new generator.

Evaluate Generator capacity versus the latest EOC requirements. Minimum generator size to be 125kW to match existing size.

Upgrade Fire Alarm to meet the latest Life Safety requirements.

Provide new lighting and lighting controls to meet the latest T24 requirements.

Emergency power for egress fixtures, via local battery packs,

3.2 Mechanical
Same points as Option A, also including the following:

Upgrade all duct, pipe, and equipment anchorage and seismic attachments to building structure. Replace duct and pipe connections with flexible joints throughout.

All large equipment shall be spring isolated.

AHU to be placed in attic level or roof. Preliminary selection indicates (2) AHU's at 7'W x 28'L x 5'H (10,000 Ibs each).
i*-isga.o'o
Cupertino Cty Hall Study 2
Appendix Page 253
148
CC 05-03-2022
148 of 1033
Or'O'Oer 7 20i4
Boiler to be placed at roof level.

Add HVAC heating to generator load (AHU, Boiler, Pumps, will be on emergency power, connected to the generator).

3.3 Plumbing
Miscellaneous upgrades for ADA compliance per September 2014 ADA report, including repositioning toilet heights and correcting lavatory/drinking fountain aCCeSS.

Upgrade all plumbing equipment and pipe anchorage and seismic attachments to building structure.

3.4 Fire Protection
Modify sprinklers for code updates.

Upgrade fire sprinkler pipe anchorage and seismic attachments.

3.5 Indirect Costs
Cost of operating the Council Chambers at the Community Hall is separate.

3.6 Floodplain Considerations
We understand that FEMA stipulations require that emergency equipment shall not be located within Special Flood Hazard Areas Zones A, AE, and 40 (which are areas within the 100 year floodplain). The attached FEMA map shows flood plain areas in the City of Cupertino and near the project location indicating that the project location is not within the 100 year floodplain zones.

FEMA's 2007 Design Guide for Improving Critical Facility Safety from Flooding and High Winds, publication 543 (located here: http://www.fema.qov/media-library- data/20130726-1557-20490-1542/fema543 complete.pdF) advises that emergency equipment should be located above the 500 year flood elevation. While this is a design guideline and not necessarily a FEMA requirement, PAE recommends that the project design should attempt to comply with this guideline. Consideration should be given to relocating the emergency generator to a level above grade to mitigate the risk of flooding due to storm conditions or piping malfunctions within the building.

The attached map indicates that the project is within the 500 year floodplain; however it does not designate the specific elevation of the 500 year flood. PAE recommends that a qualified firm/organization should be engaged to consult on specific floodplain elevations and recommendations for FEMA compliant locations for the emergency generator.

4.0 0PTION C GUT AND REMODEL CITY HALL

4.1 Electrical
Existing Electrical equipment including Main Switchboard, panelboards, transformers etc. are all well past their useful life. Replace all Electrical distribution equipment. 14-1593. € m
Cupertirio (Ay Hatf Study 3
Appendix Page 254
149
CC 05-03-2022
149 of 1033
QC"Ober 7, 2 0 ! 4
Provide new Electrical Distribution throughout the building. This includes new Main Switchboards, panelboards, and transformers.

Provide new conduits to distribute power.

New wiring
Existing Generator is well past it's useful life. Replace with new generator.

Evaluate Generator capacity versus the latest EOC requirements. Minimum generator size to be 125kW to match existing size.

Upgrade Fire Alarm to meet the latest Life Safety requirements.

Provide new lighting and lighting controls to meet the latest T24 requirements.

Emergency power for egress fixtures, via local battery packs.

4.2 Mechanical
Same points as Option B, also including the following:

New thermal zoning layout.

New distribution ductwork.

New distribution piping.

Design for mixed mode natural + mechanical ventilation, possibly engaging light wells or light court for transfer air.

All new mechanical system is likely to remain an air based VAV + reheat system.

4.3 Plumbing
Provide new high efficiency, condensing gas water heater.

Provide all new piping for the following systems:
a) Domestic Cold and Hot water piping
b) Vent piping
c) Gas piping
d) Storm piping
e) Waste piping
Provide new (water conserving) plumbing fixtures, ADA compliant. 4,4 Fire Protection
New sprinkler system.

4.5 Indirect Costs
Cost of operating the Council Chambers at the Community Hall is separate. 14-1593.00
Cupertino Ci§ Half Study 4
Aooendix Paoe 255
150
CC 05-03-2022
150 of 1033
DC':'J':ey'74aa"':L"14

4.6 Floodplain Considerations
Same as Option B.

5.0 0PTION D NEW CITY HALL BUILDING + BASEMENT PARKING

5.1 Eledrical
New incoming service
New distribution
New Lighting
New Generator
New Fire Alarm

5.2 Mechanical
New central hydronic equipment: geothermal slinky field (60,000 sf area) below basement parking, served by water to water heat pump. Although the basement parking footprint area is planned to be 45,000 sf a 601000 sf excavation area may be available due to shoring requirements. If needed the slinky field can extend further into (below) the site, or can be located in another location that may already be planned for excavation for other campus reasons. If desired, the slinky field can be piped so as to accommodate potential future expansion should the slinky field ever be desired for use as a campus system serving multiple buildings. - Take advantage of federal tax savings for geothermal systems: 10o/o Tax Credit year 1, and 100o/o depreciation over 5 years.
- City of Cupertino to determine tax liability and eligibility for tax savings programs. One option may be a Thermal Purchase Agreement (TPA) in which a tax-liable 3rd party procures the geothermal system and secures the tax savings, and the City of Cupertino purchases the thermal energy from the 3rd party.

New indoor services, including radiant heating/cooling with dedicated outdoor air system.

Garage ventilation with CO sensor control.

5.3 Plumbing
New incoming/outgoing services for Fire, Gas, Domestic Cold Water, Storm Drain, and Waste.

New high efficiency condensing gas water heater and associated components (recirculating pump, storage tank, expansion tank, etc.) New water conserving plumbing fixtures, ADA compliant.

New plumbing piping systems.
i<-isgy.oo
CuperUno CRy HaU Study 5
Appendix Page 256
151
CC 05-03-2022
151 of 1033
'Cj:Ober pt 2Gi4

5.4 Fire Protection
New sprinkler system.

5.5 Indirect Costs
Cost of operating the Council Chambers at the Community Hall is separate.

5.6 Floodplain Considerations
Same as Option B.

6.0 0PTION E - NEW CITY HALL BUILDING + BASEMENT PARKING +

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

6.1 Electrical
Same as Option D

6.2 Mechanical
Same as Option D, with higher ventilation rates and equipment capacities and geothermal slinky field (70,000 sf area to account for additional area of council chambers).

6.3 Plumbing
Same as Option D

6.4 Fire Protection
Same as Option D

6.5 Indirect Costs
Assume EOC included.

6.6 Floodplain Considerations
Same as Option B.

7.O ENERGY BENCHMARKING
Based on 2013 utility bills, the existing facility operates inefficiently at an energy cost rate of $3.65/sf-year and an Energy Use Intensity (EUI) of 92 kBTU/sf-year (based on a September 2014 study provided by the City). A modern, energy efficient new construction office building in this climate would operate at approximately $1.20/sf-year and 35 kBtu/sf-year.

Based on PAE's project experience, Figures 1 and 2 on the next page illustrate potential reductions in energy use and energy cost associated with each of the options described in this report.
i<-xsga.oo
Ciin.o aty Hail Study 6
Appendix Page 257
152
CC 05-03-2022
152 of 1033
a'a'--j'C-tau':aaa's7'xb'O'p4
Figures 3 and 4 illustrate preliminary lire cycle cost analysis and total cost of ownership for the mechanical systems described in Options A-E. In this case, the first cost of Options D and E was normalized on an area basis for equal comparison to Option A, B, and C. The Option D and E costs shown here are as if these options had the same project area as Option A, B, and C.

Figures 3 and 4 show that even though Options C, D, and E have higher first costs, the total cost of ownership over time is significantly less compared to Options A and B. The simple paybacks on Options D and E are less than 10 years, and the 30 year total cost of ownership for Options D and E are millions of dollars less than any other option. This is something to consider for the life of a project that is expected to last 30 years or more. 14-i593.00
Cupertino City Hall Stud'y 7
Appendix Page 258
153
CC 05-03-2022
153 of 1033
Odo=ber 7 2024
Energy Use Intensity
120
100
80 60
40 20
o
106
92 : I !l
it i . l: ffl"
A"l
it .. :i t , !.
25 25

EXISTING

BUILDING
2009
EXISTII'JG OPTION A OPTIOk B OPTIOk C OPTIC,r( D OPTION E

BUILDING
2013
Figure 1. Energy Use Intensity (EUI) comparisons
$4.50
$4.00
$3.50
$3.00
$2.50
$2.00
$1.50
$1.00
$0.50
Energy Cost Density

94.2a
S3.65
- S2.78 S2.78
FJ -i , 5isq
SC.39 ,<;039
EXISTIblG EXISTING OPTION A OPTIOh B OPTIOA C OPT;Cj% D OPr;JN E

BUILDING BUILDING
2009 2013
Figure 2. Energy Cost Density comparisons
14-1593.00
Cupertjno Cjty Hal'i Study 8
Appendix Page 259
154
CC 05-03-2022
154 of 1033
Odober 7 20M
I tm ;.+.a.r € .2'j . '&k'0 .'7.. dlh ' ;. ..' "" .s_ "'* ".".- "-; t! '4 " a " a '. ' m - _;j W "'m C '_r ; a :a,*. :. . !.. aI
i
""-""'"""-
OPTIONS j
* I
4 1
* i
' ) Avg. II Annual
Capital Costs { Maint. I
($)2014 ' Costs I
' i_
Avg. ,
Annual :
' Repla. i
Costs i'
I
i
Year 1
Utility
Costs
" ($)2014
r -i
Simple '
, Payback i
', Option A %
Base '
(Years) i
-'-]
15 Year Cost ]
of Ownership I
($)2028 I
i
?
of (0$w)2n0e4rs3hip Ii-E7ergyJ\
Index
(kBtu/sf-yr)
h
i
Q
p.k
IW
Thi
tiI -nHuFEsAF,Y"'"'Y'HA"""'LL'Illl'
l $2,725,421 ! $79,292 ]
I a .
m,
. $40,003 , ' $63,940
i""""""""""""""" ' """]
l_', ! ""'$ € € ] Wi
m
i
II
lOptionBUPGRADECITYHA[L '
iWITH LIFE SAFETY + EOC l$,oeis0 .g,g;' ,
$40,003 i
I
: $63,940:"" ""' "'N/ A" """"""]
l ]""': € € ] $
!m
vii@'?
:)9!
10ption{ - 4.0 0PTION C - GUT
AND REMODEL CITY HALL j
t'
$47,575
" " " " " " " "" " " " " " " ' "' "';
$40,003 : $36,570
7 """"'!
i. 16.7 :
0 € . ]
!!'
!
I I
Option D - 5.0 0PTION D - NEW
ICITY HALL BUILDING + BASEMEISIT '
IPARK[NG ,,
I € $23,788 $26,8s=+ 1,
i
$22,770
, ]
i 9.3 ]
4:4,754,949" !
(7 $6,651,191 I
I I
]
a a
:OptionE - 6'.0 0PTION E - NEW :

ICITY HALL.BUILDING + BASEMEISIT ,
'PARKING + COUNCIL CHAMBERS
h
$23,788 $26,884 i
ffi
$22,770 M
4' 'ff-
i
I I
I $6,605,441 I
I I
a'J i. I
wf2am)o'- ' . A " " ' .. %., ' + , -' , . ' . ', Y " , ' - aa r45 ' M M-7i d i-"'= 3 4 ei J Notes / Assumptions:

1. Capital Costs are based on reports from TBD consultants, dated 10/5/14 and 10/6/14, plus PAE estimates of controls costs. Capital costs of Options D and E are normalized by project area to create an even comparison with Options A, B, C. These are the costs if a new building was built with the same area as the existing building.

Figure 3. Life Cyde Cost Analysis Results
30 Year Life Cycle Cost Analysis
(2014 to 2043)
$12,000,00a
o
o
o
$10,000,000
$9,000,000
$8,000,000
$7,000,000
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
$3,000,000
$2,(X)0,000
$1,000,000
I 5 10 15 20 25 30
ffiOptionA fflOptionB ffiOptionC aOptionD gOptionE
Figure 4. Total Cost of Ownership over 30 years I4-1593.00
CuperUno City Hail Study 9
Appendix Page 260
155
CC 05-03-2022
155 of 1033
A ""o 9 e A ;;' lJl+
i'li) II I I I I II- -l-
l .. i
l@fi@"He: .'.. :::''
156
CC 05-03-2022
156 of 1033
This page intentionally left blank.

Aooendix Page 262
157
CC 05-03-2022
157 of 1033
APPENDIX A 11
Cupertino City Hall Alternatives Study, Structural Evaluation (Tipping Mar, Sept 29, 2014)
Appendix Page 263
158
CC 05-03-2022
158 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Alternates Study
Structural Evaluation
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
September 29, 2014

Executive Summary
Five alternative options have been discussed for the future of the City Hall, with various degrees of improvement, from performing the minimum amount of architectural remodel and structural strengthening to a brand new replacement building with additional underground parking. The first three options involve the seismic strengthening of the existing structure. This report will focus primarily on those three options, evaluated under the reference standard ASCE41-13 "Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings".

The proposed strengthening scheme for Option A involves structural strengthening of the building's seismic force resisting system to satisfy a life safety performance objective and includes minimal architectural remodeling. The limited level of seismic strengthening associated with this option will require the emergency operations center (EOC) to be relocated to another location. As part of this retrofit option, we have confirmed that the strengthening recommendations contained in the "Cupertino City Hall Essential Services Facility Analysis", dated March 27, 2012, could be implemented. The only exception would be the concrete column strengthening could be less intrusively achieved with the addition of new adjacent steel columns in lieu of fiber wrap. The new steel columns would act as secondary support members in the event of seismic related damage to the existing concrete columns. Seismic improvements would also include non-structural elements such as suspended ceilings, partition walls, and glazing systems. These elements would require bracing to seismically strengthen their connections and the replacement of any non-tempered glazing.

The proposed strengthening scheme for Options B and C both involve retrofitting the existing city hall to an immediate occupancy performance objective. This performance objective would allow the EOC to be retained within the existing city hali building. Option B would involve !ess architectural remodeling, whereas Option C would entail a complete architectural remodel. Option C would allow for a new, large light court in the center of the building, thus requiring additiona! structural modifications to both the roof and floor level gravity framing systems. Seismically, the structural deficiencies for both of these options are the same as those for Option A above. All options require strengthening the existing roof diaphragm, roof girder collector splice connections, roof girder to shear wall connections, adding additional length of concrete shear wall from the first floor level to the roof, strengthening the exterior colonnade connection to the roof framing, and strengthening the existing concrete columns to withstand anticipated seismic displacements.

Options B and C will require a more extensive strengthening of these elements than Option A, given the more stringent performance objective, As with Option A, non-structural elements will also require strengthening. To achieve immediate occupancy, these element would have to be designed to have only minimal, limited damage after a seismic event. This may be difficult to achieve with the existing building materials to be retained in Option B. In Option C, these elements will be constructed anew, and can be explicitly designed for an immediate occupancy performance objective, Finally, it should be noted that any retrofit intended to achieve an immediate occupancy performance objective will be met using prescriptive code methods that merely increased the force leve! demands on seismic resisting elements. This prescriptive code based approach does not necessarily assure that the performance goals of uninterrupted operation and immediate occupancy will be met.

Appendix Page 264
159
CC 05-03-2022
159 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Alternates Study
Structural Evaluation
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
September 29, 2014

The construction of a new City Hall building, Options D and E, will offer the opportunity to design both the building's gravity and seismic force resisting systems for the specific performance objective of immediate occupancy. Options A, B, or C, aim to strengthen the old building by limiting damage to a structure that, even after a costly retrofit is undertaken, is still largely constructed in an antiquated manner. A new City Hall can be constructed with the latest state of the art seismic force resistance technologies, such as base isolation systems or passive energy dissipation devices which will result in a facility that is more earthquake resilient than a traditionally seismically retrofitted structure. Using state of the art, site specific, seismic modeling techniques and ductile detailing practices a greater degree of certainty regarding seismic performance can be intentionally built into the structure to assure that the city's critical service functions do not become interrupted after a large seismic event.

Existing City Hall Construction
The City Hall was originally built in the latel960's as a one-story building with a full basement.

The main roof is consisted of plywood sheathing over 3" tongue and groove decking over 6 and 8 inch timber beams. The timber roof beam are then supported by either steel or concrete girders.

The roof framing for the central mechanical well is consisted of plywood sheathing over 2 in timber joists supported by steel beams. The central mechanical well is surrounded by 5' tall wood framed parapet. The main roof and the parapet are covered with clay roof tiles which represent a significant portion of the current roof's self weight and seismic mass. The structure was renovated as part of the Civic Centerlmprovements project in the midl980's. During the renovation, the north side of the basement was excavated to create a concrete terrace, approximately 20 wide, parallel to the building. Portions of the original north basement walls were removed to create new storefronts. An additional 6 inches of shotcrete was added to the remaining north basement wall.

The current lateral force resisting system of the structure is 6 inch concrete shear walls above grade andl2 and18 inch concrete shear walls in the basement. Concrete slab, joists, and girders make up the ground floor framing. Interior concrete columns extend from shallow pad footing foundations to the roof level. Perimeter concrete columns are supported by the basement walls.

There is also a perimeter exterior colonnade framed with concrete columns and beams.

Structural Evaluation Methodology
The materials reviewed were thel965 Cupertino City Hall structural drawings,1986 Cupertino City Center Improvement architectural drawings, and the Cupertino City Hall Essential Services Facility Ana.iysis Report da.ted March 27, 2012.

Appendix Page 265
160
CC 05-03-2022
160 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Alternates Study
Structural Evaluation
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
September 29, 2014

JtiernainfoausofttaisstudywastoehluateOptmns Barad Cata F%, Objedive of Immediate Oaupancy umara 20% probability ofexceedanaa in 50 yearssejgnjc hazard (Basic Safety Earthquake-IE). Options B and C are classified as a Risk Category IV Essential Facility. A Linear Static Procedure was used for the evaluation and retrofit design. Soil Site Class D was assumed as a geotechnical report was not available at this time.

Seisrnic Evaluation and Retrofit Recommendations
Retrofit Option A
The objective of Option A is to relocate the EOC to another facility and upgrade the City Hall to a Life Safety Performance Objective under Basic Safety Earthquake-1E. Based on our findings from the existing structure's evaluations at the Immediate Occupancy Performance Objective level and a review of the performance requirements at the Life Safety level, the recommended structural retrofit would be one that is similar to the scheme proposed by AKH Structural Engineers in the "Cupertino City Hall Essential Services Facility Analysis dated March 27, 2012.

As discussed earlier in the report, the existing concrete columns are susceptible to seismic damage due to the limited amount and size of the confinement ties around the longitudinal reinforcement.

The lack of confinement ties can limit the column's ductility, or ability to sway and remain undamaged during a seismic event. This limited ductility could cause the column to lose its gravity loading carrying capabilities and ability to provide continued support of the roof framing members.

The existing concrete columns should be either paired with secondary steel columns to provide redundant gravity support capabilities or strengthened with fiber reinforced polymer to address this deficiency. The exterior colonnade columns can be fiber wrapped with minimal interruptions to other architectural elements. Where the wrapping activity may not be feasible, such as in areas adjacent to exterior facades, supplemental steel 6x6 columns at the perimeter and steel 8x8 columns at the interior may be placed adjacent to the existing un-wrapped columns to serve as the back-up gravity system.

To satisfy the Life Safety Performance Objective for non-structural components and systems, it is likely a seismic safety film (designed to hold shattered glass in place) will need to be applied to any existing non-safety, non-laminated annealed glass or the glazing panes themselves should be replaced. Additional tie wires for suspended ceiling grids and additional bracing and anchorage for interior partitions should be added to prevent extensive falling of ceiling tiles and wide spread collapse of partition walls during an earthquake, Mechanical systems should also be provided with a minimum level of seismic bracing, if not already in place, to prevent duct work and piping from posing a falling hazard to occupants. Finally, new or existing roof mounted equipment should be properly anchored to roof framing. This may, in some instances of heavy equipment, require additional localized strengthening of the roof framing members themselves.

Appendix Page 266
161
CC 05-03-2022
161 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Alternates Study
Structural Evaluation
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
September 29, 2014

Retrofit Options B and C
Evatuation of Structuraf Components
The main structural deficiencies for the existing City Hall are discussed below. These deficiencies are common for both Options.

Roof diaphragm shear capacity
Roof collector splice capacity
Collector to shear wall connection capacity
Shear wall flexural capacity and seismic detailing Concrete column ductility
Porch colonnade to roof connection
Recommendations for Structural Strengthening
Roof Diaphragm Strengthening Measures
The existing heavy clay roof tiles make up a significant portion of the existing roof's self weight. As the building's seismic force demand is directly proportional to the self weight, it is recommended that the existing clay roof tiles be removed and replaced with a lighter roofing material. Even with the mass of the roof significantly reduced, the f6rce demand on the roof diaphragm is near the capacity limit state for a plywood diaphragm given the shear forces associated with an immediate occupancy performance criteria.

As such, a new High Load Diaphragm will be required for the roof area outboard of the centra! mechanical well. New 3/4" plywood will be provided over the existing 1/2" plywood and 3x tongue and groove blocking with two rows of10d nails @ 2 1/2" o.c. along diaphragm boundaries and continuous panel edges, 4" o.c. at other panel edges, and12" o.c.in field, The existing diaphragm at the central mechanical well will be strengthened with1 row oflOd nails @ 2" o.c. along diaphragm boundaries and continuous panel edges, 3" o.c. at other panel edge, andl2" o.c.in field. New 4x6 blocking will be added at continuous panel edges perpendicular to joist framing direction.

Roof Level Collector Strengthening Measures
There are several types of collector connections at the roof )evel, all of which require strengthening to increase their load carrying capacity, Where the existing roof diaphragm collectors are wide flange steel roof beams, they are currently spliced to each other with machine bolts. Theses splices will need to be strengthened with additional new splice plates and new welding as shown in on Sheet 53, Detail 2, of the attached building retrofit drawings. Where existing roof collectors occur at steel wide flange to wood girder locations, additional horizontal Simpson Holdowns or CMST straps are required to strengthen the existing steel beam to timber girder connections, as shown in Detail1 of Sheet 53. The porch colonnade on the exterior perimeter of the building is constructed of concrete beams and columns. The anchorage connections between these Appendix Page 267
162
CC 05-03-2022
162 of 1033
Cupe'rtino City Hall Seismic Alternates Study
Structural Evaluation
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
September 29, 2014

beams/columns and the wood roof framing and diaphragm currently lacks a clear load path and does not have adequate capacity. New connecting members should be installed to provide proper anchorage between the colonnade and the roof diaphragm, as shown in Detail 4 of Sheet 53.

Finally, the collector connections anchoring the steel beams to the tops of the existing concrete shear walls need to be strengthened. Additional anchor bolts will be added between existing shear walls and collectors. New shear walls will also be connected to the existing steel roof beam collectors with new anchor bolts.

Additional Concrete Shear Walls
Additional shear walls extending from foundations to roof should be added to provide new/strengthened vertical seismic force resisting elements for the existing structure. The new shear walls will typically be12" thick concrete walls from the top of existing basement walls to the underside of the roof and 6" thick concrete walls that are overlapped and connected to the face of the existing basement walls with reinforcement dowels, as shown in Detail 3 of Sheet 53. Where the wall length is limited at the north elevation within the basement level, two new new pile caps, with two micro-piles at each cap, should be provided to increase the shear wall overturning resistance along this line and protect the existing very lightly reinforced foundation from associate seismic damage.

Strengthening the Existing Concrete Columns
The concrete columns are connected to all floor levels and to the roof. As such, they will deform as they drift with the rest of the building during an earthquake. Bending moments and shear forces will be induced in these columns as they sway with the building during a seismic event. The long span and inherent flexibility of the wood roof diaphragm will also contribute to the anticipated seismic roof drift making these under-reinforced columns very susceptible to seismic damage. The existing concrete columns have limited confinement reinforcement ties around the longitudinal reinforcements, as noted earlier in this report. Sufficient lateral ties are required in modern building codes to properly confine the longitudinal bars and the concrete core in order for the columns to continue carrying gravity loads when the columns are displaced. The lack of confinement ties is likely to result in limited displacement ductility for the concrete column. The existing columns are to be wrapped and strengthened with fiber reinforced polymer. Wrapping the existing columns will increase the displacement ductility for gravity load carrying capacity.

Structural Alterations for Option C
Additional gravity framing modifications also required for the installation of a large new light court and for the relocation of the building's elevator and stairs. Roof framing modifications such as new wood headers, blocking, and strapping are required around the new roof opening. Modifications to existing ground floor concrete framing will also be required to accommodate the new light court and various relocated stairs and elevators. These modification will include new concrete beams to support existing concrete joist framing that have had their existing support framing removed or modified. Retrofit support of gravity framing members often requires precision chipping of existing concrete surfaces, rebar coupling for reinforcment extensions, and welding of anchorage plates to properly anchor the ends of existing concrete members to new concrete supports.

Appendix Page 268
163
CC 05-03-2022
163 of 1033
Cupertino City Hall Seismic Alternates Study
Structural Evaluation
10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
September 29, 2014